teros135

Practice, practice, practice...

It depend on what question you're asking. Is it "how many GM's are there in USPDA?" or "how many GMs are there in each Division?" or how many people have achieved GM at least once?" (i.e., how many unique GMs are there?". Those are different questions and will yield different numbers. USPSA isn't trying to "hide" anything. Their stats simply show how many of each classification are in each division.

"Hypothetically" is just a dodge in this conversation, isn't it? There's no major PF in Production, so you can't "hypothetically" declare Major for Prod. There's no way to "work" it. There's no downloading to x rounds, there's no Major. There's no change in Production on the horizon, at least that most of us are aware of. Some people keep coming up with ways to "improve" Production, but there haven't been any good reasons to do so, and no significant support for any of it. Let's let this go. The OP asked a direct question and got direct answers. And then, here we go again, another way to "fix" Production. Sheesh.

I've classified in Lim10 and Open using a Glock 35 (minor loads) and standard Production DOH holster and mag holder placement (behind the hip bone), with hicaps for Open. Same class I'm in for Prod and Lim. I do like Major scoring, when it's available, but apparently it isn't critical for us C-level folks. Like rowdyb said, if you're having fun, go for it. The whole "but [insert name of gun, round, or gear here] isn't competitive" probably doesn't mean much until you're at GM, or maybe M. I still can't figure out what that's about. If we're in a particular class, that's where we compete, yes? We're "competitive" vs others in our own class. Luckily we don't have to "compete" with those in higher classes, until of course we get there ourselves, and then we "compete" at that level, which has now become our current class - because we've earned it.

That's the reason I suspected. .45 loaded down to minor, huh? I may have to try that. Flight time measured with a sun dial. That could be fun. I wonder if I could use Ramshot Silhouette for that so I don't have to buy a different powder. TIME TO DO SOME LOOKING!! Actually, 180 grain .40s loaded to about 730 fps (131 PF) shoots really well and has recoil as good or better than 9mm minor, and accurate. Flight time is, well, not much (about .08 sec at 20 yards, if my math is right). I use TiteGroup and Bullseye, which are fairly fast powders. Also works with slower powders, but there's a bit more kick due to the increased gas. I've had a lot of fun with it.

Uh, no offense, but do you actually own and shoot any of the "awsome" guns you mention? I mean, it's nice to be enthusiastic about something, but until you've put some real time in and seen *significant* results, it's just enthusiasm. There have been many conversations here about whether it's the equipment makes the mark, or the shooter. Most seem to feel that it's the shooter, with skills honed by hours of practice. A new gun always feels good, but it's still the shooter that makes the difference. And the gap between a Glock and the CZ/Tanfos is bigger than you might think. New G34, add a trigger or trigger job, comp sights (fiber optic), and grip tape, and you're talking maybe $750-$800. The CGW SP01 starts at $998 but will be a few hundred more with the parts you'll want. SP01 Shadows run $1360 and up. Not knocking them - they're great guns and are popular - but so are Glocks in the hands of good shooters. Bottom line - if you want a particular gun, get it, but don't get drawn into the "this gun is the best" debate. (owner/shooter of Sig, Glock, M&P, S&W, STI, Ruger, Beretta - and shoot best with whatever I practice the most with)

Or simply use the 35 for Production/minor, too. Load the rounds to Minor velocity (Glocks like about 135 PF). Use the same bullets (say 180 grains) for both Major and Minor.

Well, dry or not it's still 112-120 degrees in the summer, and that's in the shade. Fortunately there's cover at most of the ranges, except of course when you're shooting a stage. Drink lots, stay hydrated! And in August comes the Monsoon season. The humidity goes from a summery 20% to around 70% or so, and it's massively miserable for the humidity-impaired (self included). One step outside and you're soggy all day. Fortunately it starts to get cooler, and by October it's pretty nice. Winter is very nice, which is why all the Snowbirds make their way back to the Valley of the Sun, get out their cars, and clog up the roads and restaurants. We love 'em, though, they're part of the city.

No, no, it's popular everywhere!

You might check out post #14, where I specifically acknowledged and thanked the OP for his efforts. I believe I stated my opinions respectfully, both times. Neither one demeaned the OP's efforts, and the first one thanked him for it. If you're talking about Cha-Lee (ONE voice), who says he doesn't get to have an opinion? At this point, it's the few who demean everyone else's right to have an opinion who might hurt the sport. If you guys can't stand anything other than praise, well, sorry.

This is becoming a disappointing end to what began as an encouraging thread. It started with one person trying to do something helpful and has degenerated into name calling. (BTW, "Range nazi" doesn't mean "somebody who disagrees with me".) I can see points on both sides of the discussion of a rules summary sheet. For "real" ROs, who have been trained and read the book and still read and refer to it, it can be a quick summary of the rule *numbers*, for those of us who can't remember "5.2.1.5" vs 5.2.1.4", for instance. But it shouldn't be used as a substitute (a la Cliff's Notes) for knowing the book and being thoughtful about applying the rules. In this I agree with Cha Lee, and didn't find his first post (#28) to be all that distasteful, although he made his point with direct language. At the same time, there's too much of a "Cliff's Notes" mentality in what people incorrectly refer to as "local" or "club" matches, where the people holding the timer often don't have any real training or supervision and often don't even know the range commands, let alone the rules. A cheat sheet probably isn't a good idea there because it's likely to be used as a substitute for the real thing. And I'm pretty much in favor of the Real Thing, because the rules and guidelines are what make this sport come alive and stay alive through the principles of Safety, Efficiency, and Fairness. I've read the book, have highlighted it, and have notes in it, from RO class, readings from bEnos, and discussions with fellow shooters and officials. There isn't a match that I don't ask at least one question of the MD or senior ROs, because I want to keep learning and want to be fair and equitable and safe. I don't know everything and never will, but it does help to keep an eye to understanding both the philosophy of the sport and its rules. I may (or may not) put a summary of the rules numbers into my rule book, but mainly as a quick reference during matches. Summaries provide the broad strokes, but they don't give the real substance and don't help with the subtleties. I'd hate for someone to just have a summary (or just rely on one) and not have a real working knowledge of the book. I think that was Cha Lee's point, and if so I do agree. If we see a "RO" (with our without credentials) who just pulls out a summary and doesn't have a rule book with it, I don't think we should be impressed - especially if he can't even say the range commands right.

Are these the same stages published by twodelta earlier today (post #98)? Have they been updated?

If we're going to shoot Majors (Level II and above) it's a good idea to practice some of the more complicated movements, simply because you might need them. Right-to-left reloads (for right-handers) are among these. It's not quite as "natural" as a normal reload because you need to extend your right wrist in order to keep the gun pointed well within the 180 (flexion is toward the palm, extension is toward the back of the hand). Practicing dryfire at home is a good idea, because there's no match pressure and no loaded rounds to deal with. It's not impossible at all and requires muzzle awareness - but we're doing this all the time anyway, right? I periodically run stages right to left at local matches, for the practice. It provides another level of flexibility, which can be really helpful in complex long courses.

Already did!

Nice work, and a lot of time put in. This covers the basics, and situations commonly seen. A few edits and proofing will make it even smoother. Thanks!

Mods - could you move this from Match Announcements, please?

Yes! Gonna be wonderful - again!

Just for the future, it would be good if the two ROs staggered themselves so one would always be available to officiate. That would take some load off the other squad members, such as the OP. Also, an RO would be available to deal with problems of this type. Good experience for the OP, but he shouldn't have had to be in that position. That said, safety (and the rules) dictates that we can't sweep ourselves, even if in a "good intentioned" situation where we're "pretty sure" the gun won't fire. I agree that the RO needs to clearly give permission for the squib rod to be used. For those ROs who keep a "squib detector" (such as a long cable tie) in their pocket, this can be inserted into autos from the breech end of the barrel, doesn't have to be inserted from the muzzle. For revolvers, RO can insert from the muzzle to check for distance to an obstruction, but I'd *only* do that after everything else has been checked out and the hammer is clearly down and the trigger in its normal, forward position (so the FP blocking mechanism is active). And, cable ties are flexible and can be inserted somewhat from the side, so fingers are still not downstream of the muzzle.

A Dremel flannel polishing wheel with Flitz or SimiChrome isn't going to take anything substantial off (if anything at all) - it'll just polish it. Feeding should be smoother, that's why we polish things (like all the internals that move against each other). It isn't going to leave any "lines" that would affect anything. Again, it's polishing, not cutting. Not to worry. Cratex bits (rubber impregnated with abrasive), on the other hand, can be a bit aggressive, and those take a light hand and lower speeds. I use them, occasionally, for starting polishing on parts such as the back end of the trigger bar, where other tools won't reach in to the crevices. (Schmecky uses wet-or-dry paper attached to a Dremel bit in those areas, and that's actual abrasive, so the Cratex here is actually fairly mild. Again - gently!)

Do you think it's not exciting *now*? (Isn't this the best Straw Man argument ever?)

Hmmm. You can't mix Classic and Metric targets together in a stage (4.2.1), so you couldn't have a Classic no-shoot on a Metric target, or vice versa. It will probably be the same for the minis. Now, you could probably have a Zombie (prop) holding two Minis... (How intimidating would a metric no-shoot covering half of a mini be? Forgot - there's no no-shoot, just the paper...)

I would agree. We already have a variety of challenges, including "partials", although the A-zone of the minis seems smaller than that of normal targets. That might be (1) to discourage using too many of them and (2) to encourage their intended use, which is to simulate distant targets that the bay can't support (e.g., 40-yd target in a 20-yd deep bay). If you do the trig, I believe the relative sizes of the target and the various zones are proportionately smaller. It's pretty much the same thing as a "minute of angle" being 1.047" at 100 yds, twice that at 200, three times that at 300, etc. Basically an ever-widening cone. I've placed a mini target at 25 yds and a regular target at 50. The visual size is just about the same, and A zone seems pretty much the same as the 50 yd target (small!).

I go up to 1200 or 2000 (which makes it *very* smooth), then use Flitz on a Dremel felt wheel, which makes it like glass.

The Scotch is for lubrication while you're grinding the nub down...

In USPSA Production a DA/SA gun has to be started with the hammer down (decocked, if it's a decocker gun; if not, then hammer all the way down.)