Percentages at Open Nats

[OPENB]

I just got back from my first trip to the Open Nationals. I expected to see better shooters than I'm used to on a local level, cause it's the Nationals. I'm classed A, so I pulled up the Open A's on Practiscore. I was suprised to see of the 55 A open shooters, only the top 5 shot to A class percentage. 50 of did not. Is that normal? Is it due to the classifier HHF redo? I know I can't shoot to A percentage anymore. I find myself wondering when/if I need to request a drop back to B. Or do I keep plugging along in A with the other 95% of us that can't shoot to our class percentage anymore?  Or is Christian Sailor just super human that makes the rest of us look that bad?

[Smithcity]

At a larger match your percentage is relative to 1 person. At nationals it is relative to the best guy in the division. The classifier system is relative to the average of the top 10 hit factors (unless you have match classifier scores) I.e. your classifier average is likely a measure of a different skillset against a different pool of people than nationals.

 

Many people arent going to shoot their classifier average at a large match. Keep in mind classifiers are a very different skill than field courses. You could be a legit 100% GM in the stand and shoot classifier world, and an 80% at field courses in a larger match.

 

Keep working on the rest of your match skills.

[Smithcity]

Interesting data, only 3 GMs shot a GM percentage in Open and only 2 GMs shot a GM percentage in pcc.

[amokscience]

There's usually a difference of 10 to 15 percent when any national title contender shows up to a match.

[lstange]

39 minutes ago, OPENB said:

of the 55 A open shooters, only the top 5 shot to A class percentage. 50 of did not. Is that normal? Is it due to the classifier HHF redo?

It is normal and unrelated to classifier redo. Here are distribution functions of match percent shot at area matches by class from 2017, before the HHF update. This is for Production, but I think Open should look similar. Remember that classifiers below a certain floor don't count, and classification only ratchets up. For B class and better shooters classification percent is generally higher than major match percent.

 

[MikeBurgess]

I think the big thing driving the difference in performance is consistency, in the classification system Good performances count for you, mediocre runs may be dropped (2 worst of most recent 8 are not used) and  bad performances do not count at (5% below class) But at a major match ALL the stages count so someone that can shoot 80% 50% of the time is likely to make A but will get trounced by those that can and do shoot 98% on every stage. 

 

 

[konkapot]

Old news.

 

If you shoot into your class at the Nationals, you are a true, no kiddin' stud. 

 

You used to hear the phrase "Paper GM" a lot; someone who earned a GM card by shooting classifiers rather than match placement. Normally a phrase only used by people who weren't any kind of GM..... paper or otherwise. 

 

Like an income distribution graph, there are GMs...………...and then way at the top of the food chain are the guys who shoot top 4-6 at Nationals. 

 

As a paper GM I never, ever, got treated poorly by the top top top GMs. 

 

I made GM super quickly, like 30 months. Then, after about 10 years of struggling to be competitive at the GM level I petitioned USPSA to be re-classified downward. I had the data to support this and USPSA got me reclassified within about 72 hours. 

 

So you can get yourself moved down but given that this was your first Nats I would not go that route. 

[selecw]

Only 1 Open M shot over 85% and they shot 85.02

 

Oh and with the new HFs, I think the “paper GM” should be respected !!

Edited September 30, 2019 by selecw

[rowdyb]

Go back and look at 10 years of Nats data for any class not just A and any division not just Open. Very very very few people shoot their classification at Nationals. As it was explained to me by Mink years ago, if you shoot 10% below your classification % at Nats you did great. I'm 92% in Prod I think and hover around 79% at Nats.

 

One of many reasons why I wish we had no classification system and just did overall for match results.

Edited September 30, 2019 by rowdyb

[B_RAD]

If you don't shoot your class % at nats you're a paper whatever!

[nasty618]

Everyone has their opinions... but please consider a slightly different angle of looking at the same data before bashing the current classification system or saying we don't need one at all.

 

In Production...

...there were about 5400 unique USPSA IDs reported in 2018 (based on match results and not including the non-members)

There were 246 competitors at the 2018 Nationals.  That's 4.5% of total USPSA membership

Of those 246 competitors, roughly 10 (or maybe even 5) had any meaningful chance of winning the division... that's less than 0.2% of the entire USPSA Production division members.

 

Questions:

Do you think that 0.2% cares what anyone's classification is?

Do you think the 95.5% of the membership wants to have a system based on results from Nationals? Or even major matches?  How many of that 95% pool will ever go to a major match?

 

Since we all are adding our own thoughts on this, i believe current classification system serves multiple purposes - from generating revenue for the organization to giving people quantifiable goals and measurable results - and i think it's working just fine.

 

[motosapiens]

11 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

If you don't shoot your class % at nats you're a paper whatever!

couldn't agree more. I've always thought Chris Tilley and Cody Baker were paper GM's....... 

[gnoyesiv]

I even see that at some locals there are times that people myself included, don't shoot to your class. 

[B_RAD]

38 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

couldn't agree more. I've always thought Chris Tilley and Cody Baker were paper GM's....... 

I'm totally joking. I didn't shoot my classification percentage.  Though, for this match I was a paper! 

Edited September 30, 2019 by B_RAD

[motosapiens]

1 minute ago, B_RAD said:

I'm totally joking. I didn't shoot my classification percentage.  Though, for this match I was a paper! 

I assumed you were joking. It's pretty unusual to shoot your classification at a national match.

[B_RAD]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

I assumed you were joking. It's pretty unusual to shoot your classification at a national match.

Edited September 30, 2019 by B_RAD

[OPENB]

This is enlightening. I guess I didn’t do so bad after all!

[B_RAD]

23 minutes ago, OPENB said:

This is enlightening. I guess I didn’t do so bad after all!

That's good!

[rowdyb]

On 9/30/2019 at 9:34 PM, OPENB said:

This is enlightening. I guess I didn’t do so bad after all!

Seriously dude, go on practiscore and look at the past few years of nationals results.  Hardly anyone shoots within their class percentage range, let alone their actual classification percentile. ( like M being 85 to 94.9 but I'm classified 93%. I shoot around 79% of the winner at nats in Prod. That had me 44th or something overall. An 85% finish would of had me at half that.)

Edited October 2, 2019 by rowdyb