SteveZ

I agree...its becoming clear through some of the discussions that this isn't about safety but trying to fix a "hole". I've also come to learn that they're viewing fault lines now as stage boundries. Cross a fault line and move foreward....penalties! This rule is just a means of trying to prevent stage designers and MD's from getting burned by a creative shooter. If a stage designer doesn't want you going somewhere....put up a real barrier. Invisible fences don't work (well for dogs they do) but I'd rather not get "shocked" with a pile of penalities for thinking creatively. This proposed rule is a BAD move in my opinion.

Yikes...now we're dragging up the dead! Ok..here's are my thoughts when I designed this classifier over a year ago. At the time, I was very much into Lim-10 (now shooting Limited instead) and PSSD wasn't even official (or semi-official) yet. So what I was trying to do is incorporate steel and paper in the same stage, get the round count up and maintain no more than 9 rounds from a single position. So I came up with this and made it comstock letting the shooter decide when and how they wanted to shoot it. I know its not a good idea to allow re-engagement of targets because it allows the shooter to "fix" a problem and for classifiers, thats not a good idea...but the extra shots to fix any misses is going to kill their run anyways. I've run this at club matches and gotten favorable feedback. Most people engage T1-T4 with two rounds on the first pass and also engage the steel....do the reload and re-engage T1-T4 (picking up any misses on the steel on the second pass). I had the chance to watch a couple PSSD shooters shoot it also...one was shooting minor and the other was shooting major. Both took interesting ways of solving the problem. However, now with the new draft rulebook, this classifier is dead. The new restriction is no more than 8 rounds from a single shooting position and that pretty much kills this one.

I'm hoping that when the USPSA turns the prototype rulebook over to the members for discussion...we can do some "en-mass" veto of some of these ridiculous rules that have been "passed".

Looks like a fun match. One comment....any stages that have steel plates on stands...try and do something that prevents the plate from inadvertantly falling when the stand is hit. Two methods I've seen are to place some V angle iron infront of the stand and the other is to use a hinged plate. Any hits on the stand that cause the plate to fall are going to be a mandatory reshoot. If your shooter "remembers" that they've got a previous mike or no-shoot....all they have to do is hit the stand, causing the plate to fall....and bingo.....reshoot saving themselves from a bad run.

it is..... http://www.stiguns.com/cart/aboutmags.html

provisional class....provisional CLASS...what the heck is a provisional CLASS? Oh...yeah they mean DIVISION! I think they're suffering from MV syndrome. The only way SS becomes non-provisional is if the BOD suddenly declares it so...or 2 years pass and it meets the minimum requirement for participation.

For anyone interested...here are some selected photos and videos (TGO shooing a couple stages...and winning the shoot-offs at the end of the match). http://s4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/vapors/WSSSC06/

Right on the bottom of their 2007 Contingency Program Policy "FURTHER CHANGES FOR 2007 - STI WILL NOT pay contingency awards for Limited 10. If Single Stack is a recognized division - we will pay the winner of each class, if he or she has met all the requirements." So....STI doesn't want to recognize a USPSA recognized division...but they will recognize a provisional division....yeah..that makes sense.

Hmmmm. Wonder why STI won't recognize Limited 10 in any match but will recognize PSSD. Seems a bit odd to me.

I had the same thing happen on my newly acquired STI Edge. I took a very thin drop of green penetrating Loc-tite and applied it to one side of the sight and then started working the sight hinge back and forth (removed the adjustment screw prior to doing this). The loc-tite did the trick. The pin doesn't drift at all now yet the sight is still free to move.

I'm guessing I must have one of the Chinese bags...I've had threading problems with the zippers to the main compartment that I've had to re-sew and problems with other threading in the bag.

With all this talk about range bags....I've got a Dillon range bag (blue) that I've used for a few years....and the zipper that goes around the "accessory side" (i.e. the opposite of where the gun goes) is starting to develop problems....the zipper doesn't zip the teeth together. Anyone else have this problem? I don't believe Dillon has a no-BS warranty on range bags. I've been thinking about replacing the bag with another Dillon..but if this is chronic problem (thats why I'm asking you guys)....then maybe I should consider something else?

The "success" requirement for PSSD reads: "Evaluation criteria will be set at 10-12 percent of the total scores entered from matches offering the provisional division." From club and area matches that I've attended, PSSD isn't even coming close to 10% participation....so why even consider dropping L10 and replacing it with PSSD? If L10 (single stack shooters) wanted to go play in PSSD, they would have already done so...but they haven't. Its pretty clear that the experiment isn't working out as well as it was hoped. This makes about as much sense as a car company dropping one of its most popular models and forcing customers to "choose" something that hasn't been selling well.

he's not the only one....look further up the tree. If the Area 6 AD is simply doing what he believes the majority of his constituents want.....does that mean that the USA RD is doing the same? I believe the requirement for PSSD to survive was 8% - 10% participation....is it making that figure anywhere? This 'problem' of too many divisions...may take care of itself.

Wow..I think I'm the poster child for what RickB just posted. I started out shooting USPSA with a single stack before there was L10. When L10 showed up, I thought "great, now I can compete with other guys shooting the same number of rounds as I am". Like RickB, I've tried shooting SSD equipment while registered as Lim-10 (and shot a few specialty SSD matches) and didn't have any fun....but when I started hearing the rumors of L10 demise back in the spring...I decided I was going to jump ship .... before the ship sank from under me. So I sold off my single stack and bought a hi-cap limited gun and switched divisions.....just like RickB said....this is going to result in fewer people shooting single stack guns rather than more. If SSD was never created...all of the discussion (here) and decisions on the USPSA's part for replacing/eliminating L10 never would have happened...and I'd still be shooting L10 today. It's funny how we've run with 5 divisions for years....but once a provisional division was added to the mix we SUDDENLY have way to many divisions and are facing a dilution of competion....and the provisional division (from what I've seen/heard) only account for a few shooters at your average club match. I didn't realize the difference between 5 and 6 was exponential.

Our Area Director? Yeah, I think we'll keep him! We're lucky to have Bruce as our AD. I've talked him numerous times about stuff, and he's always there to listen....even if his views on L10 (catagory) don't always agree with my views (division).

I won't argue it because it flat out isn't true. Ask anyone who is competitively shooting L10 with a single stack if they feel that they're at a disadvantage to a widebody and the answer will be no....previous L10 discussion here have proved this time and again. The key here is "competitive". It implies PRACTICING or putting forth effort. If people shooting single stacks in L10 don't want to practice and work at getting their reloads down...then they've got nothing to complain about.

Jim...I've often thought about doing a similar poll...but didn't. The problem as I see it with doing a poll like this is that you'll get input from people who don't shoot the division, don't know anything about the divisions (does anyone but the BOD know what "stock gun" is?) or don't care about the divisions in question. So you'll have, say maybe 30% of the membership passionate about the results and 70% who don't care. Those 70% (who have nothing to loose) will swamp the 30% (who have everything to loose) every time.

Well its nice to hear someone who is part of running the show finally come out and state this publically. What really irks me is that there seems to have been a smoke and mirrors campaign being run by some ranking members of the USPSA regarding what was being planned regarding Lim-10. I posted this quote below. It was made by what I would refer to as a "ranking member" of the USPSA in a different thread (I'll let all of you use your search engines to fill in the holes). but its fairly clear that the "knee jerk reaction" and "assumption" has turned out to be 100% accurate. I don't like being mislead...and I'm sure other members of the USPSA don't either.

Missoula Montana....

Thanks Gary...yes I do understand. I also want to thank you for your motion to decouple the discussions between making SSD a replacement for L10.

I noticed on the USPSA webpage BOD On-line meeting minutes area, there is already a header for what appears to be a vote on handgun rules SEE HERE. Is this what your refering to and where the votes on L10 will be revealed? Its my understanding that the draft version of the new rule book...didn't even have an L10 division.

This is what it looks like....a couple years ago via Google. http://tinyurl.com/yyaw3p

How do you pronounce, "Puyallup" ? ba Its funny to hear people who aren't from around here try and pronounce it. You can always tell who's a local and who isn't. Issaquah is another good one. Puyallup is pronounced "pew-al-up"