HHF and the Classification System

[Chills1994]

ed henry, our OP wrote to kick this whole thread off:

I think if you look at the results from the US nationals you will see that there are really only very few people that can shoot a 95% in large scale competition.

Most of the GM's out there are very good but not necessarily at the very top. Most sports have a pyramid shaped result structure. There are only a very few at the top.

ed

The problem with looking at percentages is that it is relative.

One small little bobble on a stage could put a GM or an M totally out of the running for the division champ.

I can't quite put it succinctly enough into words, but it's like either an exponetial or geometric progression with percentages when things are running that tightly.

It doesn't appear to be a linear relationship.

One of these days, when I am really bored, I will have to sit down with a calculator and figure the cumulative hit factors for say like the top 5 or maybe even the top ten at either Limited or Open Nat's, from the performance summaries listed at USPSA.org

I'm guessing that the differences in total HF are NOT going to be as great as the match percentages make you think.

Pardon my previous thread drift.

I will keep going to well run/honest matches with or without a classification system even if I had the notion I wouldn't win a trip to the prize table.

Why?

Because it's fun.

Where I place, I think, is a better barometer of where I fit in the grand scheme of things than whatever letter is after my name.

I enjoy the cameraderie of it.

I can walk away from the match, "after action report-wise" with things I need to work on, things I might not have encountered at the local club match level.

[Coolduckboy]

I think they should use Level 2-3 match scores (not classifiers) as a classification score, If, there are 5 or more competitors ABOVE your classification (not just GMs). I don't really like the classification system we have now. We should still carry the classifiers but i believe if they are with +/- 15% of your average score they should be counted and your classification should go up or down depending on how well you are doing, This would mean that you will have to shoot more consistantly than just, All or nothing type thing.

[Singlestack]

If there is such a thing as "sandbaggers", allowing someone's classification to go backwards would bring them out in droves.

[Ron Ankeny]

...allowing someone's classification to go backwards would bring them out in droves

I went from GM to M and then to A. I found it harder to go the other direction.

[sslav]

If the USPSA were to do away with the classification system, only those who want to rank themselves against the best in the sport will participate and shoot the matches that the best participate in.

And is that good or bad for the growth of the sport?

So get rid of classifications at the majors. This will cure the "sandbagger syndrome". They won't show up. And many others for that matter.

And is that good or bad for the growth of the sport?

And my pet peeve.. the infamous raffle for the gun. Let the ones that do the work reap the spoils.

What do you think will happen to "spoils" when matches start drawing a lot less people? Do you think there will be more sponsors donating more prizes or fewer sponsors donating fewer prizes.

Just my $.02

[Jim Norman]

My thoughts, or at least a few of them.

THe classifier systems is a good thing in that it allows local people to compare themselves to other local people even if they are not shooting all the time at the same clubs. It allows the people at a club to see that hte guy they don't know is a new D or an older A and have a level of confidence in how they will comport themselves at your match. It keeps the people that support the sport coming out to support it. (Think about drag racing, if they only paid top down with no divisions, only top fuel would bother to show and 99.9% of the people involved would go home, quickly followed by the last 0.01% as there would be no one there to support the sport. Same applies here)

If you want to see how well you do against the best, then go to Section, State Area and Nationals. There you basically got a slightly modified top-down pay-out. A few division and categories, but essentially order of finish. Local matches, the race for high C can far exceed the excitement of who wins high in the division.

Jim

[Chills1994]

Jim Norman wrote:

THe classifier systems is a good thing in that it allows local people to compare themselves to other local people even if they are not shooting all the time at the same clubs.

Maybe it's just me, but I have never really seen the need to compare myself against another person, and if there are people out there who compare themselves against little ol' me, the B/C class shooter that I am, then I don't get that either.

It allows the people at a club to see that hte guy they don't know is a new D or an older A and have a level of confidence in how they will comport themselves at your match.

I think looking at their USPSA member number is a better indication of if the next shooter I'm gonna RO is a complete newb who I have to worry about sweeping the peanut gallery or if it's some guy who is gonna go popper activator, static paper BANG! BANG! then drop turner.

It keeps the people that support the sport coming out to support it. (Think about drag racing, if they only paid top down with no divisions, only top fuel would bother to show and 99.9% of the people involved would go home, quickly followed by the last 0.01% as there would be no one there to support the sport. Same applies here)

Comparing USPSA to any other sport or competition is just... well... it's always gonna be apples to cantaloupes... watermelons to kiwi's...

USPSA is the local level. It's the grass roots, the life blood of the organization. If all of sudden... POOF! there couldn't be any more local club matches, who would go to the sectionals, areas and the nat's?

If POOF!, there were no more nat's, areas, and/or sections, methinks USPSA would do just fine and keep on chugging on at the local level.

I've said it again and I've said it before, I'll go to matches with or without a classification system... for the reasons I listed above (fun, cameraderie, test my skills, a better barometer of how I stack up against other shooters overall regardless of class).

I've commented before how I think that the division winners should get a trip to the prize table and then after that it's strictly at random. That's made some people very mad at me. Their argument is that we shouldn't reward mediocrity.

Well, what the heck is USPSA doing giving out a trophy to first place C or D, and a trip to the prize table?

The classification system insulates or shields people ('s egos?).

Local matches, the race for high C can far exceed the excitement of who wins high in the division.

Regardless of what division or class I am in, I always look at the combined results. I used to be real anal about charting my progress and I used to actually print out the combined results, three hole punch it, and then stick it in a binder.

Ya know what... life's too short...

As other evidence of how the classification system falls short of measuring what it is supposed to measure (aka an invalid metric), I present to you all the 2008 Single Stack Nat's results.

Yeah, I shot in C class.

The highest or first place C class shooter placed 30th overall out of 267 shooters.

The lowest or last place C class shooter tied for 267... out of 267 shooters.

The next C class shooter above him was 256th.

Now...really does it sound like the classification system groups shooters of similar skill levels together.

Nah.... me neither.

When people ask me how I did at Single Stack Nat's, I tell them that I finished one hundred something out of 267 shooters.

I would NOT even have a clue if I was the 20th or the 120th C class shooter.

Oh, one last thing, I hate to bring IDPA into this, but... yeah, they do have a classification system, but NO prize table. They have a raffle table, maybe.

What brings shooters to these major IDPA matches then you ask??

A well run, honest match, with interesting props and/or scenarios is what brings competitors to major IDPA matches.

Heck, there is no telling what's gonna be on the raffle table.... at most you could be guaranteed of walking away with a 15 dollar trophy (and contigency money if you shoot an STI and yet people still flock to the same matches year after year.

There's something that could be learned from that, I think.

[Chills1994]

oh, one other thing that bugs me is how USPSA posts the results to the web.... you would think the results would be broken out by class per divison, yeah, like IDPA does, but nope, they ain't.

It's basically "head's up" within each division and whatever letter is after your name is kinda a second thought.

Ya might as well put a theta or a sigma after my name....

Should I NOT try to read into HQ's own perceptions of the classification system from that??

[Singlestack]

You know what? You do not have to be a USPSA member to shoot matches. Why do you bother?

[Coolduckboy]

You know what? You do not have to be a USPSA member to shoot matches. Why do you bother?

[Alan Meek]

You know what? You do not have to be a USPSA member to shoot matches. Why do you bother?

Level 1 (local) true you do not need to be a member of USPSA, Level 2 and above requires USPSA membership to particiapate.

Alan

[Coolduckboy]

You know what? You do not have to be a USPSA member to shoot matches. Why do you bother?

Level 1 (local) true you do not need to be a member of USPSA, Level 2 and above requires USPSA membership to particiapate.

Alan

I think implying that, Why support a sport if you going to bash it and praise another one?

[rvb]

Flex,

Since this topic has drifted way off the issue of how the hhf is set and into the usual classification banter, I'll just say make a couple of minor points.

First, yes, I think I may have read too much into your posts. When I read your comments about "paper GM/M" (ie people who are GM/M/whatever who shouldn't be) combined with your comments about needing to update the hhf more frequently, I infered that you were stating it has become too easy to make those classes and therefore too many people in those classes. I'm sorry if I read too much into your comments.

I guess I'd be happy with any system that keeps the same precentile of shooters in each class over the life of uspsa (or at least the classification system). Now... that's maybe over simplifying it as over time the classifications should ideally trend upwards due to not being able to go down unless we start not counting people who aren't active. But my point is that we DO want it to be difficult to move up to those upper levels, but NOT so difficult that there are only a small handful of shooters who can do it. I'd bet based on top-10 classifiers we could easily make el-prez hhf around 13-14 for PD (just an example). Would that TREND (not just the el-prez example) make it so hard that only a handfull of shooters could make GM? [edit: could it be possible that the hhfs could become so high that no-one could average 95%+?] As it is, averaging 95% is a tremendous accomplishment.... what would it be like if the hhf's were all 10 - 20% higher? Perhaps that's as difficult as it "used" to be? I honestly don't know. I'm happy to discuss; they are honest questions, not rhetorical at all.

To me the goal of the whole system is to group people with approximately equal gun handling ability... has nothing to do with match shooting. So no matter the hhf, that goal is met. The question becomes what percentage of shooters should be in class? How grand is grand?

Thanks,

-rvb

Edited December 11, 2008 by rvb

[sslav]

Maybe it's just me, but I have never really seen the need to compare myself against another person, and if there are people out there who compare themselves against little ol' me, the B/C class shooter that I am, then I don't get that either.

Maybe its just me, but I do not see how else you can evaluate your progress. Does hit factor on any given stage mean anything without comparing it to how other shooters shot it? When I started in this sport, skill of a B/C class shooter seemed exceptional to me, skill of M or a GM was nothing short of magic. You bet your a$$ I was comparing myself to C shooters to evaluate my progress.

I think looking at their USPSA member number is a better indication of if the next shooter I'm gonna RO is a complete newb who I have to worry about sweeping the peanut gallery or if it's some guy who is gonna go popper activator, static paper BANG! BANG! then drop turner.

Neither is a good indication of how safe the shooter is. A guy who is a member since the late 80s but has not shot a match in 15 years is not safer than a D class shooter who is shooting matches twice a month for the last six months. A D class shooter may break 180 as he reloads going left to right. An M class shooter can break 180 as he zooms past a target a little quicker than expected.

It keeps the people that support the sport coming out to support it. (Think about drag racing, if they only paid top down with no divisions, only top fuel would bother to show and 99.9% of the people involved would go home, quickly followed by the last 0.01% as there would be no one there to support the sport. Same applies here)

Comparing USPSA to any other sport or competition is just... well... it's always gonna be apples to cantaloupes... watermelons to kiwi's...

Whys is that? What is so special about USPSA? It is just a collection of skills. Seems like a fairly close analogy.

I've said it again and I've said it before, I'll go to matches with or without a classification system... for the reasons I listed above (fun, cameraderie, test my skills, a better barometer of how I stack up against other shooters overall regardless of class).

Well I would not. On any given weekend I have a choice of at least one USPSA match within a 2 hour drive. If I expand it to various steel matches and IDPA I could probably shoot nearly every Saturday and Sunday and quite a few Fridays. I know that I am a borderline B class shooter. I know how I rank amongst the local B class shooters. And I know I can not beat A or better class shooters unless they have a really bad day. I know all of this before I leave for a major match. My goal in going is in measuring myself against a larger pool of like skilled shooters. Classification system allows me to do that. I could come in 95th out of 100 and feel pretty good about it if the other 99 shooters were A class or better. I could come in 1 out of 100 and have zero sense of accomplishment if the other 99 shooters are D class shooters. Overall standings in the match are useless to evaluate your performance unless you know the level of the competition.

I've commented before how I think that the division winners should get a trip to the prize table and then after that it's strictly at random. That's made some people very mad at me. Their argument is that we shouldn't reward mediocrity.

Well, what the heck is USPSA doing giving out a trophy to first place C or D, and a trip to the prize table?

It all seems to come down to prize tables in the end, doesn't it? Maybe I do not have a problem with the classification system because we rarely see these beasts in our neck of the woods.

But if some hypothetical C or D class shooter does get a trip to the prize table, maybe that would encourage them to continue in the sport and maybe get others involved which is to the advantage of USPSA. Maybe it would get a product into hands of someone who did not consider buying it but will now actually use it, instead of selling it off, which is to the advantage of the sponsor who donated it. Yeah seems like a really bad idea to me.

The classification system insulates or shields people ('s egos?).

Classification system allows shooters to evaluate their progress and encourages participation.

As other evidence of how the classification system falls short of measuring what it is supposed to measure (aka an invalid metric), I present to you all the 2008 Single Stack Nat's results.

...

The highest or first place C class shooter placed 30th overall out of 267 shooters.

The lowest or last place C class shooter tied for 267... out of 267 shooters.

The next C class shooter above him was 256th.

Now...really does it sound like the classification system groups shooters of similar skill levels together.

...

Anyone who came in above C class % in that match is at least a B class in another division (and most of them are now at least a B in single stack). That exposes a flaw in the system that should be fixed, but it does not invalidate the system. Aside from these anomalies, performance of C shooters actually validates the system. Top legitimate C shooters actually came in within the C class % for the match. As to those that underperformed, well everyone has a bad day. I have certainly had meltdowns in matches and came in either below my class in % or very low in my class.

Edited December 11, 2008 by sslav

[ima45dv8]

I love comparing myself to other shooters, and as sslav mentioned, it helps to know how good your competition is when making such comparisons. But this has made me realize that doing so isn't for everyone. Some don't care about these matters and drift contentedly above that noise. To them I say, Good for you not being so ego-centric. As a way of demonstrating that higher level of resolve and independence, I would applaud them if at the next match if they tore up their scoresheet after every stage so as to not get drug down into that pettiness.

[boz1911]

I love comparing myself to other shooters, and as sslav mentioned, it helps to know how good your competition is when making such comparisons. But this has made me realize that doing so isn't for everyone. Some don't care about these matters and drift contentedly above that noise. To them I say, Good for you not being so ego-centric. As a way of demonstrating that higher level of resolve and independence, I would applaud them if at the next match if they tore up their scoresheet after every stage so as to not get drug down into that pettiness.

Yeah, what he said........

[Ron Ankeny]

Some don't care about these matters and drift contentedly above that noise.

Not to seem holier than thou, but frankly I no longer care what letter is on the card in the next guy's wallet. For that matter, I really don't care what letter is on the card in my wallet. I just want to shoot for as long as I can.

[Chills1994]

singlestack wrote:

You know what? You do not have to be a USPSA member to shoot matches. Why do you bother?

Because it's still probably the best of the "action pistol sports".

Just like the good ol' U S of A is the best nation on the planet.

It still doesn't mean I can't complain about USPSA or our government.

When we (me?) get reprimanded for voicing our (my) opinions either about USPSA or our great nation, that's when I will start to get worried.

We can talk about this like adults, can't we??

If you get all in a huff about my opinions I have to wonder...

why??

Yeah, resistance to change is a very common human reaction.

I'm just one little ol' rank and file short time member of USPSA who has ideas different from your own... I take it .

It's not like I am running for USPSA president hollering "Vote for me! Vote for me! I'm gonna get rid of classifications and prize tables immediately if I am elected... Vote for me!"

sslav wrote:

Maybe its just me, but I do not see how else you can evaluate your progress. Does hit factor on any given stage mean anything without comparing it to how other shooters shot it?

My answer: combined results!

At first glance, NO I don't look at my HF for a stage, I see what my standing is. Overall, am I 10 out of 40 (the top quarter) or 15 out of 30, the 50th percentile?

Am I up on one stage?

Am I down on another stage?

Ooopss... I got beat on that one stage... Hmmn.... I thought I shot that pretty fast... What was my hit factor again?

sslav also wrote:

Neither is a good indication of how safe the shooter is. A guy who is a member since the late 80s but has not shot a match in 15 years is not safer than a D class shooter who is shooting matches twice a month for the last six months. A D class shooter may break 180 as he reloads going left to right. An M class shooter can break 180 as he zooms past a target a little quicker than expected.

Yeah, yeah, I don't like to paint with too broad of a brush, but if some guy walks up to my line or shooting box and has a A62,XXX membership number... hmmn....err... it gets my attention. I focus more on how the guy draws, loads up, etc then I have to wonder "Do I need to step back?" "Should I stand closer?" "If he is gonna break the 180, this'll be the stage he'll do it on?" etc... etc...

If some fella walks up to the line with a four digit membership number and some "salt" on his rig and pistola, I can ASSume he ain't gonna do the typical newb mistakes.

Do pro shooters make mistakes and get DQ'ed? Yeah, sure, it can happen to the best of us. Am I wrong in being a little more "mother goosey" when a newb steps up to the line? nahh! I don't think so.

sslav wrote:

Whys is that? What is so special about USPSA? It is just a collection of skills. Seems like a fairly close analogy.

Drag racing is actually broadcasted on television, on major/mainstream sports channels. There are tens of thousands of dollars if not hundreds of thousands of dollars wrapped up in just one drag racing team.

Whoever did the racing analogy first got divisions and classifications confused. Divisions are fine in USPSA the way they are. It's the classification system I have a beef with. I think it needs some tweaks. And some additional stuff, I think, needs to be posted to the web in order to give some transparency to the system. That somebody at Sedro just ain't pulling numbers out of a hat for HHF's.

Yeah, drag racing is a set of skills. Sure! But methinks that it's way much easier to buy your way to the top with the right equipment in drag racing.

sslav wrote:

Well I would not. On any given weekend I have a choice of at least one USPSA match within a 2 hour drive. If I expand it to various steel matches and IDPA I could probably shoot nearly every Saturday and Sunday and quite a few Fridays. I know that I am a borderline B class shooter. I know how I rank amongst the local B class shooters. And I know I can not beat A or better class shooters unless they have a really bad day. I know all of this before I leave for a major match. My goal in going is in measuring myself against a larger pool of like skilled shooters. Classification system allows me to do that. I could come in 95th out of 100 and feel pretty good about it if the other 99 shooters were A class or better. I could come in 1 out of 100 and have zero sense of accomplishment if the other 99 shooters are D class shooters. Overall standings in the match are useless to evaluate your performance unless you know the level of the competition.

well, good for you... different strokes for different folks.

Here locally there is a certain group of usual suspects who attend the matches. Once the results get posted to the web I can take a look at the combined and go: "Aha... I am up this month." Or "Oh, I really sucked this match."

Way back when, I used to get percentages like in 30's, who knows what I am hitting now... 70's... 80's.

That's how I track my progress. That and top third, middle third, bottom quarter, and so on....

I've switched guns and divisions for now and there just ain't enough guys in that division for me compare myself against. Either way though, I'd still look at the combined results.

sslav wrote:

It all seems to come down to prize tables in the end, doesn't it?.

NO! Not for me, it doesn't!

Why? Because, I know already that I'll never see one. Even under my current notion of just giving the division champs trips to the prize table, again, I never would make that walk.

And NO! I am not some jilted perpetual B/C class shooter who feels jipped for footing the bill for the GM's and M's prize tables.

sslav wrote:

But if some hypothetical C or D class shooter does get a trip to the prize table, maybe that would encourage them to continue in the sport and maybe get others involved which is to the advantage of USPSA. Maybe it would get a product into hands of someone who did not consider buying it but will now actually use it, instead of selling it off, which is to the advantage of the sponsor who donated it. Yeah seems like a really bad idea to me.

Again, NOT to appear to be poo-poo'ing USPSA and singing the praises of IDPA, the IDPA major matches still get filled with tons of people and some have waiting lists and it's NOT because of some dad-gummed prize table.

Methinks that at least 50% of the motivation for a prize table is to plug some gun related businesses goods or services.

Somewhere else on this forum is a thread about giving money back as a prize instead of the match officials like trying to pull teeth to get sponsors to donate to the prize table.

As much as I poo-poo the classification system and prizes in general, I really do like the money back idea.

sslav wrote:

Classification system allows shooters to evaluate their progress and encourages participation.

Where's that emoticon where the "smiley" is bashing his head against the brick wall.

Arggh...

Again, my opinion is that's where the combined results come in. How are you doing relative to the pack (of open, Limited, L-10, etc shooters)?

Maybe I would/could better utilize my classifier reports page if at somewhere else via the members only USPSA pages I could see what the top record setting hit factors were for the classifier stages then could I track my progress against that metric.

As far as it encouraging participation... I dunno... I guess I have enough carrot on the end of a stick motivation back in my cadet days that the whole "oooohh....ooohhh I made it to C"... "ooohh.... ooohh... I made it to B" thing just doesn't do it for me.

I'm guessing I'm in the minority like that, though.

sslav wrote this about the Single Stack Nat's results:

Anyone who came in above C class % in that match is at least a B class in another division (and most of them are now at least a B in single stack).

Hey, now! I resemble that remark. Yeah, I am/was a B in production when I shot the Single Stack Nat's as a C classed shooter. I still ended up in the bottom one hundred.

I'm still (stuck?) in C class in Single Stack, by the way.

sslav wrote:

That exposes a flaw in the system that should be fixed, but it does not invalidate the system.

In my mind, it does NOT validate the system either.

Maybe the percentage range for C class is too broad??

If I counted correctly, there were 8 "over C's" and 18 "under C's".

So, hmmn... yeah, I guess the majority of the C class shooters did fall between 40% and 59.9% overall. Although, trying to count them on the screen and scroll down is a real PITA.

For all those guys who I have pissed off with my "abolish the classification system NOW!" comments... I do kinda get a chuckle out of your responses

I think if I have ruffled your feathers and made you mad , well , maybe, just maybe you could use a little introspection and figure out why I have ticked you off so much.

Why so much resistance to change?

Back in the 90's all this thinking outside of the box and paradigm shifting was supposed to be good for ya.

It is, after all, just little ol' me's opinions on things.

[sslav]

I think if I have ruffled your feathers and made you mad , well , maybe, just maybe you could use a little introspection and figure out why I have ticked you off so much.

You give yourself entirely too much credit. You are the one looking for an emoticon to express frustration. I do not see anyone else being "ticked off" around here.

Why so much resistance to change?

Because you have failed to present a compelling argument for change. Come to think of it you have failed to present even a half-decent argument for change. How will USPSA benefit from abolishing the classification system?

Edited December 12, 2008 by sslav

[MarkS_A18138]

Guys just be happy we don't have a classification system like the NSSA or NCSA for clay shooters! You have E,D,C shooters that all shoot master scores and masters that should not be there at all. There is no pro category and should be! I have a number of friends that are A shooters and are still trying to figure out how they got there!

[Flexmoney]

Combined results are fine...if all you are looking to compare to is your pond in your neck of the woods.

When I started in this game...this forum was in it's beginning stages (actually, it wasn't quite here yet).

The top shooter in my area was all I knew. Nobody on the forum shot in my local area.

[Later] I remember shooting an early El Prez and then coming here to post my times (draw, splits, transitions, reload). I wanted to compare myself in a bigger pond.

For me, along with this forum, the classification system allowed me to gauge myself on a larger scale. It allowed me to strive to compete (thus improve) against a larger collection of competitors.

When I shoot Times Two, El Prez, or Merle's Standards...I can reasonably expect that I am shooting a course of fire that is setup the same at every match in the country and has been shoot by multiple competitors. I'm not gauging myself against my local hot-shot or shooter that "hero'ed or zeroed" the course of fire. I get, through the classification system, a chance to compare my performance against the very best that is currently possible.

To me, that is the benefit to the true competitor...being able to stack up against the very best on a specific shoot test. And, it doesn't matter where I am located...or where my competition comes from. I can't get that shooting at the local level and comparing myself in my small pond.

Sure, I can get that by going to big matches...to an extent.

Sandbagging, grandbagging, prize tables...and whatever else...those things are off-shoots. They are derivatives. They are extra baggage.

In fact, the classes themselves...the percentages that break down one class from another...those could be anything. Arbitrary. Somebody decided what an "A" was and what a "B" was. Well, it's gotta be something, I suppose.

I guess my point is, just because some don't see the benefit of the classifier system for themselves...that doesn't mean that others don't enjoy having the system.

[Ron Ankeny]

Flex:

I couldn't have said it better. Your characterization of the system is spot on.

I became bitter and jaded about the system along about the time I made master in all divisions and realized my stand and deliver skills were vastly superior to my movement skills. I rocked in Box A and blew chunks freestyle. Then I managed to get sucked into the cesspool of gossip about grandbaggers, "paper" masters and grandmasters, and so forth. Hell's bells, there was a time when I could have made GM in all divisions from Box A, but to do so would have ruined the sport and I would have owed the entire shooting community a public apology.

Now that I have come full circle, you are right (from previous posts) that the classification system is what we have and it works for the vast majority of shooters. Most folks would be well served to accept the system for what it is, don't get wound up tighter than a cheap watch over the system (like I did), and just shoot. It seems to me that we waste way too much energy in this sport debating over classifications and prize tables. If there are two topics that breed more negativity, I don't know what they would be...

[Chills1994]

Kyle wrote:

I guess my point is, just because some don't see the benefit of the classifier system for themselves...that doesn't mean that others don't enjoy having the system.

A'yup, I will agree with that (as I tiptoe by NOT talking about money which I think has gotten me at least two other threads closed this year )

Ron Ankeny wrote:

It seems to me that we waste way too much energy in this sport debating over classifications and prize tables. If there are two topics that breed more negativity, I don't know what they would be...

I can agree on that too.

And the mantra I keep repeating is "get rid of the classification system" and a lot of those problems/negativity will go away.

Just doing a quick search here on the forums by punching "sandbagging" into the search form yielded 12 pages.... 12 freakin' pages! : or results, all the way back to 2001.

I really don't have too much else to say that I haven't said in other threads that subsequently got locked down, and I don't want to get this thread locked down either.

Oh, wait... yeah, I do have one other thing to say and it's in reguards to the transparency of the classifier HHF's... I think I came up with a good analogy today.

Let's say I ran the 100 meter dash/sprint in 12 something seconds today.

Yeah, I might think that's fast, but how do I know for sure.

I could just do a quick google search to see the actual results that the top sprinters in the world are putting up. Maybe take a look at this past summer's Olympic track and field results.

Hmmn... sub 10 second runs..

Hmmn... okay, maybe my 12.34 second sprint today wasn't that fast afterall.

[Flexmoney]

You can get that comparison because there is a standard to compare to. A 100m dash is a 100m dash.

And, you get that with a classifier system. You don't get it with random courses of fire.

Without a classifier system...we are just running to the end of the fence and back.

[Chills1994]