2006 Nationals Analysis (Top Ten)

hungrybeagle

hungrybeagle

CGN frequent flyer
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
Vancouver
Heh. I have no life.

I was reading Henning's account of the Nationals on his website where he mentioned that he only dropped 60 points on the match. Well, I knew that on the first day, I had dropped 95 and thought that was acceptable.

Out of curiosity, I pulled the stats from the Top Ten in Open division and figured out how many points all of them dropped, just to see how I compared. Sorry, it's a picture, this board doesn't accept html table tags very well. I had a spreadsheet calculate overall points (and therefore, how many points down). For curiosity, I also calculated total shooting time for the match. Since I had overall points, and overall time, I figured, "What the hell...Let's calculate overall hit factor and see how that compares to the match percent". A useless stat, but it was there for comparison.:p



Open Division: Top Ten
2006_open.gif

Then I figured I'd do one for Clint in Production division (and most of you guys would be more interested in that)

Production Division: Top Ten
2006_production.gif

And then I figured I better do one for Madness and FV as well, so they don't feel left out.:D

Standard Division: Top Ten
2006_standard.gif
 
The points dropped when you compare production and standard really stands out, huh?

There's been a few threads here where people have said "Shooting minor in Standard can be competitive if you focus on "A"s

I think this shows that it simply ain't true when you look at the minor (production) and major (standard) points dropped. It's just too hard to not drop then when scored minor.

Also, look at that HF for Mike B in Standard - He could've placed 5th in Open - 2nd Canadian Open by .024 HF. Wow....
(Note to self - convince Mike B to shoot open...:D )
 
Freedom Ventures said:
The points dropped when you compare production and standard really stands out, huh?

There's been a few threads here where people have said "Shooting minor in Standard can be competitive if you focus on "A"s

I think this shows that it simply ain't true when you look at the minor (production) and major (standard) points dropped. It's just too hard to not drop then when scored minor.
Click to expand...

well, two issues: if by "competitive" you mean "win outright, overall", no, not so much ( ignoring the Mike B factor in Std ;) ). If you mean "kick ass", sure - I mean, Clint would have been 6th in Std, using his prod scores. That's competitive, I'd say.
Plus, production is not Minor Standard - no trigger jobs (in theory :rolleyes: ) , no mag wells, DA first shot, no reduced weight slides, etc. Accounting for that, there is no doubt that Clint would have been in the top 5 in Std, had he been shooting a Std minor gun.

Half of my "points down" were stupid Mikes or NS - same point value regardless of Min/Maj.

I'd say finishing in the top 5 in the National championship, against some pretty stiff opposition, in the most challenging match in years, is pretty "competitive" ;)

You want more proof - double Mike B's points down, to simulate him shooting Minor; he still wins... (yeah, yeah, I know, he's not human, but still... ;) ).
 
Last edited:
he's a machine,:cool: ...sent back to from the future to rule IPSC in Canada.:p

A Cybernetic organism,......with a neuro-net processor for a brain....-a learning computer.:ar15:


(in my BEST Terminator voice!)
 
Last edited:
I found it interesting, too. I found out I drop too many points. :p

Then it had me wondering how different our sport would be if all scoring was done as "total points / total time" instead of calculating match points for each stage.
 
omen said:
well, two issues: if by "competitive" you mean "win outright, overall", no, not so much ( ignoring the Mike B factor in Std ;) ). If you mean "kick ass", sure - I mean, Clint would have been 6th in Std, using his prod scores. That's competitive, I'd say.
Plus, production is not Minor Standard - no trigger jobs (in theory :rolleyes: ) , no mag wells, DA first shot, no reduced weight slides, etc. Accounting for that, there is no doubt that Clint would have been in the top 5 in Std, had he been shooting a Std minor gun.

Half of my "points down" were stupid Mikes or NS - same point value regardless of Min/Maj.

I'd say finishing in the top 5 in the National championship, against some pretty stiff opposition, in the most challenging match in years, is pretty "competitive" ;)

You want more proof - double Mike B's points down, to simulate him shooting Minor; he still wins... (yeah, yeah, I know, he's not human, but still... ;) ).
Click to expand...

Your love of production is blurring what I wrote. (and that love is a good thing :) )

I'm thinking only "Standard" and shooting Minor, but using the guns who shoot Minor (production) as some of the data.

Mag wells, DA first shots (not that there were many at this match), & reduced slide weights are all about speed; not accuracy. A production gun has the capabilty of being shot as accurate as any standard gun if both are shot slow enough. I'm not comparing guns. I'm only comparing the difficulty of not dropping points in either power factor - major vs. minor.

Assuming all production shooters have similar guns - at that level they do - tricked to the max - including triggers lighter than my standard gun's. (Some people need gunsmiths to sign non-disclosure agreements when they visit...;) ;) )

They simply are not scoring as high as all standard shooters who have similar guns even though the mantra in production is "shoot As". Points will be dropped in the heat of competition. It's the minor power factor that makes the difference - therefore shooting minor in Standard is not as competitve as shooting major in Standard, no matter how hard you try to shoot As.
 
Last edited:
the intersting bit is that a few people move up or down, compared to the official results (me and Slavex trade places, Kent and Jamieson, Wade and Mike, etc). I guess when the results were very close, these tiny differences caused the move?

Sean - ehhhhh, never mind.. It's all good - I see another prolonged back and forth discussion developing, I won't proceed ;) You're right, I'm wrong, it's all good - there we go :beerchug:
 
All things being equal, a correctly set up Production gun/load and a correctly set up Standard gun/load will track very similarily in recoil. Consisency of recoil path is more imprtant than amplitude of muzzle flip. In this era of IPSC, you need 90 to 95% points to win no matter which division you are shooting in, so the idea of shooting better points in Production and closing the gap in Standard will never work. The same shooter shooting the same series of matches with the two different guns will likely AVERAGE out getting the same ratio of hits in either division, so bottom line: major will always win.
 
omen said:
the intersting bit is that a few people move up or down, compared to the official results (me and Slavex trade places, Kent and Jamieson, Wade and Mike, etc). I guess when the results were very close, these tiny differences caused the move?
Click to expand...

I think it shows how one really good stage or one really bad stage can change the picture dramatically. I dunno, I didn't think about it TOOO hard. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom