bdpaz

This is one valid way to make 6 shot neutral stages but I wouldn't want it to be THE definition. Here is a link to a video of a fairly simple stage that as designed requires an additional reload from the 6 shot guys but it can be done on the move, there are multiple options for both 6 and 8, and if either capacity needs a make up it throws off their reloading plan. The shooter, the world famous star of stage and screen Scott Krushak, is using an 8 shot gun shooting it as 8-8-8. A 6 shot gun could do it similarly as 6-6-6-6 or either could break things up differently if they wanted. https://youtu.be/aEe05YMt2SQ

Defining it concretely might have unintended consequences. Maybe the first step is to add some additional information to clarify the intent? I think 6 shot friendly is what we are trying to accomplish, but that probably still isn't clear without some additional guidance. I like that idea! It leave stage design wide open with just a minor restriction that keeps the 6 shot guns in the game.

So can I assume you fall into the "6 shot neutral is equal number of planned reloads and don't sweat the extra make up shots available" camp?I'd say that in this example the 8 shot gun has a significant advantage with 4 vs 2 availble make up shots per position (with the same number of reloads) on stars and plate racks. That is fine with me as it sounds like fun with either capacity, but using one of the dictionary definition of neutral which is "not supporting or helping either side" I wouldn't call it neutral as per the rules.

We are not directly discussing Limited 6 or making it "fair" for new shooters or making everyone equal so I'm not sure where we're spinning our wheels. The point here is to determine what 6 shot neutral means so yes, one possible definition is that it means make 6 and 8 shot guns equally competitive but no one seems to be in favor of that definition. In my opinion everyone has preferred some variation of making it fun to shot a 6 shot gun without going for scorched earth competitive equality - but no one can show where the rules say that is how "6 round neutral" is defined. Point me to the rules to support my argument that trying to make them equal is not required.

It would be helpful (to me, at least) if everyone commenting could include a description of how their matches are made 6 shot neutral. "6 shot neutral is fine" or "6 shot neutral is the tool of the devil" doesn't mean much as does "We do 6 shot neutral by way of equal number of planned reloads and some make ups available for both capacities and it is fine" or "Our matches see 6 shot neutral as removing any advantage to the 8 shot gun so we get stages like nine hits, mandatory reload, nine hits, mandatory reload, etc. so it is the tool of the devil" From the other threads I see three general methods of defining 6 shot neutral: 1. Absolute equality with no advantage to the 8 shooter. 2. Equal number of planned reloads with stages set to allow no more than 6 hits from any location and to make it advantageous to load between positions. Some consideration is given to the 8 shot guns having more make up shots available but it is not a major factor. For example, a 4 shot array then a 5 shot array, then a 6 shot array with the shooting positions far enough apart to allow a reload on the move. 3. Both capacities shoot the stage in the same "look and feel" where the 6 shot gun may have an additional planned reload but both reload in the same way (moving or standing) and both have no make ups available without deviating from their planned reloads. For example, a 24 round lateral movement stage with with shots per array as 4-2-2-4-4-2-2-4. Method 1 may not be common but I see it regularly so please don't discount it in this discussion. I and some others are not imagining theoretical problems with 6 shot neutral, they do exist. I personally like (and am using) method 3 but I am fine with shooting matches using method 2, particularly when there is a plate rack and I have an 8 shot gun.

You need stages like that to make 6=8 but if then if you think about it the 4 shot arrays let the 8 shot guys carry 4 to the next one so you'd need 5 shot arrays but that only leaves the 6 shot guys with one make up vs three so you'd have to go with 3 shot arrays but then you're back to letting the 8 shot guns skip reloads... and so on and so on until your brain explodes! Everybody misses occasionally, including the good shooters pushing hard, and just pulling the trigger once more beats reloading.

A lot of "probably"s in there! Eliminating misses is great in theory and in some applications, but are you saying that even the top shooters will consistently burn down a plate rack or star just a fast with a 6 shot gun as with an 8 shot gun? I think it is the mid-pack shooters who benefit most from trying to eliminate all misses while the top shooters know the s*** happens and benefit from having that extra shot or two available. I know some pretty good revolver shooters who run 8 shot guns but make their stage plans as if they have 6 shots.

An interesting and reasonable explanation but one I'm not sure that any random shooter would come up with when asked to define "6 shot neutral". I think that at your 6 shot array the 8 shot gun clearly has an advantage, more so if any of these shots are on steel. My feeling that it is more neutralish to, for example, have a 24 round stage where the 6 shot gun will always have an additional reload but if a shooter with either capacity needs a make up it throws off his or her plan and requires an additional reload. I don't think my interpretation is any more valid than yours, so perhaps instead of more clearly defining 6 shot neutral we just need to add that it is NOT removing any and all advantages of an 8 shot gun?

That, correctly or not, some (many?) people interpret 6 shot neutral to mean 8 shot must have no advantage. And even if not taking it literally, as you pointed out it is subjective as to how many available make up shots are needed to make it "neutral". I have decided to interpret the 6 shot neutral stage requirement as meaning that it is equally fun to shoot with a 6 shot or an 8 shot gun. Where the number of reloads probably won't be equal but it flows similarly with both capacities. So everybody reloads on the move and/or between position or everybody has standing reloads. In the last year of ICORE matches at PRGC first with Steve Horsman and now with me running the matches that approach has worked well, with Classic shooters finishing up near Limited and Open shooters of similar ability. This approach may (or may not!) be close to the intent of the 6 shot neutral requirement but until ICORE defines it differently I'm sticking to it as being just as valid as meaning 8 shot has no advantage.

If you think that having additional shots available, particularly with steel, does not favor the 8 shot gun then we're at the agree to disagree point. I don't feel that designing a stage so that the number of reloads is equal IF you shoot the minimum number of shots equates to 6 shot neutral.We aren't at that point. I am well aware of the advantage of having the extra rounds on steel where you either eat an extra reload or take a miss. So how many makeups do you have to have to negate the advantage? A four shot array with two steel or a nine shot array with three paper and three steel? Maybe two paper and five steel? Where does it wash even for you? Above ten rounds required you never get two spares again in the same reload. So we're giving up 2-4 seconds to make up the miss to come out 2 seconds ahead of or even with taking the miss.So how does 1-5, 9-11, 17 sound then? Neutral? I believe that revolver shooters had to man up in the six shot days facing off eight shot arrays and marksmanship was an assumed baseline above C class. So while I understand the value of the extra shots, I still try like the devil to go one for one. I feel like misses are self perpetuating and can eat through any number of makeup shots. It sounds like we agree on what makes a stage good for both 6 and 8 shot guns but, in my opinion, you and others aren't following the "letter of the law" of 6 shot neutral and those who are set up painful, stilted, suck-all-the-joy-out-of-life stages. So my real problem is with the "six shot neutral" requirement itself. I think it should be changed or expanded to eliminate the "3 paper for 3 hits each from box A, mandatory reload, then 3 paper for 3 hits each from box B, mandatory reload, then 3 paper for 3 hits each from box C" stages.

If you think that having additional shots available, particularly with steel, does not favor the 8 shot gun then we're at the agree to disagree point. I don't feel that designing a stage so that the number of reloads is equal IF you shoot the minimum number of shots equates to 6 shot neutral.

I think trying to make stages truly six shot neutral is futile. Unless you make every stage Shots Limited (Virginia count) and require mandatory reloads it can't be done. An achievable goal is for every stage to be fun to shoot with both 6 and 8 shot guns and accept the fact that people shooting 8 shot guns will have fewer reloads and/or more make up shots available. At last Sunday's Phoenix Rod & Gun Club ICORE match I had a Classifier, a steel stage (two strings) with 5 plates requiring 2 hits each where you could see them all at a distance or move closer and then move sideways to see them sequentially, a field course with lateral moment and 12 paper targets grouped as 2-1-1-2-2-1-1-2 followed by two poppers, and another field course of 12 paper with walls and ports arranged so that the targets could be engaged in groups of 3-3-3-3 or 4-2-2-4. It worked for both capacities and high overall went to a Classic shooter. Granted, we were missing some of the top Open and Limited shooters and Jason might have been able to beat his own Classic time if he'd shot Limited, but by not throwing up arbitrary roadblocks to handicap the 8 shot guns it worked for everyone. Here is a link to the results: http://www.prgcpractical.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=79&id=1181&Itemid=497 It loads slowly so be patient.

If you were keeping score, you were also a range officer. Can you help me with a rule that confirms this? I agree that the scorekeeper assists the RO (Defined at 7.1.1) and the RO would be smart to listen to a scorekeeper, but I don't see where the scorekeeper has equal authority. Interestingly, though, the rules discuss scoring as if the RO is the one doing it. (9.7.1) Why do you think it is not the a Range Officer doing the scoring? 7.1.1 and 9.7.1 both refer to an RO doing the scoring - "scorekeeper" is not mentioned anywhere. At a major match there may be multiple ROs on a stage while a local match typically has a "Timer RO" and "Clipboard RO" (probably need a new term for the latter thanks to Practiscore).

What is the reason they should be USPSA sanctioned matches? As you stated, they already hold an official USPSA match every month. I can't speak for the OP but I don't think most people look at it as practice match but as a stand-alone fun match. It is similar to Tuesday Night Steel at Rio Salado that doesn't follow any sanctioning body's rule book but is also very successful and popular.

I must have missed the survey that showed that the majority of the 100ish shooters at Nationals dislike 8 shot guns and are only shooting them to be competitive. Strangely enough, everyone I know has more fun shooting 8 shot minor, even the 6 shot diehards who finally tried it out of curiosity.

Then I apologize - it is Dillon's terminology that has confused me!

So to clarify, when Dillon establishes it's loading rate. The assumption is the press is set to load and replenishing supplies such as extra loaded primer tubes and additional bullets and cases are at the ready from the start of the hour? The clarification might be more clear if you used Dillon's terminology. I think your "loading rate" is what Dillon calls "one hour production rate" but I'm not sure I'm clear on that.

I think the direct link to the Practiscore Single Stack registration is https://clubs.practiscore.com/western-states-single-stack-championship/register . The link on the Rio website had it as "...western-stats..."

If you are a member at Rio Salado you can use the practical bays after shooting some number of matches - I think it is 10 but I'm not sure. You can also buy a key to have access to the plate racks, target stands and steel. They are first come, first serve so they fill up fast in the mornings. You can usually find a free bay in the late afternoon - particularly in the summer! I think Phoenix Rod & Gun Club also allows access to the pistol bays but I don't know it they have a formal policy. You can get official answers from the practical division directors at Practical@RSSCAZ.com and practical@phoenixrodandgun.org

It does work in real life and without raised entry fees. Here in the Phoenix area the USPSA and steel matches have a set up/tear down crew that is compensated in some way (I can't speak for the IDPA matches). The others show up, pay, shoot, and leave. I don't know the specifics of each match, it may be just shooting the match for free, also getting a few bucks for lunch, or free shooting plus hookers and beer, but those who do the work get something for it. Some people have more money than time, others have more time than money so why not use a system that works for both? If you want to run a match where everyone pitches in, great, but that's a tough system to sell when it grows beyond you and your buddies. And you are selling it. Volunteer event or not, when people pay a fee they have expectations. In other activities that I've been involved with that rely on volunteers the volunteers work the event and don't participate that day. It is up to you to make it clear that you don't see them as customers and that they must pitch in and help on match day. When I help with a match I absolutely do look at the shooters as my customers. When I pay to shoot a match I'm the customer and I expect the set up and tear down to be taken care of by the staff. This is not the only approach to running matches but my point is that neither is demanding that everyone cycle through and help as some sort of mandatory public service. Incorporating "Shoot and Scoot" shooters may offend many but to me it means more options. Speaking directly to the idea of using kids to build for the future: I like the idea but we mostly have adult shooters with free time. Some have brought kids and grandkids out to help and I'll have to see if we can encourage that - of course by rewarding them in some way, not by saying it is expected!

So let me combine all the suggestions/requirements here from those putting on matches into a description of the ideal shooter. The shooter must devote all day to the match - if he doesn't agree then he's a selfish a-hole. The shooter must participate equally with all other shooters in the set up and tear down - if he doesn't agree then he's a self centered a-hole. If he thinks he can pay a fee and then act as a consumer (you know, the way almost every other recreational activity works) he's just a flat out a-hole. Everyone must pay the match fee and help set up and tear down because letting some pay to "shoot and scoot" and some do the work in return for compensation is immoral and against the volunteer creed of USPSA. When this approach doesn't generate enough shooters who buy into it to keep a match going then obviously it is the shooters who are wrong (and yes, probably a-holes as well).

And we're having fun while we're getting whipped up on! One important aspect of shooting here is that people (including us mid pack shooters) make things happen. Between Rio Salado and Phx Rod & Gun Club we have special revolver matches, afternoon rifle matches where you run the USPSA stages from the morning, shotgun and pistol caliber carbine matches, unofficial big bore ICORE matches, and more. These all came about because when people here want something, instead of asking for "somebody" to implement it, they ask if they can make it happen. And if there is room in the schedule the answer is usually yes.

Well you got an answer from A GUY from Rio. I have been a member out there for dogs years and that was the info I was given. But you can believe whatever you want. That is pretty much how I heard it, with the addition that the Dessert Classic people agreed and weren't pressured into the change

My experience is similar - random range brass reloads and some Winchester +P JHPs fire and extract but with loads in new Starline brass I get light strikes and have to pound on the extractor rod to get the empties out. I plan to try the now once fired Starline brass (and test some other ideas) this weekend.

The OP lives in Arizona and we don't have a winter slow down. But don't think that it doesn't get cold. I had a long sleeve shirt on for the entire match Saturday morning. And as a side note, for Classic shooters we had 8 out 17 Saturday and 6 out of 35 the previous Sunday so Classic isn't weak here. This is how I read "6 shot neutral" and also the problem I have with it. But most here seem to interpret it as something along the lines of "reasonable to shoot with 6 shot gun" so maybe the stages of shoot-a-few-targets-eleventy-twelve-times aren't widespread.