Duplicate
Duplicate
Last edited by YVK; 02-02-2016 at 06:46 PM.
...shooting 9mm minor, with a stock Glock, concealed AIWB...Originally Posted by Mr_White
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
Well yeah, considering 90% at this year's production nationals was a top 16 finish, and more than half of the M/GM shooters finished lower than 80% of Ben. What josh didn't really mention is that Ben and the other national contenders aren't really just shooting hundos consistently, if you were to actually have access to their hit factor, it would be more like 110% + HHF. I am perfectly capable of shooting hundos here and there, but I'm certainly not consistent enough, nor am I quite a contender for an area match win (especially now that JJ has been showing up in prod). My own experience says that shooting skill is vastly more than 20% of success in USPSA. Our different valuation may just be that we conceptualize what falls under "shooting skill" differently, but guys like Ben and Vogel just plain shoot a bunch better than most of us.
For reference: Production M; 80% at nationals; TY83544.
Last edited by Talionis; 02-02-2016 at 06:57 PM.
Okay then you're experienced and shooting at a high level. You remember when you were A class but you could rip off a 95% classifier? How were you placing at matches then? Your placement wasn't because you weren't a good shooter - it's because all the other facets of the game you weren't as good at as the shooting.
Entries, exits, shooting on the move vs static, efficiency in footwork and balance, setups, planning nuances, cadence, target transitions, etc - all of these are things that deal with time when we're not shooting.
That is the other 80%. Bianchi shooters can be accurate as hell and be quick at it .... but they don't know a thing about moving.
Think about what you have to get better at right now as a M. Is it splits? Is shaving .2 off yoru bill drill going to make you win area matches? Is being able to shoot a 2" group instad of 3" at 50y going to get you in 90% at nationals?
Or would it be better to work your entries and exits and cut 1-2 seconds off every one of your stages? That will get you into 90% ...... Imagine if you took 12-24 SECONDS off your total time at an area match. It's not through shooting better...just moving better.
The top 16 at Nationals all shot within 10% of Ben, but that isn't really my point. My point is that the only guys who are shooting, and sometimes seriously exceeding, the HHF on classifiers for record are the guys who win or are in contention to win Nationals or Area matches. My theory based on that evidence is that there should be some shooters who don't fit this mold if USPSA matches aren't primarily about "shooting," which I assume we can agree that classifiers are.
I guess I don't quite get what you're trying to say other than "Ben is a better shooter, of course he wins". Ben and Eric slaughter the competition because they are ruthlessly consistent and don't faulter under pressure. They also are on the absolute razor's edge of movement skills.
Ask yourself this.
If you could consistently shoot 100% classifiers, with your same level of movement now, how much do you think your winning percentage would improve?
My whole point in the 80/20 thing is the 20% takes a lot of work to get to. Don't get me wrong, I've busted my ass for years to shoot to the level I do. I realized once I got here that I still had a long way to go... I beat Rob Leatham on a shooting competition - 1 shot, from the draw - head at 7y. Does that mean I'm at the level where I'll beat him at Nationals? Not even close. For a "broke fat guy" as he says, the dude can move like a cat.
I don't know how this got to HHF....
I think you're looking at the numbers the wrong way. It seems fairly obvious that the top 16 are going to slaughter classifiers. Instead why don't we look at GM's not in the top 16 and see what their percentage is at nationals. I think you'd agree that classifiers are a test of shooting with little to no movement, while nationals are a test of both.
Because, as you point out, classifiers are about "shooting," and not what you consider the other 80% of USPSA.
Since classifiers are about shooting, we can look to them as an example of who are clearly the best "shooters." (At least given USPSA scoring).
If there were shooters who are really good at shooting, but not at the other 80% of what it takes to be good at USPSA, I'd expect they would be able to shoot classifiers as well as the shooters who win or place in the top 5 at Nationals or a well attended Area match.
This doesn't seem to happen. The only people I've seen with consistent "100%s" in their classification records are the guys who win or place very highly at Nationals or well attended Area matches.
So, my point is that the best shooters win.
To help with the gigantic derail, on the OPs question, I think you need to decide what you want out of shooting USPSA.
Do you want to shoot an HK because it's similar to your carry gun or because it's still an HK? If the former, I'd at least shoot a pistol that has the same trigger system.
Last edited by joshs; 02-02-2016 at 08:31 PM.
Ok, now I think I'm developing an understanding of what you're getting at. The bolded parts of your post are all aspects of shooting in my mind. If we stipulate that for the context of this conversation simply standing and shooting at one target is shooting then I agree.
Consistency to my mind is also directly tied to overall shooting skill. An A class that occasionally strings together a 95% classifier is waaaaaay behind me, not to mention a top 16 GM. My main point with that is not different than what you mention, Ben and Eric are so good at shooting that they can shred nearly every time. Sure, I can put together a stage that is close to them, but they do it for the whole match.
If I could shoot 100% classifiers consistently with my current movement and stage planning, it would net me about 10% at nationals.
You get it. I think the difference is you are defining "being good at shooting" as having good marksmanship and uspsa skills. There are lots of people good at shooting. People who win steel challenge are good at shooting. People who win sniper's hide. People who win horse mounted shooting. SASS. Etc.
All of those have litte to nothing to do with *movement*. USPSA places a very heavy emphasis on *movement* hence my comments on an arbitrary percentage.
I think we've kinda played this one out.
Reply With Quote