AM/CIV Class & Prizes in Unlimited - Your Thoughts

Discussion in 'GSSF' started by BCarver, Jul 2, 2007.

  1. BCarver

    BCarver CLM Millennium Member

    Messages:
    824
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 1999
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    DannyR and Ede discussed a suggestion in the "Ft Smith" thread that may need to be surveyed on a separate thread, so I'll start the thread.

    The suggestion was, "AM/CIV prizes in Unlimited comparable to the new award system whereas the Masters can shoot in Competition or Subcompact and win prizes".

    In other words, "If Glock agreed to this addition, if UL had more than 3 but less than 10 AM/CIV competitors, a prize of $100.00 would be awarded to the 1'st place AM/CIV competitor. IF there were 10 or more AM/CIV competitors, a prize of a gun would be awarded to the 1'st place AM/CIV competitor."

    If Glock/GSSF agreed to this "new revision" to their current award's program:

    Do you think that more AM/CIV competitors would compete in Unlimited? Why or why not?

    I'm sure that Glock/GSSF would like to hear your comments on this. My experience at several matches has been that there are several AM/CIV competitors shooting Unlimited.

    Thanks,
    Bobby
     
  2. FESTUS

    FESTUS Guest

    Messages:
    822
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 27, 2001
    Well I just sent in registration for Marietta and for the first time in three years ....I have dropped Unlimited....hmmmm....I beginning to think EGO may have played a part in this.....I might have to eat my words and build an Unlimited Gun if they decided to have an Amateur category....ALLRIGHT I'm in..I would go and continue to register for the Unlimited class as an Amateur....Great Idea.:thumbsup:
     

  3. JonInWA

    JonInWA

    Messages:
    858
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2004
    Location:
    Auburn, Washington
    Bobby, I appreciate you starting this thread-wh've had interesting discussions going on in both the Ft. Smith and Roseburg Reports threads. Basically, at least some of us are disenchanted with the GSSF new awards structure, and feel that it's counterproductive to what we perceive the thrust of GSSF to be. It's arguably FAIRER, but ultimately may be counterproductive, in that those without an exceptionally high level of skill (regardless of division) perceptually have a very, very slim chance of coming away with any tangible award from a GSSF match-and GSSF membership plus divisional entry fee(s) make a GSSF match fairly expensive, especially compared to other venues, such as IDPA. Basically, a GSSF entrant has to pay a not insignificant entry fee(s), in addition to other ancilliary travel expenses and time for a fairly limited amount of shooting time...and now, not much of a tangible incentive (i.e., the random drawings) to enter. Of course, there's the camaraderie, the Glock Armorer support, and the competition....but Glock/GSSF seems to be straying from its roots-which as I understood it was to incentivize entry to mid-level shooters, their families/significant others in a relatively low key competition sport-and that such an approach would compliment the other shooting sports venues (and act as a feeder for them), and positively impact on Glock's image, market penetration, and bottom line. Today, it seems to be drifting to a "skill only" reward structure-not that that's bad, or unfair-but is it what the purpose and future of GSSF really is?

    I shoot Am Civ, Competition, and Master Comp-basically I use the Competition and Master Competition divisions as my "warm up" for my Am Civ performance. While I truly enjoy, and am committed to GSSF, given the size of the competitions and the new awards structure, realistically,I have a very, very slim chance of coming away from a match with any tangible award-and that's ok, but I don't think that that's where GSSF's success (or intent, or market) has been, or will be. I strongly advocate a return to the old awards structure, and feel that such would be more "rewarding" to both GSSF and Glock. To directly answer your question, I think that the answer is not so much in creating a new category, it's in re-examining the GSSF awards structure.

    Best, Jon
     
  4. ede

    ede

    Messages:
    11,938
    Likes Received:
    4,463
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Location:
    New Mexico Mountians
    without a doubt there would be more entries in UL if they knew they weren't shooting aginst the masters for the same prize. i can't see any reason not to allow it, they opened up Comp and Sub for a master bracket. i can't claim the idea was mine, i think wig brought it up before me.
     
  5. WIG19

    WIG19 Light left on

    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2003
    Location:
    Renegade State
    Personally, it would mean adding a 4th entry (everyone has their threshold for a variety of reasons), as I'm not going to quit shooting CD. HOWEVER, I would very strongly consider it this year at the matches that are historically well-attended, and almost certainly next year. "Das Boot" (my G34) is getting anxious to get out of drydock. :supergrin:

    I'd think that the Am shooters already shooting this for fun - who may even have a bit of an edge shooting a true UL gun in this category - would welcome the chance to see something back in addition to shooting their tricked-out baby & mentally ranking themselves against the Master community. Since it only applies if the entries go above a certain point, nothing is taken away from those shooters anyway.

    As I said at Indy (beore the monsoon came) I'm tentatively in. :thumbsup:


    :patriot:
     
  6. BCarver

    BCarver CLM Millennium Member

    Messages:
    824
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 1999
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Jon,
    I didn't begin shooting GSSF until 1998 and since then, I've seen many changes in the format, rules and prize distribution. I'm sure that other GSSF competitors who have competed in GSSF may have seen more than I. From my experiences and perceptions, I believe that Glock "did" initiate GSSF as a venue to promote their guns through application and use at an organized venue called GSSf." It is my belief that Glock did not expect the overall acceptance of this venue, thus the objectives of GSSF may have changed over the years.

    As we all know, no other manufacturer promotes and organizes regular competitions like Glock does with GSSF, giving away many guns and alot of cash at each event. As an active member of IDPA and IPSC, I've struggled with my comparisons to GSSF and finally realized that GSSF is difficult to compare to the those venues. I developed the comparison below:
    IDPA:
    Annual Dues: $35.00 (Renewal $35.00)
    Regional Match Fees: From $75.00 to $125.00 (Average)
    Regional Prizes: Plaque only
    Local Matches: Yes
    Local Match Fees: $10.00 to $15.00 (Average)
    Local Match Prizes: Plaque only
    IPSC:
    Annual Dues: $40.00 (Renewal $40.00)
    Regional Match Fees: From $75.00 to $125.00 (Average)
    Regional Prizes: Prize Table
    Local Matches: Yes
    Local Match Fees: $10.00 to $15.00 (Average)
    Local Match Prizes: Varies upon club. Primarily Plaque only
    GSSF
    Annual Dues: $35.00 (Renewal $25.00)
    Regional Match Fees: From $25.00 for each entry
    Regional Prizes: Currently Minimum of 5 guns plus cash. More guns and cash available dependent upon the quantity of entries
    Local Matches: No
    Local Match Fees: Does not apply
    Local Match Prizes: Does not apply

    As an avid competitor, I belong to all of the above organizations and love shooting all of them. My conclusions, after comparing the 3 organizations are as stated below:
    1. IPSC is a shooting organizations that profits from the fees that we pay when we shoot classifiers at local club matches and compete at regional events
    2. The prize table at many IPSC tournaments are funded by some of the match fees and donations from manufacturers
    3. The local clubs that hold the regular shooting events profit from your match fees to support the club and their expenses for supplies, etc. All RO help is donated by the individuals
    4. Glock promotes GSSF as a "stand alone" venue. There are no local clubs, no donations from other manufacturers. The fees that we pay at the GSSF events pay for the expenses to put on the match. As you know, Glock provides free guns for the RO's, shirts, hats and a complimentary gift for their time.
    5 Other than the membership fees, I'm not aware of any other fees that IDPA makes from matches.

    I realized that all 3 venues were different and excellent venues to enhance our shooting skills and compete. I personally do not agree with Glock's award system before or after the most recent changes. There are advantages to Glock's approach to reward everyone for their shooting skills and disadvantages. IDPA and IPSC have positives to their approach and negatives, too.

    I hope that GSSF grows and thrives, just like I hope that IDPA and IPSC continue to grow and thrive because it provides all of us another opportunity to compete, shoot our guns in a controlled and safe event, excercising our rights, "to bear arms".

    Thanks for allowing me to share my thoughts,
    Bobby
     
  7. JonInWA

    JonInWA

    Messages:
    858
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2004
    Location:
    Auburn, Washington
    Bobby, great analysis and comparison-and you certainly are one of the GSSF "godfathers" so I appreciate your time and thoughts. I am curious as to what awards structure you recommend for GSSF, given your qualms about the current and the immediate previous structure.

    Where I differentiate GSSF from IDPA (and IPSC) is that GSSF is a manufacturer's created sport and match, specifically limited to Glocks. As such, it's a de facto extension of Glock's marketing strategy, and Glock benefits both directly and indirectly from GSSF. This is not a bad thing, but it is a key differentiation from some of the other shooting sports. In other words, Glock stands to profit in multiple ways from their sponsorship, staffing, and awards structure inherent to GSSF. I simply don't see their market target being merely the top several shooters in each category-hence the genius in the random awards.

    When I compete in IDPA, particularly in the local matches, I do so with whichever gun I choose, in whichever category I choose/qualify for-and do so for the experience, skill building, and camaraderie within my squad. As you stated, there are no prizes, other than for the State and National matches (and I plan on participating in our State match, but not the National match). My local match costs me $10 if I belong to the local club in addition to IDPA, or $15 per match if I just belong to IDPA. My monthly travel time is about 1/2 hour each way. The State match is $50, is at the same range as my monthly IDPA matches are, consists of 12 stages includes lunch, is limited to 100 qualified shooters, and includes at least one gun award by random drawing and a prize table, with the anticipation being that approximately 1/3 of the participants will receive an award of some sort.

    With GSSF, I'm shooting in 3 matches in the Northwest this season, and in 3 divisions in each. Factoring in match/GSSF fees, fuel, travel costs, and ammunition, I'm looking at $600+. I will build my skills, I will have a good time, I will enjoy chatting with Glenn Wisser,the Armorer/Regional Glock District Manager (and a great guy), and Chris Edwards and/or Scott Gilbertson. BUT-my chances of winning anything tangible are slim to none, and given the size and the new awards structure/parameters/restrictions regarding the Random awards, the Random awards probably won't occur. Period. So-what's the incentive for the entry-level to middling skill shooter? Previously, a significant part of the event draw was the Random award factor. Now my perception is that I'm the one significantly subsidizing Glock's marketing, not vice versa. I certainly expect Glock to make a profit, and flourish...but I think that something has been lost in the process, and that the result is significantly diminished attendance in the smaller-venue matches-which I think is ultimately to Glock's loss, not just ours.

    Perhaps the solution would be a combination of a match and a shooting clinic, at the various skill levels, to provide a greater value to the individual shooter. I don't know, other that I'm somewhat frustrated with the current state of the GSSF awards structure.

    Best, Jon
     
  8. Don At PC

    Don At PC Senior Member Millennium Member

    Messages:
    5,227
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 1998
    Location:
    USA
    No, Keep UL as it is. I will continue to shoot this category and thoroughly enjoy either way because I like shooting my dot Glock.
     
  9. WIG19

    WIG19 Light left on

    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2003
    Location:
    Renegade State
    As that would be my 4th shoot of the day that would be my primary reason as well. Maybe by the time we get inside the clubroom at Lexington you can show me how to turn that dot thingy on... I always wanted to be able to turn to one of them high-fallutin' master-class shooters at a match and truthfully be able to say: "I think I left the door open a little fer ya..." (Don't tell 'em it's a hangar.)

    :rofl:
     
  10. Don At PC

    Don At PC Senior Member Millennium Member

    Messages:
    5,227
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 1998
    Location:
    USA

    You mean you gotta turn it on? Maybe it was only luck.:wavey:
     
  11. dking1

    dking1

    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Location:
    Central Ohio
    If an Unlimited AM. is added then I am in too! I have the gun for it but have let my lack of confidence get in the way of signing up for it. Great idea!!!!:thumbsup:
     
  12. glockess56

    glockess56 CLM

    Messages:
    1,105
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Location:
    Dublin, Ohio
    Yeah, I'd be in it, too. I might just shoot the G17 I shoot for the other events instead of my "Gastly Gaston!" But, once again, if the match isn't "big" enough, there won't be door prizes or even second place. At Ft. Smith, GSSF was looking for one more person to shoot so they'd have enough to pay second place! Now, when I travel 12 hours or more to a match, whether it's a new match or an old one, I don't know the total of people who are going to be there. So, if GSSF is for all shooters, then change some structure so door prizes, guns, etc. can be given at the smaller matches, as well. Right now, only skill achieved any prizes at Ft. Smith. We enter and travel great distances and maybe we expect to at least to have a chance to win something at randam. Shooting UL is intimedating to some people, with people shooting guns with all kinds of bells and whistles on them. I don't find them fearful, but I don't enter because of other reasons. Now I might even enter and do it with iron sights. I have a race gun, but the last match and the last indoor match I did better with my stock gun shooting iron sights. I might do a fourth entry, but I don't know if I want Sub Compact or UL.

    I've added Master Stock in the last year and that's a great category to enter and it shouldn't be changed. That's the shark tank and if the bluegills, the carp and the catfish want to go there, they can, but the sharks are at the deep end. Nothing is hurt though, if the other fishies want to join in. They more the merrier.
     
  13. Rikki

    Rikki Pathetic Loser

    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2002
    Location:
    Behind the curtain
    Why not just put the Lewis system back in Civilian and Guardian Divisions, leave the other divisons on the new "Distribution of Awards" system and move on?
     
  14. BCarver

    BCarver CLM Millennium Member

    Messages:
    824
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 1999
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Jon,
    Since GSSF has always been a marketing tactic for Glock, it's difficult for me to explain what I think their structure should be. I'm a "long time" competitor, competing in different shooting sports for over 30 years. Until I began shooting GSSF, I had never competed in any competitive venue that did not award the best with the highest award. Understanding that you will have many skill levels at any competition, handicapping is necessary to level the playing field. All sports handicap and it's acceptable.

    GSSF does not have a "true" handicap or classification system. Once a person wins 3 guns, they are bumped to a Master. With the current program, you could finish up to 4th place, shooting in UL or MasterStock and win a gun as an AM/CIV dependent upon if the people finishing before you were Masters and had already won their gun for the match. After winning a gun by default 3 times, you are now a Master, though your skill levels are not up to the Masters competing. I don't agree with that principle because it discourages the shooter to compete because he would have to compete with people exceeding his/her skill level. He could practice and improve but that's not always possible for some people due to time and cash. I believe that everyone should compete with those who are in their class but have proven by skills not luck to be in that class.

    In my opinion, GSSF should have classification shoots at each match for current and new shooters. These classification shoots would determine the classes each person would compete in after completing 3. Until a person received their classification, use their class from IDPA and IPSC, which ever is the highest. Of course there will be sandbagging but whenever a person wins X times or finishes in the Y% of their class, they would be bumped to the next class. With a classification system, 1'st, 2'nd and 3'rd place finishes could be given and dependent upon the amount of registered shooters, additional places paid. If a person had no classification in any venue, they would shoot as a Novice their first match.

    I'm sure there are many reasons why this is not being done but this would be, in my opinion, an option to the current awards and random drawing program.

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. Though we may not have the responsibility to make the changing decisions, our thoughts have been heard.

    Regards,
    Bobby
     
  15. Maxthemutt

    Maxthemutt

    Messages:
    920
    Likes Received:
    108
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    Location:
    MN
    My GF would love to shoot an Unlimited gun at a match, but not against the Masters.
     
  16. shootinglocks

    shootinglocks

    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    mr. carver
    i think that is an excellent idea.i currently shoot unlimited regardless of winning or not.this could give other am/civ or grd competitors another opportunity to win.the more chances to win a gun the better:banana:
     
  17. unclebob

    unclebob DFC, MSM, 12 Air Medals.

    Messages:
    9,364
    Likes Received:
    2,600
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2000
    Location:
    Mary Esther FL
    I asked Chris Edwards a couple of years ago if he ever thought of have an Amateur Unlimited category. He gave a very firm NO. But maybe if someone with more clout than me brought it up again, he might me more receptive
     
  18. dking1

    dking1

    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Location:
    Central Ohio
    I like the fact that GSSF is trying to keep the vets interested and still bring in the new blood at the same time. I also understand that you'll never keep everyone happy. The fact GSSF is trying to improve says a lot about that group. Can't say the same thing for S&W, Springfield Armory, Kimber, etc... Again, build it and they will come.

    :thumbsup:
     
  19. Norske

    Norske Millennium Member

    Messages:
    3,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 1999
    You don't quite understand what Bobby is proposing.

    Right now, in Subcompact and Competition the AMATEURS shoot for a gun for 1st, $100 for 2nd, and $75 for 3rd.

    The MASTERS in those two categories are shooting for a single $100 1st prize, unless there are enough of them entered for the prize upgrade clause to kick in.

    So, both the Amateurs and the Masters may be SHOOTING in the same categories, but they as they are shooting for differing prize SETS they really are not competing with each other, nor taking prizes away from each other.

    Currently, Unlimited only has the Gun/$100/$75 1st/2nd/3rd prize structure. It has traditionally been open to both Amateurs AND Masters, but it is pretty much a de facto set of "Master" awards since it is never easy for Amateurs to beat Masters.

    What Bobby is proposing, if I understand it right, is turning around what the Masters are getting in Subcompact and Competition. To offer a $100 1st prize to the top AMATEUR in Unlimited, and subject to the same "upgrade" clause if they get 10, 15, or 18 Amateurs together within it.

    One question. Right now, Amateurs are theoretically eligible for the "standard" Gun/$100/$75 1st/2nd/3rd prizes in Unlimited IF they can beat the Masters to win them.

    If this additional prize were to be offered, would Amateurs still be eligible for those awards? Or, just as the Masters are ineligible for them in Sub and Comp (barring the upgrade clause), should the Amateurs no longer be eligible for them?

    My opinion; the Amateurs SHOULD be eligible for the top 3 prizes in Unlimited. (Actually, the top award only. The 2nd place award is equal to the proposed $100 "1st Amateur" award and 3rd place is inferior to it).

    If they can beat the Masters out for the gun, they should get the gun.

    Opinions and comments, anyone?

    :headscratch:
     
  20. Don At PC

    Don At PC Senior Member Millennium Member

    Messages:
    5,227
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 1998
    Location:
    USA
    Quote by Norske:

    "My opinion; the Amateurs SHOULD be eligible for the top 3 prizes in Unlimited. (Actually, the top award only. The 2nd place award is equal to the proposed $100 "1st Amateur" award and 3rd place is inferior to it).

    If they can beat the Masters out for the gun, they should get the gun".

    My feelings exactly. If I earned it I want it, none of this IF there are "X" number of shooters in my class. This is the kind of explanation I was wanting to hear. The current system in UL is just fine.