Team Competition

[SmittyFL]

OK......Here's the deal.

At the "big" matches, they have a "team" catagory. Each team may have a maximum of 8 members. The team must represent a club active with USPSA. Each team member must have shot the MAJORITY of their classifers (minimum of three) at THAT club within the previous 12 months. Only the top 4 team member scores will be used. Only one score may be used per class. (So you can't bring 8 GM's) U is not a class. A team member must shoot in the highest division they are classed. (If they are M in Limited, they may not shoot L-10 in which they have an A card) The score will be based on the percentage of how the team member finished in their division. If you finish in the top three of a class higher than you are, your score may not be used. You have to pay an extra 5-8 bucks per team to enter the team competition and in the winners get a trophy or something.

It would go something like this:

Team Hosers

Frank M Limited

Bob A L - 10

John A Limited

Fred B Open

Mary C Open

Jack C Production

Moe D L - 10

Larry D Revolver

So that is your team, you can only use 1 person per class and only a total of four. You use their percentage within their division. So if Frank was 92% in limited you would use him and Bob was 86% in L-10 vs. John's 82% in Limited you would go with Bob. Fred had a 83% in open but his Overall finish put him ahead of 3rd A class so you couldn't use Fred. Mary was 72% in Open compared to Jack's 74% in Production so you would go with Jack. And Moe was 36% in L-10 vs. Larry's 62% in Revolver so you would go with Larry.

In this scenario you would use Frank 92% / Bob 86% / Jack 74% / Larry 62%

So you would either add up or otherwise calculate the team's scores to come up with a winner.

I just made this up so I'm open to suggestions on scoring, membership, is it a good idea, would you go for it, etc.

I just think it would be fun for clubs, they could make shirts, etc., and to bring new shooters out to big matches, since you have to use different classes per team member.

Whadda ya think?

Smitty

[John Dunn]

And I thought angled shooting was complex!

[TriggerT]

Sounds like a cool idea, but Iwouldn't want to be the match director who has to explain, or impliment it.

[SmittyFL]

I don't think the scoring would be that difficult. No more than it already is. I'm mainly concerned with people's thoughts. Would you be interested? Has anything like this been tried before? Doesn't the World Shoot have some kind of a team thing?

[JFD]

I think it sounds good. From my end, it might increase local match attendance as prospective team members try to meet the classifier goal.

[Vince Pinto]

Smitty,

Yes, we have Team Awards at the World Shoot and all other major IPSC matches, but the system is very simple.

Regional Teams comprised of 4 competitors may be entered by Division (e.g. Team USA Open) or by Division/Category (e.g. Team USA Open/Ladies) and the final scores of the top 3 team members are used to calculate team results.

However I must confess that I don't understand your proposal - can you present it another way?

[SmittyFL]

Vince:

After I read my orginal post, I too, thought it was confusing. In my head it isn't though.

Let me try again.

The object is to involve all classes of shooters, built comradrie within local clubs, and above all, have a good time.

The purpose behind having 8 person teams is to involve as many people as possible from your club, but only using 4 people for scoring in case smaller clubs can't field an 8 person team to a major match.

You may only use one person per class to avoid stacking your team and to involve new shooters. But have a scoring system that allows any of your shooters to come from any division. So you could have an Open A, Limited B, Production C, and L-10 M. Or they could all be in one division but they have to be from different classes.

I haven't thought all the way through the scoring but it would have to be based on how each shooter finished within their division. Then add them up or average them for the team score somehow.

All team members have to be from the same club, that would have to be moderated somehow to avoid stacking the team. (So you couldn't go to the USPSA web site top 20 in class and pick the top shooter from each class) Also, any shooter who placed in a class higher than the one they are in couldn't be used as one of the team's 4 scores.

I have lived and shot in a couple of different states, and the new shooters (or the C and D class shooters) don't seem to attend the big matches. I don't think it is the money, I just think some people don't want to spend the time and money to travel to a big match and get their ass kicked when they can do that just fine at home. Whatever the reason, I thought this would be a way to encourage (apply peer pressure) to the C and D shooters to come to the big match and be on the team. Since theoretically a D shooter could help the team as much as a GM could. Plus you could make cool shirts for the team to walk around in (I hear chicks dig matching shirts).

Does that explain it better? More imput from forum members please!!!!

[Vince Pinto]

Smitty,

OK, gotcha now. You're suggesting teams based on Mixed Classifications and Mixed Divisions (but from the same club) whereas under the existing teams formula, you'd always have your top shooters (e.g. GM or M Grade) in a single-division team (e.g. Open).

It's a very interesting idea which gets lower grade club members involved, and I think it has lots of merit but, in practice, I think you'd initially need to stick to a single division because your plan has too many variables - it's possible that my team is the only one with, say, a D Grade Revolver shooter and I suspect many clubs won't have GM or M Grade shooters.

I'd try it on a local level first, using the most popular division in your area (Limited?), and using the most easily achievable grades (i.e. no higher than A Grade), before taking it further. The trick would be to get 4-6 clubs in the Florida area to test the system on a smaller scale.

For example, each club would form a Limited Division Team comprised of one A, B, C and D Grade competitor to see how it flies (you could also go to 8 person teams by using 2 of each grade). Obviously the classifications must be based on "current" USPSA gradings.

Bottom line: I think it's a great idea ............... well done !

[tightloop]

We used to have a big team shoot in Texas, before there was national classifications. Based it on club classifications. Only one A shooter (top class) allowed on any team. But then, everyone shot the same division, nothing but open, then. It was however, LOTS of fun.

I think Smitty has a good idea, although I see problems administrating it at anything but the club level.

[ErikW]

I was trying to come up with a team side match to raise money at our local charity match when I was M.D. a couple years ago.

What I came up with was a points system, where you have X number of points to spend on your team. GM, M, and U all cost the most points, then A, B, C, D. (Match Director's discretion to allow a new shooter U to be considered a D.) I structured it based on the local talent pool (heavy B-C). Basically, it was impossible to "buy" two Ms on a team. You could afford an M and an A, but the rest of the team would be Ds. If this seems too complicated, just work out all the possible combinations and say the team must be one of those combos.

Your team had to compete in one division, with all members in that division. Just add up match points for team scores.

I never did go through with the idea.

[twix]

SF, I like it in theory and intent (of getting more new shooters involved).

In practice only the much larger clubs would be able to fill all the slots with their best ABCD shooters.

You're not one of those New York Yankee fans now living in Florida are ya?

Just kidding. Really I liked the creativity.

TommyB

[SmittyFL]

Twix, no I'm not a yankee fan. I have to respect their business model though. It's a shame when that's what it comes to in sports. Go Steelers, the last team to Draft their way to a championship.

By having an 8 person team and only using 4 scores I was trying to let the smaller clubs be able to play also.

Eric's idea is interesting also.

I'll have to put some more thought to it. If I could come up with an easy way to score it, I don't see why it wouldn't take off. The goal is just for fun, obviously it is a competition but for the majority of the shooters who realize a match win is probably not in their near future I think it would add to the fun and maybe bring shooters to a big match who wouldn't normally attend.

The thing I would really like to do is to be able to have different classes and divisions on the same team and keep the scoring even or fair. That is the tough part. But if you allow different divisions I think it would increase the pool of shooters to draw from. I would like to figure out a system so that a revolver or production D class shooter can help the team as much as a M class open shooter.......I'll think about it.

[tightloop]

Smitty

Now you have distilled it down to the hardest part.

No way a revo shooter or D class shooter can help the team that much. No offense to Jerry M or D shooters. Unless you have some kind of special scoring for them.

[SmittyFL]

TL,

Yeah, it's a tough one. I'm trying to figure a way to use how they finished in their class and division as a percentage. So if your D shooter was first D production and your M shooter was 5th M limited the D shooter would in effect help the team more.

I know....I Know....I'm still working on it.

[twix]

This could be good fooder for "deep thoughts at work" time. Or a reason to pick up some extra aspirin.

*thread drift mode on*Interesting thought on the Steelers being the last team to draft their way to a championship. I'm not knowledgeable enough to challenge it. But I am heady enough after Sunday to suggest the Colts may be the next one. Harrison, Manning, James. I think our big name free agent is Chad Bratzke. On defense did I forget to say Freeney, Brock, and undrafted Harper? *drift off*

[DogmaDog]

Sounds crazy difficult to compare teams with all the possible mixtures of classes and divisions you might put on one team...how do you measure one team's performance against another?

I guess I'd advocate something more like you see in highpower rifle competition. In highpower, a team is 4 (or 6 or 10, in big matches) shooters all shooting the same class. One shooter usually has to be a Tyro (never competed at this level of competition before).

For USPSA, you could have 4 shooters in the same division, with no more than one GM on the team, and maybe you say at least one C or D class shooter. That way you're forced to get a newbie into the match, and you have an experienced anchor for the team. I think it would be much simpler, since you could just add up all the match points scored by each member of the team, and give the trophy to the team with the high aggregate, without dropping scores, weighting scores, tweaking divisions, etc.

Clubs could put in teams for each division. That would be cool.

Semper Fi,

DogmaDog

[hopalong]

Smitty sent this to me to look at for my idea on the 3-gun team thing I'm working on.... so I will bump this one and maybe we can get something worked out that might bring another level of excitement.

On Muti-division teams..... Sounds great 1 shooter per division per team with no more than 1GM/M, 1 A, 2 B/C, 1 D or a combination of something that would fit. Example: Team----Smitty------1gm(limited),1 C L-10 2D (revo and Prod) 1B (open)

Notice the 2 d but no A..... allow any lesser classified shooters until that classification is full...(gets more lesser experienced shooters involved)

for scoring just use their match percentage !!!!!

gm shoots 100% he gets 100pts, D revo comes in 2nd in the match but has 47% and gets 47 points so his overall placeing doesn't "upset" the numbers (this is the tricky division as there may be no others besides 2 or 3 shooters)

then you get a total for the team based on their performance in their division !!!!!!

For the clubs that would get really serious with the Team thing they would either find new members who shoot in Divisions that are not represented or some of them would just Change over to a new Division. but it would still do nothing but help increase participation at all levels of the game.

Just a few thought from a country boy who likes burning gunpowder !!!!!

Hopalong

Thanks Smitty

[shred]

In my experience (having been on back-to-back winning teams at the TX Make-A-Wish match), the way to win these is to have your best shooter shooting in Limited-10 or Production or some similarly undersubscribed division, then proceed to rack up the match percentages (or match points, if you do it that way) since there's likely to be a lot less competition there.

Maybe you could add a fudge-factor or something, but then we're back to complicated again..

[SmittyFL]

I still think it would be a great idea. Obviously the issue is the scoring. Something that is fair and somewhat easy for the MD's, I don't know.

[eric nielsen]

Shannon

I was thinking the same thing would happen as Shred describes - didn't know it had already been done. Another reason why I'm not a fan of having 5 divisions. If you think of a way around that it would be very cool.

Back in the day in SC they had competing Gunshop/Gunsmith teams. They were just doing it for bragging rights which would appear on the walls of the gunshops, who also hosted alternating indoor matches, 1st&3rd Tuesdays in Charleston and 2nd&4th Wednesdays across the river.

It was an excuse to print up cool polo shirts and it boosted attendance at matches from what I could see. Guys didn't want to let down their buddies with a no-show.

[SmittyFL]

That's the main reason I think it would be cool. Not a super competitive thing, something that includes all classes of shooters mainly for fun and shjt talking rights.

Make up some shirts for "team slacker", "team twomike", or whatever. I just don't know if it would catch on or not. Maybe pay an extra 5 bucks per team member for a trophy or something.

[Jim Norman]

How about use the stage results?

Either use percentages as points and add them up OR use place as points, first equal 1 pointsecond equals 2 and so on. I like the percentage as points best. But don't use match results, use stage results. more variation involved. A shooter can win and get 100% on the match having lost (placed low) on a coulpe of stages. By using stage results you can level the curve slightly.

THis is by the way what we do so score three gun. We use HF scores to acheive place, but the percentage is the actual score for each stage. First is 100 points, and it moves down from there, It seems to work to make all the stages worth the same towards the overall win.

Jim

[shred]

Stage results still has the 'undersubscribed division' problem, some cases even worse if one guy wins all the stages, they get all the stage points too, where it's less likely in other divisions.

It's still fun. but just very difficult (nay, impossible) to come up with a real answer to "who is the best team?" if you allow multiple divisions. It's like asking "who was the best shooter?" at a big match with multiple divisions-- in most cases the scoring system makes it impossible to compare.

[tightloop]

Having shot is a few of these, scoring them is a very long process...

[JohnRodriguez]

Here's my simplifed version of a team shoot. Use the regular match for the results, NRA highpower team matches occur on the day before the main match, and that would be a logistics pain in the butt. 500% match points would be possible, 100 % pts from each division, you wont' be required to have a production or revolver shooter(s) but then you would only have 300 pts possible or whatever divison is not represented ( this would help promote production and revolver shooter turnout). Classification would not matter, because we've been to the matches were the A class open shooter beat a GM by 5 or six places and giving the GM 100 pts and the A class shooter 100pts would not be fair to the A shooter and make it a scoring nighmare. That's it, pretty simple huh?