Sloppy Approach To Classifiers.

[Ron Ankeny]

I dislike the classification system for several reasons including the upward bias, it doesn’t test the skills we see with the trend toward long courses shot freestyle, the hit factors for Production and Revolver are based on voodoo, and the hit factors for some classifiers like CM 03-18 must have been pulled out of the magician’s hat. In spite of its problems, the classification system is here to stay, a lot of hard work has gone into the system, and for the system to work, we must all do our best to see that classifiers are administered fairly and uniformly.

We can’t do a thing to control variables such as lighting, the weather, or the time of day, but we can do our best to set a classifier up according to the diagram and take steps to insure the stage remains set the same for everyone. Those people who bust their butts to setup a classifier with attention to detail, then do everything possible to administer the classifier the same for every, are often times perceived as legalistic or perhaps even “anal”. Here are some first hand examples of classifiers I have shot where a half hearted approach was taken to the classifier. I think things would have been different if someone with a tape measure and a different perspective was running the show.

I attended a four classifier special where only one of the four was set up with any attention to detail. The attitude was one of “good enough”. One of the four was a classifier set up in a bay that was not quite wide enough, so a couple of the targets were moved a foot or so and about a half a step was left out of the distance between shooting spots. What difference could a few inches between spots and the targets being shifted just a bit possibly make? Well, it makes a huge difference. Shooters didn't need to twist around the prop as far as would normally be required in order to engage the targets and shooters could “set up” faster for the first shot. The classifier was set up wrong, period. I politely voiced my concerns with the club, but to no avail. That classifier pushed me over the top for my second Master card and I didn't say a word to HQ in order to avoid hard feelings with the club. What a great feeling it is to make Master on a bogus classifier. My mommy would have been proud.

I shot Ironsides (at another club) but before shooting I noticed a problem. The classifier was a 03 series classifier that no one present had shot before. I had considered using the classifier at our club and I knew what was required for a prop. The wall that you shoot from behind is supposed to be 4 feet high and 8 feet wide, but the guys setting up misread the diagram and used a half sheet of plywood. That meant the movement from the left side of the wall to the right side was four feet instead of the required 8 feet. I asked the guys about the set up (both are friends of mine), but since I was on the last squad re-shoots weren’t possible, and the decision was made for the scores to stand. The guys didn’t think four feet would make a big difference. Obviously the error cut the movement in half, but what they really didn’t consider was how it changed the angle of engagement and the amount of lean. My last shot was a miss, going wide into the berm, so the classifier wasn’t even counted when it arrived in Sedro.

As some of you know, I "earned" a GM card in Limited Division about a year ago. The administration of the classifier was questionable (I won’t go into detail) so the score was eventually thrown out. I don’t want a GM card based on a classifier that is questionable and surrounded with controversy, even if the “question” would have meant no difference in the score. I suppose some folks would be upset with losing the GM card, but I insisted the score go away. What would you have done?

As Match Director I have been guilty of exercising poor judgment at times. I once bowed down to peer pressure (and my own ego) by sending in a classifier that really should have gone in the trash. Once I realized how stupid I was, I took remedial actions to fix the problem but change was slow in coming. As a result, Bruce Gary spent a lot of time on the phone at Area One cleaning up my mess on behalf of a shooter who was misclassified because of my mistake. It would have been much easier to err on the side of caution and do the “right thing” at the club level in the first place.

I have a lot of other examples of screwed up classifiers, but I suppose the reader should get the point by now (or they never will). In my view, classifiers need to be set up as close as humanly possible, then stake everything down and mark the positions. If the administration of the classifier is suspect then throw it out, period. If a target moves a foot, re-shoot the stage or just pitch the scores in the trash. But where do we draw the line? Is the stage trash if the measurements are off a couple of inches or are we good to go until something is off by a foot? Just how picky should we be? I think we just need to do our best (within reason). Anything less is substandard.

[BritinUSA]

You will hardly ever see a classifier set up exactly as per the book. Range surfaces are usually not flat, so one popper or target could be a couple of inches higher/lower in relation to the other targets.

Angles may not be 90 degrees and so what is shown as 16' could be 15' 10".

This sport is measured to the hundredth of a second and so distance and layout are critically important. As such, accuracy is simply not consistent across the nation, this would indicate that the classification system is nothing more than a revenue generation device.

If you want to determine how good you are compared to other shooters then the only way is to go to Nationals. The grading system is so flawed it's not even funny. I don't check my classification scores like I used to. It's meaningless.

[Vlad]

The way I see the classification system represents your best game, not your normal game. I too however think that people need to be a lot more carefull about setting up classifiers. I've seen some very badly setup ones, making them meaningless. Also, are the HHF actually maintained? I've heard various answers to that and I'm curious what the offical position is (I see that Mr Boudrie is reading this thread right now ) because if they are not, then they are worse then meaningless, they are misleading.

[EricW]

Poll: All in favor of shooting as "U" and having the option of checking a a box with "No Classifier" on the entry form and putting the $5 toward more club props, say Aye!

[Not a real poll, but what I'd prefer. I hate the classification system. I gage my performance by my overall match %'s - which is keeping yours truly mighty humble lately.]

Edited April 3, 2006 by EricW

[Ron Ankeny]

Before anyone thinks I am totally trashing the system, I am not. While I personally have my own beliefs about the system (some good, some bad) my point is as MD I am obligated to do my very best to maintain the integrity of the system.

[driver8M3]

I suppose some folks would be upset with losing the GM card, but I insisted the score go away. What would you have done?

i would have called you a sandbagger.

[Genghis]

I'm happy as long as I'm getting better. Shooting better percentages, and moving up in classification, is a sign that I'm getting better. What value is a higher classification if I'm not really getting better? It has to mean something or it's not worth anything.

Same thing is true about plaques and certificates and trophies. That piece of wood and metal is only worth $20 or so. It's worth a lot more if it means you beat a lot of good shooters to get it. You're not worth anything if you cheat to get it then use it to lie and claim to have beaten those good shooters.

[edited to add:]

+1 to what Ron and BritinUSA said. If you set up a classifier stage, it's vital to set it up per the diagram. Invalidating a classifier because of bad setup would be a bad thing, especially after the shooters thought they'd get a classifier score. Sending in tainted scores is worse.

Edited April 4, 2006 by Genghis

[Luv2rideWV]

This is an old topic, but here is what we do at our new club:

The evening before the match, I and a fellow committee member lay out as many of the stages as possible, placing the bases for the target stands where they will go and placing stakes where the poppers go. As for the classifier, we actually get a long tape measure and a string to establish a center line and measure everything to the inch. Because we are relatively new, we don't want anything to cause the classifier to be thrown out.

[Sturdy]

Setting up a classifier and administering its scoring to the best of your ability is the responsibility of every USPSA member. That said, no one is perfect. If some monkey business occurred, don't beat yourself up too much about it. I travel for all of my matches and am rarely able to help set up. Shooters like me appreciate your doing the best you can. Seriously, we do.

As far as the system itself not working, I disagree completely. I used to shoot several matches in VA and NC where the month after month the results would shake out:

GM

GM

M

GM

M

M

A

A

B

B

More often than not. Pretty darn good for a self-regulated handicapping system.

[Graham Smith]

While acting as an MD, I had a real struggle with classifiers. Our ranges aren't flat and are rocky so most stages have to be rather flexible in how they get setup. Of course you can't do that with a classifier. That meant that we were pretty much limited to one bay where we could put classifiers and there were a number that wouldn't work properly so they weren't used.

Granted, if someone were to break out a transit and laser ruler our classifiers might be off a bit, but it's not for lack of trying to get them right. The notion that a MD would intentionally skew a classifier is horrendous.