2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun

[Stefan]

I think the reason for this is so that a shooter doesn't just spray the long range targets, avoid the FTE penalty and just take the "miss" penalty and a really good raw time. Seen it done. It works out pretty well if you're shooting an iron sighted SKS and surplus 7.62-39.

[Merlin Orr]

I think the reason for this is so that a shooter doesn't just spray the long range targets, avoid the FTE penalty and just take the "miss" penalty and a really good raw time. Seen it done. It works out pretty well if you're shooting an iron sighted SKS and surplus 7.62-39.

The complexion of the match is definitely changing from a "standard" IMGA type match toward a more IDPA restricted non free style type of shooting.

[Scout454]

Merlin - the same scoring format was used at Blue Ridge and it worked out well. It stopped people from hosing, taking the miss and going for a fast time. Points down on paper put accuracy back into the game.

[bigbrowndog]

If the penalty is going to be different for targets at distance, then steps need to be taken to ensure that targets are visible for ALL shooters at ALL times. I know that on the Sniper stage, AM shooters get great target presentation due to the sun being at your back, however PM shooters get the sun in their face, this advantage can be negated by using contrasting backers and having the targets painted for every squad, while the walk thru is being conducted. It only requires an ATV, and I seem to remember a few of those being around. Every shooter should receive the same chance to see and hit the target, (acts of God do not count!!!!) If fog or rain or wind affect presentation, those are things that pop up and we cannot avoid, things that can be avoided should be.

As to concerns of just throwing shots downrange, targets need to be easy enough for the AVERAGE shooter to reasonably be able to hit them, the better shooters will accomplish this faster. Making shots too difficult leads to people figuring that its WORTH just blows rounds downrange and taking the penalty. If it comes to timing out and not finishing or taking penalties and finishing,............taking penalties is going to win.

I look forward to another great match, as usual!!!!

Trapr

Edited June 11, 2008 by bigbrowndog

[Stefan]

Fast is fun. You want shooters to be more accurate? Use smaller targets. Cut the D zones off the targets, keep the same rules, and let the hosing begin.

[LChico]

I think the reason for this is so that a shooter doesn't just spray the long range targets, avoid the FTE penalty and just take the "miss" penalty and a really good raw time. Seen it done. It works out pretty well if you're shooting an iron sighted SKS and surplus 7.62-39.

The complexion of the match is definitely changing from a "standard" IMGA type match toward a more IDPA restricted non free style type of shooting.

I'll agree that changing the method of scoring targets does move it away from a "standard" IMGA type match, but I do not see how that limits 'free style.' I don't think free style and accuracy are incompatible. The type of stages are not changing. You will still be 'running & gunning' but perhaps slowing down to aim more carefully.

Both USPSA & IDPA impose a 'penalty' (points or time) for hits that do not impact in the A or 0 zone. The only reason we chose to use the IDPA 'time penalties' is because we are using time & not points to rank the shooters on the stage.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

[Merlin Orr]

I think the reason for this is so that a shooter doesn't just spray the long range targets, avoid the FTE penalty and just take the "miss" penalty and a really good raw time. Seen it done. It works out pretty well if you're shooting an iron sighted SKS and surplus 7.62-39.

The complexion of the match is definitely changing from a "standard" IMGA type match toward a more IDPA restricted non free style type of shooting.

I'll agree that changing the method of scoring targets does move it away from a "standard" IMGA type match, but I do not see how that limits 'free style.' I don't think free style and accuracy are incompatible. The type of stages are not changing. You will still be 'running & gunning' but perhaps slowing down to aim more carefully.

Both USPSA & IDPA impose a 'penalty' (points or time) for hits that do not impact in the A or 0 zone. The only reason we chose to use the IDPA 'time penalties' is because we are using time & not points to rank the shooters on the stage.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

I see the "IDPA" thing hung you up. That is a point but the real difference and IMO the real step away from "free style" is the arbitrary assigning of extra points down for the different targets. (long range in this case). You just stepped into the "Failure To Do Right" mode at that point. You can"t say the type of stages aren't changing when you change the scoring by 100% on some of the targets. That is a radical change on the risk vs reward chart for the shooter and thereby radically changes the way a shooter must think and shoot stages.

[Stefan]

I think you guys are trying to fix something that isn't broken.

[Still Praying]

bigbrowndog Posted Yesterday, 10:37 PM

targets need to be easy enough for the AVERAGE shooter to reasonably be able to hit them

FWIW, I agree. If more than 5% of the shooters can't hit the targets, then your looking for problems or a lot of complaints. I would bet that only about 10% of the shooters have a place to shoot at 600 yards. That being said, anyone know where I can shoot at 600 yards here around Ft, Benning? I need to (no would like to) try it. 600 yards sounds fun to me but, I dont think it's very practical for this kind of match.

Oh well, it's Ft. Benning. It's still going to be a blast.

Ronnie

[Mike P]

This scoring method works just fine and it addresses one of the concerns that I've heard raised about the old scoring method which was "two D's counts the same as two A's, WTF?". Anyway, I see it as an improvement. We're all shooting all A's anyway, right. The enhanced penalty for the long range targets is a non issue if you hit them (and I have as much or more trouble in that regard as anyone). As far as target definition goes, the AMU invented it with the yellow backers and black targets (at least that's where I first saw them). I suppose anything can happen in 6 months, but if there is to be a 600yd shot on the Brinson range, and thats where they said the entire match would be, then they may need get some Sea Bees in there at least a day before the event. Or it could be there's some "leg pulling" going on.

Either way, it'll be interesting.

Mike

[LChico]

This scoring method works just fine and it addresses one of the concerns that I've heard raised about the old scoring method which was "two D's counts the same as two A's, WTF?". Anyway, I see it as an improvement. We're all shooting all A's anyway, right. The enhanced penalty for the long range targets is a non issue if you hit them (and I have as much or more trouble in that regard as anyone). As far as target definition goes, the AMU invented it with the yellow backers and black targets (at least that's where I first saw them). I suppose anything can happen in 6 months, but if there is to be a 600yd shot on the Brinson range, and thats where they said the entire match would be, then they may need get some Sea Bees in there at least a day before the event. Or it could be there's some "leg pulling" going on.

Either way, it'll be interesting.

Mike

You may have noticed that the application said: "7 or 8 Stages." Aaron is working VERY hard to get access to a nearby range that would allow more long range rifle shots (up to 600 yards). We will certainly let you know once plans are finalized. I have 2 separate squad schedules designed for a 7 stage match or an 8 stage match.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

[LChico]

I think the reason for this is so that a shooter doesn't just spray the long range targets, avoid the FTE penalty and just take the "miss" penalty and a really good raw time. Seen it done. It works out pretty well if you're shooting an iron sighted SKS and surplus 7.62-39.

The complexion of the match is definitely changing from a "standard" IMGA type match toward a more IDPA restricted non free style type of shooting.

I'll agree that changing the method of scoring targets does move it away from a "standard" IMGA type match, but I do not see how that limits 'free style.' I don't think free style and accuracy are incompatible. The type of stages are not changing. You will still be 'running & gunning' but perhaps slowing down to aim more carefully.

Both USPSA & IDPA impose a 'penalty' (points or time) for hits that do not impact in the A or 0 zone. The only reason we chose to use the IDPA 'time penalties' is because we are using time & not points to rank the shooters on the stage.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

I see the "IDPA" thing hung you up. That is a point but the real difference and IMO the real step away from "free style" is the arbitrary assigning of extra points down for the different targets. (long range in this case). You just stepped into the "Failure To Do Right" mode at that point. You can"t say the type of stages aren't changing when you change the scoring by 100% on some of the targets. That is a radical change on the risk vs reward chart for the shooter and thereby radically changes the way a shooter must think and shoot stages.

Merlin, I think you and I are using at different definitions of words.

To me, free style means competitors must be permitted to solve the shooting challenge presented in a freestyle manner, and to shoot targets on an “as and when visible” basis. "That is a radical change on the risk vs reward chart for the shooter and thereby radically changes the way a shooter must think and shoot stages." Calculating risk vs reward and adjusting the way you think and shoot stages based on your equipment, skill level, conditions and the stage structure is the essence of free style to me.

To me, arbitrary means 'random' penalties, like if the point value of misses or procedurals changed from stage to stage, or if a penalty could be applied differently by different staff. If every target over 100 yards incurs the same penalty, it is not arbitrary, but rather a reflection of the fact that it is a more difficult shot & penalties for misses should be higher than for, say, pistol targets set at bayonet range. USPSA recognizes 'enhanced target values' based on distance, with enhanced penalties to go along with them. I have no idea about IDPA, since I've never shot an IDPA match or worked one, other than in stats (where I just record the penalties & don't actually issue them).

Again, I think those words mean different things to me and you.

That said, I am not the author of the changes. I was more interested in seeing to it that I could generate timely final results with this rule set.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

[Mike P]

This scoring method works just fine and it addresses one of the concerns that I've heard raised about the old scoring method which was "two D's counts the same as two A's, WTF?". Anyway, I see it as an improvement. We're all shooting all A's anyway, right. The enhanced penalty for the long range targets is a non issue if you hit them (and I have as much or more trouble in that regard as anyone). As far as target definition goes, the AMU invented it with the yellow backers and black targets (at least that's where I first saw them). I suppose anything can happen in 6 months, but if there is to be a 600yd shot on the Brinson range, and thats where they said the entire match would be, then they may need get some Sea Bees in there at least a day before the event. Or it could be there's some "leg pulling" going on.

Either way, it'll be interesting.

Mike

You may have noticed that the application said: "7 or 8 Stages." Aaron is working VERY hard to get access to a nearby range that would allow more long range rifle shots (up to 600 yards). We will certainly let you know once plans are finalized. I have 2 separate squad schedules designed for a 7 stage match or an 8 stage match.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

Da-yum!! Talk about staying on top of it, contingency plans six months out. Not a surprise mind you, but still, Da-yum!! 600 yd targets would be really cool, I hope it happens, with or without Sea Bees, eh?

Mike

[springy]

"rather a reflection of the fact that it is a more difficult shot & penalties for misses should be higher than for, say, pistol targets set at bayonet range."

Am I missing something here? Why would you want to do a higher penalty for a harder shot? That means that if you totally goof off and miss the up close bayonet target, that's fine and ok, but if you can't hit the long range target we're gonna nail you.

I'm wondering what percentage of the competitors in the match have access to a range with more than 200 yards to even get a zero for their rifles?

[Merlin Orr]

Looks like a great match and I will be there with.....with.....velcro on BOTH sides of my shotgun..!

As much as I enjoyed pasting for my stage mates last year I am going to try and not cheerleader twirl my shotgun this year.....

[ccur]

At the USPSA 3-Gun Nationals in Reno in 2006, there was a stage where you sat on a hay bale and engaged 3 steel targets at approx 150ish with no support sitting...Some of us took the time to hit the targets and had OK times...the really hot shots figured out that the miss penalty was not great enough to bother taking all that time to hit them, so they just threw 3 really fast shots at them and...VOILA..they beat the snot out of the people that actually hit the targets! I am glad the penalty makes you really attempt to hit the targets. If the COF says 600 yds. you can bet between now and then, I will learn how to shoot at 600. AND, It is only one stage....if you boink it, you still have 8 more to shoot well on. If I can't get that range, I will ask other shooters what their hold overs are and they will share...Either way, it will be an awesome match!!

Just my $.02...

Cheryl

Edited June 11, 2008 by ccur

[bigbrowndog]

Merlin, hopefully that velcro will not be the same type used on your ammo at the CMMG match

It really makes a difference if the shots are relatively easy to make or not, some people will figure out the time it takes to make the shot versus the time for the penalty and if the difference favors the penalty then they'll take the penalty, the only way I know of effectively defeating that mindset is to make the shot relatively easy and the penalty relatively high, if it is any other way people will choose the penalty.

Trapr

[bigsaxdog]

just checked out the new scoring rules. the best method i've seen so far, easily......uspsa should adopt these rules!!! winning a stage w/ mikes should not be possible. hosing w/ edger d hits should not win stages. and i really like the long range penalties. too many 3-gun matches consist of way too many pistol range shots with rifles. don't get me wrong, i dig hoser CQB style run and gun, but balance it out, and this match has done this every time. i realize that range restraints exist for some, but ballistic problems are part of rifle shooting, so figure it out. one of the great things about this match was the sniper ranges, hope they can get it together for this year, too. this scoring thing changes the whole complexion of the match, in the correct direction. i'm all in.........

[M ammo]

just checked out the new scoring rules. the best method i've seen so far, easily......uspsa should adopt these rules!!! winning a stage w/ mikes should not be possible. hosing w/ edger d hits should not win stages. and i really like the long range penalties. too many 3-gun matches consist of way too many pistol range shots with rifles. don't get me wrong, i dig hoser CQB style run and gun, but balance it out, and this match has done this every time. i realize that range restraints exist for some, but ballistic problems are part of rifle shooting, so figure it out. one of the great things about this match was the sniper ranges, hope they can get it together for this year, too. this scoring thing changes the whole complexion of the match, in the correct direction. i'm all in.........

+++1!!!!!!!!!!!

Jim M ammo

[LChico]

"rather a reflection of the fact that it is a more difficult shot & penalties for misses should be higher than for, say, pistol targets set at bayonet range."

Am I missing something here? Why would you want to do a higher penalty for a harder shot? That means that if you totally goof off and miss the up close bayonet target, that's fine and ok, but if you can't hit the long range target we're gonna nail you.

I'm wondering what percentage of the competitors in the match have access to a range with more than 200 yards to even get a zero for their rifles?

Can't help on the practice time, but Ft Benning has always provided access to a free "Zero Range" for 2 full afternoons before the match (Thursday & Friday) where shooters are able to sight-in and zero at the distance equal to the longest shot in the match. Nearly 80% of the shooters the last two years took advantage of the "Zero" range. I don't get off the East Coast much, so I am not sure how many other major 3 Gun matches offer a similar arrangement.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

[RiggerJJ]

This scoring was used at Blue Ridge Mountain 3 Gun, with great success! It is a BIG step in the right direction!

jj

[Charles Bond]

IMO the fact that most shooters do not have a range over 200 yards means little. If all our matches are just going to be about shooting distances the average shooter can easily find a place to tune up for, our matches will get bland real soon. Besides, we have a ton of east coast shooters driving out west just because they can shoot distant targets. And before anyone asks, for me to get to shoot past 250 yards, I have to drive 2 hours or more unless I can set up an over the river and through the woods target on property where I have no guarantee that a person will not stray into my field of fire at a very bad time.

I do not like the result I see when shooters bang away quick misses at distant targets and eat the miss to gain a time advantage. Having said that I do not think the way to fix that is to award extra penalties for long range misses. It stretches the imagination to see how you can call it practical to face a larger penalty for missing from 300 yards than 3 yards. In the real "practical" world if you did not have confidence in that 300 yard shot you would wait until the target came closer or you would actively close the distance. Besides, every game I have ever played at the arcade gives you more points for putting the fose ball in the smaller hole than in the larger one.

Would it not be a better approach to award more points for longer range targets and leave the penalties the same? The match would hence become more about accuracy and less about speed. If that close one is worth only 10 points and the distant target is worh 25 points the speed guys will take the time to hit it but based on what I see at most of these matces, they are going to hit it anyway. The rest of us would then have some incentative to take the time to deliver our bullet on target.

I have a ton of confidence in the AMU and their team advancing this match above and beyond what have been wonderful successes in the past. That a certain scoring system worked well for one match of about 100 shooters does not mean it is fair or practical or should be used anywhere else. Regardless of the rules or the scoring system, this will be a match like no other.

Charles Bond

[LChico]

I have had a few shooters ask why their checks did not clear the bank. None of the checks were deposited yet.

I posted regarding the proposed rule changes on this forum nearly a month ago, while we were still working on revisions. See previous post

Several shooters took advantage of that time to post suggestions or propose changes. Some sent email messages directly to me or Aaron. All comments were considered, and the AMU & Aaron made changes on some rules (most notably the Heavy Metal rules). We have finalized the rules.

I didn't want anyone to think we had taken their money & then changed the rules. I have been holding all the checks. I sent out confirmation letters tonight to all registered shooters, except RO staff. I wanted to be sure everyone had a chance to read the rules before I send checks to be deposited, so I will continue to hold them for 2 weeks. If anyone decides they do not want to participate because of the revised rules, I will be able to return their check.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

Edited June 12, 2008 by LChico

[RiggerJJ]

Charles,

higher penalities for misses are in essence bonuses for hits on long range targets! That gives the shooter the incentive to make the effort, concentrate, read the wind and elevation and hit it, and not just make a half a$$ attempt or even worse, game it, throw one round and move on.

Relating 3gun to real life has been hashed out, it isn't even close to the same, so there is no comparison. It is a competition to see who is best at what is presented, not surviving a firefight.

The "Horner" scoring system or a derivation, will work with a match of 100, or a match of 1000, makes no difference. Its not that different from what we have been using at RM3G (and all other "outlaw" matches for the last 10+ years), and it worked well at Blue Ridge Mountain 3 gun.

Like I said in another thread, give it a chance, shoot some matches that use it, and get used to it, because it will probably be close to what other matches adopt down the road.

jj

[gose]

At the USPSA 3-Gun Nationals in Reno in 2006, there was a stage where you sat on a hay bale and engaged 3 steel targets at approx 150ish with no support sitting...Some of us took the time to hit the targets and had OK times...the really hot shots figured out that the miss penalty was not great enough to bother taking all that time to hit them, so they just threw 3 really fast shots at them and...VOILA..they beat the snot out of the people that actually hit the targets! I am glad the penalty makes you really attempt to hit the targets. If the COF says 600 yds. you can bet between now and then, I will learn how to shoot at 600. AND, It is only one stage....if you boink it, you still have 8 more to shoot well on. If I can't get that range, I will ask other shooters what their hold overs are and they will share...Either way, it will be an awesome match!!

Just my $.02...

Cheryl

From the current edition of the USPSA multi-gun rules:

Steel rifle target values may be increased 10 points for each 100 yards

of distance. I.e.,

0-99 yards value is 5 or 10 points

100-199 yards value may be increased up to 15 or 20 points

200-299 yards value may be increased up to 25 or 30 points

300-399 yards value may be increased up to 35 or 40 points

What was the value of the steel?

With the current USPSA rules, those targets could have been valued 15/20p each, resulting in -30/-40 for each miss, which probably would have been enough to "force" people to shoot them.

To me (without more background info) it sounds more like an oversight in stage design rather than broken rules. Not sure if those rules were in effect in 2006 though (I'm guessing not), but a similar situation could easily be prevented with the current USPSA rules.

In the long run I think that the proliferation of multi-gun rules will hurt us, especially since it seems like pretty much every match is moving towards having their own rules.