jkmccoy

OK, OK, OK, According to the rule book there is NO SUCH THING as combined scores. They don't mean anything. They don't count for anything. They are meaningless. 6.2.2 - Each division shall be scored separately and independently. EZWinScore does allow calculation of combined scores and I think it is a serious flaw in the program (it isn't the most serious flaw, but it is a serious flaw nonetheless). The combined scores are meaningless (MEANINGLESS! I'd put it in one syllable words if I could). If you want to shoot against Joe X, then you need to shoot in the same division as Joe X. If you don't want to shoot the same division then you did not compete with Joe X. Is it an example of "local rules"? YES! If you print out "combined results" (although they are meaningless and unofficial) shooters expect it. I do not print combined results and I will not print combined results and I'm sick to death of shooters wanting to know "did I beat Joe X." If you didn't shoot the same division you didn't shoot the same match and the scores are calculated separately. There's another thread recently that shows why those results are not meaningful. Some stages are "Limited friendly" and others have a distinct advantage for Open shooters. The overall standings will change based on who factored which stage. You CAN'T produce useful or meaningful results based on combined scoring. If you and your buddy (who shoots a different division) want to know who won you should use the hit factors for each stage. Yes, the stage points will change based on who won the stage. That doesn't matter. Remember that combined results are UNOFFICIAL and don't mean ANYTHING! Get over it! We have divisions so that people compete against other people using similar equipment. You do NOT compete against people in other divisions. If you want to print out/see "combined" results then I can't stop you. If you come to San Angelo Gun Club you will see only Division results. Cheers, Kelly McCoy p.s. Jake, I think "Aggregate" only refers to the combination of several matches into a tournament (e.g. rifle, shotgun, and pistol matches for a 3-gun tournament). It might be difficult to win the "aggregate" for a 3-gun match in Production since there is no production division for rifle or shotgun.

No! No! No! 6.2.2!!! If you want to know how you scored against John Doe you must declare the same division as he did. (Or, you are welcome to get out your calculator and compare the hit factors.) It is NOT a convenience for your local shooters. It is an example of using "local" rules that are contradictory to the national rules. There is NO SUCH THING as "combined results" under USPSA rules. Any scorekeeper who prints out those results and presents them to shooters is violating the rules and should be fired. Go ahead, give me the example that shows it isn't against the rules. Uncle Vinnie, Help! Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Let's not get too hasty. We don't need for USPSA to abandon 3-Gun competition. We do need for USPSA to develop/adopt a useful and workable set of rules for REAL 3-Gun matches. We should definitely look at other 3-Gun matches and their rules and shamelessly borrow the good thing from their rules. Rules can be a good thing. A really good set of rules can be a great thing. At present, the best possible outcome would be for the BOD to approve and publish a set of rules far in advance of the 3-Gun Nationals. Failing that, I think it would be far preferable to publish a temporary suspension of 6.1.3 instead of drastically altering the nature of the match. (Apparently we have been ignoring this rule for years. Let's officially ignore it at least once more.) BTW...I saw Kurt M. shoot at least one USPSA 3-Gun match this year and he looked like he was having a good time despite the rules. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

6.2.2 ...each Division shall be scored separately and independently. Also, 6.2.5 I know that WinEZScore allows you to calculate "combined" results but it is against the rules. Do not do it. If shooters want to know how they scored against someone in another division they are welcome to use the hit factors and a calculator to work out the score. If Joe Blow wants to shoot against John Smith he is welcome declare the same division as John Smith. Otherwise he is shooting in a different match. The standings can change within a division if the match is scored "all divisions combined" because the individual who factors any stage may be different. Don't score "all divisions combined" it doesn't mean anything and it is against the rules!!! Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Wasn't really disagreeing with you Troy (just tryin' to keep the conversation lively!). I firmly believe in a good set of rules and following all of the rules all of the time. I had honestly missed 6.1.3. We have run a couple of big 3-gun matches with multi-gun stages with no problems and that were well received by the shooters (Heck, they were both a BLAST to shoot). It would be FAR preferable for the USPSA BOD to approve a really comprehensive and functional set of rules for multi-gun matches before the 3-Gun Nationals, but that seems fairly unlikely at this point. I do NOT believe that 6.1.3 should be allowed to radically alter the nature of the match. I would not have any serious problem with the BOD issuing a temporary (for this match only) suspension of 6.1.3 pending approval of a complete set of multi-gun rules. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Rule 6.1.3!?!? Where the heck did that come from??? I must have missed it. Mr. Amidon must also have missed it in sanctioning the Texas State 3-Gun match the last couple of years (since we obviously had several multi-gun) stages. Don't get me wrong. I am firmly in favor of a unified, comprehensive, and complete set of rules (the USPSA rule book is actually pretty good). However, persons of good sense must also be able to recognize when the rules don't/can't apply and respond appropriately (thanks Thoreau). I absolutely agree that we must have a set of rules and that we must follow the rules. Does it really result in anarchy if we suspend for one match one rule? Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Dang, You guys really need to come to West Texas occasionally. We used a Cooper tunnel for the Texas State 3-Gun (in a pistol stage). Then in our April Club match we used the same tunnel for a shotgun side match. We have Cooper tunnels fairly often out here. BTW Erik, Cooper tunnels also piss off tall shooters, shooters with bad backs, and shooters with bad knees (I guess those may have been covered under "gimpier"). That is of course my goal as a stage designer...piss off everyone. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

I gave my daughter's boyfriend a Rainbow Scallion for his birthday (yeah, I'll probably be a really cool father-in-law...if he doesn't cross me) and now he carries it all the time. Those are very nicely made and beautiful knives. The assisted opening feature is really the sh*t. I may need to get one for myself sometime, but as Wakal points out EVERYONE around here has one so there isn't much distinctiveness value. They do seem to have a high CDI (chicks dig it) factor, but I'm old and married so that doesn't do me much good. What I actually carry is an old Browning two blade folder (I think the model is the "Fin and Feather"). One long blade that locks and one short blade. I actually like a knife I can drop into my pocket and I very rarely need to open my knife instantly with one hand. I like having two blades so I can keep one really sharp and keep one for stripping wires, cutting cans, etc. The knife I carry now is actually my second of the same model. It's only about 9 years old. The first one I carried for about 15 years. The blades were still in good shape but I had nearly worn the wood scales off of the handles. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Don't let him fool you. The reason Wakal uses those heavy loads is because nothing lighter will run in the 12+ pound destructive device he uses in shotgun matches. The SAGC crew will be at the New Mexico State 3-Gun. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Man, for what seems like a fairly simple topic there has been remarkable depth in the discussion... I won't comment on the problem of L1 classes and who is eligible to teach them, but I will say that I would like to take the class but have never had the chance since there are so few classes offered (OK maybe just a little comment). I will preface my comments regarding "us vs. them" with the explanation that at most larger matches I am keeping score, not working as an RO... In this part of the world, at least, the "us vs. them" attitude is very small and is really just a problem with a very small number of RO's and a very small number of shooters. I actually really enjoy the dynamic nature of USPSA/IPSC shooting and the fact that there is often the possibility for "gaming" a stage. I design a fair number of stages for large (state championship level) matches as well as local matches and I love it when a shooter finds a way to shoot the stage that I didn't consider. I consider it a badge of honor when good shooters shoot my stage in different ways. As a shooter, when I approach a stage and I want to shoot it in a manner that is markedly different than the other shooters (and maybe a little gamey) I warn the RO that I am going to... It would eliminate a lot of problems if all shooters did the same. But, we must apply all the rules consistently! We must apply all the rules at local matches as well as larger matches. If a shooter's approach to a stage is within the rules we must allow it. If it is not within the rules we must disallow it (whether the shooter is a D-class shooter at a local match, or a GM at a national match). The vast majority of the RO's I work with in this area approach their job with exactly this attitude. I have never encountered an RO who I felt was "out to get me". OTOH I know the rules and when the RO applies the rules correctly I agree with them. There is occasionally a certain amount of trouble with shooters who do not know the rules. It would help us all a LOT if the shooters would all read the rule book before attending a match, even if they don't take an L1 course. Aw Heck! I'm just preaching to the choir here. I doubt that there is anyone on this forum adding to the "us vs. them" attitude either as a shooter or an RO. We're all setting a good example by enforcing all of the rules correctly when we are RO's and as shooters by following the rules and being polite when they are enforced. Personally I think that is the only way to minimize the conflict. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

I learned to shoot with my left (non-dominant) eye closed. When I started competing I discovered that keeping my eye closed for long periods added way too much strain and I shot for a long time with a patch/blinder over my left eye. That works fine for slow fire sports where I don't have to move, but is not practical for USPSA shooting. So I tried the tape thing. I'm down to using a small (~ 1/2 inch) piece of scotch tape on the left lens of my glasses. Without the tape I see two sets of sights and although I can figure out which one to aim with it slows me down. Although I am right eye dominant, I suspect that the dominance is not real strong and I can't easily focus on the image from my right eye alone. The small piece of tape gives me most of my peripheral vision and depth perception for close things (loading magazines, etc.). The tape does block out one set of sights and really helps my shooting. For me, the input from my left eye is just distracting. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Grip Safety? What the heck's a grip safety? You mean that loose piece of metal in the back of the grip that kind of rattles around? Is that supposed to do something? Cheers,

You don't understand? Really? Do you not understand, or do you not wish to admit that you understand? It is possible to understand the reaction without agreeing with the reaction. There are a remarkable number of people out there who are not intelligent enough nor sufficiently well educated to make reasonable decisions about a lot of things (e.g. what should we have for dinner). However, we live in a democratic/capitalistic society. If it makes money or it gains votes it will be promoted. The paintball/guns issue is just a small example... I'm confident that the majority of the participants in this forum understand that there is NO evidence that legal restrictions on the private ownership of firearms reduces crime. But, with the increasing urbanization of our society there is an increasing number of people who have little or no personal experience with firearms. With no personal appreciation of shooting sports these people are easily convinced that the societal ills they see are because guns are available for private ownership. Those people are not responding to reasonable, logical arguments (and they will never respond to those arguments). It is easy to convince these people (who have neither the capacity nor the desire to achieve a reasoned and logical view of the world) that the problems they experience are the result of firearms. Blaming the problems of society on firearms relieves these people of any responsibility for those problems. They don't need to teach their children proper values. They don't need to teach their children the value of education. They don't need to teach their children that criminal behavior will not be tolerated. Society's response to violence is baffling. We decry the injury and damage caused through criminal behavior, but steep our children in all manner of violent behavior. TV, movies, video games are all FULL of violent and criminal behavior. I believe that none of these are to blame for social problems. I think that I am perfectly capable of controlling what my children see and I am capable of teaching them that some of the things they see on TV are not appropriate in the real world. Too many people are abdicating the responsibilities of parenthood. They are willing to let their children watch anything and/or play any video games. They refuse to teach their children proper codes of behavior and then when the children break the law they blame the kids' behavior on Hollywood. The social values protrayed in popular media are totally SCREWED UP. Because it might sell more advertising the media pander to the lowest possible denominator. There are far more unintelligent/uneducated people out there than there are intelligent/educated so the capitalist media system will promote values and items that will appeal to the lowest strata of our society. I'd like to relate a personal obervation of how incredibly messed up we are... I watched an "uncut" version of the Mel Gibson movie "Braveheart" on network television several months ago. This movie had been heavily advertised on the network for several weeks as being "uncut". I don't recall the original rating, but it was apparently something that would not be allowed on television. The movie contained many scenes of graphic violence (limbs being severed, bodies being pierced, blood spurting, etc) that were indeed shown uncut. There was no editing of those scenes. There was one scene where Mel Gibson's character makes love to his wife late at night on a riverbank. It was not a graphic scene, copulation did not occur on screen. It was generally a very tender and loving scene and the presentation was artistic. But, when Mel Gibson's character removed his wife's blouse her breasts were blurred out. (None of the violence was blurred.) WHAT are we teaching our children???? It's OK to watch bloody and gory violence, but you can't see married people expressing their love for each other??? It's OK for our children to watch (uncut) people killing each other in gross and violent fashion but it isn't OK for our children to watch a married couple expressing their love for each other??? Think about what it would mean to your children if it was real, not just on television... How bad would it be for your kids to walk into the room... A. While you and your partner were in bed making love. B. While you were stabbing your partner to death with a butcher knife. There is no hope! There are too many stupid people in the world and they are producing offspring much faster than the intelligent people. Our society just rewards people for refusing to be educated or seeking employment. The best you can hope for is that complete breakdown of society will happen after you are gone. Cheers?? Kelly McCoy

Research biologists (such as myself) actually like lawyers. In fact, we are currently looking into methods to involve more lawyers in biological research. Current plans are to replace all laboratory rats with lawyers. Although this may seem like an outrageous suggestion there are numerous arguments that support the use of lawyers instead of lab rats in most experiments: 1) Lawyers are much more common than lab rats. 2) You don't get attached to lawyers. 3) There are some things you just can't get a rat to do.

Ah yes, The SAGC stage design crew is truly dangerous when we get together and brainstorm stages together. I want clay pigeons on a mover behind walls with small ports. I suspect that next year shooters will see another set of truly innovative stages designed to really test the shooters' ability. The results have been posted on the SAGC web page Texas State 3-Gun Results Kelly McCoy San Angelo Gun Club

I will confidently provide the same weather prediction that I provided for a shooter who asked (last year) what we could expect for the match weekend (possibilities in West Texas in April, provided in jest - but too real to be funny).... It will be between 30 and 100 degrees F during the day. It will be sunny, cloudy, or some combination. If will probably be windy but it might not. It will rain, sleet, snow, hail, or not. There may (or may not) be tornadoes, thunderstorms, lightning or hurricanes. Dress appropriately. Cheers, Kelly McCoy p.s. The range is actually quite weatherproof and unless the weather is life-threatening we will be shooting.

Vince, (and everyone) I don't like the idea of different targets for different guns. Let the stage designers draw up stages where on some targets the competitor has to choose which gun they will use. It is 3-Gun competition and that's part of the competition. e.g. Can you transition to your pistol (from rifle) to engage those close-range targets fast enough to overcome the disadvantage of using a rifle in close quarters through ports? We need to recognize PF. That's an integral part of USPSA/IPSC shooting. I know that many non-USPSA 3-Gun matches don't, but I think PF is a useful recognition of your gun-handling skill. Shooting a 9mm pistol is not the same as shooting a .40 or .45. Shooting a .223 rifle is not the same as shooting .308. Although it is possible (with some manual work-arounds) to score multi-gun stages correctly and recognize power factor appropriately, what we really need to make that work is a scoring program that really recognizes multi-gun stages. Don't let the computer software dictate the rules. We can write new software (or work around the old). The rules need to be written to accommodate the stages that we want to shoot! Not the stages that the software will allow us to score easily! Cheers, Kelly McCoy A42081

Yes! Yes! Yes! I think that's exactly what we need. I still want to be able to score/recognize PF appropriately. Although stage design can help (e.g. all steel with one gun) I don't want to limit stage design that much. Since there will still need to be some changes to EZWinScore (no tactical division right now) it might be possible to make some changes to allow proper scoring of PF (e.g. separate rifle/pistol/shotgun targets on the enter scores window). Cheers, Kelly McCoy

George, Absolutely! The solutions are there. The problem is not that it isn't possible to score matches appropriately, the problem is that current USPSA rules don't really allow that. I strongly suspect that many clubs are running matches that are not completely within the USPSA rules. It's fairly clear that any matches including multi-gun stages (including some previous 3-gun National matches) did not entirely conform to USPSA rules. I'm just suggesting that the new rules be written to allow the kinds of matches/stages that are already being shot. The USPSA rules committee has the opportunity to write a set of rules that will be useful to the membership and may indeed encourage new shooters to participate in USPSA matches. I hope that this time they opt for clear, useful rules instead of complex and useless rules. The "loophole" you describe, and your solution are correct. But I think that my solution (suggested by several other people) is the appropriate solution. The division for each of the single gun matches must be determined by the division declared for the aggregate. Cheers, Kelly McCoy A42081

OK, it's kind of a weak picture, but it's up there. Give me a few days and I'll find a picture of me looking appropriately fearsome while engaging multiple targets during a challenging 3-gun match (or petting a cute puppy, whatever is available). Troy, Cool! I've always wanted to wear the kilt but never had the nerve. Now I really need to have one made in the McCoy tartan. Everyone else, I can't believe you'd even ask what is under the kilt! If you don't know you don't need to know. (Why do you really want to know?) You all know the old joke about the scotsman who passed out on the way home from the pub (I can tell this joke since I'm Irish). A couple of schoolgirls found him quite incapacitated along the road and decided to check whether or not the general rumor was true. Upon lifting the kilt of the hapless scotsman they found that it was indeed true (at least in this case) that there was nothing worn beneath the kilt. Both young ladies were a bit taken aback by this revelation but one of them suggested that under the circumstances they should leave some indication of their presence. Agreering that this was a reasonable course of action, one removed her (blue) hair ribbon and tied it around the nether regions of the innebriate. When he awoke, the scotsman felt a bit of constriction "down there" and lifted the kilt to ascertain the source of the irritation. Upon observing the decoration left by the schoolgirls he declared "I don't know where you've been lad, but I see you've won first prize." Cheers, Kelly McCoy A42081

George, I agree that it is entirely possible to score multiple divisions (all five if you wish) for the single-gun matches. I still think that is a very bad idea! Shooters should not be able to gain an advantage in the aggregate by shooting a pistol division that has fewer competitors (e.g. shooting a revolver although the aggregate division is declared as Open....since no-one else in the Open divison will shoot revolver you will likely get 100% of the match points for the pistol match). The division should be declared for the aggregate results and the division for the single gun matches should be based on the division declared for the aggregate. That will require some revision of the rules (but I don't think it's unworkable). The WinEZScore work-arounds for multi-gun stages really aren't difficult. Anyone who can run WinEZScore can do it and I didn't mean to sound condescending when I said that you need a "clever stats guy." I really would be happy to explain my methods for dealing with multi-gun stages to anyone who asked. That just isn't a topic that will be likely be of widespread interest to readers of this forum. It may be that the real difference is in philosophy/viewpoint, not in rules. We can write rules to deal with any philosophy/viewpoint, but we need to determine what philosophy/viewpoint is correct. It appears to me that very few shooters enter a 3-Gun match without the assumption that the aggregate score is the important score for deciding overall finish. Let's not write a set of rules that is more complicated than necessary and that gives an unfair advantage to those persons who will expoit potential loopholes to earn a finishing position that they did not earn through their shooting ability. Cheers, Kelly McCoy

Bismarck, I have relatively small hands and shot a P14-45 in USPSA for several years. Although I understand the route of using just skateboard tape directly on the frame it seemed to have some downsides (as you mention). I took the original factory grips and used a small carving chisel to remove all the checkering from the panels and then cut pieces of skateboard tape to fit into the spaces where the checkering was. It made a really comfortable grip that was smaller than the original and still looked good (and covered the slot at the back of the trigger channel and kept in the ambi safety). Cheers, Kelly McCoy A42081

George, I'm not sure I understand. Are you agreeing with me or suggesting that we recognize divisions for each weapon? I'm not strongly opposed to including a fourth match for multigun stages, but I am strongly opposed to scoring divisions for the single gun matches separate from the division declared for the aggregate. I also don't like the suggestion of scoring everything major for multi-gun stages. It is possible to score stages correctly even in the current version of WinEZScore (although it isn't easy and requires a clever stats guy). If anyone would like to hear my solutions to multi-gun scoring maintaining the correct power factor I'd be happy to talk to you off-forum. Troy, Thanks, it seems like the solution that is closest to the feelings of the 3-gun shooters I run into. JJ, You are absolutely correct. Tactical rifles are not Open rifles. I could certainly score the rifle match with Tactical shooters in L10 division. (Since I will actually be scoring each single-gun match as a pistol match and then manually combining scores for the aggregate). I suggested using Limited and Open in each of the single-gun matches because it looked a bit easier. It won't change the standings within "Tactical" either way. The relative score will still be the same, it will just mean that in the aggregate the Tactical shooters may have (on average) slightly lower totals than the Open shooters (assuming that the additional modifications allowed in Open will provide an advantage that shows up in the scores). I think it's a wash either way. 3-Gun is THREE Guns. The scores must be based on the division declared for the aggregate. I really don't see any serious problems with defining a set of rules that will allow this to happen! Cheers, Kelly McCoy A42081

OK, the question of edge hits on plates is be a valid point. According to current USPSA rules (and according to Troy's report according to the soon to be adopted rules) if there is any hit on a plate and it does not fall that shall constitute REF. Too bad we didn't adopt Vince's language of "adequate hit". That means if a plate on a Texas Star is hit and is just hanging by one pin, and the competitor does not re-engage it and knock it off, it will be declared REF and the competitor will receive a reshoot. I don't like it much, but I can live with it. However, this thread has brought up several issues regarding "novelty" target arrays (and the Texas Star in particular) that I would like to comment on. Yes Jack, you really did stir it up. All of this over one hanging plate! We shoot the star fairly often (the club owns two and the manufacturer is a member so we can borrow more for big matches). We set them up for club matches and we've run several big matches that had at least one, often more, stars. Hundreds and hundreds of shooters have shot the Texas Star on our range with pistols and shotguns. The situation that started this thread has NOT been a problem. There has been NO problem with consistency. In fact, hasn't J. Amidon ruled that the Texas Star is sufficiently consistent to be a legal target array? I am sorry for those of you who experienced a match where the star wasn't set up correctly or you received a bum ruling (if the plate was hit and didn't fall off you should have received a reshoot), but I really don't think it is a failing of the target array (rather a failing of the running of the match). It has been suggested (although probably off topic) that the situation Jack presented is yet another reason to ban all "novelty" target arrays. All target arrays and props shall work reliably and present consistent challenges to all shooters (4.5.1). That is the responsibility of the match officials and applies to all props, not just "novelties." If the array/prop isn't working properly and consistenly it is the responsibility of the match officials to fix it. Very few people personally own the props/target arrays to practice swingers, drop turners, twist-and-turn targets, etc. Do you own a popper? I don't. It isn't a problem. The shooting skills required to properly engage such "novelty" target arrays are skills that can be practiced on static targets. Want to shoot some of these arrays more often? Get your club to buy some and set them up for club matches. It seems to me that one of the responsibilities of USPSA clubs is to provide at club matches the kinds of shooting challenges that their members are likely to see at major matches. We work under that philosophy at San Angelo. You could always come down here for our club matches. p.s. I'm really just a medium B class shooter and I find the Texas Star very easy to shoot. It only looks intimidating. It is really not much harder than shooting 5 static 8" plates (actually I have a real block about static plates and I find 5 static plates harder than the star). Cheers, Kelly McCoy A42081

I think I'm seeing some potential problems with the current suggestions. I'm currently running stats/registration for a big 3-gun match so these topics have been at the forefront of my consciousness for several months. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the suggestion of scoring separate matches (recognizing all divisions) and then using match percentages to calculate aggregate. (The part I don't like is recognizing all divisions within the pistol match.) I'm going to shoot the Texas State 3-Gun match using an Open shotgun, Open rifle (both are VERY Open), and a Limited pistol. At first it sounds attractive to be scored for the pistol match in Limited division because I would gain match points (percentage) based on competition against other shooters with similar equipment. BUT...Bruce pointed out in the opening of this thread I would gain an unfair advantage in a Pistol/Rifle stage that is scored in the aggregate as a Pistol stage. (I know that the rules don't really allow for multi-gun stages but the stages have been approved for match Sanction status. I also know that WinEZScore doesn't really allow scoring of multi-gun stages, but I can deal with that.) OK, Let me play Devil's advocate for a minute: now we are going to ammend the rules to allow a fourth match (multi-gun) as part of the Tournament aggregate. Points would be earned towards the aggregate standing based on three single-gun matches and the multigun match. Finish in each single gun match would be based on which division was declared for that gun. Instead of shooting my Limited pistol I'm going to shoot my Production rig. Since I'm the only Production pistol shooter in the match I'm going to earn 100% (or 100% of the match points). That means when the aggregate is calculated I'll earn just as many points for the pistol match as the guy who won the Open pistol match. It WON'T work. I don't think adjustments to the current tournament rules will work. What we really need are rules for 3-Gun matches. We have equipment and Division rules. Safety rules are very similar. Surely there are not so many cases where the current rules would be violated that it would be difficult to simply write the exceptions to the current rules that would have to be in place to allow real 3-Gun matches. BTW - we will run the Texas State 3-Gun with multigun stages. Shooters have declared a division for the aggregate. I will score it as three separate matches and calculate tournament standings as the sum of match percentages in each of the one-gun matches (calculated manually since EZWinScore does not currently recognize Tactical division). Divisions for the one-gun matches will be based on the aggregate division (Open = Open pistol, Open rifle, Open shotgun; Limited = Limited pistol, Limited rifle, Limited shotgun; Tactical = Limited pistol, Open rifle, Limited shotgun). It is noteworthy that I currently have more entries in Tactical division than in either of the others. Each multi-gun stage will be scored in one of the single-gun matches and that will be clear in information given to the shooters (e.g. there is a rifle/pistol stage that will be scored in the rifle match). I know EZWinScore doesn't really allow scoring of multi-gun stages but I can fool it into working correctly and scoring each hit with the appropriate power factor. Cheers, Kelly McCoy A42081