On a recent episode of "TAC TV" with one of my favorite chubsters, Mr. Larry Vickers, I learned some interesting things about the IDPA scoring system that bears his name. No one has mentioned it here, so I will!
First, he mentioned that Rob Leatham actually invented the Vickers Count scoring system. I didn't know that, but it does not suprise me.
Second, the original penalty for missing the center of the target was to be 1/3 second per point down. After some initial experience, IDPA changed that to 1/2 second per point down.
Here's the part that really interested me. Mr. Vickers and Mr. Hackathorn spent a significant amount of time discussing the penalty per point down and both agreed that it should be one full second per point down. Their rationale was that speed has too much emphasis and accuracy not enough emphasis in the game, especially since it was originally intend to more accurately mimic "real life" defensive shooting than did USPSA/IPSC.
I agree with their assessment. I would take it farther because I also think that penalties for misses and for hitting non-threat targets should be much bigger than they are.
Naturally this would change the character of the game. It might also shift the balance of the groups of people who dominate the different ability classifications. It might also significantly impact how (or whether) some people enjoy the IDPA game. Some will like it less, but some will like it a lot more.
I do not foresee it ever happening, but it might be fun to shoot some courses of fire using penalties that (according to Vickers & Hackathorn) would more realistically weight the respective importance of accuracy and speed with respect to being a competition simulation of "the real world."
First, he mentioned that Rob Leatham actually invented the Vickers Count scoring system. I didn't know that, but it does not suprise me.
Second, the original penalty for missing the center of the target was to be 1/3 second per point down. After some initial experience, IDPA changed that to 1/2 second per point down.
Here's the part that really interested me. Mr. Vickers and Mr. Hackathorn spent a significant amount of time discussing the penalty per point down and both agreed that it should be one full second per point down. Their rationale was that speed has too much emphasis and accuracy not enough emphasis in the game, especially since it was originally intend to more accurately mimic "real life" defensive shooting than did USPSA/IPSC.
I agree with their assessment. I would take it farther because I also think that penalties for misses and for hitting non-threat targets should be much bigger than they are.
Naturally this would change the character of the game. It might also shift the balance of the groups of people who dominate the different ability classifications. It might also significantly impact how (or whether) some people enjoy the IDPA game. Some will like it less, but some will like it a lot more.
I do not foresee it ever happening, but it might be fun to shoot some courses of fire using penalties that (according to Vickers & Hackathorn) would more realistically weight the respective importance of accuracy and speed with respect to being a competition simulation of "the real world."