IDPA Tiger Teams

[GlockCanMan]

The proof will be in the pudding.

But what type of pudding? And will it be sugar free?

[Paul-the new guy]

I hope they divide IDPA differently:

Old farts decide 1911 rules.

Young punks decide ESP rules.

Antique collectors decide revolver rules.

Cops decide SSP rules.

I was trying to find a way to say exactly that! That is a great idea. Put me down for esp :-)

[Bogey]

I hope they divide IDPA differently:

Old farts decide 1911 rules.

Young punks decide ESP rules.

Antique collectors decide revolver rules.

Cops decide SSP rules.

So can I have input in all divisions? Well, except the Cop one?

[GMB]

The tiger teams need to serioulsy look at allowing the .40 if loaded to major PF into CDP

[Bob Hostetter]

They should seriously look at allowing anything in CDP that makes power factor including 357 Sig, 9mm, 38 Super, etc.

[sanman]

They should seriously look at allowing anything in CDP that makes power factor including 357 Sig, 9mm, 38 Super, etc.

Factory or handload major?

[PEC-Memphis]

By now, I suppose everyone has seen the email regarding "Tiger Teams".

I'm surprised that there was not a thread here already.

Some of the shooters in the local area made some suggestions. Here are some of them in no particular order:

1. Eliminate magazine capacity rule, ex. load a G17 to 17+1 at the beginning of the CoF.

2. Eliminate the bullet diameter rule, ie. all holes count.

3. Sanctioned match bump counts as a classifier.

4. Add fault lines

5. Eliminate round dumping

6. Allow .40 & 10mm in CDP

7. Allow speedloads

8. Change allowable threat to non-threat ratio

9. Increase non-threat penalty, ie. 5s -> 10s

10. Greater emphasis on accuracy over speed, ie. 1 point = 1s, rather than 0.5s

11. Non-threat hits cumulative.

12. Rulebook updated more often, and/or centralized and indexed official interpretation repository.

Any thoughts on these or others? Discuss.

Edited October 31, 2011 by PEC-Memphis

[Steve Koski]

Here are a few pages of discussion:

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=138327

and

http://idpaforum.yuku.com/topic/8022/IDPA-HQ-Tiger-Teams

[Loves2Shoot]

10. Greater emphasis on accuracy over speed, ie. 1 point = 1s, rather than 0.5s

Any thoughts on these or others? Discuss.

Should be the other way, .5 to .3. This is defensive shooting (by name) and a 1 second -1 will make already slow shooters (in general) slower.

[GlockCanMan]

They should seriously look at allowing anything in CDP that makes power factor including 357 Sig, 9mm, 38 Super, etc.

This is where we start to have major problems...no pun intended. Where do you draw the line and stop...if you want to add these other calibers...as long as they make major power factor...others are going to want to say well if you can do that then I can have an extra couple of ounces on the weight of the gun.

Where do we stop?

[PEC-Memphis]

Boom. Winning.

(I do think the rulebook needs a total re-write, and I'm not sure how they will accomplish their goal of making it more straightforward without that)

I agree. I've even offered to the re-write. Among other things, my job entails writing technical document and specifications. I've worked on international technical specifications (IEEE).

[PEC-Memphis]

Here are a few pages of discussion:

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=138327

and

http://idpaforum.yuku.com/topic/8022/IDPA-HQ-Tiger-Teams

Thanks for the links. I read both from "front to back"

Best quote, " I remember one of the MA shooters saying he felt like he was being timed with a sun dial."

[ima45dv8]

"Tiger Team" topics merged.

[Bob Hostetter]

<< Where do we stop >>

Not sure I understand the question. CDP is based on the idea of shooting a major factor load (165 or above). We already have weight limits, magazine capacity limitations, approved and prohibited modifications. The various factories sell 9mm, 357 Sig, 40 cal, and 10mm ammo that makes major. It would allow or at least promote the use of different platforms which should be a good thing. A lot of people are reloading these cartridges to major power factors safely and costs would be lower. So I ask, "where is the bad"?

[Chills1994]

as I understand it, at one point in the old, old IDPA rules regarding CDP, 10mm was allowed in that division at the 165/170 power factor floor cutoff.

then March 2005 came along with a new rulebook which split revolvers into two divisions, and IIRC, moved 10mm out of CDP, making CDP a strictly .45 ACP division.

[Chills1994]

PEC-Memphis wrote: my responses in blue

1. Eliminate magazine capacity rule, ex. load a G17 to 17+1 at the beginning of the CoF. that's called LImited Minor. what happens to guys in the 10 rounds only mag states? what about the max round count for and IDPA stage/string? does it go past 18 then?

2. Eliminate the bullet diameter rule, ie. all holes count. I think this rule came about because of drop turner targets where you could have a bullet kinda skitter past or through the carboard. It is so rare an event that I reckon the rule will still stand.

3. Sanctioned match bump counts as a classifier. I can agree with that.

4. Add fault lines will probably be seen as too much like that other game, ya, know "Ip-sick"....besides that, in real life, there are no fault lines.

5. Eliminate round dumping make every stage Limited Vickers (aka Virginia Count)??? otherwise how do you propose a fix for that?

6. Allow .40 & 10mm in CDP I don't have a problem with that as long as CDP stays as an 8+1 capacity.

7. Allow speedloads again, will most likely be seen as too much like "Ip-sick"

8. Change allowable threat to non-threat ratio how about just some common sense "realism" or "practicality" to this sport... I'm not a member of the FBI HRT and would never think of doing a dynamic entry somewhere there is one hostage for each bad guy

9. Increase non-threat penalty, ie. 5s -> 10s I think 5 seconds is fine as it is....if it ain't broke, don't fix it???

10. Greater emphasis on accuracy over speed, ie. 1 point = 1s, rather than 0.5s yeah, like Scott Springer said up above, you'll make slow shooters even slower...besides that, all the classifier times, I think, would have to be readjusted....not like that is NOT going to happen anyway

11. Non-threat hits cumulative. you killed that good guy twice, three, four or more times???

12. Rulebook updated more often, and/or centralized and indexed official interpretation repository. adobe acrobat reader has a keyword search function. when something gets changed in the rulebook, Joyce or whoever else can just send out another bulk or mass email citing the rule change and a link to the now current .pdf version of the rulebook.

sorry, man, I hope I don't/didn't come off sounding too cranky.

Edited November 1, 2011 by Chills1994

[Steve Koski]

Wouldn't it be sweet if SSP and ESP went to 145 PF, like 9mm was intended? (I'm not holding my breath.)

115 x 1300 = 149,500

124 x 1200 = 148,800

Now that is full charge service ammunition. Not even +p either.

[SauconValley Shooter]

Good Morning,

I would like to see a change to the difference one can have in classes between the divisions. I feel that there should be one class difference allowed. Seeing someone classified as Master in one division and then shooting Sharpshooter, or worse, in another is just wrong. Whatever your highest classification, your classification in the other divisions will be automatically adjusted.

[rob_s]

I'll first say that I shoot both USPSA and IDPA, but have been shooting IDPA much longer. Much of what you write below seems to simply be turning IDPA into USPSA, which I don't think is very productive. Games have rules, and those that don't like the rules of a game don't have to play them. I think golf should be timed, and I'd like to see a version that is full-contact. Since neither of those things are likely to happen, I don't play.

By now, I suppose everyone has seen the email regarding "Tiger Teams".

I'm surprised that there was not a thread here already.

Some of the shooters in the local area made some suggestions. Here are some of them in no particular order:

1. Eliminate magazine capacity rule, ex. load a G17 to 17+1 at the beginning of the CoF. As mentioned, this is problematic due to the max rounds per stage rules.

2. Eliminate the bullet diameter rule, ie. all holes count.

3. Sanctioned match bump counts as a classifier.

4. Add fault lines I generally see this as OK, but there are limits to how well it would work. As mentioned elsewhere as an SO you already imagine a fault line. But part of using cover per IDPA rules isn't just about where your feet are but also the order in which you engage the targets and how much of your body you stick out to engage each one in sequence. The addition of a painted fault line only addresses a small part of the issue.

5. Eliminate round dumping I see this come up a lot. I'd like to see more discussion about it. I assume you mean "eliminate the round dumping rule". What is the complaint here?

6. Allow .40 & 10mm in CDP

7. Allow speedloads as mentioned, this is an example of changing the basic tenets of the game, and I don't think it should happen, nor is it likely to happen.

8. Change allowable threat to non-threat ratio I agree with this. If the scenarios are "realistic" how inconceivable is it that non-threats could even outnumber threats? "You're working the counter at the convenience store when a robber enters" is entirely likely and is also highly possible to have more non-threats than threats.

9. Increase non-threat penalty, ie. 5s -> 10s At my carbine matches we have a 30 second NT and FTN penalty. It drastically changes the nature of the game and I don't think we're likely to see it in IDPA. I'd frankly prefer that NT and FTN were DQ for the stage but that really gets people up in arms.

10. Greater emphasis on accuracy over speed, ie. 1 point = 1s, rather than 0.5s like #9 I wouldn't object but again don't think it's likely to happen.

11. Non-threat hits cumulative. IMO you hit 'em you hit 'em. How many times you hit 'em is irrelevent. I could see scoring it though with a peripheral hit being seen as "not so bad". It's only a flesh wound!

12. Rulebook updated more often, and/or centralized and indexed official interpretation repository. bigtime agree.

Any thoughts on these or others? Discuss.

People have to keep in mind that IDPA is a revenue stream for the Wilson clan. Making changes means people to make them and unless they can con volunteers into doing the work it means money out of pocket to get it done. This Tiger Team business seems to be an attempt at exactly that so it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

[PEC-Memphis]

sorry, man, I hope I don't/didn't come off sounding too cranky.

These were not MY suggestions, they were some suggestions from shooters in my area, so no offense taken.

I agree with most of your comments.

Rulebook: I think the rulebook needs a rewrite. The organization is, ...mmmm... not so good. And while acrobat reader has a search feature, that doesn't do much good for the hard copy at the range (not everybody has an iPad). And some rules need to be re-written to better convey intent.

CDP: I don't see a problem in allowing other calibers in CDP if they make =>165k pf.

Non-threat Ratios: As far as NT ratios, adding realism would mean that there would only be one to three threat targets for 90% of the CoFs, with NTs being 0 to 100 for 90% of the CoFs. I guess concessions have to be made to make it a sport (game).

Round Dumping: Some have suggested to design the CoF to force more RWR/TRs to reduce round dumping. RWR/TRs are supposed to be "lull-in-the-action" reloads, there is never a "lull-in-the-action" when the timer is running. Besides, it is difficult enough to be creative enough to design a good, interesting, and enjoyable CoF without having to make most reloads RWR/TRs.

Fault Lines: I don't disagree with fault lines if they are implemented for purpose of safety.

[GForceLizard]

Dreaming of changes to the IDPA Rule book.

Eliminate the penality for round dumping. Remove any references to round dumping from the rule book.

It happens a lot. Is not enforced the same from club to club. Screws new people that don't know they can get away with it.

[DWFAN]

Eliminate Round dumping rule

Allow 40/10mm into CDP at 165,000 pf

Clarify some equipment rules

Get rid of the dustcover rules. If it makes weight, and fits the box.. It's legal.

Somehow fix the cover rule. Its not consistently enforced, they might as well allow fault lines to make it less subjective. The majority of SO's are fair, but the one's that arent, spoil a lot of the fun.

[Loves2Shoot]

Put the M&P in ESP with the XD/XDM where it belongs according to their own, um, "logic." Glock isn't double action, so, it goes to ESP also, since the whole "pull the trigger cocks the gun" is pure fantasy.

Yea, those won't happen either.

[KPIC24]

Eliminate Round dumping rule

Allow 40/10mm into CDP at 165,000 pf

Clarify some equipment rules

Get rid of the dustcover rules. If it makes weight, and fits the box.. It's legal.

Somehow fix the cover rule. Its not consistently enforced, they might as well allow fault lines to make it less subjective. The majority of SO's are fair, but the one's that arent, spoil a lot of the fun.

Could not have said it better myself especially the dust cover rules, their are those that still think that a Shadow that makes SSP weight still can't be shot in ESP. If it makes weight and it fits the box shoot it. Put Xd's, M&P's and glock's in the same division.

[Dragoon]

PEC-Memphis wrote: my responses in blue

11. Non-threat hits cumulative. you killed that good guy twice, three, four or more times???

color]

Here's an idea: make non-threat hits 'double reverse points' based. A hit in the down zero = 5 seconds, a hit in the down one = 3 seconds, and a hit in the down three = one second. (winging a good guy shouldn't be as bad drilling him COM) Make those cumulative if you like....

Edited November 1, 2011 by Dragoon