Classifier vs match bump

[B_RAD]

41 minutes ago, Gooldylocks said:

If you as the RO are offering them a reshoot and that is counting for the match, then you are absolutely doing it wrong. Whatever happens on that first run is scored and entered into the match, because at the end of the day it is just another stage. 

 

However if you are scoring that one, THEN offering them a reshoot for classification and recording that somewhere else to be turned in to the MD after the match, that's different. 

 

What do you consider a "non-competitive National Level GM"? Honest question. Because @csailer just finished 3rd at nats, and was only at 93% of the winner. He is, coincidentally, one of the literal handful of people to probably ever make GM from a match bump. Not a single person at nationals this year finished 95% or better of JJ, let alone someone that was M class. The first M was at 80.86%. So okay, not Open what about other divisions? Production: one, though the only reason he isn't is because he doesn't live in this country. Limited: one, only reason he is getting a bump is because he is unclassified... In CO, there will be four match bumps to GM after nationals, for Hwansik, Phil, Mason, and Shane (one notoriously underclassed shooter and three super squad GMs in other divisions, two of which are unclassified).

 

The point I'm trying to make is, in well populated divisions, it is rare to ever get a match bump to GM. Especially if you take out the people that already are GMs in another division. It is extremely rare. Unless you are a madman like Christian and slay a bunch of people at an Area match, but even then it is rare. 

I'm doing this. 

 

 

[B_RAD]

40 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Wow! Yes, you are doing it wrong. And on several counts. LOL Being able to shoot well in a match certainly does depend on your equipment running. A gun that runs is just as critical as practice. You can't win without either for long. Then there are the rules to consider. There is only one instance where reshoots are "offered" and it's not for a gun problem. And you do realize USPSA should be getting a cut of every classifer shot at a match. That's why MD's charge people to reshoot the occasional classifier. 

Reshoot is not for score and charge extra $3.

 

 

[B_RAD]

49 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Wow! Yes, you are doing it wrong. And on several counts. LOL Being able to shoot well in a match certainly does depend on your equipment running. A gun that runs is just as critical as practice. You can't win without either for long. Then there are the rules to consider. There is only one instance where reshoots are "offered" and it's not for a gun problem. And you do realize USPSA should be getting a cut of every classifer shot at a match. That's why MD's charge people to reshoot the occasional classifier. 

what is the only reason?

[Sarge]

8 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

what is the only reason?

RO Interference. Everything else is mandatory reshoot. But broken guns don’t qualify.

[Sarge]

19 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

Reshoot is not for score and charge extra $3.

 

 

[B_RAD]

1 minute ago, Sarge said:

RO Interference. Everything else is mandatory reshoot. But broken guns don’t qualify.

My understanding is 1 reshoot per classifier  (not for March score) is allowed if the shooter wants it. Doesn't have to be due to RO or a mandatory reason. Essentially, it can be because they want to. Am I wrong?  

 

I want to be by the book. Or BOD amendments 

[Sarge]

6 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

My understanding is 1 reshoot per classifier  (not for March score) is allowed if the shooter wants it. Doesn't have to be due to RO or a mandatory reason. Essentially, it can be because they want to. Am I wrong?  

 

I want to be by the book. Or BOD amendments 

But that’s not the same kind of reshoot. I guess since you look at it like that you are right. I was talking reshoots as outlined in the rules for such things as REF etc.

  Also, keep in mind an MD can not allow classifier reshoots so it’s not a sure thing. Sometimes situations or conditions don’t lend themselves to taking the time to reshoot classifiers

[MHicks]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it not very long ago that there wasn't really a rule or guideline about a shooter, separately from a match, shooting a classifier many times and finally submitting a great score.  Then to slow that down USPSA either by a rule or recommendation limited the number of times you could reshoot. I understand that a recommendation is not a rule but thought I remembered something being said about the issue.

[nasty618]

2 hours ago, Gooldylocks said:

What do you consider a "non-competitive National Level GM"? Honest question. Because @csailer just finished 3rd at nats, and was only at 93% of the winner. He is, coincidentally, one of the literal handful of people to probably ever make GM from a match bump. Not a single person at nationals this year finished 95% or better of JJ, let alone someone that was M class. The first M was at 80.86%. So okay, not Open what about other divisions? Production: one, though the only reason he isn't is because he doesn't live in this country. Limited: one, only reason he is getting a bump is because he is unclassified... In CO, there will be four match bumps to GM after nationals, for Hwansik, Phil, Mason, and Shane (one notoriously underclassed shooter and three super squad GMs in other divisions, two of which are unclassified).

 

The point I'm trying to make is, in well populated divisions, it is rare to ever get a match bump to GM. Especially if you take out the people that already are GMs in another division. It is extremely rare. Unless you are a madman like Christian and slay a bunch of people at an Area match, but even then it is rare. 

 

I hope my earlier posts made it clear - i dont  like the term "paper GM".   I think it implies undue negative tone to a rating that was earned fair and square with hard work and effort.   I think a GM rating, however it was achieved, deserves proper recognition and a level of respect for the work put into getting there. Plus several other folks have said it earlier - not all, but most GMs are paper GMs. 

 

But let me try to answer your question.  If we must define some criteria to separate GMs - or any class for that matter - i think their ability to compete well at a high level match within a large segment of their peers should be the main one.  I am using "non-competitive at national level" term...  Allow me to explain.  Lets use a hypothetical GM that Sarge was describing - one who shoots 60-65% of the field at Nationals. Are they a real GM?  Of course, as we already determined. Are they crushing local Level 1 matches? That might depend on where, but probably yes.  Are they able to compete with their peers at a large match like the Nationals?  Unless there were unknown external factors like health issues, equipment issues, etc. that affected this placement and they consistently place at the bottom of their class and below lower classes - i would have to say no.  

 

So i would use a term like "National level GM (or M, A, B - whatever)" to describe the top competitors, people who are in the running for the top 30-40 spots overall in a field of 300+ shooters and with 20-30 entrants of their class present.  Arbitrary numbers, but hopefully it makes sense what i am trying to describe.  Then we can refer to a "paper GM" as just... GM.

 

Another way to think about things might be along the lines of martial arts belts:

C=white belt

B=blue belt

A=purple belt

M-brown belt

GM=black belt

 

National Level GM, based on their wins and placements at major matches, could then be a dan grade.

 

Not that any of this is needed, just trying to answer the question of what i interpret as "not competitive at the national level".  And personally, i am setting my goal for next year to become a "paper M"  For now i am happy to have discovered that i am a National level B class shooter, who could have been a "paper A" if he started shooting three months earlier, before the new classifier HHF were introduced.

 

Edited November 7, 2018 by nasty618

[csailer]

10 hours ago, Gooldylocks said:

If you as the RO are offering them a reshoot and that is counting for the match, then you are absolutely doing it wrong. Whatever happens on that first run is scored and entered into the match, because at the end of the day it is just another stage. 

 

However if you are scoring that one, THEN offering them a reshoot for classification and recording that somewhere else to be turned in to the MD after the match, that's different. 

 

What do you consider a "non-competitive National Level GM"? Honest question. Because @csailer just finished 3rd at nats, and was only at 93% of the winner. He is, coincidentally, one of the literal handful of people to probably ever make GM from a match bump. Not a single person at nationals this year finished 95% or better of JJ, let alone someone that was M class. The first M was at 80.86%. So okay, not Open what about other divisions? Production: one, though the only reason he isn't is because he doesn't live in this country. Limited: one, only reason he is getting a bump is because he is unclassified... In CO, there will be four match bumps to GM after nationals, for Hwansik, Phil, Mason, and Shane (one notoriously underclassed shooter and three super squad GMs in other divisions, two of which are unclassified).

 

The point I'm trying to make is, in well populated divisions, it is rare to ever get a match bump to GM. Especially if you take out the people that already are GMs in another division. It is extremely rare. Unless you are a madman like Christian and slay a bunch of people at an Area match, but even then it is rare. 

You're too kind  good points in here

[LilBunniFuFu]

12 hours ago, Gooldylocks said:

... In CO, there will be four match bumps to GM after nationals, for Hwansik, Phil, Mason, and Shane (one notoriously underclassed shooter and three super squad GMs in other divisions, two of which are unclassified).

. 

 

Yea... That's not going to happen. There were only two GM shooters. One won the division and the other shot in the 70's does not count for classification so no match bump. 

[Smithcity]

As a newly minted GM I'll throw in my 2 cents. Per the original question, most GM's get there by shooting classifiers, as others stated, few make it to GM via match bump. Your only path to GM via match bump is Nationals. 

 

Regarding classifiers:

1. I've practiced them ahead of time, sometimes it has worked out for me, others it hasn't.

2. Regarding classifier re-shoots. I've re-shot them for various reasons. Gun malfunction. Recently I had a gear malfunction. I've simply shot poorly (nearly zeroing) and reshot. It's all reflected in the classification record. Some have been GM scores, some haven't. Paid classifier re-shoots did not count toward match score.

3. I've also shot enough classifiers without practicing ahead of time, without re-shoots, to still earn a 95%+ average. 

 

I'm also one of those PCC guys, of which I've heard is the "easy" division. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, clearly HHF's needed to be updated (my 95%+ average is post adjusted HHF's). I've been shooting PCC for just over a year, my goal was to make A this year. With a lot of live fire practice, and immense dry fire / simulated practice (with a SIRT rifle), I climbed my way there.

 

Personally I feel I have mastered reloads, transitions, splits, and managing engaging near / far targets, open / hard cover and no shoot targets. Fundamental skills that translate to "normal" match stages. I have NOT mastered moving while shooting, executing the best stage plan, and minimizing movements. 

 

Ultimately, I do not think classifiers test the full skill set necessary to be 95% or above in a match. I feel I have half of the full skill set I would personally like to possess. Next year I'll work on what is missing. My goal this year is to finish out a 100% classification average, I'm 1 classifier away. My highest classifier percentage is 125% (reflects as 100% in the record), highest classifier HF is 17.1, I doubt those numbers occur very often.

 

Yes. I'm probably a "paper" GM, there is still a LOT for me to improve on. I haven't gone to many bigger matches due to travel / time constraints. Regardless, I find it unlikely that most could achieve 95%+ without a lot of practice and ability.

[Swanny10]

7 hours ago, LilBunniFuFu said:

 

Yea... That's not going to happen. There were only two GM shooters. One won the division and the other shot in the 70's does not count for classification so no match bump. 

 

A nationals match that doesn’t qualify as a classifier. Interesting. 

[rowdyb]

Yep. My prod nats finish is already in my list of classifiers. My co and L10 Nats are not, because they didn't meet the criteria. 

[B_RAD]

2 hours ago, Swanny10 said:

 

A nationals match that doesn’t qualify as a classifier. Interesting. 

It would if they didn't have 3 shooters that are all national chanps shooting as U. Not to mention the other 2 M's that should be GM's. 

 

But the hhf needed to be raised. I get it CO is a new div so there's gonna be some discrepancies but still!

[Gooldylocks]

<deleted>

Edited November 8, 2018 by Gooldylocks
Nats must also qualify as classifier before you can bump to GM

[Swanny10]

8 minutes ago, Gooldylocks said:

Nationals are exempt from the 3 or more at 90% or better for a bump to Grand Master, however not for counting as a classifier. Though with a division that unpopulated I could see them not doing it. Unless I am misreading this, and it has to count as a classifier AND you have to finish at 95% or better. Which is very possible.

 

So now I’m comfused. What do you mean it could be good for a match bump but not as a classifier? 

[B_RAD]

18 minutes ago, Gooldylocks said:

 

 

 

Nationals are exempt from the 3 or more at 90% or better for a bump to Grand Master, however not for counting as a classifier. Though with a division that unpopulated I could see them not doing it. Unless I am misreading this, and it has to count as a classifier AND you have to finish at 95% or better. Which is very possible.

 

 

I'm confused as well.

 

I just looked and it doesn't seem that CO Nats was used as a classifier.  Nor was HK bumped to GM.  He has finished above 95% at the last two CO Nats and is still only a M.

 

 

 

Edited November 8, 2018 by B_RAD

[Gooldylocks]

Well that answers that question then. Has to meet all the other criteria (50+, 3+, 90%+) and you have to finish at above 95%. I will edit my post above to remove the misinformation. 

[B_RAD]

Here's a look at all who finished above 90%.  

 

3 of them are classified as U but are all GM's and previous national champs. HK has finished above 95% at the last two and is still only an M in CO.  IMO, this should have been addressed since it's kinda stupid. I think you're classification in one division should be the same in all others. At least for pistol divisions. Again, just my opinion. 

 

 

 

Edited November 8, 2018 by B_RAD

[wtturn]

On 11/7/2018 at 10:29 AM, B_RAD said:

 

 

At my home club if I'm RO'g a shooter anywhere and they have a malfunction, I ask them if they want a reshoot. It's supposed to be a test of skill not how well they maintian their gun or how well their gear works. To me, that's the only reason I think a reshoot should be allowed. Maybe I'm wrong?  I don't know but that's how I do it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are you being serious right now?

[B_RAD]

2 minutes ago, wtturn said:

 

Are you being serious right now?

Ha ha. I was being serious. Though, I probably didn't say what I meant very well. 

 

I don't stop them and ask them. When they're done, and after scoring that run to count for match score, I ask them if they want a reshoot for no score. If they do, I make sure to charge them $3. This is at my club. 

 

From what I understand, that's allowed per the rules, or the BOD's ruling to skirt the rules. 

 

 

[wtturn]

7 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

Ha ha. I was being serious. Though, I probably didn't say what I meant very well. 

 

I don't stop them and ask them. When they're done, and after scoring that run to count for match score, I ask them if they want a reshoot for no score. If they do, I make sure to charge them $3. This is at my club. 

 

From what I understand, that's allowed per the rules, or the BOD's ruling to skirt the rules. 

 

 

 

I posted before I read your later responses.  Sorry, carry on!

[wtturn]

GM is the most stratified classification in the sport.  You have guys who win nationals/worlds all the way down to GMs who can't win their local club match.   

 

"GM" without context only means you achieved a certain mathematical result surpassing an arguably arbitrary standard.

 

Classification is the game within the game, but I think a lot of people make it out to be the primary pursuit to their own detriment.

 

People who grandbag and engage in unsporting (and unethical) behavior to inflate their classification are missing the point, or don't care to see the point.

 

I'll continue to laugh and point at the GMs who show up and get wrecked by A/B/C shooters.  

[reverse_edge]

42 minutes ago, wtturn said:

GM is the most stratified classification in the sport.  You have guys who win nationals/worlds all the way down to GMs who can't win their local club match.   

 

"GM" without context only means you achieved a certain mathematical result surpassing an arguably arbitrary standard.

 

Classification is the game within the game, but I think a lot of people make it out to be the primary pursuit to their own detriment.

 

People who grandbag and engage in unsporting (and unethical) behavior to inflate their classification are missing the point, or don't care to see the point.

 

I'll continue to laugh and point at the GMs who show up and get wrecked by A/B/C shooters.  

 

Yes, this.

 

THAT SAID, with the way our classification system works, it's not really that hard for people to be classed below their skill level. Especially now with the new HHFs.

 

People toss around the terms grandbagger / sandbagger / paper GM too much, in my opinion. Just shut up and shoot.