[JThompson]

This would be a classifier... It's in the crude design stage, I just wanted your thought on the concept.









From Box A you can see PP1 PP2 PP3 T1 T5

From Box B you can see PP1 PP2 T3 T4 (There is an option to make PP3-PP4 visible here too) Which way do you like and why?

From Box C you can see PP1 PP2 PP4 T6 T2

Start from fault enter shooting areas A, B, C and engage as visible



Or finally. Isn't it a bitch to have to complicate a simple stage like that so it can be shot in a major and therefore considered? I would like to see a waiver for stages being "considered" for classifier status. The thing is by the time you design so it can be shot at a major, it's so complicated that it can't be duplicated easily and therefore becomes useless even if accepted.

This post has been edited by JThompson: 21 March 2009 - 04:06 PM

[Jman]

Me likes.

At the buzzer advance to "B" and engage the furthest paper reload put left foot in "A" popper popper paper reload put right foot in "C" popper popper paper.

The distance is what? 10 yards or so on the front steel to maybe 20 yards to the back paper? I'd have to aim at those back ones.

[JThompson]

JimmyM, on Mar 20 2009, 03:43 PM, said:

Me likes.

At the buzzer advance to "B" and engage the furthest paper reload put left foot in "A" popper popper paper reload put right foot in "C" popper popper paper.

The distance is what? 10 yards or so on the front steel to maybe 20 yards to the back paper? I'd have to aim at those back ones.

You could do that providing your opposite foot is not touchin the ground outside the box you are shooting from. I wanted to let people shoot things in their own way... so many of the classes are go here and shoot these now go here and shoot those. At least there is a bit of freestyle in this one and I break it up with reloads. I may have to refine it further for people shooting revo... they always get screwed.

I haven't figured out the distances yet... I want to lay it out so I like it and then measure them up from there. I also want it to fit in a fairly narrow range so it can be shot indoor, though I dunno if that is going to fly as it is now.

This post has been edited by JThompson: 20 March 2009 - 11:43 PM

[Jman]

Just describing how I would attack it. Many possibilities. Steels gotta be something like 8 yards away at minimum, right? I think? I love watching Open shooters reload too.



Jim

[JThompson]

JimmyM, on Mar 20 2009, 04:24 PM, said:

Just describing how I would attack it. Many possibilities. Steels gotta be something like 8 yards away at minimum, right? I think? I love watching Open shooters reload too.



Jim

23ft 26 where fault lines are used.

[fourtrax]

I really like it. I would think that a Revo guy would have plenty of options also. I wonder about splatter from the steel to paper? Also, if, and only if, that was a problem you could invert it. Have the arc of paper arrays pointing at the shooter/transposed toward shooter. Just a thought, but the way it is would be no problem in the bay I'm going to put it in. GOOD JOB!

[Flexmoney]

Comstock and "only" don't go together (in this case..."no more than 4").

[JThompson]

Flexmoney, on Mar 20 2009, 10:02 PM, said:

Comstock and "only" don't go together (in this case..."no more than 4").

It doesn't say only four rounds, it says only four targets... you could shoot as many as needed to engage those four, or am I missing something? I do want you guys to pick it apart.

[HoMiE]

I personally don't like it. You are screwing Production and Revo shooters by having too many paper and saying you can only shoot 4 yada yada. My suggestion would be to have two shooting boxes, remove 3 paper and add 2 poppers. Change WSB to say engage array (paper or steel) from one box and engage remain array from other box.

[G-ManBart]

JThompson, on Mar 20 2009, 10:11 PM, said:

Flexmoney, on Mar 20 2009, 10:02 PM, said:

Comstock and "only" don't go together (in this case..."no more than 4").

It doesn't say only four rounds, it says only four targets... you could shoot as many as needed to engage those four, or am I missing something? I do want you guys to pick it apart.

It would seem to me that you could stipulate that at least one target must be shot from each area as well as a mandatory reload between areas, but setting a "no more than 4 targets" per area does seem unusual for a comstock classifier. Remove the no more than 4 and i somebody wanted to they could shoot one steel from A, reload, one steel from B, reload and then clear the rest from C. Same number or shots, same number of reloads etc. Just a thought.

I'd be a bit concerned about the shooting areas like that rather than boxes (or areas) that had at least a little bit of a gap between them. You could wind up with all sorts of "I only had one foot on the ground" arguments and it really is pretty hard to tell (for faster shooters anyway) whether the shot broke the instant after the foot left the ground or just before it. Without instant reply I'd hate to see the arguments that one could stir up

[JThompson]

G-ManBart, on Mar 20 2009, 11:05 PM, said:

JThompson, on Mar 20 2009, 10:11 PM, said:

Flexmoney, on Mar 20 2009, 10:02 PM, said:

Comstock and "only" don't go together (in this case..."no more than 4").

It doesn't say only four rounds, it says only four targets... you could shoot as many as needed to engage those four, or am I missing something? I do want you guys to pick it apart.

It would seem to me that you could stipulate that at least one target must be shot from each area as well as a mandatory reload between areas, but setting a "no more than 4 targets" per area does seem unusual for a comstock classifier. Remove the no more than 4 and i somebody wanted to they could shoot one steel from A, reload, one steel from B, reload and then clear the rest from C. Same number or shots, same number of reloads etc. Just a thought.

I'd be a bit concerned about the shooting areas like that rather than boxes (or areas) that had at least a little bit of a gap between them. You could wind up with all sorts of "I only had one foot on the ground" arguments and it really is pretty hard to tell (for faster shooters anyway) whether the shot broke the instant after the foot left the ground or just before it. Without instant reply I'd hate to see the arguments that one could stir up

Every other classifier out there say, "From Box A engage only T1-T3 with two rounds each." I have taken a different path to the same thing and left it up to the shooter. It is unusual... I didn't want it to be a cookie cutter. I thought some original thought might be refreshing.

The boxes being attached has merit. By putting in some space I might give the ROs some needed time to see a fault.

[JThompson]

HoMiE, on Mar 20 2009, 11:00 PM, said:

I personally don't like it. You are screwing Production and Revo shooters by having too many paper and saying you can only shoot 4 yada yada. My suggestion would be to have two shooting boxes, remove 3 paper and add 2 poppers. Change WSB to say engage array (paper or steel) from one box and engage remain array from other box.

I don't know how anyone, regardless of class, gets screwed here... Different classes always shoot stages different ways. Revo people shoot it with two reloads, Open shoot it with two reloads, Production shoots it with two reloads. Everyone shoots it from three positions. Time only matters in reference to class anyway so..
so...

This post has been edited by JThompson: 20 March 2009 - 10:52 PM

[Singlestack]

Divisions.

[boz1911]

I may be wrong but I was thinking since this has mandatory movement, therefore it's a field course. Unless there's a classifier exemption you cannot mandate reloads on a field course.

[Flexmoney]

I don't think movement is the key.

We have:

- “Short Courses” must not require more than 8 rounds to complete
and no more than 2 shooting locations.

- “Medium Courses” must not require more than 16 rounds to
complete and no more than 3 shooting locations...

- “Long Courses” in Level III or higher matches must not require
more than 32 rounds to complete...

- “Standard Exercises” - Courses of fire consisting of two or more
separately timed component strings.

- “Classifiers”

1.1.5.2 Standard Exercises and Classifiers may include mandatory
reloads and may dictate a shooting position, location or stance.



The catch 22 in a lot of those is that...to become a classifier...USPSA wants to see the stage run in a Major. Yet, a stage with mandatory reloads wouldn't be legal to run...

[shred]

Unless you run with a Level I exemption, it wouldn't be a legal stage otherwise except as a Classifier.

I'm having some difficulty seeing the value of using any otherwise-not-legal stage as a classifier-- by definition normal stages are run under different rules and ideally we should be comparing shooters on stages using those actual rules.

[wide45]

Level 1 matches are allowed mandatory reloads in medium courses, but it won't fly in a major.


I like that you are leaving the target engagement wide open for the competitor.

[JThompson]

John: Thanks for the correction.

Flex: An excellent point.

Shred: "I'm having some difficulty seeing the value of using any otherwise-not-legal stage as a classifier-- by definition normal stages are run under different rules and ideally we should be comparing shooters on stages using those actual rules."

That is another very good point... isn't that a problem with a many of the classifiers we shoot right now? I could chop it up with walls or barricades and force the shooters to go here and there and shoot this or that, but that is the very thing I wish to avoid! Also, I want to keep it simple so all clubs will have the needed props and it doesn't require a master stage builder to replicate.

Perhaps there needs to be an exemption for a stage being considered for a classifier. The way the rules are now, it's almost impossible to design something original. You you can move a few targets around, but there is still one way to shoot the stage and that goes against one of the founding premises... freestyle.

This post has been edited by JThompson: 21 March 2009 - 08:45 AM

[JThompson]

I can't make it a "Standards" because it uses PP and is scored V-Count which disallows steel of any kind right?

[shred]

JThompson, on Mar 21 2009, 10:12 AM, said:

Shred: "I'm having some difficulty seeing the value of using any otherwise-not-legal stage as a classifier-- by definition normal stages are run under different rules and ideally we should be comparing shooters on stages using those actual rules."

That is another very good point... isn't that a problem with a many of the classifiers we shoot right now? I could chop it up with walls or barricades and force the shooters to go here and there and shoot this or that, but that is the very thing I wish to avoid! Also, I want to keep it simple so all clubs will have the needed props and it doesn't require a master stage builder to replicate.

Yeah, I have the same problem with those classifiers too-- we've grandfathered a lot in over the years and not updated them as the rules change.

The one feature I don't like much is the pretty-much standing mandatory reloads. (aside: Yeah, I know "lost art of the reload... " and all that. Sorry I don't buy it. Show me an M-Open that can't do good reloads on demand). Pretty much we teach avoiding standing reloads as much as possible for shooters wanting to do better. Two reloads is also going to drop the HF considerably-- while that's not a bad thing, it's contrary to typical US big-match stage HFs, and one of the major complaints about the classification system is it doesn't accurately represent match performance.

Realistically though it probably doesn't matter much. Shoot a 90% on this one and you can probably shoot a 90% on about any other classifier.

[JThompson]

shred, on Mar 21 2009, 10:24 AM, said:

JThompson, on Mar 21 2009, 10:12 AM, said:

Shred: "I'm having some difficulty seeing the value of using any otherwise-not-legal stage as a classifier-- by definition normal stages are run under different rules and ideally we should be comparing shooters on stages using those actual rules."

That is another very good point... isn't that a problem with a many of the classifiers we shoot right now? I could chop it up with walls or barricades and force the shooters to go here and there and shoot this or that, but that is the very thing I wish to avoid! Also, I want to keep it simple so all clubs will have the needed props and it doesn't require a master stage builder to replicate.

Yeah, I have the same problem with those classifiers too-- we've grandfathered a lot in over the years and not updated them as the rules change.

The one feature I don't like much is the pretty-much standing mandatory reloads. (aside: Yeah, I know "lost art of the reload... " and all that. Sorry I don't buy it. Show me an M-Open that can't do good reloads on demand). Pretty much we teach avoiding standing reloads as much as possible for shooters wanting to do better. Two reloads is also going to drop the HF considerably-- while that's not a bad thing, it's contrary to typical US big-match stage HFs, and one of the major complaints about the classification system is it doesn't accurately represent match performance.

Realistically though it probably doesn't matter much. Shoot a 90% on this one and you can probably shoot a 90% on about any other classifier.

Okay, that's another good reason to put some space between the boxes... we have time to get a reload done. That will increase the time, but at least you won't be standing there.

[JThompson]

Moved up top

This post has been edited by JThompson: 21 March 2009 - 03:50 PM

[Flexmoney]

Here is a quick and dirty drawing with some tweakage. It would be an easier setup (still tough placement of the walls, but you can play with that).

The walls would hide PP2 & PP3 from anywhere except the respective corners of the shooting area. Same for T1 & T6 (with the hard cover like that).

I shuffled the hard cover a bit, leaving the back two paper (T2 & T4) wide open. Those two will be at about 15y, being open...you will get some shooter movement as those are engaged (option).

I'd want the shooting area to be 4ft deep and 8y wide.

If you wanted to stick in a mandatory reload... ... Mandatory reload required after engaging the first target and before engaging the last target.

 JT___Free.doc (34K)
Number of downloads: 20

[Flexmoney]

If you really wanted to ease up the setup...

- Make all the paper inline, straight across.
- Make the walls go straight across too.

 JT___Free2.doc (32K)
Number of downloads: 14

 JT___Free3.doc (32K)
Number of downloads: 13

[JimInFL]

Sorry for the OT interjection - but what software is that ?