ICASE

[Alan550]

The $300.00 entry fee numbers are BS. Free entries are given to Regional winners, and even some Class winners at some of the Regionals. Early-Bird entries are lower, and so are Buddy Entries. So that figure is bogus. They haven't paid $10,000 to the winner since 2002 at least. Last year paid $7,000 and $3,500 to Open and Stock respectively.

Some may have "crapped out" at the chrono, or been DQ'd for some reason other than that.

The only shortcoming I see in IPSC/USPSA classes is that there is no "Open Revolver" class. Other than that, they have it right! Open should mean just what it says..........OPEN........WFO.

Technically speaking, wings have been illegal from the start (Rule 5.2 Artificial Support). And I quote" Artificial support is defined as follows: (a) Any supporting surfaces, except the ground, not specifically authorized for use in the rules for the position prescribed. ( Any garment, including gloves, which can be interpreted as providing artificial support. © Other devices which can be interpreted as artificial support. [emphasis added] (see rule 13.1)" Now rule 13.1 refers to handicapped shooters, so taking what's in the rules already, they have allowed illegal guns since I've been shooting the sport!

{soapbox mode off}

What we're trying to accomplish is to NOT slow the technological "race" and NOT have a bunch of shooters who have a lot of money invested in ($4,000.00 paper weights) guns that can't be used after the investment has been made.

Thanks for the input guys (and ladies).

Alan~^~

[BigDave]

The $300.00 entry fee numbers are BS. Free entries are given to Regional winners, and even some Class winners at some of the Regionals. Early-Bird entries are lower, and so are Buddy Entries. So that figure is bogus. They haven't paid $10,000 to the winner since 2002 at least. Last year paid $7,000 and $3,500 to Open and Stock respectively.

What we're trying to accomplish is to NOT slow the technological "race" and NOT have a bunch of shooters who have a lot of money invested in ($4,000.00 paper weights) guns that can't be used after the investment has been made.

A free entry was given to the overall winner of the Regional I shot in. $100 was given to Class winners (but I think only when there was three in that class, could be wrong though). So, okay, say $200 on average. ~$30,000 total from entries. Now the sponsors have to float an extra $15,000. Great...

I'm sorry, but are you telling me that your highly tuned autos and revo's won't shoot sub 1" at 50 yds if they don't have wings or a shroud? How much do a set of revo wings cost? $50 the last time I saw them at Brownells? A Piatt shroud? $250? Mover base? $250? Wow, your $4000 paper weight just decreased a whopping $500 in parts, and it is still a sub 1" gun at 50 yds.

What is this argument really about??? Is it about the vitallity of the Cup and the Action Pistol program? Or, is it about you (the editorial "you", not necessarily you, Alan), your gun and $$$money$$$?

[brentm]

revolvers can compete in metallic with autos shot for shot

and they could compete in open until the prone change, it believe its a huge lost...

single stackers maybe now receive the same treatment

brentm

[davecutts]

I swear if Steve Anderson put his mind to it, he'd be the first person to score a 1920/192x, and personally, I'd love to see it.

that i would pay to see, and to top it all off all this complaining has inspired me to start shooting this "CUP" thing, I mean really how hard can it be I shot a one inch group once.

[Steve Anderson]

"I swear if Steve Anderson put his mind to it, he'd be the first person to score a 1920/192x, and personally, I'd love to see it."

Big Dave,

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I shoot our local Bianchi AP match with my IPSC gun and load (unless I have a minor load handy) and really enjoy it. I ususally wind up second to someone who has a Bianchi gun and has shot the match for years.

And actually, doing what you suggest suits my temperament quite well because I'm a natural weakness-fixer and you're right - If I was prepared to dedicate the majority of my life to that pursuit it couldn't help but happen.

I love the challenge of the total accuracy requirement and may have to get more into this...what are the rules again?

Anyhow, thanks for the mention

SA

[GrantJ]

Hi all.

Wow, my head is spinning. Read this whole post in one sitting, and I hate reading!

First off, wings, and the use of wrap-around barricade techniques, are definitely on the chopping block to be phased in over the next couple of years. Mover bases, etc., are not on the agenda according to the committee.

This change and the prone issue are a definite move to align with the IPSC open class pistol, in an attempt to attract shooters from that sport. Will it work? I seriously doubt that it will. For those IPSC shooters that are reading this I have a question for you. When you go to a match what is you first reaction when the match director hands you the courses of fire and there are a couple of standards exercises worth a whole lot of points? To a lot of IPSC shooters Action Pistol is a full tournament of standards.

What Action Pistol needs is promotion, not rules changes. We as competitors understand this and do what we can to promote the sport in our own areas. We do this for the love of the sport, in our spare time. The NRA are paid administrators of the sport. We are doing our jobs, are they doing theirs?

I am working on a proposal now that will hopefully allow the committee to experiment with ideas without alienating the shooters of our sport.

More soon

GrantJ

[brentm]

First off, wings, and the use of wrap-around barricade techniques, are definitely on the chopping block to be phased in over the next couple of years.

grant

so when do we get the new rules? same time frame as last years changes?

bugger why leave us waiting

brentm

[GrantJ]

Brent

You know what I know. Will update as soon as I hear anything

GrantJ

[gm iprod]

Nothing the NRA has done in the rule changes will help the Bianchi Cup, it needs promotion, leave Open as it was, leave the metallic sight and stock in and get on with it.

I have been to many IPSC shoots that require you to go prone. So the guys with big mags just slip a shorty in and get on the floor. So that little gem from the rules committe is pure Horse Cookies.

I shoot both, more AP than IPSC, (I have Open guns for both, 2 for AP as it happens, one bought really cheap, $800US, so the cost is also the aformention Horse Excrement) my knees can't handle the running around as much as they used to. I came from IPSC to AP from the first AP match I shot I was hooked, I shot my first big AP match with an old 686 Open revolver as that is what got traded into the shop the month before the match, so I thought I would give it a real go.

Decided to stick with "stock" and did so for another about 5 years (9mm Tangfoglio and then a Standard Colt 38Super). Changed to an Open Auto after the 1999 World Shoot, before which I had to change to a revolver 6 weeks before because the Colt coughed it's guts up just when I was warming up to the match. I used an absolutely factory 686 in that match. I just eased the hammer spring off a turn or two and got to it.

The problem is the NRA has let so much crap and rule bending go on for years, the mess with Jerry M, TGO and the others with their "stock" guns at the 2003 Cup was stupid. If those guns were "stock" as per the rules I read and abided by in 1999 then I am John Holmes reincarnate. So they had to let it slide as they did not give the competitors fair and reasonable warning to comply with the rule. TGO was right and did the proper thing at the time to allow him and others to shoot. If the rules had not changed then they had to allow guns that qualified under those same rules the year before.

Six months warning and practice for the biggest "best" AP match is insane. If they won't relent on the prone thing, at the very least they must leave the Open rules as they are for at least 3 years, and then re-evaluate. In that time some of effect with be showing through. Lets really see if they are on the right track. I doubt it, but we have to be certain. Changing something every year and then doing another small change will stifle the Match.

As I type this, I think that it is a possibility that teh NRA may in fact be trying to kill of the match as we know it and turn it into something different. I don't now why but thats a feeling I now have.

Shame on them if this is so.

[Leroy]

Just one Question.

What ever happened to common since?--sence--cents--sents.. da%#.. CANT SPELL IT BUT YOU GET THE POINT RIGHT?

Think about it.

Leroy

[maui1911]

maui 1911

stuff the nra they dont care about international countries they have there secret agenda and tell to many lies lets stay with the old rules,

[Chuck D]

Nobody benefitted from the IPSC-IDPA split in the beginning. Only after both sides met and decided to work together by "sharing the available membership" did either of the two organizations begin to repair the damage. These two organizations have the ability to draw from a fairly large membership pool. AP doesn't have that option...the membership pool isn't large enough.

Starting another "rival" AP program would be like starting up another MLB series. It simply won't last and the split in participation will effectively kill the crown jewel of the series, The Bianchi Cup. I understand the anger over the rules changes but splitting the already small participation pool will only make matters worse.

NRA must promote the match, get it's rules changes/modifications in order, develop a local club network that hosts AP matches and forge a relationship with USPSA to draw IPSC shooters to AP events in significant numbers. If USPSA is willing to work with IDPA, I'm sure they could work "magic" with the NRA to save the AP program.

If "outlaw AP" grows around the country and ICASE enters the picture...AP is effectively DEAD and those trying to send a message to NRA by doing so are the ones responsible. I hope that the anger over rules changes can be re-channeled into lobbying the NRA on a daily basis for positive change not knee jerk reactions that serve only to divide an already small community of available participants.

[Alan550]

Chuck,

ICASE wasn't a "knee-jerk" reaction. We pleaded with the Rules Committee at the cup to at least let the shooters have some input in the proposed rule changes. They, in so many words, said it was their backyard, their baseball, and if we didn't like it, we could go home! They have "a vision" for drawing in more IPSC shooters that just won't work. Rule changes in the past were instituted in order to bring in more IPSC shooters, and to no avail!

There are clubs around the US and in other countries as well, that are trying to increase participation in NRA Action Pistol in many ways. Our local club just invested over $4,000.00 to get a mover and put in permanent barricades. Just when things are finally coming together for us, they change the rules? WHY?

Don't rain on our parade just because you think they're on the right track. We plan to continue having NRA Approved matches, but those who want to shoot under the ICASE rules will be allowed to do so. NRA will be deprived of the money only for those who so choose. The rest will be sent in as requested for their NRA Classification cards.

I realize that most people don't like change, and some of that attitude describes the ICASE movement, but change is inevitable. Neither do most people like being dictated to, but that's where NRA is headed. Let them go their way, but allow those of us who liked the "old rules" to go our way in peace also, and may both ideas flourish!

Alan~^~

[BigDave]

Chuck,

ICASE wasn't a "knee-jerk" reaction. We pleaded with the Rules Committee at the cup to at least let the shooters have some input in the proposed rule changes. They, in so many words, said it was their backyard, their baseball, and if we didn't like it, we could go home! They have "a vision" for drawing in more IPSC shooters that just won't work. Rule changes in the past were instituted in order to bring in more IPSC shooters, and to no avail!

I don't recall hearing that at the meeting. Not at all actually. What I did hear Rudy say was he had only 2 of the "comment cards" or whatever returned. I didn't even get the impression the board had that posture. What I did hear was that AP was in trouble and they are looking for ways to draw new shooters. One other thing: good leaders piss people off.

Why won't changing the rules to allow people who have guns already set up to shoot other practical pistol sports also have guns that are legal and competitive in Action Pistol not work? I still don't get why that doesn't make sense.

There are clubs around the US and in other countries as well, that are trying to increase participation in NRA Action Pistol in many ways.  Our local club just invested over $4,000.00 to get a mover and put in permanent barricades.  Just when things are finally coming together for us, they change the rules?  WHY?

What on earth do the rule changes (that haven't even occured yet, mind you) they are talking about have anything to do with your range improvements? If they do make the changes (if) they've discussed, the worst thing that happens is that Open shooters cannot touch the Barricade. Grab an Metallic Sight blaster and come and play in my world. Just like your argument that these rule changes (that, again, have not taken place) will make your Open guns into $4000 paperweights. You still have 1"/50yd guns, right?

  Don't rain on our parade just because you think they're on the right track.  We plan to continue having NRA Approved matches, but those who want to shoot under the ICASE rules will be allowed to do so.  NRA will be deprived of the money only for those who so choose.  The rest will be sent in as requested for their NRA Classification cards.

Do you explain to your newcomers what, exactly and objectively, is going on and why you offer them to shoot under a different set of rules?

[maui1911]

as to the last person saying they didnt here what was saidat the meeting to that effect did they here that the nra dosent care about the bianchi cup cause it dosent make any money, they also said that they dont care about A P shooting, with that phrase said why the hell should we listen to them, look after your selves do what is best for your sport. other people had a lot to say about the changes, but lest we forget it was them and others that help with the space race, why change now. dont try to fix something that is not broken.

[GrantJ]

Dave, you worry me sometimes. When a senior official of the NRA tells you to "Go to hell," you have got my attention! As for the rules change, it has been tried before and it does not work, ask the NRA they have already admitted this.

Why alienate the supporters you already have to attract some that you may get? That makes sense doesn't it!

There is a way to achieve both that I am working on now. Will post it on all sites as soon as it is finished.

GrantJ

[BigDave]

All I said is that I didn't hear someone say "go to hell". I'm not saying it wasn't said. I would like to know who said it and to whom, though.

Let's be honest, rule changes will alienate some people. You cannot avoid that. However, if people "lost" due to a rule change equalled and exceeded by new participants, that has some merit. Or, if there is a rule change (or none) that doesn't alienate anyone and attracts new shooters, even better.

Yeah, I heard the 'Cup is a money loosing venture. That isn't good. That isn't good for the NRA and it is even worse for us as shooters. Think of any other business (governments seem to be the exception, mind you) that is allowed to consistently run in the red. They are not. Something has to be done to increase participation in Action Pistol and the Bianchi Cup, period. Rule changes are one method. Is it the right one? Depends on the change and how it is communicated.

If the NRA didn't care, I think they'd leave things "as is" and let the current downward spiral continue into nothingness, because without some change, that is where we're headed.

Folks, please don't misunderstand me (Alan, Grant, maui). I want, more than anyone, to see Action Pistol flourish and prosper. However, I want us to do it as one voice, not two. There is a lot of people with very strong opinions about this. Is Rudy's phone ringing off the hook? What about Don G's? If you want to see the sport move forward, be prepared to give something up to have that, if you're asked to. You might not be, just be prepared to.

[GrantJ]

Dave

The "Go to Hell" statement was made at the meeting. I was in the front row and heard it loud and clear. It is not worth naming the person as it serves no purpose. With any luck it has already been dealt with at a higher level. Lets just say that it was not called for and was not appropriate.

As far as the rules changes go, you have missed the point. Open shooters have spent many dollars fine tuning and adjusting their Action Pistols to suit their needs. At the stroke of a pen the committee can make them obsolete overnight and the shooter has no recourse. This is as much about the change as the way they went about it.

I repeat again, there is no advantage to alienating your strongest group of supporters on the off chance that your rule change "MAY" attract new shooters! There is a way to do both - More about that soon.

A history lesson: Back in 1995, the rules were changed, in an attempt to attract more shooters from other shooting sports. "Metallic Sight" was changed to "Stock Gun." Instantly pistols that had been modified to shoot PPC, Bullseye, IPSC, IDPA and others were no longer eligible to shoot Action Pistol. The guns along with their owners stopped coming. This year they went back to "Metallic Sight" and the numbers have improved.

I tend agree that ICASE is not the answer, it will simply divide an already small group of enthusiasts. I understand the frustration and anger of the organizers but I feel that in the main, we are all preaching to the choir. This anger and frustration needs to be focussed in a unified manner to the seat of the problem. If you have an opinion, share it with the Committee. Get everyone you know to do the same. If we bury them in submissions, Ideas and solutions to our current woes, at some point they will have to take notice.

Remember they still have this magic number of 1500 Action Shooters in the back of their minds. WE all know that of this number, only a very small proportion are active. That is us and we need to unify to be heard.

Sermon over

[Trader]

Grant wrote:

"Will post it on all sites as soon as it is finished"

My question , are there other forums/ websites where AP topics are posted or discussed?

Thanks

[Chuck D]

With all due respect may I ask this question, "How does your fine tuned Open gun become obsolete overnight if you can't grasp the barricade or go prone at 10,15 or 25 yards?"

At the very least, you MAY have to remove the barricade shroud BUT i'm certain that you can still use that "finely tuned" Open gun to shoot 10's and X's.

This statement makes my point for me, " I tend agree that ICASE is not the answer, it will simply divide an already small group of enthusiasts." AP isn't big enough to survive the divide. If you want an "object lesson" about "divide and conquer" ask USPSA about bleeding membership and shrinking revenues created by the formation of IDPA. Notice how both parties now work together and market their sports together? They HAD to do this . It became obvious that if they kept on poking each other in the eye...both parties would eventually be blind. Lesson to be learned here.

There was a time when you could go to your local gun shop, buy a 686, a 10 ounce Jarvis underlug weight, a Weigand scopemount, a Tasco/Aimpoint dot scope and some factory PMC 158g ammo (ah la John Pride's exact set-up) for 850 bucks and be competitive if you took the time to practice. 24 hours after some talented gunsmith figured out a way to build a shroud for an autoloader...the revolver days in AP were over. My 686 is still parked in the safe and although I have no particular use for it (as a classified High Master, it would be like competing with rocks and a slingshot compared to the autoloader crowd) I'm not complaining that it's obsolete. At least you could still use your autoloader and be competitive with it. Today,a competitive autoloader set-up costs over 4 grand. Think for a minute that THIS may be a factor in participation ? Metallic Sight and Stock Gun categories are a GREAT way to grow the ranks but more can be done to lessen the costs of ALL categories of competition.

NRA needs to find ways to increase AP participation. Making the sport accessible (and affordable) to everyone whom wants to play is one way of doing so. If rules changes are required to do so...it has to happen. By "taking your ball and going home", your only watering down an already small pool of available players. Do so at your own risk. Here in my neighborhood, outlaw AP was tried after NRA raised the shooter fees from 3 to 7 bucks per head...the program at the local club STILL died. If they could have drawn 3% of the local IPSC shooting population to an AP match, it would have remained an active program. One reason why you couldn't draw that group...specialized equipment. NRA "may" have a valid point here, how they approach it is a different story altogether but that shouldn't diminish that fact that the point "may" be valid.

Instead of expending energies trying to create an "outlaw" version of AP...why not lobby both USPSA and NRA to form a working "partnership" that would allow both sports to share shooters, ideas and resources?

If anyone is interested in this method...contact me...I've got an idea or two to share and I would be interested in helping.

[Action Pistolero]

Chuck,

You can still compete with your revolver. Just ask George Mowbray. He was clean this year going into the mover. Then he shot the worst mover that I have seen him shoot in 5 years to wind up with a 1904. Seems to me that you could do what everyone else here is telling us to do and that is practice.

Big Dave,

How many AP matches do you shoot each month? Are they all at the same range? The reason I ask this is that last year I shot 25 AP matches in 9 states. Six of them were registered. If I had the time I would have shot more. Every one of these matches are run by dedicated open class shooters. If you tick these people off there may not be as many approved matches as we have now. I know this first hand as I run matches at 2 clubs. I dropped 3 matches this year because I am fed up with the rule change and NRA's attitude.

NRA made the right changes with metallic. Instead of making all these changes within a short period of time they need to sit back and see where the growth is. As I told Rudy, I believe metallic will grow to the point where we have an equal number between open and metallic. Let that grow and leave us alone. If you are going to get serious about a shooting sport than you are going to have to have a gun dedicated to that sport to do very well. Ask Rob what other sport he shoots the gun he shot this year at the cup.

Last weekend was the first match that I shot since last fall that I went prone where I wanted to. I didn't shoot very well but a funny thing happened. I had fun!!!!!!!!!! Besides all that up and down is like doing crunches and helps keep down the spare tire.

My performance at this years cup proved that I don't have to go prone to do well. I came in 17th overall and 3rd in the plates. I shot a 1900 the hard way. I bombed on the mover and the barricade. I came back and cleaned the plates and dropped one 8 on the practical. I like going prone and have fun shooting that way. If I can't have fun than what's the point.

Kevin

[Chuck D]

Kevin, make no mistake. I'm NOT saying me (or anyone else for that matter) can't be competitive with a revolver. The point I'm trying to make is that IF Open shooters are not allowed a barricade shroud...your gear can STILL be used to shoot good scores just like my 686. It may become harder to do so but it's a change that can be overcome.

Lets not lose sight of the issue here. The issue is to create an "outlaw AP program" that would be in direct competition with the official program for shooter membership, participation and revenue raised to keep AP afloat on a National level. Some problems I see here are:

1. Classification (or lack of) not granted or honored by the NRA towards entry in an official AP event.

2. Split the participating members by creating a this vs. that atmosphere. This act will further water down the number of participants in official AP programs virtually assuring smaller numbers at local, state and National level competitions. I can hear it now..."why shoot the Cup when we can use the old rules and shoot XYZ championship instead."

3. It creates a "rip-off" of the program created by John Bianchi and administered (paid for in all reality) by the NRA. For example, is it REALLY IPSC if you use their target design/shape, portions (if not all) of their rulebook and portions (if not all) of their safety regulations to shoot "outlaw IPSC" because you disagree with a rule or want to avoid paying the shooter fees/classification fees? If you want to shoot "outlaw AP" it's your right to do so, just don't use approved AP targets, any of NRA's AP rules including safety regulations or the approved AP courses of fire. Oh yea, above all don't represent it as Action Pistol because it isn't. I can't wake up tomorrow, get mad at USPSA, decide to create my own IPSC program and do so using their targets, props, cof's and portions (if not damn near all) of their rule book.

What the NRA did to AP can be debated forever with regards to the rules changes ability to grow the ranks of possible participants. How they did it was wrong...we are in FULL agreement here. It was handled badly and you guys have a RIGHT to be angry. After seeing the damage created by an IPSC vs. IDPA split...I'd hate to see a similar problem effect AP.

I'm interested in the input/opinions of Bruce Piatt, Doug Koenig, TGO, John Pride and Mickey Fowler on the issue. If anyone (or them especially) want to share THEIR reactions...I'd be interested to know what they are. Not to devalue anyone elses opinion but I'd be interested to know the opinions of those that have won the Cup as to how the new rules have changed the game.

Having competed in 5 Canadian AP championships, 4 Canadian Provincial Championships , 2 Bianchi Cups, 5 State Championships and 3 Regional Championships from 1988 to 1996 (not including umteen club level matches) I would love to return to my first love, AP. What keeps me from returning has nothing to do with any enacted and/or proposed rules changes. It is the out of pocket costs related to the Cup's entry fee and the lack of an AP program within a reasonable driving distance of Upstate NY. Metallic sight class may just change my opinion though. I have all the parts ready to build a new AP gun. If they ditch the barricade shroud...it may become an OPEN gun instead of a Metallic Sight gun. It would be nice to shoot Open class against the best in the business and not have to spend 4 grand with Riley Gilmore to purchase competitive equipment. I could use the savings to afford the drive (and a decent hotel room) to New Jersey and Pennsylvania and shoot a half dozen matches a year. THAT'S how you grow participation...by making the game affordable and accessible.

[BigDave]

Kevin - I try to shoot AP at least once a month from April til September (which is when the local clubs shoot). My work schedule doesn't permit it each of those months, but if I'm home and there is an AP match, I'm shooting and bringing new shooters. Sometimes I get lucky and Winimac runs a 2nd monthly match and I get to shoot twice a month. Either way, I shoot AP with every opportunity I get. BTW - anyone shoot AP in Colorado?

Perhaps part of my difficulty with this issue is that I do, and always have, shot Stock/Metallic Sight. I've never shot a match Open. All I know is not being able to touch the barricade and only being able to go prone at 50 on the Practical. But I also think that is why (1) I love Action Pistol and (2) why I'll not likely ever shoot Open. Why? It is a shooting challenge. Its me, the sights and the trigger. Period. It is tough. It is a challenge. (note: please don't mistake me for saying shooting Open and all that involves isn't a challenge, I know it is)

I agree that the NRA made the right move with Metallic Sight. Those Border Patrol PPC shooters kicked big time a** in MS, and I don't think they'd ever shot this match. I can only hope that more USPSA, IDPA, IPSC and PPC shooters bring their iron sighted blasters and come and play.

But, with the increase in participation in Metallic Sight, you could see how the BoD would think that "hey, if we changed the MS rules so other sport ready guns could come play, and created another category for Production (catalog) guns, the odd man out is Open". Think about it. Open is now on an island. Is that good? I don't know.

We need to stick together here, folks. Like never before.

[GrantJ]

Trader

This is the only sight that I am aware of but it has many threads, I simply planned to post it on all

Chuck

I have over $1000 invested in a shroud that does not work, but the knowledge now to invest in another that will. Should I now spend that money on the off chance that the rules will not change? My new gun is now up to an obscene amount of dollars, but to me that is part of the game. It is like Formula One. In our own rights we are pushing the envelope to achieve excellence in accuracy. I see no problem in that.

Dave

Go back to my post/history lesson and re read it. I think you missed the point

GrantJ

[Alan550]

Well, they're gonna try to do just what I said in the beginning of this thread! The Rules Committee has a "tele-conference" meeting set for the VERY NEAR FUTURE ( read Monday, Aug.23) and here are some of the items on the "agenda"!

1. Change the rules for the Barricade Event (take away the wings/ shrouds in Open Division)

2. Change the rules on Production Firearm to reflect "Double Action" only guns to compete in the Production Category.

3. Amend the rules to say "All standard safety features of guns must operate properly".

Gotta say "I told you so"!!!!! And they went farther than I thought, by eliminating all the DA/SA pistols from Production. That means you can't go buy a factory stock S&W auto, or any other maker for that matter, in its standard DA/SA format and shoot Production Class anymore.

They aren't going to allow wings & shrouds in Open class even on the gun! So that means buying a new scope mount for semi-autos that have the shrouds now. It won't even be allowed on the gun, even if you don't use it!!!

No more "pinned grip safeties" or deactivated magazine-disconnect safeties.

As Grant said, this sport is comparable to Formula One racing, and to limit the equipment in such a manner will NOT help bring in more shooters, as is their claimed goal. Call it what you will, but the last rule change resulted in a grand total of 4 more shooters at the Cup this year over last year. They removed the Prone option at 25 on the Practical and totally on Plates. The result in the top scores was: 2003 had 11 shooters "clean" on Practical and 60 on Plates.......2004 had 7 "clean" on Practical and only 16 on Plates!

This didn't "bring in the IPSC shooters" as desired, and only hurt the overall scores of the lower level shooters. So now, to lower the scores even further, and handicap the ones who really support the program, they're going after the wings and eliminating some factory guns from Production class and making them compete against "built, Custom-shop" single action semi-autos in Metallic Sight class.

Sounds like a plan to kill the sport if I ever saw one. Grant's idea of a Modified class to be added is the best suggestion I've seen, but he's just one voice in the mix. Consequently, not much has been listened to by NRA it seems.

There may still be time to save this sport, but I somehow don't see it being saved by NRA. One of the Rules Committee members made the statement at the shooters meeting that, after the Cup, he puts his "Bianchi Gun" back in the safe until the next Cup! That's not how most of us do it, so maybe I can understand why he's upset over spending that much money for a gun that he only uses for one match a year. Most of the rest of us shoot more than that and there's no reason we should be penalized for having spent the money to better our shooting scores just because of a few "whiners".

{soap-box mode off}

Just a heads-up on the changes that are coming your way, fellow shooters!