Modified Division

[Patrick Sweeney]

Brian posted a comment that Modified was an artificial division, which I'll step into the ring and defend.  The very nature of separating equipment is artificial.  Why Limited, or Lim 10, Open and the rest?  If we were true to the roots of this game, we'd allow only unlimited guns, but we'd all have to wear a sportscoat and start from the front seat of a car.

Modified seems to be popular in Eastern Europe, as the teams at the World Shoot were ex Warsaw Pact except for the Philippine team.  I don't have anything against them, but heck if I'm going to let them beat us at something we invented.

Why grumble about Modified, and then question the validity of a 6" Limited gun?

The short mags put stage planning back in the game, since with a 15 or 16 round mag you can't hose a stage without reloading.  (Well, I did on many at the World Shoot, but with a stage average round count of 11 shots, what would you expect?)

Besides, I've got one and I like shooting it.

[benos]

Patrick,

I liked shooting mine too - it was cool little blaster.

"Why grumble about Modified, and then question the validity of a 6" Limited gun?"

I don't quite understand your question, is there a discrepancy there? - because I think they're both stupid.  The reason I think they are both stupid is because I don't think you need to have more than one class that turns into an "arms race." We have Open for that. If we just keep making more classes, I don't know, I'm sure the manufacturers and the gunsmiths will like it, but I feel it is dividing the already small sport up even more. If all of a sudden serious competitors think they have to have a 6" stock gun to be competitive, in the end the competitors are the losers when someone decides - Oh yea, now were gonna have a box requirement in Stock class.

The sport began as an open testing ground for the best methods to evolve for shooting a pistol in a defensive scenario. (Let me say that I really don't care about that, I just love to shoot.) From that, we now have the current Open division. To me, that's enough. Why create other classes that will do the same thing. It's the nature of the beast, meaning humans, to push the limits. In the long run I don't think it helps the sport of "Practical Shooting." Part of the reason I'm saying this is because, over the years, I've seen over-specialization eventually kill most of the Carnival Matches that spun off IPSC. (For a detailed rant on this, check my first vomiting on my Hate Page.)

http://www.brianenos.com/pages/hate.html#degeneration

(From that rant.) "After a few years of training by seriously motivated competitors, it’s difficult for the match to draw new blood; potential competitors are too intimidated by the specialists."

I think this same concept holds true within the classes of IPSC itself.

I think this is a major reason why, attendance wise, IPSC is the way it is today. If you think about it, the essence of IPSC is reflected in Open class. And Open class is dwindling. Don’t get me wrong, I hate rules, but I think IPSC would be in much better shape today if the rules kept the sport more towards its original inclination.

be

[John Thompson]

I have to agree and disagree with Brian.  First I love my modified gun(when it works) for a number of reasons.  Basically it's a( dare I say) "practical gun" that uses the same holster, mags, and even ammo as my limited gun.  I disagree with the new divisions being bad.  If you talk to countless shooters who have left the sport ,you hear over an over again that they left because of the equipment race.  This is not anctidotal evidence, it's fact.  I do agree that too many divisions would be bad by waterying  everything down.   And I think the only reason we have a sperate lim10 and lim division, and the reason why it was so hard to start a lim 10 division to begin with, was because some people refused to part with "purchased advantage".  Unless change or a new rule is ultimately counterproductive, I think anything that brings and keeps new shooters is imparative for the future of this sport.

     I do know where your coming from Brian.  If a guy buys a Ruger P89 knowing that that gun ain't going to be competitive in any concievable division, tough it's his problem.  Some of the fun of shooting is improving and personalizing the guns.  I think once some new shooters have shot for a while they'll want to try open class and that'll bring it back somewhat.

(Edited by John Thompson at 6:54 pm on Aug. 31, 2001)

[Patrick Sweeney]

I was pointing at 6" Limited guns as a case of technical development for the sake of perceived advantage.  Sure, a 6" gun may be easier to shoot across the course, but would you want to carry it concealed?  Which, as you say, is where we came from.

IPSC should have split three ways 'way back when, not the way we've done it.  The rational course would be Open: Whatever you want to do, with whatever someone wants to make.  Real Life Carry: The gun you could put on with your pants in the morning, and carry all day long. (Been there, done that, got the shredded clothing to prove it.  Box Stock Production:  If you do anything to the gun that isn't in the manufacturers catalog, you can't shoot it.

We'd cover the race gun competitors, the carry professionals, and the guys who just want to shoot.  By defining equipment, we end up like evey other racing sports, with a college of cardinals passing judgement on displacement, compression ratio, frame weight, spoiler/wing size, etc, etc.

If we are going to define equipment, all categories are equally rational/irrational.  So what if only five guys show up to shoot Revolver category at the Nats?  The winner is still the Revolver Champion, as he showed up with the correct equipment and shot the match.  (When USPSA starts a T/C Contender Division, I'm switching.  Until then, I'll argue for rational equipment definitions, and shoot the gear I've got.)

A Limited gun is a neat technical tool, but is it a carry gun?  How far are we willing to go from the roots to keep having fun and chasing a larger participant base?

[benos]

Patrick,

I know quite a few tough guys who carry (daily) a 5" colt. But what about a 5" Longdustcover SVI. I don't think so. So how would you draw that line, in the "real live carry division"? It almost seems the only way is a judgement call....

be

[Julien Boit]

During the european championship in germany I heard a lot of people talking about the modified division.

I believe that the division was discussed during the assembly.

Many tells that Modified still exists because of commercial "lobbys".

Gunmakers and optics makers worked a lot to have that division still alive in the future.

I love standard division, I like open division, production is a good beginning for newbies.

Revolver will attract many people who don't want to spend too much money in guns , equipment and all the rest.

Let's devellop the existing divisions !

Some people launched the idea of a "Box rule" for only one division ; That means , do what you want as long as it fit in the box.

BTW, brian, On the cover  of the september/october issue of Front sight, is the Rob shooting a 6' gun ?

DVC

Julien

[benos]

Julien,

Yes, it's the 6" longslide 45 he tore up the area 1 with.

be

[Sean O'Donovan]

Hi from South Africa (and my first post)

Over here some shooters have taken to modified class in a big way, with some very interesting designs coming out. I though tend to half agree with Brian in that the only classes which make sense to me are Open and Limited. Optics, or iron sights.

Having shot both classes I would venture the opinion that the sighting system is the biggest difference in the equipment and the classes should reflect this.

[Patrick Sweeney]

Welcome, Sean.

If we were going to hard-core and clear on the rules,  (remember Sweeneys First Axis of Competition) they the equipment rules would be simple:

Open:  Run whatever you wanted, with magazines of "X" length as the max.

Not Open:  No comps, no dots, with magazines of "X" length.  

And let competition sort out what works and what doesn't.  The problem for match organizers is simple:  there would be only two kinds of guns that would be competitive, and they would be very expensive.  If you're trying to full a match, you want to make sure no one with the entry fee is turned away.

Thus, we have Open, Mod, Lim, Lim10, Prod, Rev and who knows what is next.

Also, local rules/laws effect competition.  Lim10 is a US Division only because of the stupid 1994 Assault Weapon Law (and damn GW if he doesn't see to its sunset in 2004).  Would it exist otherwise?  Maybe, but more likely those would be IDPA shooters.

Again, once you start dividing equipment into categories, you become more and more artificial and arbitrary.  If you want to argue purity, we have to go back to square one and challenge the whole idea of scoring based on Power Factor.