OzFclass

for one year our club has been scoring fclass the same as fullbore.
we have been scoring std, open, & fullbore out of 100.10 for 10 to count, but out of 50.10 would work equally well.
for fclass, the superv has been our v, and the fullbore v has been our 10, and so on.
the perception that this is hard to score has been debunked,and was solved by the use of laminated scoring cards.
what this has done is brought the whole club closer. all disciplines compete head to head in anything that is handicapped, and this has proven to be a great crowd pleaser, particularly the challenge board, where anyone can challenge anyone.
the extra buzz in the clubhouse has proven beneficial to the retention of visitors into membership, to the extent that we sometimes have to put on extra targets over and above the extra ones already organized as the club grows.
the other advantage of this form of scoring is that it is how it is done internationally.
it is at club level that we can improve and increase our sport, and this is good for clubs.
perhaps now with a rules revision imminent would be a good time to discuss altering our scoring system.
if it makes your brain hurt, don't try it.
bruce moulds.

Bruce, someone clever told me the way to convert it back to what the SSRs require, (60.10) you just minus forty from the 100.10 style score.

Interesting experiment your CTV club started and its good to see its well recieved by all the shooters!

IanP

Conversely, Instead of Two values for rings, score as is and add 40.

Saves educating everybody again.

Tom

TOM wrote:Conversely, Instead of Two values for rings, score as is and add 40.

Saves educating everybody again.

Tom

Good point Tom and while we are on the converse look at things, perhaps Bruce should have named his thread Uncommon Scoring!

IanP

Some info
This scoring system was proposed by some TR shooters because of the additional 3 score ring included in the ICFRA target.
By changing the values its not so scary.
RB

while i prefer scoring out of 100.10, it will never happen in my lifetime.
the actual point of importance is to suggest that fclass go to the same scoring as fullbore. at the moment that is 50.10.
another benefit is that fullbore tend to take fclass under their wing more, because they feel that they have a greater understanding of it.
bruce moulds.

Actually, with the number of high centre ( 6 ring ) counts in FB, one would think that F Class scoring for FB would be the way to go, then you can give the current 6 ring any value you want -- ie 10

Barry

Barry, could not agree more - f/bore should be using the super v!!

Currently, we have butts markers registering x's and Full Bore just scoring them as a V.

EG: Currently if you get a range tie, two shooters get up with 50.9 - often the winner is calculated on count back of who shot the last V, YET this winner may have only shot 2 X's, whilst the guy who did not shoot the last V, actually had 8 X's in his score -tell me who had the better group shoot and was a more deserving winner!!! Yeah, the guy who did not win on count back?

I know if I was in the butts taking extra time to mark super v's and they just weren't being used, I'd be a little ......ty!

WA generally scores the shots as they are called: 5, V and X for all disciplines. There are less mistakes and confusion for everyone. I don't really understand the need to fit with TR, the ICFRA target and standardised scoring has done this for us.