It all began with an argument over a pig. Whether domesticated or feral, that was the bone, had the notch a human origin or nature's fate, I do not know. Like all viable feuds, each side had the law in their corner fueling the righteous indignation. In the pig fight it was state and county versus county and state, although all had been confederates, and some think the real fight was over do you stay or do you go? Once it had degenerated, it became if I remember the quote, "he is a jack ass, but he is our jack ass."
The great deceiver always places the law on both sides. In Cochise county, it was the federal and municipal (republicans) versus the county (democrats), two posses seeking to serve warrants of death on the other. In Johnson county, state versus local, with the feds rescuing the hired guns. Lincoln county the regulators were serving warrants with bounty hunters getting in the middle. "Let's dance!" As Billy and Tom Horn found out, it matters little what is right, what the law is, what the facts are, it only matters who is holding the end of the rope.
I know who is holding the end of the rope so I will hide. Maybe it is time for a new alias, or a new land. We will see!
What I know for sure is ...........!
(I leave the rest of the story for the commentators to fill in. I know better than to say it, but it jingles so well. I know I will share it, but only to my closest allies or directly to my foe. The crux will be, whom thee be!)
"He's all lathered up, chomping at the bit, give him some rein, cause there ain't no quit, be gone, hold on, Comes BoogieMan,"
Friday, August 24, 2018
Thursday, August 9, 2018
Format Matters; High Plains Territorial
I write because because I am waiting for the motel breakfast bar to open and the High Plains Territorial keeps churning in my mind. The High Plains is one of the few territorials that use the last man standing format. Big Ugly was so dominant and he was shooting so well that he probably would have won it in the magnificent format but he would have not been the favorite. The top seven from bottom to top were Buzzard Cooper, Everett Hitch, Old Drifter, Quick Cal, Beaver Creek Kid, Bolder Vaquero and Big Ugly. In a magnificent seven a handicapper probably would have pick one of the World Champions, there were three in the top seven. I would have pick Cal or that shoot-off expert. Quick Cal had been eliminated in the Southern only to be resurrected and win, but the field in the Southern was not as strong.
There are four factors in major events that determine who wins. In their order of importance they are luck of the draw, mental toughness, accuracy and least important is quickness. A shooter can practice and improve three of the four. In a last man standing format all four factors remain in play to the end. A magnificent seven eliminates the luck of the draw factor when the field is reduced to seven. Format matters!
Not only does last man standing keep luck of the draw in play, at some point CFDA bye rounds are used. The CFDA bye round is inherently unfair which is a matter for a separate discussion. A Magnificent Seven eliminates the CFDA bye rounds and eliminates luck of the draw.
The Ladies High Plains is also interesting in this discussion. Top three women were KK Kid, Holli Day, and Whippin N Spurrin (side note 2 of the 3 were Arizona Gunslingers) In a Magnificent Seven, if I was handicapping it I would have pick that Shady Mtn Shooter, Holli Day. KK Kid won the event. She was clean going into the top three. I assume, but do not know, that was a result of luck of the draw early in the day. Being clean was a great advantage for KK Kid. It may have been deserved or it may have been the result of luck of the draw. In any event, a magnificent format levels the playing field when the field is reduced to seven and each shooter is clean in a 2x shoot-off. Prior success is rewarded by a high seed, but the #1 spot may not be the preferred seeding for all shooters.
Luck of the draw is such an important factor in determining who wins, that consideration should be given to dealing with it in some fashion. I can name five major events in the last three years where the eventual winner of the event was eliminated only to be resurrected to fill the bracket. Most recent was Quick Cal in the Southern. That is why I lobby for an resurrection avenue for all shooters.
In closing I must says that the High Plains was a great event, well run and most enjoyable. Many thanks to the Powderhorn Ranch Regulators on a job well done.
There are four factors in major events that determine who wins. In their order of importance they are luck of the draw, mental toughness, accuracy and least important is quickness. A shooter can practice and improve three of the four. In a last man standing format all four factors remain in play to the end. A magnificent seven eliminates the luck of the draw factor when the field is reduced to seven. Format matters!
Not only does last man standing keep luck of the draw in play, at some point CFDA bye rounds are used. The CFDA bye round is inherently unfair which is a matter for a separate discussion. A Magnificent Seven eliminates the CFDA bye rounds and eliminates luck of the draw.
The Ladies High Plains is also interesting in this discussion. Top three women were KK Kid, Holli Day, and Whippin N Spurrin (side note 2 of the 3 were Arizona Gunslingers) In a Magnificent Seven, if I was handicapping it I would have pick that Shady Mtn Shooter, Holli Day. KK Kid won the event. She was clean going into the top three. I assume, but do not know, that was a result of luck of the draw early in the day. Being clean was a great advantage for KK Kid. It may have been deserved or it may have been the result of luck of the draw. In any event, a magnificent format levels the playing field when the field is reduced to seven and each shooter is clean in a 2x shoot-off. Prior success is rewarded by a high seed, but the #1 spot may not be the preferred seeding for all shooters.
Luck of the draw is such an important factor in determining who wins, that consideration should be given to dealing with it in some fashion. I can name five major events in the last three years where the eventual winner of the event was eliminated only to be resurrected to fill the bracket. Most recent was Quick Cal in the Southern. That is why I lobby for an resurrection avenue for all shooters.
In closing I must says that the High Plains was a great event, well run and most enjoyable. Many thanks to the Powderhorn Ranch Regulators on a job well done.
Wednesday, August 1, 2018
Given Up Cont.;Lesson from Colorado
I am going to respond to some of the comments with lessons from Colorado. I do this because there are some really good illustrations for this discussion. Colorado is really one of the best run events using the current formats.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
In the past several years there have been more than a half dozen events where the event winner had been eliminated with four x s only to be put back into the event by the CFDA resurrection to fill the magnificent shoot off. The most recent was the 2018 Southern wherein Quick Cal was resurrected and then won the event. This happens frequently. What this tells you is that sometimes the best shooter at the event is eliminated before he or she gets to the shoot off. What we don't know is how often the best shooter is eliminated by the format and he/she is not resurrected to fill the vacancy.
From Colorado: I and Okie Ed were each shooting well enough to win the State Championships but neither of us made to the shoot offs because of the luck of the draw. In the final rounds of the main match, we drew each other in consecutive rounds. We were evenly matched, matches going 2 to 2, final shot on quickness, splitting the matches, each missing out on the shoot-off because of those two matches. Okie Ed won the shoot off for place between us finishing 7th. Since it was a Fubby Five instead Magnificent Seven, Okie Ed, did not get the opportunity to see if he was the best gunfighter there. (My distain for the Fubby Five does not come from Colorado, but from the last Arizona State Championship where I finished 7th)
Also from Colorado an illustration that the format may not be working as well as we think is the final standings of the State and Territorial. The top two shooters in the standings of the State did not make the final shoot-offs of the Territorial. The top two shooters of the Territorial did not make the shoot-offs of the State. If these four shooters were truly the best four gunslingers at these events you would expect that they would be in the shoot-offs of both events or at a minimum at least one of them would make the finals of both event.
Luck of the draw is such a big factor in how you place. I did well winning the jackpot shoot and placing 2nd in the Master Gunfighter Bracket, but I have no illusions. "I was lucky in the draw, but then I have always been lucky when ....." When it gets down to the top 20% of an event, not only do you need to be lucky in your draw, but you need to be lucky in who the rest of the field draws. It really helps when someone else takes out that shooter that you can not handle, whether by speed, accuracy, or mental toughness. In the jackpot shoot and the bracket shoot the draws were favorable for me, in the main events not so much.
" I get fourth seed in the main match...stripped of qualifying seed.."
This is a valid concern but stems from our difficulty of accepting change. It is no different from the 6th or 7th seeds in fubby five matches. At least in the format changes I am proposing those almost made it places have two more days of shooting to make it to the shoot offs. The fact that repeatedly eliminated shooters win events means there is a need for a resurrections element in our formats.
At Colorado only one shooter, Two Buck Chuck, made the magnificent shoot-offs in both events. Expanding the fubby five to a Magnificent 7 does not change it, only one still made both.
Time, Time, Time:
When you consider event format and match format, it is a balancing act. To mitigate the adverse effects of luck of the draw you need a higher elimination factor. To get more x s, you need more range time. That can be done by either shortening match length or eliminating side matches. My vote would be to eliminate side matches.
At Colorado we shot a jackpot shoot on one range with 47 shooters in 4 hours. It was Nevada Eight 2x shoot. Since the time taken for Nevada Eight is about the same as Three Winning shots, I am sure we can easily shoot 100 shooters on two ranges 2 x in about five hours. I really think we could shoot 100 shooters on two ranges 3x the first day, shooting down to three. The second day we could again shoot 3 winning shots 3x down to three shooters. There have been a lot of state shoots shooting 4 x three winning shots in one day.
Side matches consume range time and we shoot side matches just to occupy eliminated shooters. It is really unnecessary. It you don't eliminate shooters until noon the third day you don't need the side matches.
Another thing that takes range time is place shoot-offs. At Colorado, there were a lot of shoot-offs for place. The rules say place for recognized places must be determined by a shoot-off and not by x count and time out. The solution to this is how you structure recognized places. If your recognized places are the Magnificent 7 and the top three places in the bracket shoots, then all the recognized places are determined on the line by the format without shoot-offs. That would be 29 places recognized on the line although some of those places would be taken by the same shooters. (Ladies 7, Men 7, and five brackets 3 each, Master Gunfighter, Gunfighter. Sheriff, Deputy and Shootist for a total of 29) For 100 shooters that is 29% of the shooter which is comparable to what most shoots do now.
Thinking about time again, there is no reason we can not shoot 100 shooters on two ranges, main match 3x three winning shots, resurrection 3 x three winning shots and then on championship day shoot five brackets, 2x two winning shots. Bracket winners, men range A and ladies range B, magnificent five at high noon, and then start the Magnificent Seven Shoot-off at 1:00. Awards at 3:00.
We have the time and the ranges. We can have an 8 x match. It is not hard. Just cut out shoot-offs and side matches. Keep all shooters in play to the morning of the third day.
Administrating ease:
I am sure this is easier to do that what is done now because there are fewer matches and less shoot-offs, but I have not punched the keys. My question to Wench and Miss Betty is can the same matches be run the second day with the same shooters on the same computer. How do you reset the computer with the same shooters? My simple solution would be to get a second laptop. Computer 1 runs the first day. Same shooters entered into Computer 2 and it runs the second day. During the second day the brackets are set up on Computer 1 for the third morning. Brackets are run and posted on the second day for the morning of the third day from first days shooting since that is the main match. Seems simple and easy.
Enough for now. "Bring me another shooter!"
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
In the past several years there have been more than a half dozen events where the event winner had been eliminated with four x s only to be put back into the event by the CFDA resurrection to fill the magnificent shoot off. The most recent was the 2018 Southern wherein Quick Cal was resurrected and then won the event. This happens frequently. What this tells you is that sometimes the best shooter at the event is eliminated before he or she gets to the shoot off. What we don't know is how often the best shooter is eliminated by the format and he/she is not resurrected to fill the vacancy.
From Colorado: I and Okie Ed were each shooting well enough to win the State Championships but neither of us made to the shoot offs because of the luck of the draw. In the final rounds of the main match, we drew each other in consecutive rounds. We were evenly matched, matches going 2 to 2, final shot on quickness, splitting the matches, each missing out on the shoot-off because of those two matches. Okie Ed won the shoot off for place between us finishing 7th. Since it was a Fubby Five instead Magnificent Seven, Okie Ed, did not get the opportunity to see if he was the best gunfighter there. (My distain for the Fubby Five does not come from Colorado, but from the last Arizona State Championship where I finished 7th)
Also from Colorado an illustration that the format may not be working as well as we think is the final standings of the State and Territorial. The top two shooters in the standings of the State did not make the final shoot-offs of the Territorial. The top two shooters of the Territorial did not make the shoot-offs of the State. If these four shooters were truly the best four gunslingers at these events you would expect that they would be in the shoot-offs of both events or at a minimum at least one of them would make the finals of both event.
Luck of the draw is such a big factor in how you place. I did well winning the jackpot shoot and placing 2nd in the Master Gunfighter Bracket, but I have no illusions. "I was lucky in the draw, but then I have always been lucky when ....." When it gets down to the top 20% of an event, not only do you need to be lucky in your draw, but you need to be lucky in who the rest of the field draws. It really helps when someone else takes out that shooter that you can not handle, whether by speed, accuracy, or mental toughness. In the jackpot shoot and the bracket shoot the draws were favorable for me, in the main events not so much.
" I get fourth seed in the main match...stripped of qualifying seed.."
This is a valid concern but stems from our difficulty of accepting change. It is no different from the 6th or 7th seeds in fubby five matches. At least in the format changes I am proposing those almost made it places have two more days of shooting to make it to the shoot offs. The fact that repeatedly eliminated shooters win events means there is a need for a resurrections element in our formats.
At Colorado only one shooter, Two Buck Chuck, made the magnificent shoot-offs in both events. Expanding the fubby five to a Magnificent 7 does not change it, only one still made both.
Time, Time, Time:
When you consider event format and match format, it is a balancing act. To mitigate the adverse effects of luck of the draw you need a higher elimination factor. To get more x s, you need more range time. That can be done by either shortening match length or eliminating side matches. My vote would be to eliminate side matches.
At Colorado we shot a jackpot shoot on one range with 47 shooters in 4 hours. It was Nevada Eight 2x shoot. Since the time taken for Nevada Eight is about the same as Three Winning shots, I am sure we can easily shoot 100 shooters on two ranges 2 x in about five hours. I really think we could shoot 100 shooters on two ranges 3x the first day, shooting down to three. The second day we could again shoot 3 winning shots 3x down to three shooters. There have been a lot of state shoots shooting 4 x three winning shots in one day.
Side matches consume range time and we shoot side matches just to occupy eliminated shooters. It is really unnecessary. It you don't eliminate shooters until noon the third day you don't need the side matches.
Another thing that takes range time is place shoot-offs. At Colorado, there were a lot of shoot-offs for place. The rules say place for recognized places must be determined by a shoot-off and not by x count and time out. The solution to this is how you structure recognized places. If your recognized places are the Magnificent 7 and the top three places in the bracket shoots, then all the recognized places are determined on the line by the format without shoot-offs. That would be 29 places recognized on the line although some of those places would be taken by the same shooters. (Ladies 7, Men 7, and five brackets 3 each, Master Gunfighter, Gunfighter. Sheriff, Deputy and Shootist for a total of 29) For 100 shooters that is 29% of the shooter which is comparable to what most shoots do now.
Thinking about time again, there is no reason we can not shoot 100 shooters on two ranges, main match 3x three winning shots, resurrection 3 x three winning shots and then on championship day shoot five brackets, 2x two winning shots. Bracket winners, men range A and ladies range B, magnificent five at high noon, and then start the Magnificent Seven Shoot-off at 1:00. Awards at 3:00.
We have the time and the ranges. We can have an 8 x match. It is not hard. Just cut out shoot-offs and side matches. Keep all shooters in play to the morning of the third day.
Administrating ease:
I am sure this is easier to do that what is done now because there are fewer matches and less shoot-offs, but I have not punched the keys. My question to Wench and Miss Betty is can the same matches be run the second day with the same shooters on the same computer. How do you reset the computer with the same shooters? My simple solution would be to get a second laptop. Computer 1 runs the first day. Same shooters entered into Computer 2 and it runs the second day. During the second day the brackets are set up on Computer 1 for the third morning. Brackets are run and posted on the second day for the morning of the third day from first days shooting since that is the main match. Seems simple and easy.
Enough for now. "Bring me another shooter!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)