Well that title is actually a bit grand for this article, I just wanted to give some of my thoughts on the subject. The Normalized Performance Average system is a classification system being looked at by the NSCA as a possible replacement for the punch system. The NPA is an averages system that attempts to account for the varying degree of difficulty of targets that are registered by NSCA shooters at different clubs in different parts of the country. This is done by "normalizing" your averages against the HOA score of a particular competition. The theory being that the lower the HOA score the more difficult the targets were.
Personally I think an averages system is the best system for sporting clay classifications. I was a member of the NSCA way back when they used a raw averages system. I served my time in "N" class before being classified into C (where I stayed for an eon but that’s a different story). Back then I remember the punch system was sold to me as an anti sandbagging measure. I’m not saying the NSCA ever said that, but that is what a lot of my fellow shooters believed. I never thought sand bagging or cheating was a real problem and I still don’t. Sure, it happens but it’s just not a major widespread problem that we need to worry ourselves silly about. We just need to address it if it comes up.
What the naysayers of the NPA or any averages system fail to comprehend is the inherent chaos of the sport. Most NSCA shooters are wildly inconsistent, it’s a fact. I suspect this is where most of the perceived sand bagging comes from. It’s quite normal for shooters to have 10 or more bird swings in their scores from time to time. Keep track of it, it happens…all the time. Sometimes you have a really good day no matter the target difficulty and other times you shoot poorly, no matter the target difficulty. All of the negative scenarios being written about on internet bulletin boards assume that there will be consistent performance by party X and also by party Y which just isn’t true.
If you don’t think averages work, I suggest you investigate what classification system almost every clay target shooting organization in the world uses, it’s averages and it works. The proof is already there. I’m of the opinion that we don’t even need to account for varying target difficulties as the NPA does because the math will work out in the end. I am not against accounting for varying target difficulties if we can but no matter what negative scenarios someone can sit around and dream up the averages will work out.
No doubt that the punch system encourages people to shoot more but does it encourage people to shoot more than an averages system? I don’t think so. The only way to improve your average is to shoot more and shoot well. What if you shoot bad a for few weeks and drive your average down? So what? You’ll get over it I’m sure and if you keep going back wards you’ll drop into a competitive class where you can win, not just be stuck at the ass end all the time. I really fail to see any problems here. We as shooters are supposed to be making honest improvements in our abilities. In a way the punch system allows you to cheat yourself and move up when you maybe haven’t really improved in ability all that much.
The punch system in some cases has even been a detriment to our sport. There are, week in and week out, club competitions where a shooter can go and spend $65-$75 and get NOTHING in return besides the shooting. I mean nothing except a punch if you win your class. You will not get any money back to class, you will not get a trophy or a prize you will not even get a lunch! You will get zip my friend and why? My questioning of these club owners has revealed in some cases that they believe all anybody really wants is a punch. Heck they might even be right judging by the number of people that still show up but I’m not going back to a shoot like that and suspect quite a few others haven’t either.
I don’t have the time to address every issue raised on the internet bulletin boards but I encourage you to judge those examples with caution and try to look at things from a larger less negative perspective. So as far as the NPA is concerned, I’m all for looking at it just as we are, to see if it works as far as compensating for course differences. Lets see what happens at years end. As far as the punch system, I’m definitely for replacing it with an averages system.
You might also like:
