Category question a newer shooter asked me.

[rowdyb]

Someone I know in real life recently shot their first USPSA match, with their wife. He has a respected background in his field and is an excellent SWAT officer and Tactical Games competitor. While he has shot extensively and competed at other things, never "our" sport. He was messaging me about the classifier stage and how it all worked and then asked if his wife would have a different hit factor as she was a woman.

 

When I said "no" he was astounded. His experience in fitness tests or other things where if you're allowed to identify by age your gender then your criteria are different. Since in uspsa you're allowed to identify as Senior, Female, Junior or whatever he was really surprised there wasn't a corresponding change in the standard. Especially as you're allowed to select them and then later can receive a trophy based on your classification.

 

At first I tried the "It was old, white guys in the 70s so of course the standard is male centric" but that didn't really seem a good argument. Then I tried the "Well, it's actually very egalitarian as everyone has the same standard" but then everyone isn't rewarded to the same standard because we allow them to sort out by category. And I had a hard time thinking of other 'sports' where men, women and children all compete in something that is a physical test, straight up against each other. I couldn't think of a one that didn't have completely different standards and/or events for men vs women vs children. (Maybe your drivers test or other certification type tests yes, but I couldn't think of competitive things)

 

Since we currently allow a separation in awards, a common refrain is "you only shoot against people similar to yourself", and the example of many other sports and activities should we have the classification hit factors adjusted for one's age or gender? (As is common almost everywhere else in sports) And if we go that far, should we then also truly separate them so that 'like' only competes against 'like'? So is practical shooting the last bastion of equality and egalitarianism or is it 40 years behind the times in this aspect?

[Racinready300ex]

Are we behind the times? Or ahead of the curve? Today women are supposed to be able to do anything a man can. Not to mention than men can identify as women and compete head to head with the women in much more physical sports than ours. 

 

Seriously though the only way I think this would work is if we completely eliminated the overall win for divisions. Everyone would need to be in a category, we'd need to add one that's just standard men's to move forward.

 

So now every division gets first divided into categories, then divided by classification. You can win your category but there can be no overall. If we're adjusting the scoring based on your perceived advantages or disadvantages due to age and gender, then we can't go head to head unless we get  a perfect balance in scoring which I don't think can happen. So we must keep everything completely separate. 

 

Is splitting our 8 divisions into 80 divisions a good move? Then with in those 80 divisions we have 6 classifications or do we dump classifications? Keep them now we've divided the sport into close to 500 potential titles at any given match. Maybe we reduce the number of categories, to help offset this.

 

Are we big enough to need this or even pull it off? What will we gain? There is a sectional registration just opened for in my area and it's full. I see 13 ladies split between 8 divisions. Should those 13 ladies get 8 divisions of there own to pick from? Or do we want to just say they can shoot minor scored major and that'll "fix" the problem? Do we do the same for seniors? Should Rob L. get to shoot SS nationals with a 10 round minor gun scored major because he's to old? Should Justine of been scored major at PCC nationals to balance the scales? Would she even want that? Seems like a super tricky thing to get right at a risk of really messing things up. So completely separate seems like the only option to me. 

[RJH]

Classification system is fine. It's a system to show exactly how well anybody ranks against the greatest in the sport heads up. The heads up nature of USPSA scoring is one of the best and defining features of the game.

 

A D class olds/woman/junior/cop are all still going to shoot D class scores.

 

Categories in match results (although I don't like them), sort out the remaining participation ribbons

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, rowdyb said:

Someone I know in real life recently shot their first USPSA match, with their wife. He has a respected background in his field and is an excellent SWAT officer and Tactical Games competitor. While he has shot extensively and competed at other things, never "our" sport. He was messaging me about the classifier stage and how it all worked and then asked if his wife would have a different hit factor as she was a woman.

 

When I said "no" he was astounded. His experience in fitness tests or other things where if you're allowed to identify by age your gender then your criteria are different. Since in uspsa you're allowed to identify as Senior, Female, Junior or whatever he was really surprised there wasn't a corresponding change in the standard. Especially as you're allowed to select them and then later can receive a trophy based on your classification.

 

 

What you should have told him is that the women's category is what should go away.  Women wanted equality, so they should get FULL equality.  Instead it seems many want it until it doesn't benefit them.

 

What I could not believe, when I entered the USNA, is that women got breaks on every physical fitness test.  The same women who wanted to serve alongside us in every combat occupational field......GTFO

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

Seriously though the only way I think this would work is if we completely eliminated the overall win for divisions. Everyone would need to be in a category, we'd need to add one that's just standard men's to move forward.

 

So now every division gets first divided into categories, then divided by classification. You can win your category but there can be no overall. If we're adjusting the scoring based on your perceived advantages or disadvantages due to age and gender, then we can't go head to head unless we get  a perfect balance in scoring which I don't think can happen. So we must keep everything completely separate. 

 

Is splitting our 8 divisions into 80 divisions a good move? Then with in those 80 divisions we have 6 classifications or do we dump classifications? Keep them now we've divided the sport into close to 500 potential titles at any given match. Maybe we reduce the number of categories, to help offset this.

 

Are we big enough to need this or even pull it off? What will we gain? There is a sectional registration just opened for in my area and it's full. I see 13 ladies split between 8 divisions. Should those 13 ladies get 8 divisions of there own to pick from? Or do we want to just say they can shoot minor scored major and that'll "fix" the problem? Do we do the same for seniors? Should Rob L. get to shoot SS nationals with a 10 round minor gun scored major because he's to old? Should Justine of been scored major at PCC nationals to balance the scales? Would she even want that? Seems like a super tricky thing to get right at a risk of really messing things up. So completely separate seems like the only option to me. 

 

I know the above is a hypothetical but that train of thought needs to be stopped in its tracks.  Such an idea, should someone ever seriously propose it, should be killed instantly.

 

I actually think all these participation ribbon categories should be done away with, with the possible exception of super senior.  Everyone else (and quite a few super seniors) is an able bodied person so if they want a win then work at it or be happy with what your capabilities are.

 

And I say that as a senior category shooter.

Edited December 23, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[Racinready300ex]

3 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

I know the above is a hypothetical but that train of thought needs to be stopped in its tracks.  Such an idea, should someone ever seriously propose it, should be killed instantly.

 

I actually think all these participation ribbon categories should be done away with, with the possible exception of super senior.  Everyone else (and quite a few super seniors) is an able bodied person so if they want a win then work at it or be happy with what your capabilities are.

 

And I say that as a senior category shooter.

 

I agree, and my hope was that spelling out what it might put it in perspective what it might take to pull it off. The part left off is that if we do this like every other sport, then we'll probably see the same result as every other sport. The only category that will matter is the Men's. No one will care which of the two ladies won Ladies-CO. And those ladies will never get the chance to prove themselves against the men. 

 

Maybe this would make more sense if women made up more of the sport, but what are we talking about here? 1% on the high end?

[Joe4d]

I do horse endurance racing, we do have juniors sub catagory,,, BUT they have to ride with a mentor so really not straight up.
Only other points thing is weight... Get more points for more weight. But that weight is total rider weight. rider, cloths gear saddle... So a lightweight is free to use saddle weights. so no age, or sex.. For rider or horse.. Nor breed rules, ( which is where the huge advantage lies)  
But just like USPSA,, there are various special awards for horse breeds and colors for some reason.

The OP brought 2 thoughts to mind:
1. Class system dies make all these categories dumb.. B class women is a B class. Class has already taken into account physical differences.
2. Typical cop attitude.... Come to 1 match.. expect it all to change for them cause they are soooooooooooo special. 

[llamasabound]

Take this year’s category results for Ladies from the World Shoot, relative the winner:

Classic 76%

Open 82%

Production 71%

Production Optics 79%

Production Optics Light 71%

Revolver 82%

Standard 69%

 

I would wager the biggest gap can be attributed to participation. Not many women play this game, and even fewer play it at a high level. I don’t think there’s an innate 25% skill gap that can be accounted for by differences in build, or muscle tone, or other elements of sexual dimorphism. 
 

Recognition of categories in match results makes sense — it is a way to give more, and more different, people “something to play for,” even if it always runs the risk of sliding towards “participation trophies.”

 

If I run a road race, I’m happy to see my results in the 40-44 age bracket, and that’s meaningful.

 

Altering the classification structure, when it is literally a set of explicit benchmarks makes zero sense. Your friend who just started playing is mistaking the classification system (which can be a game within the game) for the thing itself. Sticking to my running metaphor, handicapping classifiers would be like taking 10 minutes off my half marathon time because I’m old. It’s not at all like category finish results.
 

 

[varminter22]

37 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

What you should have told him is that the women's category is what should go away.  Women wanted equality, so they should get FULL equality.  Instead it seems many want it until it doesn't benefit them.

 

What I could not believe, when I entered the USNA, is that women got breaks on every physical fitness test.  The same women who wanted to serve alongside us in every combat occupational field......GTFO

Very well said!  Thanks!

[Joe4d]

52 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

What you should have told him is that the women's category is what should go away.  Women wanted equality, so they should get FULL equality.  Instead it seems many want it until it doesn't benefit them.

 

What I could not believe, when I entered the USNA, is that women got breaks on every physical fitness test.  The same women who wanted to serve alongside us in every combat occupational field......GTFO

Army here, but I allways wondered why Physical tests wernt job specific, versus sex.. But yeh was pretty unfair. Same job, same pay why not same standard ?
I mean why would a boaty need the same score as an infantry guy ?.
Catagory awards award fine as long as they are straight up.  Top "BClass" lady or junior or old fart wouldnt make sense though.

At one  time there was top Military and LEO in some events. BUt IMO they sorta misse the entire point of those special categories, which was they were supposed to be shooting in duty gear/guns.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

49 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

2. Typical cop attitude.... Come to 1 match.. expect it all to change for them cause they are soooooooooooo special. 

 

I quite honestly did not get that from the question

[GrumpyOne]

I don't see the categories as being part the classification system, but as a way of differentiating between who shot what. So, it kinda breaks it down to bragging rights, and nothing else. In reality, if just about all of the categories went away, they would not be missed, except for those who use them to feel good about themselves (Yeah! I'm top senior!).

[BritinUSA]

This is a low-participation sport, especially when compared to other mainstream sports. Take soccer for example, it's big enough that there are separate tournaments for Men, Women, Junior Boys, Junior Girls etc. 

 

Competitors in those tournaments are measured against each other, and winners awarded.

 

In IPSC we don't have a very big tent when it comes to participation, so all age groups and both sexes compete at a SINGLE event. There are VERY few sports like this and I'm happy that IPSC is one of them. As we have all Junior, Adult, Male and Female at a SINGLE event it only makes sense to award trophies based on those categories.

 

If participation at the highest levels reached a point where we could fill a Women's or Junior's championship then we could do away with the categories. We are not there yet and probably won't be for a very long time.

.

[MHicks]

This is exactly what SASS does. USPSA has super senior, lady etc, but does not emphasize it. You see the scores for everyone and then you can look for the first senior, lady, law enforcement etc. listed. As far as awards go they may give an "high senior" award, as an example but not in every division.

[shred]

Back to the OP.  Would we then need different classification brackets for Seniors too?  ugh.

 

Which way does the physical advantage between a 25 yard old female and a 55-year old dude break?

 

 

[Dirty_J]

3 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

What you should have told him is that the women's category is what should go away.  Women wanted equality, so they should get FULL equality.  Instead it seems many want it until it doesn't benefit them.

 

What I could not believe, when I entered the USNA, is that women got breaks on every physical fitness test.  The same women who wanted to serve alongside us in every combat occupational field......GTFO

 

[rowdyb]

33 minutes ago, shred said:

Back to the OP.  Would we then need different classification brackets for Seniors too?  ugh.

 

Which way does the physical advantage between a 25 yard old female and a 55-year old dude break?

 

 

This isn't what I want. But it was an opinion from someone on the outside, so I threw it inside to us to see what would happen. But yeah, while not what I want I could envision how we sort people going in a different flow chart direction. First question gender. Second question age. Third question division.

 

I've typed it here before, and my brain damage hasn't changed my opinion that if I was king of uspsa there would be no categories at all. None. So the post isn't my opinion, I'm just the messenger and discussion facilitator.

 

And I do think there is something to the fact there are so few of "us". I run a neighborhood 5k for a Thanksgiving day turkey trot. I joke that of the 10 or so people who do it that everyone got 1st place because of all the categories we could think of. (When really it is truly just 1st through 10th)

 

Nor was the LE who asked the question arrogant or wanting a change. (Unlike SAO/2011/magwells in CO shooters, hahaha, I kid) His experience had formed his opinion and when presented with something new he had questions. Simply that.

 

This also kinda ties into the very topical, "What really makes a difference in finish?" question that really needs a data driven answer when we think about fooling with divisions and rule sets.

Edited December 23, 2022 by rowdyb

[shred]

Yeah,  I think it's a reasonable question to ask from someone outside.  If classifications are based on the top-N scores, is that top-N overall or Top-N per category?

 

Seems like the USPSA direction is to use overall so direct comparisons can be made which makes sense to me.  An A-class regular guy competes directly with A-class Ladies or A-class Seniors for the A-class trophy (long ago when I was A-class at majors I was always right behind or right in front of the top lady who were also all A-class then).  It means you'll have less GM ladies and seniors, but also you don't need a conversion chart.

 

IPSC seems to have given up on classifications, at least at the Level 4 and 5 matches.  Doesn't seem to be hurting things that much.

 

ETA: is ladies auto racing a thing?  

[rowdyb]

23 minutes ago, shred said:

is ladies auto racing a thing

There are a few women's only things in motorcycle and car racing but they are not popular. Or well funded.

 

Is there a single Olympic event not delineated as "mixed" where men and women compete head to head? Or even high school athletics? 

 

And in a thing where there are only 35k members in the whole US and only 350 of them go to national level events does it matter?

[PhilTerry]

28 minutes ago, shred said:

Yeah,  I think it's a reasonable question to ask from someone outside.  If classifications are based on the top-N scores, is that top-N overall or Top-N per category?

 

Seems like the USPSA direction is to use overall so direct comparisons can be made which makes sense to me.  An A-class regular guy competes directly with A-class Ladies or A-class Seniors for the A-class trophy (long ago when I was A-class at majors I was always right behind or right in front of the top lady who were also all A-class then).  It means you'll have less GM ladies and seniors, but also you don't need a conversion chart.

 

IPSC seems to have given up on classifications, at least at the Level 4 and 5 matches.  Doesn't seem to be hurting things that much.

 

ETA: is ladies auto racing a thing?  

Yes,  https://wseries.com/

[RJH]

2 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

There are a few women's only things in motorcycle and car racing but they are not popular. Or well funded.

 

Is there a single Olympic event not delineated as "mixed" where men and women compete head to head? Or even high school athletics? 

 

And in a thing where there are only 35k members in the whole US and only 350 of them go to national level events does it matter?

 

I think some equestrian events are heads up in the Olympics, but not 100%.

 

In NASCAR and in Indy car women race head-to-head against the men. 

 

Considering there are already women GMs in USPSA with the system that we have right now, it would appear they can compete right along with the men in USPSA. That one gal got second at PCC Nationals this year even. And I'm pretty sure Lina want some three gun nation event or something like that against the men.

 

If I remember right, the all-time NRA service rifle record is held by a woman, that could have changed though now that they allow scopes, maybe somebody else will know that for sure

[Johnny_Chimpo]

33 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

Is there a single Olympic event not delineated as "mixed" where men and women compete head to head?

 

All of the serious equestrian events are neither mixed nor separated by gender.  Men and women compete head to head in eventing, dressage, and stadium jumping.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, shred said:

Seems like the USPSA direction is to use overall

 

What makes you say so?

 

There isn't a single USPSA award for overall winner of anything.  No official USPSA match result has an overall winner.

 

Instagram brags and practiscore don't count.

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[RJH]

"The highest recorded 80-Shot Regional Course score prior to Cleland's 800 was a 798 set by Gunnery Sergeant Julia L. Watson of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve. And former USAMU Service Rifle Team veteran, Sgt. Sherri Gallagher, is known to have the 'Service Record' for shooting a score of 800. However, Gallagher's record was shot with a match rifle. Service rifles are limited to M16s, M14s and M1 Garands with a 4.5x scope whereas a match rifle can be any caliber and size of scope. A small, but critical, factor in the record 800 Cleland shot on his service rifle."

 

 

I was curious and had to look it up myself. So the gal who shot a 798 had the all-time record until this guy Cleland took it a year or two ago. His was shot with a scope however and hers was shot when it was still irons only in service rifle. 

[shred]

1 hour ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

What makes you say so?

 

There isn't a single USPSA award for overall winner of anything.  No official USPSA match result has an overall winner.

 

Instagram brags and practiscore don't count.

 

Classifications based on overall scores by division.  No special classification HHFs for the categories L/J/S/SS/whatev