Upcoming Proposals for Member Comment

[ZackJones]

In the 8/23/2022 minutes you'll see the following entry:

 

DSC- Presents four proposals:
1) Peak Stage times recommendations
2) WSSC Slot Policy recommendation
3) Eliminate dropping of old class times proposals

4) Selective Re-Classification proposals

 

We (USPSA) will be soliciting feedback from current USPSA members on each of them. The only official place where  your feedback will be recognized is on the SCSA/USPSA web site. We can discuss them here if you'd like but official commentary and review (by the full board) takes place through the USPSA web site. 

 

1 - For PST's we are recommending more time increases than decreases. Our rationale is if people shooting WSSC aren't shooting GM times on the stages then maybe we were a little too aggressive with the PST. In those cases we are added 0.10 to the current PST. 

2 - Despite the rumors and misinformation already circulating WSSC WILL NOT be a slot only match in the future. We will have general registration. Slots can be earned at WSSC, your respective area match or the Canadian National Championship match. In a nutshell you could earn one slot per division based on how well you place overall, within your class, or category. 

3 - This would restore all stage times to your classification record. If you were to look mine up (L4038) you'll see for some divisions I have no times listed. That's because they have all expired. This proposal would restore those times for everyone. 

4 - My personal favorite. All you, the competitor, to select one or more divisions to have your currently classification letter and percentage erased and recalculated based upon the current PSTs in place. 

 

The proposals should be on the web site this week. Please review and comment, pro or con, so that we (the entire BoD) can make the best decision we can on each one. Each proposal is independent of the others. 

 

[bigdawgbeav]

1. interesting...
2. already knew this, but thank you for the clarification to squash the rumors
3. thank you.  
4. love this, especially if you just barely moved into a higher class and then PST update technically puts you back at the previous class

Truly appreciate all your hard work.  Now we just need our SC-only RO class (will be moot for me since I'm taking the full class in a month)

[Nathanb]

For number one. What does the data say?  You’ve got the scores. 

[skip62]

+1 on what Nathanb said.  Show us the data.  Why is kept so secret?  You ask for opinions, but don't give us anything to go by.  I just don't get it. 

 

Also, where on the website will it be posted?

 

Thank you

Edited September 2, 2022 by skip62

[jrdoran]

#1 - Yes please share the data.  I can imagine SS and revolver were a bit ambitious, but I sense there is a hammer about to fall on rimfire / CO / PCC times and your trying to be kind.   

 

#3 ( Boomer feature ( I'm 58 )) is part of the problem and should be rejected.  It worse than a participation trophy.   Has zero merit in a classification system, especially as peak time measurements evolve.  

 

#4 should be the norm on a regular interval something like 2 years.  It keeps us all sharp and pushing.  Today, once you achieve GM, some of the fire goes away.   Wipe it out and you get to climb the mountain all over again.   

 

Quote

We (USPSA) will be soliciting feedback from current USPSA members on each of them. The only official place where  your feedback will be recognized is on the SCSA/USPSA web site. We can discuss them here if you'd like but official commentary and review (by the full board) takes place through the USPSA web site. 

 

Umm, sure, is there a link ??   Honestly speaking pushing people through the antique website of USPSA makes no sense.  Almost no one goes there regularly.   USPSA / SC should embrace social media / forums / even practiscore as the form of discussion and commentary.  By using USPSA website you just cut the number by 2 orders of magnitude down on who will take time to give feedback.    

[euxx]

7 minutes ago, jrdoran said:

#4 should be the norm on a regular interval something like 2 years.  It keeps us all sharp and pushing.  Today, once you achieve GM, some of the fire goes away.   Wipe it out and you get to climb the mountain all over again.   

 

Wondered that too. If it can be recalculated with the changed class outcome, it probably should be recalculated automatically for all members.

[Racinready300ex]

I don't SC,

 

Is there any concern about sandbagging with number 4? Could I just shoot a few sloppy matches and recalc prior to my area match or WSSC to win a lower classification. How will this be prevented?

[bigdawgbeav]

3 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

I don't SC,

 

Is there any concern about sandbagging with number 4? Could I just shoot a few sloppy matches and recalc prior to my area match or WSSC to win a lower classification. How will this be prevented?

#4 is primarily for shooters that classified in one level but after a Peak Time update they are now (technically) in a lower class.  I'll use myself as an example.  I made B class CO but just barely, like 0.5% above.  Then the peak times were changed and now my classifier time falls into C class.  But since SC goes with the highest class achieved I would have to take my high-C ability up against every B shooter at a match.  

 

Since every SC stage is a classifier, only your best times are kept.  But if the changing of peak times drops your percentages #4 allows someone to reclassify.  It's not really sandbagging since peak times are only updated once a year and if you went to a match an purposely did poorly, that doesn't reflect on your classification scores.  So you are just hurting yourself

Edited September 2, 2022 by bigdawgbeav

[bigdawgbeav]

@ZackJones just an fyi - sent you a couple of emails

[Racinready300ex]

16 minutes ago, bigdawgbeav said:

#4 is primarily for shooters that classified in one level but after a Peak Time update they are now (technically) in a lower class.  I'll use myself as an example.  I made B class CO but just barely, like 0.5% above.  Then the peak times were changed and now my classifier time falls into C class.  But since SC goes with the highest class achieved I would have to take my high-C ability up against every B shooter at a match.  

 

Since every SC stage is a classifier, only your best times are kept.  But if the changing of peak times drops your percentages #4 allows someone to reclassify.  It's not really sandbagging since peak times are only updated once a year and if you went to a match an purposely did poorly, that doesn't reflect on your classification scores.  So you are just hurting yourself

 

I think I see, so it's not going to recalculate based on your more recent scores. It'll still take your best scores ever and only adjust you if those are below the new standards. In which case that is reasonable. 

 

I was thinking the idea was if you're best times were GM but you don't train like you used to and are only shooting M now you could get your scores deleted and start over. 

 

 

[bigdawgbeav]

58 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I think I see, so it's not going to recalculate based on your more recent scores. It'll still take your best scores ever and only adjust you if those are below the new standards. In which case that is reasonable. 

 

I was thinking the idea was if you're best times were GM but you don't train like you used to and are only shooting M now you could get your scores deleted and start over. 

 

 

Well, in your scenario, kinda.  But that would only be if your GM times have now fallen below GM percentages after a peak time update.  If you were already a 100% GM and don't shoot that anymore, not much you can do as the times won't drop THAT much.  I would also think that most GMs would keep the title.  As for me, not sure yet.  I'm a GM in PCCI, but not by much.  If the peak times change and it puts me back in M I might consider going back down just to try and get there again.  Good way to be able to push myself.

[Racinready300ex]

28 minutes ago, bigdawgbeav said:

Well, in your scenario, kinda.  But that would only be if your GM times have now fallen below GM percentages after a peak time update.  If you were already a 100% GM and don't shoot that anymore, not much you can do as the times won't drop THAT much.  I would also think that most GMs would keep the title.  As for me, not sure yet.  I'm a GM in PCCI, but not by much.  If the peak times change and it puts me back in M I might consider going back down just to try and get there again.  Good way to be able to push myself.

 

I just picked GM as a example, the same could be said for any class. Personally I think I'm like B class in maybe open I don't remember. Most of the stages I've shot once like 7 years ago lol. So this doesn't really apply to me I was just wondering how it would play out.

[10mmdave]

USPSA has a forum ??

[Gregg K]

6 hours ago, bigdawgbeav said:

 If the peak times change and it puts me back in M I might consider going back down just to try and get there again.  Good way to be able to push myself.

When peak times dropped before I had a couple of ratings that my percentage dropped below what it would take to earn them with the new times. I just decided in my head that I was going to just have to work a little harder and re-earn them, I didn't need a rule change to challenge myself to earn them back. Luckily I was still able to improve and earn them back but I can see where it would help some that due to age or other physical limitations just can't get back to the place they once were. If I was in that position I would first try to re-earn the rating and then if unable consider the option to drop down. Each individual would just have to be honest with themselves what they are currently capable of doing and choose the appropriate action.

[ZackJones]

On 9/2/2022 at 7:14 AM, skip62 said:

+1 on what Nathanb said.  Show us the data.  Why is kept so secret?  You ask for opinions, but don't give us anything to go by.  I just don't get it. 

 

Also, where on the website will it be posted?

 

Thank you

Not hiding anything but I also knew the formatting wouldn't work well in the forum. The 4 proposals are now posted on the SCSA web site. I'll do a separate post with the link. 

[ZackJones]

The 4 proposals are online for review and comment. 

 

https://scsa.org/proposals

 

 

[ZackJones]

On 9/2/2022 at 8:39 AM, jrdoran said:

Umm, sure, is there a link ??   Honestly speaking pushing people through the antique website of USPSA makes no sense.  Almost no one goes there regularly.   USPSA / SC should embrace social media / forums / even practiscore as the form of discussion and commentary.  By using USPSA website you just cut the number by 2 orders of magnitude down on who will take time to give feedback.    

 

Link below. We want feedback from current USPSA members and the best way to do that is on the web sites. We have 2 months to collect input and then make final decisions in November.

[ZackJones]

On 9/2/2022 at 8:48 AM, euxx said:

 

Wondered that too. If it can be recalculated with the changed class outcome, it probably should be recalculated automatically for all members.

That was my original intent. Your class changes based on your current percentage. I was overruled on that one. Members will retain highest class achieved unless they elect to reclassify. 

[ZackJones]

On 9/2/2022 at 12:08 PM, bigdawgbeav said:

@ZackJones just an fyi - sent you a couple of emails

I have them. I want to look up the rule before replying to the first one. 

[ZackJones]

On 9/2/2022 at 12:27 PM, Racinready300ex said:

I was thinking the idea was if you're best times were GM but you don't train like you used to and are only shooting M now you could get your scores deleted and start over. 

That's how it will work. If you hold a GM classification but your percentage is below 95% and you elect reclassification you will get dropped to M or A or whatever your matching percentage works out to be. 

[ZackJones]

22 hours ago, 10mmdave said:

USPSA has a forum ??

Yes ago there was one. It's long gone. 

 

[Darqusoull13]

On 8/30/2022 at 5:33 PM, ZackJones said:

In the 8/23/2022 minutes you'll see the following entry:

 

DSC- Presents four proposals:
1) Peak Stage times recommendations
2) WSSC Slot Policy recommendation
3) Eliminate dropping of old class times proposals

4) Selective Re-Classification proposals

 

We (USPSA) will be soliciting feedback from current USPSA members on each of them. The only official place where  your feedback will be recognized is on the SCSA/USPSA web site. We can discuss them here if you'd like but official commentary and review (by the full board) takes place through the USPSA web site. 

 

1 - For PST's we are recommending more time increases than decreases. Our rationale is if people shooting WSSC aren't shooting GM times on the stages then maybe we were a little too aggressive with the PST. In those cases we are added 0.10 to the current PST. 

2 - Despite the rumors and misinformation already circulating WSSC WILL NOT be a slot only match in the future. We will have general registration. Slots can be earned at WSSC, your respective area match or the Canadian National Championship match. In a nutshell you could earn one slot per division based on how well you place overall, within your class, or category. 

3 - This would restore all stage times to your classification record. If you were to look mine up (L4038) you'll see for some divisions I have no times listed. That's because they have all expired. This proposal would restore those times for everyone. 

4 - My personal favorite. All you, the competitor, to select one or more divisions to have your currently classification letter and percentage erased and recalculated based upon the current PSTs in place. 

 

The proposals should be on the web site this week. Please review and comment, pro or con, so that we (the entire BoD) can make the best decision we can on each one. Each proposal is independent of the others. 

 

Zach, I know you are trying and we all appreciate the time and hard work you are volunteering.

 

However, I'm against pretty much all of this. None of these proposals work towards increasing membership in the new shooter category nor do they grow the RO pool. These are the 2 major issues holding SCSA back and it's going to get worse as Area, Major and Section matches become more popular.

 

These changes are small potatoes, and to be honest, don't add real value to current members. 

 

I'd much rather see the SCSA RO cert independent of USPSA as well as SCSA investing in covering RO Instructor fees for  New ROs.

 

I would also like to see a detailed plan on recruitment and retention of new shooters with emphasis on NO prior SCSA experience. 

[Joe4d]

2 hours ago, Darqusoull13 said:

Zach, I know you are trying and we all appreciate the time and hard work you are volunteering.

 

However, I'm against pretty much all of this. None of these proposals work towards increasing membership in the new shooter category nor do they grow the RO pool. These are the 2 major issues holding SCSA back and it's going to get worse as Area, Major and Section matches become more popular.

 

These changes are small potatoes, and to be honest, don't add real value to current members. 

 

I'd much rather see the SCSA RO cert independent of USPSA as well as SCSA investing in covering RO Instructor fees for  New ROs.

 

I would also like to see a detailed plan on recruitment and retention of new shooters with emphasis on NO prior SCSA experience. 

I agree,, much ado about stuff I bet 75% of the steel challenge shooters dont know or care about.  Whats the goal ? What are you tryign to accomplish with any of that ?
 

[Squirrel45]

3 hours ago, Darqusoull13 said:

 

I'd much rather see the SCSA RO cert independent of USPSA as well as SCSA investing in covering RO Instructor fees for  New ROs.

This please!

[ZackJones]

3 hours ago, Darqusoull13 said:

Zach, I know you are trying and we all appreciate the time and hard work you are volunteering.

 

However, I'm against pretty much all of this. None of these proposals work towards increasing membership in the new shooter category nor do they grow the RO pool. These are the 2 major issues holding SCSA back and it's going to get worse as Area, Major and Section matches become more popular.

 

These changes are small potatoes, and to be honest, don't add real value to current members. 

 

I'd much rather see the SCSA RO cert independent of USPSA as well as SCSA investing in covering RO Instructor fees for  New ROs.

 

I would also like to see a detailed plan on recruitment and retention of new shooters with emphasis on NO prior SCSA experience. 

 

And here I thought you were a friend :). 

 

It's okay that you're against them. I fully understand that no matter what we do not everyone will be happy; however, these are things that were proposed back in January at the in person BoD meeting and I have a duty to follow through on that which is what I've done. 

 

I would disagree that they don't add any real value to current members. I think each one does for a variety of reasons and not all of which were included in the proposals posted. I personally know of some USPSA members that have let their membership expire due to being over classified. I see it as an opportunity to win some of those people back. 

 

I have heard, on more than one occasion, that SCSA competitors want their own RO path independent of USPSA handgun certification. I'm one of those. I can't tell you the last time I've called 2 alpha or pasted a target and I don't ever plan to do that in the future. Splitting the RO certification paths falls under DNROI and his team. I will bring it up to them as I'm hearing this more and more often. 

 

Now that the presidential election is finalized give us some time to work with Yee-Min and see what his take is on things.

 

BTW PM or email (zack@uspsa.org) me your address. I need to send you your club 13 coin.