jhgtyre

You kids and your new fangled GUI's. At least you reverted to a real command line interface to take care of the important stuff.

All I've got to say is.... well, I don't want to talk about...

On my 625 and 627 I've replaced my fancy wood grips with the X-Frame grip from Hogue. It covers the backstrap and provides a good cushion for the major pf loads I shoot in the 625. Hogue's site says they are good to go on a variety of grip frame sizes https://www.hogueinc.com/grips/smith-wesson/xzframe/s-w-k-l-n-x-z-frame-round-butt-rubber-conversion-monogrip-black

She reminds me of Imelda May

Locked it is. I hid a couple of posts that violated forum rules. Next time I'll do more than just lock the thread.

In my old house (where my kids grew up) I know exactly where you have to place the target trap and where you have to stand to shoot 10m air rifle.

I'd much rather see them test a wide range of factory offerings and then adjust the power factor to match their findings. It's way too easy to show up with a box of "factory" ammo that isn't what the label says it is just to get out of having to chrono. IDPA lowered the PF for revo down to 105 and I think that is a bit more in tune with factory offerings.

Name calling will get the thread locked and, if necessary, result in further action towards the offending member(s). Keep it within the guidelines when posting.

Okay so this MIGHT be how you could say the inside edge of a 2x4 was the fault line; you paint it. This creates a simpler version of the crazy fault line painting story that rowdyb related up above. I added the bold emphasis below. So you paint one edge of a 2x4 (or whatever legal sized board you want) stake it down and declare that the paint, not the board, is the fault line. It seems controlling (for little reason other than to be controlling) but that is how you could state that this scenario is legal. Given the wording in the rule you could also apply tape to the 2x4 to create your fault line. Why you would create this extra work for yourself is beyond me but you could do it.

Supply rule numbers supporting your assertion Joe4d.

3.6 States: C. A shooter who engages a target while faulting the line (which is defined as the shooter touching the ground or other objects on the non-cover side of the fault line) shall be assessed a PE. So it sounds like you can stand on the 2x4. I don't see anything in the rules that says you can decide the fault line is just the inside of a board but I do see rules defining how wide the board used as a fault line can be.

A good attitude and one we should stick with so this thread can remain open.

That could be Taran but I think I've actually found him:

Please note the highlighted sections in the above quotation. Closed.

I've said this both jokingly and, maybe not so jokingly, on more than one occasion. I see way too many RO's, experienced and inexperienced, who could use a reminder of this and not just when running PCC.

I haven't been a big fan of the Postal Match in years past but the stages look good this year. I like the pics and setup info.

You can chose to take it to the absurd if you like but that isn't what I said. The individual shooter doesn't have to listen to your reading of the stage briefing if they don't want to.

When I RO unless the shooter is distracting other shooters who are trying to pay attention to the stage briefing I ignore them. If they are distracting other shooters in any way I ask them to please be respectful of those who are trying to pay attention. They paid their match fee so let them be. When I'm the shooter I usually want to hear the stage description but not always. I've usually read it several times prior to your reading and, sometimes, I might feel like doing something else while you read. I try not to bug anyone who is listening to or attempting to ask questions of the CRO.

Oh, well, you had a PUMP, you WERE LUCKY! We had to use a blow gun with naught but spitballs to nudge the ballistic pendulum and hope to God that we made power factor lest we be relegated to shooting PCC with the toffs and fairies! (no, wait, that might be more recent...)

Or pretty much anything with Charles Bronson.

You can round dump now so there may well be a target that "needs" three, instead of just 2, so you can make your SLR happen at a more beneficial time. Even so I've considered running 9+1 at quite a few matches lately for many of the same reasons already stated.

It was terrible. On the plus side it did make a lot of other series finales seem just a little bit less terrible.