IHAVEGAS

8.5.1.1 Must be suitable for all day concealed carry The "concealed" part is what caused heartburn when I saw a holster challenged at a major last year. Some of us would not think of a holster with a 1" spacer sticking it out farther for a more comfortable draw as being suitable for concealed carry. I 100% agree that measurable is better.

Best I can tell is that inspection consists of making sure somebody remembered to put guns in the boxes.

Abandoning USPSA affiliation is. Not sure if giving up on the organization is just a local thing or if it is a bit more widespread.

8.5.1.1 Must be suitable for all day concealed carry or duty style holsters and worn on each stage regardless of the start position. That one caused umbrage at a major last fall. The shooter had a holster with about a 1" spacer that placed it very nicely for the draw but it wasn't a duty style holster or in any way something you would use for concealed carry. The shooter got called for it, put down his $100.00 challenge, and won. It seems like if you pretend that rule doesn't exist then you are good with the rest of the holster rules.

It might depend on the design. My local USPSA club purchased the magnetic retention type a few years back and I can't remember ever having more issues than you get with well designed static steel plates and with poppers. I actually can't ever remember having even one issue but it seems reasonable that if shot enough somebody is bound to get a very marginal edge hit (as happens with all plates) and a subsequent range equipment failure reshoot. If it was my match I would be more concerned about pepper poppers & plate racks & some of the movers. We also have the spring retention type stars and with those I would have to agree with you. The worst repeat problems I have seen at a major were with forward falling poppers. It was a very bad situation because they would fail & you would adjust them & a few squads later they would fail again so that screwed up the match flow, but the worst thing is you knew that some shooters got screwed because they were flaky & inconsistent. In this case it was the design, I hate shooting forward falling poppers but have seen some that seemed extremely reliable.

I was grousing about the rule change at a "Backstoppers" level 2 match in Missouri not long after it went into effect (that was a great club who put on a great match, I think they have stopped though). The MD I was grousing to explained that HQ was making the changes to make the sport more self defense realistic. We were literally standing next to a stage that featured zombie cows with clay pigeon targets for brains as we discussed the loss of our ability to use expensive fun targets that many clubs had already purchased in order to enhance realism.

Agreed. Joyce Wilson wrote a few years back, I think about the time they decided to outlaw the Texas star, that she didn't want IDPA to become USPSA light. I have no idea why she feels that way but there seems to be some history or ego behind holding onto some of the differences just to be different.

That, and fully recognize that it is just a game and not a self defense training program. Some of the silliest rules (reloads, can't have Texas stars, fishing vests required, etc) seem to be hanging on forever just because of a bull headed stubborn pretense that IDPA ever was about real tactical training.

Folks have been getting together and having fun at outlaw steel matches for quite a few years, it is not like SCSA invented steel matches at most clubs or that the clubs need SCSA to continue. There is room for those who think of SCSA as a real sport and more power to them, but I don't know of a reason why the "fun"shooters can't also be reasonably accommodated and I tend to think the outlaw matches might be a lot more important in the big picture. There is a lot to be said for a low key competitive ish match that gives the kids a good introduction to shooting in a controlled environment and allows the casual shooters a bit of practice and a bit of socialization.

At a lot of matches no one cares enough to dispute a questionable call. Agree that if the purpose of your match is to satisfy the folks that take steel seriously rather than those who see it as a low key introduction to the shooting sports and just practice/socialization then you paint.

I don't think any of the match rulebooks themselves are that strict. There may be some that don't reduce requirements for level 0 matches that I just don't know about. It is interesting that the new PCSL rules seem specifically intended to allow clubs to massage the rules according to local club preferences. https://www.ssusa.org/content/all-about-the-practical-competition-shooting-league/ I'm not sure why not painting should prevent a score to be submitted, it is not seen as an advantage. I do completely agree that the way you run your match should agree with the way that you promote it.

Locally it seems like there is a bit of a conflict between shooter's goals for steel challenge. Traditionally steel matches were relaxed and low key, 5 stages, enjoy shooting with the kids and grandparents, bring what you have. Currently steel is now taken seriously by many and those folks have different expectations. I don't know how common that transition/conflict is but it is something that we have been able to resolve with a little bit of communication and a little bit of tolerance.

Not often. The original IDPA classifier had a weak hand only start from low ready, have had to do it at a few USPSA matches but it is rare.

If the course of fire requires you to start hammer down and weak hand only I very much notice it, if the first shot is particularly challenging I'm aware of it and try to place extra focus on a tight grip and smooth pull. Regardless of the gun a tough first shot requires a little extra focus on getting the gun stable after the draw, for me anyway. Both situations are somewhat rare. The transition from 1st shot to subsequent shots I don't notice at all, I think it is like the transition from first shot with finger starting outside the trigger guard to second shot with all guns, it just happens.

Major loads? For 9mm minor on a typical setup (Dillon 1050) I suspect most of us are + - 0.005 or greater. I have never been able to tell any difference.

It would be interesting to select rounds 0.005 above and below target and see if you could tell any difference. I assume that something would be seen on the chrono but I don't know that a change to either feel or accuracy would be noticeable.

Went to a major where they had hired a bunch of kids to do the pasting. Seemed like a good idea but I found things boring as well.

I have never sorted the range brass I use, or heard of someone having significant variance in velocity due to using mixed brass in a 9mm 130 ish power factor load. You may have the answer but it seems a bit fishy.

I crimp just enough to leave a slight visible ring on the bullet. For coated bullets that has seemed to work well. I think I got there based on advice from SNS casting, if memory serves.

What does the bore look like? You could make a case that the jacketed bullets were cleaning lead out of the barrel for you.

Not in my one experience with a stock 1. In general I think given Tanfo's sort of random luck of the draw quality and obvious lack of inspection before shipment it would be hard to find somebody that could be top notch on dealing with gun issues , like Ruger for example, and still stay in business. I do like the guns when you get a good one though.

Don't forget to practice the safety stuff that used to be ingrained habit, reloads moving to weak side, general 180 awareness, etc.

Custom doesn’t mean good or even decent sometimes. The worst gun I ever bought was a custom gun and the worst joke of a gun I have ever seen was as well. In both cases it was hell to get the builders to do what was right. In general I think you are right though, just need to be careful and do your research.