View Single Post
Old 26th July 2016, 10:46 AM
Brian.Samson's Avatar
Brian.Samson Brian.Samson is offline
Allowed in Sales
Join Date: Jun 2009
Member of: Pontefract, Doncaster Airgun Range
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 2,322

Originally Posted by RobF View Post
No one can win a GP. They can only win their grade.

Perhaps we should just get rid of dropped scores and make every one count. Shoot the series or don't. In reality it looks like the main protagonists in each grade or class shoot all the shoots anyway.
That would have a negative impact on attendances Rob.

For example, I had a gun failure at GP5 and couldn't continue shooting - my gun wouldn't physically cock anymore. That's a pain, but not a complete disaster because I know I can drop 2 scores so I can recover from a gun failure at an event.

Consider the situation where I'm not allowed to drop a score? - that would now mean that with a gun failure there's no way I can come back from that - would I have bothered to drive all the way down to Devon for GP6? Or would I have as much incentive to get out of bed when it's blowing a gale and p'ing it down with rain for another GP? Probably not.

The result would be, that if through no fault of my own something happens that means I can't make an event - there's no real point in shooting the rest of them.

Coming back to Steve's original question, I think you need to think about why the scores are based on the top score of the day.

The idea is to use that as a benchmark for how difficult the course was, and it's a system that isn't just used in the GP series, it's also used in local regional events too.

If the sample size of competitors for picking that benchmark is too small - then you'll get unfair answers.

The theory being that suppose you've got 3 springer shooters who usually put in the top score in their category. There's every chance that all 3 of those could be having a bad day, and that would over inflate everyone elses percentage in that category.

If you have 100 AA/A shooters, it's far less likely that all of them are going to be having a bad day - there's always someone in that size of sample who steps up to the plate to provide a reasonable benchmark score to gauge the overall course difficulty.

Ok, this season we've seen some exceptional shooting which makes things look a bit skewed.. we're seeing Jack and Justin regularly putting in 50's/49's on a GP course which sets the benchmark very high for everyone else.

So for me, I would say that - with such a small sample of Piston shooters, using their scores to dictate the benchmark for that category would cause more problems than it solves.

As I say we also use that system on local events too, and it wouldn't work too well in some regions where they only have a couple of people taking part in Piston class.

It's also a system that is used in other countries too and in the World Championships, and it's nice to be able to make a comparison on performance with shooters from other countries.

Is it entirely fair? No it isn't. But... It's not a bad solution in the absence of a better one. Basing it on the top score out of 5 people instead of basing on the top score out of 145 people - isn't a better solution.
Reply With Quote