Revive the Rankings?

[AlanF]

To all

Up until the end of last year, the NRAA had a system of rankings for TR, F-Std and F-Open which was kept up to date on their website. It was managed by Geoff Roberts the former webmaster. When he was unceremoniously replaced in that role, after having done it voluntarily for many years, the rankings were copied to the new website, but have not been updated since Dec 31, 2012. The TR rankings based on the same system survived a little longer in the ATR magazine, but were not there in issue 106.

I'm considering reviving them on ozfclass.com, because I think they are a worthwhile thing, not just as a celebration of achievement, but as a way of encouraging shooters to participate more in Queens shoots. We have an opportunity to adjust the formulae in order to improve it. I know there was some criticism of the previous system, saying that it gave too much advantage to those who shoot more often. Also there was no differentiation between performances in large and small fields.

Firstly can I get some indication from the ozfclass membership whether you think its worthwhile reviving a rankings list. It would be confined to F-Class and be published on this website, and include derivation information. I asked ATR years ago if the F-Class rankings could be included there and got no response, and don't believe anything will have changed there.

So what do you think?

Alan

[Barry Davies]

Not against rankings in principle but how would one be ranked? Queens and lead up's only? For it to be meaningful there would have to be more competition person to person otherwise the West Australians would be ranked on their performance in WA as they don't stray much ( for example ) Much the same with NQ & NT. Eastern state shooters certainly attend more Queens and therefore have a greater opportunity to achieve ranking.
If it was done state by state there might be some merit in it, whereby local prize meetings ( selected ) could be included.
Just Queens and Lead up's really don't mean much in the overall picture.
Not against it but if done it needs to have meaning.

[AlanF]

Barry,

You'll never get a perfect system, but there's a variety of ways of reducing the handicap of the less central states. One is to include a selection of non-Queens events, but only where nearby Queens are few. e.g. for WA you might add say 2 major club OPMs to the Queens and leadup. Another way is to have participation in a minimum number of events in a given period to qualify for inclusion, but relax this for less central states e.g require Vic/ACT/NSW to participate in say 5 Queens events in a 3 year period, but WA only 3 Queens necessary to qualify.

Alan

[DannyS]

Alan, its a bit like our stategradings, the VRA has changed the system, and quite a few of us were unaware of it. Now done differently to the SSRs.

Cheers
Danny

[AlanF]

Alan, its a bit like our stategradings, the VRA has changed the system, and quite a few of us were unaware of it. Now done differently to the SSRs.

Cheers
Danny

The problem there seemed to be that the change wasn't communicated to the members.

[RAVEN]

who is supposed to be updating the NRAA grading Alan

[RDavies]

I think it would be a good idea to run something similar to the current system. I think having rankings weighted more on lead ups and Queens would be best as these events are where everyone will be bringing their A game. Some of the top shooters purposely don't use their best gear at smaller prize shoots (to give others a go).
Likewise, some could attend lots of small prize shoots such as the Kickatinalong country picnic shoot or Bringmybarrowback rod and rifle club annual get together and consistently win in a field of 2 shooters.

Weighting of some sort on the total numbers of competitors in a Queens and lead up.sounds like a good idea.

[DaveMc]

The other outcome of using Queens for rankings is it encourages attendance. I think it is a good step to even make the National Queens worth more so that we encourage more people to attend and make it a true Nationals. This year in FO was fantastic and hope it can be replicated.

Perhaps points for each based on a hierarchical system -
1) National Queens
2) State Queens
3) National Leadup
4) State Leadup
5) OPM's

Then Top 5 scores (or maybe more e.g. 10 over 2 years) to count. or similar

Within the OPMs you could have a bit of a weighting depending on how many attend in your division.

BUT THIS IS A MASSIVE UNDERTAKING - Queens themselves are far easier to monitor.

I don't buy this line that it means nothing. rankings are for those that want to be ranked. Like in world surfing, world tennis, golf and any other profession. It is not for those wanting to stay at home and say "I am a better surfer than Kelly Slater but just don't enter the world tour - I beat him once in 1983 at a local event".
If you want to improve your ranking then attend something worth it - ie attend the Nationals!! Those that think they are a better shot because they occasionally beat the likes of James Corbett, Rod Davies, or Bob Pederson at a 300-600 yard prize meeting then come along to a 5 day, 1000 yard event and prove it. There is a hell of a difference and the Queens are where people bring there best gear and shoot a large number of long ranges. Luck has far smaller impact over many ranges and days.

Whatever the system people will just have to attend if they want to see their rankings improve!

Points will just have to be thought about. ie someone that attends 5 small country prize meetings cannot beat someone that wins the Nationals and say 2 other Queens with high rankings in 2 more.

To feature high in the rankings then ultimately you would have had to attend a few queens over 2 years. With all the Naysayers I actually don't think the old system was too bad.

Interestingly in the US they recognize the difference between a short course and long course and have rankings in each. This is possibly another fair way to approach it. OPM rankings and Queens rankings separately. Again a large undertaking!!

[RAVEN]

In SA we run a SOTY (shooter of the year) competition
The winner of the OPM in FS & FO are awarded 100 points each
the 2nd place getter is awarded a percentage of point dependant on the number competing so everybody that competes receive points the more competitors in a particular discipline the more points are awarded to the 2nd 3rd & 4th ect ect placed shooters.

This competition has been running for 2 years and it has increased numbers at local OPM's

I had suggested to our state association to look into design OPM scoring software package that could be distributed to clubs for OPMs that the results recorded on the day then emailed back to HQ all scores automatically put into a database upgrading rankings (grading) the response was the usual

[AlanF]

I wouldn't want to take on something which involved getting results from ALL OPMs. At most, a few selected ones in less central areas. When (if) the national handicap system is established, that will provide a rankings system of sorts which will include all performances at OPMs. What I am proposing is something which (a) can be done by me NOW, and (b) will be more based on placings than percentage of winning score (much easier to manage). I already have the data for F-Class Queens results - have just finished updating the results (see http://ozfclass.com/results/queensresults.html) up to the NSW Queens (don't hold your breath for WA).

Would be good to keep this discussion going for a bit to get a wider spread of opinions.

Richard,
Not sure who the current NRAA webmaster is. There's nothing on the site about it. I did hear a rumour that a relative of a board member is doing it.

Alan

[Barry Davies]

For kickers might I suggest as minimum.

National Queens and leadup --mandatory

3 other state Queens and Lead-ups. One of them being that Queens where the national teams are held.

3 Major local ( any state ) PM's

[RAVEN]

National Queens and leadup --mandatory
only if it were to travel around the country
But having been to Belmont I appreciate why its held there

[Brad Y]

I'm not very experienced in the grading or handicap side of things but to me something simple would be a state by state grading yes on percentage of score. Then to me the national one would be the top scores highest to lowest over all of those state rankings. We have only got a couple of opms here and a queens so can't really match shooters who have more shoots to attend. We are doing our best to work on that. Happy to help I'd you want fo scores as a percentage from WA. Maybe someone else from each state might be able to chip I and give the details to Alan who can run a national ranking that gets updated either after every shoot or each quarter or half a year or so.

[AlanF]

FWIW, here are the F-Open rankings after the NSW Queens (I have emulated the NRAA system in Excel).



Brad if you have the first 3 placings in the WA leadup and the first 5 placings in the Queens, then I can update it to the present.

Alan

[Matt P]

Alan
There is no really fair system, the Queensland shooters have 3 Queens in their State and the likes of SA and WA only have one and it's a big drive to do two in a year, NSW and Vic have the ACT Queens and so on.
I would just continue with what we have.
Matt P