Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Do classifiers really represent a full skill set test of a GM?


CHA-LEE

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

PAPER KILLER Brings up good points on the subject. One thing I am really trying to focus on and evaluate is one handed shooting for the average match stage that is not a Classifier. When do you really see a top shooter leverage one handed shooting for a stage and it end up being faster/better than doing it two handed? From what I have seen, it’s been VERY rare. I have been exploring this in my own shooting to see if I can incorporate strong handed shooting into my “Bag of tricks” for a given stage in order to save time. I have been somewhat successful with it at times and other times it was just a waste of time or points. This is even for Strong Hand shooting much less Weak Hand. I am yet to see anyone transition to weak hand on a stage where it ended up being faster or better than a two handed grip. So really, other than being mandated to shoot strong or weak hand in a COF what is the point in it being a “Core” skill set??

Strong Hand and Weak Hand shooting isn't just limited to classifiers.

We could see more of them if the Match Directors and Stage Designers would choose to include them in matches. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strong Hand and Weak Hand shooting isn't just limited to classifiers.

We could see more of them if the Match Directors and Stage Designers would choose to include them in matches. :huh:

We can arrange that (insert maniacal laugh) ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not incorporate more stage designs that favor one handed shooting in conjunction with free style? I am not saying Mandate one handed shooting, but instead setup a stage that heavily favors one handed shooting for a given section of a stage. I think that too many shooters jump on the "I am not so good at X so lets avoid that in the stage designs" band wagon. You can setup a stage with long shots, really tight no shoot blocked shots, or a bunch of odd height ports and the whining is relentless about it all day long. If these shooters know that they are not "Good" at these shooting challenges then why avoid it? Embrace those things in practice to make them an asset verses a whining point.

Maybe I am strange but I like being pushed outside my comfort zone. I am 6' 4" tall and when I come to a stage and see a port that is 2 feet off the ground I know that is going to be a physical challenge for me during the stage simply due to my height. But we all have to deal with the same port so really, what’s the big deal? Is me whining about it going to make it any higher? No, so what is the point is whining about it? Just shoot the stage and deal with the "uncomfortable" things as they come up.

Now this is way off topic so I will let it go at that........ Back to the normal Bat Time and Channel :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have shot stages strong hand especially when the target is less than spitting distance, and if you were to get into proper position would lose alot of time. Did it at the nationals, the target was 2ft away behind a clear wall and I just stuck my long arm out and shot it a freaky angle strong hand, with 2 a's, and save probably 2 sec, doing it. So there are stages where it could work to your benefit.

There is also a video of Robbie oppening a door and shooting the upclose target strong hand while the door was opening and finished the array freestyle.

But anyways we are getting off the topic.

Edited by PAPER KILLER
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, good stuff here.

Let's not forget that different people respond to big match pressure differently. Many of us only get to shoot one big match a year, and in doing so, are often our of our competitive comfort zone. This can and might explain so poor performances relative to a shooters classification.

On another note, I HATE weak hand strong hand shooting. I practice draws, hands relaxed at sides, surrender position, gun on table unloaded, hands on the sides of barricade with gun in holster etc....

I don't practice weak hand/strong hand. It is not that I don't like it, I just don't enjoy it, and shooting for me is about having fun and enjoyment.

You can say that if I practiced it, and improved I would enjoy it. It is possible. But I don't care to really find out. In my own stubborn mindset, I will just take my scores on those classifiers and then excel on the classifiers that cater to my skill-set.

Let me reiterate, I shoot for fun!!!

But....

When I was playing golf ( not for fun) I typically looked for the weakest part of my game, worked on that until it was the strongest part of my game ( all the while NOT ignoring other parts of my game) and then re-evaluated and repeated the same process.

I bet this would work great for shooting too ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for your other point, isn't the game about shooting? Not a track meet or an endurance run, but shooting. The 'basics" is what we do every time we engage a target or an array.

Although I'm a beginner (6-7 months experience), I disagree. MUCH of this sport, is movement. Movement ability, quickness, agility, is required to win many stages, and therefore events. I think the majority of classifiers being stationary is wrong. Transition speed is JUST as critical (if not more so) than draw and reload speed. The current system rewards the quick draw guys, but not the "athletes" in the sport... But then... (flame suit donned) I'M GUESSING it's the older, slower guys who dominate/run the sport... I may be wrong...

LOL

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not incorporate more stage designs that favor one handed shooting in conjunction with free style? I am not saying Mandate one handed shooting, but instead setup a stage that heavily favors one handed shooting for a given section of a stage. I think that too many shooters jump on the "I am not so good at X so lets avoid that in the stage designs" band wagon. You can setup a stage with long shots, really tight no shoot blocked shots, or a bunch of odd height ports and the whining is relentless about it all day long. If these shooters know that they are not "Good" at these shooting challenges then why avoid it? Embrace those things in practice to make them an asset verses a whining point.

Maybe I am strange but I like being pushed outside my comfort zone. I am 6' 4" tall and when I come to a stage and see a port that is 2 feet off the ground I know that is going to be a physical challenge for me during the stage simply due to my height. But we all have to deal with the same port so really, what’s the big deal? Is me whining about it going to make it any higher? No, so what is the point is whining about it? Just shoot the stage and deal with the "uncomfortable" things as they come up.

Now this is way off topic so I will let it go at that........ Back to the normal Bat Time and Channel :blush:

Sigh... You are only saying this because you missed the Pueblo match yesterday. One stage essentially put a big (7 foot long and the diameter of a stew can) stuffed snake in your weak hand and an all ports stage that the last port was ground level at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for your other point, isn't the game about shooting? Not a track meet or an endurance run, but shooting. The 'basics" is what we do every time we engage a target or an array.

Although I'm a beginner (6-7 months experience), I disagree. MUCH of this sport, is movement. Movement ability, quickness, agility, is required to win many stages, and therefore events. I think the majority of classifiers being stationary is wrong. Transition speed is JUST as critical (if not more so) than draw and reload speed. The current system rewards the quick draw guys, but not the "athletes" in the sport... But then... (flame suit donned) I'M GUESSING it's the older, slower guys who dominate/run the sport... I may be wrong...

LOL

Jeff

Jeff

Classifiers have to be by design a standardized test. Field courses are by design, VERY difficult to set up in a completely standardized manner, meaning, club to club, so EVERYONE is shooting the exact same classification course ( distances traveled, length of shots from shooting postions). I think most agree that the classifiers lack the typical movement/running etc that we routinely see in matches from locals to nationals and everything in between. But, because of the threat of non-uniform courses being counted as classifiers, it is best to not have "field courses" be part of our classification system.

It is something that is broken in the system, but there is no way to fix it, so we stick with the system we have, which has proven to be pretty accurate over time.

ZH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the question should be "are the classifiers a representation of the full skill set of any class??

it isn't..

the classifiers are a standarized set of courses that test a basic skill set ( speed, power and accuracy ). With this you can loosely establish a group of individuals that have roughly the skills of those items and do them at a given time and place.

That's all it is. It's not a precise measurement of skills on demand of anyone.

Essentially if that is there purpose. Then they succeed and they do establish a grouping of individual's performances. Beyond that I'm not sure of what you are after. It is pretty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for your other point, isn't the game about shooting? Not a track meet or an endurance run, but shooting. The 'basics" is what we do every time we engage a target or an array.

Although I'm a beginner (6-7 months experience), I disagree. MUCH of this sport, is movement. Movement ability, quickness, agility, is required to win many stages, and therefore events. I think the majority of classifiers being stationary is wrong. Transition speed is JUST as critical (if not more so) than draw and reload speed. The current system rewards the quick draw guys, but not the "athletes" in the sport... But then... (flame suit donned) I'M GUESSING it's the older, slower guys who dominate/run the sport... I may be wrong...

LOL

Jeff

When you say transitions, I take it (from your text) that you are referring to movement from one shooting position to another, but we use the term transition to describe the movement of the pistol from one target to another.

I can stand in one spot with 4 targets in front of me, and the movement from shooting one target to another is a transition. I've not moved an inch but I have now acquired a new target.

Movement is just another part of the game, but not the game. You can have a quite challenging and effective COF or match without a 32 round field course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We started up a whole little section for everybody that wanted to bitch about the classifiers. (I'm not excluding myself.)

Guess what...we still see threads like this where people complain. They aren't about discussion...they are about bitchin'.

Put up or shut up. :)

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=24428

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PAPER KILLER Brings up good points on the subject. One thing I am really trying to focus on and evaluate is one handed shooting for the average match stage that is not a Classifier. When do you really see a top shooter leverage one handed shooting for a stage and it end up being faster/better than doing it two handed? From what I have seen, it’s been VERY rare. I have been exploring this in my own shooting to see if I can incorporate strong handed shooting into my “Bag of tricks” for a given stage in order to save time. I have been somewhat successful with it at times and other times it was just a waste of time or points. This is even for Strong Hand shooting much less Weak Hand. I am yet to see anyone transition to weak hand on a stage where it ended up being faster or better than a two handed grip. So really, other than being mandated to shoot strong or weak hand in a COF what is the point in it being a “Core” skill set??

Strong Hand and Weak Hand shooting isn't just limited to classifiers.

We could see more of them if the Match Directors and Stage Designers would choose to include them in matches. :huh:

Return of the squirrel?

As for foot speed being a dominant factor, that Robbie guy does pretty well with 2 knee braces on.

Rich

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PAPER KILLER Brings up good points on the subject. One thing I am really trying to focus on and evaluate is one handed shooting for the average match stage that is not a Classifier. When do you really see a top shooter leverage one handed shooting for a stage and it end up being faster/better than doing it two handed? From what I have seen, it’s been VERY rare. I have been exploring this in my own shooting to see if I can incorporate strong handed shooting into my “Bag of tricks” for a given stage in order to save time. I have been somewhat successful with it at times and other times it was just a waste of time or points. This is even for Strong Hand shooting much less Weak Hand. I am yet to see anyone transition to weak hand on a stage where it ended up being faster or better than a two handed grip. So really, other than being mandated to shoot strong or weak hand in a COF what is the point in it being a “Core” skill set??

Strong Hand and Weak Hand shooting isn't just limited to classifiers.

We could see more of them if the Match Directors and Stage Designers would choose to include them in matches. :huh:

Return of the squirrel?

As for foot speed being a dominant factor, that Robbie guy does pretty well with 2 knee braces on.

Rich

I don't think foot speed necessarily is what Charlie is talking about. Charlie is about the same size as TGO, Higdon, and Butler (the Big Angry Panda kind of shooter :D ) and shoots fricken blazing fast times (for only shooting a little over a year <_< ). Moving and shooting isn't a foot race, but how fast can one get to the shooting with the movements of a COF incorporated. Realistically, this is not weighted or measured in many classifiers. The few it is measured in are rarely set up at most clubs because of the time and effort involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PAPER KILLER Brings up good points on the subject. One thing I am really trying to focus on and evaluate is one handed shooting for the average match stage that is not a Classifier. When do you really see a top shooter leverage one handed shooting for a stage and it end up being faster/better than doing it two handed? From what I have seen, it’s been VERY rare. I have been exploring this in my own shooting to see if I can incorporate strong handed shooting into my “Bag of tricks” for a given stage in order to save time. I have been somewhat successful with it at times and other times it was just a waste of time or points. This is even for Strong Hand shooting much less Weak Hand. I am yet to see anyone transition to weak hand on a stage where it ended up being faster or better than a two handed grip. So really, other than being mandated to shoot strong or weak hand in a COF what is the point in it being a “Core” skill set??

Strong Hand and Weak Hand shooting isn't just limited to classifiers.

We could see more of them if the Match Directors and Stage Designers would choose to include them in matches. :huh:

Return of the squirrel?

As for foot speed being a dominant factor, that Robbie guy does pretty well with 2 knee braces on.

Rich

Those are just for looks, he can actually run a 4.3 40, he's just playing with us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess what...we still see threads like this where people complain. They aren't about discussion...they are about bitchin'.

Put up or shut up.

That kind of sums it up nicely.

This topic has been beaten to death over the years. Come on guys, classifiers for the most part test a few core skills and that's pretty much the end of the story. Those who "grew up" shooting IPSC/USPSA might have developed other shooting skills, and the non-shooting skills, along the way at about the same rate. For them the classification system works. For others the system isn't a true indicator of overall ability. That's common knowledge.

If USPSA were to classify folks based on performances at level three matches, I would wager the vast majority of shooters would be unclassified...wouldn't they? How would that help the sport to grow? So the classification system is what we have and that's just the way it is right now. The obvious solution is to just dump the entire classification system, but I really don't think that would be good for the sport because folks want to win something (even if it's just bragging rights) shooting against folks in their "class".

Now without sounding like a total ass, I suppose those of you who are complaining are the "real" GMs and you are weary of the lesser GM shooters polluting the GM talent pool? After all, someone who couldn't even shoot a GM classifier to begin with certainly wouldn't have any business complaining. :roflol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for your other point, isn't the game about shooting? Not a track meet or an endurance run, but shooting. The 'basics" is what we do every time we engage a target or an array.

Although I'm a beginner (6-7 months experience), I disagree. MUCH of this sport, is movement. Movement ability, quickness, agility, is required to win many stages, and therefore events. I think the majority of classifiers being stationary is wrong. Transition speed is JUST as critical (if not more so) than draw and reload speed. The current system rewards the quick draw guys, but not the "athletes" in the sport... But then... (flame suit donned) I'M GUESSING it's the older, slower guys who dominate/run the sport... I may be wrong...

LOL

Jeff

Jeff

Classifiers have to be by design a standardized test. Field courses are by design, VERY difficult to set up in a completely standardized manner, meaning, club to club, so EVERYONE is shooting the exact same classification course ( distances traveled, length of shots from shooting postions). I think most agree that the classifiers lack the typical movement/running etc that we routinely see in matches from locals to nationals and everything in between. But, because of the threat of non-uniform courses being counted as classifiers, it is best to not have "field courses" be part of our classification system.

It is something that is broken in the system, but there is no way to fix it, so we stick with the system we have, which has proven to be pretty accurate over time.

ZH

Let us not forget field courses are indeed included in the classification system. Major matches with a minimum of three GM's and the correct paperwork filed count as classifier scores. Since Major's are usually nothing but field courses this translates directly to the classification system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grandbaggers don't bother me and maybe it's because, I'll probably never be a GM, I don't know. It's the sandbaggers that bother me. I'm not talking about the guys who legitimately can't shoot classifiers for some reason or another but, do well on standard COF. I'm talking about the guys who intentionally keep their classification low so that they can be guarenteed to win their class at small to medium matches and collect trophies and prize money. I don't mind the trophies so much but, I don't think they should be rewarded with cash and/or prizes for their actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grandbaggers don't bother me and maybe it's because, I'll probably never be a GM, I don't know. It's the sandbaggers that bother me. I'm not talking about the guys who legitimately can't shoot classifiers for some reason or another but, do well on standard COF. I'm talking about the guys who intentionally keep their classification low so that they can be guarenteed to win their class at small to medium matches and collect trophies and prize money. I don't mind the trophies so much but, I don't think they should be rewarded with cash and/or prizes for their actions.

The reverse bugs me;

Its so apparent who the true sandbaggers are , that I think their patheticness is punishment enough.

Grandbaggers piss me off because it was never intended to be a title, just a classification.

I cant tell you how many times Ive been told that I should try hard to make master (ie practice classifiers that are coming up), because it would be good for business.

Screw that, Im a shooter, not a businessman.

so Im summnation, whether youre a grandbagger or true GM (or M), it annoys me when I see bragging about it, whether its on a website, or not.

I want to know how many championships come with your GM card?

cause thats all that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...