The_Vigilante Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 I would agree with davehorn. Back when the rule was written the plethora of hiking/trail shoes now available on the market didn't exist and the rule was directed at football, golf, baseball shoes. Would probably be a good idea to rewrite the rule in light of this fact. Just wonderin' if in any major competition this question has even really come up or if it is even checked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lugnut Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 This could take the cake for most ridiculous thread in my short time here. In all fairness- I think it is a very valid topic. Once again we have a rule where many folks have serious disagreements and the interpretation of the rules is often in the hands of the MD/SO in any given match. I surely wouldn't want pay a good chunk of cash and travel to a match to find out I earned an FTDR or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor_R Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 (edited) I run Adidas Star Raven trail running shoes. Used them in 2 major IDPA matchs with out a problem. Edited September 4, 2011 by Victor R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davehorn Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 (edited) This could take the cake for most ridiculous thread in my short time here. In all fairness- I think it is a very valid topic. Once again we have a rule where many folks have serious disagreements and the interpretation of the rules is often in the hands of the MD/SO in any given match. I surely wouldn't want pay a good chunk of cash and travel to a match to find out I earned an FTDR or something like that. While the topic may be valid, I don't think it applies to the gear in question unless you are making an extreme interpretation of the rules using the manufacturers marketing copy as your definition. We all know what cleats are, those ain't it. Edited September 4, 2011 by davehorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ty Hamby Posted September 4, 2011 Author Share Posted September 4, 2011 Op here: To add my wife came home with a pair of Duranamo 3's today. She did not buy the ones in the photo based on my iterpretation of the rule. She was kinda bummed. Last months match she went sliding across the crushed rock in the bay and decided she needed something better than court shoes. Wounds have healed and she will give these mild tread patterns a go. Thanks for the input. We shall see in months/years to come if we will get a better definition or removal of this rule. It is a game and for safety reasons if nothing less the rules on this should be revisited/revised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chills1994 Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 Lugs are okay? Cleats are not okay, right? Just re-write the shoe's marketing copy, change the word "cleat" to "lug". Not all ranges are going to be within a 3G or 4G reception area, so you won't be able to get on your smart phone to look up the manufacturer's website to read their marketing propaganda. Is anyone at the top of these matches really winning because of their shoes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Model19 Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 My link So how about these then? Been around for decades. Just trying to show, as I think all of us agree, that this is a really tough call. Remember the "turf shoes" of the 80's from Pony, for example? Sold by the millions to people that never got close to a football field. That's pretty much all the shoes in the original post are, a new take on that theme. I sell trail runners, and again, most of the customer base does not use them for what they are intended. They are a much more rugged and durable alternative to "sneakers", or road running shoes that non-runners where everyday but crap out in 6 months steady use. Price is similar too. Retailers worldwide sell them by the millions. Somebody got it right when they said that when the rules were written, the old hard rubber sole with molded in round protrusions (looking like upside down sand buckets on the beach) were the state of the art. Track spikes are obviously illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirveyr Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 Most IDPA equipment rules are about implied advantage. If an SO/MD does not view IDPA as a sport, which it is, they most likely not allow them. However, their Uber-Tac Assult boots that they are wearing will be considered to be totally legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrawandDuck Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 Maybe your rule book should just show PICTURES.....I used zappos.com for reference, just clicked on "cleats".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 I just typed adidas "traxion cleats" (with quotation marks around traxion and cleats to link the two words) and got 6,570 hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 I don't think it applies to the gear in question unless you are making an extreme interpretation of the rules using the manufacturers marketing copy as your definition. So if the manufacturer, the maker of the shoes, and one of, if not the, largest makers of athletic shoes in the world, says they're cleats, they're....not cleats? Ah well, what do they know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 How about logging boots? there not made for a sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 So is the argument here that these protrusions off the bottom of the shoes, designed to allow extra traction on and grip into the ground, are not cleats because they don't look like the cleats on our shoes of 20 years ago? "We know what cleats look like and this isn't it." Wow, I guess that beavertail on my 1911, that part the forms the upper portion of the backstrap and must be depressed to allow the gun to fire, isn't actually a grip safety because it doesn't look like the same part they had back in 1911, huh? Bottom line, they're cleats. They do the job of cleats, the company calls them cleats. They're more modern cleats. The fact that they don't look exactly like the cleats of decades past is really immaterial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 How about logging boots? What about them? there not made for a sport. Not sure I'm really seeing your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lugnut Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 I don't think it applies to the gear in question unless you are making an extreme interpretation of the rules using the manufacturers marketing copy as your definition. So if the manufacturer, the maker of the shoes, and one of, if not the, largest makers of athletic shoes in the world, says they're cleats, they're....not cleats? Ah well, what do they know. Clearly they didn't MARKET their product to the IDPA sport... if they did, they would have called them something else other than cleats. Seriously though- by the pure definition of "cleats": -a conical or rectangular projection, usually of hard rubber,or a metal strip with sharp projections, built into or attachedto the sole of a shoe to provide greater traction. This would include many trail shoes we all use today.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 Yes, it would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 How about logging boots? What about them? there not made for a sport. Not sure I'm really seeing your point. The rule book says (for a specific sport)thats all, you can use cleats just not for a specific sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lugnut Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 Yes, it would. Then my only options would be- tennis shoes, dress shoes or skate board shoes. Most of my running and trail shoes have these "cleats". This is painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 Yes, it would. So hiking boots, oakley boots ( or similar tactical boots), cross traiers or running shoes are now illegal because they have a Protrusion on the bottom that by definition is a cleat are all now illegal? So now we all have to shoot in bowling shoes. I get it IDPA is suppose to be daily wear gear guess what the majority of top shooters DO NOT shoot in their daily wear cloths, guns, or shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davehorn Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 This is painful. Agreed! I'll go back to this. A "cleat" as referred to in the IDPA rule book(while not specifically stated, this is the "spirit" of the rule), is a single purpose shoe not designed or intended for use beyond it's given sport or given footing surface. A cleat is not a shoe one would or could wear casually without looking like an idiot. The shoes in question, regardless of mfgs definition, are suitable (and quite popular) for everyday wear in a variety of circumstances on a variety of surfaces. And frequently(in other games) that beaver tail grip safety is not a functioning "safety" but merely a means to obtain a higher grip without getting hammer bite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 And frequently(in other games) that beaver tail grip safety is not a functioning "safety" but merely a means to obtain a higher grip without getting hammer bite. But not in IDPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davehorn Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 And frequently(in other games) that beaver tail grip safety is not a functioning "safety" but merely a means to obtain a higher grip without getting hammer bite. But not in IDPA. touche That's the best I could come up with on one cup of coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 So hiking boots, oakley boots ( or similar tactical boots), cross traiers or running shoes are now illegal because they have a Protrusion on the bottom that by definition is a cleat are all now illegal? There's a difference between tread and cleating. As I see it, "tread" is when you take a smooth surface and cut into it narrow channels. Like what we see on tactical boots, hiking boots, running shoes, etc. "Cleating" is when you take a smooth surface and add onto it multiple, fairly widely spaced protrusions. Not only do the two concepts look different, they do different jobs. For one thing, when a shoe has tread it's still basically flat (granted the curavture of the sole, natch) and is appropriate for one hell of lot more different surfaces than cleating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 I get it IDPA is suppose to be daily wear gear guess what the majority of top shooters DO NOT shoot in their daily wear cloths, guns, or shoes. So? And this has what to do with the topic under discussion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 4, 2011 Share Posted September 4, 2011 So hiking boots, oakley boots ( or similar tactical boots), cross traiers or running shoes are now illegal because they have a Protrusion on the bottom that by definition is a cleat are all now illegal? There's a difference between tread and cleating. As I see it, "tread" is when you take a smooth surface and cut into it narrow channels. Like what we see on tactical boots, hiking boots, running shoes, etc. "Cleating" is when you take a smooth surface and add onto it multiple, fairly widely spaced protrusions. Not only do the two concepts look different, they do different jobs. For one thing, when a shoe has tread it's still basically flat (granted the curavture of the sole, natch) and is appropriate for one hell of lot more different surfaces than cleating. As stated by several different people already those shoes are comfortable worn all day on many different surfaces all day. I know when I played football the first thing I did was take off my cleats as they where uncomfortable for all day wear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts