Pistol Field Target - Risk Reward Scoring is a Bad Idea...

Pistol Field Target - Risk Reward Scoring is a Bad Idea...

Joined: October 27th, 2003, 11:32 pm

June 24th, 2011, 5:43 pm #1

It's worth mentioning again...

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/t ... ad+Idea---

Risk Reward Scoring is a bad idea in my humble opinion as it is unfair, uncompetitive and basically rigged gambling the way I see it.

Risk Reward Scoring is where one can choose to shoot Off Hand at a target, as opposed to the normal seated position, and score 2 points if they drop the target whereas a Seated Shootter would only be awarded 1 point for the same target.

The Off Hand shooter gets all the Benefits of the RISK but if they MISS, they accept the SAME LOSS as a Seated Shooter would if they missed the target. I.e. the Off Hand shot is taken and they miss and all they get is a ZERO. As such, is there any REAL RISK in opting for the Off Hand Shot?!?! In my opinion, NO!!!

IF Risk Reward Scoring were to be FAIR and EQUITABLE to all shooters, the Off Hand Shot that is missed would get a -2 for having taken the Risk and Missed their shot. With Increased Risk comes Increased Rewards or Losses in the REAL WORLD.

As is, the concept is further flawed by the fact that it FAVORS the Off Hand Shooter Only! As proposed, there are no similar provisions for a Seated Shooter to earn 2 points off of a Seated Shot. As such is that Fair and Equitable to All Competitors? I think not! It basically "Loads the Deck"' for a group/subset of shooters to benefit from without any REAL RISK or DOWNSIDES for taking the "So Called Risk".

Operationally speaking it creates more issues for Match Directors. As is, in FT/HFT, Match Directors are busy enough with reconciling score cards utilizing the existing system which is quite simple by design where you either earn a zero or 1 point for every shot you take. Add in any reconcilliations for faulty targets to determine final scores for a shooter. Seems simple and easy but it's a process where I have seen shooters end up less than warm and fuzzy with the final adjustments.

Now let's consider the added complexity of Risk Reward Scoring. You're gonna have some competitors trying to keep tabs on what other people are shooting, causing traffic and noise on the course as the real competitive shooters might be calculating "well so and so is clean and I'm down 5, better start shooting off hand to close the gap..."

Then there's the situation of a shooter saying well my card is wrong, I shot these lanes off hand, it was marked incorrectly. Lastly, let's not forget that Creative Dual Scoring Systems have been tried in the past with bad results. In the 2010 Cajuns, a situation occurred, due to a unique target and scoring system, where a shooter who knocked down less targets beat a shooter that knocked down more targets.

By no means am I taking away from what the shooter that won accomplished in that match as they were playing by the rules of the game at hand and earned that win fair and square but there was quite a roar after that event over how that situation should not occur again in a match, where the shooter that knocks down the most targets loses.


In summary, it comes across more like a rigged gambling game than fair competition.

Just thinking out loud about a forum topic that came up a few weeks back. What do you think?

Regards,

Tony

Reply
Share

Joined: May 1st, 2008, 3:43 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:09 pm #2

To me, the essense of FT includes: targets at random distances, freestyle shooting, one point if the target drops - zero if it doesn't.

If you're not going to include those points then, to me, it isn't FT.

I have no problem with a separate standing class if that's what folks want. Then, of course, we'd need to decide whether that's one hand or two . . .

Last edited by raydj on June 24th, 2011, 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reply
Share

Joined: April 19th, 2004, 7:02 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:29 pm #3

It's worth mentioning again...

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/t ... ad+Idea---

Risk Reward Scoring is a bad idea in my humble opinion as it is unfair, uncompetitive and basically rigged gambling the way I see it.

Risk Reward Scoring is where one can choose to shoot Off Hand at a target, as opposed to the normal seated position, and score 2 points if they drop the target whereas a Seated Shootter would only be awarded 1 point for the same target.

The Off Hand shooter gets all the Benefits of the RISK but if they MISS, they accept the SAME LOSS as a Seated Shooter would if they missed the target. I.e. the Off Hand shot is taken and they miss and all they get is a ZERO. As such, is there any REAL RISK in opting for the Off Hand Shot?!?! In my opinion, NO!!!

IF Risk Reward Scoring were to be FAIR and EQUITABLE to all shooters, the Off Hand Shot that is missed would get a -2 for having taken the Risk and Missed their shot. With Increased Risk comes Increased Rewards or Losses in the REAL WORLD.

As is, the concept is further flawed by the fact that it FAVORS the Off Hand Shooter Only! As proposed, there are no similar provisions for a Seated Shooter to earn 2 points off of a Seated Shot. As such is that Fair and Equitable to All Competitors? I think not! It basically "Loads the Deck"' for a group/subset of shooters to benefit from without any REAL RISK or DOWNSIDES for taking the "So Called Risk".

Operationally speaking it creates more issues for Match Directors. As is, in FT/HFT, Match Directors are busy enough with reconciling score cards utilizing the existing system which is quite simple by design where you either earn a zero or 1 point for every shot you take. Add in any reconcilliations for faulty targets to determine final scores for a shooter. Seems simple and easy but it's a process where I have seen shooters end up less than warm and fuzzy with the final adjustments.

Now let's consider the added complexity of Risk Reward Scoring. You're gonna have some competitors trying to keep tabs on what other people are shooting, causing traffic and noise on the course as the real competitive shooters might be calculating "well so and so is clean and I'm down 5, better start shooting off hand to close the gap..."

Then there's the situation of a shooter saying well my card is wrong, I shot these lanes off hand, it was marked incorrectly. Lastly, let's not forget that Creative Dual Scoring Systems have been tried in the past with bad results. In the 2010 Cajuns, a situation occurred, due to a unique target and scoring system, where a shooter who knocked down less targets beat a shooter that knocked down more targets.

By no means am I taking away from what the shooter that won accomplished in that match as they were playing by the rules of the game at hand and earned that win fair and square but there was quite a roar after that event over how that situation should not occur again in a match, where the shooter that knocks down the most targets loses.


In summary, it comes across more like a rigged gambling game than fair competition.

Just thinking out loud about a forum topic that came up a few weeks back. What do you think?

Regards,

Tony
I think pistol FT is a nuisance in general. Takes away from the "actual" game IMO. I come here and see all the spirited discussions and I think many have their own ideas and agendas on what it should be to the point of who cares.

Add to that extra points for this and that and double your score if you shoot it with your eyes closed etc...LOL







"Thumper2"
Reply
Share

Joined: October 27th, 2003, 11:32 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:33 pm #4

I hear ya, not everyone's cuppa tea! Agendas abound everywhere in the real of FT, Rifle AND Pistol!!!

Regards,

Tony
Reply
Share

Joined: October 27th, 2003, 11:32 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:34 pm #5

To me, the essense of FT includes: targets at random distances, freestyle shooting, one point if the target drops - zero if it doesn't.

If you're not going to include those points then, to me, it isn't FT.

I have no problem with a separate standing class if that's what folks want. Then, of course, we'd need to decide whether that's one hand or two . . .
is a possibility...time will tell...

Regards,

Tony
Reply
Share

Joined: October 9th, 2005, 2:33 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:36 pm #6

To me, the essense of FT includes: targets at random distances, freestyle shooting, one point if the target drops - zero if it doesn't.

If you're not going to include those points then, to me, it isn't FT.

I have no problem with a separate standing class if that's what folks want. Then, of course, we'd need to decide whether that's one hand or two . . .
Certainly donot wish to see that type scoring at sanctioned matches. Wht u do locally is ur biz,but don't argue tht it is only fair to allow at a regional or national match. Ivesaod this before. If u want to shoot an offhand game its called SILHOUETTES.

It is what it is, because it is!!!
Reply
Share

Joined: October 27th, 2003, 11:32 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:38 pm #7





Reply
Share

Joined: October 9th, 2005, 2:33 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:43 pm #8

It's worth mentioning again...

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/t ... ad+Idea---

Risk Reward Scoring is a bad idea in my humble opinion as it is unfair, uncompetitive and basically rigged gambling the way I see it.

Risk Reward Scoring is where one can choose to shoot Off Hand at a target, as opposed to the normal seated position, and score 2 points if they drop the target whereas a Seated Shootter would only be awarded 1 point for the same target.

The Off Hand shooter gets all the Benefits of the RISK but if they MISS, they accept the SAME LOSS as a Seated Shooter would if they missed the target. I.e. the Off Hand shot is taken and they miss and all they get is a ZERO. As such, is there any REAL RISK in opting for the Off Hand Shot?!?! In my opinion, NO!!!

IF Risk Reward Scoring were to be FAIR and EQUITABLE to all shooters, the Off Hand Shot that is missed would get a -2 for having taken the Risk and Missed their shot. With Increased Risk comes Increased Rewards or Losses in the REAL WORLD.

As is, the concept is further flawed by the fact that it FAVORS the Off Hand Shooter Only! As proposed, there are no similar provisions for a Seated Shooter to earn 2 points off of a Seated Shot. As such is that Fair and Equitable to All Competitors? I think not! It basically "Loads the Deck"' for a group/subset of shooters to benefit from without any REAL RISK or DOWNSIDES for taking the "So Called Risk".

Operationally speaking it creates more issues for Match Directors. As is, in FT/HFT, Match Directors are busy enough with reconciling score cards utilizing the existing system which is quite simple by design where you either earn a zero or 1 point for every shot you take. Add in any reconcilliations for faulty targets to determine final scores for a shooter. Seems simple and easy but it's a process where I have seen shooters end up less than warm and fuzzy with the final adjustments.

Now let's consider the added complexity of Risk Reward Scoring. You're gonna have some competitors trying to keep tabs on what other people are shooting, causing traffic and noise on the course as the real competitive shooters might be calculating "well so and so is clean and I'm down 5, better start shooting off hand to close the gap..."

Then there's the situation of a shooter saying well my card is wrong, I shot these lanes off hand, it was marked incorrectly. Lastly, let's not forget that Creative Dual Scoring Systems have been tried in the past with bad results. In the 2010 Cajuns, a situation occurred, due to a unique target and scoring system, where a shooter who knocked down less targets beat a shooter that knocked down more targets.

By no means am I taking away from what the shooter that won accomplished in that match as they were playing by the rules of the game at hand and earned that win fair and square but there was quite a roar after that event over how that situation should not occur again in a match, where the shooter that knocks down the most targets loses.


In summary, it comes across more like a rigged gambling game than fair competition.

Just thinking out loud about a forum topic that came up a few weeks back. What do you think?

Regards,

Tony
structure of FT and PFT.

It is what it is, because it is!!!
Reply
Share

Joined: October 27th, 2003, 11:32 pm

June 24th, 2011, 6:48 pm #9

they should propose it to AAFTA for RIFLE AND PISTOL...At a basic level, why have one rule apply to Pistol but not Rifle...or vice versa?!?!

Now wouldn't that be an interesting "discussion"?!?!

Regards,

Tony
Reply
Share

Joined: February 16th, 2009, 8:33 pm

June 24th, 2011, 7:00 pm #10

It's worth mentioning again...

http://www.network54.com/Forum/451309/t ... ad+Idea---

Risk Reward Scoring is a bad idea in my humble opinion as it is unfair, uncompetitive and basically rigged gambling the way I see it.

Risk Reward Scoring is where one can choose to shoot Off Hand at a target, as opposed to the normal seated position, and score 2 points if they drop the target whereas a Seated Shootter would only be awarded 1 point for the same target.

The Off Hand shooter gets all the Benefits of the RISK but if they MISS, they accept the SAME LOSS as a Seated Shooter would if they missed the target. I.e. the Off Hand shot is taken and they miss and all they get is a ZERO. As such, is there any REAL RISK in opting for the Off Hand Shot?!?! In my opinion, NO!!!

IF Risk Reward Scoring were to be FAIR and EQUITABLE to all shooters, the Off Hand Shot that is missed would get a -2 for having taken the Risk and Missed their shot. With Increased Risk comes Increased Rewards or Losses in the REAL WORLD.

As is, the concept is further flawed by the fact that it FAVORS the Off Hand Shooter Only! As proposed, there are no similar provisions for a Seated Shooter to earn 2 points off of a Seated Shot. As such is that Fair and Equitable to All Competitors? I think not! It basically "Loads the Deck"' for a group/subset of shooters to benefit from without any REAL RISK or DOWNSIDES for taking the "So Called Risk".

Operationally speaking it creates more issues for Match Directors. As is, in FT/HFT, Match Directors are busy enough with reconciling score cards utilizing the existing system which is quite simple by design where you either earn a zero or 1 point for every shot you take. Add in any reconcilliations for faulty targets to determine final scores for a shooter. Seems simple and easy but it's a process where I have seen shooters end up less than warm and fuzzy with the final adjustments.

Now let's consider the added complexity of Risk Reward Scoring. You're gonna have some competitors trying to keep tabs on what other people are shooting, causing traffic and noise on the course as the real competitive shooters might be calculating "well so and so is clean and I'm down 5, better start shooting off hand to close the gap..."

Then there's the situation of a shooter saying well my card is wrong, I shot these lanes off hand, it was marked incorrectly. Lastly, let's not forget that Creative Dual Scoring Systems have been tried in the past with bad results. In the 2010 Cajuns, a situation occurred, due to a unique target and scoring system, where a shooter who knocked down less targets beat a shooter that knocked down more targets.

By no means am I taking away from what the shooter that won accomplished in that match as they were playing by the rules of the game at hand and earned that win fair and square but there was quite a roar after that event over how that situation should not occur again in a match, where the shooter that knocks down the most targets loses.


In summary, it comes across more like a rigged gambling game than fair competition.

Just thinking out loud about a forum topic that came up a few weeks back. What do you think?

Regards,

Tony
Not if you are a bank that is too big to fail

******************************************
Where I'm learning to shoot FT - come check it out!

CASA Member - California Airgun Shooters Association: http://forums.delphiforums.com/casaclub/?
Reply
Share