Shotgun Forum banner
  • Whether you're a greenhorn or a seasoned veteran, your collection's next piece is at Bass Pro Shops. Shop Now.

    Advertisement
121 - 140 of 196 Posts
I pointed this out to a friend that’s is state delegate and it went right over there head. A few years with this set of rules C&D are going to be packed
I don’t think so. I think you’ll see a much more even distribution among all classes.

If anything, more people in the lower classes means statistically more punches given out. You’re going to see the guys working on their game and improving will be moving up and out quicker.

what you won’t see is the same old names camped out in DFL in Master Class.
 
Perhaps the" extremely high volume of opt out requests" is an indication that the membership just does not like the current classification system. I have not been an NSCA member since the very beginning, but when I took time to read the old NPA Classification system, it sounded like a better system to me. The logic of the tweaked average of NPA seems difficult to fault. Classes were established based on current shooting performance only. I would be interested to see a few posts on this thread by members who played under the old system in order to learn what they thought about it. Do they think one is better than the other ?
Well I was one of the first 150 members of NSCA. And the class averages were a system worked very well I thought The notion of ”sandbagging “ an average over a year to me was more trouble than it was worth It seemed to me.
Although I think at that time the highest classification may been AA. My score average placed me in “B” class those days.And guess what, in B class now as well.
This new (2024) classification scheme I think will have some unintended consequence much like what has happened to subguage decline in participation.
 
What were the previous classifications? Seems I remember when they went to the shoot ratio ii was 70%. Then I think it went to 60%. So did they drop it from 60% to 40% for 2024, or was it from 50%?

I was down classed from AA to A with a 52% ratio and 5 punches. Oh well, it's just a recreational game anyway. I think people who get upset over their football team losing is funny. It's just a bunch of guys chasing a leather ball with air in it. Millions of dollars spent on a game (football) that has no true meaning in life. Likewise, shooting clays is just to have fun - don't take it so seriously.
 
Never mind - I found it. They lowered the ratio from 60% in 2023 to 40% in 2024. Quite a drop!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here were the 2023 rules:

NSCA will conduct the annual end-of-year review during the week of January 16, 2023, to determine classification of members for 2023. The following criteria will be used for the review:

12 Gauge Classification:

  • All shooters who started and ended the year in the same class and shot 500 registered targets or more are eligible for review.
  • All shooters who shot 1,000 registered targets or more, in their ENDING class for the year, are eligible for review.
  • If a shooter has accumulated FEWER THAN the following required minimum number of punches in their ending class for the year and if their calculated CCFR (Current Class Finish Ratio) in their ending class for the year is greater than 0.600, the shooter will be reviewed and down-classed.
    The number of punches earned per class, to be down-classed: Master Class, fewer than 7 punches; AA Class – fewer than 4 punches; A and B Classes – fewer than 3 punches; C and D Classes – fewer than 2 punches.
    The CCFR is determined from the total finishes in ending class events divided by the total number of entries in ending class events for the current year (for all gauges), which can be found on the NSCA website and in the individual shooter’s information records (Shooter History).
  • A shooter who has opted out of the end-of-year review will not be reviewed in the end-of-year review.
  • Any international shooters will not be down-classed at the end-of-year review.
 
I don't understand this issue at all. I know a local shooter who punched into M class in 2019, and earned punches in that class for 2019-2023 of 2+11+13+16+12=54. Now for 2024 he's downclassed to AA. First shoot of 2024, he won AA morning and afternoon, and afternoon tied the highest M class score. He has over 40,000 lifetime registered targets, and shot just under 5,000 each year 2020-2023. He's not a rich man, to my knowledge. It's nuts to believe his effort to climb back to M class will result in him shooting more targets in 2024 and beyond. It's not out of reason to believe his shooting in AA will keep a capable AA shooter from getting some needed punches to get to M class.

What you're talking about with mandatory downclassing is forced sandbagging.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tincup and sera
I don't understand this issue at all. I know a local shooter who punched into M class in 2019, and earned punches in that class for 2019-2023 of 2+11+13+16+12=54. Now for 2024 he's downclassed to AA. First shoot of 2024, he won AA morning and afternoon, and afternoon tied the highest M class score.

What you're talking about with mandatory downclassing is forced sandbagging.
So you’re saying this guy can compete with Brandon Powell? He belongs in a class with Zach K?

No?

Then maybe the problem isn’t that he’s in AA now. Maybe the problem is that there are guys in AA who would be more accurately placed in B Class.
 
Given the amount of opt outs, I requested to opt in for a down class. Since I only kept my class by meeting 1 of the criteria, I figured it was worth a shot. Keeping my fingers crossed that I get to AA before the world’s!
 
  • Like
Reactions: SGalford
What you're talking about with mandatory downclassing is forced sandbagging.
That’s nonsense. You are using one instance to come to a crazy conclusion. If no-one opts out, classes get adjusted to have similar shooters classed together. It wouldn’t be perfect, but it will adjust things to better represent shooters skills.

The lack of mandatory down classing is why I get excessive punches throughout the year at smaller local shoots. We have a plethora of Master classed shooters that would have to be shooting at barn doors thrown broad side to post a score in the 80’s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZ Dutch
So your vision of Master class is a group of 10 -15 shooters??

Steve
While that seems absurdly low, it is vastly a more accurate # of Master class shooters than the current # of shooters classed as Master.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZ Dutch
Did they announce the qualification rules at the first of 2023 or was it just a few weeks ago? I cruised through the rules book and did not see anything there. It would make sense to post what the qualifications will be to remain in class at the first of the year which among other things would give some a goal.
 
So you’re saying this guy can compete with Brandon Powell? He belongs in a class with Zach K?

No?

Then maybe the problem isn’t that he’s in AA now. Maybe the problem is that there are guys in AA who would be more accurately placed in B Class.
That's not a reasonable argument. Because a golfer, say, can't compete with Scheffler, McIlroy, etc., does that mean he shouldn't try to qualify for the US Open? I don't know how many M class shooters there are, but fewer than 10 could compete with Brandon or Zach. You're making an argument for 25 classes vs 7 classes. Or maybe 5 or 6 classes above AA, including a pro class?
 
So when will the prize money be raised?

when will nice trophies be given?

when will fully refereed shoots start? Those days are gone. They’re not coming back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: calpik and fal777
That’s nonsense. You are using one instance to come to a crazy conclusion. If no-one opts out, classes get adjusted to have similar shooters classed together. It wouldn’t be perfect, but it will adjust things to better represent shooters skills.

The lack of mandatory down classing is why I get excessive punches throughout the year at smaller local shoots. We have a plethora of Master classed shooters that would have to be shooting at barn doors thrown broad side to post a score in the 80’s.
I can give you more than one instance in my shortish career. And, why would you complain about taking the money from M class shooters that can't hit a barn door? I'm guessing because there is no real money in sporting clays. It's the hobby of Kings, and no adjustments to the classification system will turn it into a real sport, with real prize money.

I don't shoot much registered now, and as I said I am not the future of registered. But the instant I have to take a mandatory downclass will be the last time I shoot registered clays. But that's just me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sera
So your vision of Master class is a group of 10 -15 shooters??

Steve
Nationwide? No.

Locally? That’s a little low for a shoot in Texas or Florida. Probably a little high for a shoot in lesser populated places.

My vision of Master Class is the same as for every other class: an approximate even number of entrants, accurately grouped by ability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: calpik and fal777
That's not a reasonable argument. Because a golfer, say, can't compete with Scheffler, McIlroy, etc., does that mean he shouldn't try to qualify for the US Open? I don't know how many M class shooters there are, but fewer than 10 could compete with Brandon or Zach. You're making an argument for 25 classes vs 7 classes. Or maybe 5 or 6 classes above AA, including a pro class?
??

Anybody who wants is welcome to try to qualify for the US Open. The key word is “qualify”. If they’re not good enough, they don’t get to say they “played” the US Open. If they’re not on Schefler’s level, they don’t get to say they are, so if you’re not on Brandon’s level, why is it so important to you to be classified with him? Vanity?

How did you reach a conclusion that I said we need even more classes? We already added a “pro” class once. Called it Master class. How’s that working out?

I’ll be very clear: I am in favor of making the existing classes as accurate as possible, on both a local and national level. I think the new changes go a long way towards doing that. Not far enough, until down classing is mandatory, but I applaud them for what they’ve done so far.
 
I’m starting to see where this whole “preferred pronouns” got started.

Seems a lot of people want to “identify” themselves as something they’re not.
 
I’ll be very clear: I am in favor of making the existing classes as accurate as possible, on both a local and national level. I think the new changes go a long way towards doing that. Not far enough, until down classing is mandatory, but I applaud them for what they’ve done so far.
It would be nice if EC members read this thread. I think you and I comprise the majority thinking inside M class for the mid level normal M shooter. I am also fairly confident the other classes will welcome having more participants in them.
 
It would be nice if EC members read this thread. I think you and I comprise the majority thinking inside M class for the mid level normal M shooter. I am also fairly confident the other classes will welcome having more participants in them.
Agreed.

It is my hope that if they do read things here, they continue to make changes based on the game’s integrity, and ignore the “I’m going to take my marbles and go home” crowd.
 
121 - 140 of 196 Posts