Ltd-10 equipment position

[noname]

---

Quote: from benos on 6:02 pm on Jan. 22, 2003

noname,

I'm with you on the PC thing (thanks for spelling that out), I was bitterly opposed to changing when the mag ban came out myself. But after a few years of reflection, I just think it would be better for the sport overall, or in general.

If the majority of the shooters now only had 10 rds in the gun, it would force the course designers to design more shooting-skill-test stages, as opposed to the run-all-over-the-place-spraying-rounds-in-every-direction-type courses that are popular today, as a direct result of the increase in mag capacity. Of course when I say "better for the sport," that's just my opinion. I don't feel, today, that IPSC teaches us how to shoot. Instead it emphasizes equipment, mediocre gun-handling, and gamesmanship. I feel IPSC retained much more of its integrity toward  the founding principles in the early days than it does today. But, as you all know, I'm an ol' timer.

What was once pure has become heavily watered down, which is the nature of "open" type rules. But now, since we have seen where the equipment race can go, so I feel it would be better if there were less divisions, overall. Hence my feeling of leaving Open class for what it is, and then "tighten up" the other divisions.

---

I agree with much of your views here, BE.

Regardless of whether the 10 round mag restriction sunsets or not, I think it would be a good thing for USPSA to combine Limited and L10 into a single 10 round division. Though there is a slight advantage in reloading into a widebody compared to a single stack, I think the mag capacity is what really makes for the inequity in competition, as was the case before L10 came into being. There is no need for L10, or a single stack division with Limited Division mag capacity at 10 rounds.

The other change that needs to be made is lowering the number of rounds that can be shot from a shooting position from 8 to 6. 8 was fine when Revolver Division was allowed 8 rounds, but when they had the rug pulled out from under them with the round count going to 6, it was a double blow when the shooting position round count was left at 8. Either you are serious about a Revolver Division, or you are not. I don't see how stage design or competition will somehow suffer at 6 rounds.

[Ron Ankeny]

Brian:

Man have you ever nailed it...more skill, less spray and pray. I gotta tell you, the main reason I bought my Open gun was to get some help with my vision (optical sight) so I can make long and or tight shots. What a freaking waste of money; there aren't any long or tight shots, lol. As an new Open shooter, I would love to see fewer rounds, less hosing, and more skills testing.

[Chuck D]

Noname, a fellow USPSA member drafted a well worded and thought out revolver proposal,sent a copy of it to his Area Director for consideration by the USPSA board. His proposal didn't go as far as requiring a 6 round neutral policy change...just asked for course design considerations in this direction. Using the official board minutes as a guide...it didn't even get voted on. My personal guess...it was D.O.A. Shame, it was a good idea while it lasted.

(Edited by Chuck D at 6:50 pm on Jan. 23, 2003)

(Edited by Chuck D at 8:12 pm on Jan. 23, 2003)

[benos]

I'm clueless - is there a round count/capacity limit in place in Revolver class, in IPSC or USPSA?

be

[Jake Di Vita]

To my knowledge the Revolver division is limited to 6 rounds.

[Nik Habicht]

IIRC the proposal suggested to (not required) course designers that they keep revolver shooters in mind when designing stages.  Revolver shooters are limited to six rounds fired before a reload; anything over that incurs a procedural.  Stages that have you running up to multiple ports and force you to engage 4 paper targets per port suck, IMHO, and must really suck for revolver shooters.

[MBneACP]

Brian;

When I was a baby journalist, I was assigned to interview Ayn Rand, whose work had had a profound effect on my thinking. After a lot of fits and starts ("You can do better than that question, young man!"), I got a pretty good interview. At the very end, when I was packing up the tape recorder, she said, "Young man, look at me!" Then she shook her finger in my face. "Your goal," the old philosopher said, "your *only* goal, is to *see clearly!* See clearly, young man! That is my advice to you."

Best--and hardest to follow--advice I ever got.

We--the generic we, as in the sport--can depend on you to *see clearly,* and I think that's what you've done with your thoughts on this thread.

The changes you suggest would have a profound, and profoundly positive, effect on the sport. Whiners and cheaters will be with us always, but they're never worth listening to. You always are, even though you're one of them old-timers (and we met...hummmm...when was that?...).

If your ideas manage to go beyond these forums, I wouold unconditionally support them.

mb

[Duane Thomas]

"Duane, heads up, shoot whatever you brought, and beat all commers is a completely different thing than the attitude I was describing.  Maybe BE will explain it to you."

Whatever.

[Steve Anderson]

Brian,

I understand about not really teaching us to shoot...but mediocre gun handling?

Would you mind expanding on what you mean by that?

Thanks,

SA

[noname]

---

I agree with much of your views here, BE.

Regardless of whether the 10 round mag restriction sunsets or not, I think it would be a good thing for USPSA to combine Limited and L10 into a single 10 round division. Though there is a slight advantage in reloading into a widebody compared to a single stack, I think the mag capacity is what really makes for the inequity in competition, as was the case before L10 came into being. There is no need for L10, or a single stack division with Limited Division mag capacity at 10 rounds.

The other change that needs to be made is lowering the number of rounds that can be shot from a shooting position from 8 to 6. 8 was fine when Revolver Division was allowed 8 rounds, but when they had the rug pulled out from under them with the round count going to 6, it was a double blow when the shooting position round count was left at 8. Either you are serious about a Revolver Division, or you are not. I don't see how stage design or competition will somehow suffer at 6 rounds.

---

...then light a fire under the magazine manufacturers to get them to start making some real 10 round .40SW magazines for a 1911 single stack.

[Vince Pinto]

Wouldn't it be more interesting to make L10 a "sub" division of Limited?

In other words, the results of all the Limited competitors appear on a combined match result and you merely "tag" the L10 guys like you "tag" categories.

Since the equipment is identical and it's merely a matter of the number of rounds loaded, a single classifier would apply and it'd be kinda neat to see how many L10 guys whup standard capacity asses.

You can still award L10 prizes by referring to the "tag" but it would allow an L10 guy to become overall Limited Champion.

Just a thought from a danged furriner !

[Flexmoney]

Limited 8.

[benos]

Thanks MB!

Vince,

I would like to see the whole mag capacity issue go away in Limited Class, period.

Two changes I forgot to include in my original post in this thread -

1) Limited gun must fit in the box, preventing 6" 'ers.

2) Production class - three divisions - Single stack/Single action, Double action autos, and revolvers. That way you couldn't shoot a SVI in Production class, but you could shoot your single stack in Limited, if you wanted to take on The Great One.

Steve,

I knew someone would bite on that one.

Take the "big three" for example - they all have superior gun handling skills. They're capable of shooting quickly and PRECISELY at any target at any DISTANCE. In contrast, your average IPSC shooter of today can't hit the A box 6 times in a row at 25 yds, no matter how long he takes. Let alone do it over and over.

be

[Chuck D]

BE is dead on point. You have NO idea how good it makes me feel to hear someone of the stature of Brian say what I've thought and said out loud ( to the shagrin of certain others) in forums and in person for the past three years. Even if no changes ever occur...it's good to know my beliefs are NOT just my own.

[noname]

---

Quote: from benos on 4:54 pm on Jan. 24, 2003

Thanks MB!

Vince,

I would like to see the whole mag capacity issue go away in Limited Class, period.

Two changes I forgot to include in my original post in this thread -

1) Limited gun must fit in the box, preventing 6" 'ers.

2) Production class - three divisions - Single stack/Single action, Double action autos, and revolvers. That way you couldn't shoot a SVI in Production class, but you could shoot your single stack in Limited, if you wanted to take on The Great One.

Steve,

I knew someone would bite on that one.

Take the "big three" for example - they all have superior gun handling skills. They're capable of shooting quickly and PRECISELY at any target at any DISTANCE. In contrast, your average IPSC shooter of today can't hit the A box 6 times in a row at 25 yds, no matter how long he takes. Let alone do it over and over.

be

---

I may be wrong, but doesn't an iron sighted pistol with a 6" barrel fit in an IPSC box?

[Phil Dunlop]

sorry Noname, not quite, depending on the magwell and maybe the beavertail you might just get a 5.5" barrel in.

P.D.

[noname]

---

Quote: from Phil Dunlop on 7:07 pm on Jan. 24, 2003

sorry Noname, not quite, depending on the magwell and maybe the beavertail you might just get a 5.5" barrel in.

P.D.

---

Interesting. I have never had to use an IPSC box. I think restricting the barrel length to 5" is a good idea. I wasn't sure if the IPSC box was going to accomplish that.

[Phil Dunlop]

I've read that the dimensions for the box were taken from the 1911, which to my mind serves as a pretty good 'definitive' service pistol.

And I do feel strongly that a definition is required, this may be a game, but to me using a 'practical pistol' (and preferably in a practical manor) gives it a sense of purpose.

P.D.

(Edited by Phil Dunlop at 11:09 pm on Jan. 24, 2003)

[Steve Anderson]

Benos,

By gunhandling, I thought you meant draws, reloads, and gun manipulation type skills.

I still agree on the accuracy issue. I remember at a steel match last year they had a 3 x 3 plate at 35 yards and you'd have thought Hillary Clinton came and personally shut the match down...for all the bitching that was going on.

I'm working hard on precise shooting this year, I want to get to the stage and KNOW I can make the shot.

As far as L10 and limited, I don't really see a problem.

If you decide your single stack is holding you back, then you must make the decision to get a widebody. But please don't say it can't be done...

Jake and I (and others, I'm sure) have done quite well overall with 10 round, double action (THE HORROR! ) guns shooting minor.

I just feel that further dictating the style of gun hampers the freestyle nature of our sport.

SA

[JFD]

This is starting to sound like an IDPA founders thread.

First L-10 needs to be screwed over by making us use Production gear.  I guess I'll also have to return my gun to stock configuration too.

Fine, I'll just go to Limited and feel screwed or else throw away a lot of gear/parts and be an IDPA wannabee in the new single action sub-division of Production division (why don't we call it ESP).  I guess I'll have to download my .45 to 125 PF as well, if this is possible.  Oh, wait a minute; you guys have also screwed over our current Limited shooters...

So now I can shoot in Limited and be happy since it's simply a a renamed L-10 now.  Of course I may just go shoot that new outlaw match developed by all those Limited shooters who left USPSA since they didn't want to feel they pissed away all that cash for the big sticks that can now only be loaded with 10 rounds.

Limited is a very popular division locally and most L-10 shooters I talk to target it as the place they might someday want to be when their wallets get fatter, just feel the urge to shoot something different, get "magazine elbow" pain from all those reloads, or just feel like it.  Only a small percentage have any interest in those things called guns shot in Open.  If you like Open, then have at it.  I don't want to shoot it, but like to watch the Open shooters at work.  Of course you don't see me wanting rules changes for a division I don't participate in.  I wonder how many here talking about changing L-10 actually shoot it?

Leave the divisions alone and work on promoting the ones you already have instead of continuing to only give Open and Limited shooters serious consideration.  How many new people will be attracted to divisions that have second-class status at best?  I thought I was a "C" class shooter headed to "B" class who loves SSs and had a future in the sport, but now it appears I'll always be a newbie who can't afford better, just waiting on an evil big stick shooter to show up and beat up on me.

Sorry for the attitude, but I've only fairly recently discovered USPSA and the excellent L-10 division, seen a local USPSA club ruined by a decision to affiliate last year with IDPA instead (the newer shooters wanted easy stages combined with an instruction manual stage description), and had to become MD to keep my own gun club's USPSA match alive.  Seems like me and that excellent L-10 division, plus any future aspirations to shoot Limited just don't have much hope in this day and age.

The good thing about being MD is that I can drop USPSA affiliation in a heartbeat and form an outlaw match instead.  How about I call it "The 14th Edition 2001 Society"?  I already have a rule book and everything...