2025 PST Changes

[Hoops]

3 minutes ago, shred said:

Yeah, there's a still a problem if the top "GM" is supposed to be the top 5% of shooters or just the people capable of shooting top-5% scores across the board.    IMO if the bell-curve smashes everyone into say B class, classifications will become irrelevant to most (around here I'd guess half the match doesn't care about them already).

 

This was exactly my point when I started this post.  I would also speculate that the half that doesn’t care may not be members or not renewing membership.  Just a hunch.

[JM_]

8 minutes ago, shred said:

Yeah, there's a still a problem if the top "GM" is supposed to be the top 5% of shooters or just the people capable of shooting top-5% scores across the board.    IMO if the bell-curve smashes everyone into say B class, classifications will become irrelevant to most (around here I'd guess half the match doesn't care about them already).

 

See my new post in Steel Challenge, lets make something good

[lawboy]

I have not read this entire thread, but I have read enough to get the gist.  I am a lowly GM at 96.xx percent in RFPO.  It seems to me that a simpler solution would be to move people who are shooting 110 percent or greater of PSTs into a new, higher classification.  SCSA could call it Elite Grand Master (EGM) or something similarly grandiose.  Then the truly top tier shooters would not be competing against the rest of us. 

[Renno]

@lawboy this inflation is a problem that is only present in the low ready divisions. That means its a PST problem not a shortage of classes. If PSTs are reduced then you can reclassify to Master where you won't have to compete against the top level shooters. There's no need for EGM since there is already a class for the elite, it's the Grand version of Master. I think adding additional classes would damage the balance of other divisions which are not experiencing the same problems with class inflation that the low ready divisions are. 

 

Changing the class system affects every single division, but we can fix the problems that are exclusive to specific divisions by changing their PSTs instead.

[GKB]

10 hours ago, Renno said:

inflation is a problem that is only present in the low ready divisions.

 

Tell that to CARRY OPTICS.  Two and a quarter seconds is a big change, especially in a division where half the shooters (53.6%) are in "C" or "D" class.

 

 

Now look what that does for a "C" shooter.  It makes "B" go from 154.17 to 150.40 which is a 3.77 second increase.  These PST changes greatly expand down the classification ladder due to the percentage nature of the class breakdown.  (That's because the 2.26 second increase at PST gets inflated by 60% down at "B" class.)

 

[Renno]

But thats okay because C and B class shooters have the largest capacity for improvement and shave time off faster than GMs. They have the highest rate of improvement since there is so much available to learn to increase score. There isn't much more to squeeze out of GM by taking a class or reading a guide. 3.77 is significantly easier to drop at B class than 2.26 is at GM even though its quantitively proportional

[Renno]

And to clarify what I mean by class inflation: I'm referring to the problem Lawboy mentioned of 95% GMs having to go against 130%+ GMs in their class. Carry Optics does not have this problem, with top 3 GMs only being around 110, everyone else is right at about 100 or below

[Squirrel45]

52 minutes ago, Renno said:

And to clarify what I mean by class inflation: I'm referring to the problem Lawboy mentioned of 95% GMs having to go against 130%+ GMs in their class. Carry Optics does not have this problem, with top 3 GMs only being around 110, everyone else is right at about 100 or below

This is a valid point. A question I have and I understand the answer is subjective, retention. I realize the rationale for changing some of the times, I do. However I worry that doing this could alienate the vast majority of competitors. I shoot with a wide range of skill levels as you all do and see the spectrum. Let's take for example competitor X,  they've been working for the last few years to make A class. X made it to 73.75 now with the cut will be dragged back to 66.8. The next time uspsa dues come up they say "screw it". Competitor X has now become disenfranchised from our sport. I think some compromise of times would be best. Let's face it, people don't like change and we don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot over this. 

[Hoops]

2 hours ago, Squirrel45 said:

This is a valid point. A question I have and I understand the answer is subjective, retention. I realize the rationale for changing some of the times, I do. However I worry that doing this could alienate the vast majority of competitors. I shoot with a wide range of skill levels as you all do and see the spectrum. Let's take for example competitor X,  they've been working for the last few years to make A class. X made it to 73.75 now with the cut will be dragged back to 66.8. The next time uspsa dues come up they say "screw it". Competitor X has now become disenfranchised from our sport. I think some compromise of times would be best. Let's face it, people don't like change and we don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot over this. 

When I started the PST topic my initial concern was for the impact to the majority of members.  Chasing an infinite number solely based on super talented….usually referred to as super squads is not a sustainable metric.  I am pleased that we are taking a pause to look at it.  Discounting seniors, super seniors and others that may be in lower classifications probably is not a good business decision either.  

[zzt]

3 hours ago, Squirrel45 said:

Let's take for example competitor X,  they've been working for the last few years to make A class. X made it to 73.75 now with the cut will be dragged back to 66.8. The next time uspsa dues come up they say "screw it". Competitor X has now become disenfranchised from our sport.

 

I mentioned this earlier in this thread.  I chased A in RFPO for years.  I was .5 seconds away and they added 5.  Next year I was 1.5 seconds away and they added 5 more.  Etc.  Etc.  I spent all last season chasing A in RFRO and PCCO.  I made it.  This year with the changes in peak and the dropping old, faster times, I barely hung on.  Next year I'll be squarely in B for both.

 

If all I shot was SCSA, I might be tempted to do what others I know have done.  You keep changing the goal posts, goodbye.  I am primarily a USPSA shooter.  I shoot SCSA on the 4th Saturday, because the USPSA match on that day is too far away, starts too early, and always runs late.   I have nowhere to practice SCSA, so that one match a month is my practice session.

 

Pretty much the same things happen in USPSA.  I shoot with a couple of Ms who earned those years and years ago.  They haven't shot M in a classifier in years.

[shred]

The CO change seems especially bizarre to me.  Especially since it's the hugest division in USPSA and likely what most crossover-SCSA shooters would be coming in with.

 

[zzt]

CO is shrinking in USPSA as LO grows, at least in my area.

[ZOSO]

 

In my opinion, PCCI and RFRI should be adjusted downward.  All other divisions should remain the same.  In talking specifically about GMs, in all of the divisions other than PCCI and RFRI, the % of GMs is <5%, and in the majority of divisions it is less than 3%.  How much harder do you want to make it to attain GM?  Adjusting the PSTs, especially to the extent proposed, runs the very real risk of driving people, in all divisions, from the game; the last thing we need.  A simple fix would be to create a Super GM division for the +120% GMs (or whatever % makes the most sense).  In this way, the people shooting the Level 1 & 2 matches can still have reasonably attainable goals, whether they be GM, M, A etc., and the Super GMs can compete against each other in an elevated division.  Just my two cents.

[shred]

20 hours ago, zzt said:

CO is shrinking in USPSA as LO grows, at least in my area.

 

Well, yeah, it's super-easy to sign up in LO with a CO pistol, and its the new shiny people think might be "the one", but still USPSA CO Nationals had 510 shooters while Handgun Nats has 248 registered in LO.

 

[GKB]

8 minutes ago, ZOSO said:

In this way, the people shooting the Level 1 & 2 matches can still have reasonably attainable goals, whether they be GM, M, A etc., and the Super GMs can compete against each other in an elevated division

 

"Compete against each other" in what manner?

 

In a L1 match, you aren't going to have 10 "Super GMs" to qualify for awarding a Class prize.  I doubt even at Nationals or WSSC you are going to get 10 of them.  And, 99.99% of the time the person winning "Super GM" Class is winning the overall.

 

The overall doesn't care about your Classification.

 

So what is the purpose?  Just to give a plaque to "GMs" at the L2/L3 matches while excluding the "Super GMs" that are outshooting them?

[GKB]

I was asked yesterday at a match why I wanted to make GM?  (Currently need <6 sec for GM.)

 

Got all of this stuff about staying a high "M" and racking up prizes and plaques for winning Master class at matches.

 

This just leads to sandbagging where GM skilled people keep their ranking as "M" so they can clean up against lesser skilled competitors....like they are complaining the "Super GMs" are doing to them.

[shred]

Are there any matches left that award prizes by class?  Very few left IME.  Plaques maybe, but is it that big a deal in SCSA people will sandbag for one?

 

[ChuckS]

8 minutes ago, shred said:

Are there any matches left that award prizes by class?  Very few left IME.  Plaques maybe, but is it that big a deal in SCSA people will sandbag for one?

 

It is kinda dumb but there are folks out there who like being "Best of the Worst"!

[zzt]

6 hours ago, shred said:

 

Well, yeah, it's super-easy to sign up in LO with a CO pistol, and its the new shiny people think might be "the one", but still USPSA CO Nationals had 510 shooters while Handgun Nats has 248 registered in LO.

 

 

There will always be a lot of CO shooters since most of them started in Prod.  When CO became a thing, a few switched.  When the rules on weight and mag length went into effect, there was a wholesale shift to CO.

 

When LO became a thing, many CO shooters with guns that could shoot single action tried it.  Many still do.  However, at every match there are more and more 2011 LO guns showing up.  At $2k for a completely tricked out Prodigy, or $3.2k for a splendid, semi-custom Warwick Tactical, the bar for entry is fairly low.  Several of my buddies shooting tricked out CZ CO guns have more than $2.5k into them.

 

A single action trigger and drawing from a race holster are advantages many will gravitate to.  That includes SCSA.

[shred]

2 hours ago, zzt said:

 

There will always be a lot of CO shooters since most of them started in Prod.  

I don't think that's very true anymore.  "half-life" of a shooter is somewhere around 4-5 years and hicap CO has been a thing for about that long, so most of the recreational Prod shooters have been replaced by a new crop of noobs.   IME most new shooters today are showing up with dots from Day 1.  Is it different where you are?

 

[zzt]

14 hours ago, shred said:

Is it different where you are?

 

Not at all.  Dots are the rule.  So, evidently are comps and ports.  In the last two matched I had to move five shooters to Open.  They registered as CO and showed up with their brand new guns with built-in comps.  They're factory!  Tough, you are in Open.  It will be interesting to see if they come back with the same guns.

 

Even with CO, Prod was still a viable Division until hicap CO came along.  Then almost everyone switched overnight.  15-18 Prod shooters typically at a match.  One month later, 2 or 3.  Same today.  We had five at the last match.  Three noobs.  Bet they come back with big mags and dots for the next one.

[caspian guy]

2 minutes ago, zzt said:

 

Not at all.  Dots are the rule.  So, evidently are comps and ports.  In the last two matched I had to move five shooters to Open.  They registered as CO and showed up with their brand new guns with built-in comps.  They're factory!  Tough, you are in Open.  It will be interesting to see if they come back with the same guns.

 

Even with CO, Prod was still a viable Division until hicap CO came along.  Then almost everyone switched overnight.  15-18 Prod shooters typically at a match.  One month later, 2 or 3.  Same today.  We had five at the last match.  Three noobs.  Bet they come back with big mags and dots for the next one.

I assume the ports and comps and registering in CO is a result of IDPA CO allowing those things (if factory?)

[zzt]

22 minutes ago, caspian guy said:

I assume the ports and comps and registering in CO is a result of IDPA CO allowing those things (if factory?)

 

No idea.  Didn't know IDPA allowed that.  I'm not familiar with IDPA rules.  It may just be the newest fad.  There are a lot of them at my home club, and several used in our outlaw matches.

[GKB]

I lot of the new versions of guns (Sig P365 and some S&W M&Ps come to mind) are coming from the manufacturer with comps built into the barrel.  New people probably bought those because they were the newest/best.

[Hoops]

The link below is the next BOD 8-12-24 1900 EDT board meeting agenda.  On the agenda is review of Peak Standard Times.  You can view the live stream at

 

USPSA.org/live

 

 

https://uspsa.org/announcement/912

 

 

https://uspsa.org/live