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

2020 Nationals Awards / Prizes


Wiseguy724
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am attending nationals for the first time this year, Single stack and the race gun nats (shooting limited). What are the awards per class and division? I figured there's prob a chart or something posted somewhere but I have been searching and haven't found anything. Thanks!

Edited by Wiseguy724
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shot 2016 nationals, at the end there was a prize table, the better you do the better the "prize". Prizes didn't matter to me much, i was just glad to shoot amazing stages and had some great shooters in my squad. It was definitely a learning experience. There were plaques for top 3 in each division. Just go and shoot, if you get a free prize from the many great sponsors, it's a bonus. Just my 2 cents

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2018 and 2019 awards for class/category were per the rule book 10+ shooters for recognition, then I think a place for each 10 after that (thats my assumption anyway) 

Prize table in order of overall finish (as in first place C finishes 120th over all they go to the prize table 120th) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Side track but the best prize ceremony I went to was 1st/2nd/3rd for divisions, then random name pulled out of a hat. You had 30" max at the table, hands behind back, what you touched is what you got. It was well organised, well patrolled and I haven't heard so much laughing at a prize giving since. Plus a good encouragement for new shooters that they had a chance in getting something. Because let's be honest, a prize off the table is a bonus, not a necessity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 8/5/2020 at 9:16 PM, Kiwishoot said:

Side track but the best prize ceremony I went to was 1st/2nd/3rd for divisions, then random name pulled out of a hat. You had 30" max at the table, hands behind back, what you touched is what you got. It was well organised, well patrolled and I haven't heard so much laughing at a prize giving since. Plus a good encouragement for new shooters that they had a chance in getting something. Because let's be honest, a prize off the table is a bonus, not a necessity.


I think we should give the new shooters a reason to do better - have them aspire to move up and get better prizes.

 

The prizes at Nationals are incentives for people to work harder - I like that.  I want to see people perform at their peak.

 

The prizes this year were interesting.

 

With a 42nd place finish in Open - I ended up with a Brazo’s 2011 Frame.  I was really happy with that prize for such a bad finish.

 

But, Nils at 4th place in Limited only got a Phoenix Trinity 2011 Grip - worth only $300 more than my frame.

 

I felt bad for him honestly.

 

At the same time - limited is starting to be a forgotten division because there aren’t many manufacturers that use it for their bread and butter - and fewer still who are willing to appropriately pay back the sport for its promotion of the division.

 

The top 5 in PCC got nice rifles.  I missed the top 5 in open this year because I was trying to learn Nils’ viewpoint on everything.

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Whoops! said:


Then I think it probably did.  Just found out JJ got a Auto Ordnance Tommy Gun for 2nd Open.

Christian got a Honcho. 

 

Race gun might have just got more expensive stuff from the sponsors of that match. 

 

There was a lot of stuff, lots of guns, on the table at Factory gun.  The bullets was the best/most money for me. It's 100% something I'd use. I skimmed the table but that looked to be the most valuable thing.  I saw on the CO table. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have to wonder how much of that is USPSA’s choice and how much is the sponsor’s choice. 
 

With the way the contract is currently written, the sponsors are just responsible for x worth.

 

So if x worth is 1 Czechmate or 5 CZ 75’s, it’s more the sponsor’s choice.


But...

 

Still think it would majorly be worth it for USPSA to kick in their own revenue to make the top 3 prizes much more worthwhile as opposed to cheaping out and relying on donated prizes.

 

Especially considering how much time and money the top 3 have dedicated to the sport in order to get that position.

 

It would be a smart investment on USPSA’s part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Whoops! said:

Yeah, I have to wonder how much of that is USPSA’s choice and how much is the sponsor’s choice. 
 

With the way the contract is currently written, the sponsors are just responsible for x worth.

 

So if x worth is 1 Czechmate or 5 CZ 75’s, it’s more the sponsor’s choice.


But...

 

Still think it would majorly be worth it for USPSA to kick in their own revenue to make the top 3 prizes much more worthwhile as opposed to cheaping out and relying on donated prizes.

 

Especially considering how much time and money the top 3 have dedicated to the sport in order to get that position.

 

It would be a smart investment on USPSA’s part.

Well,..... While what I want to say is not terribly rude or critical, if I say it, it will probably get this thread locked up. So,....  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you’re top 3 at nats there is a really good chance you’re already sponsored although it’s hard to tell who really is with all the logos on shirts. I look at the return on investment for better prizes for those guys as minimal. In the end it’s still a business and there are better ways of generating revenue than providing better prizes and it’s very slim odds that they’ll walk away because the prizes aren’t amazing. 
 

id counter that with what value does it bring to the hobby for USPSA to offer better prizes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was shooting in Europe (20+ years ago), there were no prize tables at all. Trophies or medals for the top three and that was it.

 

If a vendor wanted to sponsor a match, they paid cash, and that money went into the competition; The money paid for better props, stage construction etc. Overseas matches always seem to have better presentation than USA, probably for this reason.


Nationals is not just a competition, it is the best marketing event that we have, great presentation looks better on images/video and that helps with promotion of the sport.

 

If they abolished prize tables how many people would stay away from Nationals, maybe a few. But I think the matches would be better with that extra capital. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Nathanb said:

If you’re top 3 at nats there is a really good chance you’re already sponsored although it’s hard to tell who really is with all the logos on shirts. I look at the return on investment for better prizes for those guys as minimal. In the end it’s still a business and there are better ways of generating revenue than providing better prizes and it’s very slim odds that they’ll walk away because the prizes aren’t amazing. 
 

id counter that with what value does it bring to the hobby for USPSA to offer better prizes?

"Sponsorship" is an interesting topic. It means many different things and might also mean nothing at all. 

 

I know of at least one person that was 100% not sponsored by anyone, in any way. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would better prizes get more people to shoot?  It worked for 3-gun for a while, I guess.

 

But pretty much all the top shooters are going to Nationals already (except maybe Stoeger, and I don't know if an extra $500 or $1000 would change his mind)

 

What sports have prize money that is the main contributor to the participants income versus sponsorship and appearance fees and the like?  Golf?  Boxing?  IDK.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, shred said:

Would better prizes get more people to shoot?  It worked for 3-gun for a while, I guess.

 

But pretty much all the top shooters are going to Nationals already (except maybe Stoeger, and I don't know if an extra $500 or $1000 would change his mind)

 

What sports have prize money that is the main contributor to the participants income versus sponsorship and appearance fees and the like?  Golf?  Boxing?  IDK.

 

So, for me, it's a weird situation. No, the prize table doesn't affect my decision to shoot or not.  

 

I'll try to say this as neutral as possible. 

 

In some things, the effort put out, speaks volumes.  

 

If there's little effort that means it doesn't matter(to that person). If it doesn't matter, then why do it? 

 

I think Nationals should be a big deal. In my mind a big deal should appear and look as if it was a big deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

So, for me, it's a weird situation. No, the prize table doesn't affect my decision to shoot or not.  

 

I'll try to say this as neutral as possible. 

 

In some things, the effort put out, speaks volumes.  

 

If there's little effort that means it doesn't matter(to that person). If it doesn't matter, then why do it? 

 

I think Nationals should be a big deal. In my mind a big deal should appear and look as if it was a big deal. 

 

So, then as someone who has finished in the top of the  heap, would you rather get a medal or something along those lines,  and have the sponsorship money go into making a better match/match experience like Britain mentioned?

 

I feel as someone who has put in the time to finish as well as you did,your opinion on the subject carries more weight 

Edited by RJH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

So, for me, it's a weird situation. No, the prize table doesn't affect my decision to shoot or not.  

 

I'll try to say this as neutral as possible. 

 

In some things, the effort put out, speaks volumes.  

 

If there's little effort that means it doesn't matter(to that person). If it doesn't matter, then why do it? 

 

I think Nationals should be a big deal. In my mind a big deal should appear and look as if it was a big deal. 

I absolutely agree with you but is that a better prize table or is that a better match etc. this is one of the few hobbies I’ve been involved in that nationals was not treated as the pinnacle of the year with all goals being towards doing as well as possible at IMO. There are some shooters who treat it that way but I don’t see the majority treating it as such. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also keep in mind sponsor are less likely to give cash, and if they do they'll probably give less cash then they would product. I've worked several Area matches as sponsor coordinator and found it much harder to get cash contributions even offering a lower dollar amount for each level if they take the cash option. 

 

And as a member I'd want to know what the money would be put toward to make the match better. Simply saying make it better doesn't cut it in my mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

So, then as someone who has finished in the top of the  heap, would you rather get a medal or something along those lines,  and have the sponsorship money go into making a better match/match experience like Britain mentioned?

 

I feel as someone who has put in the time to finish as well as you did,your opinion on the subject carries more weight 

 

57 minutes ago, Nathanb said:

I absolutely agree with you but is that a better prize table or is that a better match etc. this is one of the few hobbies I’ve been involved in that nationals was not treated as the pinnacle of the year with all goals being towards doing as well as possible at IMO. There are some shooters who treat it that way but I don’t see the majority treating it as such. 

So, I want to be careful on how and what I say. For a couple of reasons. First, it's easy to criticize when you're spectating. Meaning not out there working. Monday morning quarterback. Second, it's difficult to get across true thoughts and feelings thru text. Lastly, I'm still new and inexperienced with USPSA and nats. This was my 4th year and my 2nd Nats. That may be why I feel the way I do about things. I may not know any better? 

 

Saying all that, I'll give my thoughts. 

 

I think Nationals should be a bigger deal than any other match. That means stage design/quality, prizes, trophies, atmosphere. It's easy to say "XYZ needs to be better at Nats" but not offer how or why. I'm worried I may be guilty of this a little.  Some just want to be critical to be critical. I'm trying not to do that. So, back to what I was saying. If you're gonna offer trophies and prizes, I'd like to see them be a big deal. What's a "big deal"? Yeah, that's based on opinions.

 

Look at the prizes and the trophies given out over all the national matches. Were they equal in quality or value? If not, why? Are some divisions looked at more favorably or as more important than the others? Why? 

 

I think most would agree that match quality, stage design is most important for any match. Prizes are cool but we all know that any prizes won is won at a deficit, but we see a lot of shooters enjoy getting something really big/expensive. Nobody cares about winning a cleaning kit but just about everyone wants to win a gun!

 

Trophies are another interesting issue. A lot of people say they don't care and maybe they don't, but a lot of people do! If you win a trophy that says you were the best shooter at the national level, wouldn't you want it to be an indication of that achievement?

 

 

I thought the match itself was good!  I had a great time. I'm not dissing the prizes table or the trophies either. Just thinking out loud.  

 

 

Edited by B_RAD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turning on my shooting-geezer mode for a minute, Way Back When (early 90's is when I started), Nationals used to be that.  It had the rep for the best stages, best props, best shooters, best vendor area and the best prize table.  If you went, it was a big deal and your home club expected you would bring home at least two rolls of pictures and stories for everyone.  Find some of the old Lenny Magill nationals tapes on Youtube and see what it looked like.

 

Times have changed, other matches got better, the level of stage props and decoration has declined overall, the internet and digital video happened, things move on.   Could we get back there?  Maybe, but it would take a lot of work for who knows what return.  Kind of like Golf maybe.  I don't follow it, but it seems like there's some big match every month.  Which is the biggest, best one to win?  If you aren't a golfer, does anyone care?  Formula 1 has a bunch of races.  Is winning one better than any other?  Is there a way to make USPSA Nationals truly relevant outside of USPSA? 

 

As a small-time sponsor, product is much much easier to give than cash.  Cash comes straight off the bottom line.  If the overall shooting business were big enough then little sponsors wouldn't be needed, but shooting is, relatively speaking, tiny.  Compare say, the market cap of Ruger or one of the other public brands to say, Tupperware.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

 

So, I want to be careful on how and what I say. For a couple of reasons. First, it's easy to criticize when you're spectating. Meaning not out there working. Monday morning quarterback. Second, it's difficult to get across true thoughts and feelings thru text. Lastly, I'm still new and inexperienced with USPSA and nats. This was my 4th year and my 2nd Nats. That may be why I feel the way I do about things. I may not know any better? 

 

Saying all that, I'll give my thoughts. 

 

I think Nationals should be a bigger deal than any other match. That means stage design/quality, prizes, trophies, atmosphere. It's easy to say "XYZ needs to be better at Nats" but not offer how or why. I'm worried I may be guilty of this a little.  Some just want to be critical to be critical. I'm trying not to do that. So, back to what I was saying. If you're gonna offer trophies and prizes, I'd like to see them be a big deal. What's a "big deal"? Yeah, that's based on opinions.

 

Look at the prizes and the trophies given out over all the national matches. Were they equal in quality or value? If not, why? Are some divisions looked at more favorably or as more important than the others? Why? 

 

I think most would agree that match quality, stage design is most important for any match. Prizes are cool but we all know that any prizes won is won at a deficit, but we see a lot of shooters enjoy getting something really big/expensive. Nobody cares about winning a cleaning kit but just about everyone wants to win a gun!

 

Trophies are another interesting issue. A lot of people say they don't care and maybe they don't, but a lot of people do! If you win a trophy that says you were the best shooter at the national level, wouldn't you want it to be an indication of that achievement?

 

 

I thought the match itself was good!  I had a great time. I'm not dissing the prizes table or the trophies either. Just thinking out loud.  

 

 


 

Exactly.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...