Revolver Division

[jhgtyre]

Lets make sure that we all understand that the next use of "whiners" or any other name calling will result in moderator action.

-Larry Drake

The Moderating Team

[Merlin Orr]

Just a thought but.......

I wonder how many here (NOT trying to be specific) who want a new place to play for a very limited number of shooters extend their "we should be recognized no matter how small a group we are" thought pattern to specifically recognize small ethnic, small religious, small language, small, let me Tom, marry Bill, small ban spotted owl hunting and actually recognize any other small whatever groups and try to help legislate a recognized nitch for those groups....?

[Matt Griffin]

Oh, oh, oh can I bitch about being left-handed now? Friggin' IDPA won't let me have an extended cylinder release. Doors always hung on the wrong side, 180 traps galore, mag releases under my trigger finger, etc. etc. 10% are left handed, after all, which is a bigger chunk of folks than a lot of other acknowledged groups. I demand coin flips to determine hinge placement for doors from this point forth! ;-)

H.

[tomfturner]

but since someone else likes a gun that holds 2 more rounds you don't want them to play with you. I guess I just don't get it. I understand the 2 shot advantage, but that exist in almost all other divisions too.

Then why don't you shoot your 8 shot in production or L-10 where it is legal? If 2 more rounds is no big deal then your problem solved.

It seems to me like the whining is coming from people like you. If you 8 shot guys are such avid competitors, why do I not see any of you at major matches with your guns. If you want a rule change, the first step is to show up and shoot. If you can show there is interest, you might make some progress.

Guess that answers one question.

You want to force them into divisions where you KNOW they can't compete fairly?

[tomfturner]

Oh, and thanks Mike for actually answering some of the question I had instead of trying to assassinate my character for having the nerve to ask them. I still don't get it completely, but I do understand the history a little better now. Will be hoping for more ICORE in my area in the future maybe.

Edited July 21, 2010 by tomfturner

[Matt Griffin]

but since someone else likes a gun that holds 2 more rounds you don't want them to play with you. I guess I just don't get it. I understand the 2 shot advantage, but that exist in almost all other divisions too.

Then why don't you shoot your 8 shot in production or L-10 where it is legal? If 2 more rounds is no big deal then your problem solved.

It seems to me like the whining is coming from people like you. If you 8 shot guys are such avid competitors, why do I not see any of you at major matches with your guns. If you want a rule change, the first step is to show up and shoot. If you can show there is interest, you might make some progress.

Guess that answers one question.

You want to force them into divisions where you KNOW they can't compete fairly?

Tom, just to be polite about it, do you understand why it would be different in Revolver than in, say, L10? It's the 9-round position limitation. As long as you can have 9 rounds in the gun you can be competitive on nearly any level, because you get to reload between positions. 8 rounds is almost just as good (much more common than 9 round positions), 7 is better, 6 is going to encounter several standing reloads in a match.

So 8 rounds will always win over 6 rounds in USPSA. Thus, allowing 8 rounds in the gun means everyone who is a serious competitor would have to switch to 627s. For me that would be about $3000 just to get started, two guns, new holster, moonclip rack, dies, bullets, primers, brass, and moonclips. The same could be said for a lot of the current shooters, unless they're into steel or ICORE they don't have two 627s laying around. It just doesn't make sense, and would hurt the division if not outright destroy it.

H.

[cliffwalsh]

Oh, oh, oh can I bitch about being left-handed now? Friggin' IDPA won't let me have an extended cylinder release. Doors always hung on the wrong side, 180 traps galore, mag releases under my trigger finger, etc. etc. 10% are left handed, after all, which is a bigger chunk of folks than a lot of other acknowledged groups. I demand coin flips to determine hinge placement for doors from this point forth! ;-)

H.

The good left handed revo shooters don't seem to complain, right Tom and Phil.

[cliffwalsh]

but since someone else likes a gun that holds 2 more rounds you don't want them to play with you. I guess I just don't get it. I understand the 2 shot advantage, but that exist in almost all other divisions too.

Then why don't you shoot your 8 shot in production or L-10 where it is legal? If 2 more rounds is no big deal then your problem solved.

It seems to me like the whining is coming from people like you. If you 8 shot guys are such avid competitors, why do I not see any of you at major matches with your guns. If you want a rule change, the first step is to show up and shoot. If you can show there is interest, you might make some progress.

Guess that answers one question.

You want to force them into divisions where you KNOW they can't compete fairly?

Why is it unfair to shoot an 8 shot gun in Production??

[John Z Sr]

I guess I just don't understand all the push back on the 8-shot revos from the 6-shot guys? I keep hearing the "it'll make it an equipment race" argument, but isn't that kinda what every other division has become in some form or fashion (including revo)?

I mean you don't see manufacturers turning out guns with 7-8lb triggers anymore and advertising them to the shooting comunity, you see Glock G34-35s, M&P Pros, XDms, Sig USPSA edition guns. On the Revo side it's pretty much an S&W race as to which 625 model is going to come with the least amount of smithing needed if you're just getting into this division. And the argument about the changing holders and holsters stuff is bogus their are several manufacturers of moonclip holders that work with 6rd 45 and 8rd 38/357, and the 625 and 627 will both fit in the exact same holster (with the same barrel length).

So you want to penalize someone that has bought their first revo as an 8-shot 'cause they just like the way a revo feels, because some excuses that have been passed down for years about the equipment race? You want to force them into divisions where you KNOW they can't compete fairly? Shame on you! You want to compete on the playing field using a revolver because you like the challenge of it, but since someone else likes a gun that holds 2 more rounds you don't want them to play with you. I guess I just don't get it. I understand the 2 shot advantage, but that exist in almost all other divisions too. You can pack a lot more 9mms (major) in a mag in open than you can 40s or 45s, the guns are almost the same, but there is a definite advantage in round count. In revo there is so much push back ... is it because we want to be "retro in revo"? What's the push back? Please help me understand 'cause right now all I hear is whining that I don't want a 8-shot and I don't want someone to beat me with an 8-shot.

Equipment races make manufacturers support us people, and I want the 7 or 8-shot 45 or 10mm revo.

Do you even shoot revo in USPSA?

[tomfturner]

I see your arguments against 8-shooters H, and I appreciate the more polite answer.

A lot of that advantage would depend on stage layout as well though. For stages laid out for 10 shot (prod guns) the 625 would actually have some advantages over the 627. The equipment "accessories" from several manufacturers are interchangeable between the 625/627 (holders, holsters, etc), or at least from what I can tell from my own testing. I'm not saying there's a good solution, but there's gotta be something better than if you loose count on your 8-shot and pull the trigger on number 7 in the chamber "BOOM" you're running against 31rnd open guns. That doesn't make sense either, does it?

I would say it should be on a stage by stage basis, or try a match with both running side by side to test. Maybe this has been done with no success, but it appears as though to save the division constraints have been made without testing things at matches?

I'm fine with all the 8-shooters being scored minor, but what's wrong with trying it? Again it may have been done, but it appears there was a vote then no one revisited the possibilities. The "lets stick revolver in just to make the six-gunners happy" mentality.

[Carmoney]

Oh, and thanks Mike for actually answering some of the question I had

You got it, Bro.

One of these days we need to put together a revolver match where we can truly test out the 8-shot minors against the 6-shot majors. With good open field courses and smart target placement, this could be a lot of fun, and I think it might vindicate my long-held theory that the two platforms are actually closer in capable hands than many people might think!

[Tom E]

Kinda reminds me of the introduction of the "wide body" Para hi-cap 1911's. I was shooting a 1911 when what is now a single stack was a competitive open gun, just as the Para "wide body's" were starting to show up. The arguement (for a while) was that a fella that did good reloads wasn't at a dis-advantage with (only) 8+1. Didn't take long to show that was BS. Revolver has pretty much become a 625 class. S&W has supported us by dropping the 5" 625. 8 shooters would pretty much make 625's non-competitive. It would be nice if the other classes were more revolver friendly. This is a competitive thing, we're not just out plinking and some changes to the rules in the other classes could make it to where you might just maybe have at least a chance of being competitive with a revolver. Jerry shot production with an X27 at a major match fairly recently with so so results. If he can't be competitive with a revolver, nobody's gonna be. At the time I refigured his results scoring him as major. He wouldn't have won but he was at least competitive when scored major. Some simple rules tweaks could allow the 8 shooters a better chance in Production, L-10, Limited, Open. Major scoring at a 125 PF would be a start.

[jhgtyre]

So I was doing a little math regarding the differences in capacity.

627 vs Prod/L10 < 37.5%

627 vs 625 > 33.3%

By allowing 8 shooters in Revo you are putting the 6 shooters at almost exactly the same disadvantage that some claim is unfair or not competive for 8 shooters in production.

-ld

[Matt Griffin]

I don't think anyone is arguing that an 8 shot would be truly competitive (i.e. equally able to win a level 2 or higher match) in Production. It's a suggestion that if they want to test the theory of 6vs8, please do so by testing 8vs10 using the existing divisions rather than destablize our already-shaky revolver division. If they find that yes, they can generate the same hit factor (and feel free to bump your hits up to major) as an equivalent shooter running a G35 or whatever, then we can revisit the idea in revolver division.

Oddly though, nobody seems to be doing this simple test . . . Jerry made 75% at Nationals with a 627, IIRC, so there's the best revolver shooter on the planet running against the best Production shooters. He put down an 85% at L10 in 2008 shooting a proper L10 gun, so you could argue that the revolver cost him 10% or so.

But the main argument is avoiding dilution of the division. We're hanging on by a thread as it is, so nobody wants to rock the boat.

H.

[Tom E]

So I was doing a little math regarding the differences in capacity.

627 vs Prod/L10 < 37.5%

627 vs 625 > 33.3%

By allowing 8 shooters in Revo you are putting the 6 shooters at almost exactly the same disadvantage that some claim is unfair or not competive for 8 shooters in production.

-ld

I'm not sure it's that simple. It was the 2009 Production Nationals Jerry shot with a (8 shot) revolver. He was 38th. 75.19%.

[jhgtyre]

So I was doing a little math regarding the differences in capacity.

627 vs Prod/L10 < 37.5%

627 vs 625 > 33.3%

By allowing 8 shooters in Revo you are putting the 6 shooters at almost exactly the same disadvantage that some claim is unfair or not competive for 8 shooters in production.

-ld

I'm not sure it's that simple. It was the 2009 Production Nationals Jerry shot with a (8 shot) revolver. He was 38th. 75.19%.

I am just talking about capacity differences in that post. Not Jerry or his finish.

-ld

[cliffwalsh]

Why is it unfair to shoot an 8 shot gun in Production??

It's OK Tom, I didn't expect an answer.

[Bubber]

It's not so much that one has 2 more shots but more that the two more shots are a big benenfit. Where there are 8 required hits required from one spot and no place to make up the two hits from any place else or no benefit to shoot it from some place else ie; other targets available from where you would engage the two hits on the course of fire. I know it can be done through course design. However courses are set up for the majority of the shooters and the majority have at least eight shots. Take a look at some classifiers and you can see the benefit form two extra hits especially when they call for a reload after the 7th or 8th shot. If the revo community wants to try this > 6 shoot minor and go try it at the local level to see if it is viable and if there would be anyone to take up the challenge. I have of yet to see anyone attempt this at our OKC match when it was made available to them. And until we can get some true data over time we will continue to bring this dicussion back up again and again. I would like to shoot the 8 shot in USPSA Revo, I have shot it in open and did OK. Chris has shot it in open also but only because he could not count to six, or at least stop at six. Later rdd

[Tom E]

Oddly though, nobody seems to be doing this simple test . . . Jerry made 75% at Nationals with a 627, IIRC, so there's the best revolver shooter on the planet running against the best Production shooters. He put down an 85% at L10 in 2008 shooting a proper L10 gun, so you could argue that the revolver cost him 10% or so.

H.

I'm not sure that's right. He's pretty much "the best" with a revolver, not so with a "proper L-10 gun". Would be meaningfull if he'd shot a revolver in L-10. His 75% in Prod with a revo doesn't bode well for us mortals shooting an 8 shot revo in the "other" divisions (at least under the existing rules) as has been suggested.

Simply changing the "8 shots per position" rule, getting us away from endless 8 shot arrays, might make minor 8 and major 6 fit together just fine.

[Matt Griffin]

Oddly though, nobody seems to be doing this simple test . . . Jerry made 75% at Nationals with a 627, IIRC, so there's the best revolver shooter on the planet running against the best Production shooters. He put down an 85% at L10 in 2008 shooting a proper L10 gun, so you could argue that the revolver cost him 10% or so.

H.

I'm not sure that's right. He's pretty much "the best" with a revolver, not so with a "proper L-10 gun". Would be meaningfull if he'd shot a revolver in L-10. His 75% in Prod with a revo doesn't bode well for us mortals shooting an 8 shot revo in the "other" divisions (at least under the existing rules) as has been suggested.

Simply changing the "8 shots per position" rule, getting us away from endless 8 shot arrays, might make minor 8 and major 6 fit together just fine.

My logic was this:

1. Jerry is the best with a revolver. Ergo he is the most able to overcome any disadvantage other than shot limitation in Production.

2. Both were Nationals matches, so equivalent competitors

3. Jerry was able to score 85% with his lesser ability gun, the L10 gun.

4. He only scored 75% with his best possible gun, a revolver

Ergo, Jerry had at LEAST a 10% disadvantage by using a revolver. Arguably since he would be worse comparitively with an L10 gun vs. a Revolver (even though he is damned good with other pistols) then the difference is even greater. Competing as he would normally with a revolver around 100%, but only acheiving 75% against the Production field, his disadvantage moves to 25%. If he had shot a revolver in L10, you would only be demonstrating the difference between Major and Minor.

H.

[steel1212]

Oh, and thanks Mike for actually answering some of the question I had

You got it, Bro.

One of these days we need to put together a revolver match where we can truly test out the 8-shot minors against the 6-shot majors. With good open field courses and smart target placement, this could be a lot of fun, and I think it might vindicate my long-held theory that the two platforms are actually closer in capable hands than many people might think!

That might be the ticket right there! If you could setup a match just like Sam's but add the 8 round minor guys, not uspsa sanctioned, just to see what would happen? Problem is even if you give Jerry a 625 and a 627 and have him shoot the same field course it might not work out the same. He might be tired by the second run or what ever and hit a noshoot or have a mike or something but that is still the closest you'll get.

[scottyinAZ]

i quit fighting aginst the uspsa revo rules and got a 625. im happy i can play the game with a revolver still. be glad for what we have, not what we coulda shoulda wouda have.

and we Revo shooters get our brass back at the major matches!! another bonus.

Edited July 22, 2010 by scottyinAZ

[Stlhead]

USPSA revolver division should remain as it is. Six shots before a reload. At my sectional match this year there where only two revolver shooters in attendance. What if there was a "revolver open" or "8 shot revolver" and one of us shot that. Splitting what little we have now would surely kill USPSA revolver altogether. Lets find a way to get more people interesting in shooting with us, not trying to split us up more. ICORE has a place for 8 shooters, I would shoot ICORE if I could, but it is too far, and there is not enough interest locally to form a new club. As much as I would enjoy reducing the number of standing reloads I perform at a match, at least I know that if another wheel gunner is playing he (or she) will be faced with the same challenges.

[professor]

Any comparisons that take already-shot matches and try to recompute what scores would be like if shot minor, and vice-versa, cannot reproduce the unintended consequences of changing the operating conditions.

Just an example that you might have run into, is what happens when a shooter in any division but production shoots a match claiming major power factor, gets to the chrono and finds out then that his ammo is minor.

What goes through this sorry shooters mind, after the obvious... that he should have checked the ammo over the chrono better, or not tried to cut it so close to the limit.

Preface these comments with "If I'd known I was shooting minor I would have..."

1. ...taken better sight pictures to eliminate Ds and minimize Cs.

2. ...made up D hits when possible.

But most important, if he'd known he was going to be shooting minor, he'd have loaded his ammo to minor in the first place, to reduce indexing time after each and every shot. Shooting nearly major ammo has almost the same muzzle flip and recoil characteristics as major, but only counts for minor score.

These changes in the way you shoot a stage minor vs major affect time [more time to insure good hits]. And accuracy [good hits = better points AND fewer penalties for hard cover hits, mikes, and noshoots.] affects score.

So shooting minor vs major is never just a matter of recomputing the points after the fact.

The available round count also affects how you break down and shoot a stage, and it affects every stage, not just the ones where a 6-shot revo must make extra reloads. If you're shooting a 6 popper array with just 6 shots in the gun, you have to be more deliberate with those shots to avoid a reload in the case of a miss. With 7 or 8, you can shoot faster, because one, or even 2 initial misses can be made up without the time penalty of a reload. That is an ENORMOUS advantage on a short speed-shoot stage.

Anyway, it all boils down to my belief that revolver division ought to stay 6 round competition. Period.

[scottyinAZ]

+1 with what the professor typed!