hankfan79 Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share Posted March 1, 2011 (edited) But when someone says they are a DM in IDPA the first thing I would think is they are over 50. That is exactly what I thought. A more sophisticated way of saying "High Master Senior" Edited March 1, 2011 by hankfan79 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganShootist Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Distinguished Senior in IDPA is for shooters 65 or older like the Super Senior in USPSA. (like me) So.... if you become a Distinguished Master and you are over 65 Does that make your a Twice Distinguished Master Senior?????? :roflol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beltjones Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Good point ..... but then again how many woman GM's do you know in USPSA. Like you said, I don't want that to sound derogatory, but it's true. I can't think of any lady GM's. Can anybody else? And ironically, it would be much simpler to make GM in USPSA because of the classifer system. But I'm sure they weren't really concerned with that when they made this new class. Exactly! There might not be many/any female GM's in USPSA, but at least it's possible. Actually, it's a testament to their gender that there aren't loads of women grandbagging their way to GM. Tons of guys will sit and run a classifier until they get the score they want, but clearly the ladies abstain from that behavior. Maybe they're smarter than us after all... Anyway, back to the point, at least in USPSA it's possible for anyone to make GM. In IDPA it seems like they want DM to be some super exclusive club for only a few people, rather than something attainable - albeit really, really difficult - that shooters can aspire to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankfan79 Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share Posted March 1, 2011 Actually I think it is so that us MORTALS don't have to compete against the like of Dave Sevigny at every match we go to. Master in IDPA is not that hard to achieve where as GM is much harder. I find it challenging to shoot against Dave but not so fun at some point. Let the "pros" shoot against each other. It is kind of compared to me playing basketball against the original Dream Team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strick Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 If that is the reason the new class was set up that logic is flawed. Looking past the fact that it should not be up to IDPA to decide who is or could be competitive (let their performance prove that) the way to reach DM is now flawed. Shooters that can/could shoot at the level of the current DM's may never become one since they may not ever go to one of the only 2 matches where it can be done. Beyond that creating a class to placate a group of MA that feel cheated by having to shoot against the current DM's seems pretty silly. "Hey don't worry about getting better, we will make sure you can stay mediocre and still win a plaque". Oh and about the ease of becoming a MA.....I am still curious how many of the current MA's have earned that class as a bump, by shooting the classifier, or have done both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankfan79 Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share Posted March 1, 2011 I have done both but only in one division...SSP I do agree with you about the number of times you can become a DM. I think it should a class in itself. I, for one, will never shoot SSP MA when I know Dave Sevigny is going to be there. I love the challenge and on my best day, he would beat me by more than 50 seconds. It just take the fun out of the competition. This is just my opinion although I have heard many say the same thing. If you look at the past Nationals of just about any year, the winners or top 3 are all in the gun industry or have some kind of connection to it. Having sponsorship, trigger time, and no budget on ammo sure would help me raise my way to DM. Like I said in the previous thread...would it be fun for me and you to play two on two basketball with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird? At first yea, but over and over? Dont think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shooterready Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 There should also be a way to make DM on the classifier. Set the times to super human levels like our existing Top Dogs shoot now. SSP/ESP in less than 68s or so and your in. I'm sorry, but I don't know many master level shooters in IDPA that can shoot the IDPA classifier in less than 78s. My best was something near 82s back when I used to shoot seriously. Most all the top guys/gals can shoot in the 70s at a drop of a dime, consistently. Just saying...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strick Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Like I said in the previous thread...would it be fun for me and you to play two on two basketball with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird? At first yea, but over and over? Dont think so. That is how you get better. I shot almost weekly with one of the new DM's and have worked hard to be competitive with him. There are times he beats me pretty handily, times where it is pretty close and even a time or 2 I have won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strick Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 There should also be a way to make DM on the classifier. Set the times to super human levels like our existing Top Dogs shoot now. SSP/ESP in less than 68s or so and your in. I'm sorry, but I don't know many master level shooters in IDPA that can shoot the IDPA classifier in less than 78s. My best was something near 82s back when I used to shoot seriously. Most all the top guys/gals can shoot in the 70s at a drop of a dime, consistently. Just saying...... Where is that information from? Again I am only curious to see what their times actual are. The only one I have ever seen is the video of Stoeger shooting a 60 second classifier. Oh and I guess he won't be a DM anytime soon unless he shoots the Nationals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shooterready Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Vogel has shot the classifier in the 50's. Burkett did it in 62s on one of his videos. From memory, so don't quote me on the exact time. The top shooters in the country will shoot the current classifier in 60's all day long. Just ask them, they can prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankfan79 Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share Posted March 1, 2011 Strick, I, personally, don't have the time or facility to dedicate to specialized training. I shoot on the weekends when a match is scheduled. Other than that, it's work and family. Of course I wish it wasn't like that but it is. If I had the time and budget to do such a thing, I would not mind shooting against these people because that would be my fault for not applying myself enough. This is why they have MINOR leagues and MAJOR leagues. Most folks fall in the MINOR league but there are a few people who have the ability and other resources to be in the MAJOR league. Think the Atlanta Braves would let me on their team if I wasn't as good as some of there best? Nope. I think the DM class should be across the board and not just 2 events of IDPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shooterready Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I support the DM classification. But, just don't ask me to qualify every year given I'm a MA now. You won't see me contending for any National Championships any time soon. The top shooters deserve an elite status. They earned it through blood, sweat, and tears from their significant others Plus, I won't have to answer the questions from my non-shooting friends anymore why I got my A$$ handed to me at a major match any longer, PRICELESS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankfan79 Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share Posted March 1, 2011 I support the DM classification. But, just don't ask me to qualify every year given I'm a MA now. You won't see me contending for any National Championships any time soon. The top shooters deserve an elite status. They earned it through blood, sweat, and tears from their significant others Plus, I won't have to answer the questions from my non-shooting friends anymore why I got my A$$ handed to me at a major match any longer, PRICELESS Couldn't have said it better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock3422 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Limiting the potential DM winners to two matches is really short sighted and does not give credit to the clubs and match directors who put on big, quality matches. I would think any sanctioned match with over 250 competitors should be eligible to award DM if the division champion beats at least 10 masters in that division. There would probably need to be some adjustment for the revolver shooters. They would need to win division champion in say three such matches in a five year period to waive the 10 master portion. I guess we will find out what the criteria is when they figure it out and write it down somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strick Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 (edited) Limiting the potential DM winners to two matches is really short sighted and does not give credit to the clubs and match directors who put on big, quality matches. Or the level of shooters at those matches. By limiting it to only those 2 matches is basically saying that winning other matches isn't any big deal and is meaningless. I would think any sanctioned match with over 250 competitors should be eligible to award DM if the division champion beats at least 10 masters in that division. There would probably need to be some adjustment for the revolver shooters. They would need to win division champion in say three such matches in a five year period to waive the 10 master portion. I guess we will find out what the criteria is when they figure it out and write it down somewhere. That is an interesting concept. The only drawback to something like that is there are many matches that limit the number of shooters so 250 would be a tough number. Edited March 1, 2011 by Strick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lugnut Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 The thing is we're only thinking of this from "our" perspective. Why would Vogel or Sevigny, etc show up to win their class when only one person is in it? I guess they are always going for overall.... It will be interesting to see how this all pans out over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.W. Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Like I said in the other thread, I really don't care about " D - Master" as long as when I make Master I don't have to shoot the classifier anymore. I have a five hour round trip to the nearest monthly match, I made expert on my first try this year, next year my goal is Master. After that I only want to make that drive to shoot matches. (Although I've been thinking about SSR lately) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonovanM Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Given that one of the requirements is to place within 3% of one of the DM's, couldn't a DM completely sandbag the Nationals and have everyone else in his division earn the class? LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregg K Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Given that one of the requirements is to place within 3% of one of the DM's, couldn't a DM completely sandbag the Nationals and have everyone else in his division earn the class? LOL That's funny. We will have to have mandatory retirement when a DM gets old and their shooting goes to heck. If not we will have marksmen being forced into DM. Talk about unintended consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock3422 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Limiting the potential DM winners to two matches is really short sighted and does not give credit to the clubs and match directors who put on big, quality matches. Or the level of shooters at those matches. By limiting it to only those 2 matches is basically saying that winning other matches isn't any big deal and is meaningless. I would think any sanctioned match with over 250 competitors should be eligible to award DM if the division champion beats at least 10 masters in that division. There would probably need to be some adjustment for the revolver shooters. They would need to win division champion in say three such matches in a five year period to waive the 10 master portion. I guess we will find out what the criteria is when they figure it out and write it down somewhere. That is an interesting concept. The only drawback to something like that is there are many matches that limit the number of shooters so 250 would be a tough number. It ought to be a tough number. It should, however, be possible more than twice a year. If a Master wins Division Champion at a small match, why should it count? An Expert can't get bumped with less than 10. How likely is it that a match has the minimum number of shooters for a sanctioned match and still has 10 Masters in a division? Maybe total match attendance isn't a valid criteria. It is more valid than the title "Nationals." Eliminate the total attendance and use a criteria of beating xx Masters. Please don't make it about the money. I am proposing an idea that opens the possibility of awarding a DM bump based on the size of a match that indicates a level of popularity that confirms the quality of the match. Pick a number, but it needs to mean something. Matches limit their participant count due to range limitations. If you can't run xxx shooters through a sanctioned match, why should you be qualified to award a DM bump? On the other hand, if you run a match with xxx shooters and more than 10 Masters in the division, why can't they award a DM bump? If IDPA is listening to the membership, they ought to hear this. There are a lot of people who really don't understand or agree with this move. Nationals is Nationals because HQ awarded it to a club and essentially runs it. S&W is a Nationals because they pay for the privilige. $,$$$. The sanction fee is only $50. I think an interesting off shoot of this is that the current DMs have less motivation to shoot an qualifying IDPA match. They can only lose to a Master, for the time being. They can't really win. The top shooters have always competed for High Overall inspite of the fact that IDPA does not recognize it or approve of it. It is their bragging rights. What is the motivation for a three gun Expert to shoot a match they can't get a bump from? What is the motivation for a three gun Master to shoot a match they can't get a bump from? What is the motivation for a DM to shoot a match they have already topped out in? I think I'll be shooting some outlaw 3-gun for the fun of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strick Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 It ought to be a tough number. It should, however, be possible more than twice a year. Maybe total match attendance isn't a valid criteria. It is more valid than the title "Nationals." Eliminate the total attendance and use a criteria of beating xx Masters. Please don't make it about the money. That was basically what I was getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 but then again how many woman GM's do you know in USPSA There are currently exactly zero female Grand Masters in USPSA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 What is the motivation for a DM to shoot a match they have already topped out in? That assumes the motivation of the top shooters would be to move up in class. Which, demonstrably, it isn't. They had already topped out at Master prior to this change, yes? How has that changed now that there is a DM class? It hasn't. The best don't care about classes, they're there for Top Overall. I don't even mean "Best score in my division," I mean Top Overall. As Dave Sevigny put it to me once, "Okay, I know that Top Overall isn't recognized, we all shoot in our various divisions. But the bottom line is there's always one best score at the match - and everyone always knows who had it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beltjones Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 but then again how many woman GM's do you know in USPSA There are currently exactly zero female Grand Masters in USPSA. But the rules for making GM are pretty egalitarian. Essentially we're only competing with ourselves when we shoot the classifiers, and there is the opportunity to reshoot the classifier if it doesn't accurately reflect your ability (see: Grandbagging). However, with the new IDPA DM class, it appears that in order for a woman to become a DM she would have to beat all of the men at a national match. That's a pretty tall order. Eventually Jessie Abbate or Randi Rogers or Julie G could make GM in USPSA, but I honestly don't think any of them could ever make DM in IDPA. If part of the reason for the new DM class is that we "average joes," talented though we may be, don't want to compete head to head with the pros, then what about the women who don't want to compete against the female pros listed above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Merricks Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 The use of the word distinguished aslways reminds me of that line from the movie Top Gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now