TGO

No, that's not what I mean. Why, do you think that? Or do you think that's what I mean?

It is not me.

This is the problem with these forums. Someone comes in and says something that is untrue, like I have posted on the doodie forum. They state info they are in no way correct about as though it is truth when it is a lie. That is what goes on on that other forum. Which is why I do not go there. I'm assuming that I wasn't at first being called a smartass but now assume I am being called that. This may be true but the poster doesn't know me and from what he has written earlier shows me where both his skill and knowledge in the sport is. Please keep these entrees on the other forums where they are appreciated. The Enos forums aren't a place for that. To be clear: the triggers on the da/sa guns are very light in sa mode. Very few da shots are fired and the gun is very heavy and kicks lightly.

You have NEVER seen me post on That other forum. It doesn't deserve your time.

No, Just everyone besides Eric is....

The trigger on Eric's gun is exceptional, not anything you are expecting it to be. Some have trouble lifting 5 lbs on da pull. They are very heavy and on many stages gun started empty so no DA shot was ever fired. IPSC rules (Not USPSA) are weighted to favor the da/sa guns and the Tanfoglio's being shot have a distinct advantage. Being competitive with other than a da/sa platform seems unlikely to me. This issue is cokming home to USPSA also amd needs to be addressed. The results confirm this. 9 is not more accurate than .40, but easier to shoot due to less recoil.

Unless that was the point, to learn what would cause those results so that you can avoid repeating. Never be afraid to fail when practicing. It's necessary in fact to regularly go beyond limits of control in order to push those limits further.

Or the shoes??

The natural ability thing is real. Everyone has some, some just have more. It's what is done with it and how it is developed that matters. I have trained many, many shooters and not all have the same basic tools, plus not everyone is wired the same. A really top level shooter, as in champion at the top of any discipline has incredible physical co-ordination, and not just hand eye. They know where their feet are, and what their weight distribution is at all times and have excellent balance. They are physically strong, and I do not mean fit. Few are exceptionally light or small. There are some who are exceptions to some of these observations, but not all of them. All have a drive to train and excel while training. All are driven to excel under pressure and hate failing. All see the sacrifices they make to reach the top levels as acceptable, when many others would not. Those that stay relevant for extended periods of time truly love the equipment, practicing and the environment at the matches and feel very comfortable around others like them. They almost all do what they do out of an insatiable desire to perfect and perform the skills they need. Speculation of what it takes to get to this level seldom centers around the core elements. It is natural ability, but that is a starting point. Natural ability undeveloped will not create a champion. Interestingly, I see natural ability frequently, it is not uncommon. Having the "heart and commitment" is most rare. By the way, another curious observation; when an exceptional shooter performs at an exceptional level, it isn't special to them. They have of course experienced the feeling many times before and are expecting greatness to happen, not surprised by it....

Oh Steve, you just wanna keep those 55 year old youngsters out of your class?? I get the idea, and I'm sure I'll agree with you when I'm looking at 60 instead of 55 ! However, in reality we need to adopt motocross age groups. 30+, 40+ etc... I think the IPSC 50 years of age for senior is about right. USPSA modified that to 55 as we in the states have a lot more old folks (like me) shooting than in other countries. The eyes going matter less on the easier shots we routinely have here than ellsewhere. I just returned from Sweden where I visited but did not shoot, a big IPSC event where the average difficulty of targets was probably twice what I routinely see in the states. And I might add, they used the two smaller scale targets routinely. Never any 5 yard shots on the fullsize targets. They used of course the other target we seldom see without the head which is of itself smaller than the target we routinely have here. It was a much harder cof for iron sights, and much more athletic. You could understand why a 50 year old with glasses would want the senior division to start as early as possible.

Wrong. Why don't you read the proposal? It has NOTHING to do with Open. I am trying to grow participation in the sport, this type of setup is going to be more prevalent, by getting out ahead of that growth with a clearly defined division USPSA has an opportunity to help grow that market and increase membership. I get that there are a few on this forum that are vehemently opposed to any new division and will try their best to prevent this from happening. The proposal in front of the BOD is Production Optics, not SS Optics or Open Minor or some variation of a theme. If you oppose Production Optics then tell your AD. If you want something different then write a proposal and submit it for approval. I could also live with it being just prod optics. Like this whole thing started as... I'm very wishy washy...

I like a lot of that idea, as long as we control the guns and the mods to keep it from being minor open. Miox the rules of Prod and SS, Minor caliber and a slide mounted optic not to exceed a certain size. External mods to be limited like SS and Prod.

hey open is not really in line with the practical thing, but to be honest lots of stuff we do is now a long way from any 'practical' roots of the sport. I thought the same. I loved shooting production because of the challenge of shooting standard power loads, with iron sights, in a production hand gun. it really gives good gun handling skills and helps develop a range of shooting skills. now my problem is I have keratoconus. I struggle even to get the correct prescription and looking through different parts of my eye gives me different levels of focus. it was really hurting my accuracy. I partly cured it by lots of dry fire which gave me better muscle memory which meant my head and gun were always aligned the same. but of course as soon as I got a low port, or a sitting position etc that went out the window. One day for fun I shot a mates open gun. we were standing at about 30 meters shooting a small round plate (steel challenge plate). I fired a shot, hit the plate. then started some fairly quick fire and just kept ringing that plate shot after shot. something I could probably not do repeatably with my production gun. So I bought an open gun and for the most part it takes your vision problems out of the equation. it may be not as close to 'practical' as a production gun but it's a shitload of fun!! make no mistake, loading for, and shooting a major PF open gun is still a challenge. and as far as practical goes I certainly wouldn't EDC a open gun, but if the zombie apocalypse hit it may well be the tool of choice.... I also think shooting open is helping make me a better production shooter. And you can mount an optical sight on your carry gun. many do, including myself. While I think we have to look at the concept of production optical, it needs to be kept in check and I for one do not think, as stated previously, they should allow us to be competing for the prizes and awards, except in the old fart classes. I'm only a couple seasons from that now in USPSA and am already there for IPSC. The way I see it is this; In a couple years I probably won't be able to see iron sights well enough to win an overall division. At that time it's more than likely that I won't win anyway. Old and fat catches up to you....However I may still wan't to shoot, and going for the senior titles mean more to me now than 10 years ago and probably will more in 2 years than now. It would be nice to be in a place where I'm not relegated to having to shoot open when the time comes. I'd probably rather shoot any division, with a compact optic mounted than open. That being said, the young and strong oughta be winning overall's, I'll just still want to be shooting my SS or prod or revo and if I had one, my optical sight should not compete against the irons. For those that want to shoot optics before the magic 55, let them. But not for prizes or awards except for seniors category. My bet is a lot of folks would choose to shoot Optic whatever if it was a division but not if it wasn't eligible for the prizes. Then we would see if shooters chose to use those types of sights just to stay in the game. On the other hand it sucks that someone not 55 but wanting to, or needing to couldn't shoot the division if they wanted too. So dump L10 and institute a new class called optical carry. Mix SS, Prod, Lim 10 all together and see who wants to do that. i think the division might be cool if we can keep the guns from becoming what was once IPSC modified. My bet is I try to shoot irons until I just can't. On the other hand, it makes a very interesting piece of equipment....

And combine Revolver with Super Senior. I bet I'll be shooting open when I earn the opportunity to shoot Super Senior...

It wasn't the first thing to go.....

Guys, I don't know whats gonna be the best way to handle the Prod Op thing, I just see it as inevitable that to keep on moving forward we ought to try it new things, and where better than in the most important and easily accessible division. If it's a good deal, then we could consider trying it in other places. Maybe it won't work out, but then again... I do know I'd hate it if everything became optics and there were no iron sighted divisions, so I can see the dangers inherent in the experiment. The reason we have limited, and then SS after that is because the technology and development went unchecked. It's ok that the guns in open are what they are now. We have options. Open is our top fuel division. Not everyone wants to play there however... Personally, I doubt I'd shoot Prod Op at the national level as I'd like to compete for the title as long as I could, but I bet I'd shoot it around my home club...,

I use +1.25 for uspsa and general speed shooting, +1.50 for Bianchi, +1.75 for bullseye and my everyday is +.25-.50 with 1.50 add bi-focal for reading. just for reading anywhere from 1.75 for computer screen to 2.00 for reading and working on guns etc... I use .50 for optical sights, same as my distance RX. With the amount of correction I need to see the sights well enough for quick work, I can't see clearly enough at distance for my liking... I'm lucky to have Dr. Kerry Pearson local, who is a GM and the great people Decot sport optics in Phx to keep me tuned up!!

Keeping the production division relevant would for me require us to not add optics as a division. As I said before, let it be a category in the division. Probably no other shooter in the sport is as affected by vision changes as I am. Getting older and losing speed of focus and the wide range of depth I could see clearly at is a factor, but I have stayed somewhat competitive nonetheless. Still, I do not want to loose the integrity of the competition and we have enough divisions now. We could do with less. The more I think about it, the more I bet those that need the optics would not care if they were excluded from the overall and class titles. They aren't likely to win those anyway. They are shooting open now to allow the optical sight? If they are willing to enter in production with a prod op knowing they are only competing for sub category recognition, then I believe you have accomplished something. Found a real need and addressed it. BTW, I'd usually and gladly ditch L10 for ProdOp. Except this year where many IPSC Classic shooters will be using that equipment at the Nationals as a prep for the World Shoot...

I would agree with this. We already have lots of shooters whose guns would without the slide mounted optical sight be legal in other than open division. I do find it curious that this matters more to me now that my eyes can't as clearly see the sights on my carry gun than for aiding me in competition use.... I wonder if maybe IDPA is thinking about a compact optical sight division???????

The real world advantage of a slide mounted and therefore compact fitting of an optical sight is not for the competition shooter. We can wear our awesome shooting glasses to see the sights on the range, but I have to have the right prescription to see those sights properly, and that RX is no where near what I have for the rest of my day... Think big people. most folks aren't mounting these sights on their personal guns to shoot at a competition. The vast majority of handgun optic sights being sold today are for other than competition use. We need to be leading the way and be progressive yet remember our history. Because while optics are coming, the percentage of handguns wearing these are infinitesimal compared to the iron sights out there. Having said that, what is it that makes us want this sight. It isn't needed to make the competition interesting or fair. It's too keep the innovation and development of equipment and technique at the forefront of development for the practical use of the pistol. To me, adding production optics as a division only makes sense if the equipment is kept sensible and usable for the desired use. Whereas open has gone so far down the performance at all costs road, (and so has limited and L10) The other divisions are still reasonable. Adding the optical sight, or any other enhancements to performance shouldn't make the device unusable for other than competition use. So adding a new division makes sense in many ways although I am not for that yet. I am for allowing it in any division for sub categories. It may not work? There may be no way to keep the size, cost and weight of the devices reasonable. Do you really want to HAVE to mount a sight costing more than the gun to shoot the division? So adding this as a division seems premature. Lets find a way to try it first. If it works out that the division is viable, then we move forward. Remember that production (the most important division) is there to offer an alternative to our overly developed and irrelevant to the rest of the shooting world open and limited divisions. SS by the way is probably the second most important division. Remove it and see what industry and sponsor response is? The 1911 is the single most produced model of handgun. While some clubs may not see as many revolvers and SS entries as we do here in AZ, keeping strong industry support and involvement is more important than some may think. NASCAR versus F1 here. Go to your local public range and see what people are shooting, what they actually buy with their own money. We need to keep modifications in check. Baby steps. Keeping the guns reasonable (optics on production may not seem reasonable to many) is more important than many USPSA competitors recognize. IDPA exists because the powers that be at USPSA many years ago told the interested parties to take a hike. We did not care about keeping divisions that were not solely for the development of competition equipment. We said no, and in no polite way I might add... They are now bigger than we are now... Our response is SS, revo and production. They are the important divisions to the growth of the sport. Optics as an option would not probably hurt us if done correctly.

I wonder.....My original thought was to consider that optical sights are an inevitability. But I never meant exclusive to practical competition pistols. On many pistols, and for many uses the optical sights solve some problems. They of course cause some. Optical production, or for that matter optical any division, would be interesting if the devices did not become, dare I say it, Impractical?? Let me explain. Take me. I have been a proponent of iron sights for most of my career. The reason being open guns had developed beyond the level where they were usable devices beyond the competition range. I have in comparison lost interest in them compared to the other divisions. That's just me. Also, no way a manufacturer is going to try to sell mainstream anything that even remotely resembles our open guns. It's not that I do not like shooting them, just that I don't like how silly and specialized they have become. I'm sure to many if not most non-competition shooters, most of our guns for any division are thought of this way. But I don't like F1 cars either. Open guns have however, indeed pushed the development of several performance enhancements. Magazine capacity, sighting and recoil control improvements have been the result. However, the idea of mounting a sight similar to our open guns is unlikely to show up on the guns you see on the shelves at your local gunshop. And that's ok, it's just not progress enough for me. And maybe that's ok also. Understand that it's not improvement of the equipment I don't like, but the limit of applications some of the resulting devices have in the rest of the shooting market. I do not want to loose any of the divisions we now have, except maybe L10, but is there a way we can stimulate development of practical, sale able optical sights for the mainstream market by finding a way to allow their use in competition on other than our open guns??? You'd be unlikely to come across an ar15 in serious use that doesn't have an optical sight, so wouldn't the availability of a cheap, tough and reliable optical sight for your pistol actually be a cool thing?? Consider this possibility; Allow optional use of optical sights in production for those who want to, and simply exclude these shooters results from eligibility of winning the division awards? Classes, overalls etc would be to the current equipment rules unchanged. So the good eyes are still gonna win the coveted titles but allow then, the seniors and juniors and ladies and LE and whatever to use optics. The trick and difficulty will be to limit what sights and how they are mounted to keep them from becoming like our open division is now. Keep those things to realistic, multi use levels, and see if anyone wants to try it. So, you (or I) can win sub categories, but not class awards. Does this hurt us in anyway?? I'd say you must not change any of the rules except the box would have to be modified to allow the gun to fit with the sight mounted in the prescribed location. Could be no heavier or otherwise larger or modified except to allow installation of the optic on the gun. So no extra weight allowed, size limited to say, 1 inch above slide, and see what that gets you?? This is already the most popular variation of optics on handguns now in service except for scopes on hunting revolvers. I bet that changes, and optics on service type pistols becomes the most popular in the near future.. Many serious users of handguns are looking at optics as a way to improve performance of duty, tactical and defensive, not to mention sporting and recreational handguns. Ok, now what does everyone think about this.. Rob

I first met Dave and Heidi when they hosted a competition class in Missoula near the beginning of my shooting career. I stayed with them and had a great time. Remembering Dave is easy, he had been an integral part of USPSA from the beginning. Anyone who has been involvd in the game for any reason owes Dave a debt of thanks. The sport would not be where it is without him. However and of much greater importance, he did give me a procedural penalty at the 2000 USPSA Limited Nationals. For this I shall never forgive him. Even though I yelled at him at the time, and subsequently apologized at the awards banquet later during my acceptance speech (I still won), I have secretly held on to a grudge all these years just knowing the day would when I could rekindle my anger and unleash the torrent of words I had been storing to let him know without reservation that.... I was sorry for being such an ass that day. Oh well, He and my Dad can now sit around in heaven and try to figure out what they both should have done to better improve my character. It will be a long discussion I imagine... Adios Dave, Rob

Partial knees generally recover faster than total knees because the surgery is less invasive and you save more of your normal anatomy, which is usually still better than artificial anatomy, so if you are a good candidate for a partial I would recommend you do it. As someone else mentioned you want a surgeon who does your surgery all the time and that's true. Statistically outcomes are best with the surgeons that do the most of that particular surgery. You could likely do stand and shoots in a couple weeks but you probably won't be moving well until some time after that. I would recommend you shoot when you feel like you can. If you start shooting too early you might swell up and have some more pain for a while but it's unlikely you will ruin something. Some kind of compression wrap or stocking might help prevent the swelling. What might be a problem early on is how long you can tolerate standing on your feet, so maybe test that out before you go to a match and when you do go, bring a folding stool that's not too short. Most people get better (than they were before surgery) in 2-3 months but compared to uninjured control subjects of the same age, they never get full strength and speed back. I think this is for a lot of reasons, including people stopping working on it too soon as they are happy to feel better, and they don't even remember what "normal" feels like. Other factors include insurance running out before you are full strength, your doctor discharging you because you have good range, and PTs who like to massage more than they like to work on strength and stamina. Hip abduction strength is very important (and correlates more with function than quadriceps strength after knee replacement) and can be started immediately as it does not stress the knee. Be sure to strengthen your good leg too because one of the best predictors of outcomes after knee replacement is contralateral (other) leg strength. Probably one of the best things you can do is prevent muscle loss after surgery in the first place rather than try and get it back later with electric muscle stimulation to the quadriceps and hamstrings immediately after, if not before surgery, which is supported by a lot of research but I believe is underappreciated by most surgeons and physical therapists, so you might have to ask for it. I've recently started blogging and I go into a lot more depth on most of these factors here: http://absolutept.com/tag/total-knee/ Good luck! PS, I was Rob Leatham's physical therapist for both his knees. Chad is a pretty good Physical terrorist I guess, but it did take me a couple years to win another National after the Knees. That being said, I am never sorry I had them done. They never hurt, never get cold, never keep me from sleeping at night or get stiff anymore. However, Chad is right when he says it has a lot to do with your therapy immediately post op. You will not enjoy it and get really, really tired of being told your not trying hard enough, but, it will be way better in a couple months than when you went in for surgery. Oh, BTW, my surgeon does just knees, is a genius at it, and I heartily endorse him. And Chad. As a therapist. :-) Ask Chad and he'll give you everything you wanna know about this subject. Maybe a whole lot more. Also ask him about the time he pushed on the weights holding my knees down to get extension and I tried to smack him! Rob

Forgot to mention, I have 3 .40 SS guns and fastest is at least 30 fps faster than slowest. My SS 6" 1911 is 40 fps faster than the SS I shot at Nationals this year. Kippi's 1911 9mm is almost 50 fps slower than my XDm 5.25. So when you are doing this load workup, do it out of the gun you are gonna shoot. My production ammo will not make minor in Kippi's SS gun And the ammo I loaded for the L10 Nationals a couple years ago DIDN'T make major in the SS gun I shot at the Western States SS a year ago.....