motosapiens

its not necessarily about the scores being similar or different. its about the fact that striker and da guns will disappear from co entirely if they have to compete with 2011s. see limited and open for good examples of this. regarding “getting smoked” in open….. major is only worth 3-5%. if you weren’t close shooting minor, you won’t be close shooting major either.

i personally would be ok with a weight limit that excluded my s2. i think it would need to accommodate typical duty/carry guns with a flashlight. probably in the 40-45 oz range somewhere. but im also cool with something else… or the status quo. i understand that other people want other stuff, which is why im cool with LO being minor only even tho i would be all over major. the world doesn’t revolve around me.

the issue is that every division that allows custom 2011s is completely dominated by them. if u combine the divisions, everyone except sponsored pros will be shooting custom 2011s within a year or two. it doesn’t even matter if some smart guys think you will get the same score with a da or striker gun. i have tested my shadow2 back to back with my atlas titan, and i would always choose to shoot the 2011 if the division allows it. i would still like to see people be able to compete effectively with lightly modified duty/carry guns, and for that to happen they really need a separate division where the more expensive and competitively superior 2011s are not allowed.

oh, i didn’t realize you were talking about a cz. my 9 and 40 cz mags are 100% interchangeable, but they are all for small frame (cz75/p01/shadow). i guess the large frame mags must be different.

you are probably right. to me as a shadow 2 owner, it still makes sense to roll. back to some of the original restrictions on CO, like 15 rds, possibly lighter weight,etc, but that would piss a few people off and maybe theres no real reason to differentiate the divisions other than sa vs da and custom. guns vs production guns. one thing i would be strongly against is combining the two divisions.

u must be pretty busy. it takes me 30-40 mins to load mrs moto’s 38sc practice and match rounds for each week we have a match. in contrast, we spend 2-3 hrs at practice and 6-7 at the match, and 30 mins cleaning guns the night before. i’m not sure i would ever notice that 30-40 mins if i bought factory ammo (especially since i usually have a sports event on the boobtube), but i would notice the extra $50-80 i spent each week.

why not just keep shooting uspsa matches? the local matches near me are better than ever, and i don’t really care if $3 of my match fee goes to uspsa. full disclosure: i filed my taxes this week instead of moving to costa rica, even tho i disagree with many things the govt is doing….

in your opinion. whether or not i attend nationals, im ok with my membership dues and my $3/match being used to support it. Im also ok with some of my usa hockey dues being used to support national team programs even tho i certainly will never play on the national team. fortunately stoeger doesn’t play hockey so i’m blissfully unaware of whatever drama there is in that organization, and no one has teamed up with anti-hockey dems to get tournaments cancelled. however i do think it’s totally reasonable to demand more transparency in the accounting and reduce costs to the org where it can reasonably be done. to me the issue is not “losing money on nationals”, its that nobody seems to know why nationals loses money but A1 can spend 1000’s on range improvements and break even.

for ro’s? that information is freely available on the website. free entry to staff match shared hotel room during match lunch at range $25/day per diem up to $375 travel cost with receipts it is sufficient right now to attract quality ROs, but obviously the majority of shooters find its not enough to make it worthwhile.

thats a reasonable topic for discussion. imho, yes, but it doesn’t bother me if others want to jealously guard their $3. i think even the whiners would probably be ok with it if there were other national programs that they felt provided value to them and their clubs, like a stage design library (which already exists) or more resources to help new clubs, or open/expand ranges.

ive worked several nationals, and shot 2 where i didn’t work. for anyone who advocates reducing RO reimbursement, my question is “have you RO’d at nationals, and if not, why not?” is it because the reimbursement is not enough? is it because you know your shooting will suffer from less time to observe and shooting on a compressed schedule while still working at the staff match? if the reimbursement isn’t enough to get these folks to volunteer, does it really make sense to reduce it?

im not so sure of that. it appears that most of the loudest howlers on FB don’t even shoot nationals. i know the l2 and l3 matches were shooting this year filled up just as fas as ever.

im loading for both LO and open. 5-6 cents per round diff, which is not backbreaking, but alot more than zero. with open you really need jhps, and open guns use 2-3 x as much powder. this also ignores the need to be much pickier with open brass to ensure consistent extraction and avoud bouncing brass off the optic mount. also, while you *can* spend near open $ on an LO gun, most people do not, at least so far.

its worth trying it. just to convince yourself, but imho .2 is a wild exaggeration, and so is .1. in reality, it won’t save much of anything because your left hand still has to travel the same distance. however, as an md, ro and stage designer, i specifically use vague and permissive wsb language to encourage people to overthink it and do stupid stuff instead of just shooting more points per second.

i am seeing more interest in open locally as Time goes by. people get their first cheap taste of a dot with co, then after a year want major scoring.

its extremely rare for me to see a stage that forces 8-8-8-8. it does occasionally happen but usually with an unloaded start when im shooting ss (major, obviously…)

good question. when i say “better” i mean better constructed, more carefully proofed, less likely to get thrown out, and more fair. for sure you sometimes see more interesting and elaborate stages at an area match, but also you are more likely to see issues with competitive equity at those matches, at least in my experience. fwiw, i have shot a2 and a3 a couple times, a1 10-ish times and 8-10 nationals in st george, talladega and frostproof, so no experience whatsoever with the other area matches.

just as popular as ever. zero participants out of 48 at the match i md’d yesterday. we did have guys in limited and one in ss.

there are a couple significant differences.one is that area matches typically reimburse staff about half of what nationals does, and also often run with fewer and less qualified ROs. also the range costs are typically lower [$10/shooter at our range), and because the time commitment is less, and at least for A1 it moves around to different ranges, and for our range involved some significant range upgrades, there is a little more volunteer buy-in, but also a little less experience and skill among the volunteers. ive worked. alot of both in the last 10 years, and nationals usually feels like a more sophisticated event with better stages and more experienced ROs, but most of the area matches have been really well run, so it may be worth asking if we want to pay for that extra quality, or even if most people notice it.

haha, probably because they wasted so much of my money on the national offroad events. we raced several hare and hounds and national enduros in 2008-2009 timeframe. shooting seems awfully cheap in comparison. oddly enough, the enduros are still advertised as “ama national enduro series “, so perhaps i should have facebook fact-check your post.

i don’t much care one way or another. maybe im unusually successful but membership fees and level 1 match fees are pretty negligible from my perspective. i literally pay more than 20x as much on ammo and travel costs to shoot local and level 2 matches. $40 membership +30-ish local matches ($4 each goes to uspsa) means i’ve been sending about $160 of my hard earned dollars to uspsa each year. that seems pretty cheap considering how much i enjoy the sport i paid more (and got less) from ama membership when i was racing motorcycles, and i pay more (and get less) from usahockey membership. it wouldn’t surprise me and i wouldn’t care if both orgs are using some of that money to subsidize national programs. that seems like a reasonable expense for a national organization. nonetheless i think it would be wise for the org to take some steps towards greater fiscal responsibility.

after asking a few questions on fb, it appears that much of the howling is coming from people who don’t even go to nationals, and many are not active at all in the sport anymore. one of complaints i read that was at least from an active competitor was from an individual who has a years-long reputation (at multiple clubs) of never helping with setup or teardown.

i don’t know much about your area, but i md’d at my local club in idaho yesterday. 48 shooters (not bad for a damp winter day). by my count at least 13 of the shooters have competed at nationals in the last couple years. i know when i go to nats i always enjoy myself.

this begs the question, how many nationals have you RO’d? if the compensation is so overly generous, why isn’t it enough to convince you to take advantage of it?

same here. partly because i am cheap and would rather spend the money on more shooting, and partly because i shoot better when i reset and stay mentally involved in the match instead of sitting on my fat azz and smoking cigarettes and talking about myself.