Proposal - Classifications in FClass at the SPRA - to attract more shooters into LR

For all intents and purposes, the NRA and ICFRA long range targets are going to be the same - records are not decided by the extra 2" on the magpie-3. PRAs all seem to be running their stock out of DCRA targets before going to the more challenging ICFRA - some PRAs have made the jump already, just a matter of time before all are shooting ICFRA. You'll still have a issue with metres vs yards - that won't go away.

Scores are are decided if you touch the line or not, so an extra 2 inches makes records not comparable. ICFRA targets are 5V and NRA 10X making records not directly comparable.
Until we decide to shoot on the same targets nationally, National record keeping for Mark I will be elusive.

NormB
 
...... Just because wind conditions are HARD and as a result scores are low, does not mean that it was a BAD MATCH and that the shooting was bad. On the contrary, a score of 66 (out of 75) in hard conditions can be a vastly superior result than a score of 75 out of 75 in easy conditions. And while it seems odd to be more proud of the 66 than the 75, it is right to credit the very-hard-fought-66-that-won-the-match as a better shooting performance than the 75 on the easy day.

Hey were you shooting in Raton this Aug :)

I was watching the relay before mine and it was calm. Shooters in open were coming off the line holding their heads low and cursing with a 74 and 73!!!!. The high scores were all 75's and fighting for near perfect V bull counts.

A few relays later, shooters were coming to congratulate shooter for a superb effort and shooting. He got a 68 in hideous air.

So who were the better shooters?

I agree that the NRA system based on pure raw numbers does not account for the challenges that occurred during the match. It can lead to some "sand baggin" of results to maintain that average.

I kind of like the IPSC way of comparing your score to the top score. That number is relative and really doesn't matter but it showed what the best shooter accomplished in that stage and how you compared to that result.

Something similar was used during the trials for the Canadian Team ( at least I think so). Shooters that were in the top pack or within 95% of those scores (pretty sure I saw that???) were easy to identify.

So if shooters had horrid conditions and scores were across the board low, you still could see a relative ranking which typically agreed with the podium.

Otherwise, you might rank that "73" shooter ahead of the "68" shooter and miss out on some top talent.

Due to the lack of numbers at most matches, having too many divisions will lead to everyone being "first" or for some in lower ranks never getting ranked per their level because they are always being bumped up.

How about a handicap system a la Golf? Figure out a system to level the scores. Each shooter has a handicap or points that are added to their score. At the end of the match, raw scores get podium finishes.

Then there would be a second podium run using handicapped scores. It works surprisingly well in golf allowing all levels of talent to compete in a pretty level way. In fact, there are times where a top shooter is actually trying to beat a handicapped player if they are having a good match.

Would certainly reduce the number of prizes and places????

Just a suggestion.

Jerry
 
Scores are are decided if you touch the line or not, so an extra 2 inches makes records not comparable. ICFRA targets are 5V and NRA 10X making records not directly comparable.
Until we decide to shoot on the same targets nationally, National record keeping for Mark I will be elusive.

NormB

5 inches is 5 inches, pretty standard measurement. If you score it a 5V or a 10X, that's no issue with the scoring line. A 73.14V won't be setting records - it'll be settled within the bull-5.

Agree it'll be hard for Mark to settle out - I've sent him the Alberta records and some commentary about target faces and distances (yds vs m). BUT IT IS A START.
 
Does anyone have a timeline on the National target switch? Maybe the PRAs could be surveyed on the quantity of remaining faces and a deadline set for the change over. Also the DCRA inventory.
Trying to RETRO FIT a classification with past scores will be a nightmare and might not be as precise as we would like.
So at the shoot after the change over deadline we have a HUGE Greenshot class, and it starts the classification process, which will be evolutionary in nature anyway, and the whole thing works itself out with the record keeping being centralized.
The above exchange has already brought forward great thoughts and solutions, and this thread started by Kodiak will be the cornerstone on which the F-CLASS classification system will be built.
p/s I like the 1/2MOA white centre idea.
 
I looked for you RIFLEF regarding rule changes for the DCRA.

This info is for the 1000 yd LR targets changes of the V-Bull sizes.

The DCRA rule book dated January 2007 Edition 14 has NO reference to ICFRA and section 3.01 Targets - Dimensions shows the 1000 yd target as having a 12" V-Bull.

The DCRA rule book dated January 2009 Edition 15 has references to ICFRA and again, section 3.01 Targets - Dimensions shows the 1000 yd target as having a 12" V-Bull. This same copy also shows ICFRA TR Rules 2008 as amended for DCRA competitions 6-Aug-2009 and in ANNEX T/D from page T29-30 - DIMENSIONS OF ICFRA TARGETS shows the ICFRA International Match Target (Long Range) as having a 10" V-Bull but this whole section is struck-thru meaning shown but with lines thru the characters - thus not applicable

I could not find any changes from 2009 to 2012, ie, no new rule books in this time period.

The DCRA rule book dated 2012 page R3/1 Table A Yard Distances shows the V-Bull again as 12" and notes of Table A shows
- 7. F class will use a stick on replacement centre that has a vbull of half the diameter of the TR vbull. The TR vbull as below will be the F class bull with all other rings reduced in value by one.
- 8. The ICFRA target system will NOT be used at the CFRC but IS authorized for use by provincial associations at their discretion and by other groups.

So now referring to the ICFRA rule book, ICFRA F-Class Technical Rules 2009, it shows under section B3 The ICFRA International F-Class Target (Long Range) a 5" V-Bull

Regarding remain stock of targets, when I was at the CFRC in 2009 I asked about the ICFRA targets then and was told that the DCRA would have to use up the existing stock of 12" V-Bull targets before they purchase the new 5" V-Bull ICFRA targets and that they had a whole sea can full still. I suggested that I could go in there and have a cigarette and since they should have insurance, there could be an accidental fire LOL.

The SPRA has just this year purchased replacement wear centers for the TR targets (12" V-Bull) and FCLass wear centers as well (6" V-Bull) so the stock still exists.
We also have a good supply of NRA LR 10X targets with the 5" V-Bulls.

Extra Comments
I agree with Billy that the only difference between the ICFRA and NRA target exists by the extra 2" on the magpie-3 and if you are shooting magpies in FClass, you are not in the running anyways for any range records and a if you are occasionally or usually hitting in this section of the target, scoring a 3 vs a 2 means little difference to your classification. It is a difference of 1 point. I know when I go to the line, I'm telling myself, "You don't shot 4's on a 5 bull target" and this is so I remember to watch the flags!

In Ration, at the WFC, they used ICFRA 5" VBulls targets with a value of 5, 15 shot possible was 75-15V

Maybe it is time for another re-write of the DCRA rules. I think pairs fire make you a better wind reader but since the US and ICFRA uses string fire, maybe the new rule book could include both forms of fire for FClass. Also think that this would be the time to put in a new classification breakdown based on percentages for the PRAs. The current rulebook under the classification system references the use of an A, B and C for the all-comers aggs plus the 800 metre matches included in the MacDonald Stewart Grand Aggregate, which I think is to allow for bad conditions between relays but is very confusing IMO and also impossible to code in a automated classification system!

RIFLEF, I think you would find a white V-Bull to be very eye fatiguing on a very bright sunny day, now cream would be a different story! Cream for the 5,4 and 3, black for the 2 (aiming mark for the peep boys) and cream again for Rest of Target (ROT) but again, we all would have to have those accident fires to eliminate the old stock LOL. and to save printing costs and different wear centers, all should be made up for FClass with the smallest V-Bull in it and scored as FClass and the TR boys just add 1 point to the score shown!

The current classification system in the current DCRA rulebook reads as follows...
5.04 Target Rifle Classifications

(1) TR competitors at the DCRA Matches will fire in one of four Classes: Master (MA), Expert (EX), Sharpshooter (SS), or Greenshot (GS).

(2) The Greenshot (GS) Class is only open to Canadian competitors who are competing in the Canadian Fullbore Rifle Championships (CFRC) for the first time and who, in the opinion of the DCRA Secretary, are "beginning" shooters. However, a competitor will not lose his eligibility for Greenshot status merely by virtue of having fired as a "walk- on" in one previous CFRC, provided that the total number of shots he fired on score in that CFRC was not more than 50.

(3) Shooters from Canada or elsewhere who do not possess a current DCRA TR Classification, must present to the DCRA Secretary, at the time of entry, any evidence that they wish to have considered regarding:
- (a) their prior experience in all rifle disciplines, and
- (b) the rifle classification(s) which they may hold with other bodies.

Those who do not present any such evidence, will be placed in the DCRA Master Class. In addition:
- (a) for holders of Bisley Classifications: “X” or “A” Class shooters will fire in the DCRA TR Master Class; all others will fire in the DCRA TR Expert Class.
- (b) for holders of Australian and New Zealand Classifications: “A” Class shooters will fire in the DCRA TR Master Class; all others will fire in the DCRA TR Expert Class.
- (c) for holders of United States of America Classifications: AHigh Master@ and AMaster@ Class shooters will fire in the DCRA TR Master Class; all others will fire in the DCRA TR Expert Class.
- (d) for holders of other Classifications: Other visitors from outside Canada will be classified on the basis of their national or local Classification.

(4) Members of an official visiting Cadet team will fire in the Sharpshooter Class unless they have previously earned a higher classification.

(5) Reserved

(6) Canadian competitors will be classified on the basis of grades determined by their standing in the “Classification”' Aggregate in the immediately preceding three-year period. The Classification aggregate consists of the Allcomers Aggregate plus the 800 metre matches included in the MacDonald Stewart Grand Aggregate. 900 metre scores are NOT included in the Classification Aggregate.

(7) Grades will be calculated each year from the Classification ' Aggregate, as follows:
(a) The scores of competitors described in paras (2), (3) and (4) above will be removed in the initial calculation of grades;
(b) The scores of competitors with incomplete aggregates will be removed in the initial calculation of grades;
(c) Remaining competitors will be awarded "grades" (see para (8) below) as follows:
- (i) Top 30 per cent - A Grade;
- (ii) Next 45 per cent - B Grade;
- (iii) Low 25 per cent - C Grade;
(d) Grades will be awarded to competitors in (2), (3) and (4) above, whose scores have been removed in (7)(a) above, by comparison of scores with those in (7)(c);
(e) Incomplete aggregates will be prorated to a full score if the number of shots fired is:
- (i) not less than half the total, and
- (ii) not less than 40;
Grades will then be awarded by comparing scores with those in (7)(c). If both (7)(e)(i) and (ii) are not complied with, no grade will be awarded.

(8) Classifications will be based on grades in the immediately preceding three-year period, and will be recalculated each year as follows:
- (a) Three grades:
- - Two or more A – Master
- - Two or more B - Expert
- - Two or more C - Sharpshooter
- - One A, one B, one C (any order) - Expert;
- (b) Two grades:
- - One A, one C (either order) - Expert
- - Last grade A - Master
- - Last grade B - Expert
- - Last grade C - Sharpshooter;
- (c) One Grade:
- - competed as SS or GS and earned an A -Expert
- - competed as MA, earned C - Expert
- - Single grade A - Master
- - Single grade B - Expert
- - Single grade C - Sharpshooter;
- (d) Notwithstanding any of the above, a competitor shall fire in the Master Class who:
- - (i) has elected Life Master classification; or
- - (ii) in any of the three years has placed in the top 25 of the Macdonald Stewart Grand Aggregate, in the top 25 of the Governor General's prize, or in the top 18 of the Canadian TR (Bisley) Aggregate.

(9) Classification of competitors who have not competed in the Classification' Aggregate in the previous three years will be determined as follows:
- (a) The competitor's PRA of residence will work out a classification using the above rules and based on an aggregate at that PRA's Annual Matches which is comparable with the Classification Aggregate (ie, ranges up to and including 900 yard/ 800 metres). In addition, scores of non-residents of the Province will be removed in the initial calculation of grades.
- (b) Competitors shall fire in either their previous DCRA class or the class worked out by their PRA, whichever is the higher.
- (c) Competitors who are not beginners, but for whom there is no previous evidence of classification from the DCRA or their PRA Aggregates, may be classified by their PRA or club on the basis of not less than 30 shots fired under competition conditions using the following average points per shot:
- - (i) 4.70 and above - Master;
- - (ii) 4.40 to 4.69 - Expert;
- - (iii) 4.39 and below - Sharpshooter;
- (d) For their own internal purposes, PRAs may establish a Provincial or Regional classification based on scores at the appropriate level and for use at that level. It is recommended that the above rules be followed and that the method of classification be published and circulated to the DCRA and all members affected, prior to the start of the TR season.
- (e) An entrant to the CFRC who presents no evidence of performance, experience or previous classification will automatically be classified as an Expert. The onus will be on the entrant to present suitable evidence to the DCRA Secretary in order to be placed in a class lower than Expert. (In the case of Rifle Coach Course Cadets competing in the CFRC for the first time, a letter from the officer in charge of the team will be sufficient evidence).

(10) Precedence .When in doubt, where a current DCRA classification exists based on aggregates outlined in 5.04 (6), the DCRA classification will always take precedence over any other classification during the CFRC. At PRA matches, 9(d) above may take precedence if the PRA so decides.
 
Last edited:
Just found this thread. Wow Kieth your putting a lot of effort into this as well as others too. I think this is a great idea, it does give some hope for a less experienced shooter to maybe win something against his own class of shooters. I just hope that with low turn outs it doesn't just get all muddled into one class.
I'm not sure if it's a mistake, but you have me as master, I hardly think I belong in master I've never been in the top ten at any big matches, but it must have been a couple real good 600 yd avg's. I guess this is the downside of classification.
 
You shoot well at the PPRA this year Paul. 47-03 at 300, 50-02 at 500 and 48-07 at 600 on Sat, then 47-04 at 500, 46-03 at 600 on Sunday for a total of 238-19v. 238/250=0.952*5=4.76 which is a Master score my friend! You fired 50 rounds these two days at the short ranges (300M to 600 yds), only need 30 rounds to qualify at a PRA, see 9c above. Has nothing to do with coming in the top 10 at a big match. Same with your buddy Denis, he fired only 49's the first day and a 48 and 49 the next, good shooting, both of you and both should be proud. Yes, this was just one good match for both of you two and in lighter than normal winds at Nokomis, but enough to qualify according to the DCRA rulebook. The way to fix this, come out more often and fire lesser scores and your averages will fall since the calcs are based on a three year average, but I'm also pretty sure both of you would fire over 47's at these yardages. If the rules included the 800-1000 scores, you still come up with a 4.525 average, which is mid Expert and Dennis would be a 4.613, again an Expert average score.

Maybe these are good examples to show the DCRA reps why the LR scores should be included in the PRA FClass classifications!
 
Keith, between Paul and Bill W you have the perfect example of why mid ranges scores do not work. Accoring to your method, Paul is a master despite never finishing in the top ten while Bill W is classed as an Expert despite being in the top few at the last few Westerns and placing high at Raton.
 
Yes, the DCRA rulebook needs a re-write, adding a FClass classification system for the PRAs, and I think/know the 800-1000 should be included for us and also the rulebook need to specify both pairs and string fire breakdowns, with possibly higher values for string fire, plus different breakdown values for FO vs FTR and the minimum number of rounds fired for both TR, FO and FTR has to be increased from 30 to 60 or 120. The SPRA was had a few of these type of matches in 2013 to allow our shooters to get use to string fire for US matches. String fire gives higher scores and is a different game, knowing when to start and when to hold and wait out the wind change. The PPRA, in Paul's case, was pairs fire so these stand, according to the TR classifications which my software uses. Bill was having a loading year from hell for his scores, either bad brass or a bad barrel when he was last at NorthStar. Again, coming out more often fixes these issues.

Using all scores from 2011 and on, I'm an Expert in FO as well, with 74 scores from 300 to 1000 fired at the SPRA with a total of 3841 out of 4175 coming up with a 4.6 average. Again, a few bad scores at 600 since switching to the 6BR over the 6-250 I was using in prior years :) I'm a Master in the US.

Duplicated the classification script and called it FClass Classification to include all yardages and ran it for you too. Came up with a total of 375 out of 400 for you which works out to an Expert score of 4.6875. Only have 8 scores in the database for you from a PPRA back in 2011.

Next I ran it for GT and he shows 1442 out of a total possible of 1525 for 34 scores fired at Northstar from 2011, and this makes him an Master in FO only with a 4.72786885, and he too is a Master in the US. Original run included some of his FTR scores. Now that too makes a difference, including these made GT an Expert in both FO and FTR combined, using just FTR he comes out a Shartshooter in this time period.

This also shows that all classification systems are an estimate of the shooters ability and not perfect and the breakdown need to be different for FO vs FTR.

Using all scores, Paul comes out an Expert with a 4.525 average and this is were he should probably be, and I too come out an Expert and maybe this is were I should really be, an Expert in FO in Canada, firing pairs :)
 
Last edited:
Your results using ALL distances make a lot more sense and the results "fit" with how I would rank them intuitively. I would have to agree with my ranking as Expert, it's the same as my NRA ranking for Long Range.
 
Ok, using my newest system based on comments and recommendations here (shots > 60, since 2011, all yardages included, all matches included)
Here are my results...


FOpen Masters
Taylor, Glen 4.73

FOpen Experts
McCrea, Tom 4.65
Dalgleish, John 4.65
Lair, Dennis 4.61
Skjerdal, Keith 4.60
Waldner, Cal 4.59
Rossington, Paul 4.53
Pomechichuk, Jerry 4.51
Lepine, Kevin 4.50
Zulak, Murray 4.49
Minish, David 4.43

FOpen Sharpshooters
Closen, Ken 4.36
McClean, Darrell 4.33
Kanak, Mike 4.31
Rowe, Brian 4.26
Archer, Brian 4.26
Skafel, Orrin 4.25
Carriere, Rick 3.25

FOpen Greenshoot
Steuart, Triant UNC
Skafel, Sylvia UNC

FTR Masters
None

FTR Experts
Hamilton, Barry 4.53
Minish, David 4.50
Watts, Bill 4.42

FTR Sharpshooters
Wosrsley, Brian 4.30
Archer, Brian 4.29
Spenst, Darcy 4.25
Lochell, Chuck 4.16
McInnes, Jim 3.99
Pickering, Shawn 3.53
Pickering, Kassie 3.28

FTR Greenshoot
Helland, Mark UNC






TR Masters
Nelson, Ken 4.91
Jmaeff, Peter 4.90
Dawson, Ron 4.86
Sloane, Murray 4.77
Grant, Darrell 4.74

TR Experts
LaLear, Frank 4.67
Papasderis, Peter 4.67
Frost, Stan 4.67
Hulbert, Gord 4.65
Kaczmarski, Leonard 4.65
Suttil, Neil 4.63
Marsh, Perry 4.60
Uhrich, Dennis 4.58
Kachmarski, Alex 4.57
Chapman, John 4.57
Michel, Marv 4.54
Luchuck, Dale 4.53
Kashmarski, Rob 4.47
Potter, Doug 4.44

TR Sharpshooters
Kashmarski, Sharron 4.21

Note: on days that GT shows up shooting FO, all us FO Experts bump to Master and on days that Barry H and/or Bill W show up shooting FTR, all the FTR Sharpshooter's bump to Expert so a prize can be allowed to the top class shooters as well.



and again, using only 300M to 600 yds and the one the SPRA will probably use;

FOpen Masters
Lair, Dennis 4.88
Taylor, Glen 4.87
Rossington, Paul 4.76
McCrea, Tom 4.75
Skjerdal, Keith 4.70

FOpen Experts
Pomechichuk, Jerry 4.69
Dalgleish, John 4.68
Lepine, Kevin 4.68
Waldner, Cal 4.65
Minish, David 4.58
Closen, Ken 4.53
McClean, Darrell 4.48
Archer, Brian 4.48
Skafel, Orrin 4.46
Zulak, Murray 4.43

FOpen Sharpshooters
Rowe, Brian 4.36
Kanak, Mike 4.31
Steuart, Triant 4.16
Skafel, Sylvia 3.16
Carriere, Rick 2.74

FTR Masters
None

FTR Experts
Hamilton, Barry 4.68
Spenst, Darcy 4.625
Minish, David 4.57
Wosrsley, Brian 4.48
Archer, Brian 4.46
Helland, Mark 4.43
Watts, Bill 4.42

FTR Sharpshooters
Lochell, Chuck 4.39
McInnes, Jim 4.27
Pickering, Shawn 3.61
Pickering, Kassie 3.43



TR Masters
Jmaeff, Peter 4.93
Nelson, Ken 4.91
Dawson, Ron 4.86
Sloane, Murray 4.76
LaLear, Frank 4.74
Grant, Darrell 4.72
Papasderis, Peter 4.7

TR Experts
Frost, Stan 4.67
Hulbert, Gord 4.65
Kaczmarski, Leonard 4.65
Suttil, Neil 4.63
Kachmarski, Alex 4.62
Marsh, Perry 4.59
Chapman, John 4.57
Uhrich, Dennis 4.56
Luchuck, Dale 4.54
Michel, Marv 4.54
Kashmarski, Rob 4.47
Potter, Doug 4.44

TR Sharpshooters
Kashmarski, Sharron 4.21



My intent is to make this work at our PRA level, and if the others PRAs want to use the system we adopt, they may. From a national level this would be up to the DCRA Fclass committee, which I too I'm a member of. This committee can bring forward any recommendations to the DCRA for a National system. My guess is this may take a year or two and ours will be the test ground. I will also guess that our exec will opt for the 300M to 600 yds version since this allows more shooters per class breakdown and less of a chance that everyone is pushed to the Master class.

I'd like to thank you all for your input and suggestions and in time, we may end up with a FClass classification system that will work. Now it is up to the SPRA exec to pick the system and implement it.
 
Last edited:
Keith, looks like you're putting alot of time and effort into this!!! I think its a great idea...keep up the good work!!!
Question for yah, in a case like mine...where i shot FO in'12, FTR in '13 and am going back to FO in'14 would my classification be the same or would i be classified in both? Just curious how you'll do it?
 
Well I re-ran it for you and in FTR and FO you are an Expert :)

If you had not shoot in say FO but only FTR, your are not a Greenshot (only for first year shooters) and your FTR classification would still put you in an Expert classification in FO. Same with the other way around, if you started in FO and switched to FTR, I would still put you in the Expert class in FTR and if your scores over time were bad enough, you would slip into SharpShooter.

As you can see, using all yardages and just the 300M to 600 yds ones, you are a little higher in the averages in FO, due to better equipment and higher in the all yardage averages in FTR due to a heavier bullet and more experience. FTR was a 308 and FO was a 6.5 for those interested.
 
Last edited:
Here’s my 2 cents…

Shooter classification is a great idea and is long overdue. As for the east west target inequality, I feel that ideally we should all be using the same target. That being said, the realities of target supply do enter the equation.

So, what to do? Here’s what…

Since we seem to be in agreement that shooter classification is a good idea lets accept that and move forward with it even if the east west targets are not identical. But.. with the understanding that there is a migration path toward east west target uniformity.
The ranking equality will sort itself out over time as the targets get used up and the new ICFRA ones are purchased to replace the old retrofit TR targets.

Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. I’d rather have a ranking system that is marginally and only temporarily flawed because of target inequality than no ranking system at all. Once the obsolete targets get consumed we will have ranking system bliss.
 
Last edited:
Ok I did more work and added all the Westerns into the PRA mix (total of 4425 scores from 164 shooter for 300 to 1000) and this is what I get using all yardage scores and not looking at FO/FTR breakdowns - if you are a cross shooter LOL
48 shooters in total shown below here and there is pretty good division, but that would have to be at a big match, like the WCFCC or the Cdn FC Nat in Ottawa

SGaa 4.7666 Master
MThib 4.7412 Master
LDolhun 4.7225 Master
GOgg 4.7113 Master Note: using his 2008 CFRC scores :)
RDreg 4.7 Master

EBisson 4.6873 Expert
RWyen 4.6833 Expert
JDalg 4.6743 Expert
KSkj 4.6684 Expert
NSab 4.6656 Expert
SBaardsen 4.6633 Expert
BCondie 4.658 Expert
GTaylor 4.6394 Expert
TMcCrea 4.6366 Expert
DLair 4.6125 Expert
CWal 4.6113 Expert
BHam 4.5938 Expert
GWiens 4.5718 Expert
JWilder 4.5667 Expert
PRoss 4.5656 Expert
KLepine 4.5497 Expert
BWors 4.5422 Expert
JPom 4.536 Expert
DHarry 4.5153 Expert
KKunz 4.513 Expert
LKacz 4.5072 Expert
DSpenst 4.5035 Expert
JTeo 4.4793 Expert
TFripp 4.4769 Expert
KClosen 4.4543 Expert
DMinish 4.4416 Expert
SThie 4.4406 Expert

MYoung 4.3833 Sharpshooter
BHarmes 4.3793 Sharpshooter
DTomlin 4.375 Sharpshooter
NDoan 4.3351 Sharpshooter
CChev 4.3343 Sharpshooter
CCauce 4.3051 Sharpshooter
BRowe 4.2891 Sharpshooter
BArch 4.2672 Sharpshooter
OSkaf 4.2532 Sharpshooter
RMoroz 4.2041 Sharpshooter
CLoch 4.1589 Sharpshooter
JMcIn 3.9854 Sharpshooter
GBeer 3.7111 Sharpshooter
CPage 3.5764 Sharpshooter
SPick 3.555 Sharpshooter
CRick 3.2454 Sharpshooter
 
Last edited:
I did some checking and found you can not add 10 bull and 5 bull targets in calcs, it inflates the results!!
Using Les D as my test subject, I found this out. Could not figure how he was so high, sorry Les.
Original calc was 3353 points out of a total of 3550 so (3353/3550*5) =4.722535

Calc'd just the 5V ave at 4.514 (948/1050*5)
Next calc'd just the 10X target ave at 4.814 (2311/2400*5)
Then using a spreadsheet and reducing the 150 max (10v) back to 75 max (5v), his average for these two WCFCC matches were the 10X target was used drops back to 4.629 on a 5V target (89 points dropped in the sixteen 15 shot matches, so 1111/1200*5). Taking an average of these two his average comes out at 4.571

This means all of the last post figures are inflated if they shot in the last two WCFCC matches and most of us using all scores reduced back to a 5v target would be in Expert class once again, some lowered to SS.

Another way to look at the difference, think of dropping 5 points on each type of target, 70/75=93.3% and 145/150=96.6%! So even % do not solve this and why the US percentages have to be higher, plus they shot string!

INTERESTING eh! BLOODY MATH rrrrrrrr

Good thing I have saved copies with these separate still and have since corrected this issue, now both are working as they should. After re-running the westerns classifications again, which ios based on only the westerns from 300m to 1000 yds, we are again left with 1 FO Master, 17 FO Experts, 25 SharpShooters and in FTR, 0 Masters, 2 Experts, and 40 Sharpshooters out of the 85 shooters in from 2010-2013. Again, the MR system would allow the best breakdowns in this country IMO.

BTW, the guys in the highest class in the Western version for both FO(Master) and FTR(Expert) only shot once in 2010 and if they attended more Western's, they too would be in lower classes IMO.
 
Last edited:
THe SPRA executive in the Dec 1 , 2013 budget meeting has approved FClass classifications using mid range scores system (300m to 600 yds) so we have both classifications and larger possible numbers in each classification for our local matches, with awards for each class and classification.
PromoFlyer001.jpg

2014Classificationspg1.jpg

2014Classificationspg2.jpg

2014Classificationspg3.jpg
 
Last edited:
That's a hell of a pile of math and spreadsheet manipulation Keith. I was wondering how I ended up so high in the rankings too. It all makes sense when you explain it. Believe me I'm happier in Expert anyhow although apparently I have to come to Sk more often since I don't have a ranking at all if you use only MR scores.

See you at Nokomis.

Les
 
Back
Top Bottom