Revolvers in IPSC Issues

[Duane Thomas]

All this discussion is very interesting - and I say that sincerely. But it's not what I was talking about. I'm not interested in changing - or even making suggestions - on a nation/world-wide level. I just want ONE 6-round neutral Factory Gun Nationals. What would the Revolver participation be like for that, if USPSA advertised the fact a year in advance?

[xcount]

Where there's a will, there's a way. Yesterday I shot a 6 stage match with a total of 87 rounds required. There were two 6 round speed shoots including the classifier (CM99-62, Bang & Clang), a 12 round speed shoot, two 18 round field courses, and a 27 round field course.

And this was all done on two (2) indoor ranges!!!!!!!!

The "how" is really pretty simple. As you looked at the layout of targets & props on one of the ranges it went like this (I hope my descriptive skills are up to this) ---

On the extreme left of the range was one of the 6 round speed shoots, in the middle was the classifier, on the right were a couple barricades forming a shooting port with 3 targets downrange.

Stage 1 - the 6 round speed shoot. Then they had the shooter reload and move "hot" to Stage 2 - the classifier. After all shooters had completed stages 1 & 2 everybody went through Stage 3 - an 18 round field course.

A few feet back up-range from the classifier shooting box were some extra walls and vision barriers. For the field course, Position A was what was formerly used for the 6 round speed shoot with a different starting position. Position B was the formerly unused shooting port to the extreme right. In between was a free fire zone from which the targets formerly used for the classifer were engaged, only now there were the walls & vision barriers to contend with.

As a bonus, one of the poppers now part of the free fire zone activated a swinger only engageable from position B.

The other range had the 12 round speed shoot first, followed immediately by the 18 round field course (two boxes with a free fire zone with walls & barriers in between). Then the 27 round field course which utilized many of the same targets but with more walls, etc.

With the exception of leaving some steel plates down for one stage no extra work is done between stages. By that I mean no walls are moved around and so on. Once the props & targets are set up they stay in place. But engaging the targets from the 2nd prop set creates a whole different stage.

Six stages, 87 rounds, on indoor ranges, with not a single shooting position requiring more than 6 rounds. It can be done.

Genesee Conservation League; Rochester, NY; first Saturday of every month. (A shameless plug for some folks who really extend themselves.)

[noname]

---

Quote: from Duane Thomas on 11:17 pm on Feb. 1, 2003

"I would like to believe that USPSA had a vision of the FGN being more than a match of downloaded Limited raceguns, but that seems to be the preference that the customers have, and management is going to pay attention to the anemic number of competitors in Production and Revolver."

I don't think 72 Production shooters at the first-ever Factory Gun Nationals was "anemic." Less than Lim-10, sure, but still pretty darn good. And yeah, okay, 19 Revolver shooters - but that's more wheelgunners than have been at a Nationals in.....since when? Ever?

---

My anemic comment was not directed specifically at the FGN, but at the larger matches in general.

Area 1: 185 shooters, 11 Production, 2 Revolver

Area 2: 359 shooters, 11 Production, 6 Revolver

Area 3: 185 shooters, 14 Production, 2 Revolver

Area 4: 242 shooters, 7 Production, 1 Revolver

Area 5: 231 shooters, 19 Production, 4 Revolver

Area 6: 295 shooters, 19 Production, 7 Revolver

Area 7: 184 shooters, 16 Production, 5 Revolver

Area 8 split their match into a Factory Gun (136 shooters) and a Race Gun (202 shooters) Championship.

Area 8 Factory Gun Championship: 136 shooters, 38 Production, 10 Revolver

When given a choice, most shooters will choose Open and Limited. If you aren't shooting Production or Revolver on a regular basis, it is hard for the average shooter to show up to a match like the FGN or the Area 8 Factory Gun Championship and feel that he is going to perform well, so he is more likely to shoot a downloaded Limited racegun in L10.

It may be interesting to note that both the FGN and the Area 8 Factory Gun Championship had 27% of their competitors in Production, and 7% in Revolver.

At matches where all 5 divisions are available to the competitors, the numbers drop off to about 5% in Production and 1% in Revolver.

(Edited by noname at 12:52 pm on Feb. 2, 2003)

[xcount]

Duane - I hope you lobby long and hard for that 6 shot neutral FGN. I would like to see it, too. I might even have to retract my "no more nationals" pledge to myself.

noname - your assessment that guys with little time behind the revolver will be unlikely to shoot them at major matches is dead on. Growth in this division will have to begin at the local level. Revolver Division at the FGN is a nice enticement, but not sufficient promotion. And growth will take promotion.

However, it should be obvious by the actions taken so far that IPSC & USPSA have little interest in seriously promoting Revolver Division (and Production, too, to some extent).

I believe the reason for this is that the leadership of both organizations view these divisions as "entry level" way-stations where new shooters can play for a period of time until they upgrade to a real gun and a real division.

I wish Vince was still around to convince me I'm wrong on this. (That sound you just heard was bait hitting the water.)

[xcount]

Flexmoney sez - Shouldn't a shooter embrace the differences of the wheel gun?  Love it's challenge?  

I do, Flex, I do. And since it is more challenging, I enjoy beating flat guns with it even more. It embarasses the hell out of 'em to get bested by 19th century technology.

Maybe that's where the institutional mindset comes from. Have you ever heard this one? "God created whiskey to keep the Irish from ruling the world."

Maybe IPSC & USPSA created the standing reload to keep................

God, that whiskey is making me silly.

[Duane Thomas]

"It embarasses the hell out of 'em to get bested by 19th century technology."

A bit of thread drift, but if you want to get excruciatingly technical about it, the 1911 is 19th century technology, too. John Moses Browning first developed the design that would eventually be refined into the 1911 in 1895.

[Patrick Sweeney]

I certainly hope the powers that be do not view Revolver and Production as simply entry funnels to get more shooters into Open and Limited.  If so, we can kiss goodbye any ideas of interesting sponsors in those Divisions.  And then lose any shooter interest in them, as they aren't "Real" Divisions.  We get enough of that already.

As for time frame, I simply began referring to them back in 1986 as "Victorian-Era Rotary Launchers."

Entry in Divisions is not a shooter-neutral statistical exercise.  Most of the regular shooters are more experienced, and thus more likely to have Open or Limited guns.  So, if we want more R/P shooters, we have to treat them like Real Divisions, even though the numbers right now seem otherwise.  If we don't, we're simply creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I'm not asking for a completely 6-shot neutral match, just don't make me eat standing reloads on every single stage, and sometimes two on a stage.

(Edited by Patrick Sweeney at 7:51 am on Feb. 4, 2003)

[Vince Pinto]

Patrick,

Production and Revolver were created so non-single-action guns and wheelguns have their own unique divisions, so that competitors who prefer those types of guns can compete directly against each other on a far more level playing field.

They are not considered "entry-level" although they certainly both carry a lower price tag than, say, a fully tricked race gun. This is a bonus.

The other divisions are overwhelmingly dominated by single-action pistols, with varying levels of restriction, but again this keeps like equipment together.

The subject of this thread is a proposal to change our COF rules, which is another subject entirely and one which affects all competitors, unlike divisions which is an indivdual choice.

While we'd like to balance the needs of all competitors, we must consider our biggest customer base, and that is people with 10 rounds or higher capacity.

Remember divisions separate equipment, but courses of separate competitor skills, and this includes better and, yes, more frequent reloading.

It's a fact of life that revolvers require reloading more often than a pistol.

It's my choice that I shoot my Glock 21 with 13 rounds in Production, when I could just as easily shoot my G17 with 17 rounds, but I don't expect Match Directors to lower the round count of Medium Courses (the majority of IPSC stages), from 16 rounds to 12 so that I can avoid a reload.

You pick your gun, you enter the correct dvision, then you strut your stuff!

[xcount]

Vince,

While your recent post was directed to Patrick, I feel I must respond. First, thank you for clarifying your view of the Production & Revolver divisions as not being entry funnels. While that may not be your (or IPSC & USPSA's) intent, I believe it may be the reality none-the-less, at least to some degree.

The new guy is going to be subjected to peer pressure, urging the "upgrade", if only in the mistaken belief that he has to have the same equipment as the superstars. And even without that influence, it will not take the new revolver shooter long to figure out that a gun with a capacity of greater than 6 is much more compatable with our 8 shot ad nauseam COFs than a revolver.

Which is why I contend we will see little growth in Revolver division. The new (not stubborn old guy like me) shooter seems to quickly take one of two paths - switch to some sort of auto & stay in the sport OR stick with the revolver & find another (more compatable) sport.

Growth in the division has been my goal all along. If we intentionally make shooting a revolver in IPSC less fun than shooting an auto or shooting a revolver in some other game, then low numbers in the division will be the self fulfilling prophecy Patrick alludes to.

I cannot disagree with this statement of yours - "It's a fact of life that revolvers require reloading more often than a pistol." I reckon most revolver shooters understand this going in. However, this is quite different from "Revolver shooters must do STANDING reloads more often than pistol shooters simply because the course designer is allowed, under our rules, to demand that of them."

Finally, for the benefit of anyone who might be just tuning in, I feel compelled to correct a couple of uncharacteristic mis-statements on your part.

First, this thread is NOT about a proposal to change any COF rules. The proposal I made to USPSA asked that they RECOMMEND action on the part of those who design COFs and produce matches.

Second, the recommended action would be strictly VOLUNTARY. Those that had the ability & desire could do so. Those that did not would be under no obligation to do so.

Third, voluntarily limiting the number of rounds REQUIRED from a single shooting position to 6 rather than 8 would not, as a natural consequence, result in lowering the round count on a stage. Stage round count could be maintained by having one or more additional shooting positions.

Fourth, the market place would dictate whether this is a good idea or not. Those clubs that made the effort to offer 6 shot neutral COFs (eliminating standing reloads) to their "customers" should see (I believe) an increase in revolver shooting customers. Those that did not, probably would not. And anyone, having made the effort but failing to see any increase, would be free to drop the practice at any time.

All I ask is that clubs, tournaments, etc. give it a try. If it doesn't work, drop it. But keep an open mind. The most expensive thing anyone will ever own is a closed mind.

 

[Vince Pinto]

The "lack of growth" and "standing relaod" thing must be unique to the USA.

If you visit the IPSC 2002 Match Calendar, you'll find there are lots of matches where Revolver was popular, and there were even two Revolver championships in Germany and France.

And at those matches, the COF requirement at 9 rounds is higher than the USPSA at 8 rounds. Go figure.

The fact that there was a poor showing at World Shoot simply shows that the top shooters in each region prefer pistols, but we knew that already.

My work is done here! Good luck with the USPSA.

(Edited by Vince Pinto at 10:06 am on Feb. 5, 2003)

[xcount]

OK, time to spin some numbers.

Area 7 Director Rob Boudrie recently conducted a survey of Area 7 members. One of the questions he asked was this...........

"Would a board policy encouraging, but not requiring, that matches limit the maximum number of rounds from any one shooting position to 6 (instead of the current limit of 8) be good for the sport?"

And the results were (envelope please)..........

27% - Yes

44% - No

29% - Doesn't make much difference.

Now, here's my spin on this. If you combine the number of respondents who think this would be good for the sport (27%) with those who think it doesn't make much difference (29%) then..........

Those who think this would not be good for the sport are in the minority.

Gotta admit, these numbers surprised the hell outta me.

[Chuck D]

Must admit...shocked me as well.

I look forward to shelving "old slabsides" and using the "round gun" in matches next year.

Time to grow the wheelgun ranks by one.

[Flexmoney]

xcount...nice try on the "spin" lol.

[Tom Mainus]

I love this revolver talk stuff. I started shooting strictly revolvers back in 2001 (I think) It was also at this time that I took over the IPSC program at our gun club in Wi. Guess what, If the match director is always shooting revolver, all of our stages are always 6 shot neutral. I have not heard one complaint yet about any of our stages. It is really not that hard to design stages that are 6 shot neutral, and yet still challenging to all of the other shooters. We have seen our numbers grow every month, and we are getting alot of new shooters. I know revolvers will always be the minority in this sport, but that doesn't have to be the case. With a little thought going into stage design, the matches can be fun for everyone.

[JFD]

My division breakdown for last weekend is as follows:

Open - 7.1%

Limited - 35.7%

Limited 10 - 50.0 %

Production - 7.1%

Revolver - 0.0%

Now you may see why I defend L-10 so strongly....

IDPA holds a match the weekend before mine. They had 70 shooters, 3 of which were revolver shooters (4.3%). All stages were 6 shot neutral as always. 3 wheel gunners was a record for them.

The outlaw match the week after mine has no divisions. All shooters compete regardless of whether they have single stacks, double stacks, or wheel guns. They typically have 8% revolver shooters on stages that aren't revolver friendly, beating out the cheaper IDPA match. Go figure.

I think the majority of revolver shooters must be dressing up like cowboys, calling themselves "Stinky Bob", and shooting SASS with single actions.

Looking at the USPSA website, of all classified shooters, only 3.5% of them are revolver shooters. With this as a potential customer pool, you can set up revolver neutral stages to your heart's content and never have a chance of seeing enough additional customers to make the effort worthwhile. It's bad business to cater to customers who just don't exist. The Area match numbers (2% or less) provided by noname are less than the 3.5% revolver shooters that my "market research" shows, but are close enough to show the numbers aren't skewed to any real degree.

McDonalds isn't offering the McSquid sandwich because market research would have told them that there would be no buyers. They don't have to actually gross out their regular customers in order to find out it's a bad plan. Taking action based on wishful thinking is bad business.

I'm guessing any resistance shown by USPSA to 6 shot neutral stages, volunteer basis or not, is based on actual market research/membership info. No need to give it a try when it's doomed to failure.

Our former MD kept our COFs 6 round neutral for 5+ years. Never did we have more than 1 revolver shooter, yet 25+ other shooters got a lower round count because of it. The wheel gunner eventually quit showing up anyway. I ended the 6 round policy as soon as I took over as MD. Nearly all of my shooters voiced their happiness at the return of 32 round stages. That's good business.

[Tom Mainus]

JFD,

You just proved my point that it all comes down to stage design. Who says that you can't have a 32 round field course and still make it 6 shot neutral. We do it all the time. Of the 8 stages we are having for our sectional this year, 4 of them are 32 round field courses all six shot neutral. The rest will be smaller courses of fire due to bay size restrictions. We have never had any one complain about round count due to the 6Shot neutral design.

[Ron Ankeny]

I purchased a revolver specifically for IPSC and I sold it after just 4 months. A wheel gun is just not well suited to IPSC and shooting a revolver is like a fat old dinosaur running a race against a hare. People who shoot revolvers do so because they love the platform not because IPSC is a good place to shoot one. I designed several courses of fire around revolver shooters and it really wasn't worth the effort. I decided that if I wanted to shoot a wheel gun in IPSC I would just need to accept what the majority of shooters want in the way of course design and move on. In light of the fact that most shooters want high round count, up close targets (and I dislike that trend with an unrivaled passion) I decided to dump revolver and shoot an auto. Changing the face of IPSC to accomodate a revolver is not a battle I would choose to fight.

[Bill Nesbitt]

A few months ago I shot revolver at the Buckeye Blast. I probably won't shoot revolver in USPSA anymore. I am a pretty good revolver shot. I am used to finishing near the top of the pack in USPSA or IDPA shooting a revolver IF the course design doesn't FORCE me to make standing reloads. Even a standing reload once in a while doesn't bother me. But whan I have to do 24 standing reloads compared to almost none for everybody else it gets old pretty quick. The Buckeye Blast listed overall scores on their web site right after the match. There were 6 pages of results. I was on page 5. It was pretty depressing to me.

If a club wants my money, then they will have to give me good stage design. Otherwise I will take my entertainment dollars somewhere else. IDPA revolver use is running around 10 to 15 % at bigger matches and growing. That's where I will shoot my revolver.

Bill Nesbitt

[JFD]

Tom Mainus

I agree that 6 round neutral stages can be easily designed. I'm not so sure about 32 round stages being easy, as we never saw one until I took over and threw out the revolver neutral limitation.

The problem is that there are simply not enough revolver shooters available to make these changes worth the effort.

Pistols shooters come to matches to shoot. All who I've seen like to shoot as much as possible. They know that 6 round neutral stages are cutting down their shooting. To keep it from cutting down their shooting, I have to use additional props to keep the round count up. The extra props take away from other stages which results in pistol shooters having their shooting cut down anyway.

If you can manage to run a 6 shot neutral match without killing the round count, then that's cool. The only problem is all that work will be basically wasted because you will never see enough revolver shooters at your match.

I also agree that revolvers are simple not the guns for USPSA, and that's a big reason why the entire subject of 6 round neutral COFs should be a non-issue.

We tried it for 5 years with absolutely ZERO success. The revolver shooter who occasionally showed up was showing up before it was 6 round neutral. He eventually left to shoot IDPA because IDPA is slightly better suited for revolvers.

If USPSA wanted to push 6 round neutral COFs on a volunteer basis only, I have no problem with it. However I'm convinced it would be a waste of time and effort, no different than the McSquid sandwich. No customer base means there's no hope for success.

[spook]

I think it is unreasonable to put an emphasis on designing 6 round neutral stages. You'll take all the fun out of standing reloads . Plus the open and standard shooters will be pissed, 'cause you'll slow their game down. First boost the number of revolver shooters. 3% is not enough.

I chose revolver class and everything that came with it (including standing reloads). You are competing against other revolver shooters, not against shooters in open or limited/standard.

I do think stage designers could consider the fact that revolver shooters have to shoot stages differently and shouldn't make it extra hard for the revo guys.

[wide45]

If USPSA wanted to push 6 round neutral COFs on a volunteer basis only, I have no problem with it.

I do think stage designers could consider the fact that revolver shooters have to shoot stages differently and shouldn't make it extra hard for the revo guys.

DUH! That's exactly what the original request to USPSA was for.

The questionair was poorly worded. 6 round arrays are the worst way to make a COF revo neutral.

[spook]

wide45, what I meant by that was that I don't have a problem with 9 round arrays. I'll do the standing reloads. What I hate is a 7 round array, followed by a 7 round array, followed by a 7 round array. That's making it extra hard on revo guys in my opinion. There is (at least to me) a big difference in making a stage "revolver friendly" and making a stage "less of a pain in the neck for revolver guys". Ya follow?

[wide45]

Absolutely.

I hate stages that are 7/7/7. I hate stages that are 6/6/6/6. Its dumb stage design, and it sucks for everyone.

You can make revo neutral stages without going that route.

[SharonAnne9x23]

regarding the statement that 145 shooters were at the IRC.. how many of these were with USPSA/IPSC legal revolvers? perhaps half. the IRC runs open and limited championships concurrently.

SharonAnne

USPSA L-2387

[Chuck D]

O.K. lets say that half of them are legal USPSA/IPSC revolvers.

Does that mean that 72 revolver shooters is STILL viewed as an insignificant number of competitors?

A famous saying..." Watch the pennies and the dollars will take care of themselves".

Same could be said for membership numbers or growth of a division.