Stage Difficulty Rating System

[Jack Master]

Is it possible to develop a stage difficulty rating? (SR for Stage Rating)​

I see this being helpful for match directors, competitors and mostly new shooters, but then again, I'm a numbers guy so maybe it just helps me. This is me thinking out loud (or typing quietly in my office... welcome to my brain)

Before we get started; I do understand this will never be a truly fair system for rating a match or comparing one match to another. There will always be variables that affect the difficulty of a match like wind, weather, Terrain, match layout, barricade wibbly-ness and many other things. I mostly want to focus on just the Stage rating for this post rather than a match rating. If the stage rating starts to work we could look at a match rating system.

As a shooter this could be used to evaluate what your level of shooting is. Its a metric to measure growth. Its a way to look back at a match and figure out what you need to work on to get better. Similar to what @ChrisWay is doing to evaluate the shooter's capability maybe we can couple this the stage difficulty to understand what we suck at.

As a match director its also a way to know if your match is harder than last year. Maybe last year you had a 70% hit rate by the winner of your match and you can now evaluate how or where to make the match easier/harder next year. Maybe there becomes a target combined or average Stage Rating number to try to get when designing match.

We have about 7 different variables to take into account when looking at a stage. I hope we should be able to get a fairly good idea of the stage rating by just reading the stage description. Picking out these variable is usually pretty clear. The variables are : #shots, #Postions, #targets, Yardage, Target Size, Time and "Other". These could be broke into 3 categories;
1. Shooter - # shots, # Positions, # targets - These are things that take time to complete.
2. Targets - Yardage and Target size - These are what drive Precision and you might say wind calling.
3. Competition - Stage time and "other" - These the the restraints added by the match director.

Here is how I define each of these pieces.​

# Shots - How many rounds for the stage. (12 round more difficult than 8)
# Positions - How many positions you have to move between. (5 positions is harder than 2)
# Targets - How many targets you have to transition through. For this the targets need to be at different yardages or different angles to the shooter. Its adding weight for the need to adjust the sight direction (target acquisition and fundamentals) and or change the scope dials (or hold over). 2 targets at the same distance in the same direction is only considered 1 target for this factor like A KYL rack with 5 plates would be 1 target. (4 target transitions/dials is harder than 2)
Yardage - How far are the targets. I propose to use an average here. (Targets at 800yds are harder then 300 yds. [if they are a the same size]).
Target size - How big/small are the targets in MOA. I suggest using an average here as well. 1.5 MOA targets are harder to hit than 2 MOA targets.
Time - How much time for each stage. Maybe using more of less than 90 seconds as a start.
Other - This is if the match director throws something extra in the stage. Random target order, no bags, requires a tripod, ranging on the clock, mag changes, etc. This is a scale factor That is a bit arbitrary meaning everyone might come up with a different number to slightly adjust the Stage Rating #

Including more of these variables in to the stage evaluation will create a more accurate stage rating, but maybe having 7 variables is too much to keep track of. This is where I would like your help. How many of these variable do we need to use to get a good idea of the stage difficulty. Also remembering not not all of these variable are always available in the stage description such as target size.

The rating system​

We're going to use 3 examples stages to try to evaluate a couple different scoring options.
Stage 1 - Prone Troop line - 10 shots, 1 position, 5 targets, 700yd Avg distance (500,600,700,800,900), 1.5MOA targets, 120 sec, 1 Mag change required.
Stage 2 - PRS Barricade - 8 Shots, 4 Positions, 1 target, 400yds, 2MOA, 90 sec.
Stage 3 - Positional - 10 shots, 5 positions, 2 targets/transitions, 525yd avg, 1.5 MOA, 120 sec.

Here is a way to put all of these variable together on one big evaluation. This is weighing every option in to the scoring. Its slow and cumbersome but probably the most accurate.
Full Rating
Stage Rating(SR) = Shooter x Targets / Competition
Stage Rating(SR) = [(shots x Positions x Targets) x ((Avg Yards/100)/MOA)]/(Sec/120)*Other
Stage 1 = [(10*1*5)*(7/1.5)]/(120/120) = 233 SR
Stage 2 = [(8*4*2)*(4/2)]/(90/120) = 171 SR
Stage 3 = [(10*5*2)*(5.25/1.5)]/(120/120) = 350 SR

Can we remove some of the variable from the Full Rating to make rating easier?
I think the shooter portion of the equations is the base for any option. The # shots, # positions and # Targets is the idea of this game and should be in any evaluation of a stage. Here is a SR of the 3 stages for just the shooter portion:
Shooter Rating
Stage Rating(SR) = Shooter
Stage Rating(SR) = [(shots x Positions x Targets)
Stage 1 = 10*1*5 = 50 SR
Stage 2 = 8*4*2 = 64 SR
Stage 3 = 10*5*2 = 100 SR
Does this match what you thought each of these stage would rank? Troop line, then Barricade, the Positional?

Target size can be a big factor in how difficult a stage is. I would go 1 step further and say the target size could be a deciding factor for how difficult a stage is. 1 MOA targets are surly harder than 2 moa targets from any position you are shooting from. If we added the target size in the equation we get a bear bones rating system. its as simple as it can get but also starts to take into account all of the shooter and come target variables. Here are the same stages with a target size factored in:
Bear Bones
Stage Rating(SR) = Shooter/ target size
Stage Rating(SR) = (shots x Positions x Targets)/MOA
Stage 1 = (10*1*5)/1.5 = 33 SR
Stage 2 = (8*4*2)/2 = 16 SR
Stage 3 = (10*5*2)/1.5 = 67 SR
This could work because when we take into account just the target size. We should be able to remove the target distance factor because the target MOA is alreay based on distance. Do you think a 2MOA target at 300 yards as easy as a 2MOA target at 800yds? Is there an element of more difficulty in farther targets the same MOA size we need to keep in the rating? Wind is the biggest element that is being left out when the target distance is removed and we all know wind is the hardest part of this game. Farther targets require better wind calling and bigger wind holds to get on target. But then again, wind is different at every stage and event so maybe it should be removed.

How about the stage time? If feel like a 90 second stage is much harder to get more shots off. To make things easy on the time side maybe we can say a 120 sec stage is (*1) and a 90 second stage is (*1.5) this makes a 90 second stage twice as hard. Deciding on this factor rating would be a hard decision.
Bear Bones with Time
Stage Rating(SR) = Shooter/ target size * Time Factor
Stage Rating(SR) = (shots x Positions x Targets)/MOA * Time Factor
Stage 1 = (10*1*5)/1.5*1 = 33 SR
Stage 2 = (8*4*2)/2*1.5 = 48 SR
Stage 3 = (10*5*2)/1.5*1 = 67 SR
This bumps the PRS barricade to be as difficult at the troop line. If an entire match is 90 sec or 120 I don't think the time matters as much. If you try to compare stages match to match the time factor starts to matter more.

The " Other" Factor is a bit arbitrary, but it can make a big difference in a stage. If the MD makes you crawl under a table with limited space and movement while shooting off the 4 leg supports is a lot harder than moving 4 positions on a PRS barricade. This factor might always be the unknown difficulty rating and will have to be applied by the individual shooter or match director.

Bear Bone W/time is what I would use to start. What do you guys think? Is that a good starting point? Have I missed any elements? How would you rate a stage? (honest questions)

Because I'm a numbers guy I think the Full Rating is the best matric but damn, that sucks to calculate without a spreadsheet.

Maybe to help figure it out, give me your 3 stages that would be easy, Med and Hard and we'll see what rating system works best to fit.

 

[Lowlight]

We actually flushed this out pretty well, but I like where you are with it.

Several years ago, when the PRS was going through much of the same drama, people wanted to scrap it and try something else. At the time a variety of matches was just starting to pop up and not every location was deemed equal. So we wanted to rate the match, rate the stage using a set of measurements that could be replicated to the different venues.

We nailed it pretty well, but I don't remember a lot of it. Since that time I completely dropped the idea and don't know where the notes are today.

A couple of notes,

Full rates would be best

Time helps settle ties

 

[Jefe's Dope]

I like the concept. It would help to understand what you're getting into when shooting an unknown, to you, match and what you might expect. Kinda like skiing.

 

[Tree]

I’ve actually been working on this for a number of months and am currently in testing with something locally. It also helps if we ever decide to do classifications.

My current calc actually takes into consideration distance and size of target, Stability of position, wind charactistics, start in or out of position, target movement, number of positions, distance moved between positions, shots from each position and number of targets from each position.

Based on these characteristics it calculates a hit % rate which then if you look at how disk golf does it you could assign points based on how you shot the then “evenly” rank people across the world regardless of who shows up.

I am beta testing it with various local matches to see how it does.

 

[1moaoff]

Are you basig wind off of wind conditions at typical range facilities? That could vary day to day out west.

Then you have places like K&M that everyone jokes is a left edge range all day unless its weird weather for area.

Another item that would be interesting is mirage. Some ranges are killers while others not so much.

 

[Sheldon N]

Interesting concept, I think it is really tough to put together a simple but usable metric for stage difficulty. The reason being is that so many of the inputs are interdependent on each other. If you look at the reasons people miss targets, I would put them into three main categories (bad trigger pulls or mental errors aside):

Time
Stability
Wind

Time is a function of so many things. Shooter movement, target transition, the complexity of getting into the shooting position, difficulty of target ID/acquisition, number of times and how much you have to dial, how long it takes to settle in on a stable sight picture (dependent on stability and target size), whether you need to devote time on the clock to look at wind changes/mirage, and so on. The effect of time is that a shooter either 1) times out and doesn't send all their rounds or 2) rushes and misses.

Stability is pretty self explanatory but is also completely interdependent on position relative to target size and time. 1 or 1.5 MOA targets from prone are very doable, 3 MOA targets from the top of a t-post are difficult. If you add time you add the ability of shooters to increase stability, bust out the tripods and tac-tables etc. Even without extra gear, if you add time you still add stability. The shooter can relax, take a couple extra breaths, refine their position, focus on the trigger pull. If you remove time and make the shooter run around, you've got way more heart-rate, wobble and pressure making the shooting position less stable.

Wind is conditions and location dependent, interrelated to target size and the amount of variability in the wind conditions. Target positioning is also a factor. A troop line of skylined 1.5 MOA targets in a fishtailing headwind is difficult. Same troopline in a steady 12mph 3 o'clock wind with dirt berms behind is a high hit percentage stage. Again, time also plays a factor - whether you have time to slow down and watch the mirage and read the conditions for each shot.


If I look back at my matches, I would say the absolute biggest determination of difficulty is time. Time pressure drives the overall quality of your shooting downward. The PRS skills stage is a perfect example. It's actually an easy stage, usually rock solid barricade and a very hittable target. It's only challenging at matches because it is loaded with time pressure - it's the tie-break stage. Yes, there are situations where a stage is going to create a low hit percentage... 1/2 MOA targets in switchy winds or ridiculously unstable carnival style shooting positions. However I don't think those are "difficult", they are just low hit percentage.

IMO, the sport of PRS style shooting at its core is the application of time pressure to shooting performance. How to create a metric that quantifies how much time pressure a stage puts on a shooter, that's a challenging puzzle to solve. An experienced shooter can read a stage description, look at the props and the targets, imagine their run and know that they will have plenty of time or know that they will need to hustle to get through. But turning that into a metric may require so many inputs it might become unwieldy.

 

[Jack Master]

Time
Stability
Wind

Thanks you for the response. I know this metric is going to be hard but that is why I asked the question and asked for some response about what you think makes a stage hard.

Time - I'm with you on this. Its a big driving factor for difficulty of a stage. What if we divided the "shooter" by the seconds per shot? This will take into account how quickly you will have to move and shoot. (seconds/shots) example = 120sec/10shots = 12 sec/shot.
Stage Rating(SR) = Shooter/(sec per shot)
Stage Rating(SR) = [(shots x Positions x Targets) / (sec/shots)]
Stage 1 = (10*1*5)/(120/10) = 4.2 SR
Stage 2 = (8*4*2)/(90/8) = 2.8 SR
Stage 3 = [(10*5*2)/(120/10) = 8.3 SR

Stability - this is location/prop dependent. Yes. time and target size will come in factor with stability too. This needs to fall under the "competition" area as an "other" factor that the stage designer can apply to the overall stage rating. Wobbly barricades, tight spaces, Ranging on the clock, etc. Anything like this will be on the designer to add a 1.2-1.5 or x2 multiplier to the over all stage score. Unfortuanlty its not something we will be able to evaluate in the base equation.

If we wanted to take the one part of this stability part we can evaluate is going to be the target MOA and distance. If we divide the Average range by the target MOA can give us an idea of how difficult the target package is. (# of targets is already in the shooter # to take into account transitions or dials)
if we multiply the above stage ratings by the target number we get
Stage Rating(SR) = Shooter/(sec per shot)*target
Stage Rating(SR) = [(shots x Positions x Targets) / (sec/shots)] x ((avg yds/100)/ MOA)
Stage 1 = (10*1*5)/(120/10)*(700/100)/1.5= 19.4 SR
Stage 2 = (8*4*2)/(90/8)*(400/100)/2 = 5.7 SR
Stage 3 = [(10*5*2)/(120/10)*(525/100)/1.5 = 29.2 SR
I feel like this is a good evaluation and the number is small. you could even eliminate the decimal to make it easier, but eh equation is long.

Wind - Yes, wind is a factor in the shooting. Wind is not a factor in stage design. I have no intention to include wind in this number at all. This one variable we just need to accept is not Quantifiable so its eliminated.

Here is where we end up
Stage Rating(SR) = [(shots x Positions x Targets) / (sec/shots)] x ((avg yds/100)/ MOA)

 

[JBoomhauer]

One very important thing to consider is target backdrop.

Is it dry dirt, wet dirt, short grass, long grass or foliage.

 

[Jack Master]

One very important thing to consider is target backdrop.

Is it dry dirt, wet dirt, short grass, long grass or foliage.

Nah. I'd leave that out. We can't define it. It might effect your score but does it effect how hard it is to actually shoot the stage? Just like wind. We can't define it.

I guess that is the number I am after "how hard is it to shoot the stage" This has nothing to do with what you score on a stage.

 

[JBoomhauer]

Nah. I'd leave that out. We can't define it. It might effect your score but does it effect how hard it is to actually shoot the stage? Just like wind. We can't define it.

I guess that is the number I am after "how hard is it to shoot the stage" This has nothing to do with what you score on a stage.

I would say it does effect the difficulty of the stage, not just the score.

I also agree with you that it is near impossible to define.

 

[Tree]

Having been through some of the same struggles creating one of these. Take your stage 2. The calculation would result in no difference of difficulty between a prone version and a version where the stage is shot from a t-post. However I would guess one is significantly more difficult than the other.
Some additional thoughts, a stage where there are multiple positions and multiple targets is not a linear difficulty as type of position and shots per position matters.
A 10 position 1 shot each vs 5 2 shots each in 90 seconds do not have the same difficulty.
in regards to wind while you may not be able to calculate it to the MPH you can use broad based characteristics to use in a calculation.