Blueridge

I can appreciate your standpoint, and see merit in your point that different shooters have to shoot the array differently. That is a much different concern than saying that it is a gimmick. The thing that all of the shooters share on such a stage is that none of them know how they will have to engage the array before seeing the card. They have to execute a plan they come up with on the fly, and I personally like the idea of that. I might totally screw up such a stage, But I would place the outcome of the stage on how I handled it. The credit or blame goes to me, not the stage. Shooters have ingrained in them that you don't shoot the "white" no shoots, but to make them have "random" no shoots changes the way they deal with a stage. Not being able to make a certain plan before the buzzer sounds takes shooters out of their "comfort zone", and of course some won't like that.

In opposition to many who do not like this kind of stage, I'll support the use of such. If you can remember to avoid "no shoots" then you can handle a "random no shoot". The challenge is that you cannot simply plan how you are going to shoot the course during the walk through or while watching other shooters go through the course. This is a POSITIVE challenge, and not a "gimmick". It causes you to make conscious decisions AFTER the buzzer sounds, instead of making a plan before the buzzer sounds and carrying it out after the buzzer sounds.

I had to pick other, because I participate in several sports. My primary sport is olympic style fencing (Foil, Epee, and Saber), with the shooting sports coming after that (IDPA, USPSA, SASS, etc...). My focus is on fencing, which takes up the major portion of my free time. There are better shooters than me, and there are better fencers than me, but I have yet to meet someone that is better at both than me. The fact that I can do well in both the shooting and fencing is more important to me than being the best at any one style of either. I have qualified and competed in the last 8 US Fencing Summer Nationals in Foil, Epee, or both. That in my view makes me a sportsman in general, due to the effort envolved to do so. The fact that I do not focus all my efforts in one sport is likely to suggest to many that I am a hobbyist. My shooting performances will continue to improve, and so will my match finishes.

I personally use a Sidearmor kydex holster for my 625, but I have used Bianchi leather holsters with other revolvers that I have. Galco has the Dual Position Phoenix and Silhouette High Ride Holster that can be used for your 625. One of these might fit what you are looking for.

What can be interesting is when they put a "shoot" target in front of a knockdown target. You have to put 2 in the cardboard and make sure the knockdown goes down. In the NC State Match they had that setup, and the knockdown activated two swingers along with a drop turner. That was a very interesting stage to shoot and watch. Oh and you were shooting seated in a vehicle. The target hiding the knockdown was on the right side of the vehicle, while the swingers and drop turner were on the left side of the vehicle.

I am left eye dominant and right handed, but can (and have) switched to shooting with my right eye in some stages. Sometimes it happens when shooting around barricades on the right side, but not often. I realized that it happened at a few matches, but my shooting did not suffer. When using a recurve bow I shoot left handed due to my eye dominance, but I can shoot near as well right handed.

I assume the chrono procedure follows from the principle of "using full-power ammo" in IDPA. You can't very well expect a guy to load his 4" gun, which is already at a competitive disadvantage to a 5" gun, with hotter ammo so as to make power factor? Realistically, everyone shoots a 5" gun and loads down to 165,000, but they don't want the guy who actually is shooting a short, lightweight carry gun to be at an even further disadvantage. Given that there are several ways to make power factor, a person with a short barreled firearm would not necessarily be at a disadvantage. I use a Ruger Alaskan (2 1/2" barrel) in IDPA and USPSA, and when I was last at the chrono at a match my PF was 185. Now you can use a light bullet that moves fast (likely getting less felt recoil) or a heavier bullet that moves a bit slower (likely getting more felt recoil). The 185PF was not my intent, as I was working for 170PF apporximately. I found that I had seated the bullets a little too deep, leading to the higher PF.

Just responding to the 7 and 8 shot revolver restriction mentioned above. As far as the rules are concerned it seems to me that a revolver that has a 7 or 8 shot capacity can be used in Production division per USPSA rules. I would consider doing so myself if I had such a revolver. Heck, given the lack of revolver shooters at most of the matches I have been two, I have been tempted to use my 6 shot in production.

Just in case I have been misunderstood, I would like to add this.... I see classifiers as a good thing, mainly because it groups shooters with others who are on the same level as far as classifiers go. Part of the appeal of the classifications is that shooters do not have to worry about going heads up with the best shooters at matches. They can focus on being the best in their classification. I would venture to say that fewer people would participate in the sport if there were not the classifications grouping shooters. What I have realized perplexed me is that I don't see many people saying that they would like to improve how they did at say the Area 6 Championships, but focusing on what rating they are. Improving the skills that are requisite to good shooting competition is what I think we all strive for, but we gauge our improvement in different ways. Being realistic I don't see myself exceeding C class in revolver, if I get there even. My usual goal is to find out how many revolver shooters are at a match, and endeavour to finish as high on that list as possible. I don't worry about what the others are rated, but concern myself with doing my best on the stages. I am not suggesting that the classifier system be changed. I am trying to find out (as I have gained insight from the replies so far) how people look at the classifier system, as it compares to actual match shooting. There is a difference in my opinion, but I want to know other's views.

I AM NOT A SUPERHERO I do not wear a cape. I cannot fly through the air. Bullets can hurt me. I cannot be everywhere at once. I am not perfect. I cannot raise your kids for you. I am only doing my job. COPS......Let's give 'em a break.

I see the classifiers and the matches as two different creatures. I am a competitive fencer and in fencing there is a classification system also. The ratings go from "E" up to "A", and are based off of how athletes finish in rated tournaments. The ratings are used to even out the pools, by spreading out the rated fencers evenly over the initial pools. Th results from the pools are used to place the fencers into the direct elimination brackets to the finals. Having a particular rating helps in your placement in the pools, as the higher rated fencers won't generally meet until the direct elimination brackets. Now I compete in all three weapon categories (Foil, Epee, and Saber) and have never made it above "D" rating. That said I have qualified (and competed in) the last 8 US Fencing Summer Nationals (Div. II & III), which is more than many in my division can say that are higher rated than myself. My classification/rating is seperate from my actual fencing accomplishments, as my classification does not reflect how well I have done in competition generally. Yes improvement made shooting classifiers show growth, but does not directly mirror how well a shooter will do in actual matches. With classifiers being posted for everyone to see, it is easier to prepare for them. Matches are a different animal because of the limited time to prepare to shoot them. You get one shot at stages in a match, as opposed to the multiple chances you can have to practice classifiers.

I prefer using a DAO handgun in competition, if I am not using a revolver.

Yeah, but who wants to have THAT much fun?????

I'm new on the block myself. Being that I compete in CAS, IDPA, USPSA, and olympic style fencing (Foil, Epee, and Saber) it has been my experience that chasing ratings is often counterproductive. If you earn them along the way while improving your overall skills it seem the better way IMO. Nothing against those who have earned the higher ratings. Heck, I chose to compete with revolvers in .45 Colt using speedloaders, when I could have used a .45 ACP that uses moon clips. For that matter I have a few autos that I could use instead of revolvers.

After reading and posting to this forum for a while, it seemed to me that there is a strong focus on ratings over general improvement. Of the many match results I have read online from several states, it seems to me that being an "A" (for example) means little when you have lower rated shooters often finishing ahead of you. I have seen where shooters who "own" classifiers have just as much trouble with match stages as novice shooters. I post this because I have read a number of posts from people who (for example) have the goal of making "A" by the end of the year, when it would make more sense to me to shoot matches better. I can see the benefit of classifications grouping shooters in categories, but don't see the ratings being the best measure of skill.

Hey, I compete in USPSA and IDPA with a Ruger Alaskan using HKS speedloaders. Given that I am shooting .45 Colt and have a 2 1/2" barrel I do pretty well for myself. I have a S&W 625 and choose to use the Ruger with speedloaders over the S&W with moon clips. I have a blast competing with it, and shoot with auto users on my squad normally. My goal is to beat them on at least a few stages each match, as there are few revolver shooters at most matches that I attend. I recently bought a Ruger Super Redhawk (7 1/2" barrel, .454/.45), and I plan to use it in some of the future USPSA matches (along with some steel matches). It's all about the competition (and gun handling practice) for me, and not chasing ratings. Have fun with what you have, until you get what you want to use. Then get serious if that is your goal.

Well I am here on the coast of NC near Ant Hill Range. I get to Oxford Range when I get a chance, for both IDPA and USPSA. I look forward to seeing you at a match. I shoot mainly revolver in both disiplines, but occasionally I shoot SSP and Production.

Ah... Okay, I was curious. It would not be worth the effort to get it for Limited 10, as I have other option for that purpose. Outside of revolver and production I don't really have much interest in the other divisions.

I don't know what happened to my original post, but I was trying to get some info and opinions on the Beretta 96 Combat Combo. I understand that it is not imported to the USA, although I do not know why. It is the first handgun that has interested me enough to consider open division, but I have no idea if it would be worth using for that purpose. Or if it would be worth the bother of finding out what it would take to obtain one.

Ah, but I use a Ruger Alaskan .454/.45 (using .45 Colt of course ) which has a 2 1/2" barrel. On those long field courses (30+ rounds needed), I feel that the others in my squad could take a nap while I am completing them. It's all about having fun to me. Of course I strive to win, but it has to be fun to keep me coming back. Since I participate in SASS, IDPA, and USPSA I find it easiest to just reload .45 Colt for all of them. I have one load for SASS and one load for the other two. None of them are loaded light.

+1 on the Sidearmour holster. I have one for my S&W 625 and it works like a charm.

Just a hop, skip, and a jump from me..... Now I just have to be ready to make a respectable showing shooting revolver.

Well I use a Ruger Alaskan (.454/.45) that has a 2 1/2" Barrel and weighs about 42 ounces. I use it in USPSA and IDPA with .45 Colt, and if I do my part it will keep me in the hunt with other longer barreled handguns. The actual sight radius is about 5 1/2" from the rear sight to the front, but with a 7 1/2" barrel it would be about a 10 1/2" sight radius I believe. This is only a 1" to 1 1/2" shorter sight radius than many full size autos. Part of the issue with shorter barrels is that any movement that the shooter makes has a "magnified" effect on where the projectile goes. If the front sight moves slightly to the left with my 2 1/2" barrel, the point of impact will be farther than if the same happened with a 7 1/2" barrel.

Well I use HKS speedloaders (safariland does not make speedloaders for .45Colt ), so the moonclip issue does not effect me. I do have a S&W 625 that I use moonclips with, but I like my Ruger Alaskan better for competition. I use the Alaskan in IPSC, IDPA, and Steel matches along with competiong in CAS matches with single action revolvers. Thus it is easier to load .45 Colt for all of the disiplines. At the chrnograph at the last NC Sectional I had a 185PF , but I had meant to load for 170PF. Apparently I had seated the bullets a little too deep.

Out of curiosity, what revolver do you shoot?