Go back to plastic?

[vluc]

On 10/22/2021 at 9:53 PM, yekcoh said:

Becoming a CO GM in USPSA is much easier than other discipline as the system is rigged. 

CO classification % is same as production classification %. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a question I wonder about, I won't say rigged, but the optic is supposed to be a difference maker.

 

After almost 4 years of CO, now with my "heavier" plastic gun, I've returned to production and find I shoot that plastic better than the other plastic.

 

Likewise why classifiers in PCC have any bearing on pistol classifications.

[-JCN-]

Single stack minor (10 shot) has easier HF than Production. 
 

Is CO way easy or is Production too hard?

 

Are there a bajillion M/GM CO because it’s super simple? Or is it because that’s where all the fresh motivated shooters are?

 

I switched to Open from CO Paper GM and there’s not a whole lot of difference in my percents on classifiers. I’d imagine once I get used to comps and major PF there really won’t be any difference. 
 

It’s not like CO GM is like B class Open lol. 

[B_RAD]

It is “easier” to make GM in CO. Or was. Not sure it’s still that way. I did make it in 2019 and it was easier back then. 
 

The classification system is a little messed up but it is what it is and for the most part, classifications do provide a good indication of how the results will play out. 
 

 

Why is it “easier” in CO?  Well, I’d say the real issue is it’s harder for all the others. Let’s look at Prod for instance. Most of those classifiers have been shot so much. Way more than most CO ones, so the HHF are bumped up so high that it’s more difficult.  Any of the newer classifiers should be set using the results from Nats. Since that’s where they’re introduced now and I’d say those(newer ones) are equally difficult regardless of the division.
 

The original CO classifiers did just use the Prod numbers but I don’t think that’s been the case for a while. Any of the older ones that were introduced before CO was a thing, should have been shot enough at locals and majors where they have their own HHF now. 
 

So, is it still easier?  IDK?  Even if it is, CO is now the most popular division. So, it’s the most difficult division now.
 

make sense? 
 

 

[RileyBowman]

On 10/22/2021 at 7:53 PM, yekcoh said:

ah yes...... 

Where was he at this year's CO nats?

 

Tony posted earlier this year saying that he felt like he had reached a point of satisfaction with what he accomplished in USPSA. He is now pursuing golf. So he was not at this year's Nats.

 

 

On 10/22/2021 at 7:53 PM, yekcoh said:

Becoming a CO GM in USPSA is much easier than other discipline as the system is rigged. 

CO classification % is same as production classification %. 

 

This is exactly why you see a million CO master classes and GMs.

Does not mean s#!t in real matches. 

 

There is a forum world then there is a real world.

Real competition. Real life. Where people actually show up to matches, nationals. and ACTUALLY shoot and produce results.

Some CO classification percentages are the same as Prod, but not all. It is definitely harder now than it was in 2019 to make GM in CO. And it's probably about to become more so in 2022. 

This last CO Nats I think addresses whether CO is full of a bunch of paper GMs and Masters or not...the distribution of shooters and their respective finish percentages is no different, and might even be a little better, than other divisions. It wasn't like there was a huge gap between the top talent at the top and a bunch of shooters at the 65-85% range. It was pretty evenly distributed.

There is a lot of stiff competition in CO now.

[UpYoursPal]

If you look at a sampling of earlier classifiers, it appears that every classifier earlier than the 18-series uses the same HHF for both production and CO.  They definitely haven't been adjusted.  Therefore, you can argue that it's empirically easier to get a higher classification in CO than prod.

[motosapiens]

17 minutes ago, UpYoursPal said:

If you look at a sampling of earlier classifiers, it appears that every classifier earlier than the 18-series uses the same HHF for both production and CO.  They definitely haven't been adjusted.  Therefore, you can argue that it's empirically easier to get a higher classification in CO than prod.

 

is it a proven fact that it's easier to shoot higher hit factors on every target with a co gun? that seems unlikely, but maybe it's just due to my lack of proficiency with a dot.

[Racinready300ex]

5 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

is it a proven fact that it's easier to shoot higher hit factors on every target with a co gun? that seems unlikely, but maybe it's just due to my lack of proficiency with a dot.

 

Certainly any stage with more than 11 shots would be a big deal. But, I'd say yeah most things are easier with a dot, but there can be a bit of a learning curve to it. 

[UpYoursPal]

14 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

is it a proven fact that it's easier to shoot higher hit factors on every target with a co gun? that seems unlikely, but maybe it's just due to my lack of proficiency with a dot.

Anecdotally, everyone I've talked to that made the transition from irons to a dot said that the dot was considerably quicker.  That's certainly not scientific, but it seems that shooting a red dot lends itself to a higher hit factor.

[motosapiens]

25 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Certainly any stage with more than 11 shots would be a big deal. But, I'd say yeah most things are easier with a dot, but there can be a bit of a learning curve to it. 

we're just talking about classifiers here, so everyone usually has to reload. It seems evident that a dot and high cap is generally faster on field stages.

[Racinready300ex]

15 hours ago, motosapiens said:

we're just talking about classifiers here, so everyone usually has to reload. It seems evident that a dot and high cap is generally faster on field stages.

 

There are classifiers that don't require reloads for high cap guns but do for low cap. 

[vluc]

3 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

There are classifiers that don't require reloads for high cap guns but do for low cap. 

 20-01, 20-02 and 20-03 come to mind, all 12 round with no mandatory reload.  99-10, 99-56, 99-57, 03-12, 06-01, 06-02, 09-08, 09-10, 19-01, 19-03, 19-04 all are 12-16 requiring a low cap reload.

 

A number of others have plus or minus 12 but there are mandatory reloads established.

 

 

[vluc]

15 hours ago, UpYoursPal said:

Anecdotally, everyone I've talked to that made the transition from irons to a dot said that the dot was considerably quicker.  That's certainly not scientific, but it seems that shooting a red dot lends itself to a higher hit factor.

 

Not everyone.  I wasn't, but that was more not being able to learn to use the dot as a dot, not a front sight.  And let's face it, not everyone is cut out for using an optic, some of us just can't "get" it.  After 4 years I still couldn't.  I was marginally faster, but not much more.  I couldn't get it after 16 plus years of production.  Although I seemed to get it better when it was production optics and 10 rounds, once 140mm came in, that was the decline.

 

Have gone back to production and my times are about the same as CO, but hits are better.  This applies to me, not to be generalized to everybody, but my shooting partners have all commented that I was/am a better production shooter than a CO after they watched me struggle trying to make it work over that period.

[motosapiens]

2 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

There are classifiers that don't require reloads for high cap guns but do for low cap. 

Yep, a few, that's why i thoughtfully typed the word 'usually'. As you are aware, the overwhelming majority of classifiers have the same number of reloads for both divisions.

[Racinready300ex]

2 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Yep, a few, that's why i thoughtfully typed the word 'usually'. As you are aware, the overwhelming majority of classifiers have the same number of reloads for both divisions.

 

So your post was pointless. 

[motosapiens]

11 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

So your post was pointless. 

perhaps I just aimed high and missed you, due to the lack of a dot.

 

my original point was whether or not it's proven to be faster on *all* kinds of targets to shoot a dot vs irons. the topic of required reloads is irrelevant to this point, and a distraction.

 

Is a dot faster on 'can you count'? or mini-mart? what about el prez? Are there certain types of shooting where irons are as fast? Are there certain types of shooting where irons are faster?  I honestly don't know because I only have a 6-8 months total time shooting CO, so I suspect I may just not be very good at it.

Edited October 28, 2021 by motosapiens

[Racinready300ex]

39 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

perhaps I just aimed high and missed you, due to the lack of a dot.

 

my original point was whether or not it's proven to be faster on *all* kinds of targets to shoot a dot vs irons. the topic of required reloads is irrelevant to this point, and a distraction.

 

Is a dot faster on 'can you count'? or mini-mart? what about el prez? Are there certain types of shooting where irons are as fast? Are there certain types of shooting where irons are faster?  I honestly don't know because I only have a 6-8 months total time shooting CO, so I suspect I may just not be very good at it.

 

Your point out round count was dumb.

 

If the shooting is limited by how fast you can pull the trigger (think can you count) then the sighting system doesn't matter. If the shooting is limited by how fast you can aim the gun the dot is better unless you suck. 

[motosapiens]

32 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Your point out round count was dumb.

 

If the shooting is limited by how fast you can pull the trigger (think can you count) then the sighting system doesn't matter. If the shooting is limited by how fast you can aim the gun the dot is better unless you suck. 

thanks for the thoughtful criticism. So it sounds like it's your belief that a dot is faster to aim at all times and under all conditions? I appreciate your opinion on this topic.

[PatJones]

7 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

Your point out round count was dumb.

Now this is the kind of scintillating discussion I come to BEnos for.

[Sarge]

11 minutes ago, PatJones said:

Now this is the kind of scintillating discussion I come to BEnos for.

  yep

[vluc]

Why we can't shoot a dot fast.  Or as I was told when I golfed, loft was my problem - lack of f talent

 

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by vluc

[Fishbreath]

On 10/25/2021 at 3:37 PM, B_RAD said:

Any of the newer classifiers should be set using the results from Nats. Since that’s where they’re introduced now and I’d say those(newer ones) are equally difficult regardless of the division.

 

This is mostly true, but it does mean that divisions with more shooters or more heat are harder. If you're using the top N shooters to set the high hit factor, if those ten shooters are better, or more closely spaced, the HHF is closer to the peak performance on the stage.

 

I recently shot 18-08 in Revolver, where the HHF would have been an 86% on the stage. It isn't quite clear how they calculated the HHF there—it isn't a straight average of the top N shooters. They might have done some weighting or adjusting, since the winner won by 6%, but regardless, I shot a 100% run and would have finished at about 90% of the 2018 nationals stage winner. (The average of the shooters placed 2-7 gets very close to the actual HHF, so maybe they did toss the winner as an outlier. In that case, the HHF is about 92% of the second-place score.)

 

If you look at Limited, the top 10 shooters go down to about 90% instead of 80%, and the HHF is the average of those shooters' hit factors. Shoot a 100% run on 18-08 in Limited, and you would have finished at about 95% in the 2018 nationals field.

 

That's an extreme case, but current and near-future CO scores are probably going to be a few percent harder than Revolver or SS targets, and probably slightly harder than Production as shooters move out of locap divisions.

[SGT_Schultz]

On 10/28/2021 at 12:10 PM, motosapiens said:

So it sounds like it's your belief that a dot is faster to aim at all times and under all conditions? I appreciate your opinion on this topic.

 

Why do you like to put words in people's mouths so much?

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

Why do you like to put words in people's mouths so much?

because some people are not always awesome at putting words in their own mouths. I asked a specific question, and got a very vague answer, so I'm trying to ascertain on what the poster actually thinks in response to the question. It's a fairly standard communication technique to restate the answer in your own words to ensure you are both talking about the same thing.

 

I appreciate your contributions to the discussion. What are your thoughts on the topic? Is a dot faster in every situation?

Edited October 29, 2021 by motosapiens

[SGT_Schultz]

38 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 Is a dot faster in every situation?

 

No.  But it is faster in most and is never slower if you know what you're doing.

 

If you suffer from presbyopia (and everyone eventually does), it removes that handicap.

Edited October 29, 2021 by SGT_Schultz

[vluc]

14 minutes ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

No.  But it is faster in most and is never slower if you know what you're doing.

 

If you suffer from presbyopia (and everyone eventually does), it removes that handicap.

 

Which handicap is that, knowing what you are doing or presbyopia?