New USPSA Survey

[whan]

1 minute ago, IVC said:

Slight change of topic, still related to the survey: major vs. minor scoring.

 

What this thread shows is that the major scoring doesn't adequately account for the higher PF. Alternatively, that the minor scoring over-penalizes lighter recoil. If the scoring was "about right," we wouldn't worry about major being a competitive advantage or affecting the LO, we'd simply say that those who shoot major get the benefit of the scoring at the expense of the recoil.

 

But this clearly isn't the case, and we know it from the Limited. Only in the SS it seems to be somewhat balanced because of the different capacity limits. And, in the Revo, it's the opposite and arguably the most pronounced - because of the very heavy price of reloading, major scoring doesn't nearly compensate enough and 625s are dead. 

 

So, what should the scoring be?

 

I'll add one sort-of-pet-peeve of mine with scoring - zones are not visible and one has to guess, especially when targets are partially covered, distant, or the light is unfavorable. If I can't tell where the A/C line is, I have to shoot for the "middle of the brown" and that takes away the ability to fine-tune shot placement. There are a lot of head shots where the only reason I can't pick the A zone consistently is because I can't see the lines well enough at speed. And counting a minor C as two major Cs is now a big difference. 

 

Ha - we actually were thinking about the exact same question!

 

1 minute ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

How about angle though. If we increase the points for minor all that really does is increase the HHF. Is the sport currently suffering from to low of HF's? Or, are we currently going to slow trying to get points and we need to go faster without loosing so many points?

 

With CO shooters occasionally beating Open shooters, I'm not sure increasing the points for minor is the right move. 

 

This is a fair point and did come up in my mind. USPSA gets criticized at times (mostly from IDPA shooters) for not prioritizing accuracy enough. Perhaps in that case if we lower major to 5/3.5/1.5 and keep minor at 5/3/1 that would be an alternative solution.

 

Interesting thought experiment using Limited Division as an example, given mag capacity has little to no effect. Say we have a 32 round stage (all paper) that a good minor shooter needs 20 seconds to complete, scoring 24A and 8C (90% of points, 75% Alphas vs Charlies). Under current scoring rules, that minor shooter would pull a 7.2HF. Say a Major shooter needs an extra 0.03 seconds to split on a given target for the same hits due to recoil, thus 16 targets = 0.48 seconds added to time. Under current rules that shooter would have 95% of points and a 7.42HF. That's a ~3% advantage to major over minor in this example. But if we cut major C scoring to 3.5pts, the HF drops to 7.23 for major, which is almost the same as minor HF

 

Of course, I think in lower capacity divisions, this will start to instead favor minor guns, as the capacity advantage also starts to come into play. But perhaps that is actually a lot more indicative of the real world - most low capacity guns people actually use for self defense are of smaller calibers because the capacity matters more. 

[Mcfoto]

5 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

When you say your score didn't improve. Do you mean you average HF's didn't go up?

 

It's hard to imagine someone going from a 8 shot iron sight gun with 3 second reloads to an optic gun with 23 rounds and their score not improve. 

Sorry, I should have said standings. Sure my HF is better but now compared to others with a dot, no. But I will say that learning to shot a dot has helped my trigger control.

[2011BLDR]

14 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

How about angle though. If we increase the points for minor all that really does is increase the HHF. Is the sport currently suffering from to low of HF's? Or, are we currently going to slow trying to get points and we need to go faster without loosing so many points?

 

With CO shooters occasionally beating Open shooters, I'm not sure increasing the points for minor is the right move. 

 would have zero efect on HHF for anything not fixed time ... ALL HHF are maximum points (nothing down on any target) combined with a smoking fast time... on fixed time having 1 C might keep you above 95% depending on the total available points  but the HHF of 100% is still all A's no peniteltys....

[IVC]

16 minutes ago, 2011BLDR said:

ALL HHF are maximum points (nothing down on any target) combined with a smoking fast time... 

We don't know that and I would doubt it...

[Racinready300ex]

13 minutes ago, 2011BLDR said:

 would have zero efect on HHF for anything not fixed time ... ALL HHF are maximum points (nothing down on any target) combined with a smoking fast time... on fixed time having 1 C might keep you above 95% depending on the total available points  but the HHF of 100% is still all A's no peniteltys....

 

I don't think you understand how HHF works. The HHF isn't who can shoot all A's the fastest. It's who can score the most points per second. Increasing the number of points you get will absolutely increase the HHF shot on the vast majority of stages across the country. 

 

Maybe look at it this way...If the points don't effect the HF why are we even talking about Major vs minor?  With your math they'd be equal. 

[Racinready300ex]

24 minutes ago, whan said:

 

Ha - we actually were thinking about the exact same question!

 

 

This is a fair point and did come up in my mind. USPSA gets criticized at times (mostly from IDPA shooters) for not prioritizing accuracy enough. Perhaps in that case if we lower major to 5/3.5/1.5 and keep minor at 5/3/1 that would be an alternative solution.

 

Interesting thought experiment using Limited Division as an example, given mag capacity has little to no effect. Say we have a 32 round stage (all paper) that a good minor shooter needs 20 seconds to complete, scoring 24A and 8C (90% of points, 75% Alphas vs Charlies). Under current scoring rules, that minor shooter would pull a 7.2HF. Say a Major shooter needs an extra 0.03 seconds to split on a given target for the same hits due to recoil, thus 16 targets = 0.48 seconds added to time. Under current rules that shooter would have 95% of points and a 7.42HF. That's a ~3% advantage to major over minor in this example. But if we cut major C scoring to 3.5pts, the HF drops to 7.23 for major, which is almost the same as minor HF

 

Of course, I think in lower capacity divisions, this will start to instead favor minor guns, as the capacity advantage also starts to come into play. But perhaps that is actually a lot more indicative of the real world - most low capacity guns people actually use for self defense are of smaller calibers because the capacity matters more. 

 

I do think Major really gets more of a advantage from the scoring than makes sense. You can shoot better hits in less time and still lose if you're shoot minor against someone shooting major. It seems crazy. Major guns are harder to shoot, but I think overall the guns we're shooting today are probably way easier to shoot then they were back in the day. 

 

So, I'm just not sure if it's really worth trying to balance them or not. If you get them really close, then you'll still have matches where minor is better and others where major is better. It wont be as drastic but then serious guys will probably have two guns. If you adjust to much everyone needs new gear (revo) and we're still in the same boat. It's a lot of risk for little pay off. 

[shred]

For all the new people trying to change the sport again... here's a bit of history.

 

The extra points given for Major PF has NOTHING TO DO WITH RECOIL.  It's about power-on-target and always has been since Jeff Cooper came up with it.

 

Scoring lines are intentionally invisible at distance. That's the point; "practical" "real world" targets don't come with visible scoring rings.

 

(BTW, I still think the answer is 135-140 PF "mid" and score 5-4-1.  Closer match to real-world, Minor and Major will wither and die on their own quietly)

 

[Darqusoull13]

17 minutes ago, shred said:

(BTW, I still think the answer is 135-140 PF "mid" and score 5-4-1.  Closer match to real-world, Minor and Major will wither and die on their own quietly)

 

I would LOVE this. PCC and CO would be unreal fun with this system. 

[IVC]

16 minutes ago, Darqusoull13 said:

I would LOVE this. PCC and CO would be unreal fun with this system. 

Yup, all the PCC and CO guys shooting for no score. Lol. 

[Racinready300ex]

25 minutes ago, shred said:

(BTW, I still think the answer is 135-140 PF "mid" and score 5-4-1.  Closer match to real-world, Minor and Major will wither and die on their own quietly)

 

 

I'd have to think about that a bit but on it's face I might be able to get behind it. When people talk about the great ballistics of modern 9mm ammo they aren't talking about 125 PF stuff we shoot. Bringing in 135 PF option where close Charlies are still reasonable but lucky mikes (delta's) are still penalized pretty harsh seams okay. 

 

Although again, I'm not completely sold on the idea that we currently aim to much and need more points for our bad shots. 

[IVC]

37 minutes ago, shred said:

For all the new people trying to change the sport again... here's a bit of history.

 

The extra points given for Major PF has NOTHING TO DO WITH RECOIL.  It's about power-on-target and always has been since Jeff Cooper came up with it.

 

Scoring lines are intentionally invisible at distance. That's the point; "practical" "real world" targets don't come with visible scoring rings.

 

(BTW, I still think the answer is 135-140 PF "mid" and score 5-4-1.  Closer match to real-world, Minor and Major will wither and die on their own quietly)

 

Hey, USPSA is a game! Maybe we need a sticky like the one in the IDPA forum that says: "USPSA is a game, here I said it."

 

But realistically, both "power on target" and "real world targets have no scoring rings" are more than just anachronisms. This is because of bullet design - do we have major scoring if using hollow points? And MG HPs or HAPs don't count because they don't expand. Also because, as much as real life targets don't have visible lines, real life targets also don't have "zones" to begin with and internal organs are all in different places. 

 

Maybe we move this discussion to the IDPA forum? They are "defensive" we are "practical".

 

(Joking, don't take it too seriously, history is actually always interesting to revisit.) 

[IHAVEGAS]

2 hours ago, IVC said:

Those are beefy guns and it shouldn't happen. If something loosens in a 929, it should do the same in most semi-autos. I have two 929s and they are much softer shooting than most lighter semi-autos. I understand target loads will have very light crimp, but this seems excessive. 

I only have one friend that shoots a 929 so I can't provide a lot of data, he had the same issue. Federal target ammo 115 grain. Do not know how much the lack of a slide/recoil spring changes things. 

[ltdmstr]

Those advocating for minor only scoring seem to miss the point that most 9mm defensive ammo is closer to 165 pf than 135 pf.  Some even make major.  So, maybe 150+ would be appropriate.  Definitely not 135.  As for major pf/scoring, there are a number of reasons for keeping it and rewarding with higher points, not the least of which is it's one of the three pillars the sport was founded on.  I know that doesn't matter to some people, but going to minor only absolutely changes the nature of the game.

[Southpaw]

1. Open: no change

2. Limited: no change

3. Limited Optics: stays minor only, as it is now

4. Limited  Minor: new division 

5. Limited 8/10: 8 major, 10 minor capacity. No magwells for double stack guns.

6. Revolver: no change, or combine into Limited 8/10

7. PCC: no change

 

Done, then we can stop changing equipment rules all the time. Can also create a participation % threshold where if a division's participation drops below set % for certain length of time then it gets axed. 

[ddc]

1 hour ago, Southpaw said:

1. Open: no change

2. Limited: no change

3. Limited Optics: stays minor only, as it is now

4. Limited  Minor: new division 

5. Limited 8/10: 8 major, 10 minor capacity. No magwells for double stack guns.

6. Revolver: no change, or combine into Limited 8/10

7. PCC: no change

 

Done, then we can stop changing equipment rules all the time. Can also create a participation % threshold where if a division's participation drops below set % for certain length of time then it gets axed. 

 

Would this not hasten the demise of Limited as currently defined?

I think only the old guard is going to shoot Limited if Limited/Minor is an option as a legit stand alone division.

[Southpaw]

40 minutes ago, ddc said:

 

Would this not hasten the demise of Limited as currently defined?

I think only the old guard is going to shoot Limited if Limited/Minor is an option as a legit stand alone division.

 

Is that a bad thing? If both divisions were offered and most people chose Limited  Minor, then doesn't that prove that it makes sense to have Limited  Minor as a division? Isn't it a good thing when division rules match the types of guns people actually want to shoot? 

[ddc]

31 minutes ago, Southpaw said:

 

Is that a bad thing? If both divisions were offered and most people chose Limited  Minor, then doesn't that prove that it makes sense to have Limited  Minor as a division? Isn't it a good thing when division rules match the types of guns people actually want to shoot? 

 

I'm not suggesting it's good or bad. Simply asking the question.

[outerlimits]

Optics,

Irons,

Major, 

Minor.

 

everything else is bs.  

 

[zzt]

8 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

That's assuming it doesn't effect the 50% of limited shooters shooting minor. Which around here is a higher number then people still shooting production. 

 

I just checked.  At the last match 18 out of 84 shot Limited.  10 major.  8 minor.  Most of the minor shooters were women.

 

6 hours ago, whan said:

no one shoots .40 anymore outside of USPSA

 Nonsense.  If that were the case, why can I go down to my local Targetmaster and buy bulk ammo boxes filled with once fired 40sw for $15/box.  The indoor range shooter are most certainly not USPSA shooters.

 

For the poster who wondered how many moved to CO for optics.  NOt many.  The huge push came when 140mm mags were allowed.  Then almost everyone put an optic on their Prod gun and switched to CO.  Last match there were 5 Prod shooters.  Three were old timers who didn't have anything else to shoot.  There were 35 CO shooters out of 84 total.

[shred]

This.  CO sucked all the wind out of Production.  Picked up a little from the other divisions, although now I'm seeing some CO shooters pick up Open guns to see what's over the comped major hill.

 

[louu]

I'm hearing a lot of "I want minor only because I'm tired of people that are better than me getting an unfair advantage!" 

[YVK]

On 7/11/2023 at 9:06 PM, whan said:

 

I agree that LO and CO in their current forms are redundant. But based on the fact that you're also ok with changing CO to be more "Carry"-like, I believe that's the better option than making LO major/minor

 

 

What's better option is a matter of a personal opinion and philosophy. While those things could be interesting to share, they are irrelevant in a practical sense. What's relevant is that nobody at the high table is sending surveys about what to do with CO, or is planning to do anything with it. Over last 7 years or so the board consistently moved that division from "carry-like" to a full-on gamer-like. That, in turn, made that division the most popular in the sport by a wide margin. There's no reason or impetus for them to mess with it. If they were at all interested in fixing redundancies between their star performing permanent division and a two months old provisional division, logic dictates that changes will be made in the latter. 

Edited July 14, 2023 by YVK

[sandflea316]

It would be interesting to see what would happen if they do away with major scoring and raise the minor pf to something like 140

[YVK]

4 hours ago, sandflea316 said:

It would be interesting to see what would happen if they do away with major scoring and raise the minor pf to something like 140

 

IDPA membership would grow because USPSA would become exclusively a reloaders' sport and people who shoot factory ammo would have to quit.

[zzt]

1 hour ago, YVK said:

 

IDPA membership would grow because USPSA would become exclusively a reloaders' sport and people who shoot factory ammo would have to quit.

 

Not really.  It would only force minor shooters to use factory 147s, many of which are 144 PF.