While this one string isn't normally a make or break for this type of competition; don't people end up getting frustrated? I'm all for a challenge, but if the vast majority drop all points here because they fail to hit a 5ish inch target with a pistol at 25m under time pressure perhaps the string needs to be tweaked a little? Perhaps make all three rounds torso shots? This also limits the gaming involved, just draw, chamber, fire three, slide lock reload, fire three. All rounds are scored as per.
I'm curious to know what the average practice duration to match duration is for competitors. For guys that just go to matches recreationally (and there is nothing wrong with this), they probably have limited practice and would be just making noise with their handguns. What do they learn? That they can't consistenly hit a 5" target at 25m (Achievable? Yes, but not an easy shot for a novice and especially so under time pressure), after awhile this has to get old, no?
As I said before, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a challenge, but perhaps design the challenge to better suit the average skill of the shooters. Generally speaking, a 25m shot on a torso sized target is already pretty difficult for a novice. For a few enthusiasts (read: other pistol shooting sports), it's consistently achievable. But for a novice, going from no hits to consistent hits on a Fig 11 is a more reasonable goal. Not only that but not awarding points for body hits with no head hits is like saying "your body hits don't matter" which is counter-intuitive. I understand the rationale for not awarding points is because if a shooter anticipates a head shot they'll drop a low shot and it becomes difficult to discern which hits are which; but again this is solved with making all body shots.
Anyway, I'm just spit-balling here. I don't shoot Service CQB often (only when my unit chooses to), so this is just my humble opinion.