Time For Teams ?

[wgnoyes]

I thought we went over this recently.. anyway, multi-division teams are trouble ...

And illegal, at least in a USPSA official match.

6.2.1 IPSC Divisions recognize different firearms and equipment (see Appendix D). Each match must recognize at least one Division. When multiple Divisions are available in a match, each Division must be scored separately and independently, and match results must recognize a winner in each Division.]

I only showed combined divisions in my example because that's what that particular match happened to be set to at the time. In a real match, team awards like all other awards would have to be by division, I should think.

[Jim Norman]

WHY?

We could field a cross divisional team of Masters, one in each of 4 divisoins, sorry revo dudes, there just are not enough of you, they could compete against other cross divisional teams. The real probalm occurs intat we insist on using match points as the method of determining the winners. If we used percentages as points, this would even out the cross divisinal diffrences better I think than using points.

Unless major matches start accepting teams and encouraging them, this is all moot anyway.

Jim

[BritinUSA]

If teams are single division, as I originally proposed and how it was done in UK, then very little change will be needed to USPSA rules. The relevant section is 6.4. At the moment it refers to National teams which are only valid for level IV and level V matches.

My proposal is to have the same team format - all shooters in a single division - but instead of being National teams they are any of the following instead:

Club team

Vendor team

Area team

State team

No changes would be needed to the scoring software (as already mentioned in this topic), it's just a minor change to the rules to allow it. The extra cost of trophies could be met by a small fee for each team, I don't think it's a big deal to try it and it might encourage a bit more sponsorship.

My Area Director has said that he will bring it up at the next board meeting and see if there is any support or if others have mentioned the same idea to their AD's. So if anyone wants to see this then a short note to your AD might help.

[Jim Norman]

Brit,

I am in favor of trying. Do we really need a rule change? At the club level we can do it apresent empirical evidence of success or failure of teams to increase revenue and participation.

Jim

[BritinUSA]

It can be done for Level I without a rule change, but Levels II and III require a rule change, perhaps a temporary one (no need for a new rule book until we see if it works)

[wgnoyes]

WHY? ...

6.2.1 and Appendix A2. I also don't see any variance for LVL1 matches.

[Nik Habicht]

WHY? ...

6.2.1 and Appendix A2. I also don't see any variance for LVL1 matches.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As long as we publish and pay prizes off of the offical USPSA scores, according to the rule book and the section guidelines, what's to prevent us from trying out the team concept on an unofficial side basis? I'm pretty sure that the biggest obstacle would convincing the stats guy to do the extra work involved.....

How is this different from a squad setting up a pool in which competitors throw a quarter in the pot for b,c,and d hits, a dollar for mikes and no-shoots, and the person with the lowest number of penalties takes the pot home?

[Flexmoney]

Well, we can't just run around the rules as we like, can we? Each (USPSA) match is like five matches rolled into one.

How about this, though...

6.2.1 IPSC Divisions recognize different firearms and equipment (see

Appendix D). Each match must recognize at least one Division.

When multiple Divisions are available in a match, each Division

must be scored separately and independently, and match results

must recognize a winner in each Division.

Do that...recognize the (divisional) winners, as usual. Then, after that criteria has been accomplished...massage the data to your hearts content.

If I were a sponsor, and only wanted to award a donate/prize to the top Glock shooter in Production...wouldn't it be up to the match to decide if they would honor that?

[wgnoyes]

...If I were a sponsor, and only wanted to award a donate/prize to the top Glock shooter in Production...wouldn't it be up to the match to decide if they would honor that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sure, since that would be within a division.

[Nik Habicht]

Then, after that criteria has been accomplished...massage the data to your hearts content.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't we do that already, by distributing the unofficial but highly desired overall results that so many shooters want to see? What I'm suggesting is very much in line with that......

[Rob D]

I've been tossing the idea of a Team USPSA match around in my head. I think it would be awesome to hold a match where everybody had to shoot as a team with one competitor in each division. Individual matches are a blast, but I think it would be a fun change of pace to shoot a match with a team mentality. Like I said, one competitor per division, then each team gets a cumulative score. In terms of skill and experience, you could give a certain point value to each Class, then set point caps for certain divisions. For instance, D=1, C=2, B=3, A=4, etc. You could cap each "Team Class" at a certain number of points allowing the team to use whatever classes they want as long as they don't go over the point limit for their chosen division. I guess there could be an open class that could have 6 GM's if you could find them, then maybe a 28 Points Class, 18 Point Class, etc.

I think this sounds like a blast just because it would be an opportunity to shoot match under normal USPSA rules but with a different competitive dynamic. What do you guys think?

[dqshooter]

I like the idea, would be interesting to see how it would play out. Not sure if USPSA would sanction it or not but sounds like it would be lots of fun.

[Rob D]

IIRC, there is a thread around here on that idea...

Doh, I found it after digging a little more

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=49537

They're mostly talking about doing it as a club match, but I think it would be fun to have one major match a year shot in team format. I just think it would be fun to put a team together and compete with your buddies to achieve a common goal.

Edited November 12, 2009 by Rob D

[Rob D]

The more relevant thread is this one Time for Teams ? that I started back in August, 2005.

Thanks! Looks like it's already been discussed pretty thorougly.

So if a match like this were put together, who would consider putting in the time to organize a team and come to the match?

[gose]

Something that was tried a few times, years and years ago, back home in Sweden, was a true team event where the stages either had all team members shooting at the same time, or one at a time (under the same timer) relay-style.

The former being more of static stages, a la sportsman team challenge, since safety with three-four guys moving through a stage at the same time would be tough, and the latter allowing standard field courses where different parts would be shot by different team members.

I doubt it could make it in under USPSA, but those matches were definitely some of the most fun matches I've shot.

[John Z Sr]

Great idea,,, if you do it on the east coast ,,, count me in for the revolver team

[Charles Bond]

This would be a great idea. I see no reason it could not be sanctioned by USPSA.

Turnout for such a match might end up being more entry fee sensitve than some others just because you have to get everyone on the team to agree they can afford to attend.

You would likely need a cash pay back system since it would be hard for a team to all use a prize. This of course then opens the discussion to getting sponsors to pay something vs send merchandise for sponsorship/support.

[Rob D]

This would be a great idea. I see no reason it could not be sanctioned by USPSA.

Turnout for such a match might end up being more entry fee sensitve than some others just because you have to get everyone on the team to agree they can afford to attend.

You would likely need a cash pay back system since it would be hard for a team to all use a prize. This of course then opens the discussion to getting sponsors to pay something vs send merchandise for sponsorship/support.

That's a great point about entry fees. Maybe a single entry fee per team would be better. Something like $500 per team would be cheaper than shooting an individual match that costs $150.

A cash payback would be great, but I imagine it would be hard to find sponsors to throw in cash. Maybe you could just put out prize packages made for 6 people to split up?

[Sean Gaines]

I think it would be a great idea, Of course I would like our chances. But you can sign up, and say your with team x, and the match sponsor can give an award for high team, or something to that effect. Since alot of people are forming teams now.

[Chris Keen]

Like I said, one competitor per division, then each team gets a cumulative score. In terms of skill and experience, you could give a certain point value to each Class, then set point caps for certain divisions. For instance, D=1, C=2, B=3, A=4, etc. You could cap each "Team Class" at a certain number of points allowing the team to use whatever classes they want as long as they don't go over the point limit for their chosen division. I guess there could be an open class that could have 6 GM's if you could find them, then maybe a 28 Points Class, 18 Point Class, etc.

Couldnt we have multiple divisions represented on each team? Why do we have to have 1 comp. per division? Where are we going to find enough Revolver shooters to spread them out amongst the number of teams at a given match? Not to mention Revo shooters always like to be on the same squad when possible. Which brings us back to the point in question ... I know it wouldnt really be fair to say have a team of Open shooters competing against a team of Revo shooters, but You'll find more open shooters who would agree to the idea of a team concept.

Maybe we should decide how many guys on the team first. Or maybe we should talk about the idea of a "Class Cap" again. If you assign points to each class (D=1, C=2, B=3, A=4, M=5 etc.) and you say there is a cap of 12 points on each team, then you could have 2 Masters & 1 C, or 3 A's, or 6 C class shooters.

Not sure I'm making any sense .... just kicking ideas around.

Keeping it fair is nice, but how do you find enough Revo, SS & L-10 shooters to round out the teams? And do you just randomly throw them out there, like squadding at the Nationals, where you never know who you'll be shooting with?

Or do you let people choose their teams?

[Navysteve]

Hmm..... Rob talk to me next month at OKC. I'm sure we can figure something out.

[Charles Bond]

What is needed here is a proof of concept match. Either we do it as a stand alone match or we do it as part of a larger match. IMO the stand alone match is the only way we are going to create the needed excitement and media notice. Getting Shooting USA and/or Shooting Gallery there is criticial as is some article in a good trade magazine like American Handgunner.

Teams are the entire basis of Sportsman's Team Challenge. It has been successfully done at the FB3G but since the story there is always going to be the match, that portion of it does not get noticed.

Lastly there is a larger potential to get more sponsor involvement if they can run a factory team as opposed to some individual shooters wearing their shirts since is is always going to be bigger news that the ABC Team won a match than that Travis Trigger who is sponsored by ABC Guns won.

[jar]

The Connecticut State IDPA match had an optional team component. It used the regular match scores and added them up. Teams were of 4 people and had to contain 1 from each class (MM,SS,EX,MA) and each had to shoot a different division (IDPA has 5 divisions). I don't see team results anywhere, so I'm not sure how much participation they got.

[DyNo!]

Sounds cool - hopefully something like this could make it to GA!

[Rob D]

Like I said, one competitor per division, then each team gets a cumulative score. In terms of skill and experience, you could give a certain point value to each Class, then set point caps for certain divisions. For instance, D=1, C=2, B=3, A=4, etc. You could cap each "Team Class" at a certain number of points allowing the team to use whatever classes they want as long as they don't go over the point limit for their chosen division. I guess there could be an open class that could have 6 GM's if you could find them, then maybe a 28 Points Class, 18 Point Class, etc.

Couldnt we have multiple divisions represented on each team? Why do we have to have 1 comp. per division? Where are we going to find enough Revolver shooters to spread them out amongst the number of teams at a given match? Not to mention Revo shooters always like to be on the same squad when possible. Which brings us back to the point in question ... I know it wouldnt really be fair to say have a team of Open shooters competing against a team of Revo shooters, but You'll find more open shooters who would agree to the idea of a team concept.

Maybe we should decide how many guys on the team first. Or maybe we should talk about the idea of a "Class Cap" again. If you assign points to each class (D=1, C=2, B=3, A=4, M=5 etc.) and you say there is a cap of 12 points on each team, then you could have 2 Masters & 1 C, or 3 A's, or 6 C class shooters.

Not sure I'm making any sense .... just kicking ideas around.

Keeping it fair is nice, but how do you find enough Revo, SS & L-10 shooters to round out the teams? And do you just randomly throw them out there, like squadding at the Nationals, where you never know who you'll be shooting with?

Or do you let people choose their teams?

My thinking was to let people choose their teams. I just thought it would be fun to have one team match a year where you can go to your club and try to recruit a team member to shoot in each division. You're right though, finding somebody to shoot in every division that would be willing to travel to a major match might be hard. With L10 you could just get a limited shooter, but it might be hard to find enough revo guys. I'm sure there would be a fair way to let the teams mix and match divisions however they want to, you would just have to mathematically weight the scores somehow.

In terms of "class caps" that's exactly what I was thinking of Chris. You could have a 12 point division that was more beginner friendly, then maybe a 20 point division for guys that could put together a whole team of mostly A,M, GM shooters. This sounds like a blast to me.