Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Competitions & Upcoming Events
NEW TIME for OKC Rifle Match
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ninefan" data-source="post: 1182790" data-attributes="member: 2401"><p>I think by points Mike means that if you take each stage as worth 100 pts, then take each persons percentage of the stage winner's points for each stage and then sum them up to make the overall (like USPSA scoring but without weighting each stage for the number of targets on each stage).</p><p></p><p>It would have the effect of making all of the stages worth the same, whereas now the long-range stage is a bit over-amplified because a bad run that is say 20% longer than a good 70 second run is 14 seconds added to the time, where on a shorter 30 second stage a 20% longer run would only be 6 seconds longer.</p><p></p><p>I think the only real way to lessen the effect of this with our time scoring would be to make the long-range stage shorter (as in less total targets) so that it takes less time to run. That would give less difference between a good run and a bad run on that stage.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand you could argue that the long-range stage is fine like it is simply because we don't have targets out past 30 yards on any of the other stages. If we could run 100-200 yd targets on other stages then they would also have much longer times. By having all of our long-distance shots on one single stage we just compress all of that long-range shooting for the match into one go at it (and boy you better have your game face on for that stage!!).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ninefan, post: 1182790, member: 2401"] I think by points Mike means that if you take each stage as worth 100 pts, then take each persons percentage of the stage winner's points for each stage and then sum them up to make the overall (like USPSA scoring but without weighting each stage for the number of targets on each stage). It would have the effect of making all of the stages worth the same, whereas now the long-range stage is a bit over-amplified because a bad run that is say 20% longer than a good 70 second run is 14 seconds added to the time, where on a shorter 30 second stage a 20% longer run would only be 6 seconds longer. I think the only real way to lessen the effect of this with our time scoring would be to make the long-range stage shorter (as in less total targets) so that it takes less time to run. That would give less difference between a good run and a bad run on that stage. On the other hand you could argue that the long-range stage is fine like it is simply because we don't have targets out past 30 yards on any of the other stages. If we could run 100-200 yd targets on other stages then they would also have much longer times. By having all of our long-distance shots on one single stage we just compress all of that long-range shooting for the match into one go at it (and boy you better have your game face on for that stage!!). [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Competitions & Upcoming Events
NEW TIME for OKC Rifle Match
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom