BritinUSA

...and probably with the same gun.

This link doesn't mention the screw size, but you can buy replacements here: https://rangepanda.com/products/replacement-screws-for-daa-mag-pouches

SPS was made in Spain if memory serves.

In this scenario it's likely that the popper changed very slowly over the course of the match. Each change was not enough to be noticed as it happened. The same is often true of poppers that end up leaning more heavily toward the shooter, thereby affecting the calibration. Having said that, I think the RO's have an obligation to ensure that their stage is run as equitably as possible. If that means breaking out a spirit level then so be it. There are apps for cell-phones that can measure angles so there should be no need for any additional expense. All it needs is someone to take a little pride in their work.

I think if a target can only be engaged with a hard lean then the target should be checked for vertical displacement (left/right) frequently (perhaps each time the targets are swapped out). If the ground is very soft or there are windy conditions then the frequency should increase. Poppers are a problem, especially in poor range conditions, and staking a popper down does not prevent all issues. As you stated, each time the popper falls it could alter the angle of the popper towards the shooter. As this angle changes it will change the lowest point of impact (LPI) that could activate the popper. The more it leans forward the higher this LPI will rise. At the start of the match the LPI should be at the bottom of the calibration zone. But it could easily change over the course of the match; That change may not be noticeable by RO's, and could lead to problems for the competitor.

The advantage of ELO is that the entire match score would be counted, not just a single (classifier) stage. The current classification system generates a lot of revenue and is almost entirely automated. An ELO system (while also automated) would probably not generate any additional income outside of the match activity fee. Personally, I think ELO would be a better system, though I predict some tweaking of the methodology to get accurate results.

Champions have to be from the area/state/country. Typically High Overall is recognized as a separate are if the overall winner is from outside the area.

There was one in Bend, Oregon and Production Nationals in Tulsa.

Like that time when Eric win the USPSA nationals but was not the National Champion. Reading comprehension is lost on some people.

Can I assume from this that he will have to recertify as an RO before taking office?

There were three RO's on each squad, so 90 for the match plus the Area RO's that had overall authority over each block of six stages. One would check competitor's equipment, one would be the RO and the other score keeper and I think they rotated for each squad. Florida had some volunteers to help with stage reset but If I recall the RO's and some competitors did help out as well. At the '96 and '99 World Shoots it was all volunteer stage reset, the competitors did nothing but shoot. Both of those matches were all day, not half-day formats.

At the 2014 World Shoot, there were THIRTY Stages. Each squad shot SIX stages per day for FIVE days, the match ran for SIX days so every sqaud had ONE rest day. I think there were SIXTEEN people per squad, four National teams. If I recall there were 1000 competitors spread over pre-match and main-match

USA used to dominate this sport, but those days are long over.

Comedy gold. I'm not sure what benefit that provides without knowing the speed of the swinger. It must have been fun to watch, though.

Agreed, no rule prohibits this.

I made the mistake of thinking that the temperature near the hotel would be similar to the range.... Nope !

Toughest match I ever shot was World Shoot X in 1993. That it rained for several days was just the icing on the cake.

Talent will always excel on stages with limited movement. If you're fast on your feet you can gain some extra time to cover a lot of peripheral hits, or a fumbled reload. Stages with limited movement have no leeway when it comes to poor accuracy or technique.

Some people shoot to get better, others shoot for fun. Appeasing both groups is always going to be a challenge.

1990 for me, though I didn't join UKPSA until 1992 (if I recall)

Agreed; And one of the reasons why we should have a few divisions that are round-restricted. The more rounds in the magazine the less important first-shot accuracy becomes. With fewer rounds available there's a greater chance of a standing reload if you miss a few shots. Reveolver has 6/8 rounds. Single-Stack has 8/10 rounds. Production & ProdOptics should be either 10 or 15. Limited & LO has 20/24 rounds. Open around 30-32 rounds.

The difference between a heavy and light production gun seems to have little impact on performance. Some competitors prefer the polymer frame guns while some prefer the steel frame. I think there are generally more options for the steel frame guns, different factory triggers, guide rods etc. that may appeal to some shooters. If makers of the polymer frame guns want more participation then making more factory options for those guns might have an impact. I think the biggest impact is the guide rod. Many polymer guns use a captive guide rod that does not always allow the user to change to a different recoil spring. As most guns are sprung for +P ammo, it makes for a hard recoil impulse when shooting at around 130PF.

At some assemblies that I attended there was usually a discussion about each subject but only if people had something to say or had questions. The president would ask if anyone had input, and if no-one did then it would go straight to a vote. I'm not sure if it's still done the same way.

Perhaps they are not seeing a decline in Standard that the US is seeing in Limited. That may be in part due to the more restrictive nature of their Production Optics division.