Why are SS classifier HFs lower than Production?

[motosapiens]

8 hours ago, -JCN- said:

@motosapiens

 

This is what I'm talking about.

At 7 yards I think (whatever Tick Tock is at), I confirmed sights a little more and slowed down some shots to 18-19 splits. Still a Hundo pace.

 

 

that's some pretty good shooting. better than I can do consistently in a match. 

[-JCN-]

9 hours ago, motosapiens said:

 

that's some pretty good shooting. better than I can do consistently in a match. 

Thanks! FWIW, I’m glad classifiers are there regardless of what people attribute or don’t attribute to them. It helped me a lot in getting perspective for how fast / accurate I “needed” to be and it was a fun goal trying to get there. 
 

Sure it doesn’t necessarily mean that I can hang on a field course, but IMO that’s a separate skill set. Classification was a game within a game to me. 
 

Without that carrot, I probably wouldn’t have worked so hard. Definitely wouldn’t have spent the time on weak hand and reloads without them, but I’m glad I did. 
 

I plan on continuing to improve and hopefully that’ll translate into good things!

 

Semi-on topic, I feel comfortable with my CO classifier ability and I feel like I could probably perform similarly taking the dot off and trying to classify in Production with the same gun. I might be down a couple percent for farther distance classifiers but it wouldn’t be too far off of my CO (same gun). 
 

If I got a magwell and the HFs were a few percent easier (like SS minor for classifiers) I feel like that should be pretty doable without a lot of specific extra training. 
 

I personally would probably be better off shooting minor on SS classifiers because the timing and cadence would be similar to what my mind’s eye has on file for CO. 

[-JCN-]

I thought about revolver or PCC but it would take more specific mechanic work than I think I have time for. 
 

SS might be a fun side project. 

Edited October 8, 2021 by -JCN-

[MikeBurgess]

1 hour ago, -JCN- said:

Thanks! FWIW, I’m glad classifiers are there regardless of what people attribute or don’t attribute to them. It helped me a lot in getting perspective for how fast / accurate I “needed” to be and it was a fun goal trying to get there. 
 

Sure it doesn’t necessarily mean that I can hang on a field course, but IMO that’s a separate skill set. Classification was a game within a game to me. 
 

Without that carrot, I probably wouldn’t have worked so hard. Definitely wouldn’t have spent the time on weak hand and reloads without them, but I’m glad I did. 
 

I plan on continuing to improve and hopefully that’ll translate into good things!

 

Semi-on topic, I feel comfortable with my CO classifier ability and I feel like I could probably perform similarly taking the dot off and trying to classify in Production with the same gun. I might be down a couple percent for farther distance classifiers but it wouldn’t be too far off of my CO (same gun). 
 

If I got a magwell and the HFs were a few percent easier (like SS minor for classifiers) I feel like that should be pretty doable without a lot of specific extra training. 
 

I personally would probably be better off shooting minor on SS classifiers because the timing and cadence would be similar to what my mind’s eye has on file for CO. 

The magwell in single stack ends up being about the same as reloading to a double stack without a magwell the mags are skinny and still need to hit the opening pretty close to go in smoothly, also the larger the magwell the less of the mag that sticks out so you have to be more careful seating them.

As a friend of mine who was an open Super Squad guy with a .7x reload at the time, pointed out the magwell is only there to save you from a f#$&ed up reload good reloads don't touch the magwell at all. 

[MikeBurgess]

20 hours ago, -JCN- said:

 

Out of curiosity, do you know what your splits are across different divisions for something like a 7 yard alpha (or something similar where recoil and return of vision to the same spot matters more than a close full hoser where you can pull the trigger to cadence rather than to vision). Not accusing, just curious.

 

I'm at 0.15-16 splits with everything but Revo (0.20-21) up close to about 3-5 yard alpha but on things at 15 yards, to stay with the same accuracy my uncompensated major splits start slowing to maybe 0.22-24 while my compensated major doesn't (0.15-17) and my CO is in the middle (around 0.20). 

I don't have tones of data on it but whenever I look at splits they stay in the same .13-.18 range for all guns out to about 7yd. I split a 45 SS 9mm SS 40 Limited and a G17 at 7 in that same range one isnt faster than the other maybe if I kept a log over hundeds of splits I would see that one on average is .01 - .02 faster but so what. That said yes with an open gun I can run at that pace a little further out and with a PCC I can go even further. But lets face it  this is totally immaterial to this sport, the guys crushing me at matches are not doing it by splitting .01 faster they are doing it by transitioning  faster and shooting sooner and shooting on the move more and being more accurate and not having dumpster fire stages.

 

 

[Racinready300ex]

2 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

The magwell in single stack ends up being about the same as reloading to a double stack without a magwell the mags are skinny and still need to hit the opening pretty close to go in smoothly, also the larger the magwell the less of the mag that sticks out so you have to be more careful seating them.

As a friend of mine who was an open Super Squad guy with a .7x reload at the time, pointed out the magwell is only there to save you from a f#$&ed up reload good reloads don't touch the magwell at all. 

 

This probably seems backwards but I found I could reload my skinny gun faster than any of my other guns. Not a huge difference but it was there. It was certainly easier than my CZ's are. My theory, the smaller lighter mags are what make it faster for me compared to my limited/open guns. But, the limited guns were almost impossible to miss the reload, while the skinny gun you could still mess up.

 

It's also likely I practiced my reloads more when I shot SS then I do shooting hi-cap divisions. 

[motosapiens]

9 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

the guys crushing me at matches are not doing it by splitting .01 faster they are doing it by transitioning  faster and shooting sooner and shooting on the move more and being more accurate and not having dumpster fire stages.

 

 

pretty much the truest thing spoken in this thread.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

This probably seems backwards but I found I could reload my skinny gun faster than any of my other guns. Not a huge difference but it was there. It was certainly easier than my CZ's are. My theory, the smaller lighter mags are what make it faster for me compared to my limited/open guns. But, the limited guns were almost impossible to miss the reload, while the skinny gun you could still mess up.

 

It's also likely I practiced my reloads more when I shot SS then I do shooting hi-cap divisions. 

 

this is exactly my experience. 

I've also noticed that it's a little trickier loading a 23 rd CO mag into a cz than a 10 rd production mag, but that's probably because I've only been doing CO a few months.

[Racinready300ex]

24 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

pretty much the truest thing spoken in this thread.

 

 

 

this is exactly my experience. 

I've also noticed that it's a little trickier loading a 23 rd CO mag into a cz than a 10 rd production mag, but that's probably because I've only been doing CO a few months.

 

I'll shoot my CO gun in IDPA some where we have to use 10 rounders. I never practice with those mags but every time I shoot a match the reloads seem easier to me. I think the 140's just don't fit my had as well. That's all subjective feel stuff, I never know my actual reload time running a stage. 

[waktasz]

22 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

The thing to understand about the classification system is that it is all about revenue generation and ego. The system is not an accurate measurement of ability as scores do not go down and the HHF’s are manipulated after the fact.
 

The system won’t change, if it did a lot of competitors would see their grades go down (some rapidly) and this might impact the generation of revenue and hurt some feelings too.

 

My highest classification in Open and CO was 94% and 92% respectively. Which is absurd. I was at best an ‘A’ class shooter, but I am being honest, there are many that prefer the bliss of ignorance.

 

What's really so broken about it? The GMs generally win the match followed by everyone else, pretty much in order. There are sandbaggers and grandbaggers, sure, but the match results reflect that. 

Yes there are GMs that have no shot to win a national title (me included), but it's like that in chess too. There are GMs and there are super GMs. Some of the super GMs could win 100 games in a row against a "normal" GM, but that doesn't mean the other GM isn't in the top .1 percentile of players also. 

[Racinready300ex]

13 minutes ago, waktasz said:

 

What's really so broken about it? The GMs generally win the match followed by everyone else, pretty much in order. There are sandbaggers and grandbaggers, sure, but the match results reflect that. 

Yes there are GMs that have no shot to win a national title (me included), but it's like that in chess too. There are GMs and there are super GMs. Some of the super GMs could win 100 games in a row against a "normal" GM, but that doesn't mean the other GM isn't in the top .1 percentile of players also. 

 

When I read about how to change the system I come back to this too. It's basically working. Sure there are easy and hard classifiers and/or divisions. But typically the G's are at the top and the D's are at the bottom. And does it really hurt anyone if some guy like me is GM and can never win against "Real" GM's? I don't think it does, IMO you should know what you're signing up for. And generally it's not GM's concerned about this problem.

 

 

 

[MikeBurgess]

2 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

This probably seems backwards but I found I could reload my skinny gun faster than any of my other guns. Not a huge difference but it was there. It was certainly easier than my CZ's are. My theory, the smaller lighter mags are what make it faster for me compared to my limited/open guns. But, the limited guns were almost impossible to miss the reload, while the skinny gun you could still mess up.

 

It's also likely I practiced my reloads more when I shot SS then I do shooting hi-cap divisions. 

CZs seem to have a really tight mag opening, when I have played with them they seem tighter than my Tanfoglios or Glocks. 

[Racinready300ex]

18 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

CZs seem to have a really tight mag opening, when I have played with them they seem tighter than my Tanfoglios or Glocks. 

 

Yeah a tanfo looks like it has a magwell on it compared to a CZ lol

[-JCN-]

 

3 hours ago, motosapiens said:

this is exactly my experience. 

I've also noticed that it's a little trickier loading a 23 rd CO mag into a cz than a 10 rd production mag, but that's probably because I've only been doing CO a few months.

 

Have you tried downloading mags? I usually don't try and reload a 23. It's much easier to reload a 22 or 21.

 

37 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

CZs seem to have a really tight mag opening, when I have played with them they seem tighter than my Tanfoglios or Glocks. 

 

18 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Yeah a tanfo looks like it has a magwell on it compared to a CZ lol

 

 

Were the CZs you were using unmodified?  A little dremeling to the internal dimensions made things much, much faster for me.

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

When I read about how to change the system I come back to this too. It's basically working. Sure there are easy and hard classifiers and/or divisions. But typically the G's are at the top and the D's are at the bottom. And does it really hurt anyone if some guy like me is GM and can never win against "Real" GM's? I don't think it does, IMO you should know what you're signing up for. And generally it's not GM's concerned about this problem.

 

 

 

i stopped caring very much about classification a while ago, but if I were going to change it, the first change I'd make is to s#!tcan the hhf concept and just switch to a percentile. if your score on a classifier is better than 90% of the scores that have ever been submitted for it, then that's a 90%. If it's the best score that's ever been achieved, that's a hundo. This system would adjust itself over time. then you'd have to decide what percentage of shooters you think should be in each class, and set the dividing lines.  I'd probably also discourage the whole hero/zero thing by not throwing away quite so many scores. Right now there's no classification penalty for screwing up on a hero-zero attempt. In my world, there would be.

 

but I don't really care. At my age, after Foley jacked the hhf's up, it seems unlikely I'll ever make GM without some kind of douchebaggery, so I'm content to keep improving my skills and consistency and match performances.

Edited October 8, 2021 by motosapiens

[Racinready300ex]

2 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

 

Were the CZs you were using unmodified?  A little dremeling to the internal dimensions made things much, much faster for me.

 

I'm not saying I can't reload them, I've just found other guns to be easier and more consistent. But I like the CZ enough to deal with it. A smaller SS mag that's half the weight is easier to handle. The only gun I've done sub 2 second 4 Aces at 7 yards is my skinny gun. Granted I don't really do that drill much anymore. As much as I like practicing reloads, I remind myself that's not what I need to be working on. IMO sub 1 reloads aren't needed in this game so I don't chase them.

[Racinready300ex]

11 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

i stopped caring very much about classification a while ago, but if I were going to change it, the first change I'd make is to s#!tcan the hhf concept and just switch to a percentile. if your score on a classifier is better than 90% of the scores that have ever been submitted for it, then that's a 90%. If it's the best score that's ever been achieved, that's a hundo. This system would adjust itself over time. then you'd have to decide what percentage of shooters you think should be in each class, and set the dividing lines.  I'd probably also discourage the whole hero/zero thing by not throwing away quite so many scores. Right now there's no classification penalty for screwing up on a hero-zero attempt. In my world, there would be.

 

but I don't really care. At my age, after Foley jacked the hhf's up, it seems unlikely I'll ever make GM without some kind of douchebaggery, so I'm content to keep improving my skills and consistency and match performances.

 

You could always get a match bump. 

[MikeBurgess]

33 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

but I don't really care. At my age, after Foley jacked the hhf's up, it seems unlikely I'll ever make GM without some kind of douchebaggery, so I'm content to keep improving my skills and consistency and match performances.

Your don't have to Duchebag just shoot some Revo

 

34 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Right now there's no classification penalty for screwing up on a hero-zero attempt. In my world, there would be.

I would like that, with the current system it motivates me to do dumb stuff like go full potato trying to keep up with the silly kids in Open.

 

[-JCN-]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I'm not saying I can't reload them, I've just found other guns to be easier and more consistent. But I like the CZ enough to deal with it. A smaller SS mag that's half the weight is easier to handle. The only gun I've done sub 2 second 4 Aces at 7 yards is my skinny gun. Granted I don't really do that drill much anymore. As much as I like practicing reloads, I remind myself that's not what I need to be working on. IMO sub 1 reloads aren't needed in this game so I don't chase them.

 

Sorry that wasn't meant as any kind of a dig. I didn't modify my internal magwell until I saw a friend's gun and with a little patience and a Dremel, made a little more room inside so it's more like a Glock opening now. I'm not saying you can't reload without modifying, but why not tip probability in your favor since the rules allow it?

[Racinready300ex]

28 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

 

Sorry that wasn't meant as any kind of a dig. I didn't modify my internal magwell until I saw a friend's gun and with a little patience and a Dremel, made a little more room inside so it's more like a Glock opening now. I'm not saying you can't reload without modifying, but why not tip probability in your favor since the rules allow it?

 

I did break the edge a little but I didn't go crazy with it. But if you look at the magwel of a tanfo it's huge in comparison to a CZ. And if you were to hog one of those out it's practically a magwell. But I don't think it really matters or I'd switch. Generally I find magwells just let me be sloppy with my technique. After a while I'm basically just throwing the mag at the gun with little regard for the direction because the magwell will just suck that bitch into the gun lol 

[-JCN-]

47 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I did break the edge a little but I didn't go crazy with it. But if you look at the magwel of a tanfo it's huge in comparison to a CZ. And if you were to hog one of those out it's practically a magwell. But I don't think it really matters or I'd switch. Generally I find magwells just let me be sloppy with my technique. After a while I'm basically just throwing the mag at the gun with little regard for the direction because the magwell will just suck that bitch into the gun lol 

 

Dunno man. Few minutes with a Dremel….

 

 

 

[BritinUSA]

4 hours ago, waktasz said:

What's really so broken about it?

 

1. The HHF’s are being manipulated, either by taking an average of the top ten scores when set at Nationals, or by altering the HHF as someone shoots the stage faster at an L1 match with no pressure.
2. When the HHF is changed for a classifier any percentages earned by others prior to the change should be adjusted downward, which is what would happen at a match.
3. Any classification score that is more than 5% below your ranking is discarded. This is absurd, every score should count. If scores can be dropped because they are 5% below normal, then should we not discard everything 5% over too?
4. The 5% rule encourages the hero/zero strategy - which when it pays off - will artificially increase the HHF; It is artificial as it is unlikely that the competitor could recreate the score on-demand. These increases in HHF make it harder for members to advance up the classification ladder as the HHF’s become almost impossible for even a pro-GM to reach.
5. Your classification should be determined by your current percentage and not the highest percentage that you have achieved. I can’t think of any sport where the ranking never goes down.
6. That some people have a relatively accurate ranking does not imply that the system works. It’s working by chance alone as the data is being manipulated. 

Correcting the mechanism to eliminate these issues will likely result in lower classifications for many competitors. Which is why it will never change.

 

I have the luxury of being completely objective on this as I am not likely to ever again shoot competitively.

[motosapiens]

20 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

 

 

5. Your classification should be determined by your current percentage and not the highest percentage that you have achieved. I can’t think of any sport where the ranking never goes down.

 

you make some valid points, but this is one I'm not sure I agree with. The only way it wouldn't be really dumb is if we stopped entirely giving participation awards (to class 'winners') and especially if we stop giving any kind of valuable prize to the participation awardees. I can just imagine the swarm of douches trying to sandbag their scores down before an area or national match.

 

Since most people in uspsa seem to like and GAF about the participation trophies, I think we need to keep the class system where you can't go own with a good reason and a petition.

 

fwiw, this is the same as it works in bicycle racing and motorcycle racing. Once you move up a class, you can't go back down. I could request to drop back down to B if I can provide a good reason (like being old and slow and way more scared of falling off my bike than I was 15 years ago), but otherwise I'm stuck in A, and if I won a trophy in B class, I would be rightly mocked.

 

Perhaps it would work if the downgrade was revisited every couple years, so you'd have to sandbag for a LOOOOONG time to downclass (or just actually have your skills atrophy).

Edited October 8, 2021 by motosapiens

[Sinister4]

25 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

 

 

Since most people in uspsa seem to like and GAF about the participation trophies, I think we need to keep the class system where you can't go own with a good reason and a petition.

 

I think the not going down without a petition and some type of review is a good thing, as really so what if your a GM and get your butt handed to you at every match ?  However we have this issue in trap, guys die on the 27 yard line shooting in the 80's never to even place but stay there forever, its a real pain at a large national shoot with long yardage overcrowded and these guys grabbing the prime light shooting squads.  (you have the option to decline a reduction) So I can see both sides.   I'm pretty amazed that bad scores are not counted as this of course can really pump up a average. Was it always like this ?  First shooting sport ive ever been in that bad scores are tossed.  Just IMHO

25 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

 

[BritinUSA]

I would agree that people can cheat the system if ranking could go down as well as up. In the past it would have been difficult to catch them.

 

But that was before the proliferation of electronic scoring.

 

At any given L1 match there is typically a single classifier stage.
 

All things being equal each competitor will be within a range of percentages compared to the others at the match. If there was a significant ‘dip’ in their score on the classifier when compared to the other attendees and those ‘dips’ occurred frequently on the classifier stages then it may be indicative of cheating/gaming the system.

 

It’s not hard to code up something that would do this kind of analysis and - when potential issues are flagged - could drive a manual process to look into it further. Note that some people may ‘tank’ a classifier frequently because they are trying too hard, so there will always need to be a human involved to confirm everything.

 

i agree with doing away with class prizes too. Award the top 3 in each division/category and leave it at that.
 

 

[-JCN-]

Or just leave things the way they are and find a way to award super-GM classification. 
 

Something like “Top 5 at nationals get a special designation”

 

That way there’s a field course performance asterisk in addition to paper GM classification. 
 

Because at the end of the day, all that GM means is that you met a minimum paper GM standard. I don’t think it’s meant to say that you’re automatically as good as an average GM. How can it?

 

It’s all just dick swinging anyway. And honestly with an A class shooter being objectively pretty damn awesome in the scope of human beings that own handguns, why s#!t on each other for what people woulda shoulda coulda otta do?