IVC
-
Posts
1,174 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by IVC
-
-
3 hours ago, RJH said:
So she was apparently able to shoot the stage standing on the fault line, correct? If so no additional props were needed. If she could in no way see the targets as presented then i (if I was RM) would have allowed a box or something for her to stand on, if it was just hard, then no box. (I have seen this done at majors in the past too)
Yes, she ended up being able to do it, but how would the extra box fit into the rules without others being able to raise the issue and try to toss the stage?
What I'm trying to figure out here is both "rules as written" and what happens in practice at higher level matches when similar situations arise...
-
1 hour ago, Schutzenmeister said:
It's a judgement issue and may need to be final called by the RM for consistency.
That's part of the question - what are the options?
Is it even within the rules to provide a prop (some sort of a step) to one shooter and one shooter only? The other shooters could then complain that the change violated competitive equity for them and try to toss the stage. What are the realistic options to resolve an issue like this? (I understand that because she was able to stand on the fault line and tiptoe into shooting position it ended up not being an issue, but what if she couldn't have.)
-
My local club was hosting its first Level 2 match last weekend (Western States Single Stack and Revolver) and I ended up on the squad with the very well known shooters. One of them is a junior lady who ended up 6th overall and a high lady (easy to figure out who it is). She is 17 and pretty short, I would say 4' 10" or so (and a great shooter).
On stage 5, there was an array of three targets on the ground that were shot at arms' length distance, but over a picket fence with hard-cover edge at the top. It wasn't particularly tall, but it was sufficiently tall that this lady had an issue shooting over it so she asked about something to stand on to get competitive equity. The RO said he didn't have anything (not sure he would allow it if he did) so she figured she could shoot (barely-ish) if she stood on the fault line. Some of the other guys on the squad (friends) were joking that it was a payback for all the low ports...
As a matter of rules, what is the correct procedure here? "Competitive equity" shows up in rules in completely different context (mid-match changes to a stage) so I'm not sure it would apply at all. The only rule I see is 1.1.6 that talks about allowing for reasonable differences in competitor's build. However, I didn't find anything that would either prohibit stages like this, or permit additional props (not talking about special accommodations for disabled competitors or penalties in lieu of course requirements, that wasn't the case here). Also, at what point does "reasonable" become "unreasonable?" (both as a matter of rules and as a practical matter).
-
Getting the correct time recorded is a matter of understanding how the timer works and there is nothing wrong with reviewing the time to determine whether the timer picked up something after the last shot. RO uses timer as a tool and the correct use is to figure out the time, not to blindly read the display. For the same reason RO cannot use timer to figure out any procedurals during the course of fire - procedurals are called by RO as they occur and trying to deduce something from timer would be an easy arbitration case: "Did you see the shooter fail to shoot at a target? No. Case closed."
As a practical matter, I will confirm the timer is picking up first few shots, then I will make sure I watch the timer at the very end both to ensure the last shot is picked up and that nothing extra is. I will only memorize the ballpark time (seconds) so I can make the correct call if something bumps it or it picks up some other noise. If the timer didn't record the last shot, it's a reshoot. I make sure I'm very close to PCCs for this particular reason.
-
Haha. We get rain so rarely and it ends up destroying matches...
-
At least they had mercy to let us go early. Six stages left for tomorrow.
-
I got Super GP100 just a week or two ago. It fits DAA Race Master with the N-Frame insert perfectly. There is a bit of rotation possible because of the round trigger guard, but it’s about the same as with 929. I have the muzzle support assembly for that reason...
-
The confusion is likely coming from either 8.1.2.1 or 8.1.2.4 - a striker-fired pistol with an external safety must have it applied if it's available and SA guns during unloaded start must have it applied if possible with the hammer down.
The RO was clearly incorrect in trying to apply those rules to the incorrect gun and standard loaded start...
-
On 2/15/2020 at 1:47 PM, waktasz said:
Does any of that matter? A brace is specifically disallowed, regardless if it's a rifle or pistol or AOW or firearm...so yea, a rifle with a brace isn't suddenly a pistol, but it's still not legal for the sport. So what are you saying again?
Just saying silly stuff about legality of various configurations and understanding rifle vs. pistol as far as BATFE is concerned. You can't just put any upper on any lower, not only because of the SBR issues, but also because conversions between pistols and rifles are not quite reversible, but hey, who cares, it's just legal technicalities about felonies...
USPSA rules have footnotes about legality of firearms yet it seems to be seen just as a suggestion in parts of the country that don't deal with oppressive gun laws. I shouldn't really care, I know how to remain on the correct side of the government bureaucracy by virtue of living in CA and being forced to know it. I actually thought someone reading the forum might benefit from knowing the legal issues. Guess I was wrong... (No, you cannot legally do some things mentioned in this thread. Here is a search term "can I convert ar rifle into pistol batfe.")
-
No, you scale linear distances, so you do it at 1/2 the distance.
The area of the scaled target is indeed 1/4 area of the actual target, but that's how the actual target would scale too - dropping with the square of the distance. So, a full target at 5 yards would be 1/4 area
sizeof the same target at 10 yards, but the linear dimensions of the target would still be just 1/2 of it. The same goes when using 1/2 size targets - you place them at 1/2 distance and you are getting correct size and correct area, the former being 1/2 and the later 1/4. -
Just to add... When your eyes converge at a specific distance, everything else is "double vision" simply because the images hitting your eyes will be coming from the off-angles (the definition of not being converged upon). The "blurry close/distant object" is actually two images slightly misaligned, a matter of geometry, and you can recognize it if you really try - you have to just force the brain to analyze the close object without moving your eyes. However, because not paying attention to objects we are not looking at and treating them as "peripheral vision" is our normal behavior, we are trained to completely ignore it and we don't even recognize it unless we try.
When you try to shoot with both eyes open and you are forced to deal with two significantly different focal planes, the target and the sights (ignore for the moment the distance between front and rear sight), that's where your brain starts playing tricks on us since it wants to jump focus between the two, not do the unnatural "converge far, focus close."
-
3 hours ago, tomface1102 said:
After reading about the double vision described in this thread, I now wonder why I didn't have any of that, if I did, it wouldn't have taken me so long to figure this out.
You almost certainly did. And you almost certainly either lined up the wrong of the two images, or split the distance between the two and your brain thought it was the correct thing to do.
As confusing as it is to rectify and work on the problems with "single focal plane, single convergence point," it's almost equally confusing to recognize it. This is because as we shift focus around in regular life, our brain is trained to understand the double vision as simply a "blurry single object."
-
4 hours ago, Sean_ht said:
I "am not dure how much USPSA you shoot ", but the number of rounds in the mags changes the shooting strategy and stage planning.
This is true, but the effect becomes significant only if the capacity is really low and reloads are really slow (wink, nudge, Revolver, wink). In Limited, the capacity gain you get in minor is negligible and you would be hard pressed to find a stage where it would change the stage strategy, let alone be a factor. If you ever run into a stage of that kind, there will be a movement that will allow you to throw in the extra reload.
In Single Stack it's more of an issue because it can affect the strategy, but having 8 rounds in major with the restriction of "no more than 8 shots..." in the rules makes it almost a non-issue. Where it matters is, e.g., Revolver shooting Tic-Toc classifier that is "8 reload 8" and Revolver major is only 6, so you end up with two extra standing reloads (slow to boot) when shooting major.
-
52 minutes ago, Stafford said:
A bit off-topic, but this thread has me thinking.... Should shooters in Production class be more concerned about accuracy than speed? Or is it all relevant in that you're shooting against other Production shooters and speed is still king?
The calculation is straightforward, even if making decision will depend on how many points you're dropping.
First, here is the math. You have your HF defined as HF = P/t, but want to know how much faster you have to be when you drop points and want to keep the same HF. So, you are solving the following equation: HF = (P - dP) / (t - dt). Notice that you're keeping the same hit factor because you want to figure out how points relate to time without changing the score. If you expand it, you get (t - dt) HF = (P - dP), or (t HF) - P + dP = dt HF. If you divide by HF to solve for dt, you end up with t - P/HF + dP/HF = dt, or dt = dP/HF (since t - P/HF = 0 by definition of HF).
Now that you know that each point (dP = 1) is equivalent of 1/HF in time, you have a good starting point for determining accuracy vs. speed. In major, shooting hard partials and taking two C's will almost always be better than taking extra time to get two A's and risk no-shoot or hard-cover since it will cost you about 2/5 = 0.4s on a 5HF factor stage (only 0.2s on 10 HF), while you would have to slow down quite a bit to get those A's, not only because there is extra risk of a miss, but because partial A zone can be significantly smaller than the exposed C zone.
Similarly, when looking at Production by itself, it will come down to the expected HF for the stage. If it's high HF, you're better of hosing because 1/HF penalty is smaller (e.g., it's only 0.2s for C in minor on a 10 HF stage). If it's low HF stage, you're better of spending extra time to get A's. The calculation will be stage-dependent.
-
2 hours ago, Ssanders224 said:
Our eyes are pretty neat. Focal distance and convergence distance can be different at any given time, or they can be the same.
This is another extremely important concept that many shooters are not aware of - we have two eyes that can move (somewhat) independently and each one can focus at different distance. Normally, when we look at an object, both eyes point directly at the object (even if it's slightly cross-eyed on closer objects) AND both eyes focus at the distance of the object, so we see a single object and it's crisp. However, one can force the eyes to converge (look at) distant object such as target, while focusing (seeing it clearly) on a closer object such as sights.
Once you start experimenting with shooting with both eyes open, you have to be able to control these two parameters independently IN ADDITION to being able to control the duplicate "ghost" images that result from forcing your eyes to do unnatural things. That's quite a bit of theory and required practice to make it work well...
-
3 hours ago, Blackstone45 said:
Bullseye shooters will generally use the 6 o'clock hold, with their point of aim somewhere in the white below the black bull. This provides them with a good reference point to aim at, without requiring them to focus on that point. The other reason they use 6 o'clock hold is that it puts the black sights against a white background.
There are two reasons for 6 o'clock hold in bullseye: (1) The distance is known, so 6 o'clock sights can be dialed in very precisely, and (2) lining up bottom of a circle on a flat front sight is much more accurate alignment than trying to guess where the center of a circle is (it's not just having "black on white," it's about having a very accurate and repeatable reference point which is formed by having the circle just touch the top of the front sight).
-
3 hours ago, Blackstone45 said:
A crystal clear front sight is more important than a crystal clear target. Having perfect sight alignment is much more important than having perfect sight "placement". Because a small error in sight alignment will translate to a large error downrange.
^^^ This is a very important concept and it's pure geometry - sight alignment error is error in angle of your shot which propagates with distance, while the shot placement error is just that, a small linear displacement on the target itself. It's also why you focus on your front sight and not your rear sight - both contribute to the error in shot angle because one of them will be slightly fuzzy, so you want the one that is farthest (front) to be crystal clear in order to minimize the alignment problem from the inability to have both sites in focus at the same time.
-
I can (and do) shoot with both eyes open in slow fire, but when it's time to speed up, the non-dominant sight picture is fighting with shot calling, so I decided to squint the appropriate amount while cleaning an array. This has helped me a lot with gaining raw speed on arrays of targets even if squinted eye provides a bit less information during transition. Remember, you shoot with different focus, from hard target to hard front sight, which affects your double vision differently at different distances.
At some point, when I get quite a bit better, I might revisit both eyes open to see if there is any gain. However, until I can match the speed of shooting while squinting, there is no reason to make it more difficult. The primary problem I had was that as my focus shifted around between targets and sights, the double vision would change in intensity and I would sometimes simply center the double sights on the target, causing a hard D or a Mike. It seems that I would have to work quite a bit to know what the double vision looks like at *every* distance...
-
You won't get faster if you practice slow shooting. The only way to get faster is to get out of your comfort zone and to build speed. Sure, you can go out of your comfort zone "a little bit at a time" (commonly knowing as simply "getting better with practice"), but that's a lot of wasted training time just so you don't feel overwhelmed. When you start working on speed, you will miss and you will feel out of control. That's the point...
Otherwise, as others pointed out, for your match scores it's about shooting sooner, not shooting faster. Also known as being fast vs. shooting fast. By far most time is lost in movement, and by movement I don't mean just "getting from point A to point B," but "from last shot at point A to the first shot at point B."
-
4 hours ago, SGT_Schultz said:
There's more than one way to do this. The way you describe is one way, not the way.
Agreed, but it would be more useful if you described the technique you had on your mind...
-
9 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:
It are you just full of s#!t maybe?
You said that brace makes it a pistol. It doesn't. Brace has nothing to do with the pistol designation.
It is important to understand what type of firearm it is since rules specify what can and cannot be used in a USPSA match. Appendix D8 under Special Conditions (1) specifies that an SBR can be used. Brace doesn't make a pistol an SBR and 5.1.10 prohibits such pistols, so understanding the difference between a pistol and a rifle is quite critical, particularly if you want to be an RO where you have to address such issues.
-
7 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:
I'm not sure what you think you corrected.
You said "...like I mentioned it has a brace which makes it a pistol.." - the exact quote. Brace does not make it a pistol. That's the correction.
-
You have to do the math - each point down is equivalent of 1/HF in time on the stage (classifier is just another stage). If you're shooting minor and hit a C, you dropped two points, which is equivalent to 0.4 seconds on a 5 HF classifier (0.2 seconds on a 10 HF classifier). That's a lot of time for a single C and you will either shoot "close C" from time to time, or you'll be too slow.
Remember, when GM-s shoot short stages at Nationals and those stages later become classifiers, they usually shoot at the B or A level. Hit factors on classifiers are like a ratchet wrench - they get updated up with every successful hero/zero run.
-
21 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:
One of the guys for example has a MPX, it would be a perfectly legal gun in USPSA but like I mentioned it has a brace which makes it a pistol so this one isn't legal.
As the rest of the inmates in the CA prison, we have to know and follow the rules much closer so I need to correct you on this - the brace has nothing to do with making it a pistol.
The primary requirement to make it a rifle is the stock. When there is no stock it's usually a pistol (can also be something called "AOW" which stands for "any other weapon," but let's not go there). An AR pistol will always have the buffer tube because it's part of the design, so it resembles a stock, even though it's not considered one. Then, someone figured out they could create a brace and attach it to the buffer tube which was already there, sell it to the BATFE as "hand support" (braces are supposed to be strapped around the arm), while allowing people to have what is essentially a stock. There was some back-and-forth about how shouldering a brace would make a pistol an SBR, but the BATFE dropped that idea and now, at least in free states, a pistol with a buffer tube can have a brace, which by extension allows other designs that don't use buffer tube to use a brace without triggering the SBR status.
While this is quite technical and is not directly relevant to the thread, it's important to understand since it affects USPSA matches - a pistol cannot be used in PCC division and AR pistols are not allowed at all in any division. In restrictive states, there are additional considerations with respect to AW and SBR status.
S&W 929 WON'T RUN MY RELOADS !!!!
in Revolver Forum
Posted
It's the brass issue - if it expands too easily, it will stick.
I have a very similar load, except I use .356 BB which are listed at 147 (they are actually 150), 3.2 grains of N320 (it was 3.1, I bumped it to 3.2 to be safe at chrono) and a bit shorter OAL at 1.120 (to fit some CZs). Range mix brass that I sometimes shoot in practice will occasionally stick and make the cylinder hard to rotate, hard to extract or both. Not to mention that the range mix will have all sorts of issues with the thicker TKC moonclips (0.040), but it's good enough for messing around.
Get uniform brass that won't stick, get matching moonclips and call it good.