Big Match prizes

[JKSNIPER]

THe raffle benefited everyone in that the lowliest competitor went there and may shot dismally but had an equal chance to win a big prize as the best shooter there did.

It’s statements like this that make General George S. Patton roll over in his grave.

Edited to add: Systems like this don't really benefit everyone, they rip off the guys that should have won. The lowliest competitor that shoots dismally does not deserve the big prize, he deserves to go home, pay his dues and practice.

Badchad,

I think you missed the main point of my posting.

"A US Army SF guy won a Nesika Bay action this way. He sold it at a BIG discount to a shooter there who then used it to build his rilfe and went on to compete and DOMINATE the L.E. sniper competitions for years and is still out there shooting in competitions."

If J.P. had not WON the action in the raffle B.A. would not have been able to purchase it at the greatly discounted price J.P. sold it to him for and B.A. would probably not have won the matches he did with that rifle because he would not have HAD the nice rifle.

I agree that the time and effort of the top competitiors (one of whom is our host here) should be rewarded.

I guess I should have clarified a little more.

The New England Sniper Summit (at the time this happened) was a relatively small match and was and still is open only to L.E. and military snipers and only a very small select group of civilians who are asked to participate based on thier dedication to advancing/supporting L.E. and military snipers.

There were not a whole lot of stuff on the table then to give out as prizes.

So Ed thought it would be good to award the accomplishment of being top 5 teams and top 5 shooters with the appropriate trophies.

Very nice trophies by the way which the top team has to agree to bring back to the event the next year and defend their title. Its like a Stanley cup type trophy with the names of the winners engraved on it.

IMHO the real trophy is the cup you win there and the real win is the respect and admiration of your peers who recognize you are the top gun there.

I'm not saying that other matches do it wrong bro.

The prize you take away for being top gun at another match can also be nice and if its a weapon can become a family heirloom passed down from father (or mom) to sons and daughters along with tales of Dad/Mom's big win at the match.

IMHO the respect of my peers, their admiration and recognition of my skill, and the dam fun of it and love of this sport, is what I compete for.

I'll probably never be seen up there taking a $10,000 check for winning the "Big One" but to me and IMHO the big check is not the point of us all doing this.

If winning large sums of money is the motivation then I respectfully suggest that the guys/gals with that motivation are in the wrong sport and should instead be on the driving range instead of the rifle/pistol range.

Sorry for the length of this......this is what happens when you're back is fudged up and you can't sleep at 1 AM.

The guy who is already at the top of the game hardly NEEDS the nice weapon or whatever.

I'd bet that in all the matches I have fired in over 90% of the time hes already got it and probably used it to win the match.

Now the lowly dismal performer could probably benefit more from that equipment upgrade as well as the morale boost he'll get when he walks away from the match with something nice.

You go to your first few matches ..driving a distance, (gas today ...wheeew!) maybe having hotel expenses, meals, etc....and then maybe not shoot so well. You go home and the wife or husband gives you grief over the money you spent and time you "wasted" on this.

You can hold up the nice thing and say yeah but I won this (whatever) there and I had a good time.

The sport benefits from the new guy getting a prize. It encourages him to return. Also it encourages his/her friends, who maybe stay away because they're worried about being embarassed by not doing well, to go to the next match and try their luck.

The sport grows.

Sorry guys for rambling and the length of this posting.

I'm NOT saying one way is good and the other is bad.

Just throwing some stuff out there to think about.

JK

PS Pic is of Ed Gross awarding the top shooter trophy at the (Re-named) 2007 North American Police Sniper Summit

Any L.E./Military guys out there go to WWW.CROSSHAIRS.ORG for info about the 2008 Summit which will be held at the Harvard Sportsmans Club in Harvard Mass Oct 19-21 2008

Anyone here interested in sponsoring the event should visit the site and give either me or Ed Gross a call/e-mail.

Cell-631-252-5056

[gose]

Look at the GSSF matches... I've lost count on how many times I've heard "I know I'm not going to win, but it's a fun match and they have a good raffle".

I've also heard from people about other matches "Nah, it's too expensive and since I'm not going to win anything, I don't feel like sponsoring the top shooters again"

However, I don't agree that having a raffle for all prizes is a good great idea either, a healthy mix is what looks appealing to me, ie, give the majority of the prizes to the shooters in order of finish but still raffle a few really good ones.

Yes, a top shooter might get "upset" if someone who scored worse than him wins a better prize in the raffle, but if that brings more people to the matches and into the shooting sport, maybe that person can realize it's for the continuous growth of the sport (and besides, the top shooters could then win two good prizes)?

To me, growing the sport and having fun have always been more important than winning stuff, but it feels like I'm in a minority here in this thread.

[Charles Bond]

Look at the GSSF matches... I've lost count on how many times I've heard "I know I'm not going to win, but it's a fun match and they have a good raffle".

I've also heard from people about other matches "Nah, it's too expensive and since I'm not going to win anything, I don't feel like sponsoring the top shooters again"

However, I don't agree that having a raffle for all prizes is a good great idea either, a healthy mix is what looks appealing to me, ie, give the majority of the prizes to the shooters in order of finish but still raffle a few really good ones.

Yes, a top shooter might get "upset" if someone who scored worse than him wins a better prize in the raffle, but if that brings more people to the matches and into the shooting sport, maybe that person can realize it's for the continuous growth of the sport (and besides, the top shooters could then win two good prizes)?

To me, growing the sport and having fun have always been more important than winning stuff, but it feels like I'm in a minority here in this thread.

While you might in fact be the minority on this thread, I do not suspect you are in any way in the minority among those who desire to grow our sport. Your observations about GSSF matches are good ones and I agree that shooters attend these matches for the raffles, ROs work these matches for the raffles, and the matches continue to draw record numbers of the truly new shooters.

USPSA gets some of those shooters but only a small percentage since the truly new shooter has little reason to desire to shoot a USPSA match except for the sheer thirll of it. What I am saying is that if we drew for prizes like at GSSF matches, we could attract more shooters, attract more truly new shootes, and retain more shooters. Would this be a disincentative to the big dogs? A rising tide raises all boats and more shooters mean more matches, lower fees, and more prizes for each and every member.

[benny hill]

It is a little disapointing to work every week at shooting hard for 15 yrs & a guy who shoots only now & then that is beat by you get the lion's share of the prize table. By order of finish you are rewarding thoes who work harder. I would shoot w/o a prize table as I love this game. Just my 2 cents worth.

[AikiDale]

It is a little disappointing to work every week at shooting hard for 15 yrs & a guy who shoots only now & then that is beat by you get the lion's share of the prize table. By order of finish you are rewarding those who work harder. I would shoot w/o a prize table as I love this game. Just my 2 cents worth.

I'm with Benny !

[ima45dv8]

Regardless of the discipline (handgun, 3G or whatever) I go to compete, socialize with my old friends and make new ones. Trophy-only matches with lower match fees are cool by me. If nice toys are made available by our generous sponsors, I'd prefer to see a few high-end goodies presented to the division winners to reward their hard work and dedication (they earned it) and the rest used for an RO drawing (they earn that).

If there's something I need badly enough I'll save my money and buy it, hopefully before the event as part of my prep and not wait to hope it's on a prize table after the fact.

[Jack T]

My 2 cents. I would wager if you made, for example, the Fort Benning Match a "Trophy" match only, you would still have a waiting list. Probably at least 90% of the shooters who go there know they are not in the running for the big prizes. They go for the love of the sport, socializing, and such. The quality/prestige of the match will bring in the shooters. The days of the big prize tables was back in the late 80's, early 90's, especially when Dillon used to be involved, those days are gone.

It is also getting to the point we need to go to a PRO/AM concept like Phil is doing out at USSA. Or, pay a large entry fee into the kitty and the winner take all out of each division. Leave the prizes for the amatures.

For anyone who would not go to a match unless it had a big prize table, that's pretty shallow and you probably won't be missed anyway so it ain't no big deal.

Does anyone know if there is an archive of the SOF results?

[kurtm]

Said it before and will say it again, since the matches we are talking about are capped at X number of participants and are filled to capacity and then some, how will any prize table structure make them grow? Club level matches that are close to home are what grow our sport. Not the 5 or 6 big matches with prize tables. In the 15 years I have been shooting 3-gun matches with a prize table I have only run into 3 or 4 people who shot their very first 3-gun at a major match.

Some random thoughts:

If we award the big prizes from the last shooter twards the top, won't we see a lot of "sandbagging". At what point do you say no "your too good" for this prize, and as the shooter gets better what does he have to look forward to? Middle of the pack won't get much AND he won't get the recognision for being a top shooter, because he isn't.

Random draw might as well be handled by sending you your prize when everyone has signed up, before the shooting starts, that way the guy who won, by hard work, won't feel slighted by only getting a small bottle of oil and a 5 pack of bullets, while the last place guy gets a nice new rifle...or the other way around as it is RANDOM. Send everyone a picture of the stuff all laid out so they can see how good the sponsors are and that way no-one has to feel like they didn't get a fair shake.

I have learned that "top shooters don't need anything" because through hard work and dedication to excellence they have put in the time and money to aquier good gear and skill to use it well.

Bruce, I have finally figured out the way to put bullets into a magazine so that they go into the round thingy with the swirly stuff inside, but how do you keep from getting cut by that weird sharp thingy on the front of the gun. Mine has a "safety glow thingy" on it to warn me not to get my hand near it, but it still gets me every now and then. Oh well I am triing, but this shooting thing is much harder than the reloading thing!

Lastly, anyone that makes more money than I do (which is real easy) should pay a lot more in taxes just to make it all even....it is your patriotic duty! KurtM

[JoshF]

It is a little disapointing to work every week at shooting hard for 15 yrs & a guy who shoots only now & then that is beat by you get the lion's share of the prize table. By order of finish you are rewarding thoes who work harder. I would shoot w/o a prize table as I love this game. Just my 2 cents worth.

I agree with Benny as well. The guys who are winning are there for a reason. They've put in the work! These are competitive matches after all and not a Casino. Do I like a random drawing, sure for small items but for sure don't give away the big ticket items based on blind luck. Granted I too would shoot just for the competition but guns, frames, etc are great when you win.

I've shot at a match and watched a guy who didn't even end up shooting win the prize table pistol (via drawing) just cause he was signed up. I won HOA at that match and walked away with a plaque and a small bottle of oil. Was I happy I shot well, hell yes, but that "raffle" didn't do anything for the sport.

[Jack T]

It is a little disapointing to work every week at shooting hard for 15 yrs & a guy who shoots only now & then that is beat by you get the lion's share of the prize table. By order of finish you are rewarding thoes who work harder. I would shoot w/o a prize table as I love this game. Just my 2 cents worth.

Maybe you aren't practicing right? Just kidding!!!

[JKSNIPER]

I think this whole fixation with prizes is pretty disturbing and fudged up.

I have only seen this once before from a fellow competitor at a match.

When it became apparent he would not take 1st place.... once the match was officially over he blew out of the area before even saying goodbye to any of his fellow competitors.

Probably more importantly to him was it was BEFORE the match director announced that the prizes would be awarded by raffle and everyone had an equal chance of walking away with nice stuff.

Would he have won something like the spotting scopes or rifle scopes or even the Nesika Bay action I mentioned earlier?

Who knows.

By his demeanor and temper tantrum he gained a reputation among those there of a whining crying (insert a VERY bad word here).

He has since shown he is a better person than the behavior he displayed that day but it took years of competing to show he was more than his winning/prize fixation.

Fello w competitors were shocked by his behavior that day.

I have never seen that sort of behavior before at a match and I hope to never see it again.

It was disgusting.

Is this sport going to go the way of others before it and become a reflection of the worst qualities present in people?

The "Whats in it for ME " syndrome?

If money and egos start to rule this organization they will ruin this organization as they have ruined many great organizations before it.

I see postings here all the time from guys and gals proud of gaining another step towards their master class or placing well in a match or just improving something and I read those because I think thats great.

THey accomplished something and want to share it with their peers.

They want our approval and pat on the back, the "way to go" and "Good job!" they have earned.

Its what I love about the shooting sports. The peer support.

The help guys and gals will give here to anyone asking for it.

Its amazing time and again the gentlemanly and ladylike behavior I have seen on the range time and time again that a guy/gal will help out a fellow competitor even if that person may wind up beating them.

Loaning equipment, ammo, and giving advice even if it means helping the person that may beat you.

True gentlemen and ladies.

I have benefited from it and have given it when the oppurtunity has presented itself.

Are we now going to focus only on the "prize" we might win and become the type of sportsmen that IMHO are despicable human beings?

Only focused on winning? "Screw everyone else..."I don't have time for you I'm too busy winning"

The guys/gals that post about their accomplishments.......

Are they less because they were not given a prize or monetary award to go with their accomplishment?

Is their accomplishment less because they did not receive a new house, car, boat, plane, because of it?

Is their accomplishment less because at the match where they made their next step up their ladder of improvement a lesser competitor won a nicer prize in a raffle?

Are we becoming a community that values the prize table over the match itself?

SO if theres not sufficient prizes on the table or prizes of what you would deem to be sufficient value do you decide not to go to the match?

Following that logic I guess we should ONLY award prizes to the very top shooter then.

Give the 1st place winner everything.

Since he/she is the winner he/she must have put in more "work" to get to the top and therefore that person is "entitled" to get awarded ALL the prizes on the table.

(By the way if you consider the practice and range time to be "work" and not fun then I humbly suggest that you need to flush out your headgear. If the thing a person does in their spare time is considered "work" then maybe that person should spend more time at their job and earn money for their "work" I'd rather have fun in my spare time but thats just me)

If you went to a match and did not win 1st place do you think you should then get nothing?

Where should the cut off be?

4th place?

5th place?

How about we do this:

Go to a match not expecting anything other than the chance to show your improvements and skill level to our peers.

Socialize with like minded and like hearted men and women and have fun.

And THEN if we win something its icing on the cake.

JK

[kurtm]

This isn't about "fixation on prizes" it is about how to fairly distribute the prizes that are already there, and we are only talking about matches with prize tables ( note: there aren't that many! ). EVERYONE that is posting here shoots far more Non table matches per year than "table matches".If you watch or enjoy ANY kind of sports on TV or in person you are supporting the exact system you are decriing here.

BTW If I won EVERY 3-Gun match in America, and that was my only source of income, I would have to live under a bridge abuttment with my 3 guns and beg for food. We are not talking LARGE sums here which tend to bring out the behavior you indicate. If we don't reward excellence with what we have, we are dooming our sport to hobby status! IMO. KurtM

[badchad]

Badchad,

I think you missed the main point of my posting.

"A US Army SF guy won a Nesika Bay action this way. He sold it at a BIG discount to a shooter there who then used it to build his rilfe and went on to compete and DOMINATE the L.E. sniper competitions for years and is still out there shooting in competitions."

If J.P. had not WON the action in the raffle B.A. would not have been able to purchase it at the greatly discounted price J.P. sold it to him for and B.A. would probably not have won the matches he did with that rifle because he would not have HAD the nice rifle.

This is all well and good and I’m happy for your friend, but this is just a relatively rare example that turned out well, but things could have easily turned out just as well if the winner of the match won the action and sold it to your friend for a cheap price. However, even though your example turned out well for the two involved, I still think the guy who did win the match got short changed.

I agree that the time and effort of the top competitiors (one of whom is our host here) should be rewarded.

This I agree with but you are promoting the opposite. I think the “from each according to his means to each according to their needs” is too Karl Marx for me and is rewarding the wrong things. If it grows the sport, that’s great for “product sellers” but is a rip for competitors, and the competitor is what a sport should be about IMO. Again I’ll state that I think the claim that raffles grow the sport, in comparison to rewarding winners, is dubious and probably mistaken. Every other sport I can think of rewards the winners, and a lot of those sports attract A LOT more participants than ours.

I guess I should have clarified a little more.

The New England Sniper Summit (at the time this happened) was a relatively small match and was and still is open only to L.E. and military snipers and only a very small select group of civilians who are asked to participate based on thier dedication to advancing/supporting L.E. and military snipers.

There were not a whole lot of stuff on the table then to give out as prizes.

So Ed thought it would be good to award the accomplishment of being top 5 teams and top 5 shooters with the appropriate trophies.

Very nice trophies by the way which the top team has to agree to bring back to the event the next year and defend their title. Its like a Stanley cup type trophy with the names of the winners engraved on it.

IMHO the real trophy is the cup you win there and the real win is the respect and admiration of your peers who recognize you are the top gun there.

I agree trophies are cool, but if there are other tangible awards, they should for the most part go to the winners as well, in as fair a manner as possible based on performance. If you want more people to win something then have some smaller prizes for those who one less, based on performance.

I'm not saying that other matches do it wrong bro.

I think that’s the gist of this thread, nobody thinks awarding the winners is fundamentally wrong, but quite a few think that awarding losers at the expense of winners is wrong. Award the winners in a match and it looks like everyone is reasonably happy. Award high dollar prizes based on a raffle and some will be happy and a lot of people end up deeply offended. Given the two choices, if I were a match director I know what system I would choose.

The prize you take away for being top gun at another match can also be nice and if its a weapon can become a family heirloom passed down from father (or mom) to sons and daughters along with tales of Dad/Mom's big win at the match.

I totally agree with you hear. But what do you want your son/grandson/nephew’s story to be when he tells others about the rifle you gave him?

“See this gun, my granddad gave it to me after he won it in a big shooting tournament.” “Really, that’s cool, he must have been a great shooter?” “Well, not really, my granddad said he finished next to last in the event, but he had the most raffle tickets so he won the gun?”

I don’t think the heirloom will be nearly so treasured in such a circumstance.

If winning large sums of money is the motivation then I respectfully suggest that the guys/gals with that motivation are in the wrong sport and should instead be on the driving range instead of the rifle/pistol range.

The best athletes in any sport usually love the sport and the financial rewards are just icing on the cake, sometimes its just whole lot of icing. I don’t think top shooters are any more noble in this regard, but they certainly aren’t less noble, and less deserving of top rewards.

[badchad]

And the rest of my response:

The guy who is already at the top of the game hardly NEEDS the nice weapon or whatever.

As I said earlier, it’s not about what the competitor NEEDS. It’s about what he WANTS, what he EARNS, and what he WINS. What you’re promoting here is the sporting equivalent of socialism and while to some it sounds nice on paper, in reality goes against human nature, and certainly goes against the nature of a competitive sport.

I'd bet that in all the matches I have fired in over 90% of the time hes already got it and probably used it to win the match.

Well I just ordered a JP-15. I think it might be pretty cool to win a CTR in a match. I shoot a Glock in pistol shooting, and while I might like to play around with a single stack, I decided I won’t unless I win one. That’s just one of many ways I self motivate myself to practice.

Now the lowly dismal performer could probably benefit more from that equipment upgrade as well as the morale boost he'll get when he walks away from the match with something nice.

The lowly dismal performer would certainly benefit more from hard work and practice than a shiny gun. If a better gun is necessary to win, then he should work hard in his occupation, sacrifice some beer money, save up and buy one. I’m pretty sure that’s how most winners did it. If you and others think a particular shooter is really needy and deserving then you should just donate your own money and buy him a gun directly rather robbing the winners of their spoils in the off chance the needy guy might get something useful.

You go to your first few matches ..driving a distance, (gas today ...wheeew!) maybe having hotel expenses, meals, etc....and then maybe not shoot so well. You go home and the wife or husband gives you grief over the money you spent and time you "wasted" on this.

You can hold up the nice thing and say yeah but I won this (whatever) there and I had a good time.

Winners generally sacrifice a lot more to get where they are. The random drawing spits on their greater sacrifice and rewards those who were watching TV while the winners were doing all you describe above plus a whole lot more.

The sport benefits from the new guy getting a prize. It encourages him to return.

The class system already gives new guys a chance to win something and still drives them on to increasing performance. Random drawings do only the former and not the latter.

Also it encourages his/her friends, who maybe stay away because they're worried about being embarassed by not doing well, to go to the next match and try their luck.

Competitions are about promoting excellence not trying your luck. Slot machines are for the latter.

The sport grows.

Ever so slowly.

I'm NOT saying one way is good and the other is bad.

I’m am saying one way is good, the other is bad. Until this thread I hadn’t put a lot of thought into it, but now I’ll be sure to check ahead how the prize table is handled at a match, and it will be a factor that helps me decide whether I want to enter it or not. Philosophically speaking rewarding LOSERS at the expense of WINNERS at a COMPETITION makes me want to throw up.

[Merlin Orr]

The decision regarding prize distribution should be the sole responsibility of the match organizers. The manner chosen should be clearly posted on the match application and then adhered to without any modification.

If the manner of distribution does not suit your idea of what "should be" you can pass on the match.

It's that simple. Quit your bitching and shut up and shoot....or not.

[latewatch]

HHMMMM........

Have the few Big Name Shooters sacrifice for the betterment of the masses of Less Accomplished Shooters so everyone gets an even chance at a slice of the pie..........

Sounds an awful lot like something the government might come up with

Edited September 19, 2008 by latewatch
political content removed

[TRUBL]

The decision regarding prize distribution should be the sole responsibility of the match organizers. The manner chosen should be clearly posted on the match application and then adhered to without any modification.

If the manner of distribution does not suit your idea of what "should be" you can pass on the match.

It's that simple. Quit your bitching and shut up and shoot....or not.

I see a political future for this guy

[badchad]

If money and egos start to rule this organization they will ruin this organization as they have ruined many great organizations before it.

How do you define ruined?

Only focused on winning?

Like it or not, that’s what most winners do. The more completive the arena, the more it becomes necessary. Ask Michael Phelps his opinion.

(By the way if you consider the practice and range time to be "work" and not fun then I humbly suggest that you need to flush out your headgear. If the thing a person does in their spare time is considered "work" then maybe that person should spend more time at their job and earn money for their "work" I'd rather have fun in my spare time but thats just me)

That’s your personal value judgment and that’s fine. Me I’m new to shooting sports but not sports in general and I pretty much live for competition. I love winning and I hate losing. Yesterday I woke up early did a run and then dryfired for 2 hours, I did another hour dryfire when I got off work, before going to a local match (my fourth match this week.) After the match I did another hour of dryfire before going to bed at 12:30. After 6 hours of sleep I started over again this morning. I’m not sure if I’d call the practice work, but it wasn’t fun either. That’s my value judgment. Now when the bigger competitions come around, I’m a lot less likely to sign up for one that thinks my hard work isn’t worth more than the guy who sat on the couch last night drinking beer and watching the game.

If you went to a match and did not win 1st place do you think you should then get nothing?

Where should the cut off be?

4th place?

5th place?

I don’t have much of an opinion here, the cut off is somewhat arbitrary. I just think that the higher place finisher should get the better rewards. That’s the nature of sport and competition. Giving away awards based on paid entry with a random drawing. That’s just gambling.

[badchad]

HHMMMM........

Have the few Big Name Shooters sacrifice for the betterment of the masses of Less Accomplished Shooters so everyone gets an even chance at a slice of the pie..........

Heck, even the communist block countries knew to reward athletic excellence.

Edited September 19, 2008 by ima45dv8
political content removed

[kurtm]

Where did BadChad's last post get off to?? That was some funny sh*t right there!!

AHHH......It,s BAAACK! see above ^ (edited because the other post was edited and then brought back...as all classics should be!)

Edited September 19, 2008 by kurtm

[buzzworm]

I think this whole fixation with prizes is pretty disturbing and fudged up.

How about we do this:

Go to a match not expecting anything other than the chance to show your improvements and skill level to our peers.

Socialize with like minded and like hearted men and women and have fun.

And THEN if we win something its icing on the cake.

JK

I wonder what would happen if we took this approach to NASCAR or the NFL. The guy that wins gets the trophy, but the water boy or the driver that hit turn three in the first lap gets all the prizes and big $$$$ because he had the winning ticket.

"badchad" for president!

[scottmilk9]

Well, why don't we make a professional shooting association and see what happens when your income is based on performance. Entry fees will rise too to cover fees for officials and scorekeepers and the waterboys who do a damn fine job bringing new targets and water to everyone.

Kelly, Kurt and others have all brought up good points. The other point being made is, this is just a hobby for 99% of us.

3 or more years ago, I would have said random prize drawing because of my skill, not that its at a top 10 skill set yet, but if you have 5 divisions and your tac scope is 60% of the entire match, i agree that 60% of the guns should be on that prize table, if, iron sights, which i love shooting, is only 10% of the match, well then 10% of the guns go there, but after all the firearms are gone, it still should be a balanced prize table.

Its all opinion and each of us have one, but lets keep shooting because we love the sport

[mike.45]

I shoot for DSA and JP

.....I thought you shot for CEEZEEE ?? GAMER !!!!

There are a lot of top named people posting here and what they say is the same, and I have to agree ! You won the 400m Hurdles at the 2008 Olympics but sadly you came 8th in the lucky draw, the guy from the Ukraine who sprained his ankle after 300 yards came 1st in the raffle so he gets the Gold medal, but bless him he did try hard.......

I come to the US twice a year to shoot 3 gun and come because I know I will be competing against the best. My motivation is to try and come top 20 in TO class and so I train hard and practice as best as I can and try and compete to the best of my ability, the icing on the cake is doing well, beating Kelly and Ty, and getting a nice prize. By dedicating my life to try and shoot well and coming 10th and then get a $20 voucher, (with thanks to our great sponsors), but the guy who came 157th walks away with a pistol just aint right !!

You have to reward excellence, and it needs to be fair.

[Brian Payne]

Prizes awarded by division placing.

Seperate prize tables for all divisions.

If you want less prize tables, have less divisions.

[badchad]

As for the prize tables between divisions with more or less contestants. How about setting the top performance at 100% and percents of the top in each division (time based, USPSA, whatever) determining the order one goes to a single prize table?

That way the top guy in each division gets maximally recognized, so guys like Kurt won’t ever go to the table after a guy in Tac Scope that they beat both in placings and in absolute score, and a guy who shoots only 40% of the winner of his division, but got a high placing because there are few shooters in his division, wouldn’t get to the table ahead of guys who shot better than him but placed lower due to the number of entrants. It would also put tactical and open sight divisions on equal footing with the open shooters.

The only downside I can see would be if a really crappy shooter was the only one in a recognized division, giving him an early trip to the prize table. However, I have to think that would maybe happen once before it would self correct itself. You would still have to figure out which division winner goes to the table first but there are enough top rewards to cover the division winners everything else would sort itself out.

Something like, or exactly like, what StealthyBlagga said in post #2.