USPSA Division Revamp Based on Data

[Fishbreath]

23 minutes ago, CClassForLife said:

uncertainty in equipment configuration but certainty in competition

 

This is ultimately where I think your idea falls apart. In a sport where equipment runs anywhere from a few thousand dollars to a lot of thousands of dollars, certainly in equipment configuration is a feature, not a bug, unless you want to totally crater casual participation.

 

Large pools of competitors to shoot against are nice, but we already have that in the popular divisions, for the people who think it's important: rejiggering the equipment rules to try to bring more shooters together is a solution to a problem we don't have, and seems much more likely to make resentful, reluctant shooters out of people who are caught out by them than it does to do anything positive.

[Racinready300ex]

36 minutes ago, CClassForLife said:

 

Same pitfalls for sure. Choose a dynamic list of divisions or dynamic list of modifiers. I feel the latter is easier to maintain. Personally, I don't think gun gear has as much of an influence on the results as a race car. For example, put Hamilton in a HAAS last season and he's not winning. Give Sailer some other Open gun and he still wins. The current system has independent divisions with further subdivisions by category (LE, Lady, Junior, Senior, etc). The proposed system still has independent divisions but the modifiers become the categories. The game each year now becomes uncertainty in equipment configuration but certainty in competition instead of the other way around.

 

My thinking is if we have someone like Eric G. come along and is just a notch above everyone else. He starts winning with some gear that maybe isn't the best gear but he's paid to run it so he does and he wins anyway. Our system would be running on modifiers based on perceived advantages of equipment not shooter skills. So we'll start adjusting the modifiers to balance that out based on results. Eventually Eric switches to the gear the modifiers are helping and crushes everyone and the whole system needs to be recalibrated.

 

This is the same thing that was happening to that racer. The Organization was assuming his result was because the combination of parts he was using had a unfair advantage and needed to be balanced out. Their assuming it's the gear and not the work effort of the man behind the gear. Now he's going to turn everything on it's head by taking advantage of the system that was rigged against him. 

 

Personally I'd prefer certainty in equipment configurations. Nothing is more frustrating to me then not knowing what gear is going to be legal next year or what changes I'll need to make to stay competitive. Eventually the constant changes push people away, I'm already there. Our equipment rules are a joke and change constantly, that's led to me caring less and less about the sport as a sport. It's still fun, so I'm just going to shoot what ever I want in what ever division it fits. What I'm not going to do is ask for a new division for my specific tastes. 

[konkapot]

I generally agree with louu. At some point changing the rules of an organization to appease a a perception held by a fraction of a fraction just stops making sense.

 

 

[GMFORLIFE]

Well thats 5 minutes of my life I will never be able to get back. I would rather take a bath with a toaster than shoot uspsa with this rule set.

[ddc]

So... let's completely blow up the sport as it is currently defined, understood and happily enjoyed by what I will assume is the vast majority of it's participants other than the minority that occasionally posts otherwise.

 

So not only does the squeaky wheel get the grease but the entire mechanism is going to be redesigned by someone who never understood how well the original worked.

 

In what world does that make any sense?

 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

14 hours ago, CClassForLife said:

The game each year now becomes uncertainty in equipment configuration but certainty in competition instead of the other way around.

 

Your entering argument is unsound for several reasons.  Many of which have been covered already except one: there is an extremely high probability that you will end up with uncertainty on both.  Because: human nature.

[Part_time_redneck]

Wow. I can't believe it took me this long to figure it out. This is all a set up for a fantastic April fool's gotcha!!!!!

 

Very well played. 

[Fishbreath]

Another thing that occurred to me this morning is that, while you can average the benefit of a dot or rifle (for instance) over not having those features, you can't actually trust that average to be correct at any given match.

 

Picture two matches: one, whose targets are all three-yard hoser specials, and another, whose targets are all 20-yard partial accuracy tests. For the hoser match, a dot is a much smaller advantage than average. If a dot gets a 5% handicap, but irons are only 2% slower, you'd want to shoot irons. For the accuracy match, the dot is a bigger advantage than average: dots are particularly good relative to irons when the irons shooter has to pay attention to sight alignment. If a dot gets a 5% handicap, but is 8% faster, you want the dot.

 

Most examples won't be so extreme, but the handicap between certain kinds of equipment on every stage will fall somewhere around the average, rather than on the average exactly. By handicapping certain features by a fixed amount, you encourage gaming of the equipment rules: if you don't have at least a dot gun and an irons gun, you're potentially handicapping yourself a few percent based on the character of the match.

[Racinready300ex]

52 minutes ago, Fishbreath said:

Another thing that occurred to me this morning is that, while you can average the benefit of a dot or rifle (for instance) over not having those features, you can't actually trust that average to be correct at any given match.

 

Picture two matches: one, whose targets are all three-yard hoser specials, and another, whose targets are all 20-yard partial accuracy tests. For the hoser match, a dot is a much smaller advantage than average. If a dot gets a 5% handicap, but irons are only 2% slower, you'd want to shoot irons. For the accuracy match, the dot is a bigger advantage than average: dots are particularly good relative to irons when the irons shooter has to pay attention to sight alignment. If a dot gets a 5% handicap, but is 8% faster, you want the dot.

 

Most examples won't be so extreme, but the handicap between certain kinds of equipment on every stage will fall somewhere around the average, rather than on the average exactly. By handicapping certain features by a fixed amount, you encourage gaming of the equipment rules: if you don't have at least a dot gun and an irons gun, you're potentially handicapping yourself a few percent based on the character of the match.

 

 

Good point. This will likely mean a real gamer is going to want to have dot guns and iron guns and train on both so he can walk the stages the day before and pick the best tool for the job. This could put our currently equipment race situation on steroids. 

 

Now in my head I'm picturing someone showing up to that hose fest match with a glock 19, factory ammo and a dot on it. And he's going to get hit with a 5% penalty for the dot. Meanwhile someone else in his classification is going to be running a 50 oz Custom 2011 with a sub 2 lbs trigger but using irons. Your average C class guy that doesn't practice and struggles to find the dot. lol. Now somehow he has to beat these guys at his same skill level by 5% just to beak even with them. 

 

This could be the most complicated disaster of a idea in shooting. 

[Sarge]

16 hours ago, motosapiens said:

+1

I love you, man!

Same here but he’ll probably have to take one for the team

[AKJD]

I just wish all you deep thinkers would just leave USPSA alone and go tackle important issues like world peace, hunger, poverty, or the shortage of primers.

[twodownzero]

On 3/23/2022 at 11:32 PM, CClassForLife said:

 

Initially, I had the same concern. However, due to major scoring being removed, it balances quite well. The top competitors for CO intermix with the top Open shooters. The top of each division still beat the mid-pack of the other. Same pattern applies to dot/no dot with the proposed modifiers. I looked at Area matches and matches like Dragons Cup that have a strong turnout for each division.

 

By stratifying divisions based on mag capacity, shooters are free to experiment with whatever platform they want. It becomes purely about the sport in my opinion. It's not about everyone having the same exact gun, but it's about making everyone believe they have the same shot.

 

 

CO should be in Open, too.  That never should have been allowed.

 

There is much more to this game than reloading the gun or not reloading the gun.  It isn't about sport where equipment is not segregated by equipment creating a competitive advantage.

[NoSteel]

2 hours ago, AKJD said:

I just wish all you deep thinkers would just leave USPSA alone and go tackle important issues like world peace, hunger, poverty, or the shortage of primers.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

2 hours ago, twodownzero said:

CO should be in Open, too.  That never should have been allowed.

 

LOL

 

Send that up to the board.

Edited March 25, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[motosapiens]

5 hours ago, twodownzero said:

 

CO should be in Open, too.  That never should have been allowed.

if you don’t like it, don’t shoot that division. increasing numbers of LE agencies and concealed carriers are packing striker fired guns with optics. seems practical to me, and its also the most popular division by far in many places.

[ima45dv8]

{sigh}

I've removed a number of posts that violate our Forum Guidelines. 

Not that I necessarily disagree with the sentiments, but you're expected to find a better way to express yourself here.

 

If your post is gone, now you know why.

 

Play nice, y'all.

 

From those Forum Guidelines:

Quote

Posting Guidelines

Attitude
Please be polite. Or if not polite, at least respectful.
No bickering. Regardless of the subject matter.
Antagonistic, offensive, or quarrelsome tones are not acceptable.

 

If I have to clean this out again the parties involved will not like my solution...

- Admin

[echotango]

On 3/24/2022 at 3:41 PM, GMFORLIFE said:

Well thats 5 minutes of my life I will never be able to get back. I would rather take a bath with a toaster than shoot uspsa with this rule set.

This. 

[Nolan]

This reminds me of a company where I used to work.  It was a fairly small company, but for years we dominated the market with a 70+ share.  We were bought by a much larger company that had failed twice attempting to move into our market.  They immediately set out to 'improve' our performance and market share, based on their 'data'.  They basically changed everything about our company that had made it successful, within a year both companies were out of business.  

 

Nolan

[Bakerjd]

This seems extremely over complicated. 

[Bakerjd]

On 3/25/2022 at 11:44 PM, Nolan said:

This reminds me of a company where I used to work.  It was a fairly small company, but for years we dominated the market with a 70+ share.  We were bought by a much larger company that had failed twice attempting to move into our market.  They immediately set out to 'improve' our performance and market share, based on their 'data'.  They basically changed everything about our company that had made it successful, within a year both companies were out of business.  

 

Nolan

Man I hate reading this. I work for a small family owned company that was bought out recently. 

[twodownzero]

This game worked really well for a long time and we resisted the urge to change or add more divisions for almost the entire time I've been shooting it.  Then, recently, in the sentiment of everyone wanting a trophy, we have had so many recent rule changes that have done nothing to improve competitive equity or advance our sport.  I'm sure I'm not alone in considering focusing on my other shooting sports if this game can't get its act together.  I actually thought until recently there was a good chance at combining some divisions and going to purely heads up competition, changes I would support even though I shoot the inferior divisions and have no chance of competing at the highest level anytime soon.  Instead, we've gone absolutely the other direction.  This post would just make it worse, because now the extreme arms race we already have would be reset entirely, including permanently eliminating power as a principle of practical shooting competition.  I can't even express how out of line that is.

 

That said, if this really was so great, someone would create a new sanctioning body and do it.  Since that worked so well with IDPA, what we really need are 3 pistol games with minor and irrelevant distinctions from each other so we can all complain about it.

[Zincwarrior]

On 3/25/2022 at 9:18 PM, motosapiens said:

if you don’t like it, don’t shoot that division. increasing numbers of LE agencies and concealed carriers are packing striker fired guns with optics. seems practical to me, and its also the most popular division by far in many places.

Indeed. In the last local match, there were two Production shooters (including me); 25 COs; 18 Open; 11 Limited; and 8 people who brought a carbine to a pistol match. technology has improved, allowing worthwhile CO. Match winner ran a CO...

[Johnny_Chimpo]

5 hours ago, twodownzero said:

 I'm sure I'm not alone in considering focusing on my other shooting sports if this game can't get its act together. 

 

 

 

This game is working fantastically well for the majority of members who have voted with their feet and dollars to make CO the absolute most popular division in many areas of the country.

 

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[ltdmstr]

Well, the problem with CO is it's not particularly challenging.  A dot combined with minor power factor pretty much removes most of the difficulty in terms of the actual shooting.  That's great for the newbies with limited skill set, and the hoser types.  Really, it ends up being down to athletic ability and gamesmanship.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.  It's just very different game than what we started with.  The thing I find funny is that a  lot of CO folks like to poke fun at PCC shooters and and joke about them shooting a pistol match with a rifle when their thing ain't much different in terms of difficulty.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

6 hours ago, ltdmstr said:

Well, the problem with CO is it's not particularly challenging.  A dot combined with minor power factor pretty much removes most of the difficulty in terms of the actual shooting. 

 

Interesting.  My CO pistols must be broken.  They don't make the draw, grip, trigger press, mag changes, unloaded starts, table starts, etc any easier than the few I've left without dots on.

 

They do fix most of my visual handicap tho, so there is that.