2015 Production Nationals

[GJM]

I think if you averaged all classifiers, very, very few shooters would average their current percentage. Those that would keep their percentage are probably the very top GMs that would stay at 100 percent, because they really are shooting 110-140 percent now, but only getting 100 percent in the current system. Below that small group of GMs, you will have to either rejigger hit factors in each class, or downgrade virtually all USPSA shooters from their current class. Refiguring hit factors would make sense, since many have hit factors so high, you need to hero or zero to shoot a decent percentage.

I am not tracking your comment about making the current system "more accurate," maybe you can elaborate?

[YVK]

Think Gaussian distribution. Accurately classified shooters are mean +/- n x SD, whatever n is. Under and over classified are outliers on each side of it. As we hopefully agreed, the all classifiers count rule will minimize the number of overclassifiers, who are in this example are half of (3-n) x SD. By eliminating or decreasing that group, your classification is that much accurate in assigning the rank.

In other words, your gun is mechanically 1 inch gun, you're shooting 5 inch groups concentrically around it, and now you did something that you're shooting 3.5 inch group with preponderance of hitting low. You're still more accurate that you were before.

[joshs]

Think Gaussian distribution. Accurately classified shooters are mean +/- n x SD, whatever n is. Under and over classified are outliers on each side of it. As we hopefully agreed, the all classifiers count rule will minimize the number of overclassifiers, who are in this example are half of (3-n) x SD. By eliminating or decreasing that group, your classification is that much accurate in assigning the rank.

I don't think counting all classifiers will more accurately reflect skill because of the high hit factors and low stage points of classifier stages. Because small errors can have a huge effect on a classifier score, it's relatively easy to end up with a couple really bad classifiers.

Do you think that USPSA suffers from a major problem of over-classification? I think that there are some problems with the current system, but I don't think over-classification is one of them.

[YVK]

Do you think that USPSA suffers from a major problem of over-classification? I think that there are some problems with the current system, but I don't think over-classification is one of them.

On a big scheme, I don't care as much, Rob's right that over classified peeps are just screwing themselves, and Josh is right about current classification generally correlating..

[GJM]

YVK, you seem mostly concerned with shooters who are over classified. I am much more concerned about the shooters who are under classified. Everyone loves that GM they can beat, but nobody likes being beat by a B.

[Leroy]

Many of the top shooters do not shoot classifier stages because some of them do not shoot local matches and it is rare to see a classifier stage at a major. Their current classifiers are their major match results. If a classifier is part of a major match they rarely will push for a higher percentage on the stage because the stage is not worth many points but a mistake could still cost big time. The shooting strategy for shooting %100 on a classifier is different then the strategy for winning a major match. That does not mean that the ability to shoot %100 classifiers does not correlate to match scores. It is not unusual for shooters who want to make GM to spend a large percentage of time on classifier skills (static gun manipulations and hosing the shit out of targets) only to switch over to field course skills because those skills provide the greatest gain in match scores.

[Sal Picante]

It is not unusual for shooters who want to make GM to spend a large percentage of time on classifier skills (static gun manipulations and hosing the shit out of targets) only to switch over to field course skills because those skills provide the greatest gain in match scores.

I agree and disagree...

The skills you use in classifiers are 100%, no BS, the same skills you use to crush the enemy and hear the lamentation of the women at matches. There are some additional things regarding footwork, strategy, and mental-prep that people may do to round out the field course performance aspect, but learning how to blast classifiers is one of the best ways to become the one legged man at the ass kicking convention...

[Sal Picante]

I think adding all the classifications is kinda pointless: I was terrible in the beginning. Truly horrible. I put in a lot of effort to get better and where I'm at today is SO different then where I was way back when. Including 3 years of being the guy trying to find his ass with a flashlight just doesn't make sense...

I have to say that looking at the match finishes compared to classifications, it is pretty decent...

To those that want to get rid of the classification system, I'm apt to agree, but for guys just getting into the game, I think it does provide a nice way to track progress, etc...

[EricM]

I assumed those advocating for using all scores were thinking about simply using the last 8 scores (or however many), instead of the last 6 of 8 that were greater than 2% and no more than 5% below your current classification. Can't see any reason it would make sense to use all scores going back to when someone first joined USPSA, but I can certainly see the argument for using a more representative sample of recent performance.

In the end though, it doesn't really seem that important, at least to me. I'm relatively new to USPSA and figured sometime I'd come to understand the value of the classification system, but it hasn't happened yet.

[Leroy]

I agree and disagree...

The skills you use in classifiers are 100%, no BS, the same skills you use to crush the enemy and hear the lamentation of the women at matches. There are some additional things regarding footwork, strategy, and mental-prep that people may do to round out the field course performance aspect, but learning how to blast classifiers is one of the best ways to become the one legged man at the ass kicking convention...

The intent of the post was not to degrade GM classifier skills. More a statement of how some GM's have the percentages they do. I know a few GM'S that where 100% for a short time but are no longer. It is difficult to stay at or near % 100 without winning every major you shoot. I think the classification is good. It correlates to match finish and provides a reference for basic practical shooting skills. Even a shooter who has acheived GM through zero or hero mentality has accomplished a feat very few will do. I think there is only roughly 100 GMs in each of the 3 major divisions of USPSA. Every GM I have seen can really shoot.