Stage Weighting

The current IPSC scoring system causes much confusion to many people. A question we sometimes hear after we publish the Postal Match results goes something like this:

“I beat my friend Bob in the Postal Match, so how come you have him listed higher than me?”

What usually happens here is that the local club scores the match and publishes the results. But the match is incomplete. When their score sheets are sent in to IPSC and scored with all the others, the relative positions can (and often do) change.

How can that be? It can be explained in two words: Stage Weighting.

The current scoring system does not simply add up factors from all the stages to arrive at match results. Instead, the stages are weighted according to the maximum target points that can be scored in each stage. Those maximum target points are awarded to the winner of each stage, and the rest of the competitors get points in proportion to the winner. (See rule 9.2.2.2)

One of the side effects of this scheme is that the outcome of the match cannot be known for certain until all the scores are completed.

A Simple Example

Here is a very simple example to illustrate how stage weighting can alter the outcome of a match. For the purposes of illustration, there are only two stages in the match.

Stage 1 has 4 targets and is worth 40 stage points.
Stage 2 has 8 targets and is worth 80 stage points.

The scores in this example are contrived to make the math simple.

Joe Beats Bob

Bob and Joe are shooting buddies. They get to shoot the match early. Interim results are calculated and scored after they finish shooting. Joe is very pleased to see that he beat his friend Bob.

The results look like this:

Stage 1

Name	Points	Time	Factor	Stage Points
Bob	40	5	8	40
Joe	30	15	2	10

Stage 2

Name	Points	Time	Factor	Stage Points
Joe	80	10	8	80
Bob	60	20	3	30

Match

Name	Stage Points
Joe	90
Bob	70

Along Comes Sam

Later in the day, along comes Sam Hoser to shoot the match. True to form, Sam zeros the first stage and aces the second. Final results are scored and published. They now look like this:

Stage 1

Name	Points	Time	Factor	Stage Points
Bob	40	5	8	40
Joe	30	15	2	10
Sam	0	0	0	0

Stage 2

Name	Points	Time	Factor	Stage Points
Sam	80	5	16	80
Joe	80	10	8	40
Bob	60	20	3	15

Match

Name	Stage Points
Sam	80
Bob	55
Joe	50

Bob Beats Joe

Joe now finishes below Bob, because Sam has altered the outcome with his blazing run of stage 2.

The example illustrates how this happens. The spread of stage points between Joe and Bob in stage 2 was diluted from 50 down to 25. That was enough for Bob to move ahead of Joe in the match results.

The Lesson

With the current scoring system, the expression “It ain't over till it's over” applies to IPSC more than any other sport. Bear that in mind the next time you look at interim results.

Return to IPSC Home Page

Last updated Saturday, June 21 2003 at 02:08:37 PM EDT