ICORE class vs. USPSA class ?

[ysrracer]

Are you guys in the same class in both organizations?

 

I'm in C Class in ICORE, but I just shot a six classifier match in USPSA, and I'm in B Class with them.

 

ICORE is mostly dead in the LA / Orange County California area, so I'm moving over to USPSA.

[MWP]

It’s much easier to make a higher classification in uspsa by shooting classifiers than in icore by shooting classifiers. Uspsa revolver numbers are all messed up, icore has them set properly. 

[ysrracer]

12 minutes ago, MWP said:

It’s much easier to make a higher classification in uspsa by shooting classifiers than in icore by shooting classifiers. Uspsa revolver numbers are all messed up, icore has them set properly. 

 

Oh man, I thought I was getting better

[Mountain09]

I would prefer the USPSA class .

[Fishbreath]

9 hours ago, ysrracer said:

Oh man, I thought I was getting better

 

If your classification is going up, you are!

 

Most of the classifiers from before the 18 series with more than 6 rounds between reloads haven't been updated since the addition of 8-round guns, as I understand, so you're shooting at a small disadvantage in points and a large advantage in time.

 

The 18 through 21 series classifiers are set by looking at Nationals scores (and eventually adjusting), so they take 8 rounds into account. I think they're a little softer than the old 6-round classifiers, since they're based on shooting in a match rather than 15 years of burn-it-down, but they're still reasonably challenging.

[ysrracer]

[ysrracer]

[ysrracer]

[Fishbreath]

You steal a reload on the sixguns on 99-57, but 13-04 and 18-03 are both fair. (Maybe even a little 6 Major-biased.) 09-10 doesn't take an extra reload, but I think it's more natural to shoot with 8 than with 6.

[ysrracer]

One of them is a five second par time at 75 feet, 45 feet, and 30 feet.

 

At 45 feet I got off three, and a reload, then beep

 

No second three shots.

[MWP]

Uspsa throws out the outlier numbers they receive for classifier hit factors. That’s fine in large divisions, but in revolver it’s a major issue since the pool is small. 
 

Fishbreath makes a great point that 18-21 are set at nationals, and don’t have a decade of hero/zero runs on them. At nationals, the people with the speed to set those numbers extremely high are turned down to ensure a safe match run. But, those classifiers then go to club matches and are shot hero/zero by everyone else. Then, when one of those 2-5 people who can shoot at a ridiculous pace sets one that’s 125-150% over the number the computer has from a nationals, it tosses it as an outlier, rather than fact. 
 

ICORE doesn’t do that from the way I’ve seen their numbers. The top number is the top number. I’m not sure how often those numbers are updated, but they’re closer to actual pace. 
 

There’s two ways to figure out your “actual” uspsa classification since the system is flawed. Neither of them will result in a higher classification from the one HQ gives you, so most people don’t want to do that math just to get a lower number. 

[ysrracer]

8 minutes ago, MWP said:

Uspsa throws out the outlier numbers they receive for classifier hit factors. That’s fine in large divisions, but in revolver it’s a major issue since the pool is small. 
 

Fishbreath makes a great point that 18-21 are set at nationals, and don’t have a decade of hero/zero runs on them. At nationals, the people with the speed to set those numbers extremely high are turned down to ensure a safe match run. But, those classifiers then go to club matches and are shot hero/zero by everyone else. Then, when one of those 2-5 people who can shoot at a ridiculous pace sets one that’s 125-150% over the number the computer has from a nationals, it tosses it as an outlier, rather than fact. 
 

ICORE doesn’t do that from the way I’ve seen their numbers. The top number is the top number. I’m not sure how often those numbers are updated, but they’re closer to actual pace. 
 

There’s two ways to figure out your “actual” uspsa classification since the system is flawed. Neither of them will result in a higher classification from the one HQ gives you, so most people don’t want to do that math just to get a lower number. 

 

I just want to go, shoot  have fun, have lunch with my friends

[alecmc]

14 hours ago, MWP said:

It’s much easier to make a higher classification in uspsa by shooting classifiers than in icore by shooting classifiers. Uspsa revolver numbers are all messed up, icore has them set properly. 

 

 

Agreed with Mike here.

 

I made GM in USPSA, Master in ICORE. 

 

Per my Finishes at nationals % wise I should of probably been a Master in USPSA as well. 

 

Much easier to make GM in USPSA than it is in ICORE.

[Fishbreath]

1 hour ago, MWP said:

Fishbreath makes a great point that 18-21 are set at nationals, and don’t have a decade of hero/zero runs on them. At nationals, the people with the speed to set those numbers extremely high are turned down to ensure a safe match run. But, those classifiers then go to club matches and are shot hero/zero by everyone else. Then, when one of those 2-5 people who can shoot at a ridiculous pace sets one that’s 125-150% over the number the computer has from a nationals, it tosses it as an outlier, rather than fact. 

 

Based on the data on this year's classifier HHF updates from USPSA Insights, I'm pretty confident in guessing that HHF updates are a manual process, or at most semi-automatic. A great many classifiers didn't change, even in CO, which has no shortage of recent data and also uses Production HHFs for all the pre-18 classifiers.

 

In Revolver, the 18 series got uniformly harder (except for 18-01), along with 20-02 and 09.04. 20-01 and 20-03, which used Production HHFs and required a reload, got substantially easier. Notably, none of the classifiers pre-18 with forced 8-round sections changed. (I'm doing my part to generate data for those by setting 100s. ) I think that's much more the source of any perceived softness in revolver than HHFs too slow to adjust.

Philosophically, though, I think it's fine if classifiers represent super squad match pace rather than super squad hero/zero pace. Using the very best run as the HHF can pollute the data: there's not a lot of oversight of local matches, and incorrect setups or score entry fumbles do happen. It's difficult to tease those out from valid data in an automated fashion. More pragmatically, I think slightly too soft is a better error than slightly too hard—Open M, for example, seems to trap a lot of people who are in the running for wins at majors, and I think that's bad for the same reason that I think sandbagging is a worse sin than grandbagging.

[Racinready300ex]

I haven't shot Revo in years, good to hear the classifiers are still all jacked up lol. 

[pskys2]

I think the biggest issue between the two is 1) Time based scoring favors accuracy, you can outun a few bad hits in USPSA even a miss can be overcome.  It's much harder to do so in ICORE, virtually impossible. 2) Most of us USPSA types have worshipped at the alter of SPEED for so long that it's hard to focus on accuracy.  That's why the top guys, the ?Master? GM's? are closer to their actual ratings.  They've learned to get A's at top speed.  Us mortals can do one or the other, but struggle to combine them.

ICORE is a more demanding game, USPSA is more fun (IF one can get by the siren call of the High Cap's).

If one can shoot their best game in ICORE, USPSA will be easier.

[MWP]

6 hours ago, Fishbreath said:Philosophically, though, I think it's fine if classifiers represent super squad match pace rather than super squad hero/zero pace. Using the very best run as the HHF can pollute the data: there's not a lot of oversight of local matches, and incorrect setups or score entry fumbles do happen. It's difficult to tease those out from valid data in an automated fashion. More pragmatically, I think slightly too soft is a better error than slightly too hard—Open M, for example, seems to trap a lot of people who are in the running for wins at majors, and I think that's bad for the same reason that I think sandbagging is a worse sin than grandbagging.

I agree with everything Jay says here.

 

If there’s going to be an error, and we know that all crowd sourced data has plenty of it, I think it’s more beneficial to the competition to be errored as it is. 
 

Interestingly, as far as I am aware, the US is the only country that uses classes for practical shooting. There are some independent IPSC sites that use an elo system to determine peoples classes, but it’s not official.

[testosterone]

On 6/3/2022 at 12:57 PM, MWP said:

ICORE doesn’t do that from the way I’ve seen their numbers. The top number is the top number. I’m not sure how often those numbers are updated, but they’re closer to actual pace. 

I wonder about this but haven't looked that much if they adjust.  Traditionally the irc has the 'classifier match' prior to the match and I think if you look back in time at names you expect that is where the 100's came from, you will see a lot of JM 100's(nothing there now, his mem expired so scores are not showing) where he put down super human runs.

 

Like uspsa 6v8 classifiers though, icore has a few magical classifiers from the old batch that a mortal can make 95% on if they just have a clean 1 sec 1st shot and fire/transition 8 alphas in .27's or whatever, melody line I think is doable like that and doesn't require an .80 first shot with .15 splits and transitions...

 

They are mostly though i think like 009 which is a triple bill drill on three sep targets, the calculated 100% is like 7.45 seconds.  When you start breaking down the math on what 1st shot, 2 reloads, and 17 shots... ...its like ok...

 

All that said, making GM should be hard though, its "Grand" after all...

[RangerMcFadden]

19 hours ago, testosterone said:

I wonder about this but haven't looked that much if they adjust.  Traditionally the irc has the 'classifier match' prior to the match and I think if you look back in time at names you expect that is where the 100's came from, you will see a lot of JM 100's(nothing there now, his mem expired so scores are not showing) where he put down super human runs.

 

Like uspsa 6v8 classifiers though, icore has a few magical classifiers from the old batch that a mortal can make 95% on if they just have a clean 1 sec 1st shot and fire/transition 8 alphas in .27's or whatever, melody line I think is doable like that and doesn't require an .80 first shot with .15 splits and transitions...

 

They are mostly though i think like 009 which is a triple bill drill on three sep targets, the calculated 100% is like 7.45 seconds.  When you start breaking down the math on what 1st shot, 2 reloads, and 17 shots... ...its like ok...

 

All that said, making GM should be hard though, its "Grand" after all...

What division for CS-003? (That’s the one with 3 bills on 3 targets; 009 has 7 targets)

 

100% there is 9.71 for Classic which is reasonable for a GM to do. 7.45 would be spicy.

 

limited is 8.9

limited 6 is 8.9 too

not sure open

 

Edited June 14, 2022 by RangerMcFadden

[pskys2]

19 hours ago, testosterone said:

I wonder about this but haven't looked that much if they adjust.  Traditionally the irc has the 'classifier match' prior to the match and I think if you look back in time at names you expect that is where the 100's came from, you will see a lot of JM 100's(nothing there now, his mem expired so scores are not showing) where he put down super human runs.

 

Like uspsa 6v8 classifiers though, icore has a few magical classifiers from the old batch that a mortal can make 95% on if they just have a clean 1 sec 1st shot and fire/transition 8 alphas in .27's or whatever, melody line I think is doable like that and doesn't require an .80 first shot with .15 splits and transitions...

 

They are mostly though i think like 009 which is a triple bill drill on three sep targets, the calculated 100% is like 7.45 seconds.  When you start breaking down the math on what 1st shot, 2 reloads, and 17 shots... ...its like ok...

 

All that said, making GM should be hard though, its "Grand" after all...

I like that "Grand" should be hard!  Remember if you look at the long run, we all get old....I'm a Super Senior now and even though I'm listed as a Master in USPSA in Revolver I'm more likely to shoot low A scores now.  In ICORE I've been a B for a very long time, something like .14 from an A though.  I just quit worrying about my Class though.  I just want to shoot a good clean match, as fast as I can, and let the placement fall where it will.

[testosterone]

23 minutes ago, RangerMcFadden said:

What division for CS-003? (That’s the one with 3 bills on 3 targets; 009 has 7 targets)

 

100% there is 9.71 for Classic which is reasonable for a GM to do. 7.45 would be spicy.

 

limited is 8.9

limited 6 is 8.9 too

not sure open

 

Open, its possible(probable) my memory is faulty though, I had it in my training notes of "wtf's" at some point, but lost that log awhile ago.

I don't even think open is any particular advantage on that particular classifier given target distance, i think an l6 with a 625 and 125pf is probably ideal...

[testosterone]

26 minutes ago, pskys2 said:

I just want to shoot a good clean match, as fast as I can, and let the placement fall where it will.

I've never won anything big, so take it for what it is, but you can only shoot your own match and that's it.  You can try and shoot someone else's match and if you are hyper good maybe it can work, I wouldn't know because i'm not good.

I've talk to JM a bunch over the years and at one point he said you can only let it happen, you can't make it happen, you just shoot the stage in the time it takes, it will feel slow, but that will be your best performance, if you try to do something outside your realm, it'll go bad.   I guess this means practicing to the point that doing everything as fast as possible does not feel rushed or like you are forcing it to happen.

 

I guess anyways, still trying to figure it out, i experience something like what he is saying for about 30% of a match, and the rest is more like making it happen based on accuracy and errors...

 

[Fishbreath]

8.9 is pretty reasonable for iron-sight guns with moon clips, and even 7.45 wouldn't be out of reach, I don't think. A .9 draw, .22 splits, and 1.6 reloads will do it, by a nose, which would be a great run for me with irons but not a perfect, once-in-a-lifetime run, and I still have a good bit of ground to make up between me and the perennial contenders.

[ysrracer]

On 6/2/2022 at 8:43 PM, MWP said:

It’s much easier to make a higher classification in uspsa by shooting classifiers than in icore by shooting classifiers. Uspsa revolver numbers are all messed up, icore has them set properly. 

 

All I'm hearing is, "good job Brad" 

 

[testosterone]

28 minutes ago, Fishbreath said:

1.6 reloads will do it

I personally have never seen anyone do a 1.6 shot to shot reload live at a match,  definitely not two in a row.  I've only ever seen 2 people, mike and jerry, do it with live ammo on video.  Im not saying its not happening though and I haven't seen everything obviously...

 

I personally could never get an in practice shot to shot definite A zone 7 yard reload in less than 1.90 when I was practicing 7 days a week, my limit really is getting the shot out of the gun, at one point I could pretty reliably flail the gun into a loaded condition pretty quickly, but would get the gun back up and not move the trigger.

 

The math I think to make the reloads not need to be 1.60's is more like a .75-80 first shot and the splits need to be more like 18's give or take...The first shot just never happens for me, the 16-18's can happen(well, they used to, recently picking things back up this doesn't seem to be my reality anymore) on the 5 yd, the 7 yd is going to be 21-23's...

 

You should come to an icore match and try it out...east coast regional is aug 20th at lower providence.