wtturn

I'm sorry, but this is my chief gripe with your claims, because it is absolute nonsense. U/D/C/B guys are slow in the context of stage times because they shoot slow, they transition slow, they reload slow, they enter and exit slow, and they run between positions at sub-maximal effort. Fitness has next to nothing to do with it. If you take a fat slob and train him to move at full effort, his time will improve drastically, despite his fitness level remaining flat. Improved stage times are not a function of fitness. That's a technique change. Fitness is good. If a shooter is committed to getting better he will not ignore physical fitness. But fitness is not a bandaid for technique deficiencies and it is certainly not the low hanging fruit for a lower classed shooter. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

I would hazard a guess that we rarely-to-never actually hit our personal max foot speed in a match. There just aren't opportunities for it in a typical stage. We just don't do that much pure running with the stop/go nature of our stage requirements. The more efficient guy beats the faster guy every time in this sport, I don't really see that as debatable. The assertion that general fitness training will result in greater sport-specific score improvement than sport-specific training in a technique-based sport is just flat wrong. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The question at hand is whether it's a better use of your time to exercise or to train shooting to increase your USPSA results. Exercise and fat loss doesn't make you a better shooter. It doesn't improve your technical skills at all. Exercise makes you fitter, which may be a nice goal in and of itself, but you want to conflate fitness and shooting ability which is inaccurate. Prioritize how you think best, but don't kid yourself into thinking if you lose ten pounds that you're going to be a better uspsa shooter because of it. You'll become a better shooter by going through 10k rounds in training. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Eh, I don't really agree. Raw foot speed doesn't make a whole lot of difference. What matters is that you haul ass at your personal max speed at all times when not shooting. For two guys of equivalent shooting ability, the more fit/fast guy has an advantage, but the shooting itself will always trump. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Yep.

From Troy, dated June 24, 2017: Consensus among the instructors is no DQ, provided the finger is outside the trigger guard when the gun is being loaded, i.e., magazine inserted. Once that's done, they can dry fire with a finger on the trigger, as long as no safety rules are broken (AD, 180, Sweeping, etc.). When the slide is racked, the finger must be outside the trigger guard, and safety applied, if possible, when holstering the gun. Sight pictures with a loaded gun are permitted, again while observing all safety rules. Troy In response to this email for context: QUESTION: Is the competitor permitted to put his finger inside the trigger guard and press the trigger of a gun with loaded magazine inserted in the firearm (but before chambering a round) during the "make ready" routine? SCENARIO: The competitor receives the make ready command, draws the gun, loads a magazine in the gun and then begins taking sight pictures and pressing the trigger (on a Glock it would be a "dead" trigger, on a hammer gun the hammer would actually fall). After dry firing, the competitor racks the slide to chamber a round and holsters. GOVERNING RULES: 8.4.1 When loading, reloading or unloading during a course of fire, the competitor’s fingers must be visibly outside the trigger guard and the handgun must be pointed safely down range or in another safe direction authorized by a Range Officer (see Section 10.5). 8.7.1 A competitor is permitted to take a sight picture prior to the start signal. Such sight picture is only permitted no more than one step from the “Make Ready” location 10.5.9 Failure to keep the finger outside the trigger guard during loading, reloading, or unloading. Exception: while complying with the “Make Ready” command to lower the hammer of a gun without a decocking lever, or while initially loading a revolver with a spurless hammer. Appendix A3 Glossary Loading: The insertion of ammunition into a firearm. Loading is completed when ammunition is inserted and firearm is in battery, (slide forward or cylinder closed), and ready to fire. Loaded Firearm: A firearm having a live round, empty case or dummy round in the chamber or cylinder, or having a live or dummy round in a magazine inserted in the firearm ARGUMENT: Disagreement arises from the definition of "loading" and whether the loading process can be paused between the insertion of a magazine and the racking of slide into battery. The proponents of issuing a DQ under this scenario argue that the definition of loading means that loading begins with the insertion of mag and never ceases until the a round is chambered in battery, thus a DQ for finger in trigger while loading. Those opposed to issuing DQ argue that "loading" refers to the discrete and separate acts of insertion of mag and racking the slide. A shooter is permitted to press the trigger in between those discrete and self-contained acts. The analogy used is "That action is no different that if the competitor reloads during a course of fire expecting a round to be chambered and pulling the trigger on an empty chamber...then racking in a round after realizing there was no round in the chamber..." The argument for DQ creates an apparent contradiction in the definition of "loading" and "loaded firearm". A gun with a loaded mag and empty chamber is a loaded firearm under the rules, however, under the definition of "loading", that same gun is an uncompleted state of loading because it is not "ready to fire". Because loaded is a status and loading is an action, it would seem to support the position that the two elements of loading are discrete and distinct and thus there should be no DQ issued. There is no prohibition against finger in the trigger guard of a loaded gun, only "during loading". CONTEXT: The thread on Brian Enos forum may be valuable- http://forums.brianenos.com/index.php?/topic/239423-1059-sight-picture-and-dropping-hammer-during-lmr-command/& Thanks for your time!

Yes, it's noticably less smoky than TG. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

As has been noted, you have a lot of wasted movement in your draw and presentation. I won't get into the whole press-out vs. natural draw too much, but it's hard for you to argue that the shortest distance between two points isn't a straight line. You have a hitching motion when getting your initial grip and your support hand is just floating around out there before mating with the grip around chest level. Get the support hand on the gun early. Listen to Jake. As far as your stance and getting pushed back: You have this hunched/turtled stance, particularly at the start. The bend at your waist just looks awkward. Stability comes from your legs. Build a stable foundation. Experiment with getting your feet wider, get the excess tension out of your shoulders, make your head/face upright and square to the target. As Jake noted, the goal is not to have the center of gravity out so much forward to combat recoil. That actually tends to exacerbate instability problems. Keep your weight centered slightly forward of the midfoot.

That's a fair question. I'd say we can use our common sense and observe the body language and watch for any delay or evidence of confusion. If I guy reacts immediately and violently to the beep and grabs his gun but flubs the draw then wants to stop himself, sorry. He reacted overtly to the beep. If I guy is obviously slow to react or halts his hand motion or looks around at you in a questioning manner, then I think that's presumptive evidence that something was off with his reception of the start beep. I'm urging that we use the totality of the circumstances and our good judgment to issue an equitable run of the stage. Tie goes to the shooter, in my opinion. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

I watched a super squad, top-16 type shooter get hosed at an area match a couple years ago. He assumed the start position, "are you ready.........standby...." and took a step off the back fault line in anticipation. He visibly relaxed his body, and was placing his foot back on the start mark when the RO beeped him. By this point we were 4+ seconds from standby command. The shooter jerked and looked at the RO, then drew and started the course of fire. The shooter finished and then made a beeline toward the RO to ask for a reshoot. The RO told him that he wasn't going to give him a reshoot but he would add a creeping procedural if the shooter wanted. I think the shooter was so disgusted that he just walked away and didn't bother calling the RM due to the obvious attitude of the RO. I estimate it cost him between 2.5-3 seconds of dead time on a high hit factor, hoser stage. I don't know if any part of that was intentional, but it was a dick move nonetheless. This is a serious competitive equity issue. Every shooter deserves an equitable attempt at each course of fire. If there is any reasonable doubt about the reaction of the shooter to the timer beep, restart the shooter.

As an RO you generally have a better vantage point if you're not up in the shooters' underwear. If you have been told about it, then you're probably crowding too much and paradoxically more likely to create a safety concern in your zeal to prevent one. Tripping or bumping with a loaded gun in the mix is not a good situation. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Yeah, but that's not how it works. There is nothing per se unsafe about firing a shot (downrange, that neither goes over the berm or strikes within 10 feet of the competitor) that fails to hit a target. Otherwise every mike is unsafe gunhandling. There is nothing per se unsafe about lighting one off early, no matter what the round impacts, within the confines of the above listed criteria and others in 10.4. Further, this scenario doesn't require any particularly difficult extrapolations beyond the written word of the rulebook as you seem to imply. I can imagine an unsafe act which would not be directly addressed by the rules, but the present scenario is directly addressed. 10.4 and 10.5 by extension deal are exactly precise and on point. No imagination required. The rules leave room for the competitor to make mistakes and accidents that are not inherently unsafe. This circumstance falls within that built-in cushion. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

BBI 125gr 3.9gr Sport Pistol 1.120 OAL

This is spot on. Not just for you, but for everyone. In fact, I was critiquing another GM friend of mine recently and it's the suggestion I made to him. That's just to say that this issue transcends class. Get the weak hand to the gun early in the draw process and have a firing grip long before you're actually firing the shot.

Everyone who's trying to achieve something in the sport goes through the same thing. It gets worse the higher you climb up the totem pole. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

I feel pretty confident that you're not gripping hard enough with your support hand. Few people are.

Ah, I misread. Even so, I paid $950 and $900 respectively for my pair of shadow 2s Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Apparently some of you will not rest until you are able to completely rewrite production division into some incoherent mismash of rules that suit your tastes. Funny how everyone's line in the sand seems to correspond precisely with your own pet modification or tweak to the equipment rules. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

It never was. Limited (minor) is the beginner division. Also the Stock II is a $900 +/- gun. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

You are wanting an equipment answer to a skills/training problem. You don't need a new gun. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Interesting idea.

I'm familiar with the letter of the law. Doesn't make it any less f*#king stupid. "You say you said 'finger' but I heard you say 'stop'!"

Warnings off the clock are fine. Warnings on the clock are bulls#!t. If you start hollering randomly at me when I'm shooting a course of fire I'm going to stop, because the only thing you ought to be saying between "standby" and "if finished...." is STOP (if necessary). Running around behind the shooter yelling "finger" because you can't tell if the finger is out or not is a s#!t job of RO-ing. Either call the DQ or shut up.

My opinion is that it should not be possible for anyone to shoot 120+% on a classifier. Top guys, or hero runs, whatever. That should be made mathematically impossible. I think when someone really hooks up or has a once in a lifetime performance that you probably ought to see no higher than 105 +/- on a spectacular run. We had several classifiers that you could reasonably hit 110, 115, 120+ on and that seems to have been corrected. Shooters of the sport in aggregate are improving. The classification system needs to move with trends. If there HHF remain fixed, then eventually you'll have ten percent, and then a quarter of shooters as M or GM. That's obviously undesirable. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Some of these have never been adjusted or have only been adjusted once. When you have a sufficiently large enough set of classifier runs that are disproportionately GM or even exceed 100% then they need to be adjusted. In some cases, adjusted aggressively. There is nothing illegitimate about the process just by virtue of it being aggressive. That's what was needed to make the system reflect its own goals accurately. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk