Should you take the disappearing targets, or leave them ?

[Jake Di Vita]

Gotcha....that's what happens when you post after a long night of drinking.

Ok, to fix that.

50 seconds for a 150 point stage.

3 points per second.

Alpha is worth 1 seconds more than a delta and 1.66 seconds more than a NPM.

[Nik Habicht]

Gotcha....that's what happens when you post after a long night of drinking.

Ok, to fix that.

50 seconds for a 150 point stage.

3 points per second.

Alpha is worth 3 seconds more than a delta and 5 seconds more than a NPM.

Unless you're shooting minor, there's a three point difference between Alpha and Delta, setting the time to make up a Delta with an Alpha at 1 second to remain even....

That said, most of the time it makes sense to try and get the disappearing target; rarely is there a stage where the tradeoff is worth it....

[ChuckS]

Gotcha....that's what happens when you post after a long night of drinking.

Ok, to fix that.

50 seconds for a 150 point stage.

3 points per second.

Alpha is worth 3 seconds more than a delta and 5 seconds more than a NPM.

I am not exactly sure what Jake is concluding here but if the question is "how much faster do I have to shoot a 3HF stage to make up for lost points?" this is how I see it.

In Jakes example, you have a 3 HF or 3 points/sec. That give you .33 sec/point. So if you pass a disappearing target (2 hits - 10 points) you better shave 3.33 seconds off your time to break even.

Stage getting all the points:

150 pts / 50 seconds = 3.00 HF

Stage passing up one NPM target:

140 pts / (50 - (10)*(.33)) = 140 pts / 46.70 seconds = 3.00 HF

For the A vs. D thing (major scoring) you give up 3 pts so to break even you need 3 pts * .33 sec/pt or a .99 sec faster time.

Am I correct?

Later,

Chuck

[Flexmoney]

The explanation given above by Flexmoney works fine, but mainly for auto shooters in my opinion. When you toss round count out and reloads of the equation it makes total sense. In a 24 round course I have to reload three times (barring no misses), while an auto shooter only two (and Open possibly none at all). My point being that round count can play a part in the decision to engage a DT or not.

I hope that made sense.

You lost me. I'll have to go back and re-read what I posted, but what gun division you shoot in shouldn't make a difference. What is more fundamental is the actual hit factor the shooter is likley to get. That determines if the potiential points are worth the time and risk.

If it costs a shooter and extra reload (time)...that needs to be figured in.

If it costs a shooter to get off their plan (more time)...that needs to be figured in.

[Micah]

The explanation given above by Flexmoney works fine, but mainly for auto shooters in my opinion. When you toss round count out and reloads of the equation it makes total sense. In a 24 round course I have to reload three times (barring no misses), while an auto shooter only two (and Open possibly none at all). My point being that round count can play a part in the decision to engage a DT or not.

I hope that made sense.

I see what you are saying...but consider the following:

How fast can you hit a reload and get back on target? If the extra points + extra time = a higher overall hit factor, then you certainly want to make the effort. This is universal from wheelies to 29 round supercomp machines.

[Nik Habicht]

How fast can you hit a reload and get back on target? If the extra points + extra time = a higher overall hit factor, then you certainly want to make the effort. This is universal from wheelies to 29 round supercomp machines.

Sometimes there are other factors too --- at a recent club match, there was a top hinged port that opened toward the shooters and activated one appearing and one disappearing drop turner at 12-15 yards. The choices were to hold the port open with the weak hand, to drop the port cover on top of your head while resuming a freestyle grip, or to activate the port while sprinting by. Most people got a single hit on the disappearing target, some people managed two, but two alphas were rare.....

I would have liked a do over to see if skipping the port resulted in a better overall score....

[Jake Di Vita]

I actually wasn't referring to the time required to make up the shot and still be ahead, but the time you have to shoot an Alpha the first time.

[Nik Habicht]

I actually wasn't referring to the time required to make up the shot and still be ahead, but the time you have to shoot an Alpha the first time.

Oh, that concept will have me thinking for me a while.....

[Blueridge]

I see what you are saying...but consider the following:

How fast can you hit a reload and get back on target? If the extra points + extra time = a higher overall hit factor, then you certainly want to make the effort. This is universal from wheelies to 29 round supercomp machines.

Ah, but as you stated to shoot at the DT takes extra time. That is time you don't have to take. I don't see it as being universal from wheelguns to open guns in more than theory. In reality the reloads throw another aspect into the consideration to engage a DT or not. If I did not have to be concerned about ammunition capacity, I would ALWAYS go for the DT.

If I was shooting a stage (with a round count multiple of 6) with a revolver that had a DT, I would activate it and move on quite likely. That would reduce the possible need to add and extra reload, by giving me two more rounds to engage the other targets with. In a stage that does not have a round count multiple of 6 I would likely engage the DT, as I would have to load more rounds for the stage than is required anyway and have "extra" rounds.

That is just my way of looking at the problem though.

[professor]

I see what you are saying...but consider the following:

How fast can you hit a reload and get back on target? If the extra points + extra time = a higher overall hit factor, then you certainly want to make the effort. This is universal from wheelies to 29 round supercomp machines.

Ah, but as you stated to shoot at the DT takes extra time. That is time you don't have to take. I don't see it as being universal from wheelguns to open guns in more than theory. In reality the reloads throw another aspect into the consideration to engage a DT or not. If I did not have to be concerned about ammunition capacity, I would ALWAYS go for the DT.

If I was shooting a stage (with a round count multiple of 6) with a revolver that had a DT, I would activate it and move on quite likely. That would reduce the possible need to add and extra reload, by giving me two more rounds to engage the other targets with. In a stage that does not have a round count multiple of 6 I would likely engage the DT, as I would have to load more rounds for the stage than is required anyway and have "extra" rounds.

That is just my way of looking at the problem though.

Put me in as agreeing with blueridge. As a revo shooter, I'm looking at a reload every 6 shots after the first 6. If I can reload while moving between shooting positions, I will. As a revo shooter, MOST of the arrays I'll see at ports/shooting locations are more than 6 shots, so I'll usually have to do a standing reload, unless I've worked out a way to get some of the targets from a different location.

So when I come to a shooting position with 8 possible shots, including an activator and a disappearing drop turner, I'll take the 6 shots required and pass up attempting any shots on the drop turner. Otherwise, I'd have to do an unnecessary reload to give me the 2 bullets I'd need to hit the drop turner.

Jake, the time involved in taking those two shots is the reload time, the indexing time on the DT, and the cycle time for the 2nd shot. For me, that would typically be 3 sec + .5 sec + .22 sec [3.72 sec] to score a maximum of 10 points. That's a hit factor of 2.69 points per second. In your example, the stage is "worth" 3 points per second, so engaging the DT in that situation will LOWER my stage results.

However, if there are additional targets I could engage from that position, then I have 4 bullets left to engage another two paper, say. I can do that in .5 + .22 + .5 + .22 = 1.44 sec, and potentially score another 20 points at a rate of 13.89 points per second. That will up my stage results, and result in an average of 0.86 seconds per shot, or a HF per reload of about 5.8 points per second.

My point is that revo shooters have to be more aware of where the many reloads we do can be achieved without sacrificing time by doing standing reloads. Stages are broken down into chunks of 6 shots, not the Pro or L10's 10 shot chunks, or the Ltd or Open's 20 to 31 [big stick] shot chunks. Whenever we are forced to do a standing reload, we have to consider a 3 sec reload as adding 0.5 sec to each of the 6 bullets that the reload makes available to us. Semiauto shooters can usually find time while moving to do their reloads, so that they can effectively ignore their reloading time. Exceptions would be the mandatory reloads in many classifiers, which are almost always standing reloads for both revo and semiautos, except when revo shooters have to do two reloads for every reload that the semiauto shooter does, because the COF requires more than 6 shots between the mandatory reloads.

I hope this explains why there are significant differences between how revo shooters and semiauto shooters approach COFs.

Edited October 23, 2007 by professor

[Flexmoney]

I hope this explains why there are significant differences between how revo shooters and semiauto shooters approach COFs.

Hmmm.... Doing the math was the point I was getting at by starting this thread. For any given target, there is a certain number of available (or likely) points to be had. And, it will take a certain amount of time to collect them.

That is the basic concept that I was trying to put out there. It is the hit factor that a shooter is likely to get on a stage that determines if a shot...any shot...is worth taking. It doesn't matter if it is an Open shooter with Major power factor and 28 rounds...a Minor power factor Production shooter with 10 rounds...or a 6 round Revolver shooter. And, it doesn't matter if it is a drop-turner at 20y or a wide open static target at 3y. The question to be asked is...are the points to be collected worth the time to collect them?

The break-even point...is the individual shooters likely hit factor for the stage.

[Skywalker]

I learned a long time ago, from Benos book, that you can reverse the HF calculation to show you how much time is a single point worth.

E.G. if a 16 rounds medium course can be shot in 12 seconds (time according to your skill), and you think you might be able to drop only a couple of points, 12/78=.15 seconds is the average time it takes you to score each point.

Lets apply this to a stage with 7 static targets, 2 steel and 1 DT.

If you know you can shoot this stage in 12 seconds (not shooting the DT), you know that each A on the DT is worth .75 seconds and each C is worth .60.

At this point, you have only to do the math: if you can shoot an A-C on the DT faster than .75+.60= 1.35seconds (including waiting for the DT to appear, moving to a different shooting position, etc.), then you know if it's worth shooting it or not.

I'll try and expand on what I already posted.

Please note that this applies to all divisions, it's based on INDIVIDUAL known performance and skill level.

Let's consider a long course composed of 8 paper targets, 2, poppers, 18 rounds minimum, and let's add a DT (2 additional rounds).

Let's also suppose that the CoF is composed of 3 different shooting positions:

Position 1: 3 static targets

Position 2: 3 static targets, 1 popper

Position 3: 2 static targets, 1 popper (activator), 1 DT

I made it purposedly revolver un-friendly, as worst case.

Now let's assume you KNOW your skill level, and you know that, DT notwithstanding, you estimate you will shoot the CoF in 15 seconds, for a HF of 5.00 (full house, for ease of calculation, but you can put in it what you realistically expect to score).

Each point will be equivalent to 15/80=0.1875 seconds.

This means that an Alpha is worth some .94 seconds, and a Charlie 0.75 seconds (Major PF scoring).

This is your starting point to evaluate your best strategy.

Now you can start speculating: an A-C on the DT is worth .94+.75= 1.69 seconds. A double A on the same DT is worth 1.88 seconds. An A alone on the DT is worth .94 seconds.

Shooting an hi-cap this is a no-brainer: provided the DT activates in a reasonable amount of time (1s.), knowing that you can have a .25 or .30 split on the DT, even if you don't engage any static between the activator and the DT, you still have plenty of time to improve your HF engaging the DT: 1.00 + 0.30 = 1.30 to score an A-C on the DT.

Doing the math: 15+1.30=16.30 seconds, 80+9=89 points => 89/16.30=5.46 HF, which is definitely higher than 5 (not shooting the DT). This as worst case, but it improves even more if you can shoot something in between the activator and the DT, thus saving time.

Shooting a revo you have to take into consideration the time you need to reload. Let's assume you can do the reload in 2 seconds flat, and you will have a split time on the DT of .40 seconds: 2.40 seconds more to shoot a double A (+10 points). We already figured out the break even point for a double A was 1.88. Not worth.

But, going deeper into the analysis, you could find out something interesting: on the third shooting position, after engaging the 2 statics and the activator, you still have 1 spare round in the cylinder (provided you didn't fire any make-up shot).

We have already determined that an A on the DT is worth .94 seconds. Now, if you can shoot something in between the activator and the DT, assuming a 6th shot would cost you .4 seconds to score an A on the DT, I would for sure go for it: 15+0.4=15.4 seconds, 80+5=85 points => 85/15.4=5.52 HF. Definitely worth!

Hope this helps.

[vluc]

Nice, but more math than I care to do.

I try to take them whenever possible (mentally adjusting for if I'm going at a pace I need to be at), not just for the stage points, but the match points as well. Never know when those two alphas can make the difference to where you place.

[ChuckS]

Nice, but more math than I care to do.

I try to take them whenever possible (mentally adjusting for if I'm going at a pace I need to be at), not just for the stage points, but the match points as well. Never know when those two alphas can make the difference to where you place.

I think I understand what you are saying but your stage points are determined by your hit factor on that stage. Time has to be included. Going for a difficult 2A could get you a lower HF which gives you less stage points which will drop your match placement. Since we score points/time, both numbers are important. In fact, I have heard DTs refered to as "sucker targets" more than once.

Later,

Chuck

[Flexmoney]

Never know when those two alphas can make the difference to where you place.

Ahhh...but that is the thing...you can know.

[vluc]

Never know when those two alphas can make the difference to where you place.

Ahhh...but that is the thing...you can know.

This may be why so many of you do so well at matches.

I know how fast I shoot, I know my splits and transitions, I just never take the time to do the computations on hit factor, nor do I mentally decide in advance how fast I should shoot a stage. Fact is, I sometimes perturb people I shoot with who ask me how fast I ran a stage. Unless I just got the time, I don't remember. The time on that stage was the time, unique to that particular stage. Once shot, I move on.

To borrow Brian, my hits dictate the time, and I don't worry about speed. Just your casual "B" class shooter having a good time (which may explain why I'm not moving up). Maybe I should look at the math part more, but my stage prep does not include figuring all that out.

[Flexmoney]

This may be why so many of you do so well at matches.

I know how fast I shoot, I know my splits and transitions, I just never take the time to do the computations on hit factor, nor do I mentally decide in advance how fast I should shoot a stage.

I don't mentally decide how fast to shoot a stage in advance either. That would be a focus on speed in my mind...and, I don't want any part of that. (It is hard enough to avoid a speed focus.)

Fact is, I sometimes perturb people I shoot with who ask me how fast I ran a stage. Unless I just got the time, I don't remember. The time on that stage was the time, unique to that particular stage. Once shot, I move on.

I seldom know my time when asked either. (though, I should pay more attention to that...as mistakes happen and the wrong time can get written down)

To borrow Brian, my hits dictate the time, and I don't worry about speed.

That is a great way to address the shooting (for me anyway...it works out for me through my math )

Just your casual "B" class shooter having a good time (which may explain why I'm not moving up). Maybe I should look at the math part more, but my stage prep does not include figuring all that out.

Might that casual attitude may be hurting your scores in some instances? And, that is fine and dandy if you are OK with that. On the other hand, you certainly have an approach to how you deal with the stage. Would you be open to exploring an approach that increased your scores?

[Skywalker]

To borrow Brian, my hits dictate the time, and I don't worry about speed. Just your casual "B" class shooter having a good time (which may explain why I'm not moving up). Maybe I should look at the math part more, but my stage prep does not include figuring all that out.

Vince,

we're not talking about speeding up shots. As I wrote earlier, the math can be of any help only if you know exactly your skills, and how much it will take you (in terms of time) to score an A-C or better a double A on ANY target.

If you know this, you can determine with absolute certainty if the DT is worth engaging or not in terms of score.

And, stage prep, in terms of rehearsal, doesn't include strategy: this step comes earlier.

[vluc]

Might that casual attitude may be hurting your scores in some instances? And, that is fine and dandy if you are OK with that. On the other hand, you certainly have an approach to how you deal with the stage. Would you be open to exploring an approach that increased your scores?

Always open to another approach which is why I will begin to incorporate this into my routine!

[vluc]

To borrow Brian, my hits dictate the time, and I don't worry about speed. Just your casual "B" class shooter having a good time (which may explain why I'm not moving up). Maybe I should look at the math part more, but my stage prep does not include figuring all that out.

Vince,

we're not talking about speeding up shots. As I wrote earlier, the math can be of any help only if you know exactly your skills, and how much it will take you (in terms of time) to score an A-C or better a double A on ANY target.

If you know this, you can determine with absolute certainty if the DT is worth engaging or not in terms of score.

And, stage prep, in terms of rehearsal, doesn't include strategy: this step comes earlier.

I think I do that, but not in the way that has been described. More intuitively than methodically. But as mentioned, I'll give it a try and see what happens.

[Cuz]

Man, I knew I should have paid more attention in math class.

You and me both. I just can't get the hang of USPSA scoring. There has to be an easier way to figure this stuff out without math that goes out to 3 decimal places!!!

-Cuz.

[Cuz]

Man,

As much as this thread is making my head spin, I'd give anything to be having this discussion with all of you over a few beers after a shoot someday. These are the kinds of "discussions" that keep me up at night sometimes...

Should I have gone for it? or not??

What if I did it the other way instead?

Could I have gotten there in time??

Why didn't I notice I hit the hard cover part of the target?

How could I have missed that target that was soooo close?

If I didn't get those two mikes I'd have finished 6 places higher!!!

-Cuz.

[Flexmoney]

Man, I knew I should have paid more attention in math class.

You and me both. I just can't get the hang of USPSA scoring. There has to be an easier way to figure this stuff out without math that goes out to 3 decimal places!!!

-Cuz.

Just the scoring?

Hit Factor is points divided by time...which is the same as points per second...which, anybody ought to be able to relate to miles per hour....or, how many eggs you can find on an Easter egg hunt in one minute...or, how may dollar$ worth of goods you can get in a shopping cart in one minute...

[ChrisStock]

BAD stage design tries to force you to do something, good stage description flows and "encourages" or "tempts" you to do something, and offers you options.

That is one nugget of wisdom that has been drifting around my subconscious for awhile. Since I now derive a ton of pleasure designing stages, I'll keep this little jewel in the front of my mind as I plan more. Thanks DP40!

[Flyin40]

I have found that there are quite a few stages that if I would skip the drop turner it would work out better. The key word is "if". If I shot a perfect stage and everything went great it would turn out better but the disaster factor was too high. Any mess ups you would take a big hit on score for the stage. It was never worth the risk for the points I would gain compared to the points lost "if" it went perfect.

Flyin