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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tanders

  • Rank
    Finally read the FAQs

Contact Methods

  • MSN

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Seattle, WA
  • Interests
    USPSA and not much else...
  • Real Name
    Todd Anderson

Recent Profile Visitors

121 profile views
  1. Anybody have any idea why Chris Tilley stopped making the Supergrandchamp videos? I ran into Kimble (the guy who filmed and edited them) at 2018 Nationals and he sounded like they had a lot more in store, but then everything stopped abruptly right after the match. It's really too bad since they were entertaining (in an '80s acid trip kind of way) and had a lot of good info in them.
  2. Due to a widespread wave of poor judgment and moral depravity, most of the Production shooters in my region have begun bolting vile red dots to their guns in a misguided attempt to attain new levels of hot and nasty speed. Since I am slowly being driven mad by the solitude of being one of the few remaining adherents to the one true faith of Iron Sights, I am tempted to shake hands with the Devil and fasten his aiming device to the previously undefiled slide of my SP-01 Shadow. However, I have heard tales of metal-framed pistols exorcising the spirit of many a red dot (likely a protest on the part of the handgun for having such an unholy monstrosity affixed to it). I therefore present the membership of this forum with the following query: if I am to sell my soul and descend into the cesspool of Carry Optics, which electronic aiming abomination would serve me best in my shameful quest? The Deltapoint Pro seems to be favored by much of the CO rabble, but I wonder if this abhorrent device will be able to bear the righteous scourging my metal-framed weapon is certain to wreak upon it.
  3. Hey, the man himself! Congrats on the win. You almost look like you're shooting with a dot in your BITB video. Have you found that primarily shooting Open has sped up your iron sight game? It's really interesting to watch your match video back-to-back with some of the other Production and Single Stack guys. You seem to spend noticeably less time confirming your sights compared to most of the other top Production and Single Stack (minor) shooters.
  4. It was the best-run major I have ever been to. Smooth as glass. No back-ups and all the ROs were great. Can't even come up with something to complain about if I tried.
  5. I'm glad I'm not the only one who does this. This thread served to kill a lot of time. Amen. Preach it, brother. The level of irritation I feel when a match has random drawing is comparable to the feeling I get when I notice a bird has crapped on my car. I don't care that much and I'm still going to shoot the match. As an aside, you wouldn't happen to be the gentleman with the dogs who was CROing the classifier stage at Area 1, would you?
  6. I finally see the point that you've been trying to get across. Sorry I've been a little slow on the uptake. You are saying that it is unfair to group the weekenders who take part in USPSA for fun with the true professionals who make a living either teaching shooting classes or working for a factory team. That is absolutely true and I 100% agree with you; lower-classed shooters should not be fed to super-GMs at major matches so that the latter can make a living off of the former's entry fees. You also mentioned the introduction of a pro/am format with a winner-take-all prize structure for the pro divisions. I would be fine with this and would have no problem at all paying an elevated match fee to get spanked by the big boys just so I can see how I measure up (in fact, I would love that). However, USPSA already has something of a pro/am format in place: we have club matches and major matches. Club matches provide an excellent environment for people to experience shooting competitions without a major time or financial commitment. No one is forcing lower-classed shooters to shoot major matches. If an amateur is entering a major match, it should be because the match quality is better and because they want to see how they stack up shooting against a deeper talent pool; they should not be entering because they think they will have a chance to walk away with a gun out of a random drawing. If I entered the PGA US Open, I wouldn't be expecting to win anything. I would be expecting to get my teeth kicked in, but have a blast knowing that I was competing with the pros. By contrast, the winner of the US Open should be expecting to get something for the time and effort that he put in which enabled him to have his way with everyone else who entered the match. Level III matches should be the pro division of our sport, but too often they seem a bit like glorified club matches or sectionals with steep entry fees. I would like Level IIIs to be a bigger deal and the easiest way I can think of to accomplish this would be to incentivize more entries from talented shooters even if it comes at the cost of lower overall match attendance. Based on the responses I have gotten in this thread, this view isn't likely to get me elected USPSA President. Oh, well.
  7. This was an extremely articulate post. What match is it that you direct? I definitely sounds like it would be worth a fair bit of travel given the amount of consideration you seem to put into it.
  8. How do the top IPSC guys make money? It seems like they are full-time athletes. Is it industry sponsorships?
  9. In every sport or game there are people who will obsess about it and train constantly in order to be the best if it is financially feasible for them to do so (to be clear, I am not one of these people). Right now that group only consists of competitors with a full-time job at some sort of firearms brand (Glock, Sig, etc.). It would be cool if the culture in USPSA started to shift toward providing more material reward to those who are training a lot, thereby enabling them to free up more time and resources for skill development. I would love to see USPSA evolve into an actual sport with more full-time athletes who don't need day jobs for support; this increases the exposure of practical shooting and encourages growth. Giving away sponsor-donated prizes to top finishers won't accomplish this, but it would be a step in the right direction. Am I making sense?
  10. The people who place well have almost always sunk more time and resources into developing skill compared to those who don't practice and are just there to hang out with their friends and have fun (nothing wrong with that). It would be nice for the people who have invested more into mastering this sport (activity?) to get something that offsets their considerable expenses. Sure, everyone pays the same match fee, but there is a LOT more expense besides match fees that is necessary to win a major. If someone isn't willing or able to prioritize shooting enough to meet these time and financial commitments (I fall into this category), that is COMPLETELY understandable; however, they have no business feeling entitled to a shot at winning something valuable that would recoup investments which they have not made. To be honest, I really like Sanders' idea of writing checks to division winners. I have heard many people say that the sport is built on the intermediate-classed guys who make up the vast majority of the membership. I'm not sure how true that is and here's why: the reason why this sport grows is because people see some super-GM burning down a stage on YouTube and they think, "I wanna do THAT!" It doesn't grow because someone stumbled upon a B- or C-class shooter's hatcam footage on Instagram (not knocking B- and C-class, everyone who's any good started out there). Skill looks really freakin' cool. If we tangibly reward skill, it draws even more skill (or encourages people to develop skill). This in turn raises the profile of the sport and attracts new members. If we continue to randomly distribute anything of value in the majority of major matches, I don't see how practical shooting is ever going to be anything more than a hobby for the vast majority of its participants since there's no financial incentive to invest the considerable time and money necessary to excel. Creating an enviroment in which skill is rewarded would go a lot further toward growing the sport than raffling off a few guns before the awards ceremony. Holy crap, that was longer than I planned! I don't think I'm going to change anybody's mind, but I enjoyed having the opportunity to hear other people's thoughts and express my own. Really glad I started the thread.
  11. I think maybe I'm miscommunicating my position. I'm not saying that prizes should be the main motivation for shooting a match. Go ahead and get rid of prizes. I just dislike random drawing since it is... Well, random. As a format it doesn't recognize the hard work required to attain the skill necessary to win at a major match. In my mind major matches are competitions, not products.
  12. I just spent 5 minutes Googling you... You're kind of a baller and I want to be just like you when I grow up.
  13. I don't think very many people choose to shoot a major match because they have a shot at winning a random gun drawing. Not very great odds there. I have also never been to a major where everyone in a division sucked (unless it was L10 or Revolver). However, the quality of prizes for less populated divisions could be adjusted if necessary.
  14.  The class system doesn't really provide a good metric for predicting major match results anymore. The HHF update last year really screwed things up since USPSA decided to raise the HHFs to unattainable levels. When you couple that with the introduction of programs like the #Winwithwalther "Sandbagger Rewards Program," the class system is pretty much irrelevant. That being said, I'm M-class, verging on GM. However, I have no natural ability and I had to work really hard to get where I am. I'm also poor and made M-class almost completely by dry-firing, so I feel that this is an achievement that is attainable for anyone. I noticed that in most of your posts you have focused primarily on the unfairness of GMs being rewarded for beating up on lower classified shooters. However, there is also a flipside to rewarding order of finish, and that is the time-honored tradition of shaming grandbaggers. There is nothing more fun than seeing a bunch of Ms and GMs get whooped by an A-class guy who has been training hard. That sort of achievement is what I want to see rewarded. In the event that someone wins their division at a major match, I don't think that they should get a gun or some other nice prize because they dunked on a bunch of B- and C-class guys... I think they should get a gun because they put in more work and did a better job keeping it together than anyone else who showed up that day. Everybody who entered the match showed up to shoot a competition, not just to have a fun day at the range. Therefore, the guys who competed the best should be rewarded the best.
  15. Since the vast majority of match prizes are sponsor-donated, you aren't paying a GM to win the match; your match fee goes toward paying for supplies and compensating the staff, something from which every participant in the match benefits. If a GM gets a big-ticket item for winning the match, it doesn't cost you a dime. Most of the guys who win sectionals and area matches do not have a sponsor who is giving them anything more than a discount code for a product. These guys are winning because they sink more time into skill development than the other competitors, not because they have some "sugar daddy" sponsor who's paying for their ammo and match fees or because they are born with natural talent. This investment of time and resources should be rewarded since it encourages others to make the same investment and therefore helps to improve the talent pool of the sport. I don't see how that could be a bad thing.
  • Create New...