LuckyDucky
-
Posts
84 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by LuckyDucky
-
-
I've been practicing stand-and-shoot for too long (GSSF anybody?) and want to start practicing more movement. Has anybody ever come up with a stage design that incorporates various skills in it? I'd like to set one up in my back yard and just leave it up. It would be dry fire/airsoft only.
My first thought was to come up with a list of skills (entering a position from various angles), rounding a barrier multiple directions, ports, leans, shooting while moving, and so on.
Then try to design a stage that allows practicing these various skills. Because it is dry fire/airsoft only, it could be used in any direction.
The point is not necessarily to shoot the entire stage every time, but to shoot portions of it for specific skills.
So how about it?
-
Nothing would change except the occasional placement trophy/prize would go to a different person.Pulling out every single class in every single division into it's own separate match would dilute everything down. To the point that the 1 GM or M who came out that day beating out say 50 other people, but b/c everyone is in there own match he can't be recognized because there isn't actually an overall division anymore.
The divisions are the individual matches. It doesn't get broken down any further for scoring. The culture in the US is to go down the overall list and recognize class/categories (and the rulebook basically has guidelines for how to do that if the match chooses to). These are basically participation trophies that IPSC doesn't bother with. Personally I think we do it as a way to appease the masses. People like being told they've "won" something. Most people who shoot uspsa will probably never win a match and recognizing classes is a way to keep them paying dues and coming to big matches.
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
If I face you 1 on 1 and beat you, then I'm "better" than you. But then you throw Max Michel in there and because by chance our performances relative to him worked out that you were better than me relative to him, now you're better?
Doing away with class recognition makes more sense. -
Having the scores relative to division introduces an element of chance to the class rankings. Your overall score depends on how you did relative to the division winner, not your fellow class members.
It doesn't make sense.
Rule 6.4.2 and appendix A2 do reference class awards/recognition. But nothing says how to score classes. If classes aren't competing and it is simply a progression metric for the amateurs, why would classes be recognized and awarded at matches?
If they are recognized and awarded, they should be scored relative to each other so there is not an element of chance. -
So that person is not really always first relative to the B shooters.The division as a whole.Relative to the 100% benchmark of whomever was high overall, the first place in B class is the B-shooter who shot the highest percentage of his score.
Where in the rules does it state class ranking is relative to division?
If I'm technically competing relative to other B shooters, shouldn't my score be relative to the B shooters?
-
Is placement in a class calculated relative to the division, including higher classes, or relative to the class including only members of the same class in that division? It can create different placement results either way.
-
6 hours ago, jhgtyre said:
Not to get a political conversation going but this is why we complain about activist judges legislating from the bench. DNROI is subverting the process.
I thought the same. DNROI's job is interpretation, not making rules. It's not even trying to be an interpretation. It just says, "rule # is amended to read."
My real issue here that I wanted to ask about is that the rules aren't published properly. If a rule is changed, it should be integrated into the rulebook or in a supplement link right below the rulebook ASAP. That's how government does it, and the online US Code is updated regularly now instead of every 6 years.
But according to the poster above and President Foley himself, the new rules are supposed to be updated more frequently.
I don't suppose ignorance of the rules is an excuse for a reshoot in USPSA is it?
-
Reviewing the minutes, I didn't read them all, but used keyword search on NROI. It appears 570 times. Nowhere in the minutes did the BOD authorize NROI to unilateraly change the rules willy nilly. The only thing close to this was in 2003 authorizing DNROI to establish a production gun eligibility policy.
-
So since I feel like finding an answer...
Without yet checking the minutes or articles, the answer is that only the BOD has authority to create or change rules for USPSA.
3.1 of the bylaws states the corporation shall "set forth and publish" rules.
16.1 of the bylaws says that the rules are those most recently published by USPSA.
16.3 of the bylaws state duties of NROI include "communication of official rules interpretations."
The bylaws do not specifically designate anyone with the power or duty to make the rules other than 3.1. It's been awhile since I checked Delaware law, but only the BOD has the power and authority to do something if it is not specified in the organizational documents. So we would need to check minutes or articles of incorporation to see if BOD delegated rulemaking power/duties to NROI.
Additionally, NROI "rulings" are not published as "rules" nor is it within NROI's duty to "set forth and publish" rules. Therefore, NROI CANNOT change the rules. (unless such duty was delegated by the BOD in minutes or Articles). Also, the "rules" that are "set forth and published" are the 2014 rules, not the NROI rulings.
-
Isn't that what IDPA does?This just reinforces in my mind the theory I have that the more a stage designer or md wants to force you to do something the less appealing their stage or match. The frequency a person has the thought of "I want them to do this" or "This will really screw 'em" and has to coerce it through an overly written description or extra verbal clarification is inversely proportional to how much I want to come back again. -
What authorizes dnroi to change the rules?
This has been covered a few times on the forum already.
Before April, 2017, walls height was "as constructed" unless otherwise stated in the WSB. Ie, you could shoot over them if you could see over them.
However, USPSA published a "ruling" last year (this is different than an interpretation). Said ruling is available on the USPSA site under "rulings".
Ruling:2.2.3.3 is amended to read: Unless otherwise specified in the written stage briefing, all such barriers, walls, vision barriers, snow fence barriers and other constructs will be considered to go from the ground to infinity, provided said barrier is at least 6 feet, (allowable variation = -3 inches) in height. Any barrier less than 6 feet tall (-3 inch variation) specified as extending to infinity must be clearly identified in the WSB and marked accordingly, otherwise, all barriers less than 6 feet tall are considered to be \"height as built\" and may be used accordingly by competitors. -
I'm tall, so I shot over a wall as I could see all the stage targets from one spot. The WSB did not prohibit it and neither did the rule in the rulebook.
But the "interpretation" does prohibit it. Something I did not know.
Whims of men, not rule of law.
Please describe what happened so that others won’t make the same mistake. -
I don't actually, as I don't follow these Shenanigans, or I would have known to check the nroi rulings. What was it about?This has been the MO of the current DNROI for a long while now. Remember Hammergate? -
An amendment is not an interpretation.
Do you mean changes will be integrated on the fly? That would be nice.There is a process.
Rulings are reviewed by the BOD. They may void it or approve it. If they take no action after five days (IIRC) it is automatically approved.
The 2019 version of the rulebook will be evergreen, meaning that any future rulings or interpretations will be included in the on-line (downloadable) rulebook. -
Rule 11.8.1 says interpretation is NROI's job. Can NROI validly amend a rule to change it to the opposite of what it says?
For example, the fence rule 2.2.3.3 says fences are not infinite height. NROI ruling eff. 4/12/17 literally amends the rule to the opposite. This is not an interpretation, but a change.
That is not within the NROI's responsibility, and therefore the rule hasn't changed
Why does this matter? Fairness. I looked up the rule before shooting a stage the be sure. I looked in the rule book on the app. After I finished someone told me that's not the rule because of the NROI "interpretation" so I zeroed the stage.
If we can't rely on the rulebook for rules, what's the point of having a rulebook?
It needs to be updated to have the actual rules in it.
-
I pull my slide back from the rear and lock it back at the same time.
Then I catch the boolit and the slide is already back for the RO.
-
Does it fit in the box?
Is that the only restriction on mags now?
-
Is a Glock 26 w/ a 10rd mag and +6 TTI basepad production legal?
-
I called one of the gun stores and that's what they told me. SucksThere's not an indoor range in Wichita Falls
-
Is a glock 43 with tti +2 extensions legal for single stack?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Apparently 13-04 has changed---just got Production results back, and apparently the Prod HHF is now the same as the Single Stack HHF, instead of the number that classifiercalc thinks is correct (which it used to be).
13-04 Production now: 11.6505
13-04 hhf has apparently changed.
The old limited hhf = the current production hhf
The old open hhf = the current limited hhf
the current open hhf = even higher.
I checked peoples scores from the last match and this seems to be true.
Do you have some numbers for me?
13-04 on 5/2/15
Open: 11.6737 HF = 88.4371%
Limited: 10.6557 HF = 86.4910%
Production: 8.4034 HF = 72.1290%
Singlestack: 9.6107 HF = 82.4917%
Revolver: 1.4563 HF = 15.1697%
-
Apparently 13-04 has changed---just got Production results back, and apparently the Prod HHF is now the same as the Single Stack HHF, instead of the number that classifiercalc thinks is correct (which it used to be).
13-04 Production now: 11.6505
13-04 hhf has apparently changed.
The old limited hhf = the current production hhf
The old open hhf = the current limited hhf
the current open hhf = even higher.
I checked peoples scores from the last match and this seems to be true.
-
just shoot singestack
-
Get the lightning to hdmi adapter to put your iPad screen on your tv
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
I know that, but what does "maximize time-on-target from stable shooting positions as close as possible" mean? Maximizing *any* kind of time is bad. The less time you can take to get the job done, the better.Get as many points as fast as possible = maximize time-on-target from stable shooting positions as close as possible.
Wait, what?
hit factor = points per second.
Haha true I meant as opposed from far away while standing on one foot.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Building the ideal stage for training multiple skills
in Training Techniques
Posted · Edited by LuckyDucky
I've been thinking a L or a U shape is probably enough to cover most core skills. You just place targets where you need.
Edit: messing around in practisim:
https://imgur.com/a/a88eV0Z