Ed Deegan Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I have shot SS (with one exception) since I started shooting USPSA. My classifier's are now listed on the USPSA website, but the percentages shown are all the exact same (using the Ohio calculator for comparison) as L-10. Anyone else have the same thing? Regards, Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I was afraid this was going to be the case. Not really a fair way to do it, as there is a huge difference between L-10 and SS! I can't think of the classifier, but I shot it with SS, it is a empty gun start to a 8 shot array with steel, so IF you have a miss, it is a mandatory standing reload, NOT anywhere near the same as L-10. Also, reloading a widebody downloaded to 10 is NOT that same as a skinny gun!! Too bad, I hope that correct it if your assumption is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airedale Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 My single stack classifiers aren't even listed! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket35 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 Yeah- where did SS go?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 Mine are there, but they dont have a HEADING. Instead of saying "SINGLE STACK" they say "CLASSIFIERS". (at the very bottom) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 Mine are there, but the classification is not computed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeMartens Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 mine are listed, but not classified either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I was afraid this was going to be the case.Not really a fair way to do it, as there is a huge difference between L-10 and SS! I can't think of the classifier, but I shot it with SS, it is a empty gun start to a 8 shot array with steel, so IF you have a miss, it is a mandatory standing reload, NOT anywhere near the same as L-10. For that particular situation...it would make absolutely no difference. The HIGH hit factor would never be set by somebody that missed and had to do a reload. And, all the classifications are based off of a high hf. Just so you guys know... For years, the HHF in L-10 was identical to the HHF in Limited. (Even on classifiers, like Times Two, where you had to do an extra reload). Production was established at 95% on Limited. Revolver was at 90%. (If I recall correctly). After a few years...it seems we started to get enough independent data to set HHF's for those divisions, independently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 Hey boys, give 'em time to get the report fomatted. They are probably out shooting today! Just take all the "Y" entries and average them. If there are at least 4 "Y" entries, that is your current classification. Later, Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Its up like its suppost to be now. If they are using L10 HHF I don't see why. I've seen a couple guys with classifiers back through 05 so they should have pleanty of HF to go from I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catfish Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 something's still odd; only counting 4 classifiers... No biggy, I'm sure it will get worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgkeller Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Apparently using the "initial classification" methodology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtypool40 Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 After a few years...it seems we started to get enough independent data to set HHF's for those divisions, independently. And some Limited's are 90% of Open, or the Open HF. It would be nice if HHF's were based on match scores, instead of some dreamt up number or just handing other divisions the same # or a handicapped percentage of. It would be nice to have an updated classifier system which is REALLY simple in this day and age, but hmmm, naybe someday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Hey boys, give 'em time to get the report fomatted. They are probably out shooting today! Nope, shootin time is tomorrow morning. I think it's in decent shape. Please email rob at boudrie dot com if you see any problems with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 After a few years...it seems we started to get enough independent data to set HHF's for those divisions, independently. And some Limited's are 90% of Open, or the Open HF. It would be nice if HHF's were based on match scores, instead of some dreamt up number or just handing other divisions the same # or a handicapped percentage of. It would be nice to have an updated classifier system which is REALLY simple in this day and age, but hmmm, naybe someday. Agreed 110% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Well, I made "A" with my initial SS Classification!!! Gotta love it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Well, I made "A" with my initial SS Classification!!!Gotta love it Way to go Z! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Well, I made "A" with my initial SS Classification!!!Gotta love it Way to go Z! Thanks, that was my initial shooting goal, now I have decided I want to be a Master. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 (edited) First AD as an "A" Edited January 13, 2008 by zhunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 After a few years...it seems we started to get enough independent data to set HHF's for those divisions, independently. And some Limited's are 90% of Open, or the Open HF. It would be nice if HHF's were based on match scores, instead of some dreamt up number or just handing other divisions the same # or a handicapped percentage of. It would be nice to have an updated classifier system which is REALLY simple in this day and age, but hmmm, naybe someday. The only problem with using match scores is the 100% frequently isn't a LOHF-type run since the match winners are likely not pushing as hard as they can go, wanting to win the match and all. Then when the classifier gets out to the grandbaggers, they can easily crank over 100% on it. From my last look at the USPSA database, the way it's set up, it's tough to do a real-time recalc of the HHF based on the top-10 scores. That may have changed since they did do an adjustment a while back. What I would do is ask the top 5 shooters in any given division (doesn't really matter which top-5 shooters) to say what they would consider a 100% run to be, average that and use it for the initial HHF. I'm pretty sure most any of them could look at the stage diagram and give an answer good to within a few tenths of a second. Hopefully most of them have enough respect for USPSA that they could do that without charging for the service I'm guessing that L10 and SS HHFs are going to be very close in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carinab Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 First AD as an "A" Oh-Oh!!! Did it result in a match DQ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 First AD as an "A" Oh-Oh!!! Did it result in a match DQ??? Not unless we tell him he can't post for a day. I think he was talking about a double post.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chills1994 Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 DirtyPool wrote: And some Limited's are 90% of Open, or the Open HF.It would be nice if HHF's were based on match scores, instead of some dreamt up number or just handing other divisions the same # or a handicapped percentage of. It would be nice to have an updated classifier system which is REALLY simple in this day and age, but hmmm, naybe someday. +1 zhunter wrote: I was afraid this was going to be the case.Not really a fair way to do it, as there is a huge difference between L-10 and SS! I can't think of the classifier, but I shot it with SS, it is a empty gun start to a 8 shot array with steel, so IF you have a miss, it is a mandatory standing reload, NOT anywhere near the same as L-10. Also, reloading a widebody downloaded to 10 is NOT that same as a skinny gun!! Too bad, I hope that correct it if your assumption is correct. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catfish Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 A bigger difference to me between L10 and SS is in the placement of the holster and mags. On some of the classifiers, like Can you count, tenths of seconds are a huge difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chills1994 Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 I'd also be in favor of posting the top 5 or 10 HHF for each classifier per division, then the shooter's first name and last initial, their USPSA #, their classification, the date, and the club they shot it at. It would be like posting who has ran a sub 4 minute mile. The rest of use back in the pack-er's could then know what to strive for. I also think it would give a little more transparency to the classification system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now