Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!
nasty618

Classifiers from 2018 Nationals are official?

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, ima45dv8 said:

And that idea has some merit when you consider a crazy hero-or-zero, almost impossible to duplicate run could set the HHF while not being truly reflective of actual efforts:

 

Actually, I don’t think it has any merit at all; it assumes that the top ten scores are indicative of the rest, but if there were ten or more ‘crazy hero-or-zero’ runs then the net effect is the same, an artificially high hit factor.

 

All of this messing around with numbers is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, while an interesting intellectual challenge I think it is ultimately futile. The USPSA ship has struck the logical iceberg. It’s going down like DiCaprio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 2:41 PM, rowdyb said:

I'm gonna go up in L10 and CO and remain unchanged in Prod from just some quick calculations. Maybe there will be more CO GM's now....

Still only show 16 in the Top 20. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The USPSA Down Range e-mail went out today and still no mention of the newly deployed Classifiers. As an Affiliated USPSA Match club president I have also not been notified of the new classifiers being deployed on the USPSA website. Once again Affiliated clubs and match staff are left to figure it all out on their own magically. Why are we paying fees to USPSA again???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. I’m a club contact and received no notification.  Of course that’s not new though. We really never receive any news besidesthe down range email. 

 

Youd think youd be abke to get range officer and match director specific enails targeting those roles too but I guess that’s hard

Edited by Nathanb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CHA-LEE said:

The USPSA Down Range e-mail went out today and still no mention of the newly deployed Classifiers. As an Affiliated USPSA Match club president I have also not been notified of the new classifiers being deployed on the USPSA website. Once again Affiliated clubs and match staff are left to figure it all out on their own magically. Why are we paying fees to USPSA again???

Nov/Dec Frontsight magazine mentions new classifiers from recent 9 days of Nationals and says they will be made available soon and go into effect Jan 2019. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 6:21 PM, CHA-LEE said:

This is just my opinion so take it for what its worth. But I think there are several factors to consider when using the Nationals match performance on these new classifiers. The first is the reality that very few competitors with a chance of winning a National Title are going to let it all hang out on these classifiers while shooting them at the nationals. Its way too much risk to push your performance to 100% and potentially eat a miss or no shoot.

 

Absolutely this. I think that the assumption that "oh if a GM makes this score on this stage, that's what the HHF for a GM is now that we've turned this into a classifier" misses the important bit of context in which the stage is being run. The huge national match. The GMs ran these stages and had _strategy_ on these courses, which was to earn as many points as possible while not making mistakes and taking themselves out of the running. As you correctly identify, this is _not the same context_ as a club match where most people hero or zero them because they want to go higher in their classification, and if they ZERO the classifier stage it's not really a big deal. They don't win the monthly club match, if they were even in the race for it, in the first place. Compare that situation to what was going on at Nationals where the GMs would have lost 80 to 120 points on the leader and would have to consistently beat the leader every stage for the next 12 to 14 stages to win those points back, if they were trying to hero or zero the stage. In a match that happens only once a year.

 

Quote

If it was up to me I would take the classifier stage winning hit factors from the nationals and add 10% to each one because we all know that people are shooting those things more conservative at the nationals verses their maximum performance potential.

 

I am surprised this was not what was done at HQ.

 

Quote

I don't understand why USPSA would water down the Classification system like that with inaccurate 100% hit factors which make it much easier to make the next level of classification. But they have done exactly that time and time again whenever something new is deployed like new classifiers or divisions.

 

PCC is the most recent example of the classification system being completely wrong in skill rating for way too long which allowed a bunch of "B Class" pistol shooters to magically earn Master or Grand Master classifications in PCC. To make it even worse, they allowed the PCC classification to automatically bump up their pistol classifications to one level below. Now you have a "B Class" pistol shooters who exploited the classification hole in PCC to earn a GM classification there and by associated get a Master classification in all of their pistol divisions.

 

This appears to have happened in Carry Optics division with the new classifiers. I've seen two shooters who had above 95% scores on stages at nationals, subsequently used as classifier entries, that were flagged by the classification system as being 20% higher than their current classification, and not be used.

 

Quote

That type of mismanagement of the classification system is what pisses people off and turns them away from the sport.

 

I'm not so sure. People like getting validation that the work that they've put in is being rewarded. So, for many people they'll take these high classification scores, feel good about themselves, and hopefully realize that there is a big difference between having a GM next to their name and being in contention for a national championship. There's a big difference between shooting ONE stage as fast as JJ Racaza did at Nationals, while in the comfort of your local club match - and actually giving JJ a run for his money at a match with 24 stages with a championship title on the line.

 

 

Quote

I also want to point out that all of us pay USPSA handsomely in Mission Count and Classifier fees every weekend to do this stuff right but it still gets screwed up on a regular basis.  

 

+1 - we get what we PAY and VOTE for.

Edited by sc68cal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it weird that we have a set of classifiers (the new ones) that should be easier to 100% on vs all the rest that are harder?

 

HQ has confirmed what we  all were thinking. They took the top 10 and averaged them to come up with the hhf for the 18 series. Except CO. They had to use production scores. Which to me seems to make CO even easier. 

 

In my mind, that should indicate that their system doesn't make sense. The new ones have only been shot about 1,100 times at a national level match where maximum points is the goal!  Compare that to ones that have been shot 10k times at loacals where people are swinging for home runs and don't care if they strike out. Doesn't seem like apples to apples to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s not and I foresee a large run on the new classifiers that aren’t hard to set up once the spring season kicks off. But since we aren’t tabulating the scores on the fly for new hhf were going to see some higher scores come out of this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For fun I looked at some of the HHF for the smallest division, Revolver.

They used the same average of top 10 system to set the HHF, on "for that day" 18-06 the stage winner shot what is now a 134% classifier, my 66.9% match score is a 90% classifier score. To Make it even more ridiculous only 5 of the 10 scores used to set the HHF were clean runs the other 5 all had a mike. 

 

 

Edited by MikeBurgess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2018 at 2:56 PM, B_RAD said:

Except CO. They had to use production scores. Which to me seems to make CO even easier. 

 

Depends heavily on the classifier. If it’s a superfast close one, irons win out. Of course.

 

Now for something with 10+ yard singlehanded shooting, or partial targets at similar distances... hmm. I shoot CO... I may need to bribe our MD to pick these classifiers in the spring... ;) 

 

Edited by MemphisMechanic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MemphisMechanic said:

 

Depends heavily on the classifier. If it’s a superfast close one, irons win out. Of course.

 

Now for something with 10+ yard singlehanded shooting, or partial targets at similar distances... hmm. I shoot CO... I may need to bribe our MD to pick these classifiers in the spring... ;) 

 

I disagree. I think an optic is faster no matter what. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

I disagree. I think an optic is faster no matter what. 

 

I agree. Since I’m not using it up close. Index, hammer, transition, repeat. :D 

 

(You have more miles on one than I. I’d probably feel differently if I actually did any amount of practice.)

 

Edited by MemphisMechanic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MemphisMechanic said:

 

I agree. Since I’m not using it up close.

 

(You have more miles on one than I. I’d probably feel differently if I actually did any amount of practice.)

Practice?...... Nah....that's boring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shot all of the classifiers, across all 9 days. I never layed it up and went for it on each and every one. No one I know was dinking around at nats on any stage as we all know the value of a single point.

 

Talking about Carry Optics (I was 22nd overall in that division) 18-04, I was 9th overall for that stage. So my score is one that could have been used to determine the HHF for that classifier. At nats that was a 78% run but in my record it is an 87% classifier. And then for 18-08 I was 22nd overall for that stage in the match at 85% but for a classifier it was worth 92%.

 

Now Limited 10 (where I shot minor and was 11th overall in the divsion) and for 18-01 I was 3rd overall in the match, so my score again could have been used to determine the HHF for the classifier. In the match I shot got me 88%, but as a classifier it is worth almost 92%. Same match let's look at 18-03, I was 5ht overall and another one that could have been used for determining the HHF and at nats that was an almost 92% run. But as a classifier it counts as only 86%.......

 

I haven't bothered to cross check any of my Prod ones because I'm still pissy about going from 94.2 to 88 in one week because of the nats classifiers.

Edited by rowdyb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why anyone would care what their classification is at this point, it seems little different than employing a random number generator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 4:18 PM, CHA-LEE said:

I just checked the USPSA website and sure enough the new 2018 Classifiers are listed in the classifier stage section.

 

I am surprised that USPSA hasn't sent out an e-mail notice to the membership about this yet.

Oh come on now, nobody is surprised that this wasn't communicated to the attendees, general membership or club contacts. 

Back on topic. I actually agree with how these HHF's were calculated. Watching some of the top shooters on these stages there were in fact folks pushing for a hero score on some, but not all, of the classifiers. The starting seated classifier was definitely not a stage you could cruise on. Comparing how you perform relative to the top 10 at nationals is a far better comparison to Grand Master than John in Springfield having the stars align while lightning struck a unicorns horn to annihilate a HHF never to be duplicated by anyone. Hell, why not just have Ben run the drill all day and submit his best score if you want to know what is REALLY possible.  

 

I completely agree with you that the weak hand accuracy drill on turtles was shot much more conservative as the reward just wasn't there. Will someone get a high score on that classifier at a local match by going full hero? Maybe. He will damn sure need to practice weak hand shooting to the point of a GM to make it work. And he will probably need to be the person in charge of setting up the classifier because that stage in general was a soul leecher for half the match. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 6:24 PM, MikeBurgess said:

I agree, looking at the top 20 there are way more 100s now than there were last time I looked, 

3 in CO

2 in limited

3 in open

7 in PCC

5 in production

5 in revo 

 

 

From what I understand, the revo scores were not updated to new HHF because of lack of data. Me shooting 100s by shooting my sights and not going for broke proves this. But also 4 out of 5 of those revolvers belong there.

 

On 11/20/2018 at 6:49 PM, CHA-LEE said:

I just did some basic calculations on the 100% hit factor listed on USPSA vs real match results from the nationals and its looking like they averaged the hit factors for the top 10 shooters for each division to come up with the initial 100% hit factors. I can see most of these getting blown out of the water with 110% - 120% runs when people go for broke at local matches. This is an interesting contrast to all of the old classifiers 100% hit factors being bumped up to nearly unobtainable levels for most GM's.

I wondered how that happened. I ended up getting a 100 and a 98 at Nationals but I don't believe my highest percentage for a stage was close to that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ran 18-01 yesterday. All I can say everyone used most of the target surface! No obvious a-zone clustering... 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nasty618 said:

Looks like the local clubs are starting to run the new 18 series classifiers. 

 

https://practiscore.com/results/new/71125 - looks like they had a match  that included at least 4 of the 18 series classifiers

 

 

I shot this match and CM 18-08 has a problem with the WSB.   First page has 1 description for string 2 and second page has a different description for string 2. Looks like a copy paste error on second page but the page with the diagram was how we shot it at Nationals. 

https://uspsa.org/viewer//18-08.pdf

Nice having some new classifiers 

18-06 had a lot of shooters walking back shacking their head.😭

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×