USPSA Scoring

[Artemas2]

Comment by shooter at USPSA Nationals, some years ago: Any sport that takes 20 minutes to explain the scoring system has got problems.

When IPSC was trying to get in as a "demonstration event" at the Olympics, they were going to use Time Plus scoring so the spectators could tell what was going on before the match was done and hit factor, stage factor, and results were computed.

it's Points per second(time)
P/T=HF
then the HF is calculated on a curve for each competitor using the stage point value as a total to derive from, which is then combined across all the stages to determine the winner.

Explaining it isn't the hard part, it's understanding and applying it.

...it only took me 4 years to figure than much out

[Jim Watson]

I understand the system, I'd hate to have to figure it out manually. Practiscore makes it easy now, though.
The statement was published in USPSA's own Front Sight magazine, they know what they have.

[Leroy]

Once you understand and know how to use hit factor scoring to your advantage everything else seems really boring. I think it's the best scoring system I have used in any of the practical shooting sports.

[bofe954]

Comment by shooter at USPSA Nationals, some years ago: Any sport that takes 20 minutes to explain the scoring system has got problems.

When IPSC was trying to get in as a "demonstration event" at the Olympics, they were going to use Time Plus scoring so the spectators could tell what was going on before the match was done and hit factor, stage factor, and results were computed.

Technology has cured that, unless you somehow are still scoring without tablets.

[Gio]

Hit factor scoring is far superior to any other competitive shooting scoring format, and as others have said, it's easy to compute now that it's all done electronically.

One of the biggest frustrations with time plus scoring is one disaster on one stage (dropped magazine, malfunction, etc) can hose your entire match. With hit factor scoring, you can recover from problems like that and still have a successful match.

Another way to think of hit factor scoring is "how many points can you collect in a certain amount of time." At the higher levels of shooting, this pushes shooters to keep the time the same and be as accurate as possible within that time, which pushes shooters to find the limits of human performance with a pistol. With time plus scoring and harsh scoring penalties (i.e. IDPA), it's almost always worth taking make up shots for accuracy or slowing down to shoot reactive sight pictures on most targets, which limits how far people can push the envelope of performance.

[Clusterfrack]

Once you understand and know how to use hit factor scoring to your advantage everything else seems really boring. I think it's the best scoring system I have used in any of the practical shooting sports.

I’d rather spend my time and money practicing than shoot a time plus match.

[Sal Picante]

Hit factor scoring is far superior to any other competitive shooting scoring format, and as others have said, it's easy to compute now that it's all done electronically.

One of the biggest frustrations with time plus scoring is one disaster on one stage (dropped magazine, malfunction, etc) can hose your entire match. With hit factor scoring, you can recover from problems like that and still have a successful match.

Another way to think of hit factor scoring is "how many points can you collect in a certain amount of time." At the higher levels of shooting, this pushes shooters to keep the time the same and be as accurate as possible within that time, which pushes shooters to find the limits of human performance with a pistol. With time plus scoring and harsh scoring penalties (i.e. IDPA), it's almost always worth taking make up shots for accuracy or slowing down to shoot reactive sight pictures on most targets, which limits how far people can push the envelope of performance.

^ This. In droves.

Applying hit factor scoring to fixed times is pretty easy... Consider that IDPA stages are essentially fixed at essentially 2 Hit Factor (minor) and attack those matches as such.
( A Charlie is -2 points in minor and adds 1 second. That's 2 HF. Interestingly, a Delta, which is -4 points, adds 3 seconds, so is ~1.6 HF...)

I think this is why I've had success in IDPA, honestly. I just approach everything as a 2 Hit Factor stage. Hits are more important.

[Sal Picante]

Once you understand and know how to use hit factor scoring to your advantage everything else seems really boring. I think it's the best scoring system I have used in any of the practical shooting sports.

I’d rather spend my time and money practicing than shoot a time plus match.

I love the richness of Hit Factor scoring WAY WAY WAY more than fixed time scoring.
There is a big element of variability in competition with Hit Factor, i.e. some stages require speed, while other require accuracy.

That said, for the aims of IDPA , where they're trying to reward good marksmanship, the scoring system encourages diligent shooting and severely penalizes poor shooting.
I appreciate that they've set it up that way - think of the average CCW holder: if they're getting a stiff cup of "You done fu-kittened up!" at the local IDPA club match, that's a clue that they should be hitting the target way more.

I appreciate that there is room for both scoring systems.

[Sal Picante]

This just dropped a few days ago... Eric Grauffel and JJ discuss Hit Factor math.
It is worth watching.

[Clusterfrack]

I love the richness of Hit Factor scoring WAY WAY WAY more than fixed time scoring.
There is a big element of variability in competition with Hit Factor, i.e. some stages require speed, while other require accuracy.

That said, for the aims of IDPA , where they're trying to reward good marksmanship, the scoring system encourages diligent shooting and severely penalizes poor shooting.
I appreciate that they've set it up that way - think of the average CCW holder: if they're getting a stiff cup of "You done fu-kittened up!" at the local IDPA club match, that's a clue that they should be hitting the target way more.

I appreciate that there is room for both scoring systems.

Good points. A few thoughts:

A properly designed Hit Factor stage can accomplish a similar thing. When the HF is low (2.x) that will heavily punish sloppy accuracy.

At the last IDPA match I shot, I was beat by a guy who scanned targets for hits outside the Down 0, and made them up--after most or all of the string/stage was over. That had never occurred to me, and was a total WTF moment for me. But a few seconds is a long time...