1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Handicapping at the Calif state shoot

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by BOBL, Jul 10, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BOBL

    BOBL TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    73
    My experiance at the handicap window at Kingsburg was not a happy one, nor was it for many of the other people I was in line with. The problems were not about
    handicapping but classification. My card was up to date complete with my singles average, 93.5, however the last two scores included in this average
    were 96 and 99. The lady at the window called to Eileen who bumped me to, A, class. Eileen put in a long hard week of long hard days, I thank her for that.
    Known ability was her reason, I just have a problem with that rule.

    Bob L. Wood
     
  2. Laudygirl

    Laudygirl TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    49
    I'd say she got it right.
     
  3. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    I would need to see your entire card before making a judgment. I would be looking for high scores, especially 100 and wins.

    Pat Ireland
     
  4. Steve NJ

    Steve NJ Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    250
    I agree with Pat. I look at the last 1000 targets, overall average and last years average to determine where a shooter belongs. Here in NJ a guy can have a 93.5 singles average but have a 96/97 average on the last 1000. Around here someone that shoots through the winter will generally have a lower average then his/her ability. If you take the time to explain that to the shooter "most" understand.

    There are so many variables with each shooter to be classified it would be impossible to have hard fast rules to go by. For the most part classifiers do a good job with the information available.
     
  5. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Gee Bob,

    My average was also at 93.5 and Eileen put me in A class as well because my last 10 scores had a bunch of 95+s. I knew I probably wouldn't win B without a 198 and that it would take 200 + shootoff to win A. However, the only reason I showup to shoot singles is to chase the 100 straight so it didn't matter to me.

    So, Eileen was consistant.

    However, I do agree that the current classification system sucks because it allows for low scores shot in the winter to drag down overall averages. Take the last 7 scores, throw out 2, do the average and shoot in that class.
     
  6. fssberson

    fssberson Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,375
    I was proud to be back in the A classification with my last scores bumping me up. And the 198/200 [a 100 straight on the back side] got me nothing but a free beer... thanks Bob M. Fred
     
  7. BMC

    BMC Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Messages:
    769
    Congrats on that 100 straight Fred! That is good shootin' no matter what letter is next to your name on the score sheet!
     
  8. Beancounter

    Beancounter TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    482
    BOBL - as others have already written, you did not provide enough information. Where did you finish last year and over how many targets. How many targets this season and what is the high score in your last 700 - 1000 targets? It is not just your average but is how the scores trend that will bump you up. On your side of the ledger is if Ca has 6 classes, the armchair handicappers are full of it and you (and others) got screwed.
     
  9. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    HGWT,

    I think Bob finished last year about 95.5. As long as classifications can be changed due to the subjective "Known Ability" rule, or last few scores "trend", it really isn't an objective classification system. This could be fixed if the ATA wanted to fix it.
     
  10. BOBL

    BOBL TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    73
    Before I give more info about my scores, let me explain my question or problem.
    The known ability rule makes the handicapper judge and jury over each shooter,
    and no two of them are alike. Now for my info,2006, 1650 targets at 95.39%,
    2005, 1850 targets at 93.62%, 2004, 1400 targets at92.14%, 2003, 2200 targets
    at 94.36%. With this much info in every handicappers hands why do they only
    consider the last few hundred targets, and then only if those scores are above
    your average?

    Bob L Wood
     
  11. Cherokee Kid

    Cherokee Kid TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    291
    Bob, obviously last year you were a real solid A. How about giving us your 2007 average after throwing out anything under 90 and your last, say, 6 scores before the State Shoot.
     
  12. 3DHC

    3DHC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    92
    You guys need to grow up and stop sniveling about your Singles classification at the California State Shoot. Eileen does a great job and gives the proper weight to the relevant factors in making her determinations.

    Also, you need to shoot 200 straight in B, A, AA, & AAA just to get a ticket to the dance! Vet runner up earlier in the week sometimes plays with a 198 or 199.

    Butch
     
  13. ajc

    ajc Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    77
    Someone already mentioned that if everyone were ethical and honest, there wouldn't be a need for any rules. While I don't think we will ever solve this issue (if you build a better mousetrap all you get is smarter mice), I'll offer what I personally do. In addition to maintaining my scorecard (as the rules clearly state), I also manage my scores on an excel spreadsheet, and I graphically track the results (I know, it's a little--OK, a lot--anal) by pure average and by trend. Trending nullifies an extreme score, whether good or bad, and it can represent the "trend" (get it?) over time. And because you can easily set the number of scores to derive the trend, it can be modified to be any size data sample you want.

    It seems to me that if a uniform trend value were established for classification, much of the issues raised here are removed.
    1. A really good or bad score has less effect on your trend (much like a purified average).
    2. The trend shows the direction your scores are headed. And is a lagging indicator of where they may go. Useful for a the person doing the classification.
    3. It removes the subjective decision from the classifier, and makes the shooters arguments irrelevant; the trend value will place the shooter where he really belongs, without question.

    Alas, I can only dream.

    ajc
     
  14. fssberson

    fssberson Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,375
    Butch: you are right. It is 200 straight or go sit down, but it is fun trying and occassionaly you catch the brass ring. Fred
     
  15. Cherokee Kid

    Cherokee Kid TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    291
    I guess Bob can't find those scores.
     
  16. bow377

    bow377 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    142
    Hey Bob Wood, you're correct Eileen did put in a long week at the STATE SHOOT, but she still made a BUT of herself with her (KNOWN ABILITY). Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure you will).If your last 10 scores are (4) 94s, (2) 90s, (2)91s, (1) 96, (1) 98, thats a total of 932, for a avg. of 93.2, BUT not accouring to Eileen, she says the 98 & 96 are (KNOWN ABILITY) and the two 90s are not, giving you a avg. of (94) which is A class. But I guess I should thank Eileen because I saved a lot of money, I wouldn't shoot and single.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.