USPSA multi-gun stage scoring?

[George]

Howdy again,

IMHO, correspondence with the existing "Pea Shooter" body of rules is not a big factor in many of the avid 3 gun crowds mindset and if you want to serve them, then you must listen to them. The shooters are saying things loud and clear nowadays. Multi-gun stages are in demand. Shooters want a single optic on Limited rifle. There is a growing demand for a bona-fide .308, .45, (pump) 12 gauge shotgun division (read He-Man here). Give them what they want and they will come to the matches in droves.

As much as I think the individual gun results are interesting, can I live without them? Yes! Do we need to allow mixed PF scoring? Yes! It's either that or dump PF differentiation in 3 gun altogether (as in the rest of the 3 gun community). Or else maybe we should just forget multi-gun in USPSA if it's too darned hard to get a few rocks out of the road to the future

BTW, I like the World IPSC wording for divisions much better than ours and think 3 gun should use the terms Standard, Modified, and Open instead of Limited, Tactical & Open to describe the divisions. Those terms are perfectly descriptive whereas Limited & Tactical do not speak of what they are well. I have no concerns about the PC issues here. Tactical & Limited just don't make logical sense to me in describing the divisions (I am sure I will hear it on this one).

I do believe that USPSA is making a great move here, we just need decisive action, not endless discussion. I believe in Mr. Voigts vision of 3 gun and pretty much feel that anything Mikey says is good enough for me in the long run.

--

Regards

Geoffrey Linder

TY-11141

[mactiger]

True, the rulebook doesn't say that if one gun is Open, then you are in Open. However, it doesn't say that the match can't be set up to be that way, either.

I recall the deal in Vegas very well, (I didn't like it, and neither did you) and that's why at last year's match, it was Open or Limited, pick one, and run what you brung. If you picked Open, but had some Limited equipment, you were still in Open. There is no Production or Revolver for rifle or shotgun--how many 3 gun shooters do you know will compete with a Production gun, unless it also fits Limited, like a Glock?

You could go with Limited Pistol, Limited Shotgun, and Open Rifle--aggregate scores in Open, but award a trophy in Limited for the Pistol and Shotgun, and hand-calculate the aggregate, but what's the point?

As Erik says, Nuke and Pave.

I don't think that you'll find too much objection to the way I'm describing, as long as it's spelled out loud and clear prior to anyone sending in their money.

Troy

[Flexmoney]

Ditto. Nuke and pave.

What most are communicating is that we are looking to shoot one 3-gun match. (Some might call that a tournament, but nobody here seems to care what you call it.)

Bruce, it seems you are talking about 3 seperate matches, rolled into one.

That is the difference.

And, there is likley a place for that. I can see having a Shotgun only match...like they did last year in Europe.

But, if you toss that old way of looking at it, you can go with an aggregate only format. Then, if you only shoot shootgun, so be it.

[Gary Stevens]

For the record, I am in favor of redoing the whole 3-gun and going to a shooter picking a single division, matching his/her equipment to that division, and awarding by aggregate scoring per division.

I am probably in the minority right now, and this is a change from the past. However we are going through this mind numbing process of reviewing and crafting a new rule book. Why not go all the way and write something the majority of shooters appear to want, and what I think is a better process?

Your mileage may vary.

[Barrettone]

NUKING AND PAVING......................I like that terminology. In fact, I would make that the formal request at the BoD meeting: "Mr. Voight, it is by virtually unanimous decision from our constituents that we "NUKE AND PAVE" our archiac "3 seperate matches" mantra and begin anew with a system that has proven that it works." I understand that the board doesn't want to deviate ANY MORE than it absolutely, positively must. However, we cannot continue to be held hostage by the World IPSC people when the masses (in our own back yard) are telling us that they want something vastly different, and the market is there waiting to be had. We've been on this tight-wire long enough...and it's getting old. Why don't we just grow a set, and do what serves our membership??? I know that I may hit a nerve here, but this pussy-footing around is ridiculous. I know we can't be an island unto ourselves, but continually trying to keep their verbage when it clearly doesn't apply, and by chewing up time trying to find something that isn't there is crazy. This kind of thing isn't serving our members best interests (IMHO). I'm just trying to read between the lines here Bruce. I know you guys just got back in the good graces of these guys, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out what is going on here.

Jeff

[Flexmoney]

Well...looking at nuking and paving (which sounds great to me), what are the hurdles?

1. Time is short? Am I right in reading that this is holding up the rulebook, and that the US 3-gun Nats is coming closer and closer?

Might need to do something less long lasting if that is the case. No need to rush thru things and not get it right.

2. Conflict with the IPSC book?

Maybe there doesn'tneed to be a conflict. Maybe we write and AGGREGATE book as a supplemental?

[Barrettone]

A supplement is a great idea Flex...I know that they were origionally going to do a 3 Gun Rulebook (two years ago?), but I don't know why that idea went down the tubes origionally, and they ended up with this "3 seperate matches" thing. Any history on that fellas???

Jeff

[Barrettone]

At least a supplement might not step on IPSC's toes as much, as it would be considered a different animal so to speak. I do know that IPSC does have long gun rules, and we would still be circumventing them though.

Jeff

[bgary]

Just for the record... IPSC has never had 3-gun rules until recently, and the ones they have now were modeled after ours.... and the "three separate matches" thing is pretty much the way it has always been in USPSA (check out the red book, and the toilet-paper book, and I think even the blue book was that way)

So... not sure we can pin this one on "being held hostage by IPSC". If we change rules, it will be *our* rules we are changing.

Bruce

[ErikW]

Now, go out to the USPSA website, open up the draft of the "tournament rules"

I can't find it... is it buried in one of the meeting minutes PDFs? Got a URL?

[bgary]

Huh. I can't find them, either. Maybe they got filed when the site re-design happened.

If you are interested, send me your email address and I will email you a copy.

Bruce

[mactiger]

Here's a little history concerning the evolution/creation of the IPSC rifle and shotgun rules. Be warned that this is my perspective, and may not jive with official versions of events...(Hi, Neil and Darth).

IPSC, as has been stated, did not have official long gun rules. USPSA had pistol rules that the rulebook said applied to rifle and shotgun, except where specifically amended. That worked pretty well, I thought, but there was some room for "interpretation". So, we (the respective rules committees) got together last year, mostly by email, but once in person, (at least for me), and hashed out some rifle and shotgun and pistol rules. These turned into 3 separate rule books, which work fine for single gun matches, but, IMO, will be hard to follow in a 2- or 3-gun "tournament". There are some significant differences in the rules for different disciplines; we here in the US are not used to these because of our application of pistol rules, etc. I thought that we'd end up with one book, basically a general rule book with the generic rules that govern all 3 disciplines as the main body, with specific discipline rules inserted where needed. After all, an AD is an AD, no matter what gun you do it with--same for breaking the 180, UGH, procedurals, etc. That didn't happen. I think, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, that the separate rule books were produced because there are some regions that can either only shoot one discipline (shotgun, for example), or that's the major thing they shoot; also I think that the Coordinating Committee thought that 3 separate books was the way to go. That way, if you had a rifle only match, you had a rule book specifically for that.

While I think the rules for all 3 disciplines are good, where I see a problem is in the so-called "tournament" rulebook, which is very short, and (again, IMO) doesn't really do much to consolidate the 3 different disciplines into a cohesive, comprehensible set of rules for a tournament. I'd like to emphasize that as a member of the IPSC rifle committee, I had nothing to do with the tournament rules.

I'd like to make it clear right now that I'm not condemning or criticizing the work of any of the rules committees. I just think that as things evolve, we here in the US are realizing that we need more options.

This tournament book, however, is where the things like multi-gun stages, divisions, etc., could be more clearly and concisely defined. This would seem to be the logical place to write USPSA-specific rules that would fit the membership's desires, especially for those of us who enjoy 3-Gun. If you want to hold a shotgun match, there are rules for that. If you want to hold a rifle match, there are rules for that, and rules for pistol, too. What we need, I think, is to make the tournament rules fit what we want to see in 2-or 3-Gun competitions. Allow the MD to declare what divisions he'll recognize, or define what it means to enter in Limited or Open or Tactical. Allow multi gun stages, and spell out how they should be operated and scored. Anything else that needs to be done to facilitate a fun, challenging 3 Gun tournament needs to go into this book. That way, we stay close to IPSC rules for the most part, because we want to encourage international competition without having to learn a brand new set of rules, yet we manage to keep our multi-gun shooters happy. If "HE-Man" shooters want their own division, then put it into the tournament rules.

One of the biggest complaints I've ever heard at any 3-Gun was the restrictions on Limited rifles--everyone wants to be able to shoot a scope. (Something about "old" eyes.) I remember when there were no restrictions--pistol had Open and Limited, but for long guns, it was anything goes. Some of the purists out there wanted Limited restrictions all across the board, and that was done. Still, even the Limited competitors fuss about long rifle shots without scopes. The second biggest complaint was that we (USPSA) weren't catering to "tactical" shooters like we should--this was stated as a way to increase attendance and interest in 3 Gun, and frankly, I agree. I think we could draw another 50% of the overall match entrants if we did more to attract the tactical shooters. Multi-gun stages might be a step in that direction. I don't think that all the stages in a tournament should be multi-gun; after all we do want to test your shooting ability with a rifle or shotgun or pistol alone. A few mixed in won't hurt, though.

Maybe nuking and paving the tournament rules would be the simplest, most efficient way to solve this problem.

(Sorry for the length of this post--I'm at work, and it's kind of slow. Guess I'll have to go to the "What I Hate" forum and spew about shift work.)

Troy

[George]

Maybe nuking and paving the tournament rules would be the simplest, most efficient way to solve this problem

Just finished reading the tournament rules and I will have to agree. The individual IPSC Rifle, Pistol & Shotgun rulebooks would be workable as is if they had a new front end set of tournament rules and a new scoring system that allowed for multi-gun.

As far as PF differentiation within a stage goes, if there were three distinct paper targets required (ie, IPSC for pistol, Classic for rifle and a "player to be named later" for shotgun), then the scoring hassles in combo stages could be reduced considerably with very little in the way of rule changes. Just specify this for combo stages in the tournament rules. Individual gun stages can be handled normally. No changes in the individual rule books needed.

--

Regards,

[Barrettone]

Bruce,

Sorry for the rant...I just kept hearing "3 seperate matches", and it just seemed a little IPSC'y to me. Troy, thanks for the history,and while I totally agree that the tournament rules need re-vamping, I would say that we also have to get it done for people at the local match level also. We host seven 3-guns a year, and aren't going tournament for all of them (UGHHHH). Whatever we do, it has to work from the ground up. Also, we need EZWINSCORE to be updated to handle these changes. I am nervous as hell about this, since we have an area 3 gun tournament coming up, with no rulebook, scoring program problems, and RO's that we need to bring up to speed...all by early July!!! I know that you guys just want to get it right the first time...but we're really cutting it close here. That is why I feel that just getting rid of (or ignoring?) the "3 seperate matches" and putting together an actual 3 gun manual would be easier, faster, and render the best overall results, because, Bruce, as you point out, every time you change one rule, you need to modify two other rules to accommodate it. Having a seperate rulebook (supplemental section) and scoring program (in WINSCORE) that only takes into account AGGREGATE and then leaving the individual rules alone, would still allow people to have a "shotgun only" match under the old rules, but host a 3-gun aggregate match under the new ones. This way, you get the best of both worlds without having to go through all these changes. In the new rules, you could make provisions for tactical and combo stages. Trying to piecemeal these rules in and make them compatable with existing rules for singular matches is not going to get it done (IMO). Chew on this and let me know what you think...I feel it will save the most time and heartache in the long run.

Jeff

[Flexmoney]

I am on the same page as Jeff (Barrettone).

[mactiger]

I probably should have been a bit more clear: when I say "tournament", I'm actually thinking "3 Gun Match"--which is what Jeff and Flex$ are saying, I think.

It's just a matter of smoothing the way for both local and national level events, and making sure they are all run under the same rules. I'm all for that. Instead of "tournament" rules, it could be called "combination" or "multi-gun" rules.

Troy

[Neil Beverley]

Hi Troy/All

I'm not going to attempt to comment on the main debate here but instead I'm going to add/correct some history about IPSC "long gun" rules.

The first IPSC official rules for Shotgun and Rifle were published in a supplement to the handgun rules and were put forward in 1987 (+/- 1 year) and were implemented in the following year. These were based on IPSC Rule book 8 or possibly 7 and as stated it was a case of use the handgun rule if there wasn't a replacement rule in the supplement.

In the early - mid 90s there was a revamp of the rifle rules which some Regions adopted on a trial basis. The biggest problem was that the SG & R supplement never "grew" with the various updates for handgun and became more and more awkward to work with.

I've been shooting a lot of SG specific matches, and a shotgun league championship, using the IPSC rules since 1988 although I started competing in SG in 86/87. The UKPSA have run a shotgun league every year since then and separately to the HG league (the latter which stopped as a result of our HG ban ).

I became frustrated with the outdated SG rule supplement in 1996 and created the first set (to my knowledge) of IPSC stand alone shotgun rules. In reality they weren't an official set of international IPSC rules but we did get the go ahead to formerly trial them in the UK. These were a complete shotgun specific adaptation of Rule Book 13.

The UK started to use these rules as from Jan 1998 and to my knowledge we were the only Region to trial them.

I joined the IPSC Rifle and Shotgun rules Committee in September 2000 and the committee presented revised separate rule books in 2001 which were formerly made available for all Regions to trial for 1 year starting Jan 2002. These were based on the substantially revamped RB14 which Vince was very much involved in.

These rules were a huge improvement for both SG & R but nevertheless we still made a number of changes for launch Jan 2003. Some of the changes were created by the committee, some we borrowed from Vince and Co in their update to RB14 and some were inspired by the attempted RB15 which was put forward by Mike Voigt and John Amidon. In reality the SG changes got voted through so as to be in place for the European Shotgun Championships last year but the rifle rules were withdrawn pending the all new (in Vince's words) "Mother of All Rules Committees".

By 2003 there were some significant differences between the long gun rules and the handgun rules even on areas where we should have been able to agree commonality. Bringing the disciplines back together, and with the US, formed a substantial part of the work done during 2003.

After that Troy has done a fine job here and elsewhere outlining the tremendous work of the IPSC Rules Committees. Guys, like them or not, the new IPSC rules are the result of HUGE amounts of work, more than you can probably imagine, from all on those committees and every point, won or lost, was discussed with passion and zeal. There wasn't a single person who was there for any other reason than a complete and utter dedication to this sport.

Whether this helps or not (probably not) it does at least establish the ancestry of the IPSC long gun rules. The current USPSA SG & R supplements in the red book are very similar to the 1988 IPSC rules (I don't know which came first). I have a copy of the red book (I'm a USPSA member) and I still have a handful of copies of the 1988 IPSC rules. I read every US SG & R rule in the red book more than once during the rule writing process. I would have been a fool not to.

Here endeth the history lesson, thankfully for most of you no doubt.

[mactiger]

Thanks, Neil. My IPSC history isn't that great, and I appreciate the update. Since I'm "USPSA-centric", I just assumed that there were no IPSC long gun rules, at least prior to a few years ago.

Good history lesson, and there you have it, folks. I'm quite sure the rules will continue to evolve--continued input as to what works and what doesn't helps a lot.

Troy

[hopalong]

Ok guys, here is what we are doing at the Mississippi State match to address this issue.

1 we are not having multi-gun stages due to the scoring problem

2 we are having 3 divisions, 1 open 2 limited 3 tactical

1 open run what you brung

2 limited thats just it, everything fits into limited division

3 tactical limited division equipment except your limited legal rifle may have 1 optic on it.

3 I listed the match on 3 websites 5 months ahead of time for the people who are interested can decide on what they want to shoot.

4 we are paying back the aggrigate results only!!!

back to 1

1 if you declare major PF on pistol it will be scored as so, if you declare minor it will be scored as so, there for if you bring a Glock 17 and shoot using the 18 round mags it will be limited but minor PF

2 same in rifle you declare PF we will score as so ( unless you don't make PF)

SAM KEEN By the way I'm from South Texas, and down there as also in TN we belive in the K.I.S.S. method. FORGET the old rules MAKE NEW ones.

[ErikW]

Having perused the proposed tournament rules and attempted to modify them for multi-gunning, I now understand Bruce's frustrations. The tournament framework hamstrings us... we really need a whole new paradigm. I sent my comments to Bruce, but ideally we need to work outside that tournament framework.

[mactiger]

we really need a whole new paradigm. I sent my comments to Bruce, but ideally we need to work outside that tournament framework

Is that the same as "Nuke and Pave"?

Troy

[Neil Beverley]

This may technically be the wrong place to post this but if I move it to (say) USPSA/IPSC rules it'll be lost over there without links and long explanations.

Just out of interest I've scanned the first page (of 6) of the IPSC's shotgun rules fom 1988 and I've pasted them below. You'll note just how similar they are to a number of the current USPSA long gun rules.

If anyone is interested in looking through the complete 1988 rules for SG or R please send ne an email or PM and I'll scan them in and forward them as an attachment.

I.P.S.C. SHOTGUN RULES I. EQUIPMENT. 1988

1.1 Firearms used in the competition regardless of action type will be subject to

the same conditions of time, distance and scoring. This includes single shot, slide action, semi-auto, selective action, double barrel or actions in any configuration.

NOTE: Actions capable only of full auto use are specifically banned from use.

1.2 There shall be no minimum calibre of bore, minimum barrel length shall be subject to the Regions/local regulations.

1.3 SHOTGUN TYPES. - There shall be no restriction on the type of firearm as long as it complies to 1.1 & 1.2

1.4 There shall be no restriction on weight of trigger pull, provided it is deemed safe for the firearm type.

1.5 Detachable, hinged, folding or telescopic shoulder stocks shall be permitted provided they are deemed safe and do not, when detached, etc, reduce the legal length requirements of the particular Region/local regulations.

1.6 There shall be no restriction on type of sights or aiming devices. Detachable, quick removable or folding sight mounts are specifically allowed, provided the method used to secure them is deemed safe.

1.7 All firearms/equipment used in competition shall be serviceable and safe. If any firearm/equipment is observed or deemed unserviceable or unsafe it shall be withdrawn at the request of the RANGE OFFICER with the MATCH DIRECTOR having the right to demand at any time, examination of all firearms and equipment on the range.

1.8 The following devices must be serviceable at all times:-

a. Safety catch/selector

b. Engagement sears

c. Disconnector (semi-auto actions)

1.9 In a single competition, a competitor may use a different model, type and/or calibre firearm in each match, provided that the firearm used and the equipment worn remain in the same position for the duration of that match and the designated power factor nominated before commencement of the match is still meet.

1.10 Trigger shoes or extensions shall not protrude beyond the width of the trigger guard. However, firearms fitted with "winter triggers/guards" may be used in this mode, provided that this fitting was designed and manufactured as part of the firearm and only when the particular climate or weather conditions dictate.

1.11 Slings may be fitted to or be removed from any firearm at any time provided it is done safely as defined in Rule 1.13.

1.12 SPARE AMMUNITION & WORN EQUIPMENT. Spare ammunition and/ or loaded reloading devices must be carried or worn on the person or equipment in safely designed pouches, pockets or loops. In no case shall a competitor start with spare ammo or loading devices in the hand or touching

[TonyH]

Okay, let me ask a question in regards to shotgun rules. Why was there a limit put on the amount of rounds (10+1) a open shotgun to hold? We don't have limits on rifle or pistol, so why just SG. Open should have no restrictions as to how many or what you can do to it. This has never made since to me from the time it was first talked about & adopted. This rule should be revisited also.

As for multi-gun stages. I'm not by any means very knowledgeable about how the scoring system works within the computer program, but why not just score them straight up. If your declare open score with open group, tactical with tactical, limited with limited. There are only 3 stages at this years match & 12 others that will be scored individually. I don't see a way of scoring the multi stages by each weapons pf individually,if that's what we're after. Are we not keeping each group seperate when the scoring is done? Now am I on the same page with you all or have I just confused myself.

[Neil Beverley]

Tony

IPSC & USPSA differ on the divisions issue and have done for some time. It is likely to continue for a while yet.

However just for info purposes for IPSC (capacity):

Open: No restrictions on capacity. Detachable mags OK, speedloaders OK, we even saw a Benelli in Italy with 3 revolving tubes for around a total of 27 rounds.

Modified: Only a single fixed mag tube is permitted. No detachable mags, no speedloaders. The gun in it ready state must fit squarely in a box which is 1320mm long (51.96 inches) - this may have an impact on mag length and therefore the max capacity.

Standard: Only a single fixed mag tube is permitted. No detachable mags, no speedloaders. Max number of rounds loaded at the start is 9. The gun must not be able to be loaded with 10 x 2 3/4 inch cartridges (if it could hold 10 x 2 1/2 inch cartridges AFTER the start sigmal then OK but not 10 x 2 3/4 inch)

Contrary to what's often discussed it does not appear that there is any such beast as Limited Division for shotgun in the USPSA rule book. Only Open, Standard and Production.

[Jim Norman]

People think of it as a three-gun match, not three one-gun matches. You compete for a trophy based on the aggregate and you go to the prize table based on the aggregate. Make three aggregate divisions: Open (run what ya brung *3), Limited (Limited handgun, Standard rifle, Standard shotgun), and Tactical (Limited handgun, Standard rifle with not more than one optic, Standard shotgun). Nevermind recognizing the individual gun divisions.

The people are leading. It's time for the leaders to follow.

This solution would seem to make the most sense.

Open is just that. You can shoot just about anything. There may be some practical limitations, but essentially you bring it, you can shoot it.

Limited: Iron sighted Rifle, 1" comp, no bi-pod, no optic, Pistol, USPSA Limited or Limited 10 Legal, Shotgun USPSA Limited legal.

"Tactical/Practical": Limited legal Pistol and Shotgun, Limited legal rifle with the addition of one and only one optic. No Bi-pod.

Score either or both ways:

Three seperate matches or an aggragate. Multi-gun stages still three seprate matches, but you have alread asigned three divisions. If you are declared Tactical/Practical, that is your PISTOL Divison and so on.

Only thing I'd like to see is a DQ is a Tournement DQ, not a match DQ. If you screw up on day one shooting pistol, you are out, as an example.

As to scoring Major Minor, that is a bit more problematic, most all shooters use a minor rifle, but a major pistol and shotgun. You can address this by assigning targets to the firearm. It would take a bit of adjustment to the scoring program, you need an additinal target line, major targets and minor targets. Frangibles for shotgun can be scored as steel.

Jim Norman