Chuck Anderson

I'm seeing 132 places on the results for the main match and another 50 in the Rimfire match. I'm sure some of those are Multi division entries but that's a lot more than 60.

Blue, definitely.

If it doesn't have a comp, doesn't have an optic, doesn't have a magazine longer than 141.25 mm and shoots a .40 caliber bullet to make major you can do it. 5" slide with a 9" barrel with a weight hanging off the end, *thumb rest [generic]*, tungsten mag well, don't care, do what you think will make you win. I'm guessing the 2013 Lim Nationals will be won with a gun that looks an awful lot like the one that won this year.

If you want to put a barrel weight on for 2013 have at it. As long as it doesn't have ports, you should be fine.

Lots of factors here. Is the gas port still on the same setting. Did you clean it. Where are the empty hulls landing, close or far? What weight 1911 spring did you use? If the shells are close you might have put too heavy a spring in or changed to a lighter gas port setting. Far away and you might have too light a spring or too much gas and outrunning the mag spring.

I heard there was some dude on his squad ripping on HK the whole match. That's a filthy lie. It was no more than two stages.

I heard there was some dude on his squad ripping on HK the whole match. I wonder if it was an HK P30-L-S, DA/SA, or P30-L with LEM trigger? I heard it was the DA/SA. Very comfortable gun. Recoil springs could be lighter though. I had both...I prefer the DA/SA. Accurate gun. DA/SA, as wtih all four guys on the HK team. They said they preferred it to the LEM.

Munier shot an HK P30L.

I've actually shot a handful of perfect or nearly perfect doubles. Can't think of one in USPSA though. All in GSSF and almost all on the first target of Glock M or Five to Glock. But that's putting 6 rounds into a four inch circle at 5 yards. The odds go up, a lot. I do remember watching a Super Squad shooter claiming a double on a very close target, angled on the ground. He was very convincing. Until you watch the footage on Shooting USA and see the second round hit several inches away from the target.

There is an NROI interpretation on the website that covers it. Basically what we're looking at is a standard production holster attached to a race gun holster belt hanger. It allows for more adjustment than a BladeTech DOH but doesn't really change anything. They are perfectly legal.

Most people don't need an RO class for the rules to be perfectly clear. But most of the stuff you get all worked up about is covered in the book already and could be pretty easily explained. Both from a what does the rule mean and a why is it there point of view. You have this tendency to view the rule book as wrong when it doesn't support your view of what the rule should be. Just because you do t agree with what the rule says, doesn't mean it isn't clear. As far as race holsters in our sport. The rule was written to cover available technology at the time. And did so quite clearly. After a decade, people started usin hybrid race/production holsters. By that, a race hanger with a regular holster attached. I doubt anyone anticipated that's where the market would go. If you did ten years ago I'm sure you'll make a bundle on your new holster trend. There will be a constant string of new equipment coming into the sport. Some anticipated and some not. There are smarter guys than me coming up with stuff to make us go faster. The rule book is not intended to be fluid enough to keep up with those changes. That's what NROI rulings are for, if needed.

So you tried something that had never been tried before and the RO questioned it? OK. What's your point. I've had ROs make incorrect rulings before. There is a process fr resolving disputes. Arbitration and or doing what you did which was contact DNROI. Without getting into an approved holster list, or taking three pages to describe what a race holster is this will remain a bit fuzzy to you. It's crystal clear to me based on conversations with John. Brandon, the reason you are catching crap on this is because most of what you complain about is clear to most people that have been to an RO class. A read of the book would clear things up. But some people need an RMI to explain stuff as well.

And nowhere has there been an example of any rule that is unclear regarding any safety issue. The fact that some people don't bother to read and comprehend the rule book before spouting off about needed changes does not negligence make. The safety rules are clearly defined and as a result USPSA has an enviable safety record. Making statements such as you have are merely posturing to try and make a point. There is no need to take an RO class to safely compete in USPSA. However, if you want to fully understand the rules the class is helpful. No different than saying a lawyer only needs to read law books in order to practice law. Or did you have to take a class or two before taking the Bar?

Lawboy, can you provide an example of one of these negligent issues you're talking about? If its the belt thing that caused this thread to start, that is pretty clear to anyone with a 12 th grade education and a basic level of reading comprehension. The penalty for failing to comply with divisional requirements is spelled out. Just not for every single instance. If you don't comply you go to open. If you don't comply with open you shoot for no score. As far as winning a lawsuit on what division somebody shoots in. Well good luck with that. I believe the safety rules would likely have a higher potential for litigation. And a you pointed out. They are very clear, without takin a class.

thanks for posting the photos. it looks to me like at least 2-3 others in the picture have the belt in a similar position (related to their own anatomy, not to their clothing), and I remember at least a couple others not pictured that seemed similar to me too. And of course, going by the rulebook picture, the majority of competitors (male and female) appear to be illegal. How do you choose who to punish? It is only an issue if they were shooting production. It appears that for men, 5.2.3 requires the belt to be worn at 'waist level' for all divisions. It also appears to me (tho there may be a ruling otherwise) that the diagram in appendix E3 is mostly intended to show the fore/aft positioning of the gun and equipment behind the hipbone, rather than illustrate what 'waist level' means. Is this diagram the reason people think the exemption for women to wear their belts lower doesn't apply to production? That seems like quite a stretch to me, but perhaps there is some history behind this that I'm not aware of. Nothing to do with E. if you read appendix D on the chart there is a line the reads 5.2.3.1 applies followed by yes or no. In Production and SS it says no. This means, man or woman, the provisions of 5.2.3 apply in Prod and SS.

I think its a whole lot of BS. She outshot everyone in her category. After she shot all the stages she gets bumped? From the pictures of the other female competitors i have seen she was not alone with odd belt placement. You're are incorrect on you assumption that she went through the whole match in Production. The Arb was filed at about 1:35 on the second day of the match and decided that afternoon. I think (not 100% positive which schedule she was on but I believe AM/PM/AM) she only shot about a third of the match before being bumped. Steel1212, read the thread. The rule that allows female competitors to wear the belt below the waist does not apply in Production per Appendix D. It's been mentioned a couple times before. To the couple of guys who keeps quoting the last half of 5.3.2 as reason why the belt can be anywhere. You need to read the whole rule, not just the sentence you think supports your position. 5.3.2 starts off by saying the belt must be worn at the waist ... Period. It then describes how the belt must be worn, either securely fixed or with three belt loops.

That you're gonna have to talk with Phil about. Not sure if he's planning a staff match or not. It is planned as a Fri- Sun match for about 375 competitors. Beyond that its still too early to know for sure. I have worked for Phil as an RO and he always did his best to take care of staff during those matches. I hope he can work something out here as well.

I looked at her gun at the USPSA Nats. Had adjustable sights. Did not look like they were milled in like the Shadow Target. They looked like they were in the factory dovetail, just like the new sights from CZ Custom that don't require milling. But I'm sure there are more rumors about specific shooters cheating we can throw out there. Oh wait that violates forum rules and we should probably knock it off before a mod slaps us around.

Just texted Phil. Plan is still for Tulsa. No validity to the above rumor.

Couple CROs and the RM noted it and made the call. I was on the Arb committee and there was no mention of any others competitors complaining about her belt position.

Not sure about Monday. On Saturday and last night at the second members meeting Phil said he's still working on the contract for Tulsa. Limited followed by the Open/L10 is still scheduled in St George, Utah the end of September. Production Nationals in October in Tulsa. This is what was announced and the only thing I've heard.

It had more to do with creating an easily enforcible set of rules. So many of the old ones, 500 units, recoil devices etc were just vague. Do the really wide ambi safeties count as a recoil device? Do tungsten mag wells counts as weights? Do I need to have 500 complete guns, components, or similar guns to be legal? Who keeps track? It was a mess IMHO.

Not of the current version. Online only.

That is correct. There are about 500 people on that list, not everyone will make it in. We'll have a better idea of numbers once payment and squadding open up. Out of area residents won't be entered into the match until Dec 15 and that will be in order of application. We're going to try and stuff as many people in during the main match and staff match again.

Ken just had shoulder surgery so he's holding off a couple days till he can type a bit. Shouldn't be long. We've got 500 entries so I want to make sure it's done right the first time.