international classification
- Thread starter euxx
- Start date
A couple of points to note:
1. Level III matches CAN be used as Classifiers. In BC, very few match directors are willing to go to the extra effort of putting on Level III matches. I've done a few, and they're not really extra work from what I did for level II's. However, it requires a minimum percentage of the competitors in a division already have an ICS classification in order to be used. One advantage is that you do not need a GM to attend in order for the match to count as a Classifier, but you do have to pay the sanction fees.
2. The ICS system is not hugely different from the ICS system. The two major flaws that I perceive with ICS are:
a) You can go down by shooting a bad enough classifier (in the US you can't go down)
b) If you shoot a 0, you get a 0 added to your classification record. In the US, if you shoot a score that is more than 5% below your current class, it is discarded. I think that if ICS adopted this policy, it would go a long way to making the system more useful.
I put on at least 1 ICS classifier match a year. There are decent ICS classifiers out there. However, they do not often fit in with the "we need to shoot more rounds or it's not fun" mentality that seems to drive a lot of matches. One of the mindsets I see is nowadays is that if there is movement, there had better be 32 rounds in the stage. I'm quite happy with 3 position 12 round stages, or 2 position 8 round stages. Others tend to think that is a waste of range space.
1. Level III matches CAN be used as Classifiers. In BC, very few match directors are willing to go to the extra effort of putting on Level III matches. I've done a few, and they're not really extra work from what I did for level II's. However, it requires a minimum percentage of the competitors in a division already have an ICS classification in order to be used. One advantage is that you do not need a GM to attend in order for the match to count as a Classifier, but you do have to pay the sanction fees.
2. The ICS system is not hugely different from the ICS system. The two major flaws that I perceive with ICS are:
a) You can go down by shooting a bad enough classifier (in the US you can't go down)
b) If you shoot a 0, you get a 0 added to your classification record. In the US, if you shoot a score that is more than 5% below your current class, it is discarded. I think that if ICS adopted this policy, it would go a long way to making the system more useful.
I put on at least 1 ICS classifier match a year. There are decent ICS classifiers out there. However, they do not often fit in with the "we need to shoot more rounds or it's not fun" mentality that seems to drive a lot of matches. One of the mindsets I see is nowadays is that if there is movement, there had better be 32 rounds in the stage. I'm quite happy with 3 position 12 round stages, or 2 position 8 round stages. Others tend to think that is a waste of range space.
- Location
- Prince George B.C.
Lol...practice....practice....what's that??
For some people that is a dirty word.
But again I have to say if someone sets these stages up and practices them so much they become "ICS GM"'s who cares???? All they will have achieved is to gain a rating they don't deserve and they are going to get their butts kicked.... so what.
So far I have not read any convincing arguments that would cause me to discount ICS. I think it would work if we are willing to bite the bullet and add a few of these stages to every match.
John
The problem with this is that it removes balance from the equation. Some people are better at quick little draw and fire short courses, others are better at run and gun long courses. In a match with a variety of stages, these things average out. Basing your classification system on one type of stage does not accurately reflect your competitor's overall skill level.
- Location
- Prince George B.C.
For sure, but at the end of the day what difference does it make?
I don't see what you are getting at
John
Then shoot it faster with all A's, most people find things they can't do really well boring or substitute boring for "I don't like this type of stage" Classifiers are the most difficult stages to do well at in a match usually.
Pure nonsense, the US classification system ( from which the stages for ICS were stolen) works very very well as shown by who wins at major matches. Gm's then M's the A's etc etc.
Besides there are many classifiers with movement you just can't game them because then the results won't show skill they will show how many shooters copied someone who figured a way to get around the stage description.
Classifier stages are designed to be shot the same way by everyone so there will be a consistant measurement of skill.
You will not see real M's and GM complaining about classifier stages, only those who are not up to the challenge and want to blame the stage.
Yeah, it's not perfect, no classification system is, but we need to get anybody classed, who wants to be, across a large diverse area. Hopefully the stages as they fill out will include all types of stages. We have ones in our Ontario book that test a variety of skills including movement. It would be great to have some full on field courses, but how do youensure they are set up exactly the same on every range? Every angle, target, prop, barricade, has to be measured for duplication. The more complex the stage the harder it is to do that, simple stages are easier.
Back when we didn't have divisions it was easier because there was almost always enough top shooters at any match to use it as a classifier. Now with them all spread across the divisions you may only get one in each at any given match and that isn't accurate enough. An especially good day or a really bad day for the GM can skew the results.
Really? good to know you're a psychic too.
Beyond the fact that most of the classifier stages are boring there is the added fun that people choose the same ones to run all the time, so number one, I don't want to shoot the same stages all the time, and number two I want original content. It's got nothing to do with being worried about not bieng up to the challenge. It's got to do with not seeing the same thing all the time. Yes there are many many stages within ICS, a lot of which, but I'd much rather shoot a match that someone has put some thought into, then a match that someone downloaded off the net. If I want to get ICS classified, I'll run a night of them at my club and invite people to come do it. As we've seen here, others do just that.
some of us do request more round count and funner stages, but not once do I recall anyone saying they don't want a short course or ICS stages in matches...
another point, ICS stages do need to have some developed as medium courses of fire, so this way it incorporates some movement mixed with shooting straight skills..., etc....
to help balance and better gauge someones skill level....and not class them high cause they're quick and accurate but not slower on full movement stages ....
it will not be perfect system, but help it along some....
I shot two matches last year that had ics stages, but none were posted to ipsc.org site...or updated on ipsc-canada site either.... ??
apperently only for local standing or something, i forget what they said.....??
right now, I'm just looking forward to smell some gun smoke tomorrow, been a few months since last shot....:-(
another point, ICS stages do need to have some developed as medium courses of fire, so this way it incorporates some movement mixed with shooting straight skills..., etc....
to help balance and better gauge someones skill level....and not class them high cause they're quick and accurate but not slower on full movement stages ....
it will not be perfect system, but help it along some....
I shot two matches last year that had ics stages, but none were posted to ipsc.org site...or updated on ipsc-canada site either.... ??
apperently only for local standing or something, i forget what they said.....??
right now, I'm just looking forward to smell some gun smoke tomorrow, been a few months since last shot....:-(
With an Open Gun, my first shot on a 10 yard target (from hands at sides) is about 1.1 to 1.3 seconds, and my split times on a full paper at 10 yards are around 0.25-0.35 seconds. Everyone thinks I do well because I'm a fast runner with good movement.
I'm currently ranked number 1 in Open in Canada, according to ICS, based on my performance on boring, stand and fire speed shoots. With basic shooting stats as poor as mine, why hasn't someone who is more skilled at the quick little draw and fire courses have a higher ICS ranking than me?
PS. I never practice ICS stages, either.
Rob, it can't always be about what you want, you are competing to to win your division, others want to shoot against others in the same class as themselves ( not everyone is GM material but we all want to have fun).
This can only be accomplished in a system with both level III results ( catches sandbaggers) and classfier stages ( tests basic shooting skills).
If you don't want to shoot classifiers yourself then I am sure no one will give a care.
Just hold some Level III's down your way and all your problems are solved
love to have a range in town capable of it.
