I didn't want to hijack Jon's IDPA thread so here's a new one...
I wasn’t going to post this discussion because I’ve already written a letter to the USPSA President about it and was planning to write the Area directors. However, since Rob said he’d like to hear opinions, here is goes.
This is the current slot policy:
http://www.uspsa-nationals.org/archive/2007 Slot policy.pdf
Keeping it simple, if you win your class (M-D) or finish High Lady, Senior, Super Senior, or Junior at your Area (regional) match, you earn a slot to the following year’s Nationals. If your division has 100 or more competitors, second in class would also earn a slot.
They also acknowledge the first six Level III matches of the year, referred to as “Other” matches. Among these are Sectionals and ones like SummerBlast. Finishing in the top 3 overall will earn you a slot there.
From the Nationals, the biggest match in the country, the following earn slots: Top 16, Top 8 Ladies, and High Junior. Class winners are not invited back and the High Senior and Super Senior are not invited back.
The real question is simple. It has to do with the principle behind such a policy. Do you think that a class winner at an Area match is more deserving of a slot than the class winner from the Nationals? If so why?
Needless to say Nationals are much longer, harder, and consist of better shooters than Area matches. It is obvious to me and everyone I have spoken to that first in line for earned slots should be those that placed highest in the category at the largest match of the year, not those that placed highest, or sometimes second highest, in the category in some of the middle-sized matches of the year.
I would like to know if Rob, as the Area director, agrees on the principle part.
As for the other part, “where should these slots come from?” That is confusing. My initial gut says, I don’t know, that’s why I don’t hold an office. As just a member of relatively few years, I don’t know if my role should be coming up with such a policy. However, that doesn’t mean I can’t spot a problem when I see one.
My attempt at coming up with an answer for that part is that it should come down to looking at the policy and looking at the pool of possible invitees and asking who justified their invitation. I can’t see how you can say a Nationals class winner didn’t do that. So the question is really “who earned the slots”, not “where should these slots come from?”
Any input would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Steve Lyons
That is not a rule, but a policy. Yes, there is a difference - slot policy is not part of the rulebook, but is a separate board adopoted policy.
The main problem with the "Class winner" concept is that the slots have to come from somewhere. We could get some from the presidential allotment, but I would be reluctant to require the president to give up 18 of his 20 slots for a three division match (L/P/R). One other possible approach is to create a "first available slot" procedure for these folks (ie, they get offered returned slots before they are made available on the public waiting list, and at the "awarded slot" price (a $25 discount off the waitlist price). Based on history, this would mean they always get slots if they want them.
I'd be interested in hearing what USPSA members think of this idea before the March 7-8 board meeting in Dallas.
I wasn’t going to post this discussion because I’ve already written a letter to the USPSA President about it and was planning to write the Area directors. However, since Rob said he’d like to hear opinions, here is goes.
This is the current slot policy:
http://www.uspsa-nationals.org/archive/2007 Slot policy.pdf
Keeping it simple, if you win your class (M-D) or finish High Lady, Senior, Super Senior, or Junior at your Area (regional) match, you earn a slot to the following year’s Nationals. If your division has 100 or more competitors, second in class would also earn a slot.
They also acknowledge the first six Level III matches of the year, referred to as “Other” matches. Among these are Sectionals and ones like SummerBlast. Finishing in the top 3 overall will earn you a slot there.
From the Nationals, the biggest match in the country, the following earn slots: Top 16, Top 8 Ladies, and High Junior. Class winners are not invited back and the High Senior and Super Senior are not invited back.
The real question is simple. It has to do with the principle behind such a policy. Do you think that a class winner at an Area match is more deserving of a slot than the class winner from the Nationals? If so why?
Needless to say Nationals are much longer, harder, and consist of better shooters than Area matches. It is obvious to me and everyone I have spoken to that first in line for earned slots should be those that placed highest in the category at the largest match of the year, not those that placed highest, or sometimes second highest, in the category in some of the middle-sized matches of the year.
I would like to know if Rob, as the Area director, agrees on the principle part.
As for the other part, “where should these slots come from?” That is confusing. My initial gut says, I don’t know, that’s why I don’t hold an office. As just a member of relatively few years, I don’t know if my role should be coming up with such a policy. However, that doesn’t mean I can’t spot a problem when I see one.
My attempt at coming up with an answer for that part is that it should come down to looking at the policy and looking at the pool of possible invitees and asking who justified their invitation. I can’t see how you can say a Nationals class winner didn’t do that. So the question is really “who earned the slots”, not “where should these slots come from?”
Any input would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Steve Lyons