New Classifier Percentages

[Racinready300ex]

6 hours ago, stick said:

I strongly believe what you said is true for roughly 90% of shooters.  Classifiers are seen daily by shooters.  Nationals only yearly.  The classification system is a revenue generating stream.  I think the classification system is skewed.  Here's why...

How many shooters both male and female can shoot fast and accurate while standing still?  I'm going to guess in your time shooting, you've seen your fair share. (as have i) They shoot classifiers very well, but when it come to matches, they place low on the leaderboard.  USPSA in it's scoring as we all know (points divided by time) rewards the fleet of foot, not the shooter standing and shooting.  This is why we have a big problem with GM's not scoring 95% at nationals.  USPSA needs to go to a classification system that utilizes set stages and not just static shooting.  All factors should be considered into classifications not just how fast I can stand and shoot.  What are your thoughts?

 

If that is a big problem isn't raising the HHF to make it harder to make GM a good thing?

 

Most matches I've been to the G's are at the top the D's are at the bottom and everyone else falls pretty well in line. Sure there are people who look way off, but they could of had a bad day or gun problems. The guys that finish way above their class could also just be improving to fast for the system to keep up, or don't shoot many classifiers. (or sand bag).

 

I don't think the system is all that bad.

[stick]

19 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

If that is a big problem isn't raising the HHF to make it harder to make GM a good thing?

 

Most matches I've been to the G's are at the top the D's are at the bottom and everyone else falls pretty well in line. Sure there are people who look way off, but they could of had a bad day or gun problems. The guys that finish way above their class could also just be improving to fast for the system to keep up, or don't shoot many classifiers. (or sand bag).

 

I don't think the system is all that bad.

I'm not saying the system is all bad.  It just doesn't test the total ability of the competitor.  It only tests the shooting ability.   Shooting is only part of the equation.  Stage breakdown, movement and speed all play an important role in how a shooter will perform on any given stage.

[waktasz]

There were two people above 95% at the last nationals.  Ben, who won, and Gutt. 
Take everyone else's G cards away!

 

 

[malobukov]

I think the main reason for the gap between classification percent and performance at major matches is that zeroing a classifier does not lower classification percent. I understand it was done this way to combat sandbagging, but I think there is a better way:

 

Remove 5% below class threshold, but not lower classification when classification percent drops. Once you reach A class, you stay in A class (unless you get better and move up to M). Maybe add some exceptions, like personal request or no A class classifiers shot in last two years.

 

This way there’s no incentive to hero or zero, and an occasional bad run is still not the end of the world since best 6 of last 8 are averaged.

[B_RAD]

54 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

What should it tell us? I assume you mean the current HHF are to high?

 

But, I bet I can shoot a better HF more consistently at my local club match then I could if I went to nationals and shot the same stage. Shooters are also more likely to risk pushing a little at a local then at a big match like nationals. But, I guess the top guys probably don't feel pressure or play it safe when the title is on the line. I'm sure their scores will be a accurate representation of the best they can do.

Yes, I think the updates made them too high. 

 

Your 2nd paragraph makes my point.  People swing away at locals and/or probably shoot better too. At nationals, folks are going to be more reserved so they don't blow a stage. Where at a local, if they swing away to pickup the next classification, it's not really a big deal if they crash and burn. That classifier will just get thrown out!  So, for all the current classifications that have been shot thousands of times, taking the best 10 or even 10% should mean the HHF is going to be higher.  When you take the same magic supper secret number/formula for the ones that will be shot at Nats, the HHF will be lower since folks actually care about doing well. I know each classifier is different so it's not apples to apples but you get my point, hopefully. 

 

As for the top guys, even they are going to pull back a little and lay up instead of trying to hit a hole in one. If they're slightly reserved, that's still better than hitting one in the water. 

 

I'm all out of sport metaphors!  Probably used them wrong anyways!

 

I don't think there was a problem. Yes, it was possible for people to really go crazy and still hook up on ones like El Prez for a 120% but so what!  It only scores as a 100% and that's only if they're an A Class or higher. 

 

I keep asking, how many shooters have you seen make GM? I shoot at 6 different clubs in 3 different states and haven't seen 1 person become a GM.  So, it's not like someone is making GM at every club match.

 

If HQ thought there was such an issue, why didn't they make a "Pro" class?  My guess, they didn't want to do anything that resembles IDPA. That or they don't want to address the issue that we really do have professional shooters in what's supposed to be an amateur sport!  

Edited September 27, 2018 by B_RAD

[B_RAD]

7 minutes ago, waktasz said:

There were two people above 95% at the last nationals.  Ben, who won, and Gutt. 
Take everyone else's G cards away!

 

 

This!

 

And the new updates will do nothing to make that outcome any different in the years to come!

 

 

[Racinready300ex]

10 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

Your 2nd paragraph makes my point.  People swing away at locals and/or probably shoot better too. At nationals, folks are going to be more reserved so they don't blow a stage. Where at a local, if they swing away to pickup the next classification, it's not really a big deal if they crash and burn. That classifier will just get thrown out!  So, for all the current classifications that have been shot thousands of times, taking the best 10 or even 10% should mean the HHF is going to be higher.  When you take the same magic supper secret number/formula for the ones that will be shot at Nats, the HHF will be lower since folks actually care about doing well. I know each classifier is different so it's not apples to apples but you get my point, hopefully. 

 

I don't think there was a problem. Yes, it was possible for people to really go crazy and still hook up on ones like El Prez for a 120% but so what!  It only scores as a 100% and that's only if they're an A Class or higher. 

 

I keep asking, how many shooters have you seen make GM? I shoot at 6 different clubs in 3 different states and haven't seen 1 person become a GM.  So, it's not like someone is making GM at every club match.

 

If HQ thought there was such an issue, why didn't they make a "Pro" class?  My guess, they didn't want to do anything that resembles IDPA.

 

The bold seems like it would be more effected by making all classifiers count,  that would get rid of the hero or zero technique and probably reduce the HF we see on classifiers.

 

I think I've only seen one person make GM. Since I've been shooting several guys in the area have made GM I just wasn't watching when they did it.

[Racinready300ex]

37 minutes ago, stick said:

I'm not saying the system is all bad.  It just doesn't test the total ability of the competitor.  It only tests the shooting ability.   Shooting is only part of the equation.  Stage breakdown, movement and speed all play an important role in how a shooter will perform on any given stage.

 

Most guys I run into seem to think they are better at stages then classifiers. But again, if I go to a match and the higher classes beat the lower classes how can I say the system isn't testing the right skills? Shooting and gun handling are a huge part of this game.

 

How would we change it? Set up entire stages? Have you ever set up a classifier? Imagine trying to set up a 32 round field course exactly the same way as the paper says.

 

26 minutes ago, waktasz said:

There were two people above 95% at the last nationals.  Ben, who won, and Gutt. 
Take everyone else's G cards away!

 

 

 

IDPA got this right

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

But, I bet I can shoot a better HF more consistently at my local club match then I could if I went to nationals and shot the same stage.

 

 

You are doing it wrong.

[B_RAD]

9 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

 

I think I've only seen one person make GM. Since I've been shooting several guys in the area have made GM I just wasn't watching when they did it.

I know of one person that made GM at a  club I shoot at. It was in PCC. 

 

My point is, it doesn't happen every match or even often. 

 

So, what was the problem?

 

 

[Racinready300ex]

Just now, motosapiens said:

 

 

You are doing it wrong.

 

For me I'm much more comfortable at the club I train at every week then I am at out of town matches at ranges I've never been to. So I try to get to out of town matches to learn to deal with that. Maybe someday I'll get to your level where pressure doesn't exist.

 

It's funny I think I was listening to a podcast recently where they were talking about pressure at nationals and home field advantage. Those guys probably were doing it wrong too.

 

1 minute ago, B_RAD said:

I know of one person that made GM at a  club I shoot at. It was in PCC. 

 

My point is, it doesn't happen every match or even often. 

 

So, what was the problem?

 

 

 

Has that changed? It's still not going to happen often. I know 5 or 6 guys locally that come to mind that made it, certainly not a lot. (only counting handguns) I don't know that the new numbers are right, but that doesn't mean the old numbers weren't wrong or that HF shouldn't be adjusted from time to time. Some of the old ones were jacked.

[ATLDave]

This is the nice thing about a percentile based system: those rare hero-or-zero hook-up runs count... but only in proportion to how many there are.  They don't screw up the curve in the way that a small number of outliers changes things all the way down with a straight percentage system, as we use now.  Similarly, the system is self-correcting/learning as the classifier is re-used.  If something debuts at nationals and everyone turtles it for safety, but shoot it much faster in subsequent locals... the percentiles will move quickly to reflect the reality of where/when/how most scores are coming from.

 

We do percentage because that's also how we do match points (which is fine for how to determine a match winner).  I'm pretty sure that's the only reason we do it that way in the classifiers - there's really not another good rationale that I have ever heard for it.

[motosapiens]

25 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

For me I'm much more comfortable at the club I train at every week then I am at out of town matches at ranges I've never been to. So I try to get to out of town matches to learn to deal with that. Maybe someday I'll get to your level where pressure doesn't exist.

 

pressure always exists. treating different matches differently is a good way to let it have a detrimental effect on your shooting. Some guy named Lanny Bassham has alot to say on the topic.

[B_RAD]

40 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

For me I'm much more comfortable at the club I train at every week then I am at out of town matches at ranges I've never been to. So I try to get to out of town matches to learn to deal with that. Maybe someday I'll get to your level where pressure doesn't exist.

 

It's funny I think I was listening to a podcast recently where they were talking about pressure at nationals and home field advantage. Those guys probably were doing it wrong too.

 

 

You may want to go back and listen again. While they do say there is something to shooting better at your club and that there is more pressure at at nationals, I'm pretty sure they also say you should treat them the same and find a way to out the same amount of pressure o yourself. 

 

So yeah,... You're doing it wrong. 

[Racinready300ex]

29 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

pressure always exists. treating different matches differently is a good way to let it have a detrimental effect on your shooting. Some guy named Lanny Bassham has alot to say on the topic.

 

 

14 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

You may want to go back and listen again. While they do say there is something to shooting better at your club and that there is more pressure at at nationals, I'm pretty sure they also say you should treat them the same and find a way to out the same amount of pressure o yourself. 

 

So yeah,... You're doing it wrong. 

 

So let's make this about what I'm doing wrong? Did I say I treat things differently? Maybe you guys can give me some more pointers later.

 

I said "I bet I can shoot a better HF more consistently at my local match then I could on the same stage at nationals" My point was I don't think the HHF at nationals is necessarily going to be the best standard once people start shooting them in matches with a lot less pressure. But, I'll never have a national title on the line when I'm shooting so I don't really know, clearly you guys handle pressure better than I do.

[B_RAD]

23 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

 

 

So let's make this about what I'm doing wrong? Did I say I treat things differently? Maybe you guys can give me some more pointers later.

 

I said "I bet I can shoot a better HF more consistently at my local match then I could on the same stage at nationals" My point was I don't think the HHF at nationals is necessarily going to be the best standard once people start shooting them in matches with a lot less pressure. But, I'll never have a national title on the line when I'm shooting so I don't really know, clearly you guys handle pressure better than I do.

Sorry. I wasn't really trying to do that. 

 

I'll be honest, I have the same problem. I'm working on it. So, I'll change it to "I'm doing it wrong"

 

I'm getting better though. For me part of making the pressure the same, is to try and do something I got from Ben Steoger. If you address stages at all matches as just being a few sections of stuff you've done before and can do well, it becomes less intimidating and helps me relieve pressure. So, this stage is just 4 positions. In each position it's just a a few targets. It's stuff I've seen, shot and practiced before.  It's something I can do and it's not anything I can't do!  

 

I've also proved to myself several times that when I stay relaxed and know I can just go out and shoot at my skill level, I end up doing as good as I can. It ends up surprising me how well I do and it's a huge confidence buildier. I try to tell myself that I'm good enough and I'm gonna do it fast so don't try too hard. Instead go out and execute, it'll be fast enough. 

 

And dog gone it, people like me!

Edited September 27, 2018 by B_RAD

[motosapiens]

34 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

 

 

So let's make this about what I'm doing wrong? Did I say I treat things differently? Maybe you guys can give me some more pointers later.

 

I said "I bet I can shoot a better HF more consistently at my local match then I could on the same stage at nationals" My point was I don't think the HHF at nationals is necessarily going to be the best standard once people start shooting them in matches with a lot less pressure. But, I'll never have a national title on the line when I'm shooting so I don't really know, clearly you guys handle pressure better than I do.

 

I have found that I generally shoot better and more consistently at big matches. Probably because I have more time to analyze and visualize the stages, and I have fewer distractions (like having to show up early to build a stage,  or getting dragged over to another bay for a CRO question). Personally, I'm not in any danger of winning a title at nationals, so there really isn't *any* pressure on me there. OTOH, if I'm not near the top at a local match, I'll be ruthlessly mocked and hang my head in shame.

Either way, I know I shoot most consistently if I believe in my training and skills and call my shots. There is nothing I can do on match day to improve my skills, so I might as well just use the process that I know allows me to shoot the best.

I think more than pressure, the reason there will be some higher HHF's in local matches is that people are more likely to go hero/zero.

[stick]

3 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Most guys I run into seem to think they are better at stages then classifiers. But again, if I go to a match and the higher classes beat the lower classes how can I say the system isn't testing the right skills? Shooting and gun handling are a huge part of this game.

 

How would we change it? Set up entire stages? Have you ever set up a classifier? Imagine trying to set up a 32 round field course exactly the same way as the paper says.

 

 

IDPA got this right

It would nearly be impossible to setup classifier stages.  I'm not trying to build a better mouse trap.  I just think the current classifiers don't take into account the other factors that affect total stage times.  As for the new HHF, It should help level the playing field.

[motosapiens]

 I don't think making more complicated classifiers would change anything. As long as they are classifiers, some people will hero/zero them, and occasionally hook up and become classified beyond their actual abilities. Big deal.

 

If you look at any match results, there is a pretty close correlation between classification and overall placement.

[waktasz]

2 hours ago, stick said:

It would nearly be impossible to setup classifier stages.  I'm not trying to build a better mouse trap.  I just think the current classifiers don't take into account the other factors that affect total stage times.  As for the new HHF, It should help level the playing field.

 

The playing field was previously not level?

[waktasz]

5 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

 

 

IDPA got this right

 

Not really, because the field is so weak you can win a DM title at indoor nationals in a seldom shot division with relative ease and still be an A class shooter in terms of skills. 

[stick]

5 minutes ago, waktasz said:

 

The playing field was previously not level?

In my opinion, I don't think it really is.  Please tell me that the static shooters are going to do as well or better than the shooters who are fleet of foot and quick into and out of positions who have the same skill level?  All I'm saying is the classification system doesn't truly measure the total ability of the shooter.  The new HHF will group more shooters together.  It's definitely harder to become a GM.

[Racinready300ex]

14 hours ago, waktasz said:

 

Not really, because the field is so weak you can win a DM title at indoor nationals in a seldom shot division with relative ease and still be an A class shooter in terms of skills. 

 

I meant the idea, it would work better if the top guys actually shot IDPA. Overall I think USPSA has a better system of classification.

[Racinready300ex]

14 hours ago, stick said:

In my opinion, I don't think it really is.  Please tell me that the static shooters are going to do as well or better than the shooters who are fleet of foot and quick into and out of positions who have the same skill level?  All I'm saying is the classification system doesn't truly measure the total ability of the shooter.  The new HHF will group more shooters together.  It's definitely harder to become a GM.

 

Yes, in most cases people who shoot well will do better on classifiers and overall then people who don't. If most B class guys beat most C class guys, but those same B class guys loose to a lot of A and M class guys. Then clearly that must mean the skills tested in the classifier correlate to matches at least somewhat. Sure it's not perfect, and will depend on what classifiers your local club uses. Some do have movement, does your club not run those? There is one classifier actually called "On the Move" and if you want a GM time on it I think you need to shoot that on the move.

 

I'm not fast on my feet, and I don't really shoot fast either. But, I've done okay on classifiers and I think I've have had decent finishes at matches in this area.

 

Edited September 28, 2018 by Racinready300ex

[B_RAD]

15 hours ago, stick said:

In my opinion, I don't think it really is.  Please tell me that the static shooters are going to do as well or better than the shooters who are fleet of foot and quick into and out of positions who have the same skill level?  All I'm saying is the classification system doesn't truly measure the total ability of the shooter.  The new HHF will group more shooters together.  It's definitely harder to become a GM.

How does the new update better measure the total ability of the shooter anymore than before? It doesn't.  The classifers didn't change at all other than requiring more points in less time, essentially. You're saying since the classifiers were just stand and shoot, they neglected the skills of shooters movement, stage planning.  The updates didn't not change that.