Why don’t classifications go down?

[IVC]

2 hours ago, B_RAD said:

Should there be another class?  I think that makes more sense compared to lowering the classification ranges to fall within the percentages of nationals.

It's not about the class label, but about the system that works off of the HHF - it will be skewed and it will have no resolution in the middle. 

[lstange]

4 minutes ago, IVC said:

We are not talking about the same thing - gaming a system means that you're playing the classification game to mislabel yourself up (grandbagging) or down (sandbagging). Having a classification system that is off and doesn't differentiate well between shooters (on paper) or how an individual progresses, by definition makes that system not particularly usable for tracking progress.

This calibration issue is easily addressed by converting classification percent to classification percentile. If your classification percent is x%, then classification percentile is approximately pnorm(x, mean=56.6, sd=17.9). USPSA can do it even better using actual distribution rather than normal approximation.

 

Note that this transformation is monotonic, so it preserves rank ordering and does not affect discriminative power.

[Chills1994]

13 minutes ago, IVC said:

Seems like people already talk more about their time on standard exercises (Draw, reload, El Presidente, Bill Drill, etc.) rather than HF. After all, what is the meaning of classes if the goal posts are constantly moving and percentages need to be tagged with the time/date when it was achieved such that one can figure out the HHF at the time? 

I haven't shot a match in ....oh....almost 8 years.

 

But when I do go to the range, I still practice draws, transitions, and Bill Drills.

 

Did USPSA ever post up a classifier records page or tab on the USPSA.org website?

 

I should be able to click on El Prez, and then there should be tabs for Open, Limited, etc.  Click on the Limited tab and it shows me who the top 5 highest hit factors shooters are... in Limited...including their name, USPSA member number, the club name, the date, the raw points, the time, any penalties, and the hit factor they actually earned.

 

And ideally, there would be an option for each of the top 5 HHF shooters to post up a link to a YouTube video of their run on that classifier stage.

 

(reaching for the stars here)...there should also be a plot/graph of the HHF that USPSA used (on the vertical axis) with the date or just plain "time" (on the horizontal axis).

 

And we can all watch or see how HHF's having been increasing over time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[nasty618]

17 hours ago, IVC said:

It's already getting to the point where people simply look at their times instead of percentages of the HHF on standardized drills such as El Presidente or Bill Drill to measure progress and have an idea about how well/poorly they are doing overall. If Bill Drill at 2 seconds was considered a "master level time" at some time

 

This is not a valid point.  Time is a general concept, HF is not a common concept and i am fairly sure is unique to IPSC/USPSA.  And it's not "already" - it's been that way since the inception of those drills, which date back to the 70s, Col. Cooper and Bill Wilson (who also developed the 5x5 dill that IDPA uses).  Those drills have been around forever and are shot in just about every discipline by timmies and gaymers alike.  

 

Narrow bands at the top are narrow for every class underneath.  If I am not happy with B class - I will work harder to make A, M, GM.  I will disassociate my match placement percentage from my classification percentage.  I will understand that classification system is designed for a much larger pool of people, not just for the 10% that go to major matches and certainly not for the top  3-5% of those who actually have a chance of winning those matches.  But I will use both metrics to gauge my progression as a shooter.

 

Classification system is not broken. Change my mind.

Edited December 11, 2019 by nasty618

[Thomas H]

On 12/10/2019 at 3:30 PM, IVC said:

If Bill Drill at 2 seconds was considered a "master level time" at some time, anyone below it knows they are not all that bad. The fact that most B and some C shooters can shoot at that level tells the story...

 

I would like to know where "most B and some C shooters" can shoot a Bill Drill in under 2 seconds.  Because "most B and some C" can't, other than an occasional one or two here and there who specifically worked on that skill.  (Normally to the detriment of others, because if they built that skill to that level but still are B or C class, they ignored lots of other skills.)

 

And a lot of this conversation has been had before.  Your classification percentage and your match finish percentage are not the same thing, don't measure the same thing, and aren't SUPPOSED to be the same thing.  As such, people being unhappy that they aren't the same thing seems.....less than useful.

 

Throughout the years of matches, match finishes (in majors) tend to go by class for the vast majority of people.  Most of the time, GMs will beat Ms who will beat As who will beat Bs and so on.  Yes, there is some melding at the edges, and similarly, some few people who are misclassified.  (Or had a bad match with gun issues, or whatever.)  And yet...the vast majority of classifications match how people do at majors.

 

Talking about how wide the bands are (for whatever meaning people add to that) also doesn't make much sense, because GM M, and A are deliberately set to be a smaller range of percentages, plus in any test of ability, you just aren't going to have that many people at the high end.  That's how human abilities work.  We wouldn't expect the "band" of Ms to be either as wide as Cs, nor contain as many people.

 

IVC also said:

"It's a problem because the whole classification system loses relevance. If you use it to track personal progress, like majority of people do, neither your class nor your percentage reflect your ability as a shooter. "

Your class and your percentage reflect your ability as a shooter almost every single time at a major--as long as you recognize that classification percentage and match finish percentage are two completely different things.  However, your match finish (place) relative to other shooters almost invariably reflects your classification.  As such, using your classification to track your personal progress is a great idea.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Thomas H
I have no idea why it originally said "As such" twice...

[B_RAD]

31 minutes ago, Thomas H said:

 

I would like to know where "most B and some C shooters" can shoot a Bill Drill in under 2 seconds.  Because "most B and some C" can't, other than an occasional one or two here and there who specifically worked on that skill.  (Normally to the detriment of others, because if they built that skill to that level but still are B or C class, they ignored lots of other skills.)

 

And a lot of this conversation has been had before.  Your classification percentage and your match finish percentage are not the same thing, don't measure the same thing, and aren't SUPPOSED to be the same thing.  As such, people being unhappy that they aren't the same thing seems.....less than useful.

 

Throughout the years of matches, match finishes (in majors) tend to go by class for the vast majority of people.  Most of the time, GMs will beat Ms who will beat As who will beat Bs and so on.  Yes, there is some melding at the edges, and similarly, some few people who are misclassified.  (Or had a bad match with gun issues, or whatever.)  And yet...the vast majority of classifications match how people do at majors.

 

Talking about how wide the bands are (for whatever meaning people add to that) also doesn't make much sense, because GM M, and A are deliberately set to be a smaller range of percentages, plus in any test of ability, you just aren't going to have that many people at the high end.  That's how human abilities work.  We wouldn't expect the "band" of Ms to be either as wide as Cs, nor contain as many people.

 

IVC also said:

"It's a problem because the whole classification system loses relevance. If you use it to track personal progress, like majority of people do, neither your class nor your percentage reflect your ability as a shooter. "

Your class and your percentage reflect your ability as a shooter almost every single time at a major--as long as you recognize that classification percentage and match finish percentage are two completely different things.  However, your match finish (place) relative to other shooters almost invariably reflects your classification.  As such, using your classification to track your personal progress is a great idea.

 

 

As such,

Close the thread.

[IVC]

1 hour ago, nasty618 said:

Classification system is not broken. Change my mind.

I don't think it's "broken" either, just that it's evolving into a less useful system with every upgrade of the HHF.

 

I haven't suggested any changes, which happens to be the most common bickering concept here - remove this, change that, abolish it all, recreate it into something else... None of that. I agree that it is what it is and that it works the way it is designed to work (except that classifications are not recalculated against the new HHF when it's updated, which creates internal inconsistency).

 

If anything, just getting more statistics out of the USPSA would be extremely helpful - have a separate "geek page" on the website where you can look at your actual ranking percentile, historical HHF, stats on classifications and all those goodies that a few members here have to compile manually. It took a long time before USPSA would even disclose the HHF in a classification calculator, which I find counterproductive because it's (one of) the way(s) I measure progress and whether my training is effective - I mean, everyone who trains will have a timer to keep track of times on various drills and measure progress. Classification percentage should be no different. Imagine if your timer got "adjusted" to a shorter second every so often because someone somewhere shot a drill in shorter time. It would create a moving target that is not all that useful.

[B_RAD]

20 minutes ago, IVC said:

I don't think it's "broken" either, just that it's evolving into a less useful system with every upgrade of the HHF.

 

I haven't suggested any changes, which happens to be the most common bickering concept here - remove this, change that, abolish it all, recreate it into something else... None of that. I agree that it is what it is and that it works the way it is designed to work (except that classifications are not recalculated against the new HHF when it's updated, which creates internal inconsistency).

 

If anything, just getting more statistics out of the USPSA would be extremely helpful - have a separate "geek page" on the website where you can look at your actual ranking percentile, historical HHF, stats on classifications and all those goodies that a few members here have to compile manually. It took a long time before USPSA would even disclose the HHF in a classification calculator, which I find counterproductive because it's (one of) the way(s) I measure progress and whether my training is effective - I mean, everyone who trains will have a timer to keep track of times on various drills and measure progress. Classification percentage should be no different. Imagine if your timer got "adjusted" to a shorter second every so often because someone somewhere shot a drill in shorter time. It would create a moving target that is not all that useful.

You sure about that?  Speaking for myself, I mostly just use the timer for the beep. Don’t really do par times anymore. Don’t really look at over all times. I’ll look at splits and transitions every once and a while. I never keep track or times on any drill. So, not “everyone” keeps track of times. In fact, I’m more concerned with HF. 

Edited December 11, 2019 by B_RAD

[TrackCage]

45 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

You sure about that?  Speaking for myself, I mostly just use the timer for the beep. Don’t really do par times anymore. Don’t really look at over all times. I’ll look at splits and transitions every once and a while. I never keep track or times on any drill. So, not “everyone” keeps track of times. In fact, I’m more concerned with HF. 

OK, but you need the overall time to calculate HF.

 

P.S., I too am guilty of using the timer mostly for a start signal and do not actively track my drill progress over time. Maybe I should be.

[B_RAD]

2 minutes ago, TrackCage said:

OK, but you need the overall time to calculate HF.

 

P.S., I too am guilty of using the timer mostly for a start signal and do not actively track my drill progress over time. Maybe I should be.

True. I’m just saying I do not focus on time to track progress. Actually, I focus on feel most of the time. I find HF more important than speed. I don’t calculate hf on drills either just saying to me it’s more important than the time. 
 

I do variable drills in practices. Constantly chaining it up. I don’t do set drills very much anymore. I know when running something if I yanked a shot or broke one early/late Or whatever. I can tell(feel) if I ran the drill successfully. I also place a large amount of value on first runs. Not running the same drill 10 times and taking my best run. 
 

that’s just me. 

[Chills1994]

11 hours ago, Thomas H said:

<snip>

...

I would like to know where "most B and some C shooters" can shoot a Bill Drill in under 2 seconds.  Because "most B and some C" can't, other than an occasional one or two here and there who specifically worked on that skill.  ...

</snip>

 

(Sheepishly raises hand)

 

 

That was just a few months ago.

 

Did I mention I was just a B class flunkie in Production and Limited (minor) ....

 

eight years ago ...

 

when I was shooting matches?

[motosapiens]

not all alphas. Fail.

[Thomas H]

16 hours ago, Chills1994 said:

 

(Sheepishly raises hand)

 

 

That was just a few months ago.

 

Did I mention I was just a B class flunkie in Production and Limited (minor) ....

 

eight years ago ...

 

when I was shooting matches?

 

 

So you were a B-class 8 years ago, and according to you, "But when I do go to the range, I still practice draws, transitions, and Bill Drills."

 

....yep, fits the "other than an occasional one or two here and there who specifically worked on that skill.  ... "

 

A lot of people have a ton of fun meeting arbitrary-but-well-known measurements of specific skills.  2-second Bill Drill, that one-second draw, one-mile rifle shot, one-second reload, etc, etc.  They are fun to do, no doubt!   

 

I'm still thinking that if someone got together a bunch of B-class shooters and had them attempt a 2-second Bill Drill (7 yards, USPSA A-zone, all A-hits in 2 seconds), the vast majority would fail.

 

 

[Chills1994]

5 hours ago, motosapiens said:

not all alphas. Fail.

My bad!

 

 

 

[Chills1994]

1 hour ago, Thomas H said:

 

 

So you were a B-class 8 years ago, and according to you, "But when I do go to the range, I still practice draws, transitions, and Bill Drills."

 

....yep, fits the "other than an occasional one or two here and there who specifically worked on that skill.  ... "

 

A lot of people have a ton of fun meeting arbitrary-but-well-known measurements of specific skills.  2-second Bill Drill, that one-second draw, one-mile rifle shot, one-second reload, etc, etc.  They are fun to do, no doubt!   

 

I'm still thinking that if someone got together a bunch of B-class shooters and had them attempt a 2-second Bill Drill (7 yards, USPSA A-zone, all A-hits in 2 seconds), the vast majority would fail.

 

 

B class is a wide ranging class.

Probably too wide in the spectrum of skills it encompasses.

 

 

[IVC]

On 12/11/2019 at 9:11 AM, B_RAD said:

Speaking for myself, I mostly just use the timer for the beep. Don’t really do par times anymore. 

 

On 12/11/2019 at 9:57 AM, TrackCage said:

P.S., I too am guilty of using the timer mostly for a start signal and do not actively track my drill progress over time. Maybe I should be.

 

Let me guess - neither of you is around the 55% national median, high C/low B shooter, right?

 

[TrackCage]

14 minutes ago, IVC said:

 

 

Let me guess - neither of you is around the 55% national median, high C/low B shooter, right?

 

Correct. Are you implying it's only important to track drill progress (times) for lower classifications? 

[B_RAD]

46 minutes ago, IVC said:

 

 

Let me guess - neither of you is around the 55% national median, high C/low B shooter, right?

 

 

 I’m not sure what you’re saying.   Are you saying that I am around a 55% national level C/B class?

You say neither of us is around that. So, not sure if you’re implying that I am or you’re assuming I’m not.  

 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2019 by B_RAD

[IVC]

What I’m saying is that it takes a much higher level before it makes sense to work only off of the start beep. It’s reserved for when you have elements of shooting sorted out, from basic transitions and shooting on the move to shot calling. 
 

As you’re developing the technique, par time is the main way to track progress. 

[IVC]

6 hours ago, TrackCage said:

Correct. Are you implying it's only important to track drill progress (times) for lower classifications? 

I’m implying that working off of the start beep alone is a much more advanced technique and that lower classifications can hurt their training if they start using it before they are ready. 

[IVC]

As a side issue, here is an old thread from 2001 about how USPSA (used to) see HHF... Sticky in Classifiers Section...

[Chills1994]

3 hours ago, IVC said:

As a side issue, here is an old thread from 2001 about how USPSA (used to) see HHF... Sticky in Classifiers Section...

I want to say it was about 2008 or 2009 when a forum member here first emailed me an Excel spreadsheet with all the HHFs calculated out per classifier stage per division.  Or maybe it was 2007???

 

Another forum member here... I can't remember his screenname now...but IIRC he did get a timeout or three over posting his gripe about the SS division HHFs being EXACTLY THE  SAME at the L-10 HHFs.  Single stack became a legit USPSA division in 2007/2008.

 

 

[B_RAD]

7 hours ago, IVC said:

What I’m saying is that it takes a much higher level before it makes sense to work only off of the start beep. It’s reserved for when you have elements of shooting sorted out, from basic transitions and shooting on the move to shot calling. 
 

As you’re developing the technique, par time is the main way to track progress. 

I agree. 
 

however, I also feel that using par times can lead to developing bad habits. Especially for newer shooters. Proper technique gets sacrificed to beat the par time beep. I feel it helped my shooting when I quit using par times.   

Edited December 13, 2019 by B_RAD

[TrackCage]

4 hours ago, B_RAD said:

I agree. 
 

however, I also feel that using par times can lead to developing bad habits. Especially for newer shooters. Proper technique gets sacrificed to beat the par time beep. I feel it helped my shooting when I quit using par times.   

My thoughts exactly. I know I personally suffered from this a bit when I first bought a shot timer. 

[GunBugBit]

Proper technique sacrificed to beat the par time, hmm.  I suppose that's a thing.  I don't feel drilling to par times has ever hurt me.