Does IDPA Need A Grand Master Classification ?

[Slingshot]

I don’t think that an analysis using time dif gaps between top and bottom MA & EX classes within ESP and SSP at the 2008 S&W Indoor Nationals counts as being statistically significant, statistically speaking ;-) In order make a statistically significant statement, or a statement about the population based on the selection of a sample representative of that population, accepting of a margin of error, we’d have to consider at least 20-22 samples or matches. Even if we were to do that, one only needs to look at the politicians for great examples of turning numbers in any direction to suit their cause. That’s not to say that numbers don’t mean anything, or anything against Shooterready, just that I don’t think a spread from one match (or all matches from 2007) makes a resolution of this issue.

If we were to apply any kind of numbers to this topic, Robert Ray’s are the ones to use. Any his speak only of the possible need to insert a division in between Marksman and Sharpshooter than anything else.

Let’s face it, Gary’s right.

Most Master shooters didn’t walk into their first match or classifier and land on that rating. We had to work for it and enjoyed the fruits of our labors along the way. Admit it to yourself. I loved feeling like the king of the mountain in one Class and then another. Why? Being in the middle of the pack, a little effort paid off nicely for most of us because with a little work, we were able to win. Why? Because most of the other competitors in that Class were not willing to work on their game, either at all or at least not as hard as we were. Guess what, that doesn’t change at the top … only the level and amount of effort required changes, as it should. Hence the name, the Top.

One of my most prized possessions is a first place Expert plaque bumping me to Master. Not long after joining the crowd, I quickly realized two things: 1) There are many Masters who are not yet Masters, and 2), the competition was harder. My other prized possession (other than my guns), a 4th place Master medal from S&W putting me directly behind Gary.

By the way, there already is a Class above Master in IDPA. It is called Division Champion.

Morgan

Edited March 27, 2008 by Slingshot

[Bones]

It is the opinion of the MAs - those most effected - that should matter. A few have voiced there opinions here. It appears to be "No".

Perhaps the replacement of the word "or" with the word "and" into the requirements for moving up in class between "shoot a clasifier" and "place in a Major match" would suffice?

Like Morgan, My (3) most prized awards are, in order: 3rd Place MM, 1st Place EX and DC.

Craig

Edited March 27, 2008 by Bones

[Bill Nesbitt]

I've changed my mind. I don't think we need a higher class in IDPA.

I looked at some match results for the last few years. There aren't over 20 shooters actively shooting in IDPA that would be in a new class. It looks like the lower Masters (that includes me) just need to practice in order to place well in matches.

I also look to see where I placed overall. Even when shooting revolvers.

I could say a lot more but Gary pretty much said it all. Thanks Gary.

As an aside and not meant to stir things up, but I believe the skill sets needed in IDPA and USPSA are somewhat different. Being classified at a certain level in one does not directly relate to how you would be classified in the other.

Bill Nesbitt, who has been shooting this stuff for over 25 years.

USPSA A-4429

IDPA A-282

[Bones]

It's hard to argue with a guy who can do it with a 3" Model 13.

Craig, who has been learning from Bill since the turn of the century

[MichiganShootist]

FYI

The database that Mr. Ray mentioned only shows 4,000 classifications out of 14,000 members because it doesn't even come close to being accurate. The majority of clubs aren't feeding in the data on classifiers and probably never will.

That's too damn bad because issues associated with the classification system, bumping shooters etc... are very inconsistant and will remain that way as long as IDPA is operated in a decentralized manner.

From what I was told by HQ.. even the information on 5 gun and 4 gun shooters hasn't been incorporated into the mix.

[Chills1994]

Of those 4,000 (or 14,000) I wonder how many have actually go online to IDPA DOT com and created a member account?

??

[detonics]

FYI

The database that Mr. Ray mentioned only shows 4,000 classifications out of 14,000 members because it doesn't even come close to being accurate. The majority of clubs aren't feeding in the data on classifiers and probably never will.

That's too damn bad because issues associated with the classification system, bumping shooters etc... are very inconsistant and will remain that way as long as IDPA is operated in a decentralized manner.

From what I was told by HQ.. even the information on 5 gun and 4 gun shooters hasn't been incorporated into the mix.

Gee, just when I though we might get by without bashing IDPA. (insert head shaking here)

Robert Ray

IDPA HQ

[shooterready]

I don’t think that an analysis using time dif gaps between top and bottom MA & EX classes within ESP and SSP at the 2008 S&W Indoor Nationals counts as being statistically significant, statistically speaking ;-) In order make a statistically significant statement, or a statement about the population based on the selection of a sample representative of that population, accepting of a margin of error, we’d have to consider at least 20-22 samples or matches. Even if we were to do that, one only needs to look at the politicians for great examples of turning numbers in any direction to suit their cause. That’s not to say that numbers don’t mean anything, or anything against Shooterready, just that I don’t think a spread from one match (or all matches from 2007) makes a resolution of this issue.

My analysis is statistically relevant to the data set (population) under consideration. One can argue that the confidence and reliability of the data is lower given the number of data samples, but given the data set one can still draw concrete conclusions from the results.

I still stand by my original position.

Maybe we should start posting our best classifier times? This would shed some light on the arguement.

My best classifier run in SSP was around 83s. I haven't run a classifier in 3 years given I'm not required.

IMO, match performance is not the best judge of skill level. The classifier is a test of raw shooting ability testing the efficiency of your mechanics, calling shots, etc. There are no procedurals or FTNs in a classifier. Run your best 90 rounds and add it up. Those who can put 90 rounds thru the IDPA classifier in 60-70s are on a completely different playing field than I. So as stated before, classification times need to be reevaluated, IMO.

I've now given my $0.04. I'm done now because I need to save up for components instead.

Shoot straight.

Dick

Edited March 27, 2008 by shooterready

[CSEMARTIN]

Gee, just when I though we might get by without bashing IDPA. (insert head shaking here)

Robert Ray

IDPA HQ

Robert, I don't believe MichiganShootist was bashing IDPA. In fact, if I'm reading what he wrote correctly, he's pointing the blame at the club level. How could headquarters post information they don't have?

Since you're here Robert, please give us your feelings on the current classification system. Do we need a GM classification in IDPA?

Edited to add:

I agree 100% with Shooterready!! I believe there needs to be a GM classification. Rob Leatham is a Singles Stack GM and a CDP Master. Come on people, get F$%^ing real.

Edited March 28, 2008 by CSEMARTIN

[boo radley]

I'm changing my mind, as well.... I think Shooterready's numbers are valid. I went back to the 2007 Nationals, and the winner of Master class was whupping the average Master shooter by about 30% on average for SSP/CDP/ESP. In EX and below, the pack was much tighter. The class winner was only 15-17% above the average (except for some Ex shooter who was up there with the top Masters in one Division....).

But I think there are two fundamental truths:

1) At some point, we all have to shoot for high overall, and if that happens sooner rather than later, so be it.

2) There will always be a handful of shooters who are simply "better." They will cherry-pick certain IDPA matches, and win, but that's not a bad thing either.

However, I really like Bones's idea of making the entry criteria into Master being "X seconds" AND "place in a major match." Of course this would create additional burden on maintaining classifications, etc, and is Michigan Shootist really that far off in his assessment?

[MichiganShootist]

Mr Ray

You'll have to look far and wide to fine a shooter who has supported the IDPA more than I.... since I joined in 1999.

I was just pointing out that the basic structure of IDPA (as I understand it) puts the responsibility of posting classifiers on the MDs..... and at this point they have no motivation or interest it spending hours on their computer loading in classification information.

I shot the classifier at least 5 times last season at three different clubs and twice thus far in 08.... and not one club up loaded that information.

So my point..... Is that without very solid information the IDPA can't make much in the way of great choices if they want to review the classification statistics. That is not bashing... it is called constructive critique.

Edited March 28, 2008 by MichiganShootist

[rvb]

I believe there needs to be a GM classification. Rob Leatham is a Singles Stack GM and a CDP Master. Come on people, get F$%^ing real.

And given Leatham's SS record, does there need to be another class in that other game? A Great-Grand-Master division? That would only be "fair" to the other GM's who "deserve" a chance to win, right? Heck, call it the TGO class and only let him in. It's just an extreme, silly example of what we're talking about in idpa, imo.

Considering we are talking about a trophy-only game, where is the harm in "loosing" to TGO or other talented shooters other than not having "1st place" bragging rights? What's more fun, saying you came in 1st due to an arbitrary line in the sand or saying you took a run at TGO, Sevigny, Olhasso, etc etc and came in 10th or something? I guess while occassionally getting a trophy is fun, I'm not a trophy collector. The "gap" in scores only gives me incentive to practice.

For the extra round of trophies required will you also support slightly higher match fees at major matches? For smaller sanctioned matches does it seem reasonable to support a class that might have only 1 shooter?

-rvb

Edited March 28, 2008 by rvb

[CSEMARTIN]

And given Leatham's SS record, does there need to be another class in that other game? A Great-Grand-Master division? That would only be "fair" to the other GM's who "deserve" a chance to win, right? Heck, call it the TGO class and only let him in. It's just an extreme, silly example of what we're talking about in idpa, imo.

-rvb

rvb, I'm not getting your point. When has there been a big enough difference between GM's that would justify a Great-Grand-Master division? I'm not sure if you're saying that I'm being silly, or you're trying to be silly, or who is being silly? Huh? What just happened?

USPSA has six classes, IDPA has five. I don't see what the big deal is with adding another class to IDPA.

Edited March 30, 2008 by CSEMARTIN

[rvb]

And given Leatham's SS record, does there need to be another class in that other game? A Great-Grand-Master division? That would only be "fair" to the other GM's who "deserve" a chance to win, right? Heck, call it the TGO class and only let him in. It's just an extreme, silly example of what we're talking about in idpa, imo.

-rvb

rvb, I'm not getting your point. When has there been a big enough difference between GM's that would justify a Great-Grand-Master division? I'm not sure if you're saying that I'm being silly, or you're trying to be silly, or who is being silly? Huh? What just happened?

Sorry CSEMARTIN, I guess that I wasn't clear. I was trying to make the point that the whole discussion comes down to what degree we separate the skill levels. We can split the class and have a very tight upper tier so that more "mediocre masters" (or "mediocre GM's" in my silly example) can be "winners" or we can keep the status quo. My example WAS silly... a one-person class so that other GM's can win. But the argument on why it's "necessary" are the same, silly or not.... More people could say they were "winners" at something (while not coming in at the top). I was hoping my silly/extreme example would shed light on why I don't think it's necessary.

You didn't quote the real crust of my point.. that all we are doing is adding trophies so more people can say they were "1st place" at something. Why? Prize money is not on the line. Prize table is not on the line. A book deal is not on the line. TMZ won't start following you around. Just bragging rights are on the line. I'm content to come in 25th and 60 seconds back to someone who out-performs and out-prepares me. I don't feel if I got whooped up on I should still deserve a trophy.

To get a trophy for being the "best" of the subclass honestly doesn't mean a great deal. Getting trophies is fun and I keep all mine, but I'd know I was still 25th no matter what trophy I got. And I'd look at how to close that gap next time. I guess Gary and I seem to agree and we are among a small crowd who feels that way, the minority like you said. But I know we are not the only ones who look at combined results regardless of what class we shoot in to see how we compare against the best.

IDPA borders on pee-wee T-ball with it's 1-in-3 getting a trophy as it is ("everyone's a winner!"). Now we feel we need to add more?

I hope that better explains where I was coming from. If a new class were instantiated, I wouldn't be upset; I'd have another goal to add to the list. But as a "mediocre" or "amateur" or "non profession" master, I don't get upset if I see a gap between me and the top guys, I think endlessly about how to close it and what time-frame to give myself on that goal based on my budget/time/etc.

-rvb

Edited March 28, 2008 by rvb

[detonics]

Mr Ray

You'll have to look far and wide to fine a shooter who has supported the IDPA more than I.... since I joined in 1999.

I was just pointing out that the basic structure of IDPA (as I understand it) puts the responsibility of posting classifiers on the MDs..... and at this point they have no motivation or interest it spending hours on their computer loading in classification information.

I shot the classifier at least 5 times last season at three different clubs and twice thus far in 08.... and not one club up loaded that information.

So my point..... Is that without very solid information the IDPA can't make much in the way of great choices if they want to review the classification statistics. That is not bashing... it is called constructive critique.

Ok, After going back and re-reading your post I retract my statement. Sometimes clarity comes with a weekend distance between. Sorry MichiganShootist on my previous post.

Robert Ray

[stockton]

Of those 4,000 (or 14,000) I wonder how many have actually go online to IDPA DOT com and created a member account?

??

I am a CDP Master, ESP Master, 3rd match with OLD SSR was a classifier... 3 seconds out of Master. Hadn't shot SSP in years. Expert there. Bottom line... I didn't register. In fact, I didn't even renew my IDPA membership this year. NOT trying to start an IDPA vs. USPSA war, but main reason I stopped shooting IDPA was because I got bored beating the other "Masters" at all the local and most of the state matches I went to.

In USPSA, I started as a B shooter, but went up to A pretty quick. Enjoyed being "mid pack" again. Made Master after 2.5 years and fighting to make GM this year. So, yes, a Grand Master class in IDPA would be welcome. But, a classification system that was national and automatically adjusted as people collectively got better would be a better long term solution. Bottom line. . . Master is too easy to get. You shouldn't be able to be "bumped" to Master. You should have to earn it by classification. As was previously said, there are a lot of "Masters" that really aren't ready yet. Looking back, I think I was one!

[Chills1994]

^^^ Huh?

You lost me there, dude!

You either left out some "not" 's in those last few sentences or that's really your opinion. If that's the case, I think that puts you into a very small minority of IDPA'ers who think that shooting the classifier in 80 some odd seconds is earning it.

Most of the IDPA'ers I have chit chatted with are of the consensus that winning whatever division in Expert Class and getting bumped to Master is earning it. It proves to everyone that you're just NOT a paper Master .

Pardon me if my 3rd sentence up top there ticked you off.

If you can shoot a 70 or 80 second something classifier and can hang with your fellow Masters at a bigger major match, then yeah, you did earn it. You're NOT a paper master.

[Bill Nesbitt]

main reason I stopped shooting IDPA was because I got bored beating the other "Masters" at all the local and most of the state matches I went to.

Winning has never become boring to me.

[Bones]

.

Winning has never become boring to me.

I don't know, Bill. I'd get bored if you won all the time.

Master is a superlative term. It should not require an elevating adjective to differentiate it.

If more resolution is required - and I am not convinced it is - make it harder to become a Master - i.e. require match performance AND classification, or create an "almost Master"/"Super Expert" class below Master.

Same effect, right?

Craig

[Chills1994]

We could just get rid of the classification system entirely....

[steel1212]

I'll add my 2 cents. I say leave it as is. Once you get to Master or Grand Master you have to win you division, usually, to win your class. If Robby shows up in CDP...well I'm sorry for you. If TT shows up in Limited...I'm sorry for you. If all you want to do is win then....bag the hell out of it. If you want to see where you really stand with the big dogs then show up and see who has the baddest bite or go home.

[Duane Thomas]

If that's the case, I think that puts you into a very small minority of IDPA'ers who think that shooting the classifier in 80 some odd seconds is earning it.

Shooting the classifier in 80 some odd seconds is earning it.

[Mark Perez]

After being away from the games for about 15 months , I will add my 2 cents;

Do away with all the classifications and adopt a heads up format within the divisions ala GSSF.

until that day,

Mark

[Mick]

Of those 4,000 (or 14,000) I wonder how many have actually go online to IDPA DOT com and created a member account?

??

I am a CDP Master, ESP Master, 3rd match with OLD SSR was a classifier... 3 seconds out of Master. Hadn't shot SSP in years. Expert there. Bottom line... I didn't register. In fact, I didn't even renew my IDPA membership this year. NOT trying to start an IDPA vs. USPSA war, but main reason I stopped shooting IDPA was because I got bored beating the other "Masters" at all the local and most of the state matches I went to.

In USPSA, I started as a B shooter, but went up to A pretty quick. Enjoyed being "mid pack" again. Made Master after 2.5 years and fighting to make GM this year. So, yes, a Grand Master class in IDPA would be welcome. But, a classification system that was national and automatically adjusted as people collectively got better would be a better long term solution. Bottom line. . . Master is too easy to get. You shouldn't be able to be "bumped" to Master. You should have to earn it by classification. As was previously said, there are a lot of "Masters" that really aren't ready yet. Looking back, I think I was one!

Do you mind if a non-IDPA guy joins in???

With a set classifier like IDPA's I think it would be great and obtainable for everyone to make master in one or more divisions. Why not? In theory then, why couldn't everyone move to a higher division too.

That is the problem with USPSA scores at the way the percentages are figured. The percentages stay the same for the classification but the better shooters set the bar for the percentages. I don't think it has happened in IDPA but USPSA has a bunch of younger shooters who are blazingly fast and have sponsers. They tend to set the bar very high especially for the older shooters who just can't see and move fast anymore. In reality, a new USPSA shooter without alot of funds could never reach the top because of those younger guys taking it out of their reach.

So, make a GM class if you want but your system has a good goal that everyone can reach. Not so with USPSA. I like the idea that everyone can make make master whether or not it's on paper.

It's still something to be proud of and in USPSA you might not make it unless like Scott, you have the ability, time , and funds to get there.

[Duane Thomas]

I don't think it has happened in IDPA but USPSA has a bunch of younger shooters who are blazingly fast and have sponsers. They tend to set the bar very high especially for the older shooters who just can't see and move fast anymore. In reality, a new USPSA shooter without alot of funds could never reach the top because of those younger guys taking it out of their reach.

I don't believe that's true. Shooting well, even at the blazingly fast level, is simply not that physically demanding an activity. I mean, one of - arguably the - best USPSA shooter period is a 46-year-old fat man with one good knee who shoots most matches wearing a knee brace.

The key to swiflty attainging a top skill level, I think, is not youth per se but that younger guys tend to have fewer demands on their time and energies. We will occasionally in the shooting sports see a shooter come along who just vaults into the top ranks in a few years. They tend to have certain traits in common. They're almost invariably a young, unmarried guy. They don't have a wife, they probably don't have a girlfriend, they don't have kids, they don't own a house, they don't have a nice car, they don't have a job that demands immense amounts of time and mental energy. Thus they're able to work a subsistence-level, part-time job, make just enough money to pay for their tiny apartment (assuming they don't still live with their parents), buy food, keep their POS car in gas and on the road, and then everything else they have, every bit of money and mental energy, goes into practice, guns, match fees, and becoming the best shooters they possibly can. When you're a young, unmarried guy you can do that. OTOH, when you're 35 years old with a wife, two kids, a mortgage, a car payment, and the responsibility-laden job necessary to pay for all that, it gets a lot harder if not impossible to put that much time and energy into the shooting. Even the aforementioned 46-year-old vaulted to the top as a young, unmarried guy.

BTW, I profoundly disagree - politely, I hope - with the comment about having sponsors being one of the keys to making it to the top. You need to have a top skill level before you can get sponsors. Which means you sacrifice. You work your butt off. You give up, at least for awhile, the idea of having the wife or girlfriend, the house, the nice car, the kids - basically all the things that most people would agree make life worth living. And if, on match day, the people who have made those sacrifices, either now or in the past, beat the hell out of the guys who didn't....well, what did you expect?