Not-So-Mad Matt

So, the new proposed rules include an updated Classifier (section 9.9), and I feel like they may have missed an opportunity to make the Classifier a better predictor of match performance. (You can see rowdyb shooting it masterfully.) A few years ago I noticed that our local Classifier match didn't show Masters to shoot at a Master level, Experts at an Expert level, etc. Don't get me wrong, there was definitely a relationship between match performance and Classifier performance, but it wasn't nearly as tight as you might expect. There was a strong feeling among the shooters that the Classifier is its own thing -- a decent shooting test, but not a great test of IDPA skills. That led me to ask, What should the Classifier emphasize? I ended up thinking that the Classifier would be (even) better if it tested skills like drawing from concealment and shooting while moving to cover and then slicing the pie around that cover. That's what IDPA is about, in a nutshell, and performance on such a test would better predict performance in a typical match. What would you have liked to see in the new Classifier?

You're not supposed to be able to fix a problem after trying the right drill once.

I did quite a bit of dry-fire without improving my terrible trigger-control, because I assumed multiple trigger pulls would be useless in dry fire. When I started working multiple trigger pulls on the same target -- Bill drills, even -- I immediately saw how much the front sight was squirming, and that was the first step toward fixing the problem. Also, you'll see more movement from poor trigger-control while shooting one-handed, at smaller targets, from a standstill, etc. If you have a heavy enough trigger, you can simply take up the slack over and over, without breaking the shot each time, so you're not constantly re-racking the slide.

Steve Anderson's First Book -- that's the title, right? -- explicitly tells you not to pull the trigger when you draw to a sight picture, because you'll be tempted to snatch the trigger before the buzzer goes off, whether or not you have an acceptable sight picture. On most other drills, you're expected to pull the trigger normally -- except that your trigger may be dead, or mostly dead, after the first (dry) shot.

I found that working my draw really aggravated my nagging elbow injuries, but simply gripping the gun and working transitions didn't, so I've shifted my emphasis in practice.

I think the switch to one-second-per-point would go well with dropping the unwritten rule that each target should get two shots. If a dropped point is worth a whole second, then make-up shots make more sense, and requiring just one shot means plenty of targets will still get two. More make-up shots also introduces a bit more unpredictability about when and where "emergency" reloads will occur, which seems like a good thing.

They said they'd have to adjust the classifier times. I wouldn't mind seeing a whole new classifier, myself -- one that was quicker to run and a better test of "real" match skills.

Gordon's account sounds surprisingly reasonable to me, but it raises all kinds of questions about how things are supposed to be handled. When an SO misunderstands a question or accidentally gives the wrong answer and then realizes his mistake, he's not allowed to grant a reshoot? Really? And the MD isn't, either? Really?

IDPA addresses incidents at competitions The headquarters staff and leadership of the International Defensive Pistol Association was made aware of two incidents that took place at two separate IDPA sanctioned competitions a few weeks ago, both of which raise concerns. The first involves questionable behavior viewed by witnesses as a violation of the Code of Conduct. The second involves a reshoot and the accompanying appeals process. Regarding the first, IDPA implemented the Code of Conduct to insure appropriate sportsmanlike behavior at our competitions. This Code of Conduct is meant for the benefit of all members and violations of the Code are to be taken seriously. IDPA received complaints of belligerent and vulgar behavior by an individual during, and in relation to, a match, which cannot be tolerated, especially when such behavior takes place in front of junior shooters and women attending the match as guests. The Code of Conduct is in place to maintain an appropriate competitive environment for match staff, competitors and our guests. If the reports received are indeed accurate, this matter is of growing concern to IDPA Headquarters and the incident remains under review. The second incident involves the issuing of a reshoot and the official appeals process that preceded the awarding of that reshoot. Headquarters has reviewed the matter and interviewed many participants with direct and indirect involvement. While no member of the IDPA Headquarters Staff was in attendance to witness the event, and therefore in no position to overrule the final decision, it is clear from the numerous accounts received that there were several contributing factors that compounded to undermine competitor and staff confidence in the officiating process. Whether you agree or disagree with the final decision, it was the handling of the process that put both competitors and staff in a position that should have been avoided, and it exposed a clear weakness in the processing of an appeal that IDPA needs to address. Though the appeals process is fairly new to IDPA, it is not one foreign to experienced shooting sports competitors. However, the slow execution of the appeal review process and the subsequent disposition of the final judgment demonstrated a systemic weakness in our overall ability to judiciously carry out an appeal. To insure that at future matches the appeal process is handled from start to finish with the efficiency and fairness that both match staff and competitors expect and rely on, IDPA will address the proper handling of an appeal through education of our Area Coordinators and their Delegates so that they may properly support the staff and competitors at upcoming matches in their regions. While these two events are unrelated, having taken place at separate events in separate states, both, if left unaddressed, threaten to erode the confidence our members should have in their sport. IDPA will work to prevent these types of events from happening in the future and to maintain the integrity of our sport.

Does dry-firing aggravate your arthritis or make it feel better?

So, how do you fix flat feet in minutes?

It sounds like they warned you and assumed you knew you got the procedural. Usually they do let you know. You're probably right about too much going on with the new system.

The SO has the option to yell "move!" if you're not moving and about to get a procedural. After you've shot, the SO typically calls out your time and any penalties, but I certainly haven't been aware of every single penalty I've earned at local matches. At major matches they have you sign your score sheet.

Lumosity may not carry over to shooting, but certain kinds of vision training seem to carry over to other tasks.

Ron Larimer ran the numbers on the IDPA Nationals and confirmed that it's not the arrow; it's the Indian: As I stared and sorted and ran statistics, I noticed that the curves looked the same they were just squished because of the number of people shooting. So I plotted them based on the shooters percentile rank in the division and there was no difference! 10th percentile in ESP is 10th percentile in SSP is 10th percentile in CDP and the same holds true at the 20th percentile and 50th. The only place that the division seems to make any difference is in the Marksman ranks where trigger control, recoil management and weapons manipulations might not be as well developed.