Today on Shady Mtn we shot a 1x Main Match shooting down to two shooters and at the same time a 2x True Resurrection Bracket shoot, last man standing, followed by a 1x Magnificent Five. The two top seeds in the mag 5 came from the main match and the other three seeds were the champions of three brackets. Making the mag 5 were two Sheriffs (one from the brackets and one from the main match), two Master Gunfighters (again one from main match and one from the brackets) and one Gunfighter. The Gunfighter, No Name, won the event by being the toughest gunslinger on this day.
Range Time: We had 15 shooters on two lanes and were able to complete the entire event in 2 1/2 hours. Match format was Arizona 5. Extrapolating out, had we had 6 lanes we could have shot the event with 45 shooters in 2 1/2 hours including the shoot off. There was no down time on the range. There was always a round ready to be shot when the prior round was completed.
The Association of Arizona Gunslingers: This would be a viable alternative to the Arizona Bracket Shoot for summer time use. We normally get 30 to 40 shooters and need to be done in 4 hours. I believe we could shoot a 2x main match shooting down to 6 with a true 2x bracket resurrection 4 brackets with the champions going to the Mag 10 1 x shoot off. We could seed the remainder of the shooters on lanes 3 & 4 and 5 & 6. We are used to shooting 3 simultaneous Magnificent 10 to 12 etc. shoot offs.
One might ask why do this. Well, just for a little variety. By doing a different format occasionally, it might give other shooters more opportunity to be successful. We tend to have the same shooters dominate our shoots in part because they have learned and trained for the format. A little change would be good for us. This format is actually more compliant with the structure of the CFDA titled shoots than the Arizona Bracket Shoot.
Innovations: What is novel here is that we shot a true resurrection and we shot it simultaneously with the main match. This has some really great advantages.
A true resurrection mitigates the unfairness of the luck of the draw. A great illustration of this unfairness was at the Texas State. Quick Cal was clearly one of the top shooters of the event but was out in the 5th or 6th round because of the luck of the draw. A true resurrection allows for advancement through what would be "a loser bracket" in other sports. Adverse draws can be overcome by higher x counts. A resurrection feature ups the x count. In this event from 1 to 3, but if used in a 6 lane event, it probably doubles the x count.
We shot the resurrection simultaneously with the main match. As shooters were eliminated they were added to the appropriate bracket match. 19.5 allows this and it seems to work well. When I did test runs of this, the match reports were in error but I did not consider that a problem since we were shooting down to the last shooter standing and the standings were not relevant. However, in this event the standing reports were accurate. To do this you have to have some arbitrary bracket times and you have to be willing to live with uneven brackets. Our brackets were 2 shooters, 5 shooters, and 6 shooters with 2 shooters remaining in the main match. This will work better with larger shooter numbers, but the times need to be set in advance. Time out time was used, not bracket report. A larger event might allow more administrative time and the bracket report might be an alternative. When you complete scoring a main match round you get a match standing report, it would have been easy to run a bracket report at that time, will do so next time.
Fragmentation: Another advantage is that you can fragment the field. At most titled events ranges sit idle for a significant amount of time. Normally, this is to draw rounds or simply to manage the event. In the early rounds you can shoot the men on all ranges and while you are doing that you can draw and administer the ladies, again shooting on all ranges. But later, as the field is reduced this is not possible and ranges sit idle while rounds are drawn. By fragmenting the field into brackets and with 19.5 scoring program you can designate the brackets to the idle ranges. The goal is always to have a round waiting at the table when the prior round is completed.
By starting the resurrection as soon as there are enough shooters in a bracket to make a viable posse or round you can keep the ranges full. By waiting until all of the shooters are eliminated you are wasting valuable range time. You don't need to wait. We need to remember that we don't score by wins, we score by losses. What is important is that everyone gets the same number of xs to used. It really does not matter when you use those xs. (See confusion below!)
Confusion: 19.5 worked well adding shooters as they were eliminated. However, I was trying to be the score keeper and enter data at the some time. I goofed and failed to enter two shooters into the bracket match. One of the shooters brought this to my attention during the match and it was not a problem, I simply entered him in the appropriate bracket and he got his two xs. The other shooter did not tell me he was left out until the match was over and then it was too late. (Actually it was not we could have reopen that bracket and entered him but I had already announced the Mag 5.)
Next time we do this we will alert all to be sure they get put into a bracket when they are eliminated. It really does not matter much if they are added late because we score by losses not wins. Looking back over the score sheets it would have been really easy to rectify this oversight, I just was too busy running the event to think straight.
Administration: We ran this event using two laptops and one printers. Shady ran the main match and we now declare him competent to be a data entry guru from start to finish on the main match. There is probably going to be a test tomorrow, but he will protest Trail Bosses don't test. I ran the bracket match and need my attention to detail sharpened.
When the smoke clears: After the event was over Shady said he had five specials for me. After the bellow and smoke of the first round I knew something was up, was scared a bit, but won three on speed before those specials caught up with me, then a I put a .191 on the plate just to let him know that he had better add more powder next time. In the interest of honest reporting, I will note he put me out of the main match on speed, hitting 80% to my 100%. Guess speed is sometimes relevant.
Someone said, "if you are not growing, you are rotting." Growing abit on Shady Mtn.
Wednesday, July 3, 2019
Tuesday, June 11, 2019
Southern, National and Mitigation
Many times how you finish at a titled event has more to do with who you draw than how well you are shooting. Not only is it important who you are shooting but it is also important who the other shooters are shooting. In the last round of the main match of the Southern there were 11 shooters left, four lost leaving the field of the magnificent seven. For me, the most important draw was the match of Buzzard Cooper against Old West. Had Buzzard won that match there would have been 8 shooters left and we would have had to shoot another round. In that round there would have been three losers so the field would have been five leading to resurrection shoot off between 3 shooters.
In the final match of the Magnificent Seven the winning shot was a .367. Speed is glamorous, but if you watched the entire match you will know that not a single shot was won by speed. You might think that the Southern was won by accuracy but that is not the case. The losing shooter by and large is a much more accurate shooter than the Southern Champion. The final match was won by the shooter who was mentally tougher in that match. The Southern Champion entered the Magnificent Seven with three xs so he too benefited from the Buzzard/Old West match.
Who knows if he would have survived the next round and subsequent resurrection.
The National was won by that five time World Champion. I do believe there was a resurrection in this event but do not remember the details. It is interesting to note that the mag 7 of the Southern and the mag 7 of the National were substantially different although the field of both shoots were the same. That might be due to the shooting of the gunslingers or might be due to the luck of the draw.
I was having breakfast on the second day of a titled event and a seasoned shooter was asked how did he do. He said "I am out!" and then said, "What chance did I have?" and then he named 4 of the toughest gunslingers there. He was right he had no chance even though he is in the top 20% of shooters in the CFDA. That is the unfairness that can occur with the luck of the draw. Can this unfairness be mitigated? The answer is yes and it is really quite easy to do. Higher x count mitigates this unfairness. The more xs you get the more chance you have to recover from a tough draw. But a resurrection feature also does a great job mitigating this unfairness. I can name at least a half dozen titled matches won by a resurrected shooters. Happens often. We shoot all these side matches that really simply occupy eliminated shooters when we could be shooting a true resurrection which would be mitigating the luck of the draw unfairness. That seasoned shooter could be shooting his way back to fifth rather than being occupied by a meaningless 2nd chance shoot.
Scoring 19.5 will function just fine adding shooters into a resurrection as they are eliminated from the main match. Want to do this, shoot the main match down to five or fewer shooters. Fill the vacancies from the resurrection, two or three, whatever is needed from the resurrection. The complaint will be what about that 6th or 7th place shooter. So what, he or she might be shooting in the present resurrection like what might have happened had Buzzard won. The next complaint will be it is not fair for the 6th or 7th place shooter to come into the resurrection clean when the resurrection shooters may have won 9 or 10 matches to get get there. But it is eminently fair. It is far harder to win 9 or 10 matches in the main match against those 4 tougher shooters than it is to come through the "eliminated" match. The bottom line is all shooters get the same number of xs and all shoot to championship day in matches that matter.
This is just a little change, but one that would make a big difference mitigating unfairness of the luck of the draw.
Since I am on my soap box I will add that in categories I shot in final match but only competed in two of the last five matches. Love those byes, train for them, bring me another shooter.
In the final match of the Magnificent Seven the winning shot was a .367. Speed is glamorous, but if you watched the entire match you will know that not a single shot was won by speed. You might think that the Southern was won by accuracy but that is not the case. The losing shooter by and large is a much more accurate shooter than the Southern Champion. The final match was won by the shooter who was mentally tougher in that match. The Southern Champion entered the Magnificent Seven with three xs so he too benefited from the Buzzard/Old West match.
Who knows if he would have survived the next round and subsequent resurrection.
The National was won by that five time World Champion. I do believe there was a resurrection in this event but do not remember the details. It is interesting to note that the mag 7 of the Southern and the mag 7 of the National were substantially different although the field of both shoots were the same. That might be due to the shooting of the gunslingers or might be due to the luck of the draw.
I was having breakfast on the second day of a titled event and a seasoned shooter was asked how did he do. He said "I am out!" and then said, "What chance did I have?" and then he named 4 of the toughest gunslingers there. He was right he had no chance even though he is in the top 20% of shooters in the CFDA. That is the unfairness that can occur with the luck of the draw. Can this unfairness be mitigated? The answer is yes and it is really quite easy to do. Higher x count mitigates this unfairness. The more xs you get the more chance you have to recover from a tough draw. But a resurrection feature also does a great job mitigating this unfairness. I can name at least a half dozen titled matches won by a resurrected shooters. Happens often. We shoot all these side matches that really simply occupy eliminated shooters when we could be shooting a true resurrection which would be mitigating the luck of the draw unfairness. That seasoned shooter could be shooting his way back to fifth rather than being occupied by a meaningless 2nd chance shoot.
Scoring 19.5 will function just fine adding shooters into a resurrection as they are eliminated from the main match. Want to do this, shoot the main match down to five or fewer shooters. Fill the vacancies from the resurrection, two or three, whatever is needed from the resurrection. The complaint will be what about that 6th or 7th place shooter. So what, he or she might be shooting in the present resurrection like what might have happened had Buzzard won. The next complaint will be it is not fair for the 6th or 7th place shooter to come into the resurrection clean when the resurrection shooters may have won 9 or 10 matches to get get there. But it is eminently fair. It is far harder to win 9 or 10 matches in the main match against those 4 tougher shooters than it is to come through the "eliminated" match. The bottom line is all shooters get the same number of xs and all shoot to championship day in matches that matter.
This is just a little change, but one that would make a big difference mitigating unfairness of the luck of the draw.
Since I am on my soap box I will add that in categories I shot in final match but only competed in two of the last five matches. Love those byes, train for them, bring me another shooter.
Monday, May 20, 2019
What we learned
We had a very enjoyable shoot at the Loess Hills Paladins Added. It was not a CFDA event because there was no hosting club but all CFDA rules applied except as announced for testing. 22 shooters attended. Here is what I learned.
Range Time: I wanted to shoot a CFDA bracket three winning shots 3 x event and used 24 inch targets at exhibition distance to lessen the range time. That was effective with most matches being resolved in 6 or less shots. Only one match went to 9 shots. We had plenty of range time. We completed three brackets in 2 1/2 hours. We then shot a 1x Magnificent shoot off which took 45 minutes.
Most shooters had a substantially higher gunfighter rating than one would normally expect. 15 shooters had a gunfighter rating near 1.0 or above. 1.0 or above normally means a shooter is in the top 25% of the field. Using exhibition distance boosted that to 75% of the field. There were several shooters that had a unusually low rating for them. I think for those shooters the change in size and distance must have caused them to lose their focus.
I would not use the 24" target at exhibition distance again unless I was really concerned about range time or purely for fun.
The "Added": The Added work well. I thank all of the sponsors especially the corporate sponsors. If you need wax, see Royal Wax, if you need that gun slicked up see Thirsty Gun Works, LLC; if you need pool service, see Blue Cactus Pool Service, LLC; need a lawyer on the plains of Nebraska see Egr, Birkel, & Wollmer, P.C.; and for that dirt see Double Lux, Ltd. I do not mention the many individual sponsors, but thank them also. We had entry fees of $220, paid out $265 in prize money and still paid a range fee and the charity netted 20%.
While the "Added" worked well, I do not intend to solicit these sponsors on a recurring basis. I do think that the "Added" may have some usefulness for our major jackpot shoots.
Testing: The main purpose of this shoot was to test out bye procedures. The standard bye procedure is inherently unfair because of how the "advance without competing", that is the "bye" is allocated, and there is a gunfighter bias. In this event no shooter was allowed to advance without competing. A very significant advantage to this is it shorten last man standing events significantly. This results because all shooters compete in every round.
We shot three brackets, two with 8 shooters and one with 6 shooters. All brackets were completed in 6 rounds except the 6 shooter bracket which was completed in 7 rounds. There was only one shoot off for place which was shot during the final round of the 6 shooter bracket thereby taking no additional time. This all resulted in a substantial saving of range time. Using the standard bye procedure the 8 shooter brackets would have taken a minimum 10 rounds with 8 allocating shoot offs.
The 8 shooter brackets would have required some shoot offs for place but the astute scorekeepers suggested an easier solution. The normal procedure for a shoot off for place is to have a start over match format shoot off which requires an additional round. The scorekeepers pointed out that the shoot off shooters were already at the line and had shot at least three shot against each other in the "Arizona bye" procedure so why not just complete that contest which is what we did. This worked well and required no additional rounds and few shots. This modification is easily added by the following sentence. "If a shoot off for place is required, the competitors will continue the match format to completion resolving the issue in the current match with the current score between them being used."
I doubt anyone will use this, but maybe, so here is the Arizona Bye rule:
Range Time: I wanted to shoot a CFDA bracket three winning shots 3 x event and used 24 inch targets at exhibition distance to lessen the range time. That was effective with most matches being resolved in 6 or less shots. Only one match went to 9 shots. We had plenty of range time. We completed three brackets in 2 1/2 hours. We then shot a 1x Magnificent shoot off which took 45 minutes.
Most shooters had a substantially higher gunfighter rating than one would normally expect. 15 shooters had a gunfighter rating near 1.0 or above. 1.0 or above normally means a shooter is in the top 25% of the field. Using exhibition distance boosted that to 75% of the field. There were several shooters that had a unusually low rating for them. I think for those shooters the change in size and distance must have caused them to lose their focus.
I would not use the 24" target at exhibition distance again unless I was really concerned about range time or purely for fun.
The "Added": The Added work well. I thank all of the sponsors especially the corporate sponsors. If you need wax, see Royal Wax, if you need that gun slicked up see Thirsty Gun Works, LLC; if you need pool service, see Blue Cactus Pool Service, LLC; need a lawyer on the plains of Nebraska see Egr, Birkel, & Wollmer, P.C.; and for that dirt see Double Lux, Ltd. I do not mention the many individual sponsors, but thank them also. We had entry fees of $220, paid out $265 in prize money and still paid a range fee and the charity netted 20%.
While the "Added" worked well, I do not intend to solicit these sponsors on a recurring basis. I do think that the "Added" may have some usefulness for our major jackpot shoots.
Testing: The main purpose of this shoot was to test out bye procedures. The standard bye procedure is inherently unfair because of how the "advance without competing", that is the "bye" is allocated, and there is a gunfighter bias. In this event no shooter was allowed to advance without competing. A very significant advantage to this is it shorten last man standing events significantly. This results because all shooters compete in every round.
We shot three brackets, two with 8 shooters and one with 6 shooters. All brackets were completed in 6 rounds except the 6 shooter bracket which was completed in 7 rounds. There was only one shoot off for place which was shot during the final round of the 6 shooter bracket thereby taking no additional time. This all resulted in a substantial saving of range time. Using the standard bye procedure the 8 shooter brackets would have taken a minimum 10 rounds with 8 allocating shoot offs.
The 8 shooter brackets would have required some shoot offs for place but the astute scorekeepers suggested an easier solution. The normal procedure for a shoot off for place is to have a start over match format shoot off which requires an additional round. The scorekeepers pointed out that the shoot off shooters were already at the line and had shot at least three shot against each other in the "Arizona bye" procedure so why not just complete that contest which is what we did. This worked well and required no additional rounds and few shots. This modification is easily added by the following sentence. "If a shoot off for place is required, the competitors will continue the match format to completion resolving the issue in the current match with the current score between them being used."
I doubt anyone will use this, but maybe, so here is the Arizona Bye rule:
Arizona Bye
All shooters must compete using the match format in every round except when Rule IV.6 forfeiture occurs. If there is an odd number of shooters in a round, the last three shooters will compete together using the match format to its conclusion. Each shooter will be scored individually against each other shooter of the trio, a loss to either of the other shooters results in an X for the shooter. If a shoot off for place is required, the competitors will continue the match format to completion resolving the issue in the current match using the current score between them.
Range Time Benefits: The tested bye procedure worked well and resulted in substantial range time savings. This may be of useful benefit for the bracket shoots at titled events but for the unintended consequences set forth below. Titled events currently shoot bracket shoots before the main match continues on championship day. To expect a shooter to shoot a 10 to 15 round bracket match and then resume the main match and be at his or her best may be asking too much. I truly believe it would cut the rounds required by about 30-40%. Bracket matches and for that matter, last man standing events seem to go on and on and it is in large part due to the fact the one shooter is not competing in a round.
Unforeseen Consequences:
It is as important to find out what does not work as it is to find out what does work. While the current bye procedure is unfair in allocation and there is a gunfighter bias, the suggested procedure eliminates the allocation problem, there is a clear speed bias in the suggested procedure. The best way to explain it is by illustration taken from the data of this shoot. If you are down to three shooters, a low 4 shooters hitting 90%, a high 3 shooter hitting less than 60% and a low 3 shooter hitting less than 50%, under the current bye procedures the odds favor the 90% shooter. That is the gunfighter bias of the current bye procedure. However, if you match the three together as this suggested procedure does, the 90% shooter probably has no chance because the combined hit ratio of his competitors is better that 60%, and as we all know at 60% in three winning shots the quicker gun wins. This speed bias could somewhat be eliminated by having the remaining competitors shoot the trio to completion as some have suggested, but this defeats the range time savings, since you have two winners and one loser instead of two losers and one winner. You will still have the range time benefit of no shoot-off rounds.
Local Consequences:
It was so successful I think we should have at least one bracket shoot as a class D event each year. Maybe we can do one in the summer up in the mountains to avoid our summer heat. We had more variety in our winners which I think is a good thing. When you shoot the same format month after month, one should not expect different results. A change in format might open the door to some other winners.
We did not have enough long guns for a separate bracket. I think a separate long gun bracket is doable and would be fun. I would note than even without their own bracket all of the long guns were in the money at this shoot.
I would not use the Arizona Bye again because of the speed bias unless we had an over capacity crowd. For example, a 5 bracket 30 to 40 shooter shoot one range would be great and a lot of fun. If 50 shooters showed up, I would go to the Arizona Five for range time reasons. If 60 shooters showed up I would go to Arizona Five with Arizona Bye for range time reasons.
Next Up:
How well you do at a titled match or for that matter at a club event many times has more to do with who you draw than how you are shooting. I refer to this unfairness as "luck of the draw." Luck of the draw is mitigated by the elimination factor. The higher the x count the more chance you have to recover from a tough draw. The magnificent format eliminates the luck of the draw at the top of the event. Titled events also use a resurrection feature in about a 1/3 of our events to fill vacancies in the magnificent field but resurrection feature is not open to all. It would be really easy to remedy some of this so here is the next test.
I propose to do a 5 x test with a true resurrection for all shooters. It would be a 3 x main match shooting down to 5 or less with a 2 x resurrection for all shooters to fill the magnificent vacancies. All shooters would get total of 5 x s. Magnificent 7 1 x shoot off, maybe 2x at director's option. For range time reasons and because it does a better sort, Arizona 5 match format.
"It is hard to know what you don't know because you don't know." "If you never try, you will never know." Ruah
Sunday, May 12, 2019
An Apology
I apologize if I offended any of the competitors or hosts of titled matches by my recent comments. It was not my intent to do so. To make the magnificent shoot off you have to be good, tough and a little bit lucky. Those shooters deserve all the praise. Congratulations on great shooting. Likewise it is tough to host a title match. Those hosts do a great job. I like the magnificent format, it is better that last man standing for reasons I have said in prior posts.
Everyone has an agenda. Mine is the 7 x titled match. With just a few minor changes, we could be shooting titled matches where all shooters are still in competition on the Championship day.
Yesterday at Rio our new Regulator, publicly warned new shooters about the two miscreants here in the Valley of the Sun. The miscreants publicly acknowledged the error of their ways and but both invited the shooters to come and learn how to be better CFDA shooters. The irony is that no one here in the Valley or for that matter in the nation, has done more to promote, recruit, train CFDA shooters than those miscreants. "Want to be quick, come to the Camp; Want to win come to Shady Mtn."
Rio was interesting yesterday. Three of the four top shooters were Shady Mtn shooters. The Camp shooters were all well down in the pack. Last month 3 of the top 4 were Camp shooters, including our new Regulator.
I know there have been some out there complaining that we are going to use 24" targets at 15' at 47". And I know some titled matches shoot some side matches at 15 feet at target height of 50 inches, but this up coming shoot is a practice shoot. Shooting at 15 feet with a target height of 50 inches is just practicing to miss. We don't do that! I will let the Sage from the mountains explain why shooting a target height of 50 inches at 15 feet is practicing missing.
At the Loess Hills Added, all CFDA rules apply except those which we are testing as announced.
Heh, how about a 6 x Arizona State Championship in November. It would have to be a Class D experimental affair. Would be easy to do, big money payout. We could invite match directors, Marshalls, Regulators, and Quick Cal to come and see how well it would worked. When you are testing something it is just as important to find out what won't work as to find out what does work, maybe more important.
(This posts has now been sanitized, I hope it now meets standards, but if not, it is the best that I can do. 05/13/19)
Everyone has an agenda. Mine is the 7 x titled match. With just a few minor changes, we could be shooting titled matches where all shooters are still in competition on the Championship day.
Yesterday at Rio our new Regulator, publicly warned new shooters about the two miscreants here in the Valley of the Sun. The miscreants publicly acknowledged the error of their ways and but both invited the shooters to come and learn how to be better CFDA shooters. The irony is that no one here in the Valley or for that matter in the nation, has done more to promote, recruit, train CFDA shooters than those miscreants. "Want to be quick, come to the Camp; Want to win come to Shady Mtn."
Rio was interesting yesterday. Three of the four top shooters were Shady Mtn shooters. The Camp shooters were all well down in the pack. Last month 3 of the top 4 were Camp shooters, including our new Regulator.
I know there have been some out there complaining that we are going to use 24" targets at 15' at 47". And I know some titled matches shoot some side matches at 15 feet at target height of 50 inches, but this up coming shoot is a practice shoot. Shooting at 15 feet with a target height of 50 inches is just practicing to miss. We don't do that! I will let the Sage from the mountains explain why shooting a target height of 50 inches at 15 feet is practicing missing.
At the Loess Hills Added, all CFDA rules apply except those which we are testing as announced.
Heh, how about a 6 x Arizona State Championship in November. It would have to be a Class D experimental affair. Would be easy to do, big money payout. We could invite match directors, Marshalls, Regulators, and Quick Cal to come and see how well it would worked. When you are testing something it is just as important to find out what won't work as to find out what does work, maybe more important.
(This posts has now been sanitized, I hope it now meets standards, but if not, it is the best that I can do. 05/13/19)
Wednesday, May 8, 2019
Plainsight, the Comish, and Serious Matters
I recently had a post banished by the political correctness police, the Comish. Quick Cal was right to delete my post to protect the brand. Aspirin was originally a brand name but its owner lost the right to use it as a brand name because it did not prevent it from becoming a descriptive term. Now onto serious matters.
I am going to move the Board of the Association of Arizona Gunslingers to maintain a log of "bracket reports" for each of our club events. If the Board agrees we will then be able to hold a "CFDA Bracket Shoot" at a club practice shoot. It would be identical to what is done at a title match. Brackets are formed based on the prior main match performance. Seems easy but!
The but is what do you do about club top gun points. Here in Phoenix we have two clubs. I am a member of both clubs. Rio bases club points on a 24 point system and uses the seeding rounds to assign points. At Rio, shoot off results do not count. The Arizona Gunslingers use a CFDA-like 40 point system and base the points on the shoot off results. In effect both club arbitrarily assign higher points to Bracket A, then B, then C as shown on the seeding report, a timeout report.
If you hold a CFDA bracket shoot as a club event what do you do about assigning club points. The Camp followers are going say it is obvious the Master Gunfighter bracket should get the top points. But that is not right, then you are just assigning points on a classification, not performance. That is not the cowboy way.
My suggestion would be a Magnificent 12 1x shoot off among the top three in each bracket. I would seed them arbitrarily for administrative ease but you could seed them as is done in titled matches using the timeout report. (We are going to test the arbitrary method on the 18th and I will compare it to the CFDA method in a later post) Those 12 would get the top 12 point numbers. For example, #1 would get 40, #2 would get 37 and so on at Arizona Gunslinger events. At Rio, you would go from 24 points.
For the remainder of the field the gunfighters would start with the 13th position in points, 23 points for the Arizona Gunslingers and probably 11 points for Rio and progress downward 1 point per position. After the top twelve point positions there would be four gunslinger receiving identical points until the points are exhausted. The points would accurately reflect the performance of the competitors. Sounds like a reason solution to me. What do you think?
Back to the silliness of the day. The Loess Hills Added is more of a Class D event than most club shoots. Had we been using the Loess Hills range it would have been because that is the requirement for using the range. Anyway, I apologize if I offended anyone, as I emailed Cal, I do ride for the brand but sometimes stray a bit.
I am going to move the Board of the Association of Arizona Gunslingers to maintain a log of "bracket reports" for each of our club events. If the Board agrees we will then be able to hold a "CFDA Bracket Shoot" at a club practice shoot. It would be identical to what is done at a title match. Brackets are formed based on the prior main match performance. Seems easy but!
The but is what do you do about club top gun points. Here in Phoenix we have two clubs. I am a member of both clubs. Rio bases club points on a 24 point system and uses the seeding rounds to assign points. At Rio, shoot off results do not count. The Arizona Gunslingers use a CFDA-like 40 point system and base the points on the shoot off results. In effect both club arbitrarily assign higher points to Bracket A, then B, then C as shown on the seeding report, a timeout report.
If you hold a CFDA bracket shoot as a club event what do you do about assigning club points. The Camp followers are going say it is obvious the Master Gunfighter bracket should get the top points. But that is not right, then you are just assigning points on a classification, not performance. That is not the cowboy way.
My suggestion would be a Magnificent 12 1x shoot off among the top three in each bracket. I would seed them arbitrarily for administrative ease but you could seed them as is done in titled matches using the timeout report. (We are going to test the arbitrary method on the 18th and I will compare it to the CFDA method in a later post) Those 12 would get the top 12 point numbers. For example, #1 would get 40, #2 would get 37 and so on at Arizona Gunslinger events. At Rio, you would go from 24 points.
For the remainder of the field the gunfighters would start with the 13th position in points, 23 points for the Arizona Gunslingers and probably 11 points for Rio and progress downward 1 point per position. After the top twelve point positions there would be four gunslinger receiving identical points until the points are exhausted. The points would accurately reflect the performance of the competitors. Sounds like a reason solution to me. What do you think?
Back to the silliness of the day. The Loess Hills Added is more of a Class D event than most club shoots. Had we been using the Loess Hills range it would have been because that is the requirement for using the range. Anyway, I apologize if I offended anyone, as I emailed Cal, I do ride for the brand but sometimes stray a bit.
Tuesday, May 7, 2019
Anomalies at Oregon/Oklahoma
"If you do not see what is in plain sight, you are probably not looking." Alleluia Ruah
The Ladies Oregon State match was very unusual. After 8 rounds there were 12 shooters left with 11 shooters having 3 xs and one shooter having 1 x. After round 9 there were only 6 shooters left and after round 10 only 3 shooters left. The match director was probably saying "Well that work well." But such efficiency led to the following anomalies:
1. For two shooters the main match was a 6 x event.
2. For two other shooters the man match was a 5 x event.
3. For one shooter it was a 3 x event (the 2nd place shooter).
4. I do not know for sure but I suspect that one shooter reached the final five without competing in her final round of main match.
At Oklahoma in the men's event there was similar anomalies. For one shooter it was a 6 x event. For three other shooters it was a 5 x event. For two others a 4 x. If I was going to root for anyone at Oklahoma it would have been Jayhawker, but unfortunately for him it was a 3 x event.
I am not necessarily lobbying for change, just pointing out what is in plain sight. If we are resurrecting shooters, why not open up resurrection for everyone? We normally shoot the resurrection anyway, believe it would have been Wax Killer at Oklahoma.
The Ladies Oregon State match was very unusual. After 8 rounds there were 12 shooters left with 11 shooters having 3 xs and one shooter having 1 x. After round 9 there were only 6 shooters left and after round 10 only 3 shooters left. The match director was probably saying "Well that work well." But such efficiency led to the following anomalies:
1. For two shooters the main match was a 6 x event.
2. For two other shooters the man match was a 5 x event.
3. For one shooter it was a 3 x event (the 2nd place shooter).
4. I do not know for sure but I suspect that one shooter reached the final five without competing in her final round of main match.
At Oklahoma in the men's event there was similar anomalies. For one shooter it was a 6 x event. For three other shooters it was a 5 x event. For two others a 4 x. If I was going to root for anyone at Oklahoma it would have been Jayhawker, but unfortunately for him it was a 3 x event.
I am not necessarily lobbying for change, just pointing out what is in plain sight. If we are resurrecting shooters, why not open up resurrection for everyone? We normally shoot the resurrection anyway, believe it would have been Wax Killer at Oklahoma.
Monday, May 6, 2019
The "Added"
The Loess Hills Paladins, Inc is hosting a jackpot shoot on May 18 at The Camp. It will be an "Added" event.
Many hosts of title events struggle meeting the prize requirements. They do it mainly by soliciting door prizes from sponsors. This has always seemed to me to be inefficient. The Paladins are experimenting with an "Added" event. Cash sponsorship are being solicited and the cash is being added to directly to the prize money. Business sponsorship is a minimum of $20 and individual sponsorship is a minimum of $10. For that minimum amount you get listed on the sponsors board and verbally recognized during the shoot.
The Association of Arizona Gunslinger's Winter Range jackpot shoot is always well attended, more than 90 in 2018, more than 100 in 2019, in part because it pays so well, 80% payout. I would like to recommend to the board that we go to an "Added" event in 2020 and see if we could get to more than a 100% payout.
If this makes sense to you and you would like to see these "Added" events occur, do a sponsorship. You can send your check payable to the Loess Hills Paladins, P.O. Box 74726, Phoenix, AZ 85087. You might want to send me a message, e-mail or call to make sure I get you on the list.
We are, as always, testing out some other innovations. One of which is a separate bracket for Shootists. This seemed to be very well received at Winter Range. I can think of a few Colorado/Utah shootists that might want to take a road trip for the 18th. Heck, for out of staters, I could be talked into doing a seminar on mental toughness Sunday morning before they leave.
For more details on the shoot see my post on the shoot.
P.S. The Camp's address is 901 E Dolores Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85085
Many hosts of title events struggle meeting the prize requirements. They do it mainly by soliciting door prizes from sponsors. This has always seemed to me to be inefficient. The Paladins are experimenting with an "Added" event. Cash sponsorship are being solicited and the cash is being added to directly to the prize money. Business sponsorship is a minimum of $20 and individual sponsorship is a minimum of $10. For that minimum amount you get listed on the sponsors board and verbally recognized during the shoot.
The Association of Arizona Gunslinger's Winter Range jackpot shoot is always well attended, more than 90 in 2018, more than 100 in 2019, in part because it pays so well, 80% payout. I would like to recommend to the board that we go to an "Added" event in 2020 and see if we could get to more than a 100% payout.
If this makes sense to you and you would like to see these "Added" events occur, do a sponsorship. You can send your check payable to the Loess Hills Paladins, P.O. Box 74726, Phoenix, AZ 85087. You might want to send me a message, e-mail or call to make sure I get you on the list.
We are, as always, testing out some other innovations. One of which is a separate bracket for Shootists. This seemed to be very well received at Winter Range. I can think of a few Colorado/Utah shootists that might want to take a road trip for the 18th. Heck, for out of staters, I could be talked into doing a seminar on mental toughness Sunday morning before they leave.
For more details on the shoot see my post on the shoot.
P.S. The Camp's address is 901 E Dolores Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85085
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)