Nationals Slot Quantities and Distribution

[EricW]

A couple questions:

1. How does USPSA determine the # of available slots for a nationals? Range capacity? Administrative capacity? Other considerations?

2. If a host range is able to host more slots than USPSA initially allocates, would it not make sense to allow that range to host the match to its available capacity?

From anecdotal reports, Europe has much larger matches than we do. That seems odd to me.

[shred]

Swiping a page (literally) from the 2007 European Championships ( http://www.fftir.fr/index.php?FicheNum=1774 ), this is how they plan to do it:

24 STAGES (390 rounds, about 2/3rds run-n-gun COFs)

60 SQUADS OF 15 SHOOTERS

TOTAL OF 900 SHOOTERS

4 HALF DAYS SHOOTING

1 FULL DAY FREE

(50 minutes per squad per stage, with a typically Euro 2 hour lunch. First shot at 8am, last squad starts last stage at 18:10pm)

PRE-MATCH Wednesday 12 to Friday 14 (250 shooters not included in the 900-- RO's, staff, sponsors, etc)

GENERAL ASSEMBLY Saturday 15

OPENING CEREMONY Sunday 16

MAIN MATCH Monday 17 to Friday 21

SHOOT OFF Saturday 22

CLOSING CEREMONY Saturday 22

I'll take the BE expense account and go investigate further

[mactiger]

I know there is some sort of formula that determines the number of slots made available for the nationals. It would be pure speculation on my part to say how it's applied. I do have a little insight into some of the factors that determine the size and corresponding duration, of the match.

There has been considerable "customer demand" for a shorter Nationals. Competitors don't seem to want to spend a week shooting a match anymore. Nationals, in the beginning, was at least a 5 day affair, culminating in a big formal banquet for the awards, with prizes distibuted the next day. So, people were in town for at least a week, if not longer. Couple this with the increase in "big" matches over the last decade or so, and there are only so many vacation days/dollars/competitors to go around.

The squad schedule for a very large match usually means that you are not shooting more than a couple of stages in a day (as was also the practice in the past), so there is a lot of down time, which competitors don't seem to like.

As always, less slots = more demand. Standard business practice, I guess.

Range capacity does figure into it, although if we went with more of an IPSC model, i.e. more short stages, less long, the number of stages could, and would, IMO, increase. It seems that in USPSA it's all about run and gun and the more rounds the better. I'm not criticizing that viewpoint, just stating what seems to be the preference.

It would be possible to have more stages, with the corresponding bonus of being able to run more shooters through the match (more places to go in the same amount of time equals more competitors on a given day), but daylight and how many days the competitors are willing to hang around are limiting factors. Also, staffing a larger match could become problematic--again, the limiting factors are vacation and travel expenses, and number of people willing to work the match. Back-to-back formats save some of the costs for staff housing and travel, and lessens the cost of the equipment you have to rent, such as port-a-potties, tents, chairs, etc. Back-to-back match format allows more competitors to compete in a Nationals, but it doesn't necessarily make for a "bigger" match, just a couple of regular sized matches in a little longer time.

Just a few thoughts I've had on the subject. YMMV, of course.

Troy

[Chris Keen]

Could it be as easy as 18 (stages) times 20 (shooters per squad) = 360 (slots) ???

[shred]

Could it be as easy as 18 (stages) times 20 (shooters per squad) = 360 (slots) ???

The trick is if you have more squads than slots and shoot more days. For a simple example, if you have a 8 stage match, you can run 8 squads in one day (8*20=160), 16 in two (320) or 32 (640 shooters) in four.

Of course as Troy says, people are clamoring for shorter and shorter Nationals as well. (I figure it's the same people that show up late to a local match and leave early without helping tear down), but how many people tacked an extra day or two or seven onto Nationals in Missoula this year???

[EricW]

OK, so people want to shoot a shorter match. What about allowing the range to have *multiple* groups of 360 shooters over the course of a week?

The reason I ask is that it the industry is changing, but USPSA doesn't seem to be changing with it. There are guys out there building the facilities to accomodate more shooters, there is always more demand for slots than slots are available, but USPSA is sticking with the approx. 350 shooters = a Nationals model. I don't have a dog in the hunt, but others do. If people want a super-duper Nats experience, it would seem to make sense to allow the host range to bring in as many shooters as they want to accomodate so that the finances could work out better. There's other issues as well, but maximizing the revenue for the investment is the first issue that comes to mind.

[shred]

Two words: Prize table.

Without one I bet a lot more people would show up and shoot and leave at whatever schedule they made work.

Actually, could we get 900 shooters even if there were no cap on entries? IIRC there were ~ 50 names on the wait list for Open/L10 nats? How many for L/P/R?

At the meet-n-greet after the O/L10 nats, Mike Voigt said clearly that the break-even point for Nationals depends entirely on entries. If the match doesn't fill, USPSA loses money. Recently we've had several Nationals lose money, right?

[EricW]

That was the other issue: no prize tables in Europe.

I think everyone would be a lot better off if sponsors just contributed modest cash sums to the matches and there were really cool matches instead of yard sales with a shooting side match.

[EricW]

Actually, could we get 900 shooters even if there were no cap on entries? IIRC there were ~ 50 names on the wait list for Open/L10 nats? How many for L/P/R?

Yeah, but there's the phenomena of "I wasn't invited so I have to pay a penalty to get in." Get rid of that nonsense and let who wants to show up shoot, and it will probably fill up or a lot closer than we think it will.

[Charles Bond]

That was the other issue: no prize tables in Europe.

I think everyone would be a lot better off if sponsors just contributed modest cash sums to the matches and there were really cool matches instead of yard sales with a shooting side match.

Amen, Amen, Amen. Why don't you guys from Texas and Washington State actually call up your area directors and discuss this with them?

Charles Bond

Area 6 Director

[EricW]

That was the other issue: no prize tables in Europe.

I think everyone would be a lot better off if sponsors just contributed modest cash sums to the matches and there were really cool matches instead of yard sales with a shooting side match.

Amen, Amen, Amen. Why don't you guys from Texas and Washington State actually call up your area directors and discuss this with them?

Charles Bond

Area 6 Director

Ask Bruce about the restraining order sometime.

[mactiger]

Could it be as easy as 18 (stages) times 20 (shooters per squad) = 360 (slots) ???

Well, yes, if you are figuring how many stages and competitors. I was thinking more about slot distribution: how many go to each club/section, how many are reserved for Area match winners, etc. The total number available is pretty much governed by how many competitors you think you can run through in a day, times how long you want the match to be.

If you use the current squadding model, there are 36 squads, 18 "places to be", done in a half-day format. If you push the envelope a little with timing, say 4 to 4 1/2 minutes per shooter, you can figure 11 man squads. That's 396 competitors. I always use a 10% rule of thumb for walk ups, etc., so you could theoretically handle another 36 competitors, roughly one per squad, provided the staff is hustling and everything goes well. But, if it doesn't, as we've seen a couple of times in recent years, the shooters all pitch in to make it work and help catch up. A couple of years ago in Barry, they rebuilt just about the entire match, with competitor help, after a big storm blew things away. So, it's doable.

Prizes are a problem, as mentioned. Nobody wants to shoot on Mon/Tues, and leave if the prizes are given out on Saturday.

It would not hurt my feelings if we did away with them altogether.

The other thing is slots: I think this system is antiquated and needs to be revised. We should also take a realistic look at the demand for slots. If the match was an open entry match, I wonder if we'd get any more than we get now, considering the wait list and the ability to walk up on registration day and get a cancelled slot. I have a feeling that we'd not see too many more entries than now.

Troy

[davecutts]

As a shooter I would love to see more stages, and the European model of more short and medium courses seems like a good solution. Two nine to sixteen round stages in a single bay, run by one crew of RO's also seems like an efficient solution. A range like USSA could easily host a 24 stage nationals with very few additional resources. Last year at open nationals at USSA we finished shooting several stages in 30 minutes or less. Keep the shooter hot, walk over ten yards to the next stage blast away, and you've added what a minute to the shooters total time in the bay. Scoring and pasting two short courses ... has to be quicker than scoring and pasting a 32 round hose-a-thon. I concede that you many need an extra RO or two on the doubled up bays, so yes staff recruting could become a factor and cost additional money to house and feed.

Maybe I'm out of the pack here, however I also think we need to make the awards ceremony a bigger deal. A podium for the champs, a banner hung behind it celebrating our sponsors, pictures taken with the champs on the podium in front of the banner. An awards ceremony, I've only been to two nationals but the awards ceremony seemed TOO casual even for Americas. Let’s celebrate our winners and thank our sponsors. We can do it with a couple kegs of beer, some food turn it into an event not a stop over between the range and dinner/drinking. It has seemed like very few people actually wanted to be there in the last couple of years

I could go either way on the prize table; people like to get stuff, sponsors like to give stuff ECT. It does take time and has felt like a cattle call.

[paul788]

Troy

As a C L10 shooter if I know I can get in I'll schedule and shoot the Nationals. I'm probably not going to win a slot and I won't do the Russian Roulette on getting one via the waiting list. I have to schedule my vacation by the first week of January for the year. I won't tie up a week and make travel arrangements on the off chance I'll get lucky. My shooting/traveling buddy and I are both wanting to attend a National but the current system of slots and waiting list is doing a good job of keeping us at the local, State, and Area matches only.

As for prizes, you can do random drawings and mail whatever, you can do money and mail a check, or you can use the sponsors money to reduce the cost of the match. I believe that handing the winners a check and random drawing for the merchandise is a better way to keep the newcomers and sponsors happy. Does Dave need to win another Glock or Robby another XD? Joe Newby on the other hand would be thrilled to win a gun.

My view on what could be changed for the better.

Paul Beck

Edited September 3, 2007 by paul788

[BritinUSA]

My 2 cents on this:

1) I've shot a lot of IPSC matches, big ones, more than most people on this board. IPSC matches with the mix of short / medium and large courses are generally better than USPSA's addiction to large run and gun stages. Having lots of smaller stages, as Troy has mentioned, does allow many more shooters.

2) Secondly, the reason that I had an objection to longer Nationals was primarily because everyone had to spend an extra day in the hotel just for the benefit of having a shoot-off the day after the match. This is an opinion shared by quite a few people if my experience is anything to go by. So this may have contributed to the feeling that everyone wants shorter Nationals, this may not be the case.

3) There is a cost issue associated with Nationals, the more competitors the more money they make, if they make money it's good and if they don't it's bad. There is a cost to the shooter, entry fees and hotels are the big issue.

4) People need to know when the Nationals is to be held and where, they need that information 1 year ahead of the date. It is now September, we should know by now when and where the 2008 Nationals are to be held. If people have the opportunity to book vacation/hotels etc. several months in advance then prices are generally cheaper.

If we tie all this together, IPSC style matches (lots of shorter stages) allows more competitors which means more money which means we can lower the entry fee. If we increased attendance by 200-300 then each slot would cost nearly $100 less. This is the equivalent of 2 nights in a hotel. So the match could last 2 days longer and the cost is the same for the shooter. Have a better awards ceremony with the podiums, banners etc. mentioned above. Nationals should be as good as an IPSC level 4 match, if not better.

This is America for heaven's sake, we should be doing everything bigger and better than everyone else.

People

[mactiger]

Maybe I'm out of the pack here, however I also think we need to make the awards ceremony a bigger deal. A podium for the champs, a banner hung behind it celebrating our sponsors, pictures taken with the champs on the podium in front of the banner. An awards ceremony, I've only been to two nationals but the awards ceremony seemed TOO casual even for Americas. Let’s celebrate our winners and thank our sponsors. We can do it with a couple kegs of beer, some food turn it into an event not a stop over between the range and dinner/drinking. It has seemed like very few people actually wanted to be there in the last couple of years

You need to talk to the President about that--it's how he runs the awards, and is basically not my gig. I just hand out the trophies if he asks me to. I agree with you, though, it should be a bigger deal.

Troy

[Kingman]

Knowing in advance would make things a lot easier on many of us. I don't understand why we don't know now when the nats will be next year.

[mactiger]

Don't even get me started on the scheduling issue. I agree 100% with you, Paul--we should have the dates announced at the end of the previous nationals. Like a lot of people, I have to schedule vacation early in the year.

Again, it's the President's thing.

Troy

Edited September 3, 2007 by mactiger

[EricW]

This is great debate. Thank you all.

I guess what I wanted to pose was if the host club/entity wants to build a match that will accomodate 1000 people, why not let them try? Let them put out the word that everyone is welcome and see what happens. It might take a year or two to prime the pump, but if the host is willing, what does USPSA have to lose by letting them give it a whirl?

[Kingman]

with venues like ussa I think they could probably host the match and do it as any corporate entity may do for about the same price. As a corporete entity they would creat profits. With set up time being a factor in overal cost, they may want to do two day squads and allow them to go in a period of time from say monday to sunday. Eric you have a great idea.

[BritinUSA]

With a big 5 day match as I suggested earlier, the extras start to fall into place. We could host a trade show at the same time as Nationals. Invite the big vendors like S&W, Glock etc. to show their wares, perhaps using a spare berm so people can try out the guns. Invite members of the public to watch the match and attend the trade shows. They can walk around the vendors and watch the shooters and it would be a great way to introduce more people to the sport.

The more competitors that you have, the more sponsors will want to take part. Not just the guys that continually support us like Chuck, Beven, Brazos etc. But all the others that are out there.

Increased attendance = increased sponsorship = more money = more attractions for the general public = more interest in the sport = increased membership.

The US Nationals should be the premier shooting event in the world. Have one really big match, pick your division and go for it, 700+ competitors, post the dates and places by end of the previous Nationals (like they do for a WS). An entire week of shooting; Registration and course inspection on Sunday, shoot Mon-Fri, real awards ceremony on Friday night, drive home on the weekend. Use the weekend for driving and registration so shooters only need to take 5 days of vacation.

The increase in participation will lower the cost of the match entry fee which will offset the extra days hotel cost.

This is not rocket science but we should be reaching for stars not just doing what we did last year, mediocrity is starting to set in... and that's not a good thing. It's step number one on the path to decline.