moverfive

The key thing that shooting open will do for you is to improve your timing. While you must be fundamentally strong in any division, there is usually less room for error in Limited than it is in Open. But in open, you must be quick.....always. So each division has its own twist that must be mastered. But what open gives you that you cannot easily get by just shooting limited is a quicker timing. And conversely, shooting limited will make you a fundamentally stronger open shooter. But one word of caution - as people get faster in limited, they usually need to change their gun accordingly. Many limited guns that work well for C and B class shooters are totally unacceptable for A's and M's. The gun must always be able to shoot faster than you can. I say that as a lot of limited guns are not configured to shoot fast enough for M's and GM's.

I hope everyone really reads these threads and try to 'listen' from all angles. A lot of good points and opinions - from both the low to mid-level classed shooters to the upper level shooters. Depending on where you are personally, your opinion is probably biased. But Carmoney said it the absolutely best - vote with your dollars and your presence. If you don't like the way a match is done, don't go. And better yet, tell the hosts of the match WHY. If enough people don't go and tell them politely why they aren't going - their format will probably change. But the bottom is this - are we really in this for a prize table? As I have said before, the prize table does make a difference for many matches and I think people who win (whatever it is they win) should be appropriately rewarded. But I shoot some matches even though I hate the prize table format - the Mississippi match for example. I have won HOA at the MS Match two years in a row and haven't walked away with much in any year. It costs me a LOT more to shoot that match than what I have received. But I shoot the match because I like the people and the match in general and will continue to shoot that match. While some may be unhappy with their prizes, they need to ask themselves - why are they shooting matches in the first place. This issue with the prize table and rewarding performance within a class will never be fully resolved until we become a fully sponsored event - meaning we are getting enough sponsorship dollars and don't require a match fee in order to hold the event. Since that isn't happening anytime soon - we just need to be cognizant of where the bulk of the money is coming, why an event is successful, and then cater to those reasons. And depending on the audience and the match, those reasons could vary dramatically.

I can only talk from experience - but a couple of sandbagging cases were eleviated via clerical errors. So I am not sure 'it cannot be stopped' is completely accurate. It is just whether the local club will take the necessary action. But again, I think we are talking about such a small minority that the hefty majority of folks winning their class are legitimately in that class.

I so agree with what you are saying and also I so disagree with what you are saying. Do prize tables make a difference - Beyond "heck yes." Should the winner of D Class walk home with more than what the 3rd overall person did - a possible "heck yes" there too. Unfortunately this sport isn't a full time professional event, like the PGA. With the exception of a tiny number of people, shooting this sport is not their job. And even considering the number of "top" shooters, there typically aren't enough of them to even field a legitimate major match, much less fund the match. So we need to recognize their accomplishments. When I was shooting regularly, I typically came home with enough prize money/stuff to pay for the entire match (entry fee, hotel, and etc.) or make the cost very minimal. Would I like for prizes to be awarded by overall finish - HECK YES. But I also remember when I was a B class shooter. While I may not have been competing for the top of the ranks at that time, the time spent and the level of dedication it took for me to compete at that level was just as intense. If I won my class - why is my victory considered second rate to a guy that lost in their class? Until this sport receives the level of sponsorship that eliminates the need to have the 'ordinary Joe's' fee to pay for the match, the winner of each category/class should be rewarded above those that didn't win. With that being said - local clubs need to take an aggressive stance on known sandbaggers. I know of 'clerical errors' made when submitting scores. While sandbaggers may be "harmless" at your local club level, think of the legitimate shooters they will be penalizing when they shoot a big match. Again, I am talking about sandbaggers and not people advancing faster than the classification system can keep up or those that truly suck at classifiers. Most folks here know the difference with those folks therefore know who is really sandbagging. Again, yes prize tables make a big difference. We don't shoot this game strictly for the prize table (if that was the case we would all be bankrupt) but when we do well in a match, we want the appropriate reward with that accomplishment. But when we allow known sandbaggers to continue until that "big match," they are screwing legitimate people out of what should have been their just reward.

....and then there are just those shooters that cannot shoot a classifier to save their life. I know, I was one of them (and still am to some degree). Every classification I got through A class came as a result of a major match and not the classifiers. While we will always call someone that shoots above their classifier percentage a 'sandbagger,' just know that 90% of those folks are not really sandbagging. At least from my experience, only a small percentage of folks actually do. I am just saying that in case some folks get the idea this is a widespread problem. It isn't. There are just a lot of shooters whose skills are improving much faster than the classification system can keep up.

Ability aside - you are correct about the entertainment value of fireballs. Just ask Sharyn about the many comments she gets about her flame thrower.

Lee, Thanks for coming in with the great support. be Excellent thread....it forced me to buy one! :-)

This has been said many times before in this thread - both directly and indirectly. Many of these issues we are talking about are 'no brainers' when it comes to preventing them by writing clear and concise stage procedures. Many others are not known UNTIL the stage is actually built and somone actually shoots the stage (hopefully when the RO's shoot the match)......case and point in this thread, the clay pigeon. In these cases, these problems and their "cures" are not identified until everything is printed and done. In other words, this additional stage description will have to be covered via the verbal portion of the stage walk-thru and procedure declaration. The key is to provide the most consistent stage descriptions (written and/or verbal) and then apply the rules and those procedures consistently. While a shooter may want to do something (and that something may be legal), but if they and everyone else is denied/offered the exact same thing......then the results for that stage are consistent and offer a level playing field for score. And again - even if the application isn't consistent across the entire match (whether that is due to safety rules, the stage design, or whatever) as long as the rules are applied consistently on each individual stage, no one really has a legitimate complaint about the results of that stage and the ultimate match results. But the bottom line to all of this - experienced stage designers and RO's rule the day.

Now Sam, you know darn well that if you don't go to the Nationals you will kick yourself later. Heck, you drove all the Pennsylvania to chase down a slot. You need to shoot like me - wake up, remember it is match day, grab your gun, shoot the match, put the gun back in the safe, and and not touch it again until you wake up on the morning of the match day. And if you practice, shame on you!!!! .......oh, and go diving in between all the matches!

Does the phone read 'No Service' or are your calls getting blocked - getting fast busy sound?

I am curious what the real tech folks will recommend - but in the past I have also restricted access to specific MAC addresses. So I only list the addresses of those computers I will allow on the network.

....about right!!!! As a whole, watching how revolvers are shot on a typical stage, it is just too cumbersome and slow for me. A couple of weeks ago, Sam let me shoot his revolver at a local match......after a few shots, I turned and looked at him and asked, "HOW DO YOU SHOOT THIS THING AS FAST AS YOU DO???" Not that I have any desire to shoot revolver, but I quickly got a an appreciation of what it takes to shoot that type of gun and even more of a appreciation and respect for Sam's performances.

Congratulations John!!!!

I think the reason this probably isn't a real issue (as with most things) - the quality of RO's at matches. They know what is right, and more importantly, what is fair to the shooter. And while there will always be a "rookie" RO on every stage, there is always a seasoned RO there with them to correct a possible error in judgement. Case and point - arbitrations. While they do happen, they are rare for the most part. And when they do happen, the majority of the time there is a legitimate question that needs a "committee decision."

And you can still have both a "fun" stage that includes things like long range accuracy if you are using boxes. Just require that 35 yard (or even 50 yard) shot to come from Box C, for example. It was quite common in some places to have both in your face, hose-em-up targets AND 35 - 50 yard shots in the same box.

that is why we have different divisions. So everyone has the opportunity to compete with equivalent equipment.

You just reiterated my point about the stages of 10 - 15 years ago......and therefore am agreeing with you 100% in that area. I don't agree with you about the ammo capacity in a gun. Use the Limited Nationals as an example - I think for the first four years (at least for the first two years), the top two shooters were shooting single-stack. People in Hawaii with only 10 rounds in their gun (regardless of division) are making M and GM in open and limited. I know, I was the first to make M in Hawaii and was one stage point away from GM. While the extra ammo helps, it isn't the difference in who wins or loses or who advances in class - just my little opinion. And besides, all have access to the same equipment. But that isn't what I wanted to really say here - my real overall point I want to make is that the US shooters aren't less competitive on the world format today than they were 10 - 15 years ago BECAUSE of 'bipsc' stages of today. Stages as a whole aren't much different than what they were when US shooters were winning the world matches. What changed? The rest of the world is just catching up - we no longer have the monopoly of talented shooters with the ability to practice and participate.

And don't get me wrong, I wasn't trying to compare stages of 30 years ago to today's. I was trying to make more of a comparison from stages 10 - 15 years ago - the timeframe that seemed to be 'okay' with the initiators of this 'bipsc' conversation....since in that timeframe it was only US shooters winning the world championships.

Depending on your club - the biggest difference between stages from 10 years ago and today are the props. In my opinion, the stages themselves really haven't changed much. In the end, the course designer has an idea of what they want you to do and not do. In the past, they used boxes to achieve that goal.....today they use a prop. When it is all said and done, the course would be shot very similar whether it was yesterday or today. However, the props (and good stage designers) have expanded on something that boxes didn't fully allow.....the shooter must now be better at breaking down a stage and developing a plan of attack. Because boxes and stage descriptions of yesterday were so definitive, the multiple ways to shoot a stage weren't as common then as it is today. And while some of this 'bipsc' discussion evidently makes you think we are shooting a totally different game than what we did 10 - 15 years ago, look at some of the older stages and I think you will find more similarity than differences that what you see in today's stages (just imagine a prop versus a box though).

They would check your luggage locked or not. If it is locked and they can't open the lock they will break it. I use TSA approved locks for which they have a master key. They open my bag, look in it, mess it all up, close it, lock it back up. Have you had good luck with those TSA locks and the TSA folks themselves? I just got mine and haven't used them yet. Have only heard stories third-hand of folks' experiences....and those have been mixed results.

Had same the problem with the timeslot, but just recently solved it with a DVR (or TIVO for you satellite folks). Regardless of the flavor, awesome device! Anyway to the real point - I think Jim has an excellent suggestion. I know a lot of people don't play in any of the gun games because of the intimidation factor.....much like why a lot of people who do participate in local USPSA matches don't compete at a major match - they don't think they will be very competitive. And now that I am able to watch your shows, I really like your presentation and how you bring everything down to an non-competitor's level. In other words, I think your style would help folks understand what is out there and to remove some of that intimidation preventing from taking that last step needed to play in one of the many gun games out there. But just showing the major matches and top competitors might be adding to that intimidation factor - which is part of the reason why I think Jim has a good suggestion to show some 'local, everyday' folks in a local environment. But really like your show and hope you continue to have good luck with it.

Forgot about those!!!! Still the stage that I remember most from the Friendship Classics, as far as unique to Norco that is, was when Wally literally dug trenches in one berm that were big enough to take a full target and its stand and then you shot this entire stage with your gun pointing down - at about 45 degrees down. Was just weird to run all over the place and you never lifted your gun above waist height. Wally just had some of the most creative stages for that time.

For some of the folks that shot Norco when it started back in the days of cow manure berms (and faced the opposite direction) ......coming back to shoot Norco as L-10 is almost blasphemous. But regardless - bring back the Friendship Classic!

Awesome pictures.....now let the diving begin! Well, for those that have some tech training.

that's cool Sharyn! It was good shooting with you!