Welcome, Guest. Please Login
SLINGING.ORG
 
Home Help Search Login


Poll closed Poll
Question: Favorite Target Sling Length
*** This poll has now closed ***


18-20”    
  1 (5.6%)
20-22”    
  2 (11.1%)
22-24”    
  1 (5.6%)
24-26”    
  6 (33.3%)
24-26”    
  1 (5.6%)
26-28”    
  5 (27.8%)
28-30”    
  1 (5.6%)
32-34”    
  0 (0.0%)
34-36”    
  0 (0.0%)
Other, please specify    
  1 (5.6%)




Total votes: 18
« Created by: Morphy on: Apr 4th, 2021 at 10:37am »

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 
Send Topic Print
Max Accuracy Scoring Thread (Read 7277 times)
Archaic Arms
Funditor
****
Offline


Testing and inventing
"Archaic" weapons.

Posts: 591
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #105 - Nov 29th, 2021 at 9:21am
 
Morphy wrote on Nov 29th, 2021 at 8:55am:
But going from 14.2 at 20 meters to 100% accuracy over 10 shots at 100 meters might be too much to ask of anyone.

In hindsight, 5m increase per rank would perhaps be better.

Keeping the target the same size, for each increasing rank, both the distance and score requirements should increase. i.e 5 points at 5m, 10 points at 10m, etc (again, everything is up for debate).
The difficulty would not increase linearly, but I don't think that's a problem. (Using ADI system)

I agree, the top levels still have to be humanly possible, to not be a joke, but I still think that several hits (debatable how many) at ADI 100, would satisfactorily justify the top rank.
One other thought regarding the ranking system is that stars could be used in conjunction with the names. For example: NOVICE *, BEGINNER **, APPRENTICE ***, and so on. This would make the system much easier to see and understand, and would look nice on a shirt (if it goes that far).




I'll ponder some more...
Back to top
 

Regards,
Lewis.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Morphy
Slinging.org Moderator
*****
Offline


Checkmate

Posts: 7883
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #106 - Nov 29th, 2021 at 11:06am
 
ADI 100 could work. It reminds me of Korean Traditional Archery where the target is set at 145ms and the day a person lands all 5 arrows on the target is considered a great feat and doesnt happen very often at all.

I agree that 5m increments would still present a suitable challenge. You will still need proper spin control at that distance. So 50 would be the top distance? Thats still a very challenging distance. I used to practice daily at 40 so yes 50 would definitely be master level based on what I experienced.

How are we doing the point system? What do you have in mind? Is it one hit per point? Is this a typical Balearic target with Quattro and Diana 1 and 2 point system? 

Lastly I love the idea of stars near the name. What do you think about using something like ^ for the 1st 5 and stars for the second 5? That way you wouldnt have to count out everyones stars that has a lot of stars. It would be instantly apparent where they are. Anyways just a thought.
Back to top
 

"I think this guy is the king of trolls of the forum, he waited 16 years just to say this. please pay your respects in an orderly fashion."-Sarosh
 
IP Logged
 
Archaic Arms
Funditor
****
Offline


Testing and inventing
"Archaic" weapons.

Posts: 591
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #107 - Nov 29th, 2021 at 5:31pm
 
Okay, here's what I've come up with...
(The target is the 50cm Balearic Diana, without the board)

NOVICE I                    2/10 HITS, at 5M
BEGINNER II              2/10 HITS, at 10M
APPRENTICE III         3/10 HITS, at 15M
JOURNEYMAN IV        4/10 HITS, at 20M
COMPETANT V            5/10 HITS, at 25M
ADEPT VI                   6/10 HITS, at 30M
PROFICIENT VII         7/10 HITS, at 35M
EXPERT VII                8/10 HITS, at 40M
ACE IX                      9/10 HITS, at 45M
MASTER X               10/10 HITS, at 50M

(Keep in mind the names and numbers are not set in stone at all)

I think a lot of people would feel satisfied being able to rise a few ranks, with the top ranks representing an a great level of skill, while still being realistic.

I like your suggestion Morphy regarding the stars, but an alternative could be Roman numerals, which achieve the same but with a different elegance.

On a slightly different note,
I did read somewhere that in the Balearics during the old days, they used to sling at the diana + board target from 60m, but in recent times they halved the distance.

Back to top
« Last Edit: Nov 30th, 2021 at 5:45am by Archaic Arms »  

Regards,
Lewis.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mersa
Interfector Viris Spurii
*****
Offline


Druid

Posts: 2326
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #108 - Nov 29th, 2021 at 8:41pm
 
Ok I like what’s happening here however there are some traits in this scoring system that need to be addressed.

Firstly ammo. Taking into consideration that everything else is basically standardised I think ammo should be. Or at least discussed. Hitting 10/10 Diana’s @ 50m is impressive regardless of ammo. But I do think that hitting 5/10 @ 25 some ammo is going to be easier than others.
I think that ammo size must be restricted to a maximum of tennis ball diameter.

Also this ranking system really isn’t going to be favoured by certain people. Those without space to throw rocks @50m will have little hope of ever getting in practice for longer distances. I think the system is favoured to people that have space . I can’t see kick or nooc getting enough practice in at those distances but both I consider good slingers.

Also a jump in distance and Diana’s at the same time kinda accelerated the grade. So each step is actually bigger than it seems .

All in all I kinda like where it’s headed but I still feel Morphy’s original 20 throw with minimum 4 hits on target has more “proof” of a Slingers ability. 10 throws on a standardised target size is actually much better for days when your in the zone .

Judging myself against the current grades I doubt I’m even a level 5 . At least not every day .

I think a normal score of 10 throws on a baleric target shows enough in a Slingers skill. I average around 10 points at13m with my best scores around 17 .  A perfect 10/10 Diana’s in a real round is difficult even close range .

Also I feel graded are kinda pointless at this stage of slinging. Just because the sport has such a small community I think those who film and show their slinging are probably known by the others in tho community anyway and we all probably grade ourselves against each other anyway in some way.
Back to top
 

Razor glandes, Aim for the eyes!!!
 
IP Logged
 
Morphy
Slinging.org Moderator
*****
Offline


Checkmate

Posts: 7883
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #109 - Nov 29th, 2021 at 11:59pm
 
Ok some good points on both posts. We have two different view points here. I think we need more people to see this and give their opinions.

I totally get the long range question but I think this could be said with most hard to achieve goals. A black belt in BJJ requires many years of sacrifice in time, money, blood, sweat and injuries. But people that want the title bad enough eventually get it. People practicing to get their Grandmaster in chess typically spend 10 hours a day every day practicing and studying.

So actually I think any title of Master is only as desirable as it is difficult to get. I hate the idea of excluding anyone but I think this concept of difficulty to desirability is pretty universal.

I understand where you are coming from with the 10/10 hits at 50 Mersa Im not sure what I think yet. I almost think i need to hear more viewpoints to gauge the consensus. I do think there is a real danger of us setting the bar too low but Im not sure where that sweet spot is either. This is, imo, *the* question that should require a big consensus. So long as people can be really forward thinking. This system isnt just for now. Its for decades from now ideally.

All in all the system laid out by AA is very well thought out. I personally would love to hear more opposing viewpoints and see what the over all consensus is.
Back to top
 

"I think this guy is the king of trolls of the forum, he waited 16 years just to say this. please pay your respects in an orderly fashion."-Sarosh
 
IP Logged
 
Archaic Arms
Funditor
****
Offline


Testing and inventing
"Archaic" weapons.

Posts: 591
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #110 - Nov 30th, 2021 at 9:24am
 
Mersa wrote on Nov 29th, 2021 at 8:41pm:
Firstly ammo. Taking into consideration that everything else is basically standardised I think ammo should be. Or at least discussed. Hitting 10/10 Diana’s @ 50m is impressive regardless of ammo. But I do think that hitting 5/10 @ 25 some ammo is going to be easier than others.
I think that ammo size must be restricted to a maximum of tennis ball diameter.

I agree, there are areas of consideration that haven't yet been fully discussed, and this one of them. My opinion is that any 'live' ammo should be valid i.e stones, clay, lead.

Mersa wrote on Nov 29th, 2021 at 8:41pm:
Also a jump in distance and Diana’s at the same time kinda accelerated the grade. So each step is actually bigger than it seems .

This is also for a reason, as I think it should be rewarding to both newcomers and very experienced slingers. The very experienced slingers not being warded off by the necessary
dedication and determination, required to get the higher ranks. The more invested you become in something, the harder you fight for it. Like Morphy said, it shouldn't be at all easy to get to the top.
Hence why so many games make each successive level significantly longer/more difficult to achieve. Not linear by any means.
Mersa wrote on Nov 29th, 2021 at 8:41pm:
All in all I kinda like where it’s headed but I still feel Morphy’s original 20 throw with minimum 4 hits on target has more “proof” of a Slingers ability. 10 throws on a standardised target size is actually much better for days when your in the zone .

My policy is that by all means you can cherry pick those 10 shots, but if everyone is allowed to, then it balances itself out. Only skill will get you forward ultimately.
Mersa wrote on Nov 29th, 2021 at 8:41pm:
Judging myself against the current grades I doubt I’m even a level 5 . At least not every day

5 is very good by todays standard, but if we made that an expert rank, where's the room for improvement as slinging grows and standards get higher?

Mersa wrote on Nov 29th, 2021 at 8:41pm:
Also I feel graded are kinda pointless at this stage of slinging. Just because the sport has such a small community I think those who film and show their slinging are probably known by the others in tho community anyway and we all probably grade ourselves against each other anyway in some way.

Yes the community is small, but it's quickly growing and I think it's better to have something well established to help things along the way. I think it would also add a bit of extra fun and friendly competition as well, for people of all skill levels. This is what Hallofo (newcomer) said in the other thread regarding a ranking system:
" Hi all,
New-to-slinging person here. I just wanted to chime in and express my support of this scoring/ranking system. As I begin my journey, I look forward to seeing how I improve and develop!"

I think this sentiment is/would probably be more common than we like to think.
Back to top
 

Regards,
Lewis.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Archaic Arms
Funditor
****
Offline


Testing and inventing
"Archaic" weapons.

Posts: 591
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #111 - Nov 30th, 2021 at 9:28am
 
Just thought I'd throw this out there too...
Three more potential names, which could be added or used in the place of others.
CHAMPION
HERO
LEGEND
Roll Eyes
Perhaps the context has also shifted such that this discussion should be moved in the "New Ranking System" thread instead? https://slinging.org/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1636466610/45
Back to top
« Last Edit: Nov 30th, 2021 at 12:19pm by Archaic Arms »  

Regards,
Lewis.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
NooneOfConsequence
Interfector Viris Spurii
*****
Offline



Posts: 2864
Texas
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #112 - Nov 30th, 2021 at 9:51am
 
I think any labels for ranks come with language barriers and unnecessary arguments about which labels are better for which ranks. Instead of arbitrary labels with an absolute ceiling on performance, I would prefer a numerical system where there is no absolute ceiling… the higher the number, the better the slinger did on the test, and leave it at that.

Even better if the test is designed to minimalize luck so the rank is indicative of the slinger’s regular performance.
Back to top
 

“My final hour is at hand. We face an enemy more numerous and cunning than the world has yet seen. Remember your training, and do not fear the hordes of Judas. I, without sin, shall cast the first stone. That will be your sign to attack! But you shall not fight this unholy enemy with stones. No! RAZOR GLANDES!  Aim for the eyes! May the Lord have mercy, for we shall show none!“  -Jesus the Noodler
 
IP Logged
 
IronGoober
Interfector Viris Spurii
*****
Online


...and now, No. 1, the
larch...

Posts: 1135
California
Gender: male
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #113 - Nov 30th, 2021 at 1:11pm
 
I like the idea of a numbering system over named levels, as long as the number is somehow included in the rank, the names could be anything, "I Snail", "II Turkey" "III Thumbtack" Smiley

But as far as the requirements, I like what has been discussed so far. Making the top level hard to achieve even for people of a skill from historical accounts seems reasonable to me. I don't mind chasing the impossible dream of becoming accurate with a sling.
Back to top
 

John R.
 
IP Logged
 
Archaic Arms
Funditor
****
Offline


Testing and inventing
"Archaic" weapons.

Posts: 591
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #114 - Nov 30th, 2021 at 2:41pm
 
IronGoober wrote on Nov 30th, 2021 at 1:11pm:
I like the idea of a numbering system over named levels, as long as the number is somehow included in the rank, the names could be anything, "I Snail", "II Turkey" "III Thumbtack" Smiley

But as far as the requirements, I like what has been discussed so far. Making the top level hard to achieve even for people of a skill from historical accounts seems reasonable to me. I don't mind chasing the impossible dream of becoming accurate with a sling.


NooneOfConsequence wrote on Nov 30th, 2021 at 9:51am:
I think any labels for ranks come with language barriers and unnecessary arguments about which labels are better for which ranks. Instead of arbitrary labels with an absolute ceiling on performance, I would prefer a numerical system where there is no absolute ceiling… the higher the number, the better the slinger did on the test, and leave it at that.


I'm content with doing away with any names if that is the general consensus. Lvl.I, Lvl.II, Lvl.III etc. would work just the same, and avoid language barriers.
Theoretically if people became truly exceptional, the system could accommodate levels above 10, but I don't think that would ever become a real concern. (due to how difficult Lvl.X is)
Back to top
 

Regards,
Lewis.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Morphy
Slinging.org Moderator
*****
Offline


Checkmate

Posts: 7883
Re: Max Accuracy Scoring Thread
Reply #115 - Nov 30th, 2021 at 3:52pm
 
NooneOfConsequence wrote on Nov 30th, 2021 at 9:51am:
Even better if the test is designed to minimalize luck so the rank is indicative of the slinger’s regular performance.


This is essential I think. This is one reason I advocate for doing it multiple times over multiple sessions within the same week.
Back to top
 

"I think this guy is the king of trolls of the forum, he waited 16 years just to say this. please pay your respects in an orderly fashion."-Sarosh
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 
Send Topic Print
(Moderators: Morphy, Rat Man, Chris, Kick, Curious Aardvark, vetryan15)