bgary Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 This is a *really* interesting direction to take this. Locally (western Washington), what I'm seeing is a strong growth in Limited-10. In fact, if you lump Limited and Limited-10 together, that's 75% of the shooters. Open is in serious decline (at least locally), Production is getting off the ground [slowly], and Revolver... well, there are a few die-hards, but I don't see it growing much. I [personally] think one of the reason we still see an equipment race in Limited is because of course design. The US rules say you can't *require* more than 8 shots from any single position, but it says more shots can be possible. So, a 40 round field-course with all the targets wide-open and visible heavily favors the hi-cap. The IPSC rules say you cannot *allow* more than 9 scoring shots from a position. If you put the two of those together (cannot allow more than 8 scoring shots from a position), I bet we'd see a real resurgence in single-stacks... but the screams from the course-designers and the match setup crews would be deafening. One relevant fact is that most clubs do not have the props and manpower to make it so you can only see specific targets from specific places on every stage... and the shooters probably woudn't like it if they did (can you say "walls with ports"?) Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 JZELEK, what kind of "Hi-cap Major scoring raceguns" did you see in Production class? I'm curious about what sort of mod's etc. made these "Production" guns so racey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 We need to look the basic root cause of the current predicament - a tendancy of the members to have a very narrow view and unwillingness to accomodate change if it would take away any advantage they had purchased. When the federal ban (which even Bush has promised to renew) was put in place, the most common reactions to questions about the future of hi cap magazines in USPSA competition were : <ul> <li>"Course design negates the hi cap advantage, but don't you dare undermine the investiment I made in purchasing a capacity advantage." One must wonder why the great concern with protecting a purchased advantage which supposedly does not exist. <li>"Don't make it my problem if you don't have pre ban equipment" <li>"If someone can't get a hicap, they just aren't willing to make a big enough committment to play this game." <li>"What problem? I have <b>MY</b> high caps. You should be content to use your low caps." </ul> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Nice post Rob. Besides the content, I especially liked the bullet list! One might think you know a little about this html/web stuff... be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack T Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Thanks Rob, I didn't want to be quite so blatant as my credability has not been established. Personally, I feel it is our responsibility at the individual/club level to take an active role and promote our sport. You guys do a great job at that level and as you said before, you provide a data base. There are so many ways we can promote a higher interest in the sport and retain our members. One reason we have a large attrition rate within our members is due to non-advancement within the classification system. For example; a shooter has weak fundamentals, made C class and has been there for two years, gets frustrated and gets out of the sport. I feel that it is our responsibility to mentor the new shooters and those that want help so that they maintain growth. I have the time, so I make myself available to these individuals on a Saturday out at the range to give them the assistance they need on their fundamentals. It's hard for them to progress when they try to do it by themselves. We need to get more involved. This sport means so much to me. When I was diagnosed with terminal cancer and started getting sliced and diced internally a few years ago, I felt that I was robbed not being physicaly capable of shooting competition again. It left a huge hole in my life, as I thrived on competition. Having been given a second chance to do it again with a clean bill of health, I refuse to take it for granted and will do everything I can to promote it. I am just full of ideas at the moment, but I have a serious head cold and need to take a break. Latter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 JZELEK, if at that match you and other Production guns were scored against non-Production-legal guns, it wasn't done so under USPSA rules. You may have seen unofficial combined stage results or combined match results wherein all divisions are listed just for the sake of giving competitors something quick and dirty to see. The club's idea of a "Production only" match may have been awarding only Production division competitors, but letting people compete in other divisions. In fact, a USPSA club pretty much has to do that. If allowing non-Production guns on the range is so offensive to you, despite the fact they aren't competing against Production competitors, then USPSA isn't for you. USPSA should un-affiliate any club that lets a shooter who has dropped his gun during a COF continue in the match. That is a DQ plain and simple. USPSA has no more real oversight of club matches run under its auspices than does IDPA. This is why both organizations have some local matches which are run the by the book and some local matches which aren't. It's up to the club members, officials, and participants to keep them honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZELEK Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 The match was billed as an offical USPSA match with all classifier stages for production only, but open guns were allowed to compete for overall score. It ruined what would of have been a great match. It was as if the lower class open shooters were looking for an easy win. Don't get me wrong, I think that USPSA is a good sport with great people running it. These people just need to make this sport great by doing away with this silly major/minor scoring and getting back to the basics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 JZ - Sorry dude, but your complaint should really be with the local club. USPSA really has nothing to do with what happened at that match. Furthermore, all guns ARE scored as minor in USPSA's Production division. They're really isn't anything left to "fix." E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZELEK Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 Eric, Your right the local club did screw up. What I meant about the major/ minor scoring issue is this, do you really think an open gun shooting major is harder to control than a production gun shooting minor? No, of course not, so why does that open gun get scored higher points on a target? A great majority of shooters don't want to spend thousands of dollars on a open gun just to be competitive. This problem was fixed by IDPA and maybe its about time that USPSA looks into it. Just my 2 cents worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 JZELEK, I don't think the IDPA has solved anything with the lower power factor. It certainly isn't more tactical. They just took advantage of the least common denominator. And, your right. An Open gun is not harder to control than a minor production gun...it is much easier. But, it is putting more power downrange. Major and minor in Limited...that is a different story. Speed Power Accuracy (and maybe SD, for stage design...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZELEK Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 Flexmoney, I don't see how standing out in the open blazing away doing speed reloads is tactical. Now using cover and doing your reloads behind it is tactical. Also a 9mm fmj @1150fps (minor/factory standard) VS a 9mm fmj @1450fps (major) really doesn't give your gun more stopping power it just makes your guns compensator work better! Maybe USPSA's moto should read... Money Speed Accuracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack T Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 Greetings, This thread is running totaly unrelated to the topic. But, can someone direct me to a hot, controversial thread on Minor vs Major Power Factor? This is the first forum I have ever had the interest to participate in and I am not entirely sure how it works. latter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooter Grrl Posted February 3, 2002 Share Posted February 3, 2002 I'm locking this topic - it's gone way adrift! Jack T - Nik started a thread for you to discuss Minor vs Major power factor. JZ and Flex - your conversation should probably be restarted in the IDPA forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts