Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

FTDMFR

Classifieds
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    446

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by FTDMFR

    Yet another rulebook revision - version 2

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted



    Reading it again, I don't think the physical object used for the fault line needs to be more than 36"
    You just need to visualize where the fault line would be based on the physical object.
    See classifier diagram.... they only go 36" when they could go much farther.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


    Yeah, I think you're right.

    Fault Lines

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted

    Me thinks you are reading more than is written. It does not say the MD has any freedom in placement of fault lines. 

    Two things....this does not say the physical line extends to the boundary line, just that it virtually exists in that location. The 3 ft rule still applies. Second it does not say that the alignment is no longer with center of the first target and the edge of cover. 

    This is how internet confusion starts. People don't read the words. They see what they want to see 

     

    Agreed that I misinterpreted the thing about fault lines not being extended.

    Regarding fault line placement, they removed the rule about aligning the fault line with the first target and replaced it with a rule saying that they must be placed by the MD to promote the IDPA principle of shooting behind cover, and they define cover as having SOME part of the shooter's body behind an object.

    Fault Lines

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted

    3.6.3.b
    Physical objects used (wood, rope, barrels, walls), as Fault Lines, to delineate cover must start at the cover object (e.g. wall, barrel, etc.) and extend back away from cover in the up-range direction. The object used to mark the line must extend back away from the cover object at least 3 feet.


    So only 3 feet.



    They added this to the stage design section:

    6.E. Fault lines used to mark a PoC extend from the end of the physical objects used up range to the stage boundary to accommodate long-cover.

    Fault Lines

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted

    Wow, they fixed the fault line rules today! No more aligning the fault line to the center of the outermost target (so no more super narrow arrays), and now fault lines have to be physically extended all the way back to the stage boundary.

    Fault Lines

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted

    Here are two competing points.

    In one case it will "strain the arthritis of us old guys". As one who easily qualifies for Super Senior (by 10 years), I can say confidently that stages and rules are written for everyone, not for seniors or anyone else. Younger people clearly have an advantage...eye sight, flexibility, running speed. Those of us who fail in those areas have to compensate by being as able as possible and being super competitive . Unfortunately age is against us but I refuse to admit that I can't compete even though it might be true. Also I point out that USPSA allows the use of things like ropes to stabilize shooting of difficult inside targets. They are neat because it forces single handed shooting without requiring it. There are numerous advantages to body types. Tall guys can lean around barricades better. Short guys can get on the ground better. People who practice usually can shoot better. Use your advantages, minimize your disadvantages and get on with kicking somebody's ass.No excuses!

    Fault lines just limit the stage boundaries. As described they actually enhance use of cover as the guy above fears. Sometimes fault lines force the shooter nearer to cover as I, myself,  said before. They, in conjunction with stage boundaries, can actually force longer shots. Visualize a target near the 180 with hard cover protecting it from sight at the junction of the fault line and cover. The stage boundary angles toward the berm (backstop) so that the only way to see that target is on the move from 15-20 yards away  because you can't see the target when near it.

    All these things will change stage designs and in MHO make them more USPSA-like. The example above will actually make the IDPA shot more difficult than a similar USPSA shot because you can stop and shoot in the open in USPSA, but not in IDPA. Even a 10 yard target is harder on the move. 

    Quit looking for problems with these changes and start looking for new skills that you need to work on. 

    Let me get this straight. There are standard stage designs and target arrays that were perfectly fine under the old rulebooks that will now be physically impossible to shoot under the new rulebook, regardless of age/physical ability/height/etc. You think this is a good thing?

    "Fault lines just limit the stage boundary" - This just isn't true. There's a huge difference between fault lines in USPSA and fault lines in IDPA. Fault lines in USPSA don't limit where targets can be placed with respect to a shooting position. Fault lines in IDPA will force targets shot at a position to be placed within a very narrow cone.

    So before, when a stage could place targets at one position to make you pie a corner by 90, 120, or more degrees, we're now going to have targets spread out at 50 degrees at the very most.

    So all those stages where you pie a few targets in front of you and then one more in the corner close to the 180? Gone. I don't understand how this is a good thing.

    As for forcing long distance shots or shots on the move or whatever, we don't need fault lines to do that. We could do all of that under the old rulebooks!

    As far as I can tell, there are no new target presentations that fault lines (as implemented in the rulebook) will suddenly create. They will only restrict target presentations from what they are today.

    I don't need to look for problems, buddy. They're standing in front of me clear as day.

    Fault Lines

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted

    I agree it will limit the width of target arrays in stage designs versus the former subjective cover lines. I fail to see how that is bad.The worst-worst-worst problem with IDPA was the subjective cover calls. Nobody ever used the 50% torso rule as a cover call....it was impossible. The entire foot fault thing was a way to simulate the 50% torso cover rule. Fault lines work great in USPSA. It's about time IDPA eliminated the cover calls.


    I wholeheartedly agree that subjective cover calls are terrible and should be addressed somehow. However, the method they chose removes the subjectivity at the expense of watering down the game, which I don't think is a good trade off. I do think limiting the width of target arrays is pretty bad. It reduces the amount of movement in a sport that is already not that dynamic to begin with (although I guess the new rules about reloading and reengaging on the move could counteract that somewhat).

    Someone mentioned the virtual extension of the fault lines to the stage boundary and how that would continue to cause subjective calls. They overlook the new requirement for marked stage boundaries. If boundaries are marked within a reasonable distance (as they should be) then the fault line can extend all the way to the boundary and you have the equivalent of a USPSA enclosed shooting area.


    To completely remove subjectivity, I think "can" needs to be changed to "shall". I'm guessing they'll extend the fault lines well enough at nationals and other big matches, but I'm not so sure about club matches.

    Also the need to shoot the inside targets will force that the shooter to approach near to the cover because shooting far from the cover makes it more difficult to see the inside target(s).


    That's exactly why I don't like it. Being able to decide between shooting from near cover vs. far cover based on your skill level is one of the things I like about IDPA. Forcing near cover removes choice from a game that already doesn't provide many opportunities to make a choice.

    It amazes me that shooters have such diverse views, but they do. The fault lines are a major improvement in IDPA in my opinion. They solve the main problem that drove me away....the inconsistent cover calls between known and unknown shooters, different SO's, and different types of cover like barrels, barricades, and walls.


    I'm all for fault lines in theory. I think not having subjective cover calls will be great. The problems I have stem from defining a single fault line from the centerline of the outermost target. I don't think it will work well in practice. In some cases, targets will start being placed so close together that it will water down the stage design. In other cases, stage designers will push the boundaries of how wide a target array can be with a single fault line, and it will put shorter and less flexible/mobile shooters at a disadvantage.

    Maybe it would work better if they somehow split the difference in a target array and drew the fault line from there instead. Or maybe allow multiple fault lines at one position - not a bazillion fault lines spread out like a fan, but maybe just two. One fault line for the first half of an array and another fault line for the second half. Or leave it up to the stage designer's discretion how to break it up based on how far the targets are spread out.

    It will be interesting to see how the fault lines are received. For casual shooters at local clubs that play fast and loose with calling cover who have never had to deal with subjective cover calls to begin with, I think it's going to be a pretty rude awakening.

    Fault Lines

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted

    Some people have to see things as half empty.

     

    This is a much needed step in the right direction. There still appears to be a few things in the rulebook that need ironing out. This may or may not be one of them. 

    It's not just that though. Since the fault line is aligned with the outermost target, it's going to force target arrays to be narrower. Or to put it another way, the cover requirement gets tighter and tighter as you shoot outside in. Before, to shoot a wide inner target, you could shift your feet and still be 50% behind cover, but now, that same target could force you to be 75% or more behind cover!

    Just eyeballing that example picture in the rulebook, I don't think I could physically shoot the innermost target without going over the fault line, unless I crowded the shit out of cover, stuck my arms past the wall, and scrunched my feet together.

    So not only does the fault line (as implemented) not do what it's supposed to do, it creates additional, significant problems.

    I agree that there are several new rules that are great, but cover is such an integral part of this sport, and I think the new rulebook worsens how cover is used.

    Fault Lines

    in IDPA Rules

    Posted

    And, the fault line includes an invisible line that extends back from the physical fault line to the stage boundary. Which completely defeats the purpose of using fault lines to begin with!

    2nd Shot Return to POA

    in Handgun Techniques

    Posted · Edited by FTDMFR

    On 10/4/2016 at 2:28 PM, ES13Raven said:

    I've heard top shooters say get an acceptable sight picture, not a perfect one.  Acceptable being an A or close C.  I'm wondering if they are able to track the front sight so well, that they are able to take that second shot while the front sight is still in motion - just when it is on target.  Maybe I'm waiting too long for the sight to settle and I should try shooting while it's still in motion.

     

    Pretty much this.  It's a combination of tracking the sights better, knowing what kind of sight picture you can get away with for a given target presentation, and having good enough trigger control so that you can break the shot as soon and as fast as possible without disturbing the sight picture.

    When I stop thinking about speed and just watch the sights, even though it feels slower at the time, I end up shooting faster AND more accurately than when I just shoot for splits and hope the hits are there.

    For example, on stage 13 at the Western, before the beep, I just stared at the first plate and visualized my sight picture over it, and then watched my sights as I shot without rushing.  It felt SUPER slow, and I was expecting the time to be more in the 13-14 range.

    Shooting weakhand

    in Handgun Techniques

    Posted · Edited by FTDMFR

    I lock my weak hand elbow, shrug my shoulder into my cheek, and cant the gun 45deg to get the sights in front of my dominant eye.

    What really helped me to manage recoil and shoot faster was to reduce how much finger I was putting on the trigger.  Before, I would use way too much finger, which would rotate the gun outwards with respect to my forearm.  Using less trigger finger and aligning the gun to my forearm helped manage recoil and track the sights much better.

    To start, I'd work on trigger control a ton in dry fire (set a timer on random start, and on the beep, press the trigger as fast as you can without disturbing the sight picture), then practice (from low ready) singles, pairs, Bill Drills, and Blake Drills from 3-7 yards in live fire.

    Being accurate, but not fast

    in Handgun Techniques

    Posted

    that's one way to do it.

    I'm never comfortable with misses, but when I see them from the sights, I don't mind nearly as much as when I am surprised by them.



    Agreed. I should have said "not great hits" instead of "misses".

    I still want to see what's happening when working on speed. I just let points take a back seat to time.
×
×
  • Create New...