National attendees - what ya think?

[BritinUSA]

Taking nothing away from Ted's awesome performance, he shot very well at the Open match (18th with a iron sighted gun?), but I agree, the lack of stage alteration between matches could certainly benefit those who shot it once already.

This is another reason why I think we should try a combined Nationals.

After talking with several people that have shot alot of international matches, I just think that the nationals should be something that "wows" people and is a step above anything else out there. Like I said, in terms of stages (design, round count, and number-16), vendors, pomp-and-circumstance, the nationals felt like just another area match.

Most international have something like a 3-2-1 ratio of speed-medium-field courses so for me this years Nationals was very much like shooting IPSC. Those same stages with another 6-8 in a similar vein would have made the match in my opinion.

As for stage design I think we all need to take a moment between now and next year and try to come up with a couple of good stage designs, post them in the stage-design forum for critical review and then send them all off to the next Nationals organisers with a tag indicating that they came from BE.com

We could call next years match 'The USPSA Combined Nationals by Brian Enos.com'

[Carmoney]

Pros:

Got to watch the supersquad while we were on our break. Got the story directly from L winner on why he shot his limited gun in Open, and ended up making a practice run cause the stages were practically identical (Production gun went down just before the match).

Taking nothing away from Ted's awesome performance, he shot very well at the Open match (18th with a iron sighted gun?), but I agree, the lack of stage alteration between matches could certainly benefit those who shot it once already.

No way. I wish I hadn't shot the matches back-to-back. There was nothing to be gained, the stages were simple enough I can't imagine anybody (other than perhaps a novice shooter) would receive any meaningful benefit from the "practice run." All it did was tire me out and create an awkward transition from one platform to another.

If you ask me, I think it makes Ted's victory that much more impressive.

Edited September 30, 2009 by Carmoney

[JohnGaultsGun]

No way. I wish I hadn't shot the matches back-to-back. There was nothing to be gained, the stages were simple enough I can't imagine anybody (other than perhaps a novice shooter) would receive any meaningful benefit from the "practice run." All it did was tire me out and create an awkward transition from one platform to another.

If you ask me, I think it makes Ted's victory that much more impressive.

I think there is something to be said by shooting 32 stages in a week. Yeah, stages were simple but why did A LOT of shooters (even the good ones) hit no-shoots and mikes? "Simple" provides it's own set of challenges that need to be addressed. Applying this during the match takes practice and discipline IMHO.

For me I learned that attitude played a very important part of performance. I shot Production in the first match and was so wound up about things that I incurred penalty after penalty and came up short in the standings. My expectations hampered performance and I beat myself up over it. And looking at the preliminary scores only made things worse!

In the 2nd match I shot L10 but corrected my attitude. L10 was NOT what I had been shooting during year and so there were no expectations. I was also too tired to keep thinking of the final outcome but still competitive enough to want to do well. Plus there were only minor changes in my stage plans. The result was only 1 match penalty and a personal best match performance. I never would have gotten this value had I run an "OK" 1st match and now I can take this with me to other matches.

My 2 cents