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

How would you classify this shooter?

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Chris_H, Sep 3, 2008.

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

    Chris_H Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    313
    I have a question on which class you would put this shooter for singles if there were no target requirements. 500 singles: 92,87,182,91 for a 90.4 average. 1100 caps: 86,74,94,94,92,71,90,99,97,93,91. All scores are from the beginning of the target year with the last scores being the most recent. The shooter also went from the 21 to the 23 with a 1 yard punch for the 99 and another yard for the 97. Would you have the shooter in C class singles or based on known ability bump them a class or two? Just curious to how anyone who does classifying on a regular basis would handle something like this.

    -Chris-
     
  2. KEYBEAR

    KEYBEAR Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,222
    Looks like a C Class Shooter that can shoot handicap better . Most shooters shoot higher Singles scores but that is not always true .

    ALF
     
  3. Surfside6

    Surfside6 TS Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    115
    C Class Not all shooters are sandbaggers. Very few actually are.
     
  4. Rico46

    Rico46 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    725
    I concur! You have a class C singles shooter who shoots decent handicap!

    Rick Brohmer
     
  5. wolfram

    wolfram Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,260
    Well you didn't say what the known ability was so it is unknown to me. I would be interested in the previous years results if there were any but as it stands this shooter would be C class singles in any size shoot. The handicap results are fairly similar if you throw out the highs and lows so that doesn't suggest that we are looking at a sandbagger, just a person that had a couple of good days.
     
  6. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    I would put him in C and tell him he was overchoked at the 16 :)
     
  7. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,226
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    JBrooks, you win a cigar for that one!! :) Probably real close to fact! Hap
     
  8. Steve NJ

    Steve NJ Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    250
    Class C
     
  9. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    With the information presented, I would put him in class C (in a 5 class shoot), but I would ask for some clarification. I don't like scores recorded as 189. I prefer to see each 100 targets recorded separately. If the 189 was actually a 100 followed by an 89, I would be thinking about class B.
    Also, I would look at the last two years averages. They can be important with only 500 targets this year.

    Pat Ireland
     
  10. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Nothing tricky about this, just another "C" class shooter on the 23; there are hundreds of them.

    Neil
     
  11. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    I happen to agree with Mr. Ireland as the statement that he made "I would look at the last two years averages. They can be important with only 500 targets this year." is along the line of the ATA rulebook

    "a. If the shooter has less than 500 targets on current year’s Average
    Card, use the previous year average and known ability."

    True the book says less than 500 targets but I believe it warrants a look see just to be sure.

    Bob Lawless
     
  12. Gary Waalkes

    Gary Waalkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,400
    Lets see... it is a State shoot, there are two classifiers, the line is long and we need to get people into the system so they can get a squad and we can start the shoot.

    You see where this is going - there is zero time to study this card or any other. If you scutinize one, you must do the same for all. The line will not move and you will be pissing off your customers. I just check current scores, check target totals, and see what happened last year or so.

    There is no time to look at handicap and try and apply those scores to singles. What if the handicap scores were poor - would you advocate putting the shooter in Class D? Since handicap shoots long targets, should we bump doubles shooters too? I am trying to say that it is not science, it is just a process that must happen before we can get people squadded.

    There are shoots where the computer programs are really providing the classification guidance. At those shoots, classifiers do not even look at the card. The machine cranks out an answer based on the last 1,000 targets entered and the classifier simply hands you your slip and pin and that is that.
     
  13. ec90t

    ec90t Guest

    Looks like the scores that I shot when shooting registered trap. Just like Neil stated, just another c class shooter.

    ec90t
     
  14. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Gary Waalkes sorry I can't agree with statements classifying is a responsibility to make sure all shooters are in the proper class. No matter how upset the customer gets this process is for their protection. Making sure that shooters that are not put into the wrong class. Some will get misclassified but it should not occur because of neglect.

    In the case of this shooter from the information I have been given and the number of targets that I can see he would be in a penalty class for lack of targets. So as I see it his average is a moot point.

    Bob Lawless
     
  15. Hauser

    Hauser Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    860
    If all I was looking at were his singles scores I'd put him in class C.



    That said based on his handicap scores I'd put him in class B.


    Jerry hauser
     
  16. Chris_H

    Chris_H Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    313
    Ok here is a little more info. 2007 200 16s with a 91.5 average and 2006 1900 16s shot with a 94.79 average. Not sure how far back you would go so 2005 was 1100 targets with a 93.64 and 2004 1300 90.23. I doubt you would go back to 2004 or 05 but there they are. I am just curious to if that means that with this persons known ability would place someone them in a higher class even though the current and previous years only show 700 16s shot at. The reason I am asking is for a local trophy shoot that has no target requirements so that is why I am asking.
     
  17. Little Dog

    Little Dog TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    531
    Definitely a sandbagger who should be placed in AA class.
     
  18. maclellan1911

    maclellan1911 TS Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,226
    looks like he shoots more caps than singles, practice caps more to I would guess. I would bet he has a high shooting tight choked gun, getting better scores at yardage. I raised my comb as high as it would go one day step back to the 27 hit them well, returned comb to normal not hitting so well.
     
  19. markdenis

    markdenis TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,123
    In my opinion, he needs to shoot in the class where his average is. That is why the ATA rule book is published and lists class averages. For any classifier to put him in any class other than where his average falls, is a biased opinion based on the very vague "Known Ability" references.

    As far as I am concerned, the only "Known Ability" in the ATA is a handful of professionals that can prove time and time again they can shoot perfect scores in all events.

    Mark Rounds
     
  20. Gary Waalkes

    Gary Waalkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,400
    To my critics, please address the software that just averages the last 1,000 targets and cranks out a classification. No examination of anything. The Eastern Zone shoot did it in 2007 and I am told it was done at the GA this year. To those who would move someone up because of handicap scores, you forgot to address moving them down in singles if the handicap is crummy. Also related and not addressed is the impact on doubles classification. If anything, shooting longer targets applies more to doubles than singles.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.