Mayonaise

Joe's the mad scientist. That's a compliment Joe D. I swear!

Single stack .45's can be used in ESP class. Yep my typo. Just no logical reason to shoot them in ESP unless every COF benefitted 7 or 8 round mag capacity.

As long as you use the same capacity magazines for the entire match you're good to go. Your gun just needs to fit in the box with whatever mags you're using. So yes, if you start with the 9+1 you should download the larger mags to 9 rounds. The max for ESP would be 10+1 to start and the reload mags capped at 10 also. BTW your 1911's are for CDP not SSP. And there's nothing wrong with shooting them in CDP (or ESP if other than .45 ACP). Many people including myself carry 1911's every day. Have fun!

I'm obviously not connected.

I'm not sure how he did it, but Austin Schall burned down stage 2. All the scores were entered twice, so it was not a typo in the scoring trailer. Dave S. was the only one to beat him on that stage! Yeah, that one makes you scratch your head. Perhaps an out of body experience.

Amen to that. He's a great guy. To borrow a line from Mr. T, "Pity the fool that screws with Austin". Austin is the best!

That's who I thought of on stage 2. He and Mitch. Two kneeling positions and a prone. Ouch.

Cuz we all know that 2 isn't enough to get the job done with your 126pf ammo Joe. Yeah no points down on the scores, High LE, Hi Ladies, High Senior, none of that. Did they hand out awards or make note in any of those categories at the awards?

I know one thing Jim. In those sanctioned matches it appears that the rules are subjective. I can support my position with the rulebook. But that won't get me anywhere when the stage is approved by the AC and the AC is the Rangemaster at the match will it? It's a valid shooting problem. But the effort should be made to make it happen within the rules is all I'm saying. I'm done.

I agree. Murphy and Mother Nature bit them in the ass. K.I.S.S. principle validated.

After pondering on this and discussing it with a couple of people I feel the best way to do this within the rules is with two targets. Scored separately, yet stay true to the MD's intent. I would probably make it 3 to the body and 1 to the head to reduce the chance that a shooter might fail to neutralize the front target.

Craig, Yeah it's in there. But it's used in a way that validates Dwight's point. Mark

Greg, The reason I would offer the body armor shots as misses is to eliminate the round dumping and courage the shooters to make the effort to follow/adhere to the intent of the stage design. Otherwise what's to stop the shooter from bypassing the torso and dump 3 rounds as fast as they can at the head? Either way it needs to be clearly addressed how the COF will be scored in the walk through and hopefully in the printed description. I'll agree with that to some extent. I don't like shooting traps where some target arrays require 2 and others require 3 etc... I don't have a problem though if the T1 target requires some extra rounds though. Those are realistic to me. Regarding your previous post about having the head scored separately from the torso. I don't think that's the right path either. We're shooting humaniod targets, not circles and squares. If you can't score the target straight up, you probably need to rethink the stage. Joe, That's the stage. I remember that clearly because RT and I were there on Friday and shot with Dave, Julie and the SO's. Myrin later agreed with me on the FTN issue on that stage. I don't know which AC approved this current one we're discussing but it's not legal IMO and open for a protest. Mark Yeah I think I stated that earlier. How can you enforce a COF like this if there is no rule to support it? Wide open for a protest IMO. The result might even be that the whole stage has to be wiped out of the scoring for everyone, which really sucks.

Scooter, That's partially correct. It's actually up to the MD and should be made clear before hand.

Joe, Jim, The stage in Alabama was SO'd by the former TN AC John F and Joe D. The AL AC was the MD and when I told them the as long as the shooter scored 4 points (prior to the current FTN rules) the target is neutralized. I was given that it's the same for all shooter line. Well, sorry, that's not in the rule book. While it seems like a small thing that shot was difficult on a swinger. It was brutal for a MM or NV shooter. Even by their logic it wasn't the same for everyone. Easy for Sevigny, Hard for me, brutal for the novice and MM. I discussed this issue again with former AL AC and he finally admitted that it wasn't according to the rules. I can't believe it was AGAIN in a sanctioned match. I have no problem with failure drills in IDPA. But if the rules state that a target is neutralized by points (a hit in the minus 1) then that's the rule. I've seen it before in a club match. Two stages that the shooter was issued a procedural and an FTN for passing a target without scoring a head shot. Didn't matter how many times you scored hits to the torso. We nicknamed it "A murder match". To get back on point. This could have been solved by making the body hard cover. In the COF description make sure the shooters know that misses will be scored as misses. That way the head shot is required and satisfies the FTN requirement per the rules. Mark

Sorry to disagree with you Jim but this sounds like a carry over from Alabama 3 years ago. Same deal where they enforced this on a swinging target no less. If you want to simulate body armor, paint the body black and only score the head. That way a miss on the head would meet the rulebook requirement. Even then the required body shots couldn't be scored for points other than misses because of the "hard cover/body armor". As long as the shooter meets the rules requirement of at least one -1 hit or higher the target is considered neutralized by the rulebook. Being the same for everyone and "The rule book is for minimum requirements, nothing against the CoF setting higher standards." are not in the rulebook. The rulebook IS the standard for a sanctioned match. If ET45 protested the call the MD has nothing in the rulebook to support your position. If it can't be covered by the rulebook it should not be in a sanctioned match.

I don't think IDPA would ever adopt a min. trigger weight. I've never gotten all that wound up on the issue. I do wonder how many internet reading Dremel commandos have worked their "safe action" triggers to such a point where they have compromised the safety. That said, I have seen two people come to the line and watched their Glocks go full auto and earn a match DQ. So it makes you wonder. Light triggers on carry guns at some point becomes a liability issue. I would doubt that a manufacturer or custom builder would sell or do a trigger job for a carry package with a trigger weight under 3.5lbs for that reason. Most people I know understand that handguns aren't great primary weapons. In fact they suck. But until the day comes where we can go about our daily lives in America with a long gun slung or in hand they have to act as such at least until we can get to a proper gun.

John, Topping off 1911's is just a normal way of life. Glock "standard" capacity mags are so cheap now there's no reason not to have a slew of them. They function much better than the 10 rounders as well. I just change the springs out on them out of the box because Glock mag springs just don't hold up for me.

JFD, Well said. Pretty much sums up my experience. I think I get along just fine with my local friends that shoot USPSA. There's some ribbing but that's about it. I'll admit that I've allowed myself to get sucked into some of these "debates" and kick myself to doing so afterwards. If you're a gun person, your my brother/sister. I just don't like being treated like the bastard stepchild. Mark

Jim, it's obvious when you see it. And I know you've seen it. You shoot with Joe D. It's a tough judgement call to make so it has to be pretty damn obvious. In almost 10 years of IDPA shooting I've seen it called once and have never called it that I recall. So it's hardly worth going on about. Blacknight, I'd be willing to wager that Joe is better versed in the rules than his current AC. Mark

Jim, I know it's a sore spot for you but I've seen people dump into a berm to get to slide lock. So, are you going to call it for one and not the other? fFrom teh game stand point how is it different than some one intentionally not reloading to complete a string or COF? It's no different if the intent is to gain an advantage in time and score. When in doubt the call goes to the shooter. When it's blatantly obvious that the shooter is trying to gain a better score then it's a fair call. Naturally and astute MD or course designer can solve the issue before the stage is ever shot. Mark

I'm with you Joe. It's not called an "Emergency Reload" for nothing.

While I agree with Joe on one rule issue (initiating a reload only when behind cover) the other two (empty mag and round dumping) what I consider "game integrity" rules. With the emphasis on the word game. Would the game change much of they were removed? Not a lot but some. But they exist because there is a defense minded basis for them as already mentioned above. You won't be counting rounds in a gun fight and you shouldn't be dumping rounds in a gunfight for at least two obvious reasons. Since there are logical foundations for those two rules I have yet to hear a well communicated argument against them. I have yet to see anyone busted for dumping rounds unless it was blatantly obvious and they earned it. Joe, From what I hear BW isn't all that involved in the day to day anymore. What we are missing is an official training syllabus for the SOI's. That will eliminate most of the variances out there on how rules are interpreted. The biggest issue I see currently are SO's that are certified but still not really solid on the rules. Something that USPSA definitely has over IDPA IMO.

I don't care how you do it. Just do it in a reasonable amount of time and above all, safely. I constantly end up having to remind people to top off. Whether they do it intentionally or not. I usually remind people during the walk through that if they have high caps they are welcome and encouraged to start with 11 in their first mag to expedite the process. Some SO's force the top off. Either way works for me.

Most people who carry full size 1911's as work guns don't use FLGR's. FWIW.