Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Thomas H

Classifieds
  • Posts

    1,273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thomas H

  1. Congratulations on missing the point, regarding making absolute statements but being forced to put "should" into them at the same time. It quite literally depends on the situation. Example: Stage is a speed shoot (so from one position). Does safety require two ROs to watch the shooter at all times? Of course not. Example: Different stage has one target engaged from the start position to the left, then movement and an entire array from the second position, moving literally to the right. After that, the shooter moves forward and finishes the stage. The CRO moves with the shooter to the right. The tablet guy takes 3 seconds to look at and score that first target on the left, saving quite a bit of time on scoring and resetting because all the other targets are off in the distance to the right and forward. The tablet RO is back by the shooter before they move forward. Does safety require both ROs to watch the shooter during their first movement directly to the right when the CRO is right there? Of course not. Actual experienced ROs know perfectly well that much of the time, having at least two ROs watching the shooter (one from each side) is indeed by far the best thing. They ALSO know that there are plenty of occasions when that isn't necessary. More importantly, they also know plenty of occasions when it simple isn't possible, as often occurs at local club matches. Know who also knows that? NROI folks. And that's why they call it a "best practice" as opposed to a "match requirement."
  2. USPSA has a literal classifier calculator on their website, so not only can you find the HHF easily, you can check your score's percentages right after shooting. They used to hide a lot, but these days it is out there for everyone to see. ICORE----I must admit, after I shot my last couple of classifiers, I went to the ICORE page, looked up a couple of people that I knew shot a lot of ICORE in my division, used their old scores to figure out the HHF on the classifier I had shot, and figured my percentage from it. ....I could have instead waited a couple of days and looked at the website, but I'm a math nerd and I wanted to know. Note: This doesn't work if the HHF have changed over time and you are using data from years and years ago.
  3. Well, not for most people---simply because this is something that is literally covered in detail in the RO class. (Using the exact graphics that are the topic of discussion in this thread.). Not only is each one explained and scored, but the rationale behind how it works is covered. So most ROs have a solid grasp of how this works because it was covered point-by-point in their class.
  4. IDPA MA in SSP, ESP, and CO. Got my MA in each of those three via match bump in 2014, 2015, and 2021 respectively. (Joined IDPA Dec 2013, shot my first major in 2014 in SSP, shot ESP in 2015 then traded ESP and SSP back and forth for a couple of years, then started shooting CO in May of 2019.) USPSA: M in PROD, CO, and PCC. (And 0.4327% from M in SS. Dang it.) And yes, I use my Production gun in SSP, my SS gun (9mm Minor) in ESP, and my USPSA CO gun in IDPA CO.
  5. The number of people making statements of opinion as if they were facts should note that in their sentences, every time, they are required to use the word "should" in their absolute statements. "Should" does not mean "required." And as has been said, a "best practice" is not a "required practice" nor is it something that is even possible for everyone all of the time---and it isn't always necessary, either.
  6. Don't remember total right offhand, but I recall that right before open registration occurred, there were still over 100 empty squad slots available.
  7. As an aside, I am heartened to see how many people are completely getting it right regarding the "shooting a target through HC is a FTSA" question. (As a comment on that, a good way to explain it to people is to say "if a wall was in front of the popper and you couldn't see the popper at all behind the wall, could you engage it? Obviously not, right?") I'll note that I also agree with the "deliberately shooting stage props in order to obtain a competitive advantage" comment regarding the OP situation in which they literally said that was what they did. So yeah, don't do that.
  8. Regarding the part in bold: You literally are using the word "stepping" to describe what is happening here, and even better, said "stepping" is part of a multi-step movement. Movement is indeed defined as taking more than 1 step---and your LAST two steps (the step into the box, and then bringing your other foot off the ground to also put it in the box) is literally the end of a series of steps. (Which is definitely "more than one step.") "If a shooter starts moving their finger into the guard as they are making that last step into the box that is perfectly legal." No, that was literally a DQ, under the old rule. No one would call it, though, which is why the rule needed to be fixed. Which is why it is good that the rule was changed to this, because now it ISN'T a DQ. "This new rule just means that a shooter can move to the center box with their finger in the guard as long as they are aiming at the targets" Ok.....so what is the problem? How is this an issue? If a shot goes off, it is in a safe direction (they were aiming at the target, after all, and merely get a procedural for a foot fault. If people want to do something that makes them slower, that's completely their choice. (Moving while aiming is flat-out slower than moving.) I guess I'm not understanding the issue here----literally, people can now prepare to fire (and even fire) while their body is in motion to/into the center box on Outer Limits, which is what everyone has been doing in the first place. (And what everyone SHOULD be doing.) And now the rules won't say they should be DQed for it. How is this a problem or an issue? Dr. Phil wrote: "Every club where I have shot SC there have been those who never remove their finger when they move from box to box on Outer Limits." Sounds like that club's ROs need someone to mention that to them so they can start doing their job. The clubs I shoot at would call that a DQ. Joe4d said: "Guy could be moving box to box light a round off, jump out of his skin,, stop , look at RO,,, But then continue,,, and just gets a foot fault when he lies and says he was aiming at a target." Just because the shooter says it, doesn't mean it is true. If the RO is noticing that the finger is in the trigger guard, they'll also notice whether or not the person is aiming through the sights/optic, AND in the direction of the target. If they weren't, then it is a DQ. Fairly straightfoward. If the shooter wants to argue, they can submit an arb. (Which they will lose.) "Buy yeh Outer Limits doesnt belong, plenty of other games sprinters can play. " No one needs to sprint to move laterally 6 feet quickly, particularly in the situation of Outer Limits. The people who do well, move smoothly immediately after finishing their second shot, and start shooting immediately upon creating a presence in the center box. Sprinting isn't at all what it looks like.
  9. Yup, the guys in our two states did surprisingly well in the last IPM! When I read it, I also assumed that "standard" meant "local" as opposed to "State, Regional, IPC" though it doesn't actually ever state that anywhere. Note: As a reminder to folks (though I'm certain for most this isn't an issue) rule 10.8 says "Current ICORE membership is required to participate in the Regional Championships and the International Revolver Championship (IRC), for which the ICORE treasury provides award money. " Just like USPSA and SCSA, you have to be a member to shoot matches above club level. As for "...want to make sure its a shooting match, and not a climb up a wall match..." --- it'll be an ICORE match.
  10. Truthfully, I thinks this makes it easier to enforce. Here's why: Under the old rule, if a person started to bring their gun up and put their finger in the trigger guard while stepping into the box on Outer Limits, that was supposed to be a DQ. (They have certainly taken more than one step, and are currently in movement.) And yet, that's what almost everyone does---their finger is in the trigger guard when they are moving. By the original rule, that's a flat-out DQ. But no one ever got DQed for it, of course. That's because if they had lit one off, it wouldn't have been an unsafe situation, it would have been a foot fault since it was still outside the box but they were trying to hit the target. Under the new rule, people will be treated exactly as they should---if your sights are on target, then your finger can be on the trigger. Where-ever you are. You might get a foot fault for taking a shot when you shouldn't, but the action itself isn't unsafe because you are aiming at a target. So yeah, if someone wants to slowly move across the distance in Outer Limits while aiming at the next target with their finger on the trigger the whole time, sure. That shouldn't be a DQ. The RO doesn't have to be able to judge "are they perfectly on target" because we don't equate "aiming at a target" to "getting hits". (Just like shooting AT a target is sufficient to engage in USPSA, whether it hits or not.) We equate "on target" to "aiming toward a target which automatically means a safe direction." The RO doesn't have to see the gun alignment. At the same time, just pointing into a random berm isn't "at a target" either. Is the shooter trying to get on target, and as they do so, do they put their finger in the trigger? Then that's fine, whenever it occurs. Under the old rules, all those fast kids who brought the gun up and had their finger in the trigger as they stepped into the center box on Outer Limits SHOULD have been DQed. The new rule works a lot better, IMO.
  11. If that is a reply to my comments about what I've seen done to make plates non-problematic---as I said, the plates had a lip on the base so that they can't spin. And it is a plate---edge hits will make it fall over. It isn't like it takes much. (Unless you meant "hitting them edge-on" which is definitely a setup issue, not a plate issue. If someone sets up a plate so people can even SEE it edge-on, the setup person is doing it wrong.) Of that list, the first six aren't about plates, they were about plate-racks and Texas Stars. The ONLY thing on that list regarding plates on stands is that if the plate spins, it is a reshoot. And again, I've already spoken about it. It isn't hard to weld a lip onto the base of the plate, so that literally the plate can't spin. So that entire list isn't actually saying anything against plates in matches at all. It is against Texas Stars and plate racks, (which is actually pretty funny since there are competitions that use plate racks all over the place), but against plates----not really. Again, it is literally a setup issue for plates. It seems odd to me that plates are okay at Level II matches, but are somehow insufficiently reliable at Level III matches. Especially since I have yet to see any problem listed with plates that wasn't a setup problem. (Note: I'm not ignoring how people have said that some clubs don't set them up properly---my comment there is that the solution isn't to outlaw plates, but instead educate people to set them up correctly.)
  12. I think your comment about "for safety" doesn't actually make sense given that your other commentary was always that it should be parallel to the berm "for safety". Disagree on the meaning of negligible? Probably. If you think that losing 7% of the facing area of the target you are attempting to shoot is something that won't make a difference, then you are factually incorrect. If you think that is "negligible" and any difference in times will be small enough to ignore, then indeed, we disagree.
  13. Matches I've worked where we had plates on stages, we put steel in front of the stands. Never had any problems. Seems odd that we'd specifically add a rule saying they couldn't be used when another section of the rules literally specifies what plates are allowed to be used as targets in matches. In other words, problems with plates seem to be a function of setup issues (rather similar to setup issues with other steel targets) as opposed to target issues. As such, making a rule disallowing them (instead of helping people set them up properly) doesn't make much sense to me. Example: When we set up a major match, we put plywood flats down underneath the steel poppers we use, so that the popper is always on a flat surface, and can't alter that surface by falling on it repeatedly. Similarly, we both make sure all adjustment bolts/nuts are locked in place, and then check them between squads. Doing this, we almost never have popper issues, and if a calibration is needed, it is invariably because someone has a glancing edge hit, and the popper falls due to proper calibration when checked. Similarly, when we use plates, we put steel (as someone has pointed out, SC rectangles work really well for this) in front of the stands so that only the plate itself can be hit, and our plates have metal sections that hang over the stand so that when the plate is hit, it can only fall instead of rotate. Because of that, we haven't had range equipment malfunction problems with those, either. I would think that instead of disallowing a target, we'd instead promulgate how to reduce issues with said targets. ...because I agree with what someone said earlier, that plates make good targets that are different from the other targets available.
  14. Yes, that will do it. I know a lot of people who change out the recoil spring in their various Glocks for use in IDPA so that they can adjust the recoil spring weight. (The Glock 9mms are ridiculously oversprung from the factory.) For 9mm, a 13# spring is great. .40.....no idea. It'll be interesting to see what works best for you and the load you decide to use.
  15. Quoted from the ChangeLog for rules posted from the BoD meeting (https://uspsa.org/documents/minutes/20230128 CompRules-March2023 Change Log-final.pdf) : "4.3.1.4 – Original rule: Various sizes of metal plates may be used (see Appendix B3), however, metal plates must not be used exclusively in a course of fire. At least one cardboard target or popper must be included in each course of fire. Updated rule: Various sizes of metal plates may be used (see Appendix B3) in Level I and II matches only, however, metal plates must not be used exclusively in a course of fire. At least one authorized cardboard target or Popper must be included in each course of fire." (Bold emphasis added by me.) This seems to mean that you can't use plates at L3 matches any more. I realize they weren't exactly in high use, but...this seems an odd addition out of nowhere. Were there a significant number of issues with plates at L3 matches lately, sufficient for a rule change no longer allowing them? Or am I mis-reading this?
  16. As of right now, the competitor (not staff) squads have a total of 102 slots open. I'm not sure I would characterize that as "the few".
  17. Nope. The "then" at that point would lock in exactly where the reload should happen. Their argument about 10.2.4 was that it said "engage T1-T3, reload, THEN engage T1-T3 again" which to them meant "you have to engage each target after the reload" and pretty much nothing else. If there is a "THEN reload" part, it specifies that the reload occurs after the first six shots, and then 10.2.4 would apply if the reload did not occur at the correct point in the stage. They wouldn't be penalized for incorrect number of shots, they are being penalized for not performing the mandatory reload at the correct time.
  18. Shred actually said "Set those plates to be less square to the shooter so the plane of the plate ends in a side-berm if you don't want stuff coming up-range into the spectator area." which isn't the same as "place targets so they are parallel to the backstop." If you make all targets parallel to the backstop, it actually makes a significant difference on several of the stages, in terms of the area of the target facing you compared to what it should be. Awhile back I did an analysis of it, in terms of what percentage of what you actually see as opposed to what you are are supposed to see, and the answers were fairly surprising. Sure, on several stages the difference is close to zero---or at least, less than 5% difference. In a couple of important cases, however, the difference was significant, enough to make an appreciable, measurable difference in people's performance. As the post says---if any way possible while being safe, figure out how to put the stage in your bay to have the plates facing the shooter according to the rules. Otherwise, it WILL make a difference. (I notice that in that thread, I was replying to zzt there also.) The difference is NOT negligible on a number of stages.
  19. I'm thinking that the entire problem could have been solved by putting "then" in the written stage briefing, specifically: On the audible start signal, from within the shooting area, engage T1-T3 with only two rounds per target, THEN make a mandatory reload, then engage T1-T3 with only two rounds per target. Given that, it specifies a mandatory reload after 6 rounds. As such, the situation at argument would then be covered under 10.2.4. Not having the "then" listed in bold means that "engage with only two rounds per target, make a mandatory reload, then engage..." means "engage each target and reload, then engage each target again with the expectation that there will be four hits per target scored." Again---I'm not saying I agree with that interpretation. (Not at all.) I'm just saying that given their interpretation, adding that extra "then" would solve the problem.
  20. Yup. But the classifier doesn't specify the body THEN head order, so this rule doesn't apply. Shoot it however you like. That all being said...I think that the difference in time you save from going from the head to the body (if it even exists in the first place) is so small that you'll make Master before it actually makes any difference. Especially since recoil helps you bring the gun up.
  21. Last time I wrote an email response to a blog entry about rules like this, I got an intelligent, polite response in several days, and then the blog in question was updated and fixed. So....opinions vary.
  22. Instructions say "Draw and fire 4 shots to the body and one shot to the head freestyle." It doesn't say "Draw and fire 4 shots to the body then one shot to the head freestyle." As such, barring some sort of announcement from IDPA HQ adding a procedural rule to the classifier, you can shoot it in whatever order you like.
  23. I know of at least one person who responded directly to the NROI blog question of the month, with a fairly long-ish discussion of the issue. (And a conclusion that it should be one procedural for 10.2.4, as the reload should have been after 6 shots, given the "with only two shots on each target" wording.) No response yet. (The last time that person responded directly in a similar fashion, it also took several days for a response, because unsurprisingly, the NROI folks actually things to do outside of blog stuff. I'm assuming there will be a response forthcoming here, too.)
  24. I have been to a couple of matches where they kicked the price up $5 per division, and the local boy scouts (or JROTC group, or something similar) used it as a fundraiser where they got that money and had 3-4 kids on each stage doing the painting. It didn't speed up the match in the slightest----but it DID mean that we were a LOT less tired by the end of the day, because we weren't walking out and painting all day. I think it actually worked out well. That being said, I've seen it NOT work also, when the group that was fund-raising didn't send enough people so you ended up painting anyway. Wasn't worse than normal, but it was a little annoying to be told one thing and have something else happen. Personally, I think THAT is the way to go for SC matches. Add $5 per division, and with 300 entries that is a solid $1500 of a fundraiser. Share it between two groups (to make sure you have enough kids to paint) and have 3-4 kids per stage. Staff doesn't have to do any extra running (their job is tiring enough), and the shooters don't have to walk and paint. I don't mind painting, but it IS certainly true that if I'm shooting in the morning and afternoon blocks, all eight stages both times, by the time I reach Outer Limits, Speed Option, and Showdown at the end of the day I'm wanting a quad to carry me out to those far targets to paint.
×
×
  • Create New...