bdpaz

You'd lose that bet. It is about the travel restrictions. https://www.motogp.com/en/videos/2020/03/02/ezpeleta-on-the-reasons-behind-the-2020-delayed-start/326239 Update - maybe you'd only lose half that bet. The 2nd race has now been cancelled because Thailand is canceling events with large crowds. “We have been in close contact with the authorities in Qatar to understand exactly what we could do. Then during the weekend, the situation changed a lot. On Saturday and Sunday it wasn’t a specific problem for anyone, but later on on Sunday we received indication from the authorities in Qatar that due to the situation in Italy and around the world, everyone of Italian nationality or residents of Italy arriving from there needs to be sure they haven’t been in Italy during the last 14 days. 'In those cases, it’s not that entrance to Qatar is forbidden, but anyone who has been in Italy in the last 14 days is advised that they will be quarantined for 14 days in Qatar. Obviously that’s not possible for our people, and this was what led us to cancel the MotoGP category at the Grand Prix of Qatar. Because Moto2 and Moto3 have been testing this week in Qatar, it’s possible to continue with the Championship but only with Moto2 and Moto3, as well as the Asia Talent Cup. “We have been speaking to the authorities in Thailand all weekend and they advised us that early on Monday, Thailand time, there would be a meeting to decide which events can happen in Thailand. It’s not related to Italians or anyone of any other nationality going to Thailand, it’s that they have decided to cancel big events with large numbers of spectators. It’s different to the situation with Qatar, so we decided to postpone the Thailand Grand Prix and try to locate a date at the end of the year to make the GP possible. “There will absolutely be a 2020 MotoGP season. We will try to continue with everything and stay aware of the situation because it’s changing day by day, but our wish is to do all the races in the 2020 season.”

It is not "..finally...". This point has been mentioned several times, once very early in this thread, and you (apparently) have not noticed it until now. I believe that not responding to things like that are part of the reason others are becoming frustrated with this discussion and suggesting that you aren't interested their replies.

For years I thought it was a crazy amount of money - until I got one six months ago. I find it to be quite a bit faster but, as you mentioned, the convenience alone is worth it. I would get tired/bored after 200 to 300 rounds. Now I'll crank out 500 in one session without a problem.

You are all so focused on just shooting minor that you have missed the combination that will take you straight to GM and match wins: Shooting minor while wearing shooting gloves!

I would ask other IPSC shooters at that range if a miss is typically considered Unsafe Gun Handling. If they say it is, they may be able to explain why and how shooters are supposed to know about it. I don't believe that it is standard IPSC practice so perhaps is is a local range restriction that "everyone just knows" - except when they don't.

It's not carry optics legal though. SAO. SAO is legal in IDPA Carry Optics because it is legal in ESP. From Appendix C- Carry Optics: 1.1 Handguns permitted: A. Handguns, associated modifications, restrictions, holsters, magazine carriers, calibers, start condition, and division capacity shall be compliant with ESP Division requirements, except as it relates to sights, lasers and overall weight. B. Maximum weight including empty magazine will not exceed 45 ounces.

Cool - I didn't know we could rearrange quoted text. Moving a conclusion to apply to more lines than originally written will be a fun option for future comments! Not arguing the other way, you're entitled too whatever opinion you like, I was just wondering how the first two statements concluded to the third?

Polarized lenses can make it difficult to read the timer - I have to rotate the timer display or just look under my glasses.

It's not that straightforward. Targets may be re-engaged from other shooting positions if it doesn't violate the 180, so if stepping over the fault line doesn't put you in what is technically another shooting position (think really extended fault lines from other positions) it may not be legal. On the other hand, if you initially engage over the fault line you still get the hits, just with a penalty for being over the fault line, so it can be argued that it is a shooting position. I've seen it called both ways. The rule: 3.2.7 C. Targets may be re-engaged from other shooting positions provided the shooter does not break the defined Muzzle Safe Points see section 2.9.

Some of us don’t see how the rules allow for a single side of an object to be declared a fault line. I don’t see that asking for a more explicit explanation than something like “trust me, it was covered in the briefing and was legal” is making it difficult.

Your first hand, fact based observation would carry more weight if it included actual details. Care to share how both sides of the fault lines were defined and, if it is out of the ordinary, the rules that justify it?

I don't see that the "inside edge" is legal. Look at: 3.6.3 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. The "inside edge'" fault line does not have a non-cover side so how can it be legal fault line? I agree that it isn't worth getting wound up over, and there are plenty of legal fault line option that would be just as stupid, but the "inside edge" is not legal.

Are you considered to be in cover if you move beyond the barrier on the opposite side of the limit indicated by the fault line? 3.5.2. says "When cover is available it must be used". Does that require you to literally keep the cover object between you and the targets? Typically when the you start with "if you are behind the fault line..." the situation is that the shooter is a distance from the cover object along an extension of the fault line. But in most cases the shooter isn't exposed to the targets on the opposite side of the cover. By this reasoning, the narrow wall at P1is the object providing cover and by moving to the right of the wall you are exposed and no longer using cover. I'm not at all certain this is correct as it depends on if "using cover" is defined anywhere.

I'm still confused, but if you are saying that you are required to engage the same target from multiple positions of cover I'd say that is illegal per 6.6.5 that prohibits memory stages. A stage briefing (with a diagram) of an example of the type of thing you are questioning would be helpful.

Was this really a big deal at a local match? If it was impractical to ask the MD/RM just check with the squads ahead of you to see how they had shot it. If they had all done it the same way then do it that way and note it on the WSB. If some had shot it open and some closed then you're pretty much SOL so do what you want and tell the MD/RM afterwards. Just keep it as equitable (i.e as fun and fair) as possible.

There is no such thing as a "direction on how to score the paper". The rules are the rules regardless of the method used to record the scores in a match and there is no rule assessing a procedural for "failure to activate". As for you seeing "failure to activate" as a procedural on every tablet you have handled, I have a dummy match on my iPhone and it is not listed under the procedurals there (and the procedurals that are listed all have the appropriate rule number).

From that picture it looks like it is too low for IDPA: 8.5 Holsters H. For male shooters, the holster must carry firearm so that the entire front strap (to the trigger guard) is at or above the top of the belt. IWB holsters are exempt from this rule. They may have a different hanger that will raise it up.

It's not just to be different. As I understand it the rule exists because it was felt that "in real life" you wouldn't (or couldn't) be counting shots and would just shoot until there was a click instead of a bang. So the result is a rule that actually emphasizes counting to avoid penalties.

How do know that is what he is saying? He explicitly gives "Trail Carry" as an example of a "weird carry method", not as an example of an ambiguous description.

I was impressed by the list of bad examples in the IPDA article. I think I'll do a stage using as many as possible at the same time. Such as: At start signal drink half a glass of water then gently put down a baby while slinging a crossbow and yelling “Yankee go home” before you call 911 on prop phone at which time you will dig your low cover position with the shovel while engaging…

I'm not sure that is what the article is saying. It does start out that way but then (as I read it) seems to more about eliminating non-shooting crap that is subject to penalties, making stages that are a bit more freestyle, and letting the difficulty level be determined by the shooting and not by restrictions in the stage description. As the last line says: "...away from being a sport based on navigating the penalty gauntlet". I like complex stages with difficult shots (as long as they work for all body types - not the ones that are easy for 7ft tall left handed 20 year old but almost impossible for 5ft tall well fed 70 year old righty). But I do think there is also a place for the low round count, simple, fast and close stages that aren't seen often enough.

The 2018 Arizona State Revolver Championship is coming up in less than two weeks and registration is still open! Over 100 shooters have signed up so far but we still have room for more. Saturday October 13th at Phoenix Rod & Gun Club - 10 stages and 220 rounds if you don't miss. Whether you tanked the IRC and are looking for a chance to redeem yourself or you dominated at the IRC and want to shoot another match while you're on a roll, here is one last big match before winter sets in. The Single Action division was dropped the year due to lack of interest but we are still welcoming USPSA and IDPA revolver shooters looking to try ICORE. Sign up on Practiscore here.

The 2018 Arizona State Revolver Championship will be held at Phoenix Rod & Gun Club on Saturday October 13th, 2018. Staff will shoot on Friday October 12th. It will be run under ICORE rules but to encourage all revolver shooters to attend ICORE membership is not required. IDPA and USPSA classifications will be mapped to ICORE classifications so everyone will be eligible for division and class awards. Single Action shooters are welcome as well, and will shoot the same stages with stage descriptions adjusted for one hit each on designated targets for a maximum of 10 required hits. The match will begin promptly @ 7:00 am and will consist of 10 stages with approx 250rnds, 100rnds for SASS/Cowboy shooters. There will be awards for all divisions and classes except unclassified. There will be a small prize table with prizes that are awarded by random draw. The match will be limited to the first 100 shooters (does not include staff). Match Fees: prior to September 14th $75.00, after $90.00. Match fee includes lunch and a t-shirt. No penalty withdrawal up to Sept. 14th. ONLINE REGISTRATION ONLY. The Practiscore registration page here has details on selecting the proper classification for USPSA and IDPA shooters. It also has a detailed Single Action rules page under Match Documents as well as quick start guides for IDPA and USPSA shooters who are unfamiliar with ICORE.

I tried them to see if they would let me use a wider range of loads in my 929 9mm revolver which is way beyond finicky. They did not extract well at all so I didn't pursue it but at least I do have some experience with them and while the potential downsides are hardly as horrible as some make it sound, I don't see any real benefit for the average shooter. They are a little trickier to reload so unless you have a real need to be able to pick up the empties with a magnet I'd stay with conventional cases.

If those speeds are from your gun then the 158gr at 850fps will be legal as it gives you a 134 power factor. Realistically, as a first timer at local match nobody is likely to care. I'd volunteer that you're unsure that it makes power factor, and also wouldn't try to hustle any one with side bets on the results.