Chuck Anderson

I don't think it would apply to a new Division. I also agree with Scott. It's per Division. You can change something in Open one year, and Limited the next. I do have a local guy with a CZ 75 with a dot on top for shooting Steel Challenge. Not sure if he shoots open (where the gun would work) in USPSA or not. I am currently having a discussion in the Revolver forum about what to do with Divisions that don't have enough participation to even recognize them at a Level 3 match. Not inclined to create another division which may or may not have any participation, when every gun that has been discussed can be shot in Open already. It's not like we ban the guns. They just aren't as competitive. If we go down the road fo dividing and subdividing every division till everyone's gun is the ideal platform for that Division we might as well just pass out participation ribbons. I have a Browning Hi-Power that isn't really competetive in Limited or L10 because it's only Minor. Can I have a Limited-13 (minor only) Division? Lots of people own the gun. It's really quite popular.

Yes, they are up now.

What happens if the screws aren't tight?

Why? What part, letting them know, or them switching because there wasn't enough participation. I guess I'm not getting the issue. BTW, that happens all the time at 3 Gun matches. Not enough in Heavy or Limited. Gives folks a chance to switch gear and shoot for recognition if they choose.

Depends on the rule set. I've seen matches where it's not allowed. You definitely need to read up on that option.

That's kind of why I'm asking. This is one I'm on the fence about. On the one hand, it keeps small divisions/categories/classes from being recognized, but at the same time it makes the times they are recognized more special. I've been at matches that awarded (level 1 or 2) classes and categories that only had one person in them. Do we really want participation ribbons? But at the same time is it fair to the guy who really did kick ass to not be recognized? We had two GM's at Area 1 in Revo. There's no way anyone can say that was an easier win than L10, which had one GM and the rest of the 28 shooters were A or lower. If there's an argument either way I'm not thinking of, let me hear it.

The advertising revenue from the click count on the USPSA website was $113K. I don't have a number yet for revenue generated off the emails but I'm guessing it will be in the same ballpark. It's a bit over my head, but there are a couple guys who do know what's up who have explained it to me. I just need them to use smaller words. Basically it's money the advertisers and sponsors pay to reach USPSA members. The ad agency coordinates getting all the sponsors, billing them and making sure the revenue gets to USPSA. It doesn't cost the members a dime, and generates a good chunk of revenue that can be used for projects without taxing members. I have a really hard time seeing how this is a bad thing. Like I said, I have questions, but it's more about what portion of the money we receive, what we're going to do with it to better USPSA, and making sure that members who don't want it don't need to receive it (that's a 10 second process, just unscubscribe at the bottom of the page). For now the content is just OK. As we get more involved with this we'll be able to make better and more timely communication with the membership, but more importantly, people who aren't members yet. I've seen USPSA marketing the email to groups not traditionally involved with USPSA. If we can get them reading about it, that's one step closer to getting them shooting it.

Will we need slings again, if so for what guns? Do you have a link to the squadding? Can't find it any more.

So you'd rather use member money to send emails by paying a commercial service, rather than use an ad agency to do it, not only for free, but to give us a significant amount of money back that can be used for other marketing efforts, like running Junior Camps, updating the USPSA website, new scoring programs, USPSA App, etc. Just want to make sure i'm on the same page here. Let's see, $113,000 in lost revenue, 22,000 members, Charles, go ahead and send in your $5.00 check now for the additional membership dues. I'm not saying it's perfect, and I'm saying there are a lot of questions to be asked still, but I do think this will be beneficial in the long run. Why not give it a bit of time to get sorted out?

Nothing to do with 6.2.5. That has to do if you show up at the Single Stack Nationals with an Open gun or something along those lines, or if you forget to declare a Division at registration. The relevant rules are found in Appendix 2. This is the rule that would have to be changed to allow recognition for less than 10 competitors are Level III and greater matches. It doesn't mean 7 guys can't compete against each other in Revolver Division at an Area match. It does mean they can't receive a plaque for winning their division. APPENDIX A2 USPSA Recognition Prior to the commencement of a match, the organizers must specify which Division(s) will be recognized. Unless otherwise specified, USPSA sanctioned matches will recognize Divisions and Categories based on the number of registered competitors who actually compete in the match, based on the following criteria: 1. Divisions Level I and Level II A minimum of 5 competitors per Division (recommended) Level III / Nationals A minimum of 10 competitors per Division (mandatory)

So Federal Tactical(low recoil) buckshot is out for the spinners? I just like the way it patterns. Certainly not a hard hitter.

At a level one or two match the numbers are recommended. For level three and above the minimum participation numbers must be reached before they can be recognized. The prize table thing is not really in the book and as far as I'm concerned do it however the MD wants. But as far as that silly piece of wood, it's gotta be by the book. If we need to change the book I'm open to that. As far as changing L10, I'm not seeing it as an issue in my part of the country. Haven't seen a match without enough L10 to recognize. I'll tell you the one that's really frustrating is Junior. I hate not recognizing the high junior in each Division because only one has enough registered.

Well I also can't get my local steel club to join Steel Challenge so the rules don't matter much to them.

Question for you guys. After Area 1 I had a Revo shooter ask me about waiving the minimum number of shooters to recognize a division. I've always been reluctant to do so at championship matches. I think if a shooter says they were the Area 1 champion it should mean something more than beating two other guys. (Not referring to this year but we have had three in Revo before). It just seemed like it would be a meaningless award. His argument was that if shooters knew they would be recognized they would shoot the division. This is the same argument used at the Multigun Nationals to stimulate participation in Limited, Heavy Optics and Heavy Limited and it does seem to be working there. This match would also have been a good one to try it at because there were a couple really great shooters pushing each other to the end. I even had my 625 ready to go if the numbers had been close enough where one more would have made a difference. (That would have been even uglier than the match I did shoot). Question is, should we grant an exception to the 10 shooter minimum for a few years and see what happens. It will result in a few paper champions, but might stimulate enough growth to recognize it eventually.

The opposite actually. Last term, I do what I want now. (I was going to make a political statement but would never violate the terms of the forum...again)

Bastardization, attempt to get more than three guys at a major match to shoot it. You say potato...

I just picked up some MGM Steel Challenge targets to practice for 3GN. 10" rounds. I can adjust the 2x4s to mirror the arrays 3GN uses and don't have to go down range to reset all the time. I can also use them at distance for normal 3 gun practice as well. Pretty darn affordable as well.

Nope then the whining is just about how come the staff got this or that on their prize table.

I am no where near dedicated enough to spend hundreds of hours of work to put a match together and not shoot the thing. Based on the last two years experience, I'm going to shoot it like crap again this year. But I am going to shoot it. My take on the ethics question is that it has much more to do with the people involved than their decision to shoot or not. If you think the MD and RM are not ethical, do you really believe that they wouldn't just take something from the sponsors before it even hits the prize table? And I'm not even saying that is a bad practice. I've given the RO's prizes ahead of time. I know dang well that they don't shoot as well as they could. It's never anything big, flash hiders from PWS, or headlamps from LED Lenser. Stuff like that. Even some big ass lights the first year. But they were all prizes the specific sponsors wanted to give to the RO's. Do I think it's right to give away a rifle or other high end prize to the staff, sure why not. But it should be in the open. Either during awards or make it darn clear to everyone what happened to the gun, and why. MGM Ironman gives away a Ms. Congeniality award (they might not call it that) to staff. It goes to the RO that made it a great match. Do I begrudge Craig Outzen for winning a pair of binoculars? Absolutely not. He's a blast as an RO and I wish I could clone him, just don't tell him I said that. I do design almost all of the stages for my match. None of them are sneaky or tricky and I haven't seen one yet where designing it was an advantage. I did have one last year where it was a definite disadvantage. I put it on paper with a way I intended it to be shot. Saw it during the main match and realized there was a much better way. I probably would have spotted it as a competitor, but not as a stage designer. I do walk through every stage multiple times, but every competitor has that option as well. I don't shoot them ahead of time. Not even an array. I don't fault MD's or RM's who choose not to shoot. I know several that just wouldn't have any fun doing it. I know if the match is going bad, or behind, or for any of a hundred other reasons, I may not finish. First priority is the match. But hopefully I did my job up front well enough the match will cruise smoothly. As far as the part about the RM making all the decisions, if there's a question on his stuff, the MD reviews it and vice versa. I don't like anyone enough to lie or cheat for them. I'm certainly not going to violate or even bend a rule for someone just because they are on staff. Just ask my RM from last year at M3GI who I DQ'd. Sucked and he argued it just like any other competitor. But he didn't bring the RM position into the argument, didn't threaten to walk off and go home. He took it like a man and continued to work the match and volunteered to come back again this year.

Pete, how in the world did you pick Joe Procopio from Techwear's last name as a screen name? I thought you had some guy from New York working on this for you.

Damn that's funny.

Shooter can do it but should also make sure all his ammo is where it's supposed to be before he starts. I've had it happen and seen it lots where someone "helpful" picks upmthenprevious shooters mags and grabs the next shooters instead. That's a fun stage when you get to the next barrel and nothing is there. I also don't really see a rule to grant a reshoot. Nothing changed after make ready. Hmmm.

MGM has a new hanging target. Basically rebar for the legs and cross piece. The kit has the hanging target and the joint pieces for the legs. Really economical price wise. Might be the ticket, especially if you're looking for a practice target.

What kind of "sensitive material" could a uspsa meeting possibly have to address? Please give an example, even if its not the specific issue from this particular secret meeting.Employee evaluations, employee discipline, member discipline and suspension, civil liability, negotiations on contracts where release of information could jeopardize a bargaining position. Just off the top of my head.

No thanks I'll take the penalty