Hit Factor Scoring as an Evaluation of Skill

[Peally]

Maybe I should have been more clear that I like men's pants if I am going to wear them.

God you're picky. Think of all the senoritas you'll pick up at your post-match yoga class.

They do exist in various forms though:

https://www.amazon.com/Kayden-Tapere.../dp/B00PMR9MSC

[YVK]

Let’s consider a hypothetical drill requiring two hits to a 3x5 at 25 yards.

Plan A is a fixed four second par time.

Shooter 1 misses in three seconds and fails.
Shooter 2 misses in six seconds and fails.
Shooter 3 hits in two seconds and passes.
Shooter 4 hits in 3.99 seconds and passes.
Shooter 5 hits in 4.01 seconds and fails.
Shooter 6 hits in 12.00 and fails.


Plan B is hit factor scoring where each hit is 5 points and a miss is -10 points.

Shooter 1 misses in three seconds and has a hit factor of zero.
Shooter 2 misses in six seconds and has a hit factor of zero.
Shooter 3 hits in two seconds and has a hit factor of 5.0 (10 points divided by 2 seconds).
Shooter 4 hits in 3.99 and has a hit factor of 2.506
Shooter 5 hits in 4.01 and has a hit factor of 2.4937
Shooter six hits in 12.0 seconds and has a hit factor of .8333

Doesn’t the hit factor scoring better reflect the differences between the various shooters’ performances?

How do you score a guy who hits once and misses a 3x5 at 25 yards by an inch with a second shot in 2 seconds? Depending on what you're training for, would his HF of 0 be more valuable than HF of 2.5 obtained in twice the time?

[GJM]

How do you score a guy who hits once and misses a 3x5 at 25 yards by an inch with a second shot in 2 seconds? Depending on what you're training for, would his HF of 0 be more valuable than HF of 2.5 obtained in twice the time?

I am not sure why this is so complicated. Hit factor scoring is merely taking points and dividing by time to come up with a score that weights points and time. Hit factor scoring does not bring with it value judgments on what points to assign to what targets, what size the targets should be, what the penalties for misses should be, whether or not there should be secondary scoring zones and what points should be assigned to them. The course designers make the value judgments and size the targets, assign points and make the rules.

I once asked Bill Wilson why they did not use hit factor scoring in IDPA. He said they wanted the scoring to not require a calculator, so they talked to Robbie and other shooters and came up with times drills should be shot in, and then converted those hit factors into fixed time deductions. These days, calculators are more common. I believe Gabe told me that Tom Givens used hit factor scoring at the recent NW Tactical event.

[YVK]

Hit factor ain't complicated, you and I do it in our heads when we practice. Applying it broadly to types of shooting where values other than points per second may exist is.

[Clusterfrack]

Maybe I should have been more clear that I like men's pants if I am going to wear them.

Please. Wear. Pants.

In our neighborhood there’s a guy who waits at the bus stop in a pink women’s sweater and no pants. I’m thinking this isn’t a good look for you Gabe.

[Mr_White]

Please. Wear. Pants.

In our neighborhood there’s a guy who waits at the bus stop in a pink women’s sweater and no pants. I’m thinking this isn’t a good look for you Gabe.

Lol, I wear men's pants all the time, not sure what you're worried about.

[CleverNickname]

I once asked Bill Wilson why they did not use hit factor scoring in IDPA. He said they wanted the scoring to not require a calculator

That may have made sense 10 or 20 years ago when everyone was still using paper scoresheets, but with everyone using tablets now, not so much.

[Jim Watson]

It was allegedly Joyce who decided we should be forced to be more accurate and increased the scoring from half a second to a full second per point down.

Many years ago, before IDPA, Front Sight ran a piece on some middle of the pack shooters instead of the usual fawning over the Super Squad.
One guy said he liked the shooting but a sport that took 20 minutes to explain the scoring had a problem.

[Mr_White]

I am not sure why this is so complicated. Hit factor scoring is merely taking points and dividing by time to come up with a score that weights points and time. Hit factor scoring does not bring with it value judgments on what points to assign to what targets, what size the targets should be, what the penalties for misses should be, whether or not there should be secondary scoring zones and what points should be assigned to them. The course designers make the value judgments and size the targets, assign points and make the rules.

I once asked Bill Wilson why they did not use hit factor scoring in IDPA. He said they wanted the scoring to not require a calculator, so they talked to Robbie and other shooters and came up with times drills should be shot in, and then converted those hit factors into fixed time deductions. These days, calculators are more common. I believe Gabe told me that Tom Givens used hit factor scoring at the recent NW Tactical event.

Those factors you mention GJM, which are not always factored into hit factor, are the devil in the details.

-

An example of hit factor utility: main Tac Con in Arkansas, par time course in the match resulted in top 30 instead of top 16, and a pre-shoot off had to be held to narrow the field to 16. At NW Tac Con a similar course was at shot using hit factor scoring - top 16 was easily and clearly determined.

[Clobbersaurus]

I’ve read this thread with interest, and like others here I really don’t think there is a better system of evaluating overall shooting skill than hit factor scoring. Faster and more accurate is the definiation or hit factor scoring, which is the definition of shooting skill for the vast majority of practical pistol sports.

A lot has been mentioned here about training and using hit factor scoring. I’m not smart enough to do dirty HF math on every drill that I do in training, so I rarely calculate HF during training. On the odd time that I have, it was to figure out some shooting problem that I could always solve by just “seeing my sights and calling my shots”. Training for me is usually breaking down components of drills or components of stages and trying to improve those pieces in preparation for a match. On the core drills I do, I know what PAR time I am trying to beat and kinda know what acceptable hits mean at those speeds, so I guess, HF is considered, just not calculated on every run.

For me calculating HF is for skill measurement, not necessarily for skill building. If that makes sense.