National Prize Distribution

[dgsmith]

Tightloop,

If the prize distribution is not perfect, what can we do do make if better than to tell us to suck it up?

This whole topic seems pointless when no one here shoots for prizes yet everyone cares how prizes are handed out.

I admire the GM or M who can shoot like they do. I take nothing away from them.

I just think they should play among themselves like we do in the lower classes.

[tightloop]

dgsmith

DID you read my post at all....? the GM and M shooters do play among themselves just like the lower class shooters do......and it is my suggestion to DO AWAY with the prize table entirely...that would eliminate the whole problem...

Let me say this in the NICEST way possible...work hard, get to be a GM shooter and this problem will have answered itself for you..it is better to suck it up and forget about prize distribution entirely...

My .02....

[AikiDale]

dgsmith

DID you read my post at all....? the GM and M shooters do play among themselves just like the lower class shooters do......and it is my suggestion to DO AWAY with the prize table entirely...that would eliminate the whole problem...

Let me say this in the NICEST way possible...work hard, get to be a GM shooter and this problem will have answered itself for you..it is better to suck it up and forget about prize distribution entirely...

My .02....

What he said.

[ong45]

Tight loop,

If the prize distribution is not perfect, what can we do do make if better than to tell us to suck it up?

This whole topic seems pointless when no one here shoots for prizes yet everyone cares how prizes are handed out.

It will NEVER be perfect, you can just piss off a different set of people so get over it.

If the topic is pointless, why bring it up? You just described yourself with the last statement.

[Genghis]

Some random thoughts:

I pay a lot more attention to how I finish overall, rather than how I shoot against my class (C in Limited and Open). No doubt the most fair system would give the prizes to the top overall shooters. But . . .

This is a business, and letting the rank and file shooters have some goodies helps grow the sport. You'd have a hard time bringing in newbies if they had to pay high entry fees that just went to buy nicer toys for the GM's.

Our sport is unique in that Joe Six Pack gets to compete side-by-side with Michael Jordan. Shooting in a squad with a GM is an incredible experience, but the guys with day jobs need some encouragement. And maybe they deserve to get something from their entry fees.

Also, the percent cutoffs are completely arbitrary. Some shooter that finishes in the middle of the pack in C class now might be the class winner if B class started at 50%. Sandbaggers play it like it's a limbo contest instead of a high jump, but I can't believe you can get far in this sport if all you care about is prizes.

All I need is a little encouragement from time to time, something to show I'm getting better. I try hard to do well on classifiers, even though it'll line me up against tougher competition. Moving up in class means I'm getting better. Beating higher classed shooters means I'm getting better. Getting prizes is nice, but if that's what I'm after, it'd be easier on the ego and wallet to just go buy them. I'll still go to every match I can make, no matter how you hand out the goodies. The sport is about the journey of improvement. The rest is just window dressing.

[shred]

I find it fascinating that a lot of people seem to think the M's and GM's sprang out of Zeus' forehead completely formed.

If you go back and check, you'll find a whole lot of "those" guys put in a whole lot of time as B & C shooters, match directors, club officers and on and on. That they are better shooters now means they are committed to the sport, stuck around and kept with it.

[dfwmiket]

All I need is a little encouragement from time to time, something to show I'm getting better. I try hard to do well on classifiers, even though it'll line me up against tougher competition. Moving up in class means I'm getting better. Beating higher classed shooters means I'm getting better. Getting prizes is nice, but if that's what I'm after, it'd be easier on the ego and wallet to just go buy them. I'll still go to every match I can make, no matter how you hand out the goodies. The sport is about the journey of improvement. The rest is just window dressing.

+1. That works for me. Prizes are nice, but not too important to me. It's more about the tracking of self improvement. I've been shooting this now for a year and a half..... and yeah, I started at "D". I'm real close to making "B", and find it's awesome to be able to track improvements, spend time with friends, and have a grand ol' time.

-Mike

[Chuck Anderson]

If you're looking for prizes as encouragement, shouldn't they go from the top down? What would the incentive be to improve if it was random? What would mean more? Winning a CZ pistol for winning your class at Area 3 or winning one in a random drawing.

[RPMartin]

I always thought this sport was about safety, fun, self improvement, and being familiar with your sidearms.

I am not in this sport for the prizes, I like to shoot. Shooting against others is FUN and EDUCATIONAL.......... I like it.

If the Prize tables are this big a thorn in USPSA's back side, then just do away with them.

Unless I get my GM in the near future....

RPM

[Wakal]

As mentioned in passing earlier, 99.99% of the generous stage and match sponsors (and oh, we love each and every one of you kind-hearted folks for all the great "stuff" you give us, without which a lot of us won't have as cool of "stuff") will not give cash.

Hell, I don't give cash when I'm a sponsor either

As a sponsor, giving cash is HORRIBLE...because you pay for the "sponsored loot" at wholesale yet claim it at full pop retail as an "advertising expense." Which, of course, increases the utility of the whole thing...both in getting your name and product out to the public eye and in doing it in a cost-effective way. However, the IRS goon squad has been making sure that anything given in return (such as free slots or table space) is also listed at "true market value" (that is a hate rant right there, but I digress). But..cash is cash.

So we (speaking with my MD hat on instead of my sponsor hat) end up with a groaning table fool of loot from all the sponsors (did I mention that we love those guys?).

Match fees go to props, walls, RO hotel rooms, and all the other one thousand and one money-sucking pits that magically appear when building a match.

Yet...we have a huge pile of loot. Lets have a prize table!

Random draw: annoys the folks who have put the blood, sweat, and tears into learning how to properly align the sights and jerk the crap out of the trigger.

Order of finish: annoys the people who have not put the blood, sweat, and tears into learning how to properly align the sights and jerk the crap out of the trigger, but who love to complain being mistreated by...not being rewarded for sub-par performance...

Order of finish with "special ed" preference for categories like arbitrarily designed percentage cutoffs, age, and genitalia location...annoys the folks who have put the time in, plus the folks who can see the hidey-bagging and sand-bagging intended to hit those arbitrarily designated percentages.

So...prize tables piss someone off royally, no matter what. We can't have straight cash payback without jacking up match fees or selling heaps of loot on eBay prior to match day, so that is out.

Solution? I don't have one that will make everyone happy...I just wanted to type "genitalia location" in a clean post

Alex

[Bob Hostetter]

Since this is supposed to be an amateur sport, it should be run like an amateur sport. The prize tables should be done away with.......

[Carmoney]

Since this is supposed to be an amateur sport, it should be run like an amateur sport. The prize tables should be done away with.......

And wouldn't that guarantee that we will always remain an amateur (and possibly amateurish) sport, Bob??

I still have visions that someday we will attract some real media attention and spark some real big-time sponsorship interest.

If people will sit in front of their TVs for hours on end and watch lumberjack contests, Texas Hold-'em tournaments, and women playing pool, there has GOT To be at least some potential for spectator interest in what we do, for crying out loud.

I'd like to at least keep the door open that this could become a true pro-am sport someday. And that means having some sort of reward for the top shooters who are serious about making their living at this sport (although there are only a very few.....)

[RPMartin]

How about this........

On the entry form you add abox that says: if you wish to participate in the RAFLE add five $.

The club gets the revenue to better be able to have a better shoot next year.

Goodies are fun, money for the strugling clubs is good, Sponsers get there name/product out there and we don't have Prize table discussions anymore.....

RPM

[BamBam]

If we can agree to eliminate the blind raffle prize system everywhere, we will have taken the first step in growing our hobby into a real SPORT. If you want to win a prize by blind luck then skip the match altogether and double up on Lotto tickets at the nearest 7-11 store!! Since we go to great lengths to keep score and earn points, they ought to have something to do with the prize/trophy structure, whatever that may be.

That said, a reward system based on either HOA or according to our class system would be fine as long as its stated before you hand in your money. Let supply and demand determine the best approach. Personally, I like the class system we have and think the rewards should be patterned to match the structure of the sport. This encourages people to get into the game, and steadily move up to earn bigger and better rewards.

I understand the HOA approach and the reasoning behind the winners (in order) getting their hard earned rewards (in order). That is a fine system, too. But then you can't take a break in the middle to give away special rewards for "categories" the same way you wouldn't let the High-C shooter step in front of someone who shot better. Whatever you decide for "class" rewards has to also apply to categories for this approach to make sense.

Just make it clear on the application, and capitalism will improve the process.

[Scott G]

It kills me say this, but I agree with BamBam!

During his lucid moments (when he is not distracted by the hum of fluorescent lights because of too much caffeine), he makes a lot of sense.

Edited October 4, 2006 by Scott G

[Mistral404]

I am puzzled by the people who advocate practice more and you will move up. In some cases this is true. But by definition our classification is based on percentages. Only the top 5% of the shooter will ever make GM by definition. So our system is self-limiting to some extent. Yes I realize that once you make your highest you will not be move down. But still the basic premise is true.

Prizes are rewards or acknowledgement for performance. My idea is reward as many people as possible. For example, Buck Rogers at IBM had a philosophy of rewarding the top 70% of the people. Having 70% people receiving positive feedback, recognization moved IBM from $50 million a year to $5Billion. He moved away from just recognizing the top ten producers, knowing that only the top ten would recognized, by acknowledging the top 70% produced far better outcomes.

Reward people for performance in each category. Why NOT? Each earn the recognition based on their ability and performance within their classification. If I am second place C, I think I should be rewarded/acknowledged for that achievement at almost the same level as second B/A/M/GM.

This is similar to high school sports in many states. Schools compete against other schools by districts and classes. When the state championships occur, each team plays against other teams in the same district/class. A school with 6K students probably has a better talent pool than a school with 600 students. Is it fair that 600 student school play a 6K student school? I do not think there is a state which allows for such a disparate competition. Each should be rewarded in accordance to their class.

Discussing new approaches is trying to shift or break the paradigms. Generally this is a good thing. Find new ways to reward participation and achievement. There are decent models out there that we should seriously consider.

[shred]

I am puzzled by the people who advocate practice more and you will move up. In some cases this is true. But by definition our classification is based on percentages. Only the top 5% of the shooter will ever make GM by definition. So our system is self-limiting to some extent. Yes I realize that once you make your highest you will not be move down. But still the basic premise is true.

Actually, if everybody could shoot 95%+ classifiers, everybody could be a GM. There's no limit to the number of shooters in each of the various classes.

[EricW]

Believe it or not, some sponsors prefer that at least *some* of their prize table donations be spread out amongst the proletariat. Sponsors donate to support the sport, but more importantly because of the advertising value. If the sponsors product never reaches Joe/Jane shooter except via the USPSA Classifieds, it really dilutes the value of donating to the match.

[Unleashed]

DAMN

Who opened this can of worms?

I have an idea.....Your prize for winning your class at a major match will be a new "card"!

That way you will never get bored with shooting against the same people all the time.

I will have to agree with a few of the points made:

1. Although it would be nice to "fairly" award a shooter for finishing well in their class, sandbagging will always happen so it will never be fair.

2. Those at the top did work hard and still do. When they stop working hard, they don't stay at the top. All they will have to sell is shock-buffs if that happens

[eerw]

I usually buy my prize before I go or at Nationals ..this year I won a great gun pretty good for not being at a nationals in a long time.

My wife is going to be very proud of me for doing so well..

hey..no one tells her....

Edited October 4, 2006 by eerw

[BSeevers]

I usually buy my prize before I go or at Nationals..this year I won a great gun..pretty good for not being at a nationals in a long time.

My wife is going to be very proud of me for doing so well..

hey..no one tells her....

Ok I am ratting you out unless you let me shoot it

[eerw]

learned a long time ago...

prize tables are no win situation...by the time you pay for entry fees, lodging, food, gas..you could of stayed home and bought all the stuff you thought you should have one at the match and come out ahead..

you go to the match to try and do you best..meet fellow shooters and have some time away from the rat race..

everything else is whipped cream..

I like trophy matches..I like prize matches..it makes no difference it all incentive to do well..

[shred]

prize tables are no win situation...by the time you pay for entry fees, lodging, food, gas..you could of stayed home and bought all the stuff you thought you should have one at the match and come out ahead..

The only way somebody wins is if you pick up something you'd never have bought with the money you saved, love it and tell all your friends. Alas the 'how much can I sell this for?' dollar signs come out waaay too often at big prize tables. Get something you want, not something you want to sell.

[boo radley]

It's an interesting puzzle.

I guess I approach a match wanting to shoot my best performance, but having the competitive goal of placing as well as possible in my Class/Division. As a "B" shooter, it's unrealistically optomistic to go to a major match, and expect to challenge for HOA. However, it IS a realistic goal to consider the match a contest with 20?30?40? *other* shooters presumably at the same *general* level of skill, and shooting the best match out of everyone in one's pool is an accomplishment most matches recognize -- ie, "class win."

It's a pretty equitable system, IMO, that ensures an attractive match for everyone at every skill level, but there are two issues.

First there are those shooters that aren't really one's "peers." In most instances, I'd say, "tough," but there are legitimate cases of "sandbagging," either intentional or not -- this could be solved with some minor tweaks to the system, and some attentiveness on the part of the MD.

But second, there is the case of shooting a good match relative to the rest of the field, but not good enough for a class win, or award. In this case, the paradigm has shifted from a match in which you need to beat out 10 other "equal" shooters, to wanting reward for beating the majority of the field, who certainly aren't the shooters peers. It's a shift from relative performance on the day(s) of the match to wanting match recognition of absolute skill level and ability.

More sticky of an issue, but as long as the policy is announced up front...let the market decide as everyone points out.

Personally, I still think both absolute and relative skill can be rewarded in the same match. If there is a prize table (and I wish the $ spent on this went to recruiting, instead, in general), bestow the bigger prizes on HOA and the GM/M/A class wins, as the prize quality and $ allow.

1st A gets a better prize than 1st D, who still gets something.

[tightloop]

It really amazes me...that grown people have to get something to feel good about themselves and their performance... Everyone knows if they shot to their ability or not...if you did, great...if not, do what it takes in order to do that, next time...