Classification not Always Indicitive of Skill Level

[grumpy]

I know of shooter or shooters that run their own ranges and send in classifier scores that will range in at 100 percent shot so that they will get their classification moved up. They do this so that they will shoot with the GM at major matches.

[tightloop]

I know of shooter or shooters that run their own ranges and send in classifier scores that will range in at 100 percent shot so that they will get their classification moved up. They do this so that they will shoot with the GM at major matches.

Hope they enjoy the company..cause they won't be squaded with them after they shoot 50% of the GM score that wins it.

[xdrocker]

I agree with the thread title! To be competeitve at a major match you will have to shoot AT LEAST 1 class higher than your own to win your class (for the typical A,B,C shooter anyway). Some matches are more in line with the percentages, but most are not, just check the results page and you will see it. As for me, my last 2 on file are 84 and 87, yet I'm an open "C" . I set up front sight, el prez last week and ran them for 87 and 90%. Now at a match there is no way I can run with the M's and GM's. To slow on transitions and movement through the course I guess. So I guess it depends on what you want to do. Be able to say you're an M or GM or be in the running to maybe win something at a match. To be honest I wish that all Level II matches and above with more tham 3 GM's in a division would HAVE to count towards classification, no option. As the rules read right now "Please note that there is no gaurantee that the overall results will be used. As a minimum requirement, the results and competitor list will be reviewed at the USPSA office to determine whether enough top shooters completed the match and performed at a level high enough to be considered a national standard." So, how many is "enough"? What level is "high" enough? I still dont know what I'm going to do. Hmmmmmm, hang out in C or B or shoot for "Master" by X-mas.

[JThompson]

I agree with the thread title! To be competeitve at a major match you will have to shoot AT LEAST 1 class higher than your own to win your class (for the typical A,B,C shooter anyway). Some matches are more in line with the percentages, but most are not, just check the results page and you will see it. As for me, my last 2 on file are 84 and 87, yet I'm an open "C" . I set up front sight, el prez last week and ran them for 87 and 90%. Now at a match there is no way I can run with the M's and GM's. To slow on transitions and movement through the course I guess. So I guess it depends on what you want to do. Be able to say you're an M or GM or be in the running to maybe win something at a match. To be honest I wish that all Level II matches and above with more tham 3 GM's in a division would HAVE to count towards classification, no option. As the rules read right now "Please note that there is no gaurantee that the overall results will be used. As a minimum requirement, the results and competitor list will be reviewed at the USPSA office to determine whether enough top shooters completed the match and performed at a level high enough to be considered a national standard." So, how many is "enough"? What level is "high" enough? I still dont know what I'm going to do. Hmmmmmm, hang out in C or B or shoot for "Master" by X-mas.

The only way you are going to get rid of people sand bagging is to give the prizes by random drawing... then there would be no reason to sand bag. Is it the perfect answer? No, but it would work and nothing else I can think of would take the sand bag option out of the equation.

[HSMITH]

Nope, it isn't the prize table 100% that keeps people bagging, it is also the wood (trophy). I have won over a thousand dollars in prizes this year, but it doesn't even make a pimple on the ass of the money I have spent. I want trophies, plaques for my "I love me" wall, I want to know that I was able to beat the people I am classed with when it counted. I could care less about classification on match day, I just want to win. I won't cheat to win, but there are people that will. To get rid of sandbaggers you have to have random prize tables and random trophy awards. It isn't going to happen, the system isn't perfect, but it is the best tool we have. Onward and upward. Run them over if they won't move!!!!

[sfinney]

Only sure fire way to eliminate sandbagging is to shoot straight up, no classes (for trophies and prizes). That'll never happen (again).

[HoMiE]

Here's an idea. Why not make matches where the people who want to run straight up pay a higher match fee and they compete for top cash prizes, better prize table. Those who think I am in such and such class or there are too many sandbaggers, I won't win, can shoot in match but for no cash prizes(maybey smaller prize table) and class division winners get recognized and a nice little ribbon or plaque during closing ceremonies.

The whole sandbagging thing I feel comes from people not wanting to pay higher match fees to subsidize the prizes top shooters who are going to win in the first place. Having a random prize table makes most people feel like the have a shot a winning something if they have to pay more than the typical local match fee

[xdrocker]

In my last post I was not trying to get going on the sandbagging issue, even though I know it happens and makes me mad to. I was trying to convey that the clasification system does not truly evaluate ones capabilities. On classifiers its pretty much cut and dry, you WILL do this and WILL NOT do that. However, during matches there are tons of ways to run a course, some courses move you 5 yards, some 30 yards. They need to write a new book and have MOVEMENT, doors, swingers (not like you don't see a bunch of those at a major), drop turners, maybe even throw in a star. Make it a course, an honest no BS evaluation. As for the money part, like HSMITH said, I could care less about it, I would rather have a lower match fee, honest competetion, a good time and maybe walking away with some bragging rights.

[SA Friday]

Homie, your stats person for that big match will take you out back and put a round in your mellon if you suggested this.

It's very simple... Stop worrying about the sandies and the grandies and just focus on shooting as best you can every time YOU shoot at what ever match you are at. It works itself out in the end. My classifiers are a sorted mess of zero or hero numbers. I shoot every one as best I can for that day. Many of my days are bad, some are good. It just doesn't matter. I pay attention to the scores, but I don't let them determine what I will or won't do in my shooting at a match or classifier. Any thing else is self-changing yourself. It all really comes down to who is willing to practice the most.

Also, there are some shooters out there that are very good with large COF's and they get there early on in their shooting. Others become very proficient at short COF's and stand-shoots. In both cases, their strengths affect how they are viewed by others. One looks like a sandbagger, the other looks like a grandbagger. You can't win a match with a sort COF, but you can really hammer a classifier if you are good at them. You can win (class/division) at a large match if you are good at large COF's, and still mess up a short course, but never get moved up in class.

[HoMiE]

Take a look at the Steel Challenge. No classification, straight up, cash prizes/prize table in order of finish. I don't hear people complaining about that match.

I don't worry about the sand/grandbaggers. I shoot to win. When you don't win, I bet the person who won did something you didn't do. Maybey they practiced more, maybey they are just at a higher level than you are. Maybey they didn't throw 5 mikes and dropped fewer points than you did. Bottom line all the discussion about class and skill level is just another excuse for those who don't win. Go out and shoot. It's fun no matter where you finish or your skill/class level.

[Flexmoney]

We've had thread after thread on prize tables, baggers and such. This thread is a bit different, as it is trying to talk about whether the classification system is an accurate reflection of match performance or not.

Let's see if we can keep it on track ?

[Matt P.]

ok,

back on track. I think it is a good system. or at least the best we have. If a sandbagger has to pooch a classifier to win then they are just cheating on themselves. If you can feel good about beating someone in a lower class, I don't think it says that much for the bagger.

I shoot each classifier as if it were any ordinary stage. I do it to the best of my ability. Sometimes it's good, and ........well you know the rest.

[cpty1]

Is classification an accurate reflection of match performance? I think yes and no, depending on the individual and the approach they take to classifiers. I'll set the stage and say I'm been a master class shooter for a long time, but not because I sandbag. On the other hand, I am confident I can be competitive with any master class shooter out there at any match. I have always shot any match, major or minor, to win; if not the outright match, then at least my class. Call me a gamer if you want..guilty as charged. I want to perform at the best of my ability, but make no mistake...I want to win. As such, I've always shot classifiers as any other stage in that match. I'm not going to risk losing the match, or a class win at a match, trying to shoot a classifier above the skill level I can duplicate on a fairly consistent basis. With this approach, my general percentage usually ranges from 86 to 89%.

As Tennessee was the last major match for me this year, just prior to that, and since, I've taken a bit of a different approach on local match classifiers. It's probably nothing short of "balls to the wall". I screw up the most of them but luck into a good one every now and again. Right now, I'm closer to GM than I've ever been. I may make GM and I may not, but if I do, it's this change of approach that will do it for me. I'm ok making GM or not, but I will revert back to my old classifier mentality once major matches start up in '08 regardless of which class I'm in at that time.

There are many shooters out there who have extraordinary ability; we all know the names. They can take my same conservative classifier approach and still shoot 97-100% classifiers all day long. I'm not one of them guys.

So, what do you really want? If it's to be as competitive as you can be in your class at any match, day in and day out; take the conservative approach. But don't confuse conservative with deliberate, sandbagging, etc.......big difference. If you wish to be in as high a class as possible, even if it means you can only shoot that class percentage as the overall percentage of the winner at a major match on your best day, or when you get lucky....then I say when it comes to classifiers, put the petal to the metal and hope for the best. To each his own. It's all good.

[AZ38super]

I am one of those that many people have called a sandbagger and it is not true at all.

I go for it on every classifier, the last couple I have even tried to hard and really crashed and burned.

I classified in C in open and revolver right off the start. I can shoot longer courses of fire right up there with the bigger boys and girls but I really suck at the short speed or stand and shoots. I know this but I don't have the time and money to spend out at the range to fix this right now.

Does this mean I am a sandbagger, NO. Its just shows me where my work needs to be done.

When I look at match results I compare myself to the higher class shooters not those in my class as most of the time I am the top shooter.

I know when my skill level lets me I will bump up in class as I have been at less than half a percent away several times and sit at 58.15% right now.

I shot the Open Nationals this year for the first time and made it my goal to bump up at that match, I fell short because of a couple stages and a 36% classifier (1 mike/no-shoot).

I shot a 90+% classifier (based on Ohio calculater) once that was reworked to 83% and then still thrown out even after I pleaded to make it count so does that still make me a sandbagger.

No system is perfect but it is what we have, If those who win a bigger match with a score percentage of a higher class get bumped up in class then it will eventually take away the sandbagger issue.

[Ron Ankeny]

I have very limited big match performance. However, one thing is pretty obvious. My finish on short courses and speed shoots in a match is what one would expect in relation to my classifier scores. On the other hand, my finish on long courses that have movement, low ports, etc. is pathetic. So are my classifier scores indicative of my match scores? Yes, on those shooting tests that are of a similar nature. However, the majority of match points don't seem to come by way of an occasional speedshoot.

Then there is the issue of is a shooter's classification in line with their scores? My classifier scores have continued to show a downward trend because of vision issues and physical problems. I mailed a letter to Sedro earlier in the week in which I requested a review of my classifier scores and possible reclassification. What happens if I am moved to A class and actually have a decent finish at a major. Will I be labeled a sandbagger? On the flip side, if I retain my M card and suck at a major will I be labeled a grandbagger? My point? There is no way of telling if a person is a "bagger" unless you witness some less than honest behavior over the long run.

[richardschennberg]

I hate to put more on the stats volunteers, but I think there should be an INSTANT promotion for shooting 2 classes above your current classification when at least 3 GMs shot in your Division. Just look at the preliminary results, and if a D-Class shooter shot above 60% (a B class score) he is instantly a C-Class shooter in that Division and only eligible for overall and C-class prizes.

Richard

Edited November 7, 2007 by richardschennberg

[xdrocker]

Never happen, but I would support it. You can get promoted by winning above your class at an AREA or above match however.

Edited November 8, 2007 by xdrocker

[rgkeller]

Is the 100% bar on an individual classifier raised as the years go by?

[Flexmoney]

Is the 100% bar on an individual classifier raised as the years go by?

It is intended to be. I'm not aware that the process transparent and I don't have any clue how often the high hit factors are actually updated.

[professor]

Is the 100% bar on an individual classifier raised as the years go by?

It is intended to be. I'm not aware that the process transparent and I don't have any clue how often the high hit factors are actually updated.

If you look at the CM99 series High Hit Factors, it appears that some of them were/could have been modified at some time in the distant past. To the best of my knowledge, none of them were changed in the time frame of 1999 through today. Similarly, CM03 and CM06 HHFs have never been modified, from their initial values.

Please note that only the CM06 series have HHFs for Pro, L10, and Rev that are based upon the actual scores of shooters using the Division equipment during competition. The HHF for those 3 divisions in the CM99 and CM03 series of classifiers were based on various percentages of Ltd HHFs.

Do your best and try for consistency whenever you shoot, and the classification process will take care of itself.

[AlamoShooter]

I used to think the USPSA class system was "Off" on Skill level. I have shot quite a bit and have done OK at area size shoots. Only shooting in one or two IPSC matches a year, up until three years ago.

Before that I figured if I shot for 6 months or so I could move into Master with out much trouble. well It was not easy to even shoot in to A class that required 6 months. Maybe I tried too hard on the classifiers I even re shot several. The system that is in place was not easy for me to move up in even though I applied my self. After a year I gained new respect and an understanding of what USPSA is. I not a very sharp knife, I have to keep cutting at things to get through it. I had to look at the classifiers and find the ones with a "SKILL" I was lacking in a learn that skill.

I need over two years to reach master, and Help = good help I can think of six other masters that have a share in my accomplishment.

So Is the classification indicative of Skill Level -NO I don't think so I can shoot better than the average Master shooter at All around shooting =speed, Long rang, & revolver & limited, Open , rim-fire, rifle , shotgun.

But the average master IPSC shooter is going to make big foot prints on my back on the normal IPSC stage.

I think the classification system in place is better than any other that I am aware of.

[ChrisStock]

My match % runs in the 50% range, and my classifiers are stuck in the 30's pretty consistently. Classifiers have me made out as a tad weaker shooter through no conscious fault of my own. Believe me, I wish the meltdowns would stop so that I can advance up to "C"....I'm so damned close.

[Jim Norman]

D is a very, if not the most difficult class to shoot out of. All but near zero scores count. In C, B, A, and M you have a floor below which your scores don't count. This allows you to "go for it" with out fear other than that you won't move up. Often trashing a classifier is looked at as sandbagging. In reality it is a sign that the shooter is pushing to move ahead. D shooters have to actually make a good score every time or they are stuck in the D rut.

Jim

[JThompson]

My match % runs in the 50% range, and my classifiers are stuck in the 30's pretty consistently. Classifiers have me made out as a tad weaker shooter through no conscious fault of my own. Believe me, I wish the meltdowns would stop so that I can advance up to "C"....I'm so damned close.

I was pushing hard to initial class high and blowing up. When I got my initial in C I was a bit miffed and the next class I shot I didn't care. I even said I'd go first and had never shot the class before. With no pressure I stepped up there and ripped one just off master class.

[vluc]

I think that the lack of clubs running the larger field types of classifiers may add to this discussion. When you look in the classifier book, you may find a half dozen of so larger field-type classifiers. They are prohibitive for some/many clubs to put together, whether because of space or time or help constraints.

So what you end up with is the constant repetition of stand and shoots - all part of the game, but which rule out the physical side of the game.

While I have no overwhelming issues with the current system, I'd like to see actual monthly match performance blended into the classification system, more so than what you get at a major match where it may also count as a classifier. Whether it is taking the average monthly match percentages in your division and factoring that in to the overall classification system, I don't know. I recognize that can inflate a percentage as there may be no GM's or M's in your local club shooting the same division. But somewhere/somehow I would like to think that there has to be a way to effectively incorporate non-major performance into the system beyond just the single stage classifiers that get submitted.