hoser

Hey Flex! It has never been a secret that Michael and the BOD were working with the goal of having one rule book for IPSC and USPSA. We came very close with this edition of the rules. Actually, there were no real deal breakers in the rules that were developed by the several rules committee, of which I was a part. However, from the start, both IPSC and USPSA realized that the divisions themselves would have to remain different and that was no problem. When the BOD reviewed the rules, some BOD members felt that some of the rules either were not clear and should be clarified or some rules would not work for them. There was spirited discussion on the proposed rules changes and the majority ruled. But, all in all, there are not many differences in the rules now, and that is a good thing. Arnie

Sorry for the late reply gmw2b. I don't anticipate any Division changes forthcoming. Arnie

How could I ever forget Feri? He met us when we arrived in Budapest, "feri-ed" us through the gun permit stuff and since it was May Day, drove us to his hometown for a day long wine festival. Every time we tried a wine (only about every 10 feet down the town square) and we said it was good, he purchased two bottles of that wine for us to have in our hotel room during our trip! And, the next time you talk to Feri, ask him about how I ran over him with a four wheeler while RM'ing at the Pan-Am Championship! Yes, Ivan was magnificent, he spent almost a week after the match showing Denise and I the highlights of Hungary and Austria. Even if his driving made Denise and I fear for our lives. It was a most wonderful trip. Arnie

Yo brother Vinny, As Denise mentioned, we both worked the Hungarian MAG/ICS match in Budapest, but I also went just so I could shoot the match. Our good friend Ivan Ketler put on a great match with fantastic stages. It is easily the best match I have ever been to and I have been to man,y many matches. I also very much enjoy shooting the Thunder Bay Open every year with my Canadian friends. Arnie

Vince, Vince, Vince! You really don't want to hide Fixed Time do you? Once in awhile a Fixed Time course of fire is really fun. EZWinScore just deducts any overtime shots as -5 per shot, the same as any other penalty (except -5 instead of -10, of course). The targets are scored normally, best hits score, extra hits penalized, etc. Score sheets for Fixed Time should have a box where overtime shots are recorded and they are then entered into EZWinScore. Arnie

Oops! I was thinking two thoughts and my typing came out all wrong. What I was trying to say was that you can use your 8 shot revolver in Production, but, of course, it would be scored minor. You will be able to use a .38/.357 revolver in Revolver Division and still be able to make major. My error! Arnie

Erik, Oops, I apologize for spelling your name incorrectly in my last post. Arnie

Eric, When the new USPSA rules become effective, shooters will be able to use 8 round revolvers in Production and be able to score major with them. However, Revolver Division will not be eliminated. Arnie

There were two reasons for the USPSA BOD dropping rifle power factor to 150. One, it would then be the same as IPSC so there would not be two different power factors. Second, an AR15 with a 16" barrel should now be able to make minor with almost any factory ammo. Arnie

Voted other: Open: TRI (Tripp Research Inc.) made in Sandy Strayer's garage, according to Sandy Arnie

Gary, Can you feel the looooooooooove?! Arnie

Erik, I didn't see much to chime in on! As far as stage procedures go, except for classifiers, I am very much a firm believer in the course description that states, Upon the start signal engage T1 - Txx and PP1 - PPxx as them become visible. Good luck with your match! Arnie

Interesting, I just noticed that there were 3 out of 8 USPSA Directors online on this forum at the same time! Myself, Gary Stevens and Rob Boudrie. I think we can break this record. Hi Gary and Rob! Arnie

Eric, As I said, I have not seen the new courses, but the a piece of the plan was to use some "suitable" courses that had been shot in major matches, thus allowing high hit factors to be developed if numerous GMs shot the course. Remember, a little followed guideline for tournament matches stated that two courses in the tournament should be useable as classifiers. So, by that logic, if there was a course in a major match that was suitable for a classifier that used classic targets and was shot by "a lot" of GMs, it *could* be in the new book. Arnie

I rather doubt that the new classifiers will have classic targets. USPSA does not have any hit factors using classic targets. But, take this for what it is worth, this is just my opinion, I have not yet seen what courses will be in the new book. Perhaps I will see the new book/courses at the NROI Instructor's Conference in March. Arnie

Neil wrote: "When I was exchanging extensive emails with Arnie on the SG rules committee we had one or two misunderstandings. He often laughed at my use of "whilst" and made me change every instance to "while"." Now, Neil, you well know that I was not able to "make" you do anything! And, I never laughed at you for using "whilst". We were always honourable gentlemen. Arnie

Hi Guys, A new classifier book is, indeed, in the works. John Amidon has been working very hard to put it together. One problem in making the classifier book public has been the new USPSA rules coming out shortly. The USPSA BOD has been working on the new IPSC rules and I think we are about finished. Then John has to review the new rules and the new classifiers to ensure they follow the rules. In addition to that, NROI (of which John is the Director) has to come up with new teaching materials and tests for the new rules. With all of this going on, I would ask that we all be a little bit patient, the new classifier book will arrive, albeit not as soon as all of us like. Arnie

Neil!!! Why are you besmirching my honour again? You Brits! Perhaps I should have stated that I was thrown out of the place. Is that better? Looking forward to buying you a drink in Vegas. Arnie

Well, darn, Denise beat me to the answer again! I used to have an IBM notebook and a desktop PC. As Vince stated, it was a royal pain to coordinate files between the two, it always seemed as though the file I wanted at the time was on the other machine. So, I got the Sony VAIO and have been happy ever since! Arnie

Well, heck, I guess everyone could guess that if Denise will be at the IPSC meetings and SHOT, I will be there as well. Vince and Neil, Denise and I will be honored to accompany you to sssssHOOTERS for some wings. Not sure about the buns, the last I sampled them I got tossed out of the place. Arnie

Hi Kees, USPSA decided to allow firing the first shot by cocking the hammer in Production Division for several reasons. 1. The equipment still has to fulfill the requirements for Production Divsion. 2. The shooter still has to start the stage with the gun in double action condition, ie the hammer has to be down or decocked. 3. If the first target is at, say, 25 yards, the shooter has the option to cock the hammer manually and fire the first shot in single action mode, the same as he would after the first double action shot. This means the shooter does not have to "dump" a shot into the berm so he can take that hard shot using a single action trigger pull. 4. If the shooter does manually cock the hammer before firing the first shot it actually adds more time to his run. 5. Allowing the option of cocking the hammer is actually more freestyle - the shooter has to decide if the added time is worth the single action trigger pull. 6. Allowing the option of cocking the hammer really does not adversely affect anything in Production Division. Hope this helps, Kees. Arnie

Geez, Michael, I would have thought you would have gotten over that proper call by now! The story does seem to get better every time you tell it, though. Have a very happy Holidays, Michael, maybe, just maybe, I owe you one. Arnie

>I would like to make some observations. Since when did rumors and kicking around ideas constitute proper notice? It doesn't. Being published in Front Sight constitutes proper notice. >how hard was it to include this on the BOD agenda? Michael Voigt has stated that the omission of Tactical Rifle on the agenda was an oversight. >I also know the Area 7 & 8 directors were quite surprised and knew nothing about creating the new division prior to the BOD meeting. I will admit that I did not know it was not going to be on the agenda as well. However, I believe Michael when he said it was an oversight. >If the Area directors didn't know, how can the membership have known to contact their Area Directors? You now will have 90 days after being published in Front Sight. >Rob Boundrie stated he voted for the new division, in part, because a decision HAD to be made right then, or else the rules wouldn't have made it to the printer in time for the new rulebook. Well, somewhat. The deadline was actually for printing in Front Sight. The rules are not even close to being at the printer for the rule book. >Another observation, if this is a "preliminary" division and still subject to rule changes and approval, then why did Rob have to vote immediately? As mentioned above, to be able to be published in Front Sight. >If this is "preliminary", why is the division listed on the application for the 2004 Nationals? The person to ask is Michael Voigt. But, I suspect it is listed just in case it is approved, it will save a lot of changes in Division at stats at the match. >Will all these crossover shooters flocking to the new divisions get their entry fees refunded if the new division is not approved? Again, that is up to Michael Voigt, but if they requested a refund in time, I would think they would get a refund of some sort. >Are all of these crossover shooters going to join USPSA? Appendix A of the rulebook states you have to be a member of IPSC to compete in a Level III (Nationals) event. Are we going to give them a waiver on that rule? No waiver, to shoot USPSA 3 Gun Nationals, a competitor must be a USPSA member. >Will these crossover shooters now let us compete in their matches and create divisions for us to compete in? Will there be reciprocity? I guess that would be up to people holding those matches. >Would someone please explain to me how the members of USPSA were nothing more than a speed bump in this process when; there was no listing of the topic on the BOD agenda, ALL Area Directors voted unanimously for the division, the new division equipment rules were implemented without discussion, its rules are being submitted to the printer for the new rulebook without approval, and the new division is on the 2004 3 gun application without approval? Whew! I guess you are correct, this is all a huge conspiracy. Did you know that Gary Stevens, the A5 Director, was seen on the grassy knoll? Arnie

Gentlemen, This is the appropriate section of the USPSA bylaws concerning rules changes: 5.12 Competition Rules The rules and regulations for the conduct of Practical Shooting events shall be those most recently published and distributed to each current member of the organization. The rules will be the most recent edition of the International Practical Shooting Confederation rules available at the time of printing, published in their entirety. Modifications/clarifications to the International rules for competition in the United States shall be approved by the Board of Directors and published with the International rules. The U.S. modifications/clarifications shall be clearly distinct from the international rules. Changes to the modifications for U.S. competition affecting personal competition equipment must be given a preliminary approval by the Board of directors before publication and those preliminary rule changes must be published in the corporate newsletter three months prior to final adoption. Final changes to U.S. modifications affecting personal competition equipment shall be adopted in final form no more frequently than every two years except as may be required to comply with federal laws. *************************** Since a new Division does indeed affect competion equipment, the second paragraph is the one to look at. So, what the BOD has done is actually approve a *preliminary* new Division. 90 days after the publication in Front Sight, the BOD will give *final* approval/denial/changes to the proposed Division. So, be sure to contact your Area Director with your thoughts on the Tactical Division. Are we all happy and can we agree that the process is still working? Arnie

Alex, One point here - the so called "bribe" money you refer to was not paid by PASA Park. The funds for that support came from the city of Quincy and the Convention Bureau. Arnie