the new "Horner" Scoring Method

[Scout454]

I worked Blue Ridge, I worked A83Gun, I've worked and shot IMGA and Multi-Gun matches all over the country. Horner scoring takes LESS time than San Angelo. It works, it's fair and it's less confusing than San Angelo to the shooter and the RO.

[Charles Bond]

As I said before, I am shooting the match regardless of the scoring method so I can pick up another flashlight. Scoring methods? We have some with long histories and FB3G has elected to go with something pretty new to the 3G community. No doubt in my mind that Hamp and Linda and the gang are going to put on another memorable match.

[Stefan]

So much for getting out of our comfort zones when you use the same scoring method as IDPA. I can go shoot IDPA every other weekend. I can only shoot Ft. Benning once a year. Ft. Benning used to use a scoing method that I thought was different from any other match I attended. (I guess I don't get out much) It encouraged thinking into the GAME (did everybody catch that) and not just the use of skills. Hell, if you want to base a match on speed and accuracy, let's just have a biathalon.

[ccur]

Oh Denise...you do flatter me!! I am lucky when I get A's...and lucky if I beat you !! I would always rather be lucky than good!

As to the time to score the Blue Ridge Match, the scores were done as fast as any match I have been to. The scoring was easy for the competitors and RO's to do, and it made you work at really hitting your targets and not being happy with 2 "thank goodness its there in the perf of the D zone" hits.

I like the idea of some accuracy required in a match. At Johnson the penalties for not hitting the long targets were STEEP!! Everyone took enough time to really attempt to hit them...What a concept! It was a great match and that was a big part of it! As for thinking stages, FB3G seems to have lots of different ways to shoot some stages, so it is incorporated into the course design. I can't wait for the match!! No matter how it is scored, it will be a hoot!

Cheryl

Edited July 3, 2008 by ccur

[outerlimits]

still don't see the big deal here-if i have an array of 4 paper targets at cqb distances, i am not gonna take the time to squeeze perfect twin "a"'s...i'll hose them and eat the 1/2 second for each c. now, if it's that "iffy" range, say 50-100 yard paper, i would certainly slow down.

[Religious Shooter]

I guess you don't shoot much IDPA? Those 1/2 second per shot penalties can eat you alive.

[Stefan]

Let's take that 4 target CQB array and look at it a moment. Let's say you AC every target. That's 2 sec. added just from that array. Let's say I shoot that array and add .10 sec to every split and every transition and hit all A's. I would end up ahead of you by about a .25 sec. Once again, that's just one array. That's how they want to force accuracy. I have no problem with more emphasis on accuracy, but instead of a change in course design they change the rules.

But just like everybody else, I'll go and shoot the match with whatever rules they use. It's hard to pass up the chance to interact with the amazing people at Ft. Benning and the honorable members of the AMU.

[LChico]

I have no problem with more emphasis on accuracy, but instead of a change in course design they change the rules.

But just like everybody else, I'll go and shoot the match with whatever rules they use. It's hard to pass up the chance to interact with the amazing people at Ft. Benning and the honorable members of the AMU.

It's NOT about Ft Benning.

Blue Ridge was the first match to use this scoring method, but other matches are considering it. I am basing this on the email interest I am getting on the program I used to score it. R&R Racing's 3 Gun is using this system to score their match in a few weeks. 2 other large 3 Gun matches were considering using these scoring rules this year, but decided the 'old' rules had been posted for too long & it was too late to make a change.

I think you will see it at a few more places over the next 2 years.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning 3 Gun Statistician

[bigbrowndog]

Stefan, if you were shooting HM you would probably slow down and shoot one "a" so you could save on a reload down the stage somewhere. As Linda stated its not a Ft Benning thing, my initial concern for all divisions was that we were being held to firing 2 shots for each target, when in the past we could go for accuracy and fire only one "a", if we decided that was how we wanted to shoot the course of fire. However, even in USPSA you still have to fire 2 rounds and get hits at each target in order to not receive penalties. Personally I like what FB has done to accomodate HM shooters, given the limited round capacity and the fact that HM shooters routinely go for an "a" on a target (opt for accuracy)to save on a reload down the stage. I still wish that it could be done similiarly with all divisions, but that is thier decision and not mine.

I feel there will be more gaming or factoring of stages this year, by shooters to see if giving a few seconds here or there will be worth it, it will be interesting to see how it turns out.

Trapr

[outerlimits]

Let's take that 4 target CQB array and look at it a moment. Let's say you AC every target. That's 2 sec. added just from that array. Let's say I shoot that array and add .10 sec to every split and every transition and hit all A's. I would end up ahead of you by about a .25 sec. Once again, that's just one array. That's how they want to force accuracy. I have no problem with more emphasis on accuracy, but instead of a change in course design they change the rules.

But just like everybody else, I'll go and shoot the match with whatever rules they use. It's hard to pass up the chance to interact with the amazing people at Ft. Benning and the honorable members of the AMU.

.1 per split is absurd...more like .3-.5 per...trust me, cqb still gets hosed-it;s the intermediate ones that we will slow down on.

[P.E. Kelley]

Stefan, if you were shooting HM you would probably slow down and shoot one "a" so you could save on a reload down the stage somewhere. As Linda stated its not a Ft Benning thing, my initial concern for all divisions was that we were being held to firing 2 shots for each target, when in the past we could go for accuracy and fire only one "a", if we decided that was how we wanted to shoot the course of fire. However, even in USPSA you still have to fire 2 rounds and get hits at each target in order to not receive penalties. Personally I like what FB has done to accomodate HM shooters, given the limited round capacity and the fact that HM shooters routinely go for an "a" on a target (opt for accuracy)to save on a reload down the stage. I still wish that it could be done similiarly with all divisions, but that is thier decision and not mine.

I feel there will be more gaming or factoring of stages this year, by shooters to see if giving a few seconds here or there will be worth it, it will be interesting to see how it turns out.

Trapr

Trapr,

Is this HM scoring using the Horner method in use at other matches than the FB match?

It is the the only thing I don't like about the "standard" Horner method; two shots on all paper no matter what.

At many matches we HM'ers shoot within Limited division and not being able to manage ammo by shooting one A makes it more of

an uphill battle against the Limited shooter's improved firepower.

I am glad that the crew at FB modified the scoring.

Patrick

[Stefan]

You must have missed the part where I said "ADD" as in "addition to" your raw time and hitting all A's meaning 2A's per target. But it doesn't matter. You just go ahead and shoot the way you want. Please feel free to leave as many C zone hits as you like.

Trapr, I see less gaming happening. Once shooters see how much time they will be loosing by giving up the same amount of points they would in a typical USPSA stage, you will see the true competitors trying to shoot perfect stages.

As far as relating these rules to Benning, this is about the only outlaw 3-gun match I shoot. It's close and I can afford to go. You won't find me at R&R. You won't find me at RM. You won't find me at SSM or DPMS. It's just not in the budget. I hope that addresses that issue.

[persona non grata]

Somebody on the first page wrote about shooting paper at 100 yards. UGGG! I guess it all depends on how the stage is set up, but that's got to be a long day to walk out score and tape those targets. That would really slow things down I would think. I'd much rather see steel starting at 100 yards, or maybe even 75

I like the idea of time plus scoring. It's a lot like golf then. The guy or gal with the lowest score (time) wins. Anybody here ever see the TSA (tactical shooting association) target and scoring system? Somehow they figure in major and minor PF on the scoring of each target. I'm not for sure how it works. I have never shot it.

[bigbrowndog]

Pat, as far as I know FB is the only group using modified scoring for HM. Again, I am glad to see they considered us 5%ers,

Trapr

[J-Ho]

I guess you don't shoot much IDPA? Those 1/2 second per shot penalties can eat you alive.

Oh hell, I'm agreeing with you for once. !/2 penalties are bad, but there are worse. A local 3 gun match I shoot regularly uses an IDPA scoring, but a full second per point down. Throwing a couple of C's can ruin a stage.

[Charles Bond]

Somebody on the first page wrote about shooting paper at 100 yards. UGGG! I guess it all depends on how the stage is set up, but that's got to be a long day to walk out score and tape those targets. That would really slow things down I would think. I'd much rather see steel starting at 100 yards, or maybe even 75

No offense but you must not have had the pleasure of shooting the FB3G. They always have plenty of help who will RUN to the 100 yard target, score it and run back without being out of breath and do it all day long. This they do faster than you or I could crawl on a 4 wheeler and even get it started. Such is the fitness level of Army Strong. Such is the effort extended into this match by the members of the Ft Benning community.

[SGDM]

Chuck,

I will have you know that most of the volunteer RO's at Ft. Benning are busted up 'ol Vets like me.

Running is an emergency procedure!

[Charles Bond]

Chuck,

I will have you know that most of the volunteer RO's at Ft. Benning are busted up 'ol Vets like me.

Running is an emergency procedure!

Last time I was there, they had "specialists" running everywhere. Of course there is going to be a need for the experienced hands such as yourself but if I recall correctly, you had plently of younger, fit, less busted up help on your stage.