Vince Pinto Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 Hi folks, While I realise it will be tough to identify one aspect of IPSC shooting which is the most important to you, the selections above are what I believe are those which make IPSC shooting different from all other shooting sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james h Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 personally Vince as one whos shoots all three disciplines with a variety of ability i would say that starting from a holster is an irrelevance as is target shape, however i do appreciate that for some who live in freer lands that this is very useful in relation to their everyday life. j Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 I chose variety in COF. That's the reason I'm shooting IPSC now and left Bullseye. It's still sooo cool to go to a match and not know what to expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajarrel Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 IMHO challenging courses of fire keep the sport from being boring. Exciting, constantly changing challenges just keep the interest levels high. FWIW dj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 None of what you list is most important to me. It is the ability to compete mentally with the MD and shoot freestyle. To see if I can out think the MD, to game the stage. That is what I enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 ...and the healty dose of geritol you take before every match... [Thread Drift Mode Off] I always hated sports where you were allowed practicing the same thing you were going to do in a match over and over for a timeless time. In IPSC shooting you can practice the basic skills, but will never be able to execute the match stages to prepare for the match. You have to shoot them cold and right at first attempt! On second thoughts, I don't even like the idea of classifiers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L9X25 Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 Sentiments are currently riding high with the B. Cup, but this thread reminds me of what I always disliked about the Cup. I shot Cup matches to work on accuracy for IPSC and not because I ever intended to shoot the cup. I thought that it was odd that some folks could be good Cup shooters but stink at the other action shooting sports. They became specialists at the Cup events but were not IMHO good all-round shooters. I think that good IPSC shooters can be reasonably competitive at most shooting sports. I have to pick the unknown and constantly changing COF. Leo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 Seems to me that "Course Variety" would encompass the other things you mention to a large degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Waring Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 Course design consisiting of a variety of challenges is what makes this game so interesting. Close, far targets, shooting postions, shoot on the move, stand and shoot etc,...I love this game over everything else I've tried. You know a stage is good when you see it shot different ways, proving there is no "1" way to do it. Diversity is the key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 Sorry Vince, you left off the "all of the above" button --- and the list might not be inclusive enough. I like the sport above all others for all the things on the list, for the ability to rapidly hose some targets, for the ability to slow down and place some precision shots on farther targets, the competition --- both against yourself and against some of the best shooters in the world, and for the camaraderie. I think if you remove anything from this list, you will have effectively changed the sport from the perfection it is..... In other words, there's not one thing on that list that is more important than the others --- it is the blend of those ingredients and others that make this the savory stew that it is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 I like diversity ... but it seems like the word means different things to different people. To some, it means "put the arm's length, wide open hoser targets in a different place each time so I can run as fast as I can and trip the trigger as I go by a little differently each time so I don't get bored by running as fast as I can and tripping the trigger as I go by." To me, it means a mix of hoser stuff and precision shooting, close targets and far, wide open and hard cover and no-shoots, run'n'gun and stand'n'shoot. I like it all, but I rarely see most of "all" in some places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 I feel that if you take Nik's and TL's post and combine them it just about covers it all! When you have to stand, run, duck, weave and bob while shooting at different kinds, shapes and, etc., of stationary, moving, rolling and circling targets from behind, over, around and though different types of cover and openings... WHEW.. That does not leave much of a circumstance you don't run into at some point while competing in our sport. While there are other disciples that profess to be "real" it appears to me that IPSC is as good as it gets for preparing one for just about any conceivable situation you might run into in the "Real World." I love it all - of course depending on how bad I just bombed a stage... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shipster Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 I get bored with shooting disciplines that shoot the same course of fire. Varity, and problem solving is what I like best about IPSC. Speed is right up there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling White Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 All of the above! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 1, 2004 Author Share Posted June 1, 2004 I think if you remove anything from this list, you will have effectively changed the sport from the perfection it is..... I couldn't agree more, but there's no ulterior or sinister motive to this poll, and I certainly don't intend it to be one of those ridiculous, impossible to answer polls which ask "Your two children are drowning, and you can only save one. Which one do you save?". However we're considering production of a new, generic promotional brochure and it would be smart to specifically highlight the single, most exciting aspect of IPSC which appeals to existing competitors, because the same thing will most likely be appealing to potential competitors. Thanks to all for your votes and comments - keep them coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 I think if you remove anything from this list, you will have effectively changed the sport from the perfection it is..... I couldn't agree more, but there's no ulterior or sinister motive to this poll, and I certainly don't intend it to be one of those ridiculous, impossible to answer polls which ask "Your two children are drowning, and you can only save one. Which one do you save?". However we're considering production of a new, generic promotional brochure and it would be smart to specifically highlight the single, most exciting aspect of IPSC which appeals to existing competitors, because the same thing will most likely be appealing to potential competitors. Thanks to all for your votes and comments - keep them coming. Vince, I wasn't trying to imply that there was an "ulterior or sinister motive," bit rather just wanted to convey that I consider all of the things on your list as equals in terms of how they affect the appeal of the sport. If you're looking to highlight the sport, consider that it's one of the great shooting tests, and that since it constantly changes, it's a new test at every match. It's also a test that can never be mastered --- because it's constantly changing. No 1920/192x scores here --- and no, that's not intended as a slam against Bianchi.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 However we're considering production of a new, generic promotional brochure and it would be smart to specifically highlight the single, most exciting aspect of IPSC which appeals to existing competitors, because the same thing will most likely be appealing to potential competitors.Thanks to all for your votes and comments - keep them coming. FREESTYLE BABY!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted June 2, 2004 Share Posted June 2, 2004 And along comes Kyle and says it in one word..... That I'd add to my above post.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 2, 2004 Author Share Posted June 2, 2004 Nik, "Freestyle baby" is two words Yes if, judging by the poll results to date, we accept that having non-repetitive COFs is the biggest attraction with IPSC shooting, then it necessarily follows that competitors want to be presented with a shooting challenge which has a number of possible solutions. Having a variety of COFs, but with only one solution each, clearly defeats the purpose of the exercise. Freestyle is about allowing a variety of solutions. On the other hand, avoiding ridiculous non-shooting challenges and/or unrealistic target presentations and/or unlimited round counts and/or painted lines on the floor instead of using real barriers merely brings a good measure of consistency and common sense to course design. However people who incorrectly consider good course design rules and guidelines to be "restrictions" are generally the same people who don't get out much to shoot at other clubs, States or countries. This is essentially the reason why we have classifiers - if people could actually attend multiple large matches each year, they could easily be graded on their performance at those "sight unseen, shoot on demand" matches, and that would give them a far more realistic grading than one acheived by another competitor practicing the same classifier over and over again until they achieved their best result. I'm sure we all know competitors who can make Master grade shooting classifer "ABC123" and so on at their home club, but they never make the same grade at an actual match containing stages they couldn't rehearse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted June 2, 2004 Share Posted June 2, 2004 Yes if, judging by the poll results to date, we accept that having non-repetitive COFs is the biggest attraction with IPSC shooting, then it necessarily follows that competitors want to be presented with a shooting challenge which has a number of possible solutions. Having a variety of COFs, but with only one solution each, clearly defeats the purpose of the exercise. Um, while I agree with the rest of it, I don't think that logically follows-- [Pedantic Mode] If every COF was different, but still only had one way to shoot it, that would still provide infinite variety-- the challenge would be to execute the solution in the most optimal manner. [/Pedantic Mode] However, I don't believe the pollees are asking for that Anyway... I'm for some course design rules and against others. For example, "course design must physically prevent shooters from getting closer than 10m to steel" I disagree with-- it might work ok for big matches where they have real stage building crews, but for little local matches where five stages might get set up in the hour before registration by a couple guys and a donkey cart, it doesn't work. It also limits stage designs where the shooter might be able to move forward after downing (or not) a piece of steel. It limits flexibility and eliminates some otherwise acceptable courses. On the other hand, for another example, I'd be for some reasonable restrictions or guidelines on how far you must run without targets to engage or how long you must dink with some irrelevant prop with no possibility of shooting. Done right I don't see either of those restricting flexibility or eliminating any good course designs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted June 2, 2004 Share Posted June 2, 2004 I'm just here to ogle the babes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GvU Posted June 2, 2004 Share Posted June 2, 2004 Variety is by far the most important, the next 3 are almost necessary components to really make it IPSC. Targets are of least importance there. DVC is a strong package! What is perhaps more important is that to perform optimally, you will have to use the gray matter between your ears. More stages are strategy orientated, where your abilities and posibilities / skills have to be weighed prior to shooting a course of fire. (This is more than any other shooting sport a thinking game.) The IPSC-community is a pleasant bunch (exceptions are rare). Sharing information and helping are what makes this a pleasant (shooting) sport. What we do need is removal from gunslingers / cowboys image into a dynamic sport (acceptance by the broader shooting community, and then the general public). Having stringent safety rules (and enforcing them) does help in this respect. Colorfull outfits instead of fatiges do help as well to show a friendly community. PR is everything! DVC, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 2, 2004 Author Share Posted June 2, 2004 I'm just here to ogle the babes. Eric, you're incorrigible but, hey, that's why I love you, man For example, "course design must physically prevent shooters from getting closer than 10m to steel" I disagree with -- I presume you're quoting the above from memory, but the actual rule states: 2.1.3 Minimum Distances – Whenever metal targets are used in a course of fire, precautions must be taken so that competitors and match officials maintain a minimum distance of 7 meters (22.96 feet) from them while they are being shot. Where possible, this should be done with physical barriers. <snip> As you can see, the actual rule only applies during shooting but, in practice, if a course designer observes the "if you can see it, you can shoot it" credo, then metal targets should not be visible from closer than 7 metres, period, which I guess is what you already said ....... I'm so easily confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted June 2, 2004 Share Posted June 2, 2004 I enjoy the fact that you don't shoot the same COF twice... Coming from a PPC/Bianchi Cup background, the variety of challenges is enjoyable. I would have to say the shape of the target plays an important role depending upon location and political realities. The Classic target helps a great deal in these localities and I hope it gets the credit it's due in your marketing program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted June 2, 2004 Share Posted June 2, 2004 For example, "course design must physically prevent shooters from getting closer than 10m to steel" I disagree with -- I presume you're quoting the above from memory, but the actual rule states: 2.1.3 Minimum Distances – Whenever metal targets are used in a course of fire, precautions must be taken so that competitors and match officials maintain a minimum distance of 7 meters (22.96 feet) from them while they are being shot. Where possible, this should be done with physical barriers. <snip> Actually I was making up a rule as an example. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now