Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

USPSA Revolver Participation


jhgtyre

Recommended Posts

+1 for Joe4d comments on page 1, I honestly couldn't stand reading further from the "old timers" who want to keep a 6 round Rev. only class and exclude a 7 or 8 shooter, come on, are you forgetting this is USPSA/IPSC, the more rounds the better. Minor scoring with higher capacity is no different than what has been pointed out by Joe4d. Maybe we should examine the real issue, old timer bias and unwillingness to change. Where is Carmoney and his legal mind to argue this point when the examples of success are already present. Take away the emotional bias and the examples are on point and comparable.

A couple of other points, I don't shoot USPSA Open because of the cost of the guns and ammo. Sure I can put together an OPEN polymer gun for $1000 to $1500, but to be really competitive a 1911 style that runs well over $2000 is just about mandatory. I would also loose all my casings which increases the cost as well. I can afford the best 8 shot revolver for $1000 and get my casings back, so I can compete with the best equipment of a class for a lot less, Why should I be cast out into a group where I wouldn't be competitve, auto class, just for shooting one round over 6.

Finally, the narrow mindedness of those who say to use a 7 or 8 shot in a class against autos is just supporting a failed position that will and would never work, so stop thowing it out there as if its a real option. Revolvers are revolvers and autos are autos. The only time I or anyone has competed in the "auto" classes with a revolver has been for ICORE practice or for the "fun of it" not for true competition.

Minor scoring for higher capacity, Major scoring for less, seems the fairest objective option and one that will increase participation for all. How would this dilute the class when we have 5 shooters at area 6, 22 at nationals, etc.,

I found the strength to go past page one and saw Mike's comments, brief, but the right conclussion. Thanks Mike.

Edited by lora
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 239
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks Bubba for trying to gather some data. I'll try also but mine will be with informal

Wed. night practice sessions where there's more BSing than shooting but we'll see.

<snip> never mind :rolleyes:

Later

I will try and see what I can do at a local level even though it will be myself competing against myself. I will shoot the courses with my 625 and then I will shoot them with my 627. I won't be able to do that until the 3rd weekend in Sept. One thing for sure I will have fun doing it and whats the worst that can happen, I might beat myself. :goof:

Dave any data you can garner is more than we have right now. And the feedback you would get could be interesting, especailly if the competitors can see the distinction in real time. Thanx rdd

Revoman, most of the time when I win at a match is because you beat yourself. :roflol: Your data can be valuable because you would have insight on your performance with each on the same day. thanx Now I need to get off my fat B^## and reload later rdd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will try and see what I can do at a local level even though it will be myself competing against myself. I will shoot the courses with my 625 and then I will shoot them with my 627. I won't be able to do that until the 3rd weekend in Sept. One thing for sure I will have fun doing it and whats the worst that can happen, I might beat myself. :goof:

You couldn't lose to a more deserving person

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for Joe4d comments on page 1, I honestly couldn't stand reading further from the "old timers" who want to keep a 6 round Rev. only class and exclude a 7 or 8 shooter, come on, are you forgetting this is USPSA/IPSC, the more rounds the better. Minor scoring with higher capacityaybe we should examine the real issue, old timer bias and unwillingness to change. Wh is no different than what has been pointed out by Joe4d. Mere is Carmoney and his legal mind to argue this point when the examples of success are already present. Take away the emotional bias and the examples are on point and comparable.

A couple of other points, I don't shoot USPSA Open because of the cost of the guns and ammo. Sure I can put together an OPEN polymer gun for $1000 to $1500, but to be really competitive a 1911 style that runs well over $2000 is just about mandatory. I would also loose all my casings which increases the cost as well. I can afford the best 8 shot revolver for $1000 and get my casings back, so I can compete with the best equipment of a class for a lot less, Why should I be cast out into a group where I wouldn't be competitve, auto class, just for shooting one round over 6.

Finally, the narrow mindedness of those who say to use a 7 or 8 shot in a class against autos is just supporting a failed position that will and would never work, so stop thowing it out there as if its a real option. Revolvers are revolvers and autos are autos. The only time I or anyone has competed in the "auto" classes with a revolver has been for ICORE practice or for the "fun of it" not for true competition.

Minor scoring for higher capacity, Major scoring for less, seems the fairest objective option and one that will increase participation for all. How would this dilute the class when we have 5 shooters at area 6, 22 at nationals, etc.,

I found the strength to go past page one and saw Mike's comments, brief, but the right conclussion. Thanks Mike.

So much for letting go of the ad hominem attacks. Do you really believe the real issue is old timer bias, unwillingness to change and "narrow mindedness"? Is that what you really think of your fellow revolver shooters?

Chill. Allow for a difference in opinion of what is best for the division.

Change isn't going to happen in any hurry so any perceived advantage of your 8 shot is a ways off.

One of the primary rationals of having this division at all was that it was a good place to start in USPSA. Kind of like production was before all the modifications were allowed and you had to spend a grand to compete....ooops

Since I own every gun you could possibly shoot in this division, I don't have a specific dog in this hunt. But, I don't think I am "narrow minded" just because I don't believe the changes proffered would lead to an appreciable increase in participation or improvement in the division

Edited by underlug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted to allow 7 or 8 shot revolvers scored as minor in USPSA competition. I don't buy the argument about my current equipment being made obsolete by a rule change. I know that this is a race and it requires that I obtain the best equipment or shoot for fun. I expect to upgrade my equipment often. I don't believe that assigning a maximum round capacity to a possible rule change is a good idea. We should have revolvers compete against revolvers. Those that make major power factor should be scored major. If it is safe to make major with a 38 short, then score it as major. Lets make some rules designed to allow competitors to win. Don't make rules so that some people won't loose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the tone of my position, but I openly admit the they were written after reading only the 1st page and yes the post enflamed a sesitve nerve. It is like being told that I have to sit in the back of the bus or I can't play with these children because I'm different. The argument, after due consideration and reflective empathy for all, I would think anyone who is fair minded would see the direct comparitors of the other classes and how their inclusiveness should be adopted asap. Any lingering or study seems only to lack decisiveness or empowers the negative non-inclusive position. Sort of like telling our children to wait for a decision that we don't really want to make, thinking they will distracted or forget and go away.

I would like to here more of the theory that including more revolvers in the class differentiated by minor or major, would dilute participation. Based on the numbers of revolver shooters in USPSA matches, except MCC, we can do much better by being more open to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the tone of my position, but I openly admit the they were written after reading only the 1st page and yes the post enflamed a sesitve nerve. It is like being told that I have to sit in the back of the bus or I can't play with these children because I'm different. The argument, after due consideration and reflective empathy for all, I would think anyone who is fair minded would see the direct comparitors of the other classes and how their inclusiveness should be adopted asap. Any lingering or study seems only to lack decisiveness or empowers the negative non-inclusive position. Sort of like telling our children to wait for a decision that we don't really want to make, thinking they will distracted or forget and go away.

I would like to here more of the theory that including more revolvers in the class differentiated by minor or major, would dilute participation. Based on the numbers of revolver shooters in USPSA matches, except MCC, we can do much better by being more open to change.

And I am asking how many more net shooters would we get? How many 627s are just sitting out there with owners not already shooting in revolver division? How many 6 shooters would we lose by people not wanting to compete against the 8 shooter for any real or imagined difference?

What effect would it have on the classification system? Most are not 6 shot friendly and I know which gun I would choose to shoot in a speed shoot that is not 6 shot friendly, major or minor not withstanding.

You can argue that the major power ameliorates the advantage of the 8 shot with the 625s, but, if you are shooting 6 shot minor, which many do (especially entry level), the argument fails. You are just 2 shots short period.

Whether this change would turn the division into an 8 shot division only to be competitive, I don't think anyone knows. I do know that USPSA is not big on obsoleting guns. If they think this will kill the 6, they won't do it. If they adopt the 8, we will never get rid of it.

I think the comparison to single stack is not applicable because an 8 shot array does not require a standing reload from either gun as stated before

Like I said. Nothing is going to happen that fast. I'm open to more information. I have been wrong before.

I've also overstated my case and said improvident things. I'm kind of known for it, I think. Both sides on this issue feel passionately about it. It's just that revolver shooters are the best group of people I know and I hate it when we infer bad intentions/character

(I think inferring a lack of intelligence is fine. I mean, we shoot revolvers in USPSA, don't we?)

Edited by underlug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we have here is a handful of competing hypothesis and a lot of opinions. Some are exclusive of each other and some are not.

1) Opening the game up to 7 and 8 shot revolvers will bring in ICORE shooters.

2) Opening the game up to 7 and 8 shot revolvers will obsolete the existing 6 shot revolvers, even if minor only.

3) Opening the game up to 7 and 8 shot revolvers is just the natural progression of equipment, regardless.

4) etc, etc, etc

The scientific method says the only way to prove or disprove them is to test them. So, what the leaders in the Revolver Division need to do is work with USPSA to come up with a reasonable test. I don't think "we are gonna start allowing them in our Level 1 Club Match" is a reasonable test. Too small a population and no control.

A reasonable test would be something like the following: 1) For the period of X to Y, 7 and 8 shot revolvers will be allowed, under specified conditions (minor only, major if you make it, whatever), in all USPSA matches except the USPSA Revolver Nationals. 2) Get with ICORE and actively recruit their members. I think this can be done in a mutually respectful way without "poaching" as many USPSA Revolver shooters also shoot ICORE when available. 3) Collect data from Level II matches, maybe a mailer or a voluntary website or a survey card passed out by the Match MDs. Maybe something like S&W Revolver Revolution website with some prize at the end. 4) At the end of the period, use that data to prove or disprove the hypothesis and make a rational informed decision. Even if the end result is "allowing 7 and 8 shot Revolvers provides no positive result for USPSA".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we have here is a handful of competing hypothesis and a lot of opinions. Some are exclusive of each other and some are not.

1) Opening the game up to 7 and 8 shot revolvers will bring in ICORE shooters.

2) Opening the game up to 7 and 8 shot revolvers will obsolete the existing 6 shot revolvers, even if minor only.

3) Opening the game up to 7 and 8 shot revolvers is just the natural progression of equipment, regardless.

4) etc, etc, etc

The scientific method says the only way to prove or disprove them is to test them. So, what the leaders in the Revolver Division need to do is work with USPSA to come up with a reasonable test. I don't think "we are gonna start allowing them in our Level 1 Club Match" is a reasonable test. Too small a population and no control.

A reasonable test would be something like the following: 1) For the period of X to Y, 7 and 8 shot revolvers will be allowed, under specified conditions (minor only, major if you make it, whatever), in all USPSA matches except the USPSA Revolver Nationals. 2) Get with ICORE and actively recruit their members. I think this can be done in a mutually respectful way without "poaching" as many USPSA Revolver shooters also shoot ICORE when available. 3) Collect data from Level II matches, maybe a mailer or a voluntary website or a survey card passed out by the Match MDs. Maybe something like S&W Revolver Revolution website with some prize at the end. 4) At the end of the period, use that data to prove or disprove the hypothesis and make a rational informed decision. Even if the end result is "allowing 7 and 8 shot Revolvers provides no positive result for USPSA".

My only problem with premise number one is "how many"/"how many that are not already shooting revolver"

The problem with your test is that during the test people may buy higher capacity revolvers in reliance of their continued use. They will. USPSA will be loath to tell those people they can no longer use their equipment so if the negative is "proven" it will be rendered moot. Also, during your testing period we will probably lose 6 shooters, especially minor, to the valid perception that their equipment is no longer viable.

Your collection process has no control.

I just do not think an adequate test can be designed, but, this is as close as you might ever get. I think we need to be careful what we ask for from USPSA, lest we get it. Revolver division was created by people here who had a definite plan and knew exactly what they wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my concern, I believe we have significant empirical evidence based on ICORE participation itself. There is a significant number of members on this forum who are wanting to shoot ICORE matches with more Rev. competion, but there are no clubs in the vicinity that shoot ICORE, but plenty of USPSA clubs and matches, but with Little Rev. competition. This observation is clear, especially when looking in the south. The Orlando club rountinely has 30-40 shooters each month, 8 shooters being the #1 or #2 in class count and many don't shoot USPSA revolver because they can't shoot the guns to full capability. The shooter count for USPSA revolver in the 4 clubs within 60 miles of the Orlando club is between 2-5 with the majority of them shooting 8 shooters and having to count, not as much fun but if I'm going to use my obsolete 8 shooter its the only other game in town.

So if a single ICORE location is 30-40 participation and multiple same area/vicinity USPSA locations are 2-5 participation, and the primary difference is 8 shot acceptance, I would think that is sufficient empirical evidence to suggest the change, and I unscientifically think this holds true accross the country.

If the participation rate of USPSA revolver current class was anything near ICORE I would be the first to say hold on lets do further investigation. I hate being the only one of 3 Rev. shooters in a USPSA match where fellow Rev. shooters are crossing classes because or the Rev. restictions.

Additionally, by the same argument, hasn't the Double Action 6 shooter made the single action 6 shooter obsolete? Now there is a support for a reload challenge regardless of power factor. At least 6 vs. 7/8 with major minor scoring is a fair fight.

The evidence is here and a scientific experiment will always be challenged as not being "real world" or not balanced. The numbers are here, USPSA can increase its participation in the Rev. class with a simple rule change, no complications. Aren't we all tired of our governments or organizations needing a study to prove what is right in front of our faces?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted no, thought about it many years ago (with and without the major/minor issue) and we discussed it even here then.

Who would want to shoot a 7 shot, when an 8 shot is allowed?

So in IPSC with an 8 shot limit per position you'd be making Revolver Division a required 8 shot minor division, so it would not change the dynamics just the equipment.

I think you would lose as many as you gain.

Me for one, just can't afford/justify tooling up for an 8 shot and would just start shooting my 1911 all of the time.

Might even go the cheap route, one reason I liked Revo no equipment race, and go with my Glock in Production.

And you can't assume the ICORE guys will flock over. I'd shoot ICORE more if it was available with my 625, as ICORE at least tries to keep the 8 shots from being an advantage, but I wouldn't if I had to get another gun for it at this time.

IPSC is such a different game from ICORE, the mindset is even way more different than the mindset of production vs limited in IPSC.

If I was serious about ICORE I'd be reluctant to shoot IPSC on a serious level regardless of equipment.

I've shot IPSC, ICORE, NMSS (Civilian PPC), NRA Action Pistol, Bullseye and even Steel Challenge Matches with a Revolver. And I'd say ICORE is closer to Action Pistol than IPSC. I'd say leave it as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I have read there are a few issues being brought to light. First is reference to the cylinder capacity of the revolvers used, and the other is the ability to use other than iron sights on the revolvers (and still remain in revolver division.

The only idea that I can come up with that would encompass allowing the 7+ capacity revolvers and allow for other than just iron sights would be to have a Open Revolver Division. This would allow Revolver Division to remain as it it now and create another division for the 7+ shot and other sight options to be used (fiber optic, Holo, and red-dot, etc...).

It is the mixing of the curretly allowed revolvers with the other suggested types and modifications that is causing most of the tension in my opinion. I think that more revolver shooters would support another division (Open Revolver) better than modifying the one that exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my concern, I believe we have significant empirical evidence based on ICORE participation itself. There is a significant number of members on this forum who are wanting to shoot ICORE matches with more Rev. competion, but there are no clubs in the vicinity that shoot ICORE, but plenty of USPSA clubs and matches, but with Little Rev. competition. This observation is clear, especially when looking in the south. The Orlando club rountinely has 30-40 shooters each month, 8 shooters being the #1 or #2 in class count and many don't shoot USPSA revolver because they can't shoot the guns to full capability. The shooter count for USPSA revolver in the 4 clubs within 60 miles of the Orlando club is between 2-5 with the majority of them shooting 8 shooters and having to count, not as much fun but if I'm going to use my obsolete 8 shooter its the only other game in town.

So if a single ICORE location is 30-40 participation and multiple same area/vicinity USPSA locations are 2-5 participation, and the primary difference is 8 shot acceptance, I would think that is sufficient empirical evidence to suggest the change, and I unscientifically think this holds true accross the country.

If the participation rate of USPSA revolver current class was anything near ICORE I would be the first to say hold on lets do further investigation. I hate being the only one of 3 Rev. shooters in a USPSA match where fellow Rev. shooters are crossing classes because or the Rev. restictions.

Additionally, by the same argument, hasn't the Double Action 6 shooter made the single action 6 shooter obsolete? Now there is a support for a reload challenge regardless of power factor. At least 6 vs. 7/8 with major minor scoring is a fair fight.

The evidence is here and a scientific experiment will always be challenged as not being "real world" or not balanced. The numbers are here, USPSA can increase its participation in the Rev. class with a simple rule change, no complications. Aren't we all tired of our governments or organizations needing a study to prove what is right in front of our faces?

Have the local club allow 8 shots and see what kind of response you get. That would be the type of empirical evidence from which you could draw something of a conclusion.

The analogy to the single action revolver is irrelevant.

And 6 versus 8 is arguable, but not proven, with the power factor. What do you do with the minor 6's? Declare them obsolete? They were part of the rationale for the division in the first place.

There are "complications" to the proposed change. Especially if you shoot minor 6

Once you allow 8s in, they will never go away.

And I am just repeating my arguments so I am done but will continue reading

Edited by underlug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if a single ICORE location is 30-40 participation and multiple same area/vicinity USPSA locations are 2-5 participation, and the primary difference is 8 shot acceptance, I would think that is sufficient empirical evidence to suggest the change, and I unscientifically think this holds true accross the country.

I'm pretty sure not allowing semi-autos is a bigger difference than allowing 8 shot revolvers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys but already shoot my eight shot 627 in USPSA and IPSC for that matter.

I just shoot it in Production which causes all sorts of confusion for the ROs and match officials.

Better stil, when I have done this, I always been far from last in the standings.

If you want to play USPSA with an eight shot, give a go and you will all sorts of fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Blueridge really came up with the best idea yet -- Open Revolver Div.

Keep it real simple, any revolver setup that doesn't fall within the current Revolver Div. rules is in Open -- 7/8 shot, comps, dot/iron, major/minor and if S&W decides to make a 10 shot X frame, you're all set.

Those who are convinced there are a bunch shooters just waiting for a Revolver Div to run their 8 shooters in USPSA will have a chance to prove it. This way you won't disrupt those who are setup for & happy with the division the way it is and also provides new shooters a less expensive way to shoot USPSA with a wheelgun.

JV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in full favor for an Open Revolver division. I think that it could be added, not hurt the current revolver division and draw new shooters who currently have open revolvers, eight and seven shots that do not shoot USPSA. Even if we added 20 to 25 open revolver shooters at nationals that would currently double the amount of revolver shooters that attend now. I don't see that as a bad thing and I don't think the open revolver shooters will pull from the current shooters who shoot revolver in USPSA.

Those who choose to shoot a six shot as it is now could continue to do so in a limiter division and all others 7, 8, red dots or iron sight would all be in open and would be scored major or minor according to the current power factor in USPSA. This is an interesting concept and yes it is what has been talked about before and I think this would be more acceptable that allowing the 7 and 8 shots to shoot against the 6 shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I am wondering how many of the people who have 7-8 shot revolvers have 6 shooters too. I am guessing most if not all. And of those how many shoot USPSA? My take on this is why dilute such a small division. In reality how many shooters would we pick up other than from California (no offence but ICORE is much more popular there, or so it seems)?

Just my 2 cents, and no I am not an old timer ( just sort of old)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...