Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Thank you August. One thing I'd like to add. In total time the shooter with a DQ is penalized twice, i.e. double jeopardy. Not only does he receive a no time for his DQ, in order for that not to lower his total time, an astronomical number of seconds is added to the total time. That's two penalties. With stage points he gets the zero for the DQ he earned and keeps shooting.
JFN
92

I do like the scoring system, it makes the sport much more competitive than total time. Stage Points keeps a top shooter in the game even when they get a stage DQ. I can't tell you how many matches I have seen good shooters win even though they had a stage DQ. That means that they shot well enough on 11 stages to beat shooters that had scores on 12 stages. Total time knocks the shooter with a DQ out. Which means the next guy wins by default, not because he shot better. I don't want to win like that.


Gee Whiz, I don't know if I should be embarrassed or angry.  I have "followed" the discussions about Stage Points in WBAS since they began here several years ago.  Those discussions always quickly turned to the topic of "what should we do with a SDQ if we returned to Total Time?"  But, until you made this clear statement, Frank, I never understood what you guys were talking about.  Like most people -- it seems -- I felt the Stage Points 'transformation' was just some mumbo-jumbo that obscured important (to me) information about what had occurred during a match.  And, seeing it that way, the conclusion -- in my mind -- was that transformations never add information, they only obscure it, therefore it is a shame the WBAS Committee has chosen to do things this way.  The purpose for scoring with Stage Points was without reason until I read your statement (quoted here).  As you know, I've participated in many WBAS matches scored with Stage Points, yet never understood how that affected the outcome of the match until today.

Two courtesies would eliminate the resentment that shooters feel about WBAS Stage Point scoring, I suspect.  First, a global statement -- like the one you've made here -- about the rationale for Stage Point Scoring that explains to shooters the advantages of this system.  And, second, a clear and concise (mathematical) explanation of how the Stage Point transformation of total time and missus is carried out.   If shooters understood both of these matters, these discussions would have been much more productive, and perhaps the issue would have been settled by now.

As I said in the first sentence, you can say something like "boy, that August West is a dumbass to have been shooting WBAS for all these years and not have understood the virtues of Stage Scoring."  Or, you could say, "that August West has every right to be dissatisfied with the clarity of explanation the WBAS Committee has given to shooters on this topic."

At any rate, thanks Frank for moving us ahead!!!

All the best to you.

A.W.
93
Flash
You are wanting the scoring system to do for you what only you can do. Even if the scoring system told you your misses, it wouldn't tell you why you missed. Part of the shooting cycle is seeing where your sights are when your gun goes off and calling the shot. And by calling the shot I don't mean hearing the ding or seeing the hit on the target, I mean seeing where the sights are when the pistol fires and goes into recoil. I've been working on this a long time. The last WR I had 4 misses and the day after the match I could "see" the sight picture on all four misses. Even now I can see three of those; a front sight floated over the top of the target, firing before the sight was on target and nothing because I blinked and pushed out at 8 o'clock. When I saw each one I immediately corrected for the next shot.

No such thing as being too busy to know how I was shooting. As a posse marshal at WR I was busy. But when I stepped to the line I gave the stage all my attention. And when I went to the unload table I could tell you everything about how I shot the stage. Anytime I let myself be distracted I shoot crappy and usually get a P, MS or a DQ.

I do like the scoring system, it makes the sport much more competitive than total time. Stage Points keeps a top shooter in the game even when they get a stage DQ. I can't tell you how many matches I have seen good shooters win even though they had a stage DQ. That means that they shot well enough on 11 stages to beat shooters that had scores on 12 stages. Total time knocks the shooter with a DQ out. Which means the next guy wins by default, not because he shot better. I don't want to win like that.

No I'm not a Chance, Capt. Sam or Boggus Deal. But I can compete with myself. Every time I shoot I want to see my sights, concentrate on the trigger and call every shot. If I miss I want to correct that before the next shot not after the match.

Just my opinion,
JFN
94
Yup - I also think the current scoring system for Wild Bunch stinks.

As Tully mentioned Total Time would be my preference also. I wonder how many other Wild Bunch Shooters would have the same preference?

And - as a comment here: For a Hobby/Sport that is dying a slow death, why can not the powers-to-be attempt to accommodate just a few requests. Why not show both scoring systems for the large matches. What harm could there possibly be to accommodate all shooters to show the two different scoring systems?

Sometimes goofy rules make no sense to most. As Marshal Stone seemed to indicate, what a shame there seems little chance for change when those in charge display appearances of having their heads buried in the sand and seem to not care what is happening around them.

Of course others mileage may vary.
95
The Wild Bunch Wire / Re: ammo testing
« Last post by Boggus Deal on April 15, 2019, 08:07:10 AM »
And Lanky, just so you understand, that any time during the match, if your posse marshal feels your ammo isn’t up to minimum, they can pull your ammo and test it.
96
My preference would be Total Time.

Tully
97


Am I the only one that thinks this could be done better?
[/quote]

Lots of folks. You just have to convince Happy Jack and the Wild Bunch.
Good luck with that.

Marshal Stone
98
The Wild Bunch Wire / Re: ammo testing
« Last post by Lanky Frame on April 14, 2019, 08:23:15 AM »
Thanks Happy Jack, see you in June
99
I don't have a problem with how the winners are determined it is mainly that when you look at scores you get nothing! You just as soon have a list of the place holders with nothing else listed. 1st place, 2nd place, etc.

You can't tell how many misses any of the shooters had or times, NOTHING! I shot in EOT Wild Bunch and placed in the top ten a few years ago. I saved the scores, ha ha why did I do that! You can't tell anything from them. I know I started out the match with a stage that I had a P and a minor safety but there is no way to tell what stage that was or how I managed to get it together enough to place in the top 10.

We had a match today and I was so busy I did not have time to pay attention to my scores or how many misses I had and I placed 4th. I got the scores and they tell me nothing.

Am I the only one that thinks this could be done better?
100
The Wild Bunch Wire / Re: ammo testing
« Last post by Happy Jack on April 13, 2019, 02:41:54 PM »
Hi Lanky,  I do the testing at EOT with a labradar radar chronograph. Ammo is picked up at random from shooters at the loading table of on the way there. Not everyone is tested, just a random about 4 or 5 from each posse. 5 rounds of pistol and 5 rounds of rifle are used. I do the testing on Sunday afternoon if possible. If the shooter's ammo fails the shooter comes with their own guns and is re-tested. If they pass fine, if not a MDQ for SCORING ONLY. They still get to shoot just for no score. If a shooter's ammo is not picked but they still want to know they can come by when I am testing and we will shoot their ammo. if it FAILS that is still OK. They don't get the DQ because they weren't officially chosen. Lets newer shooters get a feel for their ammo if they don't have the ability to test it at home. We strongly recommend that ammo is around 160pf to give some leeway for temperature or the difference between chronographs at different matches.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]