Jake Di Vita

I think you need to be harder on yourself in dry fire. When you move the gun to a new target and it stops the sights should be directly aligned. Every time. It certainly is not the gun or holster angle at fault here.

What does weak hand single action look like?

Personally I don't much care whether it is allowed or not, as it stands right now I can find nothing specifically against it and I can make an argument for it based on the wording of the rulebook. I bet if I tried arguing this at 100 matches, I'd win some and lose some. That isn't cool. If the BoD's opinion on the matter is they never want reshoots under this circumstance, spell it out similarly to the IPSC rulebook - that's fine. I think it would be fine to allow it while putting it up to the discretion of the RO under the conditions of what I outlined earlier in the thread. I'd like to think the RO has a pretty good idea of which targets were engaged from where and would be able to tell if the shooter made the mistake in target engagement. If ROs are given the power to make judgement calls in other areas of interference, I think they'd be able to handle it in this case as well.

We do not have that rule or one worded like it that I've seen. I'd be fine with it if it were spelled out like that in our book.

Too late man, I shoot open with good eyes and still suck. lol

Note that the rule starts by telling us what kind of targets it's concerned with -- paper that was either not properly patched, or paper that lost pasters, possibly from the blast of a comp or muzzle on a close paper target. Then in the middle of the rule we have a sentence that clarifies very specifically the circumstances under which a reshoot must be ordered. Then we get to the fun part that for the purposes of this rule, and for the purposes of determining whether an accurate score can be determined, we are to consider B and C hits to be the same. That implies a certain level of interest in avoiding a reshoot where possible. Why? Cause reshoot bad..... On the other hand 8.6.4 says the following: Clearly when invoking 8.6.4 you're not going to stop the competitor right there, because if you would that would be a mandatory reshoot. You're going to make the judgment at the end of the stage -- and at that point you have situation that's directly addressed by another rule. You don't have inadvertent RO contact. Last but not least, shooters can expect to encounter targets on a stage -- both metal and paper. They're not an external influence, no matter how much you may want to argue that..... An unpatched target is part of the stage -- and I've explained more than once that it might be unpatched, or that it might have already been shot by the competitor.... External influence = something from outside the stage, i.e. persons suddenly appearing on top of a berm; a gust of wind sending a tent from the vendor's area floating into the middle of the stage, etc....... But don't take my word for it -- feel free to check with any of the RMIs, or DNROI...... And from a competitive standpoint -- have fewer expectations. When you don't expect to see perfect targets, you're likely going to find it easier to just shoot them and move on..... I don't agree whatsoever on a single point in your assessment. Your position depends on an arbitrary decree that nothing in the stage can be considered external to the shooter under any circumstance. Even if that is what all the RMIs think, I still disagree. I'm most concerned with every shooter having as fair and equitable run at each stage as possible. I don't expect DNROI to agree with me considering I read what Troy thinks about poppers not falling and it made me want to gouge my own eyes out with a potato peeler.

How exactly is it determined what is and is not an external influence? You're gonna have to explain to me how an obviously unpatched target that a shooter sees, pauses, then finishes is not interference from an external influence. Earlier, I qualified my statement with if it was obviously an unpatched target and that if the external influence was out of his control. If he shot the target once already and hesitated that was his fault - no reshoot. Unpatched targets are not his fault. As far as affecting other competitiors: To me, the most important thing is always going to be competitive integrity. That everyone gets an opportunity under as close as possible to the same conditions. If I can find a way to grant a reshoot that works righteously with the rulebook, I'll do it, and I'll do it for everyone.

9.1.4 looks to be only applicable to addressing this after the completion of the course of fire, as you said. If I were litigating on behalf of the shooter in question, I might point to 8.6.4 to say that a target that was clearly unpasted could be considered an external influence that interfered with the competitor as grounds for a reshoot. 8.6.4 In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course of fire. That would be a fine argument, and I considered that rule as well as Section 4.6. However while 4.6 specifically mentions unrestored moving and metal targets, and specifically orders a reshoot if a mover or metal target is not reset, if also specifically omits unrestored paper targets. The rule book does specifically address unrestored paper targets in 9.1.4 -- and that's how the material is taught in the RO courses.... So could 8.6.4 be applicable here? 9.1.4 addresses unrestored paper targets during scoring. The way 8.6.4 reads to me, if I saw the shooter get distracted by something outside of his control (which I think an unpatched target could qualify) I could offer the competitor a reshoot before scoring, thus 9.1.4 would not apply.

I agree with A and B. Nothing prevents a part of the COF from being an "external influence" that I can think of. If someone used that against me as an RO, I'd have a hard time finding a compelling reason to quote why they are wrong. If something the shooter is not in control of happens and it interferes with his run, that seems to qualify the rule the way it is written.

9.1.4 looks to be only applicable to addressing this after the completion of the course of fire, as you said. If I were litigating on behalf of the shooter in question, I might point to 8.6.4 to say that a target that was clearly unpasted could be considered an external influence that interfered with the competitor as grounds for a reshoot. 8.6.4 In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course of fire.

that's what people argue, but the rules very specifically state otherwise. that's why when I see unpasted holes I just keep shooting. I agree it would be disconcerting on a stage where a target is available from multiple positions. bottom line is that it's a good idea for an RO team to have a routine to check every target before the next shooter gets make ready. at a major, it's pretty easy to do. less so at a local match with embedded RO's. Which rule states specifically otherwise?

I have seen shooters hesitate for a moment when they transition to a target with holes in it before they start going again. Could it not be considered that he didn't have the same conditions as the shooter before him and reshoot on those grounds?

You're crunching the shit out of the gun when you pull the trigger. It doesn't matter how much finger you have on the trigger, you just need to pull it without moving the gun. More dry fire.

Ya know, this was one of the primary matches I wanted to hit this year. After reading about what happened last year and watching what is happening this year so far, I'm not going to put the time, effort, and money into this if the goddamn match "organizers" are going to do this kind of a job. If the people running this think it's ok to not even have an application out 4 months before the match I know for a fact they are going to do an equally shitty job on other things in the match. If you can't have some pride in your work and get the details sorted out to your customer base in a timely fashion perhaps you shouldn't commit to putting something like this on.

I have found that the better shape I am in, the better I can handle long days in the heat. I also try to train in the shittiest conditions I can. If it is freakishly hot and humid out, you can bet I'll be training (whether it is physical, dry fire, or live fire) outside in it that day.

You really don't even need great trigger manipulation to make an accurate shot. Ultimately the only thing that matters is where the gun is pointed when the bullet leaves the barrel. One part of developing a high skill level with a gun is that as you get better your margin for error increases. It becomes easier to keep the gun pointed where you want even under conditions of difficult shooting positions, less than ideal grip, or poor trigger control. Robbie can slap the hell out of a trigger and keep his gun still while doing it extremely well. As shots get tougher or skill levels get lower, you're able to get away with less. Ultimately what is best is to use whichever method gives you the highest rate of success for the target you are shooting. Personally, I only feel the reset for the most difficult of shots.

It seems like that's exactly what you think: You keep insinuating that best performance comes from not compensating for recoil. I believe that is an error for the type of shooting the majority of us do here. Even with a perfect grip and stance, there is always going to be some amount of force that is required to get the sights back on target from recoil, especially when you are shooting at a high rate of speed. That force is what compensating for recoil is. You can't act like anyone that "flinches" when they drop the hammer on an empty chamber or dud is going to have their hits all over the place. That idea is simply not true. Compensation for recoil is the natural action derived from the desire to get the gun back on target at the earliest instant possible. If your main argument against it is that beginners can screw it up, well, ya....beginners screw a lot of things up. That doesn't mean they should avoid working on it. Beginners need to work on it until it consistently happens after the bullet has exited the barrel. I find this kind of advice similar to when someone says "I always pull my weak hand shots like 8 inches right of where I'm aiming, so I'm going to aim 8 inches left to hit where I want". No one in their right mind would ever suggest to someone to do that because it is not addressing the cause of the problem. If you are shooting a buckshot pattern with your pistol, your goal shouldn't be to stop compensating for recoil.

If I am shooting quickly and I hit an empty chamber or a dud I will absolutely dip the gun. I also shot about 94% of the points for the entire year (20ish matches) last year. I disagree with your conclusion in this matter.

So basically you're saying that when the gun recoils I have to react to that before I compensate for recoil? I don't think that is accurate at all, especially in my shooting. I know what the recoil impulse feels like, I also know when it is going to happen. It sounds like you're talking about shooting bullseye or some other equivalent, when I pull the trigger in USPSA 99% of the time I'm slapping the shit out of it, I don't have time to gradually increase pressure to get a perfect break on any but the most difficult targets. What you're saying makes a little sense if you are consciously (the conscious mind is shit at multitasking) thinking your way through whatever stage or drill you're doing. If you're just letting your subconscious (which is amazing at multitasking) do the work, I don't believe it ends up working the way you've explained it. I'd like to see you shoot a 2 sec bill drill or 4 sec el prez using the method you've described.

I think your index is like just about any other skill. It can be developed to an extremely high ability. 8 inch plates at 20 yards and beyond pretty consistently is certainly within the realm of possibility at the higher end of the spectrum. It is obviously going to be more ideal to go off the concrete feedback of your sights, but an extremely high developed index also helps immeasurably with how efficiently you can get on target. The better the index, the less refinement your sight picture will need.

It's hard to use Eric as an example because I'm pretty sure he could do whatever the hell he wanted and still execute stages just as well. That guy puts more rounds downrange in a year than I have in my life. My personal opinion is that inserting a new mag when I'm stepping into position to shoot is an inefficient use of time because as I'm stepping into position I want to have the gun extending towards the target and be looking for the sights. I have also found that the way Eric does this is inconsistent for me, and if I make a mistake inserting the mag the clock is running, there is no space where you don't have a target to engage to use a buffer. Once again, this really isn't an issue for Eric because he doesn't make mistakes.

these are excellent points. Just like we have a special olympics and a senior olympics for handicapped and elderly people, we also have a version of USPSA for the handicapped and elderly. Guess what it's called.... thanks for your usefull humor. well,excepting the penalty i could take for not being able to perform the prone position without risking some back troubles, , i asked if it was possible for me to put some kind of buffer on the mat so my back isn't bent downward which is what cause me some problems...still waiting for an answer since i can't find any rules against What is preventing you from going supine? It sounds like you are saying you are extension sensitive in your low back. Supine has the low back supported by the ground.

I read the title of this thread and audibly face palmed. For people that literally can't get into a prone position, supine is perfectly usable, effective, and easy to get into. I actually like to shoot supine more than prone in general.

If you're left handed, you know damn well that you will be forced to do an awkward reload at least semi-frequently (as a right hander, I know I will have to reload moving left at least sometimes). The prudent move would be to work at them until you were confident you could safely and efficiently reload going left to right or whichever direction. If you're looking at a stage saying "man I'm afraid of breaking the 180 during this reload", you haven't put enough work in yet.

When I first started shooting USPSA in production, the only results I looked at were the overalls. Placement in your division is the only thing that really matters.