Thomas H

No matter what else, wrist wraps will slow you down. If you are having recoil problems, maybe it will be worth it to you---but good fundamentals means that recoil really shouldn't be a problem to experienced shooters. As such, slowing yourself down, plus making certain wrist movements difficult, probably just isn't an optimal choice. If you have bad wrists, that is a different story. But if you are just using them as a crutch when you are starting out, they'll probably hurt your skills more than they will help them. IMO.

I am thinking of the old Iowa Sectional when it was in Iowa.. it was a few years back but I did enjoy it. Yep, we have the Great Plains Sectional back at ENGC this year. Ben, you should come down to make sure that neither Matt nor I win Production division this year. Hm. Better yet, stay away.

My classifiers always lagged my finishes in matches. I've got good, efficient movement, but my shooting fundamentals, while adequate, aren't great. (At least, they certainly weren't fantastic. They've gotten better somewhat over time.) I've gone up the classification ladder, but throughout I tend to place higher in my class than anyone seeing my classifier scores would expect. Never would sandbag (don't understand it either---seems stupid to me, as cheating is another way of saying "I'm not good enough to do it under the rules everyone else has to follow"), just most classifiers are variations on stand-and-shoot, and where I pick up higher hit factors was based on stages that had lots of movement---so I did well in larger matches, but not well on classifiers. One thing to think about is this: what part of the classifiers aren't going well for you? Is it really that you are getting too stressed, and pushing too hard? Or is there something directly about your shooting fundamentals that is tripping you up, that is masked on longer stages? What exactly is holding you back on classifiers? Just something to think about.

Hm. To me this one makes perfect sense. Why would you put a dot on the gun where you could see it? Answer: to provide a competitive advantage. Now, if you were to ask me why some magwell-work (visible in the same way) is now legal in Production, I wouldn't be able to explain that one...

Thanks for the discussion, but you can't possibly honestly think those who shoot Production simply pull their gun out of the tupperware it came in and strap it to their hip... Honestly, YES! I can, and do. And perform better than most with performance enhanced hardware. It's the Indian, not the arrows that count... Yep. Precisely what I did. Had no trouble making B-class on initial classification with a stock G34, didn't even change out the sights until after that. (And only really bothered because I saw a couple of people sheer off their plastic front sights by not using ports too well.) Did a 25 cent trigger job on it after that---and that's what I've been running in Production. Hadn't ever competed before, walked right in and started shooting. Have talked a number of other people into starting USPSA based completely on the fact that indeed, you can be solidly competitive with a stock, out-of-the-box gun, some Fobus mag pouches, and an Uncle Mike's holster. Which is how I started. And how many others I shoot with started. Yes, I've gotten a better set of mag pouches since, and also use a Blade-Tech DOH---but as to the gun, you really don't need to do anything if you want to be competitive. (Hey, I made Master with that rig---so ANYBODY can do it just fine with a stock gun.) I _do_ actually think that many new competitors do indeed (having bought a gun) simply bring it to a match and start shooting Production. Why not? That is what it is for---and it works perfectly well.

I guess I don't see it as an "ever-confusing Production ruleset" --- after all, I buy a gun, some mags and mag pouches, and a belt, and go shoot Production. There you go. Not too confusing. Now, if you want to modify your firearm somehow, then yes, you have to pay attention to the rules. (I think they allow too much, myself, but I don't really care.) So follow the rules---all you have to do is shoot with the gun you bought. Now, if you want to change the gun and do various things to it for an advantage (competitive or not) then yes, you need to pay attention to the rule specifics, and those details do get nitpicky. I don't, however see this as being a huge problem with respect to new shooters.

Worked! Looking forward to A5 this year...

Um....don't shoot Limited Minor?

Really. So I guess the .51 inch difference in length means nothing. In that case i assume the approx .8 inch difference from the 17 to the 34 will shoot the same ammo the same velocity. It's the same rifling and headspacing? Not really enough to worry about. Hm. Well, I've used a chrono on three different Glock 19s at the same time using the same set of reloaded ammunition, and out of 10-shot data sets for each, gotten numbers with a standard deviation of 6.7 ft/sec using the entire data set. Ran the same ammo (on the same day) through two different Glock 34s. The 34 data set (entire) had a standard deviation of 7.1 ft/sec. And the 34 data was consistently slightly over 21 ft/sec more than the 19 data. Speaking as a physics person, and someone who has actually taken data---all else being relatively equal (for example, pistols of the same make), longer barrels will consistently give you greater velocity. Yes, the G17 and G34 are similar. Nonetheless, you are going to get an increase in velocity. Not as much as with a G19, but you will still see an increase. I could quote numerous other people who actually took data for this sort of comparison, but I'm not going to bother. Believe what you like. ...in the end, you should chrono your loads with the gun you are going to use, and give yourself a comfortable cushion to make certain you will make the level (major or minor) that you wish. I shoot Production, and I use 147 gr Montana Gold bullets. I normally load to about a 135 PF from my G34, because it isn't if the recoil is much different compared to a 130 PF, and I want to make absolutely sure that no matter what the weather/temperature/pressure/whims of a deity, I'll make minor. Chrono your load. Always!

[sigh] Maybe it is just me---but when I try to checkout on the A5 website (after registering, activating, and trying to log in) I get a "You have entered the wrong CAPTCHA sequence. Please try again." message which is interesting because there WAS no captcha request required for login. Tried it on several computers, with different browsers---same error message. Anyone else having this problem? I'd much prefer to register online, compared to mailing it in.

I made M a little while back, and boy did I not feel ready for it---I thought that I could only consistently shoot A-level. (And occasionally B. ) Went to a couple of majors, however, (A3 and Nationals) and found out that indeed, I was ready. If you practice classifiers to get good at classifiers and make M, that is one thing. But if you practice shooting and then on classifiers make M---then even if you don't feel like you shoot M-level all the time, you will still be shooting well enough to run with the M-folks. You may not be winning but you'll be in the right crowd at the end of the match.

Actually no. After further reading of this thread...wow. Disregard all my post in this matter. What if the shooter doesn't hear you? Happens alot to those that their hearing is not so great. Ah---not USPSA, that makes a difference. Say whatever you please... If the shooter doesn't hear me, I say it again louder. And louder. If they continue to not hear me, they eventually look around at me wondering why I haven't said "make ready" yet, and we have a talk about what I need to do to make sure they receive the commands necessary.

Why? I assume you are talking about a USPSA match---so since you've been through the RO class (otherwise, you wouldn't be the RO for a shooter) why would you say the above? Instead of doing it correctly? It isn't any more clear than the correct commands, it requires actions of the shooter that it shouldn't, and it can actually be incorrect if the shooter isn't supposed to load the pistol. Give this set of commands to someone who doesn't have English as a first language (of which we have plenty in large matches) and you are going to give them problems. So....why do you use these commands?

and in the recent clarifications in the last two Front Sights talking about requiring belt loops: I note that when they say "securely fixed at the waist" Amidon has said in the past that it means the inner belt (or something similar) is actually sewn onto the pant. (This is as opposed to merely being snugly fitted.) And again---I'm not saying I agreed with Amidon regarding whether or not the two sides of the barricade are considered sufficiently different for the purposes of the rule. I'm just saying what he kept telling us when we tried to get a stage approved.

Yes. Much like two sides of a barricade are two shooting locations, especially if there are other vision barriers, making it difficult to shoot all the targets from a single side... Not according to Amidon, it isn't. We went round and round with JA last year for the GP Sectional (plus Area 3 the previous year, if I recall correctly) on this topic. Effectively, Amidon kept telling us that if you don't have to move, it isn't two shooting locations. (Move your feet, that is.) If you have to take a sidestep, then it is fine, so two sides of a wall equates to two shooting locations. But two sides of a barricade doesn't. We couldn't get a stage or two approved for our Sectional (and like I said, I _think_ we had a similar argument the previous year for an Area 3 stage, but don't quote me on that one) until we changed the barricades to walls, and required people to actually take a step. The two different views were not sufficient, even though there were visions barriers in place so that people _had_ to use both sides of the barricade. I'm not saying I agree with this---I'm just saying to get your stages approved for a larger match, two sides of a barricade = two shooting positions just won't work.

Registered today for hotel rooms with no problem. Matter of fact, when I said the date, she asked if I was coming in for the DoubleTap. Give it another try, and if they tell you that rooms aren't available, ask to speak to a manager.

Hmm. I think---I'd have to be a lot stronger to damage the slide of my Glock with the standard pusher without trying to add a handle extender for I could torque it more. I use a MGM pusher. Warren Tactical sights certainly ARE tight-fitting---you do have to work at it. But you don't have to use a crowbar, either. Haven't had any problems with any of the guns I've put them on.

Yes, that WAS the problem. We got down there on Friday, took a look at the stages in the wonderful, warm sun, wearing t-shirts, all comfortable and nice----and then FROZE the following two days. When you are burning old shot-up targets in barrels for warmth as the snow blows sideways---it is cold. [sigh] Probably the worst I've ever shot in a major match. Match itself was fantastic----I was impressed by all the stages, the prize table---not only a lot of work obviously put into it, but a lot of good, CREATIVE work. I'm coming back this year (just got squadded---Hello to everyone else on Squad 21!) and looking forward to it. But man, last year was miserable.

I'm not joking. In the last year, I've put in 4 sets of Warren Tactical sights (2 Sevigny, 2 standard Warren). They are a tight fit, most certainly. I've used the sight pusher each time, and have never had to do anything else. (Duane is definitely right, though---a good forearm workout.) And I'm small and weak---so get a sight pusher, and don't use a hammer and a punch.

The factory sight isn't great. However, that doesn't mean it can't work just fine for awhile. I had no trouble making an initial classification of B with them. It is true, however, that it is much easier to get a quick, crisp, clean sight picture, and be more accurate on far-away targets, using aftermarket sights. That all being said---my main reason for switching out the factory sights was simple: I saw a fellow competitor shear the front plastic sight right off the gun in the middle of a match. Oddly enough, that little plastic bead just isn't very durable. It is easy to accidentally shave off part of a side, or just destroy it completely. So, new sights.

It would certainly be nice to win a SIRT training pistol..... Of course, I'd have to actually shoot well. Maybe random luck will be in my favor for once... (Looking forward to the match---in particular, looking forward to not shooting it in a blizzard like last year. )

Replace mag springs? People do that? I realize it is a good idea---but I would suggest that people not worry about it much either. I have never changed out the springs on any of my Glock mags, and they all run perfectly well. And yes, I shoot more than a little. I'm not saying you should just mostly ignore it like I do. On the other hand, replacing all your springs each year really isn't necessary, in my opinion. Okay, maybe if you shoot 50,000 rounds per year through the same 5 mags, then you should. But if you are like me and cycle 20,000 rounds through 10-15 mags, it really won't be an issue for quite some time. On the other hand, I'm finally getting around to replacing the recoil spring this year in the Glock 19 I bought in 1993, so maybe you shouldn't listen to me about springs. (It has never given me any problems, but I thought, "Hey, I should probably eventually do that..") I also agree with the "Use factory mags" line. They work perfectly well, right out of the box. Don't mess with them, they'll do what they are supposed to right off the bat.

Being a left-hander, the long/short didn't really make THAT much difference--I shoot a 34 in USPSA, and a 19 elsewhere. Haven't really had any differing levels of problems either way. But again, as a lefty, I have to flip the gun slightly no matter what. In case you aren't a lefty and don't care about us poor, benighted folk----when I shoot right-handed, I like the extended release on the full size ones (17, 34) and the regular sized one for the 19 and the 26. Slightly different hand placement means a difference while shooting, and a difference in reach. Extended on a 19 or 26 eats my hand---just shreds it. Short on the 34 and 17 works just fine, but I'm faster with the extended one on those. The Gen 4 release is fantastic, comparatively. (Other than the fact that now I have to buy a bunch more magazines again....I like to have enough to run the entire match without reloading. I hate reloading mags during the match. )

Um----so after you unload and show clear, then pull the trigger to put the hammer down, you put the safety on before putting your 1911 back in the holster at the end of a course of fire? (Note: I don't shoot 1911s, so I'm actually curious. Matter of fact, none of the handguns I shoot on a normal basis has an external safety. ) No. The thumb safety will only engage with the hammer cocked. So it DOESN'T require a safety to be on to be considered safe when holstered? As long as it is unloaded? And since it IS unloaded in the case that this topic is talking about...

[sigh] And I even just read that rule in the book, but apparently my brain wasn't working. Thanks for pointing that out! Edited to say what I actually meant.