How to make IDPA better

[j1b]

Well . . . my question is pretty simple -

It seems that the new IDPA rule book is really ticking some people off. And if you're an IPSC convert (which I am for all practical purposes) the SO's fanaticism about some rules and lack there of on others is maddening.

Personally I think IDPA brings a lot to the table. The guns are all basically the same and less of a pain in the butt to mess with. The stages are back to the basics - which I personally like. Judging by the initial exception rate of such a large portion of shooters - SOME change (from the IPSC format) looks to be pertinent.

So how do we get it right? Limited class, production class and limited ten in the USPSA organization look to be meeting marginal success - with limited class truly seeing the only hint of success (that I have noticed)

I would love to see IDPA get a little more sporty while maintaining its structural integrity. I'd like to see them support the Pros more, and encourage excellence in their sport vs. simply honing skills. Not certain what everyone's thoughts are.

I guess my point is that I find many aspects of IDPA very rewarding. Some aspects I question. And a lot of shooters hate the new rule book (I wasn't familiar enough with the old to know the difference) What are the answers? Is there a sport here? Is there something worth fixing (or starting new)?

Just a discussion -

Thanks!

JB

[mike4045]

I actively shoot both sports. IDPA is the one that I get all the penalties in.  I think that they spend too much time trying to be different and not enough listening to what the shooters want. I think the shooters should be left to shoot a stage as they see fit. They can keep the basics like reloads behind cover and retention. I have seen too many stages that the SO decides what targets gets shot first.  And they penalize you for not shootng it how they would.

I think that IDPA does have it's good parts. I like to shoot what I carry with practical holsters. It was a good idea for a sport that doesn't handicap a ten round gun. I think it also gets a lot of shooters who would not shoot otherwise. Anything that gets more shooters out here is a good thing.

One thing I have seen is that the classification system needs a tune up. I have shot at clubs all over Texas and was suprised at the number of shooters who are in the master  class who are not master level shooters. I am a sharpshooter class bordering expert. I have seen only a few shooters that made me stop and say I still have a way to go. I shoot IPSC with several GM level shooters and I still wonder how they do it. I do know that there are several of these shooters who shoot the classifier several times to get the score they want. With IDPA you can master one course of fire and make it into master class. Just for fun I ahve been running the course with an IPSC Lim gun and gear and easily scoring in the low 90's. I have been trying to make myself shoot my GLock more. Next classifier hopefully I can push into the expert class in SSP and ESP.

Mike4045

I would like to

[j1b]

Mike

I agree with your thoughts on the classification system. I don't know how one gets around that. Perhaps a format similar to the USPSA's system would be appropriate. Hopefully they would structure it such that a shooter couldn't continue shooting a classifier to get the score they want.

I think IDPA's rules of engagment should be up for debate. I think shooters should be able to interpret stages - and solve the problems accordingly. However I also understand why they can't allow that. Something as basic as "slicing the pie" will often times be thrown out the window if a person is looking at the scenario from speed standpoint - when in reality "slicing the pie" would be what one would do in a more real situation. I hate tac loads - but I understand the idea behind them. I don't understand why we HAVE to put one knee down while kneeling. From a speed standpoint it makes almost no sense - and from a cover standpoint having a knee on the ground or not makes little difference.

Are you aware of what changes were made with the new rule book? I hear time and time again (online) about how local clubs are throwing the new rules out. I shoot in NW Arkansas - one club being Berryville. Obviously with Bill Wilson being there - the new rules are being adhered to. I have been shooting IDPA for about a year - dabbling at first - so I don't know what the old rules were.

The biggest component of IDPA that I like is back to the basics. My current holster will probably work for the rest of my IDPA career. My current gun will too. The concealed cover piece is different - but as long as we all have to do it - then it becomes a non-issue.

JB

[John Thompson]

j1b,

I've ranted before on the problems of the IDPA but it's been awhile so I'll sumerize;

1. No bang for the buck.

2. They justify their sport by putting the other shooting sports down.  You want to know why you can't squat instead of kneel?  It's because you can do it in IPSC which makes it wrong.  Most of the stupid rules in the IDPA only exist because they're those tactics are permitted in the USPSA.  Want to get a stupid rule thrown out of the IDPA book? Then just get that rule in question adoped in the USPSA book.  I took offense when I was told that I couldn't wear knee pads with no explaniation given.  I hate the so called tactical reload too.

3."Benevolent Dictatorship" You and I can't be trusted to have say in our sport.

4. Bill Wilson wrote in the Tactical Journal a couple of years ago that if you shoot the IDPA just for "trigger time" then your not welcome.

5.  The hyprocrisy that we've all seen at least some of the time with the rules and gamers with their tactical reload tee shirt pockets.

6.  This and no. 1  are the biggest reasons: I hate being told how to shoot and what's good for me.

I shoot the IDPA because I'm lucky enough to have a couple of clubs in my area that rise above all this and put on some decent matches.  For the most part they don't hassle me about shooting IPSC and let me shoot during the tear down to make sure I get the bang for my buck.

[benos]

I've never shot an IDPA match; but I have listened to The Great One offer his suggestions for improvement

1) Get rid of all the stupid judgement calls regarding foot faults and kneeling by restricting your position with the course design - like IPSC learned to do many years ago. In "trying to be different," IDPA doesn't benefit from simple course influenced shooting positions - fault lines, shooting under props instead of kneeling, etc.

2) Eliminate stupid dictated shooting positions - like having to shoot at close targets one-handed with your elbow touching your side, for example. (The Great One told me he had to do that in a major competition.) How backwards can we go? If they changed both of these issues, they might be able to do away with the famed - Failure to do right rule - one of my favorites, if I want a good laugh that is.

3) The Great One also suggested, and I agree, that it might be better to simply stipulate target engagement order, if the stage designer felt it was appropriate. His reasoning was - you have to shoot the targets in this order because, as the stage designer, I want you to. This is contrary to IPSC, but if you think about it, it's not that bad. This allows the stage designer tremendous flexibility - he doesn't have to use a stage full of reactionary targets to simulate a desired engagement sequence. Imagine, in a scenario, if certain targets in the designer's mind only appeared on the scene in a certain order...why not just shoot them in that order. We used to dictate engagement order in the ol days, I miss that in IPSC - in their quest for total freedomstyle.

I guess that's enough opinions from someone who's never shot a match!

be

[j1b]

JJ

I agree . . . it would be nice to have an organization that supported the right things though. It would be wonderful to see a sport grow like IPSC did for all those years (prior to recession)

BE

I have felt all the frustrations of The Great One. Stupid rules that only limit. By building stages with props that mandate where the shooter shoots from (vs how a shooter shoots it) would make the sport that much better. That would make a quantum difference. I've never done the whole "step on this rock with the right foot, tap left foot on ground, while your right elbow maintains constant contact with your left knee" thing - but I can see it happening.

I am curious - how does The Great One like shooting the sport - in general? I would think he enjoys it immensly - as it really seems to get back to the key components that make a great shooter. I may be wrong - but since I've done it a few more times - I seem to be warming up to it.

All told the shooting is the most important thing. In IDPA I enjoy the stages - and REALLY enjoy being competitive with a single stack .45.

JB

[benos]

JB,

I dig your last paragraph, and I'm guessing The Great One feels the same.

be

[talon]

I shot an IDPA stage not too long ago where you were supposed to be washing dishes and someone broke into your house and you had to turn and engage.  They actually had us immerse our hands in a bucket of water while waiting for the buzzer.  I thought it was great fun my self. Would those who mainly compete in IPSC like or dislike this type of stage ?

[benos]

I've done that (immersing) more than I care to remember (in IPSC). I don't know, as far as a match goes, it seems a little silly/risky. I recently heard of a shooter losing control of his blaster because of the water bucket. I suppose serious "martial artists"  practice "shooting wet" on their own. This is probably where it belongs.

be

[j1b]

I'm W/ Brian!

Done the whole immerse your hands in the (soapy) water bucket. It sucks.

I guess this thread has pretty well slowed down. I think its interesting (IDPA that is). I've done IPSC - and enjoyed every minute of it. I fought IDPA every step of the way - but in AR if you fight IDPA you basically don't shoot. So I tried it - and poof - I like it (like Mikey!!!)

Sure the rules are silly, but so are some of IPSC's. It is an interesting situation though. IDPA had tons of shooters flocking to it. If nothing else it demonstrated a need for change from IPSC (for some shooters) Everyone loved what it had to offer. Now all of the sudden (and at a very early age) people are hating the new rules. Personally I think change is great - just curious to know what others were thinking too.

Thanks all for your thoughts.

JB

[Singlestack]

This water bucket thing sounds like it was dreamed up by a tupperware shooter who does not like Singlestacks in the IDPA game.......

I don't even let rain get on my pistol. I would not have shot the stage. I paid too much money for the front strap checkering to be brushing rust out of it.

[John Thompson]

The IDPA used to claim all their stages were tactical until some really silly ones started showing up at the matches.

I think the reason people are flocking to the IDPA is atleast in part due to the fact it's advertised as a "truely practical" as opposed to the "dangerous habit forming game" of USPSA.  This created a "mindset" in people that if they wanted more out of shooting and wanted a practical purpose, IDPA was a way to go.   Also, a lot of people aren't interested in shooitng for fun and need that practical purpose.  The IPDA said they had it and that USPSA didn't.  The USPSA didn't counter this and allowed the IDPA created mindset to become accepted among shooters who have never even shot USPSA or did and didn't care for it because they didn't know that it too could be practical.  

I do understand some people wanting to engage in sports with a real world application.  I myself am the same way with the exception of softball.  I haven't found a way to do a "tactical swing" yet and I use a "gamey" race bat.

(Edited by John Thompson at 2:28 pm on Nov. 21, 2001)

[talon]

I have only been shooting for one year. I enjoy any and all shooting activities where I can draw from a holster, move around alot and shoot really really fast.

I've read about the IDPA vs. IPSC conflict but I'm too new to the sports to have any real opinions other than I like both.  They meet the requirements stated above.

I have also read alot about the internal IDPA debates. The "gamers" vs. the "martial artists"  for lack of better terms.  I have formed a couple of opinions about this.

One, its a game and I play by the rules.  Two, I would get a little irritated if folks would complain about the way I shoot even though I was following the rules.  For example being penalized for shooting a stage "too fast".

It's all fun to me now, water buckets and all.  Perhaps as I gain experience my tastes will become more refined.

[2alpha]

I think IDPA is attracting more shooters for the following reasons.

1. Less intimidating.  Go to any little USPSA club and you'll see shooters performing at levels that were world class not long ago. This is very intimidating for someone with no experience. Go to an IDPA club and the even the winners are not that impressive to a NEWBIE.

2.Seemingly less expensive to get into than USPSA. I don't agree that this is true but that impression is all too common. You can say all you want about production class but all the new shooter see's is the hoser with the race gun tearing up a stage.

3. There's more non competitive people out there than hard core competitive people so IDPA has more to draw from. In USPSA to be competitive you have to swallow your ego and go for it and be able to live with the consequences. IDPA has lots of built in alibi's, I shot it more tacticaly or whatever.

[mike4045]

I shoot both sports also. When I started I was intimidated by the eqpt, but I shot because I wanted to. I would really agree that the winners at local IDPA matches are not that impressive.

The cost is about the same if you shoot Limited 10 or Prod. I shoot all divisions and enjoy them all. I don't find either sport completely tactically correct.

To be competitive in USPSA I tend to go full speed. In IDPA I slow down and try not to lose because of penalties.  I think a hybrid of the two sports would be the place to be. Both sports have some parts that I don't like. Until someone comes up with a hybrid I will continue to shoot both.

I have never tried shooting my gun after it was in a bucket of water. I'm not sure I would if I had to in match. If it gets wet in the course of a match it doesn't bother me. But to intentionally soak it and try to shoot it seems like a serious safety issue.

Mike4045

[2alpha]

Yes a hybrid would be good, it would be just like.......early 80's IPSC ah the goood ole days eh Brian?

Mike, I don't think you soak your gun in water just your hands. I think a lot of the stupid stuff is thought up by guys who think they can throw the good shooters off track. How dumb?

[Flexmoney]

I like the idea of the hands in a water bucket.  At least at the local club level.  This still is "practical" shooting...even if USPSA has moved to more of a competition base.

In real life you and your gun will be wet, sweaty, bloody, whatever...

As Brian has said in the past, "...just get to the shooting."  Don't let the distractions get to you.

[talon]

mike4045,

I could not help but respond to part of your post and I quote.

"I would really agree that the winners at local IDPA matches are not that impressive. "

I'm willing to bet that " the great one" has competed in a local IDPA match and lots of folks were impressed.

And then again I have won a local IDPA match and I'm not impressive at all.

Of course it's all relative...

[midvalleyshooter]

Hello everyone,

This is my first post on this forum. Very nice website Brian I'm the guy who had you autograph your book at the 1994 Golden Gate Championship, oh well I remember

I am a local club shooter. IPSC from the early 80's, last used a racegun in 94 then did the limited thing. Shot some cowboy action for about 18 monthes, I hated sweating I have been helping run a small IDPA club for the last 3 years. I like IDPA for the simple gear and guns. The scoring is easy, its really just time plus scoring. The matches can be administrated very painlessly. The only thing I would change is tactical reloads on the clock. Slide lock reloads should be used in most cases. Thats what I think happens when the SHTF. If it did occur to me to reload in a REAL encounter I sure hope I would do an IPSC speed reload at warp 9.

Later,

Keith

[j1b]

My feeling is that enough shooters are yelling "Hybrid" sport - that someone will develop just that.

When that happens I know exactly where I will go - and I think a lot of other shooters will too. I believe the Hybrid will only grow the shooting sports - but will hurt both IDPA and USPSA.

JB

[benos]

Keith,

Thanks for coming in!

The only problem I can for see with the slide-lock load is when you factor: ammo loaded in the gun to start, or during a reload during a stage; actual mag capacity; and course design. With all these variables, if you must do lock back-loads only, there will be advantages and disadvantages occurring that have nothing to do with the shooting.

be

[midvalleyshooter]

Brian I can see how limiting the reloads to slidelock would create problems in the round count area. As our little club puts on more matches using the IDPA rules I am finding that having 10, 9 or 8 round mags creates all sorts of issues concerning stage design. Someone always thinks someone else has an advantage

Rules are like that, you can create a rule that seems like it will work. Then with all the variables added it does not work out An example is the IDPA idea that the weapon types compete separately. Sounds great but folks always want to compare overall scores. Our little club trys to put on good stages and hopefully it all evens out over the whole match.

Keith

PS I always cringe inwardly when I have to explain the IDPA reloads to a new shooter, AAAHHHHH not the "TACTICAL RELOAD" again. Said with a big grin

[John Thompson]

The so called "tactical reload" has caused the IDPA more problems and gaming than anything else.  They can't defend it.

When the IDPA first started they said that cops and the military did it.  After hearing for awhile form cops and the military that risking your life to retrieve a magazine with one bullet left in it was stupid the IDPA then started to justify it by saying that the civilian has too because he carries less ammo than LE/military.

Whenever the IDPA has a tactic shown to be old, improper, not valid, whatever, the IDPA just changes their rationalization for that rule/tactic rather than adapting and changing it to something effective.  All this just to be different than the USPSA.

A tactical reload as is taught to most LE/mililtary is that you put a fresh mag in the gun and keep/pick up  partially expended mags AFTER the gun fight appears over or when your not being threatened at the momemt

I will say this: the IDPA rule of reloading behind cover of course makes obvious sense.

[cpty1]

I've gone back and forth on the IDPA tac load issue and have about come full circle on the matter.  I view the tac load requirement as no different than when USPSA specifies a hands above shoulder start or a required reload on a classifier.  It's a stipulation of the course of fire and applies to everyone.  As far as whether it is or isn't tactically correct, I'll leave that to the martial artists to decide.

[Lee Watne]

Check out Ron Avery's tactical reload with a single stack 1911, neat. It seems a worthwhile skill.