[Neomet]

Okay, I know the first answer is to shoot all As but............

I shot Times Two today as our match classifier. I did a fairly poor job of the all As guideline but am a bit confused by how well I did.

I shot 51 points in 6.77 for a hit factor of 7.5332

Someone else shot 55 points in 7.76 for a hit factor of 7.0876

With four less points I was still able to better a score even though I was only .99 of a second faster.

This seems counterintuitive to me as I had always been told, particularly on short stages like this 60 point classifier that I was better to slow down a bit and go for better hits.

What am I missing here????

[The_Vigilante]

Speed rules!!!

[lugnut]

High HF stages are where time matters more than points (relatively speaking anyway).

A stage with a HF of 5.0 means 1 pt = .2sec
A stage with a HF of 10.0 means 1 pt = .1 sec.


So in your example... at about a 7 HF... 4 pts= about .6sec.... you were .99 faster so it's better.

EDIT: this is true for ALL stages... including a classifier.

This post has been edited by lugnut: 20 September 2009 - 08:59 PM

[G-ManBart]

It's all a balancing act. Consider this: If you'd been a little more deliberate, spent half a second more (7.27s) to get 5 more points (56 total) your hit factor would have gone up to 7.70. I think most folks could turn 5 C's into 5 A's if they gave themselves an extra tenth of a second per shot to do so...i.e. turn that .15 split into a .25 split.

Ideally you'd just shoot right on the edge of your ability to call all A's knowing a few will wind up to be C's and you'll get around 95% of the points available. If you shoot 95% of the available points as fast as you possibly can you're doing really, really well.

[Flexmoney]

Neomet, on Sep 20 2009, 11:44 PM, said:

What am I missing here????

Math Skills.


One way to look at it is that you were about 8% worse in points, but about 14.5% better in time.




Here is the real issue though:

Quote

I had always been told, particularly on short stages like this 60 point classifier that I was better to slow down a bit and go for better hits.

That advice kinda sucks.

It sets people up to think that the only way to get better points is to shoot slower. Who wants to shoot slower ?!??

Nobody does.


Just figure out how to get better hits.

[Aristotle]

Flexmoney, on Sep 20 2009, 11:02 PM, said:

Here is the real issue though:

Quote

I had always been told, particularly on short stages like this 60 point classifier that I was better to slow down a bit and go for better hits.

That advice kinda sucks.

It sets people up to think that the only way to get better points is to shoot slower. Who wants to shoot slower ?!??

Nobody does.


Just figure out how to get better hits.

Very well said.

[Nik Habicht]

Flexmoney, on Sep 21 2009, 02:02 AM, said:

Just figure out how to get better hits.....

....as efficiently as possible.....

We're back to "See what you need to see...."

Can't hurry vision; but don't want to take all day getting the perfect sight picture on a ten yard target either.....

[lugnut]

Flexmoney, on Sep 21 2009, 02:02 AM, said:

Quote

I had always been told, particularly on short stages like this 60 point classifier that I was better to slow down a bit and go for better hits.

That advice kinda sucks.

It sets people up to think that the only way to get better points is to shoot slower. Who wants to shoot slower ?!??

Nobody does.

Just figure out how to get better hits.

LOL- this couldn't be better said. It's easy in hindsight to break things down but while you are in autopilot it just doesn't work that easy... at least for me! I can't seem to make myself slow down but I know with more work and discipline I'll be able to get better hits. That is the intrigue of this sport to me!! Maybe makes me insane once in a while too!

[rkgsmith]

I usually try to determine what a good HF is for the stage and shoot accordingly. Stages with HF's above 7 I shoot for speed and below 7 I shoot for accuracy. Not saying I don't try to be accurate all the time, but high hit factor stages tend to be speed heavy, while low hit factor stages seem to be accuracy heavy in my opinion. My overall goal is never to shoot more than 5% down on any stage. But sometimes 5% will kill you on a short fast stage, so if your going to drop some points do it quickly. My .02 for what it's worth.

[CHA-LEE]

If you give each shot the respect it requires, no more, no less that’s the best you can do regardless of time or points. For high hit factor stages the shots are usually easier/faster but that doesn’t mean that you need to respect the shots any less than they require. Each target requires a unique level of respect to achieve the best hits for the given circumstances. Focus on learning the different target/shot respect levels and the points and time situation will iron its self out.

As for stage time, at least from what I have seen, the vast majority of time lost is by inefficient movements. Extra steps, sloppy reloads, slow target to target transitions, pulling the gun back and poking it back out every time you move, and on and on and on. Optimizing your movement and mechanics while traversing a stage is where you will save a boat load of time.

But in the end you still need points to divide by your time. You could have the best stage time of the match but with poor points it won’t matter. If you are not acquiring at least 90% - 95% of the stage points you are wasting your efforts on trying to get a good stage time.

[shooterbenedetto]

I have been shooting point for a while now about 1year..
always came up top overall BUT..its time to speed up.
I know speeding up will result in dropping points but the goal
is to get a better cadence from target to target. It will hurt for a while
from the overall standing every match, but I know points will eventually
catch up with speed...As Max Michel says he would rather take speed shooters
all the time and can minor adjust for better points as a shooter. now I know what he
meant by that!

SB

[Graham Smith]

G-ManBart, on Sep 21 2009, 01:10 AM, said:

It's all a balancing act. Consider this: If you'd been a little more deliberate, spent half a second more (7.27s) to get 5 more points (56 total) your hit factor would have gone up to 7.70. I think most folks could turn 5 C's into 5 A's if they gave themselves an extra tenth of a second per shot to do so...i.e. turn that .15 split into a .25 split.

When I try and look at a stage to figure out if I can do better shooting faster or more accurate I usually do worse than if I just shot it the same as all the rest.

For the past three months, I have tried as best I can to shoot consistently at a reasonable speed so that I'm not letting bullets fly when I don't have the sights where they belong. Doing this has improved my overall scores and left me feeling better about the way I am shooting. It has made me a happier shooter.

The exception that proves the rule is that I always find myself making mistakes on the classifiers that I am not making on other stages. I don't know if this is because they are classifiers or because they are short stages mainly shot from a single spot, but I always tend to shoot them just a bit faster than I am capable of shooting.

[benos]

More on that here.

Don't think in terms of ".vs".

Learn to see what you need to see to shoot the A at the earliest opportunity, instead of doing things like slowing down or speeding up.

If you try to "slow down to shoot the points," your gun's barrel will be pointed at the A-zone for a variable period of time, before you actually fire the shot.

If you try to "speed up," you usually won't see enough to call your shots.

So it's better to forget both and learn how to keep your eyes open "read the sights." Everything you need to know is found right there.
be

[G-ManBart]

Graham Smith, on Sep 21 2009, 04:27 PM, said:

G-ManBart, on Sep 21 2009, 01:10 AM, said:

It's all a balancing act. Consider this: If you'd been a little more deliberate, spent half a second more (7.27s) to get 5 more points (56 total) your hit factor would have gone up to 7.70. I think most folks could turn 5 C's into 5 A's if they gave themselves an extra tenth of a second per shot to do so...i.e. turn that .15 split into a .25 split.

When I try and look at a stage to figure out if I can do better shooting faster or more accurate I usually do worse than if I just shot it the same as all the rest.

For the past three months, I have tried as best I can to shoot consistently at a reasonable speed so that I'm not letting bullets fly when I don't have the sights where they belong. Doing this has improved my overall scores and left me feeling better about the way I am shooting. It has made me a happier shooter.

The exception that proves the rule is that I always find myself making mistakes on the classifiers that I am not making on other stages. I don't know if this is because they are classifiers or because they are short stages mainly shot from a single spot, but I always tend to shoot them just a bit faster than I am capable of shooting.

Yeah, I don't make any effort to really figure out the hit factor in advance and come up with a plan...always seems to mess with me the few times I tried it.

Now I just try shooting on the edge of how well I can call A's knowing I'll get a few that turn into C's...I can live with that. R,

[Flexmoney]

A lot of (but not all) stages that have a high hit factor have one because the targets are big and close...hosers.

Close, open targets...I call those 'ducks in a barrel'... Free Alphas.

[mountaincoulee]

lugnut, on Sep 20 2009, 09:57 PM, said:

High HF stages are where time matters more than points (relatively speaking anyway).

A stage with a HF of 5.0 means 1 pt = .2sec
A stage with a HF of 10.0 means 1 pt = .1 sec.


So in your example... at about a 7 HF... 4 pts= about .6sec.... you were .99 faster so it's better.

EDIT: this is true for ALL stages... including a classifier.

lugnut, could you explain to me how I can figure out in advance the hit factor for a given stage?
From the match copy, I can see how many points are available to be scored (hit), but I can only guesstimate how long it will take me to move through the stage and shoot those targets.

So what's the trick to figuring out if a stage has a high HF or not?

[bkeeler]

Neomet, on Sep 20 2009, 10:44 PM, said:

Okay, I know the first answer is to shoot all As but............

I shot Times Two today as our match classifier. I did a fairly poor job of the all As guideline but am a bit confused by how well I did.

I shot 51 points in 6.77 for a hit factor of 7.5332

Someone else shot 55 points in 7.76 for a hit factor of 7.0876

With four less points I was still able to better a score even though I was only .99 of a second faster.

This seems counterintuitive to me as I had always been told, particularly on short stages like this 60 point classifier that I was better to slow down a bit and go for better hits.

What am I missing here????

This might help a little.

http://robleatham.co...8/what-is-fast/

BK

[benos]

G-ManBart, on Sep 21 2009, 04:11 PM, said:

Yeah, I don't make any effort to really figure out the hit factor in advance and come up with a plan...always seems to mess with me the few times I tried it.

Now I just try shooting on the edge of how well I can call A's knowing I'll get a few that turn into C's...I can live with that. R,

Flexmoney, on Sep 21 2009, 04:33 PM, said:

A lot of (but not all) stages that have a high hit factor have one because the targets are big and close...hosers.

Close, open targets...I call those 'ducks in a barrel'... Free Alphas.

Good stuff!
be

[Neomet]

Thanks guys for all the input, and BK for the link. Great reading.