Production Division Rules

[MoNsTeR]

Oh geez guys, what's the big deal? These new rules are MORE permissive, and won't have a major effect on what happens at high levels of competition. Very much unlike IDPA disallowing 5" revolvers and moving 10mm to ESP, don't you think?

[rmills]

That's the key to the success of IDPA and also SASS. Stable rules, an organization that supports all members, not just the pro's, and an atmosphere at the matches that makes one want to be there. Yes, we've heard since the beginning of IDPA that it was going to fail due to many reasons, but how long as it been, 8 years? Yet it continues to grow in spite of what we see in these forums.

Take care..................

[Flexmoney]

Roy,

You mention rules stability. I think rules stability is one of the key things that USPSA has going for it. We have a comprehensive rule book that EVERY club is required to follow. The USPSA rules have been completely the same for the past 3 years...and now they are only being tweaked.

[rmills]

Flex: Didn't we just have some other rule changes involving 9mm major and 8 shot revolvers? One may rationalize it any way they can.

Take care.......................

[Nik Habicht]

Roy,

In my three years in USPSA I've never seen rule interpretations vary a whole lot from match to match, depending on the match directors whim. I saw that a lot when IDPA had it's brief foray in N.J.

A rule change or modification, now and again, especially one that doesn't make some of my equipment unuseable or less competitive in a division, just doesn't annoy me as much as different interpretations of the same rule. I don't care a whole lot about what the rule says --- I do care that it means the same thing everywhere.

As far as Major 9 in Open is concerned --- it was always legal if you loaded to 1.250, the only change now is that other guns can play in open too.

[Vince Pinto]

Flex,

We have a comprehensive rule book that EVERY club is required to follow.

Since you're a Section Coordinator, how would the USPSA handle an Area, State, Section or Club which wanted to have their own version of the USPSA rulebook?

Is there a procedure for variances within the USPSA?

[rmills]

You mention rules stability.  I think rules stability is one of the key things that USPSA has going for it.  We have a comprehensive rule book that EVERY club is required to follow.  The USPSA rules have been completely the same for the past 3 years...and now they are only being tweaked.

No Flex: Every club DOES NOT follow the rules. That's one of the big issues we face today. Clubs not recognizing approved divisions, allowing stages with more than 9 shots required from one position, and on and on.

As Ohio State Coordinator, you are aware of the problems I'm referencing here. The last match at our local club had 25 rounds from one position, and yes, it was designed by a guy with 27 round mags who could care less about Production or Limited 10 Divisions. Earlier in the year, there was a stage with 32 rounds required from one position.

It never ends. When asked about the rule book violations in course design, one is told to either shut up and shoot, or go home.

We did, 18 of us. We now shoot IDPA.

[Flexmoney]

Flex,

We have a comprehensive rule book that EVERY club is required to follow.

Since you're a Section Coordinator, how would the USPSA handle an Area, State, Section or Club which wanted to have their own version of the USPSA rulebook?

Is there a procedure for variances within the USPSA?

I'm pretty sure they would have to shape up...or get their USPSA affiliation pulled.

That is pretty much the way the new Ohio Section by-laws read (which is all I can really speak to).

[warpspeed]

I detect some serious thread drift here..........

[Flexmoney]

No Flex: Every club DOES NOT follow the rules. That's one of the big issues we face today. Clubs not recognizing approved divisions, allowing stages with more than 9 shots required from one position, and on and on.

That is a problem. And, when I wrote the new by-laws for Ohio...I made sure to include articles that address those issues...mainly because of you bringing them to my attention.

As Ohio State Coordinator, you are aware of the problems I'm referencing here.

I think that you would be suprised at the articles that I put into the new Ohio Section bylaws that specifically addresses the issues that you mentioned. The new bylaws should be ratified, and go into effect this for this year.

I have no problems moving to dis-affiliate a club that isn't running safe or isn't putting on USPSA matches by the book.

Stick around...it could get interesting.

[Vince Pinto]

Flex,

I'm pretty sure they would have to shape up...or get their USPSA affiliation pulled. That is pretty much the way the new Ohio Section by-laws read (which is all I can really speak to).

Thanks for your candid reply.

[Turtle]

Wow guys,

I had no idea there was so much dissension. Things are pretty good in my little corner of the USPSA world (mid-atlantic region of the country i.e. Area6, 7, & 8). All divisions are embraced, and that is usually reflected in the excellent course design. Area 8 has some great club matches!

I think the new rule covers stages that require you to load the gun after the buzzer. Technically, under the "first shot must be double action" rule, if you had to load and charge after the buzzer, you were in violation, right?

[Yoda]

I think the new rule covers stages that require you to load the gun after the buzzer. Technically, under the "first shot must be double action" rule, if you had to load and charge after the buzzer, you were in violation, right?

Turtle,

that's why IPSC made an exemption for the first shot if the shooter has to start with an unloaded gun. Under time pressure it would probably lead to dangerous situations and AD's when shooters need to load the gun and first decock the hammer before they fire the fist shot doubleaction. I still have not received my copy of FS, so I cannot read the article from my friend John. I have no clue why USPSA would allow cocking the hammer before firing the first shot. Who has more information or insight and can enlighten me?

[hoser]

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

[Yoda]

Hi Arnie,

thanks for your explanation. However - I see no compelling reason for deviating from the IPSC rules. In effect I read only one reason mentioned being the harder shot DOA on long distance targets. Other circumstance is that allowing cocking for the first shot will add more time so the competitor can have a choice between first shot DOA or cocking it manually and fire the first shot SA. What were the triggers for deviation in the first place?

I know that the first shot DOA is harder on 25 yard or even 50 yard targets. This is the same for every competitor, so if they have problems with it they can improve by practicing. Revolver shooters do it on every single shot in the match.

Looking forward to seeing you next month - maybe we can discuss this over a beer. Say hi to Denise for me.

[Vince Pinto]

Hi Kees,

We just recieved a request from IPSC Guacamole to offer special compensation for shots further than 15m for Production Division because they're "mucho difíciles" and we're working on a solution. I'm thinking we should follow golf's "Ladies Tee" idea and have different starting positions:

<--------- Targets --------->

15m <--------- Wussies & Wimps Start Position --------->

20m <--------- Regular Start Position --------->

25m <--------- Muchachos Con Cojones Grande Start Position --------->

-:and competitors who start from the W&W position also have the option of using their handbags to beat the targets to death instead of shooting them (however you get one procedural per handbag swing if you don't wear pearls and matching shoes).

[rmills]

Good analogy Vince! It's incredible that USPSA's board has decided to "water down" the rules because some people who have now decided to shoot Production Division, can't make a long shot using DA. Since USPSA is trying to comfort those folks by changing the rules, I guess I should complain that when using my Glock in Production Division, I'm at a disadvantage since I can't cock the hammer and get the single action 1st shot!

[reefteach]

One good reason for changing the rule is so that I can compete with my Springfield XD. If a round is chambered, then the trigger will be SA. The evolution of the rules is a coevolution with the technology. I believe this is why the XD is not allowed in IPSC, They didn't change the SA/DA rule.

[skeeter]

Good analogy Vince! It's incredible that USPSA's board has decided to "water down" the rules because some people who have now decided to shoot Production Division, can't make a long shot using DA. Since USPSA is trying to comfort those folks by changing the rules, I guess I should complain that when using my Glock in Production Division, I'm at a disadvantage since I can't cock the hammer and get the single action 1st shot!

now i cann't understand why anyone would care if someone cocked the hammer on the first shot anyway. if you felt that you had to do this you wont be winning anything anyway. so why worry about it?

i don't know whats worst going to a uspsa match that doesn't follow the rules and has 30 rounds from one spot or an idpa that has a stage that has 5 rounds. my first idpa match had 5 stages an only 58 rounds total! i like well run and designed stages that have a fair number of rounds that follow the rules. all the clubs that i go to follow the rules the uspsa set up for stages. and if a club didn't people would stop going.

the term freestyle should mean you can do what ever you wish as long as it's safe.

[Vince Pinto]

One good reason for changing the rule is so that I can compete with my Springfield XD. If a round is chambered, then the trigger will be SA. The evolution of the rules is a coevolution with the technology. I believe this is why the XD is not allowed in IPSC, They didn't change the SA/DA rule.

Absolutely not. The primary, fundamental, driving force behind IPSC's creation of Production Division in 1999, over and above all other considerations, was that single-action-only pistols are not allowed. All other PD rules. concepts and ideals are sub-servient to the "no-SAO" rule.

IPSC disallowed the Springfield XD Series because under IPSC definitions (and according to the IDPA and the BATF and the original manufacturer and as you yourself admit), the XD Series are single-action-only.

Regrettably, for a period of 2 months in early 2003 (right after the SHOT Show), IPSC were deceived into falling for the "if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it must be a duck" thinking. However after another manufacturer complained about the XD Series being on the list, we immediately withdrew the XD Series from the approved gun list pending an investigation. When the SAO claim was confirmed, the XD Series remained off the approved gun list.

In the 10 months since the XD Series were removed from the approved gun list, only 3 people in the entire world complained to IPSC about the removal action, but they also admitted they would retain their XDs for use in other IPSC divisions and in other shooting sports.

I hope this explains IPSC's position on the matter.

[Vince Pinto]

the term freestyle should mean you can do what ever you wish as long as it's safe.

What "Freestyle" actually means is defined in IPSC rules as follows:

1.1.5 Freestyle – IPSC matches are freestyle. Competitors must be permitted to solve the challenge presented in a freestyle manner, and to shoot targets on an "as and when visible" basis. <snip>

In other words, a COF should never state that a competitor must, for example, shoot T1-T4 from Area 1, then shoot T5-T9 from Area 2 and so on, but we do make exceptions to the freestyle rules for lower level matches, classifiers and so on. However don't apply the freestyle shooting concept to the equipment rules, which are another matter entirely and are dictated by division rules. Every division has equipment restrictions, for example:

Open Division: It's not just your first magazine which must be under 170mm long - even the ones you use after the start signal must comply.

Revolver Standard Division: IPSC rules don't limit your use of +6 round revolvers, nor do the rules limit your reloading with +6 rounds but the rules do penalise you if you fire more than 6 rounds before reloading.

Production Division: IPSC rules don't dictate how you operate your action after the first shot is made (or attempted), but the first shot made (or attempted) must be double-action.

In fact for some divisions, IPSC division rules even dictate the position of your equipment and you cannot, for argument's sake, "spin" your belt around your waist after the start signal to bring your magazines into a more forward position - if you do, you'll be reclassifed to Open Division.

The term "freestyle" has, over the years, been incorrectly applied to too many different aspects of IPSC shooting, but the actual meaning is stated in the rule book.

[Vince Pinto]

Skeeter,

Another thought just came to mind about the "misuse" of expressions in IPSC. You mentioned you don't like 5 round COFs, and I guess we all like to put a lot of lead downrange, but your comment reminds me of another term which is often misused in IPSC: "speed shoot". Way too many people consider any COF requiring 9 rounds or less to be a "speed shoot", but it's not the round count which makes a COF a "speed shoot" - it's the target distances, less movement and fewer obstacles such as Penalty Targets.

A real speed shoot is one where your draw time and your slick new holster from whoever separates the men from the boys. No targets are beyond 10 or 15 metres, there are very few Penalty targets (if any), and you can really blaze through the COF in a cloud of smoke and to the sweet sound of really quick double-taps. <sigh> Too bad we don't see too many of them these days.

However it's kinda weird how everybody seems to want to get the slickest holster in the market but not shoot short 'n' sweet COF's where such holsters make much more of a difference. OK, enough reminiscing .............

[reefteach]

Yes, this explains the IPSC reason for not allowing the XD. It is valid and reasonable and logical. But what I was pointing out is that when the USPSA changed the DA first shot rule, I was then allowed to compete with my XD. Before the rule change, I was not allowed to use the XD by the same logic. IPSC did not change the rule, so it is still not allowed for IPSC. USPSA changed the rule, and it is now allowed. See the connection? If the rule didn't change, I would not be allowed to use it. I think Springfield did some major policitcal hob-nobbing with the USPSA, to my benefit. But I think, again, that it is in the best interest of the sport because it is a coevolution of rules and technology.

[GordonB]

Cocking a DA gun to shoot SA is a common technique taught by a # of tactical-oriented schools. I was told by a well known trainer that several SWAT-type officers (Italian) he has trained told him that they often cock their DA/SA guns before going into action. It's a common practice in the real world.

Most of us will be able to hit better with an SA trigger than a DA trigger. All I know is that if I came upon a far target, from the draw, the USPSA clarification allows me to solve the problem by either cocking the trigger and taking shooting it SA or I have the option of shooting it DA. That's a good thing. The old ruling MADE you shoot it only one way.

All of you people who have posted that it isn't manly to cock the gun... well hell good for you. But how many of you who have that belief shoot a Glock?

Shoot a long/heavy pull DA gun like a Beretta or a Sig and then MAYBE you can grab your crotches, grunt like the Tool Man and say it's more manly to shoot a DA first shot. But if you shoot a Glock... hell how can you? The whole reason the Glock is so dominant is because it doesn't have a traditional DA/SA action.

[skeeter]

vince i don't have anything against speed shoots if it's part of a match with a good round count. but when i paid $20 for 5 stages and got 58 rounds i wanted more!

and cocking the hammer might be tactical in the real world but this ain't real. and if you want to shoot tactically go for have fun and train, the more rounds the better. but don't complain when you lose the game. you might win the real thing but not this.

hey as far as the first shot go's wouldn't it faster to fire 3 shots at the first target to get the gun into the SA mode fast? it's got to be faster the cocking with your thumb.