PRS Talk Are Point Races too expensive ?

[Lowlight]

Looking at the different series out there, and trying to figure out where they fall down, I am beginning to think the idea of a season long points race to be a issue.

Lots of justification for "entitlement" attitude is, "We shoot to qualify for the finale and it costs me $15k - $20k, so I deserve more to offset the costs".

I get this, if you have to shoot a minimum number of events that maybe spread across a big area, it can get expensive. Not everyone is located in an area with a Club Series of events where they can qualify points wise. This forces travel, and by travel I consider it, going to an event with more than a 4 hour ride each way. Or worse where you have to fly. So is there a solution to the points races so you can still work to qualify but the "points race" part is not necessary ?

My thoughts of a playoff style series of events. if you have 35+ sanctioned matches, and you have to attend 3 to 5 to qualify, is that too much ?

How about having a set of specific events (National / Regional Level) where you can simply qualify by making the Top 25 ?

Would it be easier to say, " You scored in the Top 25 of, say the Heat Stroke, so you are in"... You scored Top 25 of the Brawl, so you are in. Spreading out a series of events that can be spread out a bit more, not only by Geography but time of year, to open up the opportunity to attend a finale to more people ?

Do we need a points race at a national level at all ?

We spoke about this years ago, qualifying events and giving more weight to bigger competitions, vs the smaller ones.

I think the Club Series / Local Monthly Events are great, and using local events (within 4 hours drive of home) to have a points race series is good. But on a national level where you are required to attention a certain number artifically inflates the price to play.

The easier it is to find and attend a series of events, the more people who will actually play as required. It appears to me, only a 1/3 of the registered members are actually working towards the end goal. If you have 200 people working on points vs 1200 people only attending one or two events, you are missing the boat here.

It's been something I have been thinking about lately, how to address a country full of shooters, but only limited space, or ranges that can handle a full blown events or series. I like the small local stuff, I think it is great practice. But how do we translate these local resources into something meaningful ?

Looking to solve problems here, problems that maybe part of the root of the division we see within the groups.

One thought is, instead of points, how about qualifying stages you can do on a smaller level ?

 

[Sheldon N]

I don't think the current PRS system is too prohibitive in terms of matches required to make the finale. To someone who says "I spent $15-20k to make the finale" I would say, no... you spent $3k to attend the three matches to make the finale, $10-15k on your gear to enjoy the sport and the rest on ammo and practice to actually be good enough to make the finale. It's the sport that's expensive, not the actual matches to make the finale.

I would argue that for the most part the guys who only shoot one PRS event and don't go for the points race aren't in contention for a strong national placing anyway. It takes a lot of shooting and practice and match experience to really be at the top of the sport. One way to double check that? Look at everyone in the PRS rankings who has between 85 points and 100 points. The bulk of those scores are made up from two poor match placements rather than one good match placement. Yes there are exceptions, look at morganlamprecht. 14th place in the finale last year, only one score (thus far) this year.

I think a single National finale is needed is to create a level playing field, and that one match is going to be limited in how many people can attend. You really do want to get the very best shooters all in one place, and the question is does the current model do that? I don't think the goal should be to fix an attitude problem (that's a separate issue) but rather to make sure the finale draws in the 100 best shooters in the nation.

I like what they're doing with the Club series with a few of the top shooters qualifying for the finale even if they aren't in the PRS match circuit. I've actually got an outside chance at making the finale through this route.

Maybe there could be some other way to automatically qualify for the National Finale through just one or two matches by finishing position (top 20, whatever) or by points (score of 90% or better), but the difficulty is that gets wrapped up too much in how many (and which) shooters attend and the ease/difficulty of the course design.

I do think the one thing that the current system does well is that it qualifies shooters who can place well consistently. It's one thing to have one good match because you had an "on" day or because you were lucky enough to get squadded on the long range stages when the wind wasn't blowing It's another to be able to do it three times.

 

[morganlamprecht]

this is a tough thing to figure out...in the last couple yrs ive been feeling like there almost needs to be separate events for the rec shooters vs the ones going for the points race, not because i dont want to shoot with certain guys, but it just seems there are 2 different types of shooters at the matches...to me it seems a lot like taking a field of PGA pros (who are there to compete and WIN) and throwing in half the field of recreational weekend golfers who are just there to have fun...this, of course, cuts the shooter pool down pretty small nationwide for the points chasing guys, would be pretty tough to make up any matches, idk the solution to that

im cool with shooting with anyone, but i aint gunna lie and tell people im there to have fun first...im there to win, i have fun anytime im shooting/competing by default...and thats club matches, major matches, any match...it doesnt matter if i show up with my 6mm or 308...im still there to out shoot everyone else at the end of the day..ill help guys and give them my wind calls all day, but im still there to out shoot them

for myself it's neither a time or money thing, i just HATE traveling and i care abouttttttt 0% for my PRS points (obviously since i didnt shoot that pillow fight at K&M) lol im sort of spoiled here in TX...i have the option to shoot 3-4, 1 day matches per month within 4 hrs of my house, and 4, 2 day matches per year...my plan at the beginning of this year was to shoot the Brawl, Outback, Lone Survivor, and Hide Cup + a bunch of 1 day matches...with all of those matches being in TX, id only have 2 scores for my PRS rank which wouldnt even qualify me for the finale... in the middle of the year when Outback got the axe, a few buddies wanted to go hit Alabama so i just jumped in with them to replace the Outback match, any chance of me making the finale this year will solely depend on my finish at Alabama lol no pressure...had i known the Lone Star was going to pop up to replace Outback i would have just shot that one instead.

The way i see it, if i can go to any match out there and finish at/near the top...im good with it

ive never liked the Top 3 match scores system, but i get it...it promotes participation...i feel like anytime you show up to a match, it should count for your rank...not cumulative, but an average...if you go shoot 10 matches and finish 75th in 7 of them, and Top 10 in 3...your ranking is determined off the average points per all 10 matches...not 3 Top 10s...of course some guys would shoot the minimum # of matches to get the scores they wanted, and then sit out, so theres a downside to that also

if there could be some kind of state level events, that qualified you for regional events, that qualified you for national events...it makes sense, but you have some states/regions with no real options of venues or enough people to make it work...its a tough solution to find to make this all work...glad its not my problem! lol

 

[Lowlight]

I like the idea of an average vs your best... that is where guys who live closer to these events can score, by trying a few times vs people who have to travel.

Initially a lot of people signed up and paid the fee to be a PRS Member in order to support the series. They are basically giving away their money to the very few who are engaged in the points race.

Participation is not the issue, they actually watered it down and spread it a bit thin. Problems finding Range Officers is a side effect everyone is seeing right now. Staffing so many events is the issue with having 35+ events in a season that are considered National.

Dollar wise, I think it costs a bit more than $1000 a match, especially if you have to fly. Average flight for me, not using miles, $500, rental car, $500, Hotel $500, food, match fees, and then you get into equipment. Sure you can shave a few dollars trying to travel on the cheap.

it's easy to say there is only a handful of top shooters, but what would happen if the door opened up wider or easier for more guys to qualify without hte long term commitment ? We already see guys can practice specific stages and have become very proficient shooting them. An example a Top 10 finish gets you a few bonus points. With that too I would limit the max bonus points to 10. So if you have 10 bonus points, and the winner of the finale has none, if you came in 2nd you would actually win the season. If a guy with 10 bonus points comes in 11th, he would actually be 2nd and not 1st. Smaller numbers with limit so you cannot buy your way to extra points.

So it's just as likely, if you know you don't need 3 or more scores guys could adjust. Maybe you use a bonus point method to "add up" for those who can and do shoot all these events. But you tend to see the same names over and over again. It's like 10 guys you know, then the one or two that float in with them. Usually it's someone the Top guys cultivate to shoot with them, so the follow year you have the same 8 guys and then 2 new to make the 10. That one guy with constant access to an established shooter who can train alongside them.

Just brainstorming a bit as I have an idea how to make this work for me moving forward.

 

[Sheldon N]

What about best single match score + the average of all remaining scores?

Go out and crush 2 matches and you're in the finale and you can stop if you want. Shoot lots of matches and you better be a consistent performer.

I think the bonus points would be a "buy your way to a win" scenario. You'd have to shoot a dozen matches to have a shot at winning the national championship, it would become a bonus points race.

Maybe for the championship it could be finale score + season average score?

 

[Sheldon N]

Only added thought to any sort of "average" score approach is that you'd have to deal with the issue of how to handle the scenario where your gun/scope/whatever breaks down. Shoot a match where you had equipment problems and get a 40 point score and that would end the championship for you.

 

[Lowlight]

As I noted you would limit the bonus points so you can't buy in... you can't keep stacking points cause you live close to K&M or Core. It could be here you can choose your best finish for bonus points and only award them for your Top 10 finish in reverse order. You win, 10 bonus points, you are finished. Your best top 10 finish is 5th, 5 points, that is all.

DNF ... Same as NASCAR, no Alibi, no do over, you lose points... it's why point races that matter like this cost to much money. If you have a scope go down as you note, that means you have to shoot another match. But the scope needs to count. I used to carry 2 scopes to every match I attended back in the day.

The problem I see with Season Averages is the same we have today, if you are lucky enough to live in Texas, Tennessee, Utah etc, or close to some of these facilities that host multiple matches a season, you can easily slide in and fix it. If you live in place that means you have to get on a plane, you have to weigh the options. Maybe the key is to only allow 1 match at any given facility to count as your season average. You cannot shoot every K&M Match because you live or work there, and count all those. Maybe it's 1 per range vs per match.

I hear guys complaining a bit about the guys who live close to these places, and pretty much only shoot the stuff really close (Home Field Advantage) and stack points up pretty high. But once they travel outside of their home ranges, tend to not shoot as well.

If you want to have a 3 event average, make it so, they have to be in different states. If you shoot Core 4x in a season, you cannot stack those points alone. If you are gonna force people to attend multiple events, make it be at multiple locations.

 

[Bradu]

this is a tough thing to figure out...in the last couple yrs ive been feeling like there almost needs to be separate events for the rec shooters vs the ones going for the points race, not because i dont want to shoot with certain guys, but it just seems there are 2 different types of shooters at the matches...to me it seems a lot like taking a field of PGA pros (who are there to compete and WIN) and throwing in half the field of recreational weekend golfers who are just there to have fun...this, of course, cuts the shooter pool down pretty small nationwide for the points chasing guys, would be pretty tough to make up any matches, idk the solution to that

im cool with shooting with anyone, but i aint gunna lie and tell people im there to have fun first...im there to win, i have fun anytime im shooting/competing by default...and thats club matches, major matches, any match...it doesnt matter if i show up with my 6mm or 308...im still there to out shoot everyone else at the end of the day..ill help guys and give them my wind calls all day, but im still there to out shoot them

for myself it's neither a time or money thing, i just HATE traveling and i care abouttttttt 0% for my PRS points (obviously since i didnt shoot that pillow fight at K&M) lol im sort of spoiled here in TX...i have the option to shoot 3-4, 1 day matches per month within 4 hrs of my house, and 4, 2 day matches per year...my plan at the beginning of this year was to shoot the Brawl, Outback, Lone Survivor, and Hide Cup + a bunch of 1 day matches...with all of those matches being in TX, id only have 2 scores for my PRS rank which wouldnt even qualify me for the finale... in the middle of the year when Outback got the axe, a few buddies wanted to go hit Alabama so i just jumped in with them to replace the Outback match, any chance of me making the finale this year will solely depend on my finish at Alabama lol no pressure...had i known the Lone Star was going to pop up to replace Outback i would have just shot that one instead.

The way i see it, if i can go to any match out there and finish at/near the top...im good with it

ive never liked the Top 3 match scores system, but i get it...it promotes participation...i feel like anytime you show up to a match, it should count for your rank...not cumulative, but an average...if you go shoot 10 matches and finish 75th in 7 of them, and Top 10 in 3...your ranking is determined off the average points per all 10 matches...not 3 Top 10s...of course some guys would shoot the minimum # of matches to get the scores they wanted, and then sit out, so theres a downside to that also

if there could be some kind of state level events, that qualified you for regional events, that qualified you for national events...it makes sense, but you have some states/regions with no real options of venues or enough people to make it work...its a tough solution to find to make this all work...glad its not my problem! lol

I don't shoot prs because it's too far away living in the midwest and I don't want to take shooting too serious to the point it's no longer fun. Anyways, I think the part in bold is a pretty good idea. It's just like trap shooting, you have guys that tour the country and shoot all the time and they are in the same class (AA) in singles as people that break the occasional 100 straight but consistently shoot 98's and 99's. The pros can easily shoot 1000 plus birds straight so it is the same as the PGA reference. More or less the average guy is just donating to the better shooters and it does discourage some from coming back. A lot of people say it's for fun but let's face it, we all want to win. That's my opinion and feel free to disagree with me since I'm just a spectator. I just think that there should be something for the average guy instead of going home with nothing all the time.

I do have a question, is there any kind of prize for top female or for the younger shooters?

 

[JC Steel]

I think an average is the fairest way to do it. Take all your matches and average them. Only way to truly find the most consistent shooter over the course of the season.

For example in golf, there could be a golfer who is the number one ranked player in the world, and proved it consistently all year long. Just because he or she gets beat on one weekend somewhere along the line by a tenth place golfer, doesn't or shouldn't mean the 10th place golfer is now the #1 ranked. And sane goes the #1 ranked golfer shouldn't get bumped back to say number 2 just because that one week.

For a points series, I like an average of even more matches. If you shot 7 matches, even throwing in a 40th place, if you win the other 6 matches your average is about 6. The same as someone who gets all 5th place finishes and one 10th.
But managing your gear is an important part of this sport. If your putter breaks on the first hole of a golf round you better figure something out.

We have to move to average!! Even average with dropping low score? So there is a little forgiveness.

Only one match per facility should be able to count. I agree, too many guys pile up points from the same match all year long.

 

[morganlamprecht]

I'm 100% on board with the 1 match per facility idea and always have felt that way...where I'm at in TX it's 1 hr to RO, 4.5 hrs to Lone Survivor, and 6-7 hrs to the lone star match...all 3 facility's have pretty different set ups and layouts, really the only thing different about shooting in New Mexico or Florida is 6 more hours of driving, DA is similar and there's usually less wind

 

[Gil P.]

Why not mandate a shooter attend 3 matches in order to qualify for the finale/championship? If you attend more than 3, then take the best finishes and average them.
i think that's a fair minimum number of matches to participate in this sport. There's no doubt the sport is expensive, however we should have a minimum expectation of participation to shoot at a championship level match.
But wait, isn't this how the PRS does things already? Please correct me if I'm wrong. This seems logical.

 

[Sheldon N]

I like the one match per location and average score suggestions. Maybe once you get 4 or more matches your single lowest score doesn't count in the average to give you a "mulligan" in case something broke on you mid-match.

I think the other thing that fits into this is getting some level of consistency in match difficulty. Some matches are just set up really soft so that everyone has a strong showing in total points, other matches are set up with more difficult courses of fire so that the very best shooters have a greater opportunity to pull away from the pack. End result is that someone who finishes in the top 15% of shooters at one match might score in the high 70's where at another match that placing could be in the high 80 point range. What comes out of this is that you see guys picking and choosing which matches to travel to in the hopes of getting the best scores.

Ultimately that's on the match director though.

 

[morganlamprecht]

I like the one match per location and average score suggestions. Maybe once you get 4 or more matches your single lowest score doesn't count in the average to give you a "mulligan" in case something broke on you mid-match.

I think the other thing that fits into this is getting some level of consistency in match difficulty. Some matches are just set up really soft so that everyone has a strong showing in total points, other matches are set up with more difficult courses of fire so that the very best shooters have a greater opportunity to pull away from the pack. End result is that someone who finishes in the top 15% of shooters at one match might score in the high 70's where at another match that placing could be in the high 80 point range. What comes out of this is that you see guys picking and choosing which matches to travel to in the hopes of getting the best scores.

Ultimately that's on the match director though.

Yup, that was K&m this year...friend of mine finished top 5 at the brawl and then like 30th at k&m and got 1 more point for the 30th finish lol

 

[morganlamprecht]

Why not mandate a shooter attend 3 matches in order to qualify for the finale/championship? If you attend more than 3, then take the best finishes and average them.
i think that's a fair minimum number of matches to participate in this sport. There's no doubt the sport is expensive, however we should have a minimum expectation of participation to shoot at a championship level match.
But wait, isn't this how the PRS does things already? Please correct me if I'm wrong. This seems logical.

Currently the PRS ranking is the shooters top 3 scores count for the season rank...you have to shoot 3 matches and finish well to qualify regardless

 

[lukejr985]

I think the current system is fine, with the one exception being the lack of consistency in the point system as illustrated above. I don't know if this is feasible, but why isn't scoring standardized, and example being if 1st place is worth 100 spots 2nd would be 99, 3rd 98 etc. etc.

 

[morganlamprecht]

I think the current system is fine, with the one exception being the lack of consistency in the point system as illustrated above. I don't know if this is feasible, but why isn't scoring standardized, and example being if 1st place is worth 100 spots 2nd would be 99, 3rd 98 etc. etc.

It was similar to that last year...you got points for a match based on the number of shooters and your placement, not your hit % of the winner score

 

[lukejr985]

Just curious, why the change? this is my first real season so I'm not sure of any of the history

 

[BangBangBlatBlat]

Lowlight,

As someone that is living that starving shooter life, I think you are wrong. There are just some parts of the country that have more matches than others, and I think the solution is to have more matches. I'm an E4 at Benning, and don't get payed any special allowances. I am fortunate enough to have a gunsmith friend that was willing to help me build a rifle, and support me this season. I was able to attend 3 major PRS points matches this year, and 3 1 day matches spread out among 3 facilities that are within 4 hour drives of where I am stationed. The prize tables really do help soften the blow of a $250 match entry fee; I definitely didn't come out ahead by any measure with mediocre performance, but the donations definitely helped me get to the next match; the 100 pieces of Alpha Brass I got from the prize table of one match was loaded for the next match a month later.

Honestly, without consistent practice, or at least spending a good bit of time practicing the actual skills to be good at PRS, you are not going to be able to be competitive. That's a harsh lesson I learned this year. I don't think hamstringing the rules to limit shooters from qualifying for the finale would bring out a better group of shooters. My experience has been that there are some guys that are very good at the game, have a lot of experience and practice, and those guys seem to do consistently well.

The best match I went to was a 1 day match that only cost $30. There were only 6 people because it was scheduled last minute and conflicted with another large match, and there were no prizes, no lunches, and there were lots of bugs. But it was good practice and pretty stress free.

 

[BangBangBlatBlat]

Just doing some maths on how much I spent on shooting matches this year.

1 day matches: $150 (1 PRS, 1 CORE, + $250 for Guardian.)
2 day matches: $750 (2 CORE, 1 MPA)

Prizes:
1 Thunderbeast Certificate (Gave it to my gunsmith for putting up with my crap. He built my rifle on a pretty quick timetable.)
100 pieces of Alpha Brass (Used it in the next match because I lost half my brass at the previous. The owner helped me out at the beginning of the season by rush-shipping me some brass.)
1 Barrel Change Certificate. (Will either use it to pay for my next match entry fee, or use it to re-barrel a rifle. I need to see how close to shot-out my current barrel is.)

I did pretty poorly at the 2 day matches I went to. I think I only finished slightly above average in one of them. But overall, I think I won back enough that I'll be able to compete next year. The barrel change and Thunderbeast discount are enough that I feel like I got enough back to continually offset my match fees. I don't figure in the price of ammo or the rifle because I want an excuse to go out and shoot; if I wasn't doing it to be competitive, I'd be doing it for another reason.

As far as travel costs, I camped out at the CORE matches, and the MPA was really close to me. I spent probably $100 on gas to go to CORE.

This year I will probably spend more money on practicing and extra ammo than match entry fees for 1 day matches. I think my match placements would be better off if I went to 2 day matches with much more solid long range data, as well as taking one of the courses at K&M or CORE specifically geared towards PRS shooting. Or just building barricades/props to dry fire off of, or take to the range with me.

 

[morganlamprecht]

Just curious, why the change? this is my first real season so I'm not sure of any of the history

Im not sure, there's positives and negatives to both sides though

with last years scoring you could go to a match with 100 shooters that had 1 or 2 top 20 ranked shooters... one of them could win by 50 pts, crush everyone, and the guy in 2nd would still get 99 points

you could have another match with all 20 of the top 20 and finish 2nd by 1 point...you'd get the same 99 points

i don't feel like the guy who got beat by 50 deserves the same 99 points in that scenario

It's hard to make match scoring consistent across the country...changing conditions can make a match go from an 80% winner to a 60%...we've set up a match before that was smaller targets because the wind was forcasted to be blowing 5-10 and then on match day it was blowing 18-25 lol just luck of the draw sometimes

i feel like a mix of stages where 80-100% scores are very possible combined with stages where 50-70% would be a great score really help separate the field

 

[lukejr985]

yeah i can see how every example can have a both a negative and a positive to it. but in my humble opinion placing 70th in a match shouldn't leave you 80 points on the weekend, thats just absurd

 

[morganlamprecht]

I agree big time...that's on the MD though for setting up a cupcake course of fire

 

[Lowlight]

This is what happens when you have guys who design this stuff and then compete in the same breathe ... or have a vested interested in the group(s) attending.

Just like the barricade height, you have guys that are 6ft+ designing it, and everyone under 5'6" is screwed by the spec. They get around this by saying the stage will have a step to use but I have never used one yet at a PRS event. In the local matches that use the same design I have dragged a cooler over to use it. When talking about new shooters, etc, I always point to the juniors I bring into my matches. Bigger squads of kids under 16... they all suffer do to this lack of fore thought Instead, they could have easily designed a real barricade stage that is not the same damn thing twice, on a barricade that is NOT the same height on both sides. You can easily spec a barricade that has a tall side and short side. I have done this and initially sent it off to George and the PRS howeve they refused to change their initial design.

The points needs to be consistent from match to match. You cannot quibble on this stuff. If guys are figuring out which matches to shoot because of the ability to manage the higher points, you have an issue. This is done for a reason, it's no accident when competitions are designed to help certain people. A bit of a running joke was to have IPSC targets at 100 yards to help a select group at a specific match.

Back in the day we, (I mean me on this site) talked about ranking the range / competition to create a point offset based on the location and match. Hearing how some matches had a lot shorter ranges than other matches because they go heavy on the alternate positions. You go out west you get longer ranges, more wind, etc, vs back east with the shorter ranges and lighter winds. They make up for the space disadvantage with speed and obstacles. The match manipulation to play with the ease and points is another thing that should be addressed. You hear this complaint a lot.

The points needs to be easy, and free of manipulation. Hopefully this gets address, because before it was a free for all. No guidance, it was all hands off, if you want to be a PRS match and they agree to your event, after that it's all hands off beyond a few technical things, and the prize stuff which was 1 box worth. Ya you get the big check which is nice, but more needs to be done. The rule book needs to focus on the shooters as much as they focused on the match before agreeing to call it a PRS event.

 

[Darkside-Six]

At this point I'd just be happy with the availability of matches within 6-7 hours of me. There are literally no matches in Michigan aside from the Guardian which has been a great match. All the ones in Ohio like the BDS one this last weekend are a good 6-7 hours away and even those are few and far between.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JC Steel]

This is what happens when you have guys who design this stuff and then compete in the same breathe ... or have a vested interested in the group(s) attending.

Just like the barricade height, you have guys that are 6ft+ designing it, and everyone under 5'6" is screwed by the spec. They get around this by saying the stage will have a step to use but I have never used one yet at a PRS event. In the local matches that use the same design I have dragged a cooler over to use it. When talking about new shooters, etc, I always point to the juniors I bring into my matches. Bigger squads of kids under 16... they all suffer do to this lack of fore thought Instead, they could have easily designed a real barricade stage that is not the same damn thing twice, on a barricade that is NOT the same height on both sides. You can easily spec a barricade that has a tall side and short side. I have done this and initially sent it off to George and the PRS howeve they refused to change their initial design.

The points needs to be consistent from match to match. You cannot quibble on this stuff. If guys are figuring out which matches to shoot because of the ability to manage the higher points, you have an issue. This is done for a reason, it's no accident when competitions are designed to help certain people. A bit of a running joke was to have IPSC targets at 100 yards to help a select group at a specific match.

Back in the day we, (I mean me on this site) talked about ranking the range / competition to create a point offset based on the location and match. Hearing how some matches had a lot shorter ranges than other matches because they go heavy on the alternate positions. You go out west you get longer ranges, more wind, etc, vs back east with the shorter ranges and lighter winds. They make up for the space disadvantage with speed and obstacles. The match manipulation to play with the ease and points is another thing that should be addressed. You hear this complaint a lot.

The points needs to be easy, and free of manipulation. Hopefully this gets address, because before it was a free for all. No guidance, it was all hands off, if you want to be a PRS match and they agree to your event, after that it's all hands off beyond a few technical things, and the prize stuff which was 1 box worth. Ya you get the big check which is nice, but more needs to be done. The rule book needs to focus on the shooters as much as they focused on the match before agreeing to call it a PRS event.

A lot of good stuff here frank.
I take my daughter shooting quite a bit. She's a stud and loves it. She is 10 and when we practice the prs barricade I just have her pass over the top position. It does irritate me that for a match she would not even have a chance at those shots. Which are really straight forward and simple gimmie shots. So that is not fair.

 

[Lowlight]

This is part of the equation Jake that the haters don't get. They want to attack me for speaking out but none of them realize, not only did I design and spec a 2 sided barricade. A design that has a tall side and a short side, but attempted to lobby the PRS with this when the initial barricade design and skill stage was announced.

I was told to STFU and stop complaining. that was the attitude. Nobody wanted to listen.

When I mentioned the Juniors shooting the stages, they straight up said they didn't think of it, but in the end did not care. Because, at the time, and I know it changed, the powers that be had no interest in changing things their "Teams" were successful at.

It's billed a great skill stages, and it's the stupidest thing I have ever seen. Resembles nothing like what barricade stages were supposed to represent. They were designed to highlight a supported position at it;s most basic level. Doing the same thing twice is comical. It used to be, you had to shoot, sitting, kneeling and standing, under pretty decent time limts and the target size was the same so you could see a difference. Your alternate positions focus on sitting, kneeling, standing, as a basic foundation for alternate positions.

 

[lash]

... It used to be, you had to shoot, sitting, kneeling and standing, under pretty decent time limts and the target size was the same so you could see a difference. Your alternate positions focus on sitting, kneeling, standing, as a basic foundation for alternate positions.

We still do it that way down here with a basic VTAC. I guess that we're old-fashioned that way.

 

[Killswitch Engage]

Yup, that was K&m this year...friend of mine finished top 5 at the brawl and then like 30th at k&m and got 1 more point for the 30th finish lol

exactly the issue. presumptively they look at this from a business perspective that the more points the match is worth the more shooters/$. that would be the number one thing id fix

 

[RyanM]

Lowlight would you mind sharing the double sided barricade design? All of the matches up here in Canada are club style with the exception of Meaford and we are not beholden to any standard set of rules (although we largely follow the standard PRS rule book).

We have some junior shooters, as well as shorter stature men and women, that cannot shoot the barricade stages due to height and it would be great too see some ideas how to handle this.

 

[Lowlight]

Barricades need to be about more than doing the same thing twice ... it serves no purpose but to waste time and ammo.

A barricade is a simulation, a simulation of different supported position. You should be using the barricade to not only shoot from these positions but to understand transitioning from position to position.

"WHY" do we do what we do, that question should be answered. Repeating the same thing twice has very little in the why department

Making a 2 sided barricade is easy. I recommend not overthinking it

 

[RyanM]

Lowlight I like that a lot, makes a lot of sense. I envision new skills stages at my matches.

 

[bab029]

If I'm honest in answering the initial question then the answer is absolutely, yes. I got all starry-eyed a year or so ago and thought I'd go to a few big matches this year, but I can't stomach it. I have just as much fun at the 2-3 local matches and just shooting on my own. I'll probably commit to RO locally next year anyway. I enjoy competing above all else, but it has turned into so much of a gear race that I'm just out for the most part.

 

[epracmetcon]

Honestly, they are only expensive if you want them to be. Find a friend or two to travel with. Try to drive if you can, split hotels. Me and a friend went to the big dog steel match last weekend. It was 8 hours away so we drove. With fuel, hotel, match fee I am in it for less than $400.00. I will shoot a total of 7 matches this year including the finale, and I am far from rich.

 

[noisewaterphd]

I like the idea of averaging except that it penalizes the new shooter who progressively improves over the season.

Some of the regional series are amazing, some of them are not. If we could ensure a quality regional series, I would think the best way to do it would be to start the season with regionals where you qualify for national "playoffs", which then lead to the finale. The playoffs would eliminate any of the guys that dominate a weak club, which is something we see a lot in our region, you get a few guys with impressive series scores because they only shoot their club. I think you could temper that by bringing back some kind of requirement for travel within the region.

As for junior shooters, I think everyone needs to be better at keeping them in mind when designing stages. Even if it is just an alteration of the stage for the junior class. We need to be doing all we can to get kids into the sport!

 

[atomic41]

The Border Wars series does a version of this:

http://bwrifle.com/information/

http://bwrifle.com/

I think this is a great way to do it.

 

[uncoffeed]

Something PRS is missing that many other sports have is a true amateur categorization system. I've spent most of my life racing bicycles; road, track, mountain bike, cyclocross. The primary governing body has a category system set up where folks advance based on results. In a nutshell, there are five categories, numbered from Cat 5 (beginner) to Cat 1(pro), and then levels of *real* pro, which I've never been fast enough to even get familiar with. In bike racing under USACycling rules, EVERYONE begins as a Cat 5. After either 10 race starts or a certain number of points (points being awarded on a standard scale based on finish placing and field size), a racer can move up to Cat 4. In Cat 4, the race distances increase, and one can no longer move up categories based on number of starts- it's points only. Same thing to Cat 3, Cat 2, Cat 1.
This system allows folks of similar ability/equipment/talent/interest levels to compete against other folks of roughly the same caliber (zing!). It allows slow Cat 4 fatties to trash talk other slowbies and act like they're the cat's pajamas, but also allows the speedy Cat 2 hunks to not have to worry about getting crashed out by a first-race idiot. Everybody wins, and everybody has a better chance of winning- which is why we're all out there anyway.

As with any system, this one can be gamed. For instance, a racer is basically never "forced" to move up by USAC. So there is some sandbagging, but honestly it's pretty uncommon. Most folks who are the type to work hard enough to get wins are also the type who are more interested in getting results in higher categories. Just like in the real world, racers tend to advance to their level of incompetence. I doubt it'd be any different in the shooting world.
Also, even though equipment makes just as big a difference in the bike world as it does in the shooting world, there aren't really equipment restrictions within each type of racing. So in a road race, a group of Cat 4s might include one guy on a 1990 aluminum Cannondale with friction shifters and heavy wheels, and a guy on a 2017 15lb carbon fiber Pinarello with $3k aerodynamic wheels and electronic shifting. Gear's just part of the game, but so are diminishing returns (this coming from the guy shooting a Savage and SWFA scope, FYI).

I, for one, would love to have a categorized system to shoot in. As it is, I have a half dozen or so other guys who I really focus on during matches, and whose results I pore over afterward. They're the guys who would be in my "category". We usually finish within a few points of one another, even though we're generally only in the 11-25th spots overall. I'm not sure they even know it, but the competition is f*cking fierce.

Oh- and one more thing. This prize table thing in PRS is godawful tacky. It's embarrassing and horridly vulture-istic. There are all kinds of creative solutions to this, but here's one suggestion:
In bike racing, we have a concept of a "prime" (pronounced Frenchy-style: "preem"). A prime is a race-within-a-race where a racer is awarded a prize. Normally, at some random lap in a multi-lap circuit, a bell is rung as the racers cross the start/finish line (which they cross 20 or 30 times in the course of a race). This bell indicates a prime, which will be awarded to the first guy across the line next time 'round. Usually the prize is a gift certificate or a new helmet or twenty bucks or something. Nothing shocking, but it's a fun thing that adds a little excitement and a shakeup.
I'd *LOVE* to see this in PRS. If sponsors could set up primes for certain stages, there could be some serious showcasing. For instance, the stage with a rope, a post, a tank-trap, and a tree trunk could be the "Gamechanger Prime" stage. The guy with the most points (or fastest time, or worst score, or whatever) on this stage in each category wins a Gamechanger. Or the playing card-reading stage; best guy gets a scope. UKD stage gets a LRF. Et cetera. It doesn't even have to relate, though. I've won primes in bike racing for skin/hair care products, pawn shop gift certs, dress shoes, steaks, Home Depot bucks, eye exams, LOTS of coffee, and heaven knows what else. So a stage could just be for a new barrel or trigger or sling or bag or brass or whatever else usually goes on a prize table. I could imagine a certain ammo manufacturer might have a field day offering up some "prime" awards.

JMHO.

 

[Assault116]

Growing pains, There's no perfect system but common sense and courtesy could and should solve most of the issues, unfortunately we can't always rely on that. I have to say there's a huge difference in the level of competition out there in the PRS in 2017 as compared to 2014. The sport has grown so fast that it's a tall order to keep up with the growth, provide an even playing field from coast to coast, and somehow make it as fair as possible for everyone.

The simple problem is the numbers of competitors involved all going for the same trophy. It's not a cheap sport, and neither is any competitive sport at the top levels. But the difference between our sport and say NASCAR, or other similar competitive sports is, in this sport the Guys at the absolute top level aren't typically running equipment that's 10, 50, or 100 times more expensive than the weekend warriors are running. Yes the top of the heap are running pretty awesome rigs, but they aren't dropping a $50-70K motor in their rig every weekend or even multiple in a weekend vs the weekender dropping in a $5K motor for a season. This puts us in the unique position of on any given weekend, the new guys can go play on the same stage as the top guys in the country, which is awesome, but lets face it, they probably have about the same chance of winning as the weekend dirt tracker does showing up at the Daytona 500. This leaves many somewhat disenchanted with the whole thing. Heck even some of the regional series are turning into some very stiff competition, and if you went to a full on regional ladder system, all the top shooters would still be knocking out the others.

This is why while I agree it's expensive to chase the series points, it's not really any more of a gear race than you make it for yourself. And IMHO if you aren't in it for the long haul, you don't deserve to go to the finale, it's a sacrifice and a lifestyle at the top level. It takes time, dedication, and yes, money. Few if any of the top shooters got their sponsorships just handed to them, many are in the business themselves, most have proven themselves, and paid their dues to get there. That doesn't mean that you can't go to any match you like and have fun and get after it, but it does mean that we're at a point where you have to have some mechanism of thinning the herd to progress towards the top of the heap. We're all gadget guys and we all like the cool new gear, but to be honest, Jake Vibbert, Matt Brousseau, Brian or Bradley Allen, Shannon Kay, or the rest of the top 15-20 shooters in the series would whip the majority of the fields tail consistently with nothing but a bipod and rear bag all weekend. It's not the gear, it's the guy running it. Yes there's things that provide an advantage, but that lasts for exactly 1 match, and then everybody truly in the chase figures it out pretty damn quick and the tables are balanced again. Point being that no matter how you slice it, it takes a ton of work, dedication, practice, and yes sacrifice (both financial and time) to make it to the top.

Personally I like it the way it is, Any average dude with enough time, effort, practice, discipline, and skill can go and compete and have a 100% fair chance to win or at least compete with the best on nearly any given weekend. The thing most don't realize is that there's another element besides just shooting and skill involved. It takes big match experience in order to develop the feel and comfort with the sport, to know how to approach a stage, how to manage your own stumbling blocks, etc.

All that said, Like Morgan mentioned there's been a few matches this season that the hit ratio skewed the points on them. For instance I have 1 match that I finished 12th in this year and got 72 points, and another where I finished in 51st and got 86 points. There's no silver bullet for that, but I think last years points structure was slightly better, because the way it is now, there's a couple matches that you absolutely have to go to in order to qualify for the finale without having 3 finishes inside the top 10 and even then it might be close. Going into 2016 everyone figured at first that the 2 top 15% finishes locking you into the finale would be a good deal and would still allow for other guys to get in. there were VERY few guys that made it in without the 2 top 15% lock in matches. It will come, it's just going to take some work and figuring.

As to the Junior Shooters, It's closely approaching the point where they need to have their own division for say 16 and under, and MD's will have to take that into account when they build a COF, and the PRS barricade needs to either have 2 sizes available or a big/small side like Frank's design IMO. I'm fortunate, I'm 6'1" I don't have many if any physical limitations to stages built for matches. A MD could potentially design stages that would be perfect for a shorter/smaller person and screw over a big guy too, so I don't see why a smaller shooter, be it a Junior or just a short guy, should be made to suffer. It's not a difficult thing to plan for, and it needs to be done. I will say I have gone to multiple matches with a Junior shooter in my group this year, and I have yet to see a MD not make an accommodation for a junior or other shooter with a physical disadvantage due to a specific stage design. That said it's something that needs to be paid more attention to.

 

[Mormegil87]

Growing pains, There's no perfect system but common sense and courtesy could and should solve most of the issues, unfortunately we can't always rely on that. I have to say there's a huge difference in the level of competition out there in the PRS in 2017 as compared to 2014. The sport has grown so fast that it's a tall order to keep up with the growth, provide an even playing field from coast to coast, and somehow make it as fair as possible for everyone.

The simple problem is the numbers of competitors involved all going for the same trophy. It's not a cheap sport, and neither is any competitive sport at the top levels. But the difference between our sport and say NASCAR, or other similar competitive sports is, in this sport the Guys at the absolute top level aren't typically running equipment that's 10, 50, or 100 times more expensive than the weekend warriors are running. Yes the top of the heap are running pretty awesome rigs, but they aren't dropping a $50-70K motor in their rig every weekend or even multiple in a weekend vs the weekender dropping in a $5K motor for a season. This puts us in the unique position of on any given weekend, the new guys can go play on the same stage as the top guys in the country, which is awesome, but lets face it, they probably have about the same chance of winning as the weekend dirt tracker does showing up at the Daytona 500. This leaves many somewhat disenchanted with the whole thing. Heck even some of the regional series are turning into some very stiff competition, and if you went to a full on regional ladder system, all the top shooters would still be knocking out the others.

This is why while I agree it's expensive to chase the series points, it's not really any more of a gear race than you make it for yourself. And IMHO if you aren't in it for the long haul, you don't deserve to go to the finale, it's a sacrifice and a lifestyle at the top level. It takes time, dedication, and yes, money. Few if any of the top shooters got their sponsorships just handed to them, many are in the business themselves, most have proven themselves, and paid their dues to get there. That doesn't mean that you can't go to any match you like and have fun and get after it, but it does mean that we're at a point where you have to have some mechanism of thinning the herd to progress towards the top of the heap. We're all gadget guys and we all like the cool new gear, but to be honest, Jake Vibbert, Matt Brousseau, Brian or Bradley Allen, Shannon Kay, or the rest of the top 15-20 shooters in the series would whip the majority of the fields tail consistently with nothing but a bipod and rear bag all weekend. It's not the gear, it's the guy running it. Yes there's things that provide an advantage, but that lasts for exactly 1 match, and then everybody truly in the chase figures it out pretty damn quick and the tables are balanced again. Point being that no matter how you slice it, it takes a ton of work, dedication, practice, and yes sacrifice (both financial and time) to make it to the top.

Personally I like it the way it is, Any average dude with enough time, effort, practice, discipline, and skill can go and compete and have a 100% fair chance to win or at least compete with the best on nearly any given weekend. The thing most don't realize is that there's another element besides just shooting and skill involved. It takes big match experience in order to develop the feel and comfort with the sport, to know how to approach a stage, how to manage your own stumbling blocks, etc.

All that said, Like Morgan mentioned there's been a few matches this season that the hit ratio skewed the points on them. For instance I have 1 match that I finished 12th in this year and got 72 points, and another where I finished in 51st and got 86 points. There's no silver bullet for that, but I think last years points structure was slightly better, because the way it is now, there's a couple matches that you absolutely have to go to in order to qualify for the finale without having 3 finishes inside the top 10 and even then it might be close. Going into 2016 everyone figured at first that the 2 top 15% finishes locking you into the finale would be a good deal and would still allow for other guys to get in. there were VERY few guys that made it in without the 2 top 15% lock in matches. It will come, it's just going to take some work and figuring.

As to the Junior Shooters, It's closely approaching the point where they need to have their own division for say 16 and under, and MD's will have to take that into account when they build a COF, and the PRS barricade needs to either have 2 sizes available or a big/small side like Frank's design IMO. I'm fortunate, I'm 6'1" I don't have many if any physical limitations to stages built for matches. A MD could potentially design stages that would be perfect for a shorter/smaller person and screw over a big guy too, so I don't see why a smaller shooter, be it a Junior or just a short guy, should be made to suffer. It's not a difficult thing to plan for, and it needs to be done. I will say I have gone to multiple matches with a Junior shooter in my group this year, and I have yet to see a MD not make an accommodation for a junior or other shooter with a physical disadvantage due to a specific stage design. That said it's something that needs to be paid more attention to.

I agree for the most part however I feel that the big series, PRS and NRL specifically have to decide what they want to be.

Do they want to be the mechanism that grows the sport by making it accessible or do they want to find out who the best shooters in the country are. It’s tough to do both. The PRS has the right idea with the club series but we’ll see how it plays out in a few years. The NRL looks to be making its way east in 2018 so we’ll see how that plays out.

Border Wars, Jim See’s series was good at making the price of admission attainable for new shooters. The competition from match to match varied quite a bit so new shooters had some opportunity to finish decent but at the next match shoot with some heavy hitters.

This sport is growing fast and is experiencing some growing pains. It’ll all shake out in the end. The hardest part is getting ranges and clubs to see that it is safe and growing, therefore making it worth their while to come on board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lash]

I'm following this with great interest. As a small local club that has to make best use of its limited range availability, our group tries to stay as focused as possible on the new shooter and still offer a challenge to experienced shooters. Our matches are low cost, one day, and offer no prizes other than the satisfaction of a match well shot and the comraderie offered.

We still struggle to balance target sizes and position options that are interesting but doable. The winds are unpredictable, if not as severe as those in Midwest states, so that, in itself is a challenge for those who are on the ball.

My point is that the local scene is still where it is going to happen for new shooters. The national scene does need to figure out what it is going to be, but it should be a higher bar than the local scene, by definition of national sports and champions.

From a personal point of view, not having the time nor finances to commit to a professional run at national finals; I am comfortable trying to get in one or two major matches just for the adventure and exposure. I'm well aware that this limits me to the middle of the pack and still I have a good time while doing so.

Honestly, I cannot see a way to make the series completely accessible to the new/amateur shooter other than continuing to make it possible to attend the major matches. I know that I enjoy the heck out of just being able to shoot these and push myself past my local comfort zone. I never expect to place at the top nor do I care about taking home prizes. Being able to shoot in them is a type of reward all in itself.

Take this for what it is, one man's opinion.

 

[Assault116]

I agree for the most part however I feel that the big series, PRS and NRL specifically have to decide what they want to be.

Do they want to be the mechanism that grows the sport by making it accessible or do they want to find out who the best shooters in the country are. It’s tough to do both. The PRS has the right idea with the club series but we’ll see how it plays out in a few years. The NRL looks to be making its way east in 2018 so we’ll see how that plays out.

Border Wars, Jim See’s series was good at making the price of admission attainable for new shooters. The competition from match to match varied quite a bit so new shooters had some opportunity to finish decent but at the next match shoot with some heavy hitters.

This sport is growing fast and is experiencing some growing pains. It’ll all shake out in the end. The hardest part is getting ranges and clubs to see that it is safe and growing, therefore making it worth their while to come on board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally, I think the PRS and NRL do both, and can do both, It's peoples expectations that it has to some how fit their mold that needs to change.

As mentioned, the local scene is the place for new shooters to learn the game, and decide how far they want to go. That takes local groups and ranges stepping up to provide a avenue for that. I grew up in MN and most of my life I never knew that a quarter of the things I pull off in matches today was even possible. I moved to CO in 2008, and I started in this game in the fall of 2013 and after my first exposure to it, I was hooked. I took that itch and scratched it at the local matches, then my first big match was Snipers Hide 2014, then shot a couple of the Competition Dynamics Matches, and every local area match I could get into. Then in 2016, I joined the PRS and this year I qualified for the Finale.

Point being without the local scene we have out here, I wouldn't be where I'm at. During the majority of the season, I can shoot a local match about 3 weekends out of every month, and probably every weekend If I were to drive a little farther. Most are $30 or less entry fee, no prizes beyond bragging rights, I am/we are fortunate out here that there's a large selection and that it's very popular here. OK, TX, and other places are very similar these days and as a MN Native I'm thrilled to see it starting to catch on in the midwest, Huge props to Jim See and all the guys up there starting to make it happen there. That's what grows the sport.

The Gap Grind is a great venue for newer shooters to get a taste of the big match scene and this year was over 300 shooters and is a great way for new folks to learn the ropes from some of the best shooters in the country. That said, IMO it's up to each individual shooter to decide how far they want to go and how much they are willing to dedicate to it. If it's truly a sport, there needs to be a pinnacle, right now the PRS is that pinnacle, That said, it's not the be all end all, There's still a lot of otherwise unsanctioned large matches out there and it's growing every year and now the NRL has popped up and I honestly don't think a slightly different flavor is a bad thing, the number of shooters out there is growing so fast I don't think they will be lacking for people to fill matches.

That said, the local scene is where the sport grows and things like the Border War Series and the PRS Regional series offer the middle step that was missing in the past between the small locals and a series that's still very affordable. Then the open registration nature to all the big matches offer shooters the chance to step in the pool anytime they like, which is awesome. I just think some folks need to have a slightly better set of expectations when they make that step. It's grown beyond the point where you can realistically expect to compete effectively with the top tier without a ton of work and dedication to it and that comes at a lot of expense of time, effort, and money, as does any top level competition.

It's ever evolving and it's not all going to be perfect, but I think it's headed in the right direction.