IDPA Distinguished Master

[jetfire]

So, IDPA has a new class, called Distinguished Master. The only way to get into DM class is to win your division at one of the two National Championship matches or to shoot within 3% of the division winner. I think that this is a good thing for IDPA as it removes the Super Squad from the ranks of Master class, giving "average Masters" like me an opportunity to shoot for trophies again.

On a note of personal annoyance, I do wish that they hadn't done this after I'd spent a significant chunk of last year getting their 5-gun master award. C'est la vie.

I do like that you can only get into DM class by scoring well at Nationals. It gives me motivation to practice harder (and actually get to a Nationals).

[ToddG]

Agree on all counts. While there are plenty of people who would have liked to "grand bag" their way to Distinguished Master by getting a great Classifier score -- myself included! -- IDPA HQ did the right thing by making this a classification you have to earn in competition. Much of what separates the truly top competitors from the "average Master" has little to do with the skills tested in the Classifier.

[beltjones]

" I think that this is a good thing for IDPA as it removes the Super Squad from the ranks of Master class, giving "average Masters" like me an opportunity to shoot for trophies again."

It's kind of a bummer, though, for the average Master women who still have to compete against the likes of Randi Rogers.

There aren't any female USPSA GM's, but at least it's possible for them to reach that level. I can't imagine there will ever be a female DM if the only way to get there is to come within 3% of Sevigny or Vogel at one of only two matches per year.

[jetfire]

That sort of brings up a different question though - I'd noticed a while back that there are no female GMs in USPSA, although Jessie Abbate has been close a couple of times apparently. The question though is more along the lines of whether or not there are any "average female Masters"? From looking over the scores from the recent Indoor Nationals, there were only 2 female Masters, Tori Nonaka and Randi Rogers, neither of whom are "average". At the 2010 Nats, there were only 3 - Tori, Randi, and Julie Golob. The issue is that IDPA doesn't have a lot of women competitors at the Master level nationally; and while a lot of the really talented women shooters in USPSA like Maggie or Jessie could easily cross over and shoot as IDPA masters, for whatever reason they don't.

[jthhapkido]

That sort of brings up a different question though - I'd noticed a while back that there are no female GMs in USPSA, although Jessie Abbate has been close a couple of times apparently.

In the interest of precision (and this is no way is meant to be derogatory towards Jessie), Jessie has not ever "been close" to making GM. She is an outstanding shooter, and solidly earned her M-card in USPSA through shooting good classifiers. However, she is not near GM in terms of classifier, nor does she score GM-level (or close to it) in matches.

Yet. (Give her some time, and we'll see. She's good, and practices well. Who knows where she will end up? She might be the first female GM in USPSA.)

At the moment, she is an accomplished M-class shooter, who normally places around 3/4 of the way down the M-class list in Nationals.

The question though is more along the lines of whether or not there are any "average female Masters"? From looking over the scores from the recent Indoor Nationals, there were only 2 female Masters, Tori Nonaka and Randi Rogers, neither of whom are "average". At the 2010 Nats, there were only 3 - Tori, Randi, and Julie Golob. The issue is that IDPA doesn't have a lot of women competitors at the Master level nationally; and while a lot of the really talented women shooters in USPSA like Maggie or Jessie could easily cross over and shoot as IDPA masters, for whatever reason they don't.

I'm think that last sentence is really the one that makes the difference---there just aren't that many women in IDPA. (Or USPSA.) Only a small percentage of people make master---so that small percentage of a small number of women just means you won't have very many.

I don't think this new class makes much difference to the women---until you get a large group of Ms, the difference between "pros" and "hobbyists" isn't going to mean much.

[jetfire]

I just double checked, Jessie has shot a 95% classifier in Limited and several 90%+ classifiers. I'd say that counts as "close".

[jthhapkido]

I just double checked, Jessie has shot a 95% classifier in Limited and several 90%+ classifiers. I'd say that counts as "close".

Not really. Jessie's highest ever classifier average is 87.19, which is just barely above M-level. (M-class starts at 85%, and goes up to 95%.)

I've shot a couple of 90%+ classifiers and also a 98%---and believe me, I'm nowhere near GM-class.

The ability to shoot a classifier once at a high level just isn't an indicator of GM-level shooting ability. Consistently doing so (and thus, having an average close to 95%) works much better. In a similar fashion, taking a look at large matches, and how the competitor places relative to the GMs, also tell you.

Jessie is a M-class shooter--don't get me wrong. She can outshoot most people. Nonetheless, she was 27th out of 40 M-class shooters at the last Nationals, and 60th overall. That's really good shooting---but it isn't anywhere near GM-level.

[jetfire]

Being a GM on paper doesn't necessarily mean that you can shoot to a GM's skill level either though. If you define "GM" as "only the people that finish in the top 16 at Nationals" then you'd have to revoke a lot of people's GM cards.

[jthhapkido]

Being a GM on paper doesn't necessarily mean that you can shoot to a GM's skill level either though. If you define "GM" as "only the people that finish in the top 16 at Nationals" then you'd have to revoke a lot of people's GM cards.

I agree with both of those statements---even if they are talking about two very separate things.

There are a number of people out there who are GMs merely because they practiced the classifiers (in either USPSA and for M in IDPA) until they could get the score necessary. They can't actually consistently shoot at a GM level, they merely managed to do it once, and that was enough. (Or in USPSA, 6 times over a number of years, and that was enough.) They are a GM---but they certainly can't shoot GM level in a match. I first beat a GM when I was B-class. (I remember it vividly.) After I saw him shoot a stage, though, it wasn't a subject of celebration anymore. It wasn't that I had done particularly well---it was that he wasn't even remotely close to GM level as a shooter. (Matter of fact, he got beaten by C-class shooters. I don't know how he could claim GM without shame.)

On the other hand, in very large matches, we have a lot of people who do shoot GM level, but have a bad day, or are competing (in USPSA) against people who are GMs in a different division, but are rated M in the one at hand. And some M-class people have a really good day, and are close to GM level also. You are going to get some cross-over here and there.

In general, GM-level people will beat non-GM people, so unsurprisingly, you see a preponderance of GMs at the top of Nationals, interspersed with some others as you move down.

I'll note that I don't believe I ever said anything about "Top 16 at Nationals" --- but we can certainly say that someone who consistently scores in the middle of the M grouping at large matches is a solid consistent M shooter, can't we?

Going back to the topic---that is where Jessie shoots in Limited. As an Open shooter, she is a solid "A" class shooter.

None of this is derogatory, by the way---most people can't keep up with her as a shooter. There are only a very small number of people at GM level. She isn't one yet. (She is still improving, though---who knows where she is going to stop?)

Back to the ORIGINAL topic again---there just isn't a large pool of women shooters yet in either sport (USPSA or IDPA). Yet. As such, the new DM category just isn't going to make much difference to the women, until they get a large number of M shooters who then separate out into "pros" and "hobbyists."

[gtmtnbiker98]

Just received an e-mail from IDPA-HQ this morning, sounds like there may be a Classifier for the DM Classification; however, they are still working on the time requirements per Division. Be interesting to see how this pan's out.

For me, I'm just a lowly MA who doesn't really care, anymore.