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

glandry51

Classified
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    50

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by glandry51

    Single Stack Weight Limit Rule

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    Cuts that are designed to specifically or significantly lighten the slide, such as holes, or slots, are ruled as competitive advantage and prohibited

    So no, gamers already cannot cut up their slides to race out their single stack guns. That point is mute. The rule is a rule... And we must ALL abide by the rules the same.

    New gun quandary

    in Miscellaneous BEginners

    Posted

    I know you already chose the Para, but I still want to add me 2 cents: I know all the cool kids shoot STIs, but I don't think you're giving up your potential to make GM shooting a TS, not in function, reliability nor in performance. If it fits your hand and you like the ergonomics the TS is a fantastic value: right out of the box you get a sub 2# trigger which is very crisp and an action which runs like a raped ape then with off the shelf pads and followers you get 21 in the mag reloadable. 2011 guys, is there a place to buy reliable 21+1 mags off the shelf? if so, how much?

    Using .40 CAL 140mm STI mag tubes and using Taran Tactical Spring/Follower/4G2 Basepad, I get 20+1 and is SUPER RELIABLE

    Popper requires multiple hits before falling: REF or not? Split from a

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    I understand the "local interpretation when it's just a club match" position completely, and I think the "coolest" thing to do in a club match is grant a reshoot due to REF if you find the popper was set too heavy. BUT...each rule in the book was created to solve some problem. Shooting a popper until it is down, and THEN claiming it was too heavy is a problem. Especially if the shooter claims that only after crash n burning on the stage, but not if it otherwise was a good run. That introduces ambiguity and judgement calls where there don't need to be any. Sticking to the rule of "if shooter fells plate, no calibration/reshoot" reduces ambiguity & judgement calls. In addition, the rule is crystal clear.

    I wish SCOTUS and our Fed legislature would stick to literal interpretations of the Constitution, and not "create wiggle room". I damn sure see more problems with creative interpretations than with literal interpretation.

    That's not a local rule at all. IMHO (and apparently in practice at national championship matches), the rules give the RO and RM some latitude to ensure the match is run fairly.

    If the shooter simply claims the popper was set too heavy, you can say 'too bad, no calibration since you shot it down', and move on to the next shooter.

    OTOH, if you examine the popper, and find that it was obviously set wrong somehow, and then you adjust it significantly, or you instruct the other RO's to change the way they have been setting it (with a forward-faller, for example) you have changed the presentation of the stage, and a re-shoot *may* be justified. This is a VERY different situation than the one you describe.

    I don't think any reasonable person is suggesting that people should be able to call for calibration after having to use more than 1 shot to drop a popper. I'm saying that if the popper (or any other prop or piece of equipment) was OBVIOUSLY improperly adjusted, *and you change that adjustment to fix it*, a re-shoot for someone who was affected by the maladjustment *may* be justified.

    You are living in a fantasy world if you don't think there will always be ambiguity and judgement calls. The key is to apply the rules consistently and fairly in those cases.

    IMHO you cannot apply rules consistently and fairly if you are making calls based soley on judgement... Because it became a judgement call and that is open for interpretation by different people. The rule is set as it is for just this reason, it makes it equal for everyone. If GrandMaster Joe shoots a popper 7 times before it falls and D shooter Jane does the same thing, they both own the score. Equally. If it becomes a judgement call from the R.O., there is absolutely no guarantee that D shooter Jane gets the same call as GrandMaster Joe.

    *Every* rule call is based solely on judgement. That's why we have human RO's that can think instead of RO robots.

    If either GM joe or D jane has trouble with a popper, and inspection proves that the popper is drastically out of adjusment or broken and must be replaced or adjusted for the match to continue, then the call would be the same.

    I cannot agree with that at all. If you shoot a popper until it falls, you own the score per rules. Not a judgement call. You drop a gun during a COF, DQ. Not a judgement call. Rack your slide to fix a malfunction with your finger in the triggerguard, DQ. Not a judgement call.

    Now trying to explain what constitutes a popper "drastically out of adjustment", that is a judgement call. And there is no rule to support making this call if the shooter has put the popper down. It is not hiding behind the rules, it is enforcing the rules evenly and to the letter so that all shooters are treated the same. If you are going to play this game, KNOW THE RULES. It is not the job of an RO to stop a COF b/c he THINKS that a popper is out of calibration. It is on the shooter to know the rule, stop shooting the popper, keep going, and ask for calibration after. That is how the rules read, enforce them as such.

    Popper requires multiple hits before falling: REF or not? Split from a

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted · Edited by glandry51

    I understand the "local interpretation when it's just a club match" position completely, and I think the "coolest" thing to do in a club match is grant a reshoot due to REF if you find the popper was set too heavy. BUT...each rule in the book was created to solve some problem. Shooting a popper until it is down, and THEN claiming it was too heavy is a problem. Especially if the shooter claims that only after crash n burning on the stage, but not if it otherwise was a good run. That introduces ambiguity and judgement calls where there don't need to be any. Sticking to the rule of "if shooter fells plate, no calibration/reshoot" reduces ambiguity & judgement calls. In addition, the rule is crystal clear.

    I wish SCOTUS and our Fed legislature would stick to literal interpretations of the Constitution, and not "create wiggle room". I damn sure see more problems with creative interpretations than with literal interpretation.

    That's not a local rule at all. IMHO (and apparently in practice at national championship matches), the rules give the RO and RM some latitude to ensure the match is run fairly.

    If the shooter simply claims the popper was set too heavy, you can say 'too bad, no calibration since you shot it down', and move on to the next shooter.

    OTOH, if you examine the popper, and find that it was obviously set wrong somehow, and then you adjust it significantly, or you instruct the other RO's to change the way they have been setting it (with a forward-faller, for example) you have changed the presentation of the stage, and a re-shoot *may* be justified. This is a VERY different situation than the one you describe.

    I don't think any reasonable person is suggesting that people should be able to call for calibration after having to use more than 1 shot to drop a popper. I'm saying that if the popper (or any other prop or piece of equipment) was OBVIOUSLY improperly adjusted, *and you change that adjustment to fix it*, a re-shoot for someone who was affected by the maladjustment *may* be justified.

    You are living in a fantasy world if you don't think there will always be ambiguity and judgement calls. The key is to apply the rules consistently and fairly in those cases.

    IMHO you cannot apply rules consistently and fairly if you are making calls based soley on judgement... Because it became a judgement call and that is open for interpretation by different people. The rule is set as it is for just this reason, it makes it equal for everyone. If GrandMaster Joe shoots a popper 7 times before it falls and D shooter Jane does the same thing, they both own the score. Equally. If it becomes a judgement call from the R.O., there is absolutely no guarantee that D shooter Jane gets the same call as GrandMaster Joe.

    DQing a New Shooter...What would you do?

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    Why not just stop the shooter as soon as you suspect REF? If the RO witnesses good hits in the cal circle or above and the popper doesn't go down, especially if there was other steel on the stage that went down no problem, why not stop the shooter there? It's not specified in the rules that a shooter should be stopped if the RO suspects REF, but I can't find where it's not allowed. App C1 #6 lists the competitor's options when a popper doesn't fall, but does not mention the RO's options. A shooter stopped by the RO for a suspected REF would be a reshoot supported by the rules, since it's not a safety issue (DQ, squib, etc).

    Why let the shooter continue to fire 5,10,etc shots at a popper until they finally knock it down, only to then grant a reshoot that's specifically not allowed by the rules?

    One reason not to stop the shooter is b/c the RO does not know what ammo the shooter is using. Possible that the shooter is using underpowered handloads.

    DQing a New Shooter...What would you do?

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    So where do you draw the line? What constitues a new shooter? Why does he/she get a break from the rules and others don't? What rules do we allow him to break and what ones do we enforce?

    I shot a local match recently and was squadded with a well know shooter. (Well known as on the World Shoot Team). And that person broke several rules and was never penalized b/c of their name. That turns as many shooters off to the sport as DQ'ing one for a safety violation. During that same match I was shooting a classifier and had a malfunction. I racked the gun with my finger in the trigger guard. I wasn't penalized but was told about it after I shot. I voluntarily withdrew. We cannot allow any rules to be broken for the "good of keeping people in the sport." It is doing more harm than good.

    DQing a New Shooter...What would you do?

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    I have been shooting for a little over a year now and my opinion: Follow the rulebook. There is no rule that can be bent for new shooters, especially not a safety violation. It is a DQ, use it as a learning experience. I shoot at 7 different local club matches and at times it is difficult to know the rules b/c they are enforced differently based on who/where you are shooting. This is a detriment to the sport. If the rule says a dropped gun during a COF is a DQ...it is a DQ. If the rules says that by firing until the popper falls constitutes a legal run and you cannot challenge...then the run stands. You are not doing this sport any favors by bending the rules to fit your likings.

    2011 upgrades?

    in 1911-style Pistols

    Posted

    Change out the Recoil Master. It will break eventually. Also, you can select any recoil spring weight you want.

    You could try a tungsten guide rod.

    Change the MIM slide stop to an EGW machined one.

    Keep the original hammer and sear. They're good enough.

    +1 here, change out the Recoil Master. I bought a Dawson CRP Edge last March as did a friend of mine. Both of our Recoil Masters broke within 8 months.

    Lesson Learned

    in Match Screw-ups

    Posted

    Realized that watching the Master Class shooter breeze through a classifier directly before me was a BAD idea. Made me think I could shoot that fast... and I cannot. Ended with a hit factor of 0.00. Yes, that was 0.00. Lesson learned.

    Does 4.5.1 apply to a 'move the ammo can' stage if...

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    4.5 Directly speaks about "Rearrangement of Range Equipment or Surface". 4.5.1 states that: The competitor must not interfere with the range surface, natural foilage, construction, PROPS, or other range equipment at anytime. I would think (just my opinion which isn't much) that removing anything from the ammo can (PROP) would be interfering with it.

    I believe 4.5.2 should have been used. Should have requested Match Officals clarify and correct so as to ensure consistency.

    As an RO, would you let this guy begin the COF?

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    8.2.2 The competitor assumes the start position as specified in the written

    stage briefing. Unless otherwise specified, the competitor must stand

    erect, facing downrange, with arms hanging naturally by the sides.

    On the second stage of the video, she is most likely not in compliance with 8.2.2. Her hands are at a right angle to her wrists and she is crouching (not erect). Unless the WSB start position said arms extended with palms horizontal while crouching, as an RO I would not have started her.

    The rules are the same for everyone. They should be enforced the same for everyone.

    +1 for that!!!
    but we all no they are not being enforced the same or shooters like her would not still be doing it!

    AGREED!

    As an RO, would you let this guy begin the COF?

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    8.2.2 The competitor assumes the start position as specified in the written
    stage briefing. Unless otherwise specified, the competitor must stand

    erect, facing downrange, with arms hanging naturally by the sides.

    On the second stage of the video, she is most likely not in compliance with 8.2.2. Her hands are at a right angle to her wrists and she is crouching (not erect). Unless the WSB start position said arms extended with palms horizontal while crouching, as an RO I would not have started her.

    The rules are the same for everyone. They should be enforced the same for everyone.

    +1 for that!!!

    Winger swinger legal?

    in USPSA/IPSC Rules

    Posted

    I would have a problem with any Range Equipment on Level II and higher matches that were not the same for every shooter. If it did not have the exact same path for every shooter, than how could you compare one shooter's time to another?

×
×
  • Create New...