2014 special qualifier match listing??

[praff]

It's all good. No offense taken. I did just have a light bulb moment though. I never really thought of a club or group of people taking advantage of the system by hosting multiple all classifier "matches" in a single month or even a weekend to achieve the results they hope to gain. Hence the worries over the rule change surrounding special classifier matches. I think some people get lost in the competitive side of the sport and lose track of just having fun and getting to shoot.

 

[rhino]

The only difference for me is that I'll shoot two to four D-class classifier scores per match instead of one.

 

[Rob377]

The system has no integrity.
I personally don't want to shoot any classifiers.They are boring and don't represent all the skills needed on field courses.
Until most of them require movement,the system can't possibly represent an individuals ability.

Fun fact: At the 2013 Production Nationals, one's classifier percentage and match finish percentage had a correlation coefficient of 0.851259. Perfect correlation would be 1. Anything over 0.8 is considered a strong correlation.

 

[jakemartens]

Fun fact: At the 2013 Production Nationals, one's classifier percentage and match finish percentage had a correlation coefficient of 0.851259. Perfect correlation would be 1. Anything over 0.8 is considered a strong correlation.

Thanks
Carl F. Gauss
would be proud of you

 

[Rob377]

Thanks
Carl F. Gauss
would be proud of you

I was always curious what the correlation between classifiers and match performance is. Now I know. An afternoon well spent!

 

[Coach]

Let grand baggers grand bag. It does not hurt anything. They still have to actually shoot the stage at that hit factor. (unless Bob Trueblood is doing scores)

The BOD is not going to care about how many five man matches get submitted. The classifiers are a source of revenue. The bills have to be paid. Follow the money and figure it out.

 

[riverman67]

Fun fact: At the 2013 Production Nationals, one's classifier percentage and match finish percentage had a correlation coefficient of 0.851259. Perfect correlation would be 1. Anything over 0.8 is considered a strong correlation.

For top shooters I'm sure this is true.
I'm going off personal experience. I can score much higher on stand and shoot classifiers than I can on field courses that require a lot of movement.
Slow people are classed higher than they should be
in most cases.
I don't really care because I shoot for fun. I just don't think a system that doesn't fairly test a big part of our sport should be used as the bar. Maybe placement in level 2 and 3 matches should be weighed along with the classifiers.
We are supposed to be testing speed,power and accuracy.
Speed,outside of trigger speed,has been left out of the classifiers for the most part.

 

[jakemartens]

For top shooters I'm sure this is true.
I'm going off personal experience. I can score much higher on stand and shoot classifiers than I can on field courses that require a lot of movement.
Slow people are classed higher than they should be
in most cases.
I don't really care because I shoot for fun. I just don't think a system that doesn't fairly test a big part of our sport should be used as the bar. Maybe placement in level 2 and 3 matches should be weighed along with the classifiers.
We are supposed to be testing speed,power and accuracy.
Speed,outside of trigger speed,has been left out of the classifiers for the most part.

If there are three or more GM's in a level 2 or higher your overall finish can be used as part of your classification

 

[Rob377]

For top shooters I'm sure this is true.
I'm going off personal experience. I can score much higher on stand and shoot classifiers than I can on field courses that require a lot of movement.
Slow people are classed higher than they should be
in most cases.
I don't really care because I shoot for fun. I just don't think a system that doesn't fairly test a big part of our sport should be used as the bar. Maybe placement in level 2 and 3 matches should be weighed along with the classifiers.
We are supposed to be testing speed,power and accuracy.
Speed,outside of trigger speed,has been left out of the classifiers for the most part.

That was everyone at nationals. From guys with 27% classifications to 100%.

People like to complain about the classifier system, but it's VERY predictive of how you'll do at a big match.

How predictive?

 

[Rob377]

The interesting thing about that plot is that it shows "grandbagging" is a not even close to a problem. There are only 3-5 scores that fall out of the herd on the lower portion. Those are either granbaggers, or guys that had gun problems. Grandbagging appears to be a complete non-issue.

 

[CB45]

Rob. You should post that on Brian Enos Forums and submit to USPSA HQ.

Science!

 

[CB45]

Rob for President!

 

[Rob377]

Rob. You should post that on Brian Enos Forums and submit to USPSA HQ.

Science!

I only go on Enos for the classifieds.

HQ will see it on doodie, I'm sure.

 

[riverman67]

But can you move down?
I never finish anywhere close to my classification at larger matches.

 

[jakemartens]

But can you move down?
I never finish anywhere close to my classification at larger matches.

Sure $100 and I will write you a letter

 

[Rob377]

But can you move down?
I never finish anywhere close to my classification at larger matches.

Neither did Dave Sevigney or Rob Leatham at that match. Bump those stand n shoot grandbagging mofos down!

 

[riverman67]

Sure $100 and I will write you a letter

done

 

[Coach]

Neither did Dave Sevigney or Rob Leatham at that match. Bump those stand n shoot grandbagging mofos down!

Sevigney is focusing on making major, or he should be.

 

[rvb]

But can you move down?
I never finish anywhere close to my classification at larger matches.

Are you saying...
1. You don't finish where you should relative to others in your class (eg if your class % is an 80% you don't finish any where near mid pack of the As)?
or
2. You don't finish near your classification% at matches (eg if your class % is an 80% you finish might finish with a 65% in the match)?

The later is not the purpose of the system [STRIKE]despite[/STRIKE] regardless of what the statistics show. The former is the reason for the ability to go down in class with the proper approvals, to account for things like physical disabilities, injuries, etc.

-rvb

 

[Rob377]

Are you saying...
1. You don't finish where you should relative to others in your class (eg if your class % is an 80% you don't finish any where near mid pack of the As)?
or
2. You don't finish near your classification% at matches (eg if your class % is an 80% you finish might finish with a 65% in the match)?

The later is not the purpose of the system despite what the statistics show. The former is the reason for the ability to go down in class with the proper approvals, to account for things like physical disabilities, injuries, etc.

-rvb

Despite?

The purpose of the classification system is to group roughly comparably skilled shooters. NOT give a 1:1 match finish percentage. The stats show that it dows the formee quite well.