Growing Action Pistol

[Pin Shooter]

Personally I love the format at the Cup. I like taking a whole week off to shoot, and I shoot the whole week. The "bottlenecks" don't affect me, becuase the scheduling is so precise, I never find myself waiting or wasting time. This year "from a match perspective" was my best experience yet. The golf carts ferrying people back and forth from the parking lots was a great idea.

Match staff are great, but I know of several instances where errors in scoring occurred with no room for protest after signing your sheet. I understand that it is the competitors responsibilty to ensure before signing, but it confuses me why the NRA keeps targets for 30 days, if you can't challenge or change an error, post signing. This didn't affect me as bad as bad as others, and it was the best year for me to learn from the experience.

Shootoffs: While I appreciate that Sponsors/Press are an important part of this match, I still think that shootoffs should be for shooters. I would like to see a Top 16 or Top 10 in Open/Limited/Prod. Personally I see no reason for seniors/juniors/ladies/celebs as a seperate need. I agree that juniors are the future of the shooting sports, but not at the expense of the shooters that are in the sport now.

Awards: Personally I love the awards ceremony. It is the only match that I attend where you are required to be presentable, and I think it adds a touch of class. It could be quicker, but at the end of the day...no one is holding a gun to our heads to stay til the end. ( although giving guns away certainly helps )

This is only my 4th Cup, but I am definitely in agreement with others that the integrity of the Cup remain the same. The same 4 matches with a possible of 1920. I know for me and many others that changing the game, would be destructive. We all strive to shoot a 1920, and when we get there, it will be important to know that the 1920 we shoot on that day will be as difficult as it was on any given day in the past 30 years.

All in all this is the greatest Pistol Game and Match around. I agree that we need to grow it, but caution that we don't dilute it or turn it into a carnival match. They have there place in the shooting sports, but the Bianchi Cup is not one of them. Additionally, I believe that the Cup used to be invitation only, so clammering to rasie numbers for the sake of raising numbers, to me, seems counter productive to returning to the original vision of inviting truly the best shooters to compete. ( my opinion only )

There is a balance of Quality to Quantity.. I respect that there are big picture issues involved that I don't grasp. This is only an opion and in no way should be considered as negative feedback. I love The Bianchi Cup and would like to thank all that are involved in making it happen for us every May.

Mark

[Griz]

Match staff are great, but I know of several instances where errors in scoring occurred with no room for protest after signing your sheet. I understand that it is the competitors responsibilty to ensure before signing, but it confuses me why the NRA keeps targets for 30 days, if you can't challenge or change an error, post signing. This didn't affect me as bad as bad as others, and it was the best year for me to learn from the experience.

I had to challenge 3 out of the 6 sets of targets I turned in, but didn't really see it as a problem. They were just trying to knock out the targets as fast as possible. I don't think the scoring staff had much experience though because they missed obvious doubles and did not seem to know how to use scoring templates. It was no big deal though because each time I politely challenged the target, an experienced staff member took a look at it and in about 30 seconds had corrected the error. It wouldn't be a bad idea though to do away with the $10 fee for asking for a second look at a target and to make it clear to newcomers that challenging a target is not an insult. If an experienced referee takes a look and there is still a disagreement, then the $10 fee would be more appropriate.

All in all this is the greatest Pistol Game and Match around. I agree that we need to grow it, but caution that we don't dilute it or turn it into a carnival match. They have there place in the shooting sports, but the Bianchi Cup is not one of them. Additionally, I believe that the Cup used to be invitation only, so clammering to rasie numbers for the sake of raising numbers, to me, seems counter productive to returning to the original vision of inviting truly the best shooters to compete. ( my opinion only )

There is a balance of Quality to Quantity.. I respect that there are big picture issues involved that I don't grasp. This is only an opion and in no way should be considered as negative feedback. I love The Bianchi Cup and would like to thank all that are involved in making it happen for us every May.

My point is that the goal should not be to grow the Bianchi Cup, the goal should be to grow NRA Action Pistol at the local level. Even if the ultimate goal is to increase attendance at the Bianchi Cup, that would happen organically and be more sustainable as the number of AP shooters and local venues grew.

[Chuck Anderson]

All in all this is the greatest Pistol Game and Match around. I agree that we need to grow it, but caution that we don't dilute it or turn it into a carnival match. They have there place in the shooting sports, but the Bianchi Cup is not one of them. Additionally, I believe that the Cup used to be invitation only, so clammering to rasie numbers for the sake of raising numbers, to me, seems counter productive to returning to the original vision of inviting truly the best shooters to compete. ( my opinion only )

There is a balance of Quality to Quantity.. I respect that there are big picture issues involved that I don't grasp. This is only an opion and in no way should be considered as negative feedback. I love The Bianchi Cup and would like to thank all that are involved in making it happen for us every May.

Mark

But the downside is the NRA needs to make a certain number of entries to not be completely throwing money away. If only 20 people shot the Cup, it would not be what it is. By growing the number of people that want to go to Bianchi, you can get to the point where there is more demand than slots and get back to the more prestigious status of the past. Maybe by requiring matches at a local level, before earning a slot to the big show. That would possibly increase activity at the local level. But until you sell out, or come close to selling the match out, it's hard to limit who shoots it. As it stands now, any schmuck like me can get in.

[gm iprod]

You must grow the Bianchi Cup as the sponsors want a big match to justify their involvment. I don't care how you cut it, no Bianchi Cup no big money sponsors. That gets the bums on seats. The magazines are interested, the TV are interested, because the sponsors want a return on the money. They contact the "shooting times" etc and make sure that there is something in the magazines that are read by the non Bianchi Ap shooters. That gets them interested in trying it.

Plus the local clubs getting their act together to get the word out there.

Then going to the NRA for a "regional" they will provide medals, part entries to the Cup, all sorts of help. Ask near by clubs that also shoot Binachi to help you get going, make sure that you put matches on when they do not.

It starts at the bottom and the top. The bottom is what keeps the clubs going, the top is what keeps the Sponsors happy. The middle needs to fill itself in (or not) dependant on what the clubs and the competitors do.

[longbarrel]

I agree with Mark I. Pretty well put. This was my 12th cup.

Just a few things that I didn't like but its always a good time overall.

Troy

[Action Pistolero]

Maybe by requiring matches at a local level, before earning a slot to the big show. That would possibly increase activity at the local level.

That's a great idea. It only takes 144 rounds to get classified so that would mean there would no longer be an Unclassified class at Bianchi. This could be implemented for next year as the new rules are put out in January. They kind of did that this year with the Production promo that they did. You had to be classified in an NRA pistol discipline to be eligible.

It would be even better if there was a requirement to shoot a Regional or State match. This would take 1.5 years to implement as there are only 2 regionals and a state match before Bianchi.

I'm not sure about this but doesn't USPSA require an Area match to get a slot at the Nationals?

The Bianchi Cup will never sell out even if they get 400 shooters.

[DWFAN]

but if you included all the regionals or state matches between now and some arbitrary date before bianchi that would be a good idea.

IDPA does that. you have to shoot 2 regionals between june 1ish 2009 to june 1 2010 to shoot the 2010 nationals in september.

Edited June 13, 2010 by DWFAN

[Action Pistolero]

but if you included all the regionals or state matches between now and some arbitrary date before bianchi that would be a good idea.

IDPA does that. you have to shoot 2 regionals between june 1ish 2009 to june 1 2010 to shoot the 2010 nationals in september.

The hold up would be NRA. Things don't move very fast. The committee would have to sign off on this and they won't meet until Oct.

The only way that it could be done would be to make it retroactive to a specific date. Then the problem would be the shooters that don't normally shoot regionals would only have 2 chances before Bianchi next year to get them shot. That's why I said it would be 1.5 years to get it through.

[DWFAN]

I agree. Making that retroactive and announcing it in late fall/winter wouldnt be very fair or a popular situation.

[badchad]

The biggest, and easiest, thing I can think of to grow the sport would be to make the rules of the various gun categories, the same as for other common shooting sports. Like say USPSA or IPSC. As it is now to be competitive many have to make up a special gun for a match they are likely only going to shoot once a year, leaving at home the guns they shoot all the time. That kind of blows.

[gm iprod]

Maybe the USPSA or IPSC should change their guns to align with Action Pistol rules? Either way is it not going to work. THEY want their guns and teh Binchi Cup is a bloody hard match. I see some pretty good IPSC shooters try it and just give in, by the same token I see alot of AP guys blow it out their butt at IPSC, nice groups but the time could be measured with a sundial.

The Bianchi Cup and it's four specific matches (as decided upon out of 20 or so by Ray CHapman and John Bianchi) were originally shot with more regular guns. So was IPSC / USPSA, and for that matter Steel Challenge and NRA Bullseye. But shooters being shooters these individual matches spawned specific guns to meet the specific requirements. I now where you are coming from. But we had that in "stock" gun, but hte guins turned out to be anything but. I can just see you telling Dale Earnhart that he is going to have to get him and the rest of NASCAR to slign with the World Rally Chamos and use a 2L 4 cylinder engine at Daytona next year. Make sure he files the corners of whatever he has in his hands at the time.

IPSC has just changed it's production magazine capacity to a limit of 15, before it was whatever the maker made. It became an equipemnt race as all the big names made specific guns to meet the rules as they stood.

Look back at what Jeff Cooper and his friends were using way back in 197? and what the first shooters who turned out at the Bianchi Cup. The gear was almost identical, as that is all they had.

The thing is Production is barely "production" as it stands now. With $100,000 up for the first to bust 1900, you will see all sorts of "production" guns come out of the woodwork.

The NRA tried to bring IPSC open guns in, then shot itself in the foot with the Grip Safety and 2lb trigger rule.

Lets give the Production rules time to settle and evolve.

As proof of the pudding, we just held our part of the Cameron Cup, we use IPSC rules down here for production to try and get our local IPSC guys into it. Out of the 60 IPSC shooters at the host club, and another 50 or so within 30minutes drive, we got 2, and all they have to do is turn up, we are not as rigid as the Bianchi Cup, so that worked. Last Nationals, my gunshop offered to double the prize money to any Production Shooters, we got 6, and they were the ones who asked before the event of we would allow them to shoot IPSC compliant guns, which we did. So I don't think it is the rules.

[Action Pistolero]

It wouldn't be very hard to get IPSC or IDPA guns to fit the rules. I believe IDPA already requires an operational grip safety.

For a 1911 style pistol, all it would take is a grip safety and a sear spring. 30 bucks and you're good to go.

I'm not going to get into the Production class. I know USPSA told NRA to leave their rules alone.

[gm iprod]

Kevin,

Thats the point to my argument right there. They have their way, we have ours. No one wants to change.

How did you go in the Cameron.

I pegged a 1905, yes an odd number.

[Chuck Anderson]

I'm not going to get into the Production class. I know USPSA told NRA to leave their rules alone.

I am curious who at USPSA told them this. USPSA and IPSC went through ton of problems getting issues resolved with Production. Mainly because the division wasn't defined at the beginning, exactly where the NRA is now. I reasonably sure I know who told the NRA to not mess with the USPSA Production rules and I'd bet it's someone who's never shot Production. As far as I know there is only one BOD member who actively shoots production. And I know I wasn't asked. USPSA had some bugs. Their still working them out because no one knew how the Division might change without clear guidelines set in place from the beginning. The NRA is there now. Ignoring the pitfalls that have befallen ever other sport that tried Production isn't being wise, it's just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the problem.

[Action Pistolero]

GM,

You shot a 5!!!!!! Must have been on the Mover.

I believe Columbia is shooting the Cameron this weekend. I won't be able to make it. We did shoot a match on Sat at Alans place. I was going to send the scores to Grant and have them included. None of us did very well. Greg Davis shot his Open revolver with a score of 1889. I broke out my Ron Power revolver and shot an 1883. Except for the heat it was a fun day.

Chuck,

Nra is not going to go with an approved handgun list or a box to check dimensons. Besides those 2 items, the only things different are the 3.5 lb trigger and you can't mill the slide to accept after market sights. The NRA Production rules are actually more like Production than USPSA. The way USPSA's Production rules are set up they require a lot more policing which is what NRA wants to stay away from.

[goldfieldshooter]

Mine was an even number You can't shoot fives on the plates

Coatesy

[Chuck Anderson]

Chuck,

Nra is not going to go with an approved handgun list or a box to check dimensons. Besides those 2 items, the only things different are the 3.5 lb trigger and you can't mill the slide to accept after market sights. The NRA Production rules are actually more like Production than USPSA. The way USPSA's Production rules are set up they require a lot more policing which is what NRA wants to stay away from.

That's not accurate. I don't have any problem wtih not using a box or approved handgun list. There are several items, such as internal modifications, holster rules, trigger pull rules, sights, etc that are different between the two. Most of these have been sorted out both in IPSC and USPSA over the last decade or so. As an example, NRA specifies that you can only use Adjustable sights if the gun is offered with them from the factory. Glock offers quite possibly the worst adjustable sights ever put on a handgun, but I can now swap them out with a very nice set of Dawson's. (BTW, the only reason those sights were made were to comply with import restrictions on the subcompact models) S&W, not having to deal with import restrictions, does not offer adjustable sights on their guns. Now there is a competetive inequality between manufacturers that has been artificially created by the NRA. As far as the trigger pull restrictions, those have been hashed out between the respective sports as well. IPSC using a 5 pound first shot requirement, which obviously favors DA/SA guns. And USPSA which has no limit at all. Had the NRA wanted to even the playing field as well as promoting all Production style guns, a variable trigger pull restriction should have been used. DA/SA guns 5 pounds for first shot, 2 pounds for subsequent and Striker fired guns 3.5 for every shot. The 3.5 for every shot is not feasible for most Revolvers, without modification, or even many DA/SA guns. The holster rules could also have been a lot cleaner. Just saying a holster must be suitable for daily carry is really unclear. When I can email NRA and not get a clear answer of whether the DOH from Bladetech is legal, that is an unclear rule. Daily carry is not concealed carry. I know triners that carry a gun in a Limcat or CR Speed all day when teaching. I'm sure this is not what the NRA had in mind but it certainly leaves the door open.

Right now the NRA's Production rules don't require any policing because no one knows for sure what they are. If you want a factory gun only divison, say that. If you want a division that reflects real world, practical modifications, like sights and grip changes, say that. If you want a division that is open to DA/SA and Striker fired guns, but you can do whatever you want, say that. The reason USPSA and IPSC had so many problems is they didn't define the division from the start. This is exactly the road the NRA is going down now and it's a shame their not willing to learn from others mistakes and missteps.

[Flexmoney]

I'm not going to get into the Production class. I know USPSA told NRA to leave their rules alone.

I am curious who at USPSA told them this. USPSA and IPSC went through ton of problems getting issues resolved with Production. Mainly because the division wasn't defined at the beginning, exactly where the NRA is now. I reasonably sure I know who told the NRA to not mess with the USPSA Production rules and I'd bet it's someone who's never shot Production. As far as I know there is only one BOD member who actively shoots production. And I know I wasn't asked. USPSA had some bugs. Their still working them out because no one knew how the Division might change without clear guidelines set in place from the beginning. The NRA is there now. Ignoring the pitfalls that have befallen ever other sport that tried Production isn't being wise, it's just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the problem.

It is worth re-reading what Chuck just wrote.

[Flexmoney]

<br> The way USPSA's Production rules are set up they require a lot more policing which is what NRA wants to stay away from.

Yeah...that is what they thought in USPSA/IPSC at the beginning too. Big mistake. History shall repeat.

Here is the reality, a gun division that is OPEN will not require much policing. One that is restrictive, will require policing. By that, it can be a simple as clear and concise rules... inked on paper.

You can go any way you like with the rules . What I really fear is that the Production division will turn into another 'you gotta have this gun' division.

[Flexmoney]

Maybe the USPSA or IPSC should change their guns to align with Action Pistol rules?

USPSA, IPSC, IDPA...aren't the ones looking to grow their Production divisions. They are already well populated.

Either way is it not going to work. THEY want their guns

There is no THEY yet in NRA Production division yet, right? I mean, who really had any skin in that game at this point? I am sure there are a couple of examples, but there isn't yet a mass of shooters that are tied in to special equipment...at this point.

[itchy]

If the NRA wants to use "production" division to entice new shooters to shoot the Bianchi Cup, I think they need to keep it from becoming an equipment race. Offering a $100k bounty for the first 1900+ will not bring in your average shooter. It's going to cause the professionals to shoot production, and for sponsored shooters to get special "production" guns. These are the shooters that were already shooting Open or Metallic. It'll cause a population shift, but not necessarily an increase. Or it might be artificial, as those who were already shooting Open, will now shoot Open and Production. If they truly want to increase the number of unique participants and not just entries, there needs to be a division where the "everyman/everywomen" can enter. Somewhere where they feel competitive, without having to spend thousands of dollars on equipment.

Seiichi

[gusshuman]

Spend that money on bullets, watch the front sight and squeeze the trigger.

Al

[Action Pistolero]

+100 on what Al said.

Flex,

I never said that Production would not require policing. I simply stated that NRA was not going to police Production like USPSA does. There is no way they can handle it. The Action Pistol committee is made up of, I believe, 7 people. Of those 7 there are only 2, and I mean 2 Action Pistol shooters. The rest are NRA board members who if they have any pistol experience at all is in PPC and Bullseye. Do we like this? NO! Is there anything that we can do about it? Maybe, it will take a while to get actual shooters elected to the board. NRA is not all about shooting. By contrast, USPSA is all about shooting. Every Area Director in USPSA is an active competitor? Correct? You can't say the same for NRA.

I waited until the Production rules came out last year before I bought my Production gun. I read the rules. Figured out what gun, accessories, and holster I would need and went with it. I had a question about a mod and it was approved by the Bianchi Head Referee. That was it. I did my load testing, sighted in the gun and practiced. Then I went out and shot matches. With 3 Registered matches under my belt I had my Distinguished medal.

Why does it have to be that hard? The shooter that has all the bells and whistles is not always the winner. The shooter that puts in the time and expense to prepare for the task at hand is always the winner. It's not the gun but the nut behind it.

[Chuck Anderson]

And if you look at my USPSA Production gun, it has less modifications than my NRA AP gun. I have under $100.00 into my USPSA gun and most of that is the fixed Sevigny sights. All I did to my AP gun was put on Dawson Adjustables, and then add a barrel the week before Bianchi. There are simple ways to fix the rules that require minimal interpretation, minimal policing and are clear and easy to understand. Are the rules used by USPSA and IPSC clear and easy to understand? Nope. But that's because they let the Division roll for a couple years before they realized there was a problem. Once everyone had guns and tweaked them it was really hard to come back and tell them that their gun they put together was not legal. I'm NOT saying the NRA should go with USPSA or IPSC rules. There are issues with both sets. But it would be real easy to fix the potential issues now. It'll be a pain in 5 years. And I guarantee there are going to be a bunch of guns there next year that are not what the NRA intended when they made the Production rules.

And yes, I have forwarded all my suggestions to Tom. Not sure if he got them or not, but they were sent.

[Trader]

If the NRA AP really wanted was "no policing" then why do they have to weigh the trigger pull of every gun?

It seems like high maintenence policing to me.