Gary Stevens

These are areas that will always involve judgement, hopefully good judgement. I teach new RO's to run the timer on instant as this gives them the best opportunity to actually be in control of when the timer is activated. Noise on the range is part of life and sometimes the shooter will react to a noise other than the timer. If I believed the shooter reacted to something other than the start signal, which should be pretty easy since I haven't pushed the button yet, I would simply restart him. If he had actually fired a shot, just paste the target or re-set the steel, and go again. Of course there might be a situation where this would be handled differently, but under normal circumstances, I would just re-start him. If you can treat a shooter as you would like to be treated, and still uphold the rules, you will usually make the right decision. Gary

I can't speak for SSC, but I think a big factor would be the timing of the adoption, if it is adopted. Since the rule proposal is due to the BOD by March 1, and the SSC is in May, it may be too close. Gary

Folks you keep asking questions that I have already outlined. We would study the venture for possibly 2-3 years. If the numbers and interest are sufficient to warrant consideration for permanent status, then we (the BOD) would have to cross that bridge at that time. As to stage design, there is no mandate to do anything. The book allows for up to 9 rounds from a position, it doesn't mandate 9 rounds. You can have as few as 1 round and up to 9 per position. It is up to the course designers to design courses. If a club or match decides to venture into the 1911 provisional division area, I would assume they would consider rounds per position when they design the matches. Maybe they won't. The bottom line the members will drive this idea one way or the other, and that is how it should be. Gary

For the intended purpose of the proposed division I have outlined the intent in some of the previous messages, check out the easy cross over from other shooting sports and the marketing possibilities post. As to the time frame, we have to report back to the BOD by 3-1-05 with out outline of the program. So maybe shortly after that, if it is accepted. Once again, forget the L-10 race holsters and such. This will be either something different, and challenging, or I'll try to kill it where it stands. I will not have just another L-10 want-a-be division. It does not serve the intended purpose. Thanks, Gary

Your asking a fellow from Eastern Kentucky about computers? Thanks for your confidence Rob Boudrie, Area 7 Director, and USPSA Webmaster told me in some type of foreign language that it was a process of an Info File adjustment and that I shouldn't worry about it. Although I will worry about it, if Rob says it, I tend to believe it. Gary

Well Ted, there is no time like the present. I'll be honest with you, the conseus on this is not 100 percent. If you think this is a good idea, contact your AD and the President now. Gary

Well the final product, if there is one 2-3 years down the road might be just that. However I am opposed to it for this reason. My purposed for this is not to allow me to get my 1911's out and play with them, despite what some people think. My purpose is to help grow the sport by providing very easy crossover oportunities from other shooting sports. In addition it may provide a marketing opportunity from gun companies that might step up and help this project out. Think of the companies that produce 1911's that are not actively involved in USPSA and see the marketing opportunities. I am afraid that the marketing aspect would be damaged by making it a category and not a division. A division has an element of stature that the category does not have. That this is a provisional division the club, match must make the decision to accept the additional work on their own. They are not forced by USPSA to do so. I hope they will make the effort, but ultimately it will be up to the members to drive the process. As to the shooters who are participating in other sports some hopefully many, may take the venture someday and try our sport. Those that I know of who have, seldom leave. What will cause this to be a surefire failure is to just make a L-10 lite-lite division. It has to be different, sensible, and challenging. Gary

As they say, the Devil is in the details. At this time I am trying to get the provisional rules down in some form. I have Dave Thomas working on the classification issue and how it might impact the database. One possible, and I only mean possible, approach would be to assign the lowest classification to this venture. Considering that your lowest classification can't be more than one class down from your highest classification, I don't think this is a real problem. As to the classifiers, one could possibly run them as we run L-10 right now. I can't see how a 1911 division with the holster and mag pouch restrictions, along with fewer rounds would artifically bump a L-10 shooter up. In short, I am working on rules now, and will work on procedure after that. Gary

Well let me stir this pot a bit The SSC rules allow major power factor at .400 caliber and above, but they limit the magazine capacity for major to 8+1 rounds. They also allow up to 10 rounds in a standard length magazine for 9mm and 38 super, but restrict them to minor power factor. You could also shoot 9 rounds of 40 at minor power factor. I actually like this as it gives the shooter an option. Score major with 8+1 or score minor with 9+1 or a 10+1. Makes you think a bit. Gary

Guys, don't drag the L-10 issue into this, it has no place here. This will not be a 1911 L-10 division. You already have that if you wish to shoot your 1911 in that division. If you look at the USPSA Production Division, the SSC rules, and the IDPA CDP/ESP divisions, you will have a pretty good idea of what I hope this division looks like in some combination of the three. Gary

Let me get the wheels on the USPSA wagon first

Nope, you have L-10 for the race gear.

Not being a Glock guy, I can't tell by looking at the picture. If the one in the add will look from the outside, after installation, exactly as your trigger appears now, I would guess you would be good to go. My opinon though, worth what you paid for it

L-10 is not conected to this venture in any way, shape or form. Gary

Clay, the issue is if it is "Internal" as opposed to "External". You should check closely to see if there are any modifications that are external or not. Gary

The BOD has voted to allow my idea of a "Provisional 1911 Single Stack Division" to move into the next phase. That phase will be to formulate rules, and procedures to present to the BOD by 3-1-05. In addition to myself, Area 7 Director Rob Boudrie, and Area 4 Director Ken Hicks, will be working on this issue. This does not mean that the final product will be accepted in any form, modified or otherwise. It is in a study and rule formulation process at this point. Should the "Provisional Division" be accepted, one concept would be for it to exist on the USPSA webpage in cyber land. If a club or match were to be interested in this, they could go to the webpage, download the rules and procedures and begin shooting it. No club or match would be forced to use this "Provisional Division" if they did not wish to. Consider it a demonstration of interest venture. It would hopefully be driven by member interest and by USPSA. It would also open up avenues for cross over from other shooting sports, and gun manufacturers that are not fully represented in our current configuration. Interest would be monitored by USPSA and after a period of perhaps 2-3 years, a decision would be made as to permanent status or to abandoned the testing of the division alltogether. As a starting point we are looking to the Single Stack Classic rules for a baseline. Some small modifications will potentially be made to them such as using the Production Division holster and mag pouches positions for consistency sake since they are withing a couple of inches either way. I urge you to contact me with your suggestions, after reading the SSC rules at www.1911society.org and I will make sure my other committee members are also made aware of your suggestions. Thanks in advance. Gary

Specifically why are the Blade Tech tek-lok holsters now illegal. Type slowly, I only have a public education

Chuck D, I've tried numerous times to contact you but can't. If you want to talk, garystevens@alltel.net Sorry to use this post for communication, but nothing else works.

Depends on if you are talking about IPSC or USPSA. In USPSA yes, I'll let IPSC speak for themselves so the information get's transmitted correctly.

Don't blame me, I didn't have a thing to do with this My vote, not just no, but no way no!!! Within 24 hours it would be just another 1911 division.

Welcome aboard. If there are any quesions or suggestions you might have, you can contact me and I will make sure they get to the Board of Directors, if I can't answer them myself. Just send them to garystevens@alltel.net Gary

Well since I kicked the hornest nest yesterday, why not today? Production needs to keep the 10 round magazine limit. This allows any caliber of 9mm and above to be used effectively, and opens a varity of gun models to the game. Upping the scoring to Major, while keeping the PF at minor would only allow more "spray and pray" and take one of the DVC elements away again, accuracy. In addition I don't think the computer program would allow such a feature. As it is now, you can shoot as fast as you want, but if you drift out of the A zone too much you take a beating. Fast and accurate, smells like victory Not by my vote, no way, no how. Gary

Thanks Flex, I have enough information to work from. You can lock this whenever you wish. Gary

The SSC rules are very liberal to a large extent. I have a full house Nastoff 45 I shoot in SSC matches, (only old timers will recognize that name) that has everything you could ever want on a gun. Checkering, mag well, Bo-mars, beavertail,etc, etc, etc. They do restrict tungsten guide rods though. Nothing heavier than plain steel. They do limit you to 40 and 45 at major PF and the total is 8+1 in either caliber. When I use the IDPA CDP rules or the SSC rules, I am only trying to give a point of reference to relate to. If USPSA were to go in this direction, we would craft our rules to fit our needs, but I feel those two disciplines would have great influence on such rule making. Thanks.

Mr. Flowers, Good questions, thanks for the thoughtful reply. I guess this starts from a group of members who want to form a SS Division. In and of it's self, that is a great idea. However, when USPSA forms a new Division we also have to support it. That adds expense to an already strapped organization. The chance of getting 5 members of the BOD to vote to create yet another Division under those circumstances, is slim at best. The original intent, as I understand it, to Limited 10 was to duplicate Limited item for item, except limit it to 10 rounds in the magazine. This was in response to states imposing magazine restrictions on our members who live and compete in those states. To me the demise of the AWB has zero to do with this discussion as it was Federal, and we still have to deal with states that retain their versions of the ban. Some, who will probably voice their opinions here at some time, think that the L-10 is duplicative and really does not offer a new option or challenge to the shooter. As I attend tournaments I notice that the majority of shooters in L-10 that I observe are using a full house Limited gun downloaded to 10 rounds. These shooters jump in and out of Limited and Limited 10 as they see fit using the same equipment. I am sure at the local level the situation may be different. The proponents of this idea also point out that there are numbers of IDPA shooters who use 1911's in CDP who might also play our game if the cross over was made easier. This has been the case with Production Division and IDPA Stock Service Pistol Division, as I have seen quiet a bit of new interst from IDPA shooters, admitidely at the local level. Crossover from IDPA and USPSA is mainly a philosophy issue, but equipment can also be a hinderence assuming you can overcome the philosophy issues. If we were to adopt a 1911 Division, using the Single Stack Classic equipment rules, holsters, pouches, etc. we would have 5 distinctly different Divisions for members to choose from, that might be a good thing. I want to have a full understanding of the implications though before I reach any conclusion. If I understand the law in California for instance, and I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, if you possess normal capacity magazines you are in tall cotton. But I understand they can't be sold, traded, loaned, or even passed on in your estate. Is that correct? If so, I wonder about the long term viability of Limited as we know it at this time in such states. I note that some reference the 9 round rule from any single position. I would also note that references a maximun, not a requirement. Course designers are free to design courses with any number of rounds per position up to the maximun of 9. Obviously the question revolves around growning USPSA and what is best for the organization as a whole. There will be some members who will voice their intent to quit and never shoot IPSC/USPSA again if any change is made to any Division. That is their right. But the bigger question is what is best for the body USPSA, not for the single member who may not agree with a particular direction. If we required universal 100 percent agreement in any endevor we would come to a quick halt. So in the long winded way I have tried to answer you, from my point, I want to hear the good, the bad, and the ugly. Only then can I make an informed decision. The points though need to be relevant and not steeped in only emotion. Gary