Mayonaise

No problemo! When in doubt, seek the highest authority. JoeD probably called HQ weekly for a while. He was proud of his tattered email printout about the legality of his Seattle Slug, until the last rule book anyway.

That sucks. Tough to loose a high placing for equipment, but being a master class shooter he should have known better. The rule has been in effect for close to two years and the subject has been hotly debated on every forum and most clubs. Holsters were becoming rediculous when you had guys wearing offsets designed for women and the makers changing them after being approved. I remember seeing a guy with a revolver holster that put the butt of the grip so far out I almost mistook him for a cowboy shooter.

I think you should email (info@idpa.com) or call (870-545-3886) IDPA HQ and ask. You don't seem satisfied with the answers you've gotten here.

It's legal. G34's and G35's have cut slides from the factory also. Though it was permissible before those two guns were released.

I never had issues with the previous rule book (LGB) to be honest. The range lawyers wanted definitive lines drawn. That what HQ did (for the most part). Those who don't like where the lines were drawn want them redrawn. That's the way it goes. I think it's kind of funny that people complain about a $20 holster. I spend that in gas going to the range and back.

Non-standard targets have been a part of IDPA since the beginning. I've used Newbolds, bowling pins, balloons (in the COM -0 ring) as triggers etc.... IDPA rewards accuracy as as long as it makes sense for a scenario or standards I've never had a problem with them. They just have to work reliably and not become an "administrative time killer", resetting or dealing with reshoots etc... Thanks Mark for acknowledging the "Same for everyone" deal. Every time I've heard that in a big IDPA match it is usually an excuse for a poorly designed COF or one that is clearly outside of the rulebook. Regarding "gotchas" being against the wheel gunners. Well I hate to remind people but you are only competing against shooters in your division. All the wheel gunners were in the same boat, so to speak (not to be confused with "same for everybody"). Comparing scores or numbers of reloads in a COF with people in different divisions is pointless. There's no high overall as much as people want there to be one. Nothing against Donnie, or anyone else who's had the lowest score recorded. But it's quite possible that the CDP shooters had to perform more reloads resulting in higher stage times. It's comparing apples and oranges. Funny how it comes up year after year.

And depending on the outcome of the elections in 2008. That and other laws may return with big sharp, pointy teeth.

Those who don't understand why round dumping is a no no in IDPA that should read the rulebook again, use the search feature on just about any forum or contact HQ and ask why it's a rule. I don't believe it going away anytime soon.

Good post Bob. I agree. We all strive for perfection, but sometimes sh*t happens. Mike gave out the appropriate penalty. I guess he's guilty of not wanting to give it until he was sure. If he didn't, someone, on some forum would be complaining about the guy that allowed an entire squad to dump rounds. Hindsight in the internet is always 20/10.

About 2 years late for this debate. It's not going to happen.

I'm with you Mark. I've shot in front of Mike's timer several times. That squad and that shooter put him in a bad position. Mike's a stand up guy and a great SO.

I won't comment on the incident because I wasn't there. If you've SO'd for as long as Mike has, you will know it when you see it and as he said, if you have any doubt at all you don't make that call. It's not rocket science. You give the benefit of the doubt to the shooter, until there is no doubt. The SO doesn't commit the procedurals or FTDRs. They just have the unpopular job of making the tough call. How many times have we seen an SO miss a call and the shooter got the "gift"? A lot more than bad calls, I'll bet. Agree with the dumping rule or not, it's there, so if you're going to do it, you do it at your own risk. Some people are more adept where others are are more obvious. I'll be willing to bet that it's bothers Mike more than the shooter. Good job Mike.

I'm sure Audrey would go for that too.

Scores are up. http://idpa.com/matchresults/2007_nationals/2007_nats.pdf

Jim, I guess I should have emphasized the words serious disadvantage. You're right there's almost always a disadvantage to some shooters having to shoot a complicated COF first. But if it takes repeated views to time moving targets etc.... I see it as a problem COF in IDPA. If you're going to keep the playing field level, the first shooter in a stage shouldn't get a kick in the groin before the buzzer goes off. Mike P makes a good point. Pretty simple stages can be made challenging by having multiple strings. Freestyle, strong hand and weak hand only strings are good ways that accomplish the desire of boosting round count and difficulty.

Those are good. I've modified some of them in the past when I was an MD. I learned from Headhunter years ago that the NRA "Armed Citizen" column is also a great source of material for COF design. You can even search those articles on the NRA sight. I used to search by number of combatants etc... Heck, living in a major city there's scenarios just about every day on the news or in the newspaper. Guess I'm old school. I don't see much of a need for Rube Goldberg in IDPA.

Interesting, I shoot IDPA almost exclusively but find its stages much more "silly" then USPSA stages. I hear you. There seems to be a lot more of that in recent years. I even wrote an article for the TJ touching on that issue. It's the biggest problem I see in matches anymore. 90% of self defense scenarios are generally straight forward and simple concepts. That's doesn't mean the stage has to be simple to shoot. If designed well, those are often the hardest COF's to walk away with a good time and low points down on. But in the effort to make matches entertaining, there seems to be a trend to design more complicated stages and then attached some contrived scenario to match the design. That's where I see IDPA moving more toward USPSA. A lot more "field" COF's. Challenging doesn't have to be complicated. If the first shooter to shoot a stage is at a serious disadvantage to the second or tenth shooter who's watched the shooter(s) shoot before him/her, that's a bad IDPA COF design IMHO. I've seen a lot of those in the last few years at big and small matches. My two bits. Mark

Personally I find most USPSA/IPSC stages silly and carnival like. It's more a game of "who skin the cat the fastest?". In respect of complication and required dress rehearsal USPSA is the "varsity" game. Generally speaking, people gravitate to one or the other for completely different reasons. Once you figure out which camp you're in, it's an easy choice.

FYI Chris or whatever his name is at ready tactical has dissappeared. I know two people (one who was a dealer for him) who sent holsters back for repair over a year ago (close to two) and can't get hold of the guy. I have two broken mag carriers and am in the same boat. I've not said anything online until now. I just gave up and bought replacements elsewhere. Buyer beware...

I believe the answer to the bolded statement has already been COVERED in this thread. Yeah, well common sense seems to dissappear when the range lawyers come out to play.

Cover is cover regardless of threats, non-threats, engaged or yet to be engaged. Cover remains cover. Logic and or tactical correctness no longer comes into the equation as far as the 2005 rules for the game go. When in doubt, ask the SO how he/she will make the call if you are uncertain.

I had one of my sons do that at home. I got the new prescription. Put the new lenses in at the eye doctor's office and went in the restroom for a few discrete sight pictures.

I'm actually one of those guys that when I hit my mid 40's my already bad vision started to change, again. I wear contacts with the dominant eye focused for reading distance and the non-dominant focused for long distance. I like actually like being able to read w/out pulling having to whip out reading glasses. Having a hard focus on the front sight isn't such a bad idea also. Guess I'm a "gamer" now unless I scribe "5.11" on the lenses.

The SC match was good. Ran real smooth for me and my friends. We shot 12 stages in 3.5 hours which is impressive. Pays to do an early recon and and spot the potential backup stages and get those out of the way first. I shot poor to start but finished strong. I had a good time and was home back in ATL by 3. Pretty hard to beat that.

Here they are. 2007_SC_State_Match.PDF