freeidaho

Cy, Thanks for your reply. Given the number of angry posts about not calibrating steel for 38 special or 9mm on this and other forums, I'm thinking that isn't going to work in all cases. I'm thinking that if this flies it needs to be seperate from normal IDPA matches, like Bug matches.... maybe. Or maybe the solution is to change the BUG rules to include commonly available 22 revolvers and semi-autos. Thank you, kr

Howdy, Serious question to everyone that voted yes. What is the proposed solution to the .22LR round not being able to activate chargers, drop turners, swingers, etc. There are several of these in each of our matches, both local and State. It is an excellent way to allow a stage to be run at the shooters pace. A popper or steel plate is knocked over and pulls a cable that activates something else. What is your plan to deal with this if a .22LR division is created? Thanks for your replies, kr

That would be the Idaho State IDPA match, http://www.parmarng.org or most any match held on the Parma range where Grandma Goodfellow is in charge of the food. kr

Can you please site your source? Thank you, kr

Jane, I tried to vote no, which worked. But I still had to select an answer from part 2. Either I messed this up, or this is going to skew the data. kr

We had a bunch of USPSA shooters at our local IDPA match yesterday. They came from Montana to the All Glock USPSA match in our area, and wanted to warm up on Saturday. Most of them came prepared to shoot our carbine side match too. We had 8 great stages, perfect weather and no issues at all. Great bunch of guys. It is the same when I shoot the local USPSA matches with my carry gear. No issues. Prejudice in any form is dumb dumb dumb. kr

Nicely Done..... kr

Actually spacers are specifically prohibited, and the spec is 3/4". Here is the pertinent part of the rulebook... kr F. Can have no offset backpieces and/or belt slots. The holster may not offset away from the belt and/or body. No gap is permitted in the following areas: 1. From the body to the inside of the belt. 2. From the outside of the belt to the inside of the backpiece and/or backside of the holster. 3. From the outside of the backpiece to the inside of the holster. I. Must hold the firearm positioned on the body so an object of ¾”width cannot pass between the shooter’s body and the inside of the firearm when the shooter is standing straight and upright.²

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Similar to its brother, the Tactical 4.15, this STI 2011 pistol contains all the cutting-edge technology youve come to expect from STI International with the classic styling of the 1911. Featuring double stack magazines, allowing a higher capacity, the STI Tactical 5.0 is fit for a variety of uses from duty carry to home defense. This STI gun also features: Grip: STI Patented Modular Polymer with Aluminum Mag well Slide: 5.0 4140 Steel, Unique w/ Front and Rear Serrations, Flat top Trigger: Long Curved Barrel: STI fully supported, ramped bull barrel Safeties: Blue STI Grip and Ambi sided thumb Guide Rod: STI RecoilMaster Sights: STI Front w/ STI Fixed Rear Overall Length: 8.5 Weight: 35.1 oz., Steel Model Finish: Flat Blue Competition Approvals: IPSC, USPSA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unitl recently this handgun did not comply with IDPA in at least two ways. Bull barrel and Recoil Master. Since the Recoil Master is now deemed allowed, there is still the Bull Barrel, and maybe something else. I didn't research any further. kr

Wow, what a vigorous response to a thought problem. Sorry to take y'all out of your comfort zone. I guess here must be a concept called an honest cheater, that only goes so far. Just what makes y'all think that someone that would dump rounds wouldn't do anything else illegal. What about ghost reloads? Or GI shooters question. kr Answer: You don't.

Wow, I am learnng a lot. This situation ethics approach brings up some interesting questions. When using situational ethics where does one draw the line? Is the only yardstick being caught? What if one could get away with the following: (these don't even have any rules in the rulebook, so surely they are allowed....) --What about taping over a good shot on a competitor's distant target before it is scored, without anyone knowing about it? --What about taking the timer out of someones range bag and keeping it? --What about throwing a few pre-loaded squib rounds into your competitor's ammo supply? --What about pissing off your toughest competitor right tbe before he shoots? --What about adding 0.1 seconds or 1 point down to each of your competitor's scores when you are the scorekeeper? --What about taking a ball point pen and making a hole in a non-threat on your competitor's run. (Done to me in fun, but me and the SO were none the wiser.) --What about putting $10 dollars into the signup money bag and taking out $20? --What about using your position as SO or MD to give your toughest competitor's a worse score through penalties? --What about using your position as SO to readout a higher time to the scorekeeper than is actually on the timer and the erasing it? --What about smashing your competitor's dropped magazine into the mud? --What about keeping your competitor's dropped magazine? --What about calling your competitor's cell phone while he is shooting and you know it is on? --The list goes on, I am not really good at this... One can always make up some non-sense explanation that blames the rulebook, or blames everyone else. From what I am learning in this thread, I have no idea where the line would be drawn. The line so far seems to be anything you can get away from.... kr

Ryan, I don't care if anyone agrees with me. I personally shoot several disciplines and believe none of them are perfect. Just noting that the only solutions ever proposed here or that are acceptable here come from one place. It seems no one ever thinks out of that one box. It is but an observation, not maligning anyone or anything, just an observation, like wow, there sure are a lot of 511 vests in use. Not a enditement, just an observation. Either way, I said I was going to read more and type less, and I am. Have a good day sir, kr

Rob, Thanks for the reply. But this clearly does not make all stages limited, your own example of novices shows that. In fact most matches would go unchanged almost completely, except for there would be little or no dumping. And it penalizes novices no more than the current -1, -3, -5 scoring system we have today. By your logic, we should abolish points down altogether, since lesser skilled shooters get more points down than masters and of course that is inequatable. In the military I was in, round dumping was also not taught. Anyone that has been shot at, knows the reason for the rule. One does not just blast away their ammo, which is typically in short supply, so they can reload sooner. In fact you can't count rounds in the first place. That said, I know in my heart that this proposal falls on the deaf ears of most here. Which will never be satisfied with IDPA until it is morfed into another shooting sport entirely. We should just use the rules of another shooting sport, but with vests. But then vests would be made optional in short order. Serously though, I am so thankful that the members do not get to vote on the rules. The founders were very wise in that regard, or we would have already morfed into another shooting sport. Thanks to the minority that listened, but I'm not sure my part in this discussion is helping anyone. See ya at the range! kr

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Why don't you put yourself on the clock doing a load with retention and a speed load and see the difference. If you're good it will be under a second...most people will be well over. That compared to an extra .2 for a split...seems worth it to me. Jake, You misunderstand. The difference is between dumping a round to a slide lock reload before engaging a target, and doing a slide lock reload after engaging the target, then re-engaging. That difference is likely less than 0.5 seconds. kr

Ryan, With due respect, the proposal is a serious attempt to put an end to the round dumping issue forever. You have been wanting that... Yes? Isn't that what this thread is about? Yes we have a limited scoring system, and that is not the proposal. This is something different. The proposal eliminates many of the problems with round dumping, it does not penalize the honest shooter, and allows people to shoot at will at any target without being cheaters, and make up shots at will. It eliminates the subjectivity, which we have heard over and over a hundred times in this thread. It is behavior based, not mind reading based. Isn't that what this thread is all about? There is just a small incremental cost, that is all. So people will shoot stages as they do now, but will possibly consider a makeup shot a bit more than they do now. Misses will/can still be made up, and -3 shots will/can be made up. But it will effectively remove round dumping from our vocabulary and the incessant whining about round dumping. The advantage to round dumping.... if there is one, is surely less than 0.5 second. Of course your mileage may vary, objects in the mirror are nearer than they appear, other disclaimers may apply..... kr

Given IDPA's version of hit factor --- a point should be made up if it can be accomplished in less than 0.5 seconds, all -3 zone hits need to be made up --- I fire at least one makeup shot per stage, sometimes 2-3. They're frequently out of the first mag --- but not always. Unless you're plugged into my brain, I think you'd have a tough time calling that for certain..... Of course, if you're comfortable with assessing 20 second penalties on a hunch, more power to you..... Up until now, that wasn't the impression I had of you.... Nik, My point is that when one travels around with a squad, after a hand full of stages, the dumpers mark themselves clearly and surely. I know this isn't good news for them to hear. But if in most or many stages there is a makeup shot "needed" right before a reload, even when it is not the most difficult shot in the stage, it leaves an impression. This pattern is not clear to an SO that is stationary and has squads shift through. (They see other patterns.) Most of the shooters on the squad can tell you which shooters on the squad are round dumpers too if they are paying any attention. I have had shooters in my squad come up to me and comment on dumpers. This isn't rocket surgery. I'm not sure what your impression of me was or is. Nothing I have typed is aimed at anyone on this forum and is talk about dumping in general. I do not believe the answer to any cheating problem is to remove the rule. If we as a society did that we wouldn't laws against murder because they are not all caught..... kr PS: I'm beginning to like the 1/2 second penalty for any shot over the minimum per target, just so this 10 year round dumping issue would die.

Jake, You missed the part where the pattern is absolutely clear to anyone with a positive IQ, and the part that I have never seen a person that never dumps be called for it. But here is another idea. Replace the Round Dumping rule with a 1/2 second penalty for every shot over the required minimum per target. This would reward fast and accurate even more, and remove the incentive to dump. If adopted I guarantee you will stop seeing an extra round right before a reload because it is no longer the fastest solution. kr

I believe Duane is on to something here. If every club everywhere called round dumping when they see it in local matches it might make a significant change. Recall that when the SO travels with the squad, any SO with one whit of observational powers knows who in his squad is dumping by the third or fourth stage of the day. At least at our club, the SO travels with a squad for local matches. Squashing it at the local level would probably stop most round dumpers. Maybe it really is an enforcement problem. Thanks Duane for the fresh look at this issue. Just a thought, kr

Duane, I kinda like where you are going here. I asked once. Shooter said yes. He got the penalty. Now I don't know if the shooter learned not to dump, or if he learned to lie. kr

kr, I don't understand? We have a system where possibly 99 out of every 100 people who are effectively cheating are not penalized appropriately, and the system isn't bad? Is that even a system? -rvb Ryan, You make a good point. But my point was most of the pain this rule causes is not landing on the honest non-dumper so I don't mind. A myopic view point indeed, but it works for me. kr

From the hundreds of matches I have attended here are a few observations: Way more people are getting away with dumping rounds, than are being called for it. The ratio may be hundreds to one. It sure isn't 10 to one or less. I don't know of any shooter that never dumps getting called for it. The people getting called for it don't proclaim that they never dump. They effectively proclaim they weren't currently dumping when called. So maybe the system isn't as bad as one would believe from this discussion. Or we need to polygraph each shooter before the match to find out if he/she is a cheater, and exclude them. kr

Howdy, There seems to be two schools of thought on these threads which I will with all good humor describe below: One, It is a rule, breaking it is cheating, I have a modicum of self integrity even if no one is watching, and won't do it. Two, I don't like the rule, it is hard to call, and I should therefore be able to ignore the rule, because it gives me an advantage over the boneheads with opinion one. And if I get caught I am going to have a hissy fit. But I am a really good range lawyer and I can make up really good excuses for cheating. I was calling my shots. Everyone else does it, so I have to. It contradicts Vickers scoring. And list goes on with some really creative thoughts.... The last excuse is my favorite. These people must have a hard time driving if they can't reconcile overlapping rules.... like a speed limit and a stop sign. Driver: But but but officer it says 35MPH, that contradicts with the stop sign back there, so I did whatever I wanted to. Officer: Here is your ticket, have a nice day! The very best part about the rule is the threads like this one. They are indeed entertaining. Thanks for the smiles kr

Chris, You and I both know it is a game, and I will play up to a point. You know as well as anyone that there is no official IDPA rules clarification site... yet. For some reason you are getting joy out of seeing that statement in print. These games you are playing are why people tire of IDPA discussions. It seems logical to me that using the latest clarifications on the rulebook is a good thing, no matter the sport. A better question would be, if someone knows of a location that has the latest clarifications on a sport to explain what the founder of the sport meant when the rulebook was written, why wouldn't they go there. Maybe they have some hidden agenda, dunno It is free, it is public, and it is easy to find. I know of no one else that has trouble accessing this site. Do you know of a reason why you are having trouble with this one site? kr

Chris, You frequented and posted a whole lot on the IDPAForum before you abruptly stopped. So I am not quite sure why you are playing dumb. Ken Reed

Chris, The IDPAForum is open to the public for reading. You should be able to access those clarifications at any time Any member in good standing can post there. But you knew all this already. kr