Ezwin 3.06 after updating the classifications

[Spray_N_Prey]

basically I have two shooters that went from C class to unclassified. I D/L the file again and re-updated it and the only thing it said was that their membership expired in 4/30/09 - would this have anything to do with removing their classification and putting them as "U" class?

[Flexmoney]

Yeah...I think they go to "U" if they are expired.

[John Heiter]

This hit us at our Section Championship match and, while I understand the need to "encourage" people to keep their membership current, I don't like this method at all. We had a couple experienced shooters who had let their membership expire so they showed up as U after I ran the classification update. They wanted to declare their classification as B and C respectively. In this case, both competitors had actually renewed their membership prior to the start of the match (one of them had printouts and paperwork to prove it) but it was after the cutoff for making it into the monthly classification file. As MD (confirmed through Nationals) I had to leave them both as U. The guys were both upset because they couldn't compete where they should. There were also new shooters who did really well but who lost out on High Unclassified plaques because these guys wound up winning U. There was even some after match scuttle butt about the situation when one of the U guys found match results from an earlier match where one of these guys had won High C Class. They felt cheated and I have to agree with them.

I think this needs to be addressed.

Edited July 20, 2009 by John Heiter

[Flexmoney]

If you are running a major, I believe you can send the match file in for an up-to-the day classification update...and not have to wait on the monthly data.

I think you were given bad info. They gotta be members to shoot a major. If they are members that have had a classification...then they hold a classification.

You give out "High U-class" plaques?

[Chris Keen]

You give out "High U-class" plaques?

+1 to that. But more importantly ........ why did these guys wait until the last minute to renew their membership, and then complain about not being current?

[Spray_N_Prey]

that's what I figured. I will let the shooters know.

THanks all,

Shawn G.

[Rob Boudrie]

If you are running a major, I believe you can send the match file in for an up-to-the day classification update...and not have to wait on the monthly data.

Incorrect. What is on the web site is, but definition, "up to date". It won't have all classifiers but, by policy, the new classifications become effective when released to the web.

The classifications become effective when released to the web - there is no "advance release". In the old days, matches could send the file to HQ to verify member numbers. Today, if you use the on-line squadding system, you can use the "Verifiy registration data" feature to get a difference report of all entrants whose names do not exactly match the provided membership number.

[Flexmoney]

Incorrect. What is on the web site is, but definition, "up to date". It won't have all classifiers but, by policy, the new classifications become effective when released to the web.

I see that as a step backward.

So, an expired member who re-joins and gets into a major...will be "Unclassified" until the monthly update? By policy?

What is the reasoning that lead to this policy? (And, being a Section Coordinator and often a Major Match Director...what would I have needed to do to be aware of this policy? BOD meeting minutes?)

[wgnoyes]

At this year's Area 6, we had a competitor registered who was expired. The match dates were Apr 17-19. This fellow renewed on Apr 15th, and his classification lookup showed this

Therefore, based on the fact that USPSA "advised that this member should be treated as a current member, and eligible to participate in all USPSA matches", we did as the webpage told us and restored his classification before 1st shot fired. He won the match in his division.

So if you've got any expired people going into a major match, it's worthwhile to do a last minute research exercise on all of those to see if there are any late-breaking memberships updates on them.

[John Heiter]

Yes, you can go out to the USPSA website and verify that the competitor's membership is current, but it will still show them as unclassified until the next monthly update. I'm no SC but I occasionally MD a Major and it was news to me too this year when it happened.

...and thread drift but yes, we do give out 1st-3rd Unclassified plaques (plaque only, no checks) based on participation levels of 3-5-7 unclassified shooters per division the same way we do for the classified shooters. Why don't you?

I know it's not required/sanctioned by USPSA but, aside from the occasional classified shooter getting bumped into U for an expired membership, I find that most unclassified shooters are new to the sport. If there's one group we want to encourage it's those guys and gals. You want someone who is going to go home excited and talk up USPSA to all their friends? Hand a new shooter a 2nd Place Unclassified plaque at your next major and see what happens.

[Flexmoney]

I find that most unclassified shooters are new to the sport.

I guess I find too many exception to that for me to decide to give out a class award for those that don't hold a class. For example, I shot my last Major as U-class. I guess I would have won a plaque for it? The next U-class was a foreign member, then a prior B-class, then another foreign or two. Had to go about 5 deep to get to a Pending/new member.

Thanks for giving me a different perspective to consider. (I looked at your match and see where you have a different set of customers to take into account.)

Yes, you can go out to the USPSA website and verify that the competitor's membership is current, but it will still show them as unclassified until the next monthly update. I'm no SC but I occasionally MD a Major and it was news to me too this year when it happened.

Yeah. That seems odd. And, you ended up treating it the way USPSA apparently wants the new policy, where Bill N. did differently (as I would have, not knowing either).

So, we have a situation where major MD's aren't following the same policy.