Division 'modification' discussion

[Flexmoney]

Even if we changed it to 15 rounds, those "locked" out shooters (who are trying to shoot a MAJOR PF gun in a minor division) really wouldnt be. They could shoot limited 10.

That might be the boost that L10 needs.

We could get rid of Limited. That would boost L-10!!

Then, in fact, we could just reduce it to L-8...at which point, we could combine it with Single Stack. Since Single Stack has 8-Major and 10-Minor..we could lump Production in there too!

There:

Open

Revolver

Diablo Ocho

?Si

[dillon]

To throw a different perspective at things,based on conversations with a few of the major handgun manufacturers, they have interest primarily in Production and Single Stack divisions. The other divisions see their handgun needs met by custom offerings, not an out-of-the-box handgun. Unfortunately,Revolver division is currently too small to earn much attention. If nothing else, I suspect a regrouping of similar capacity firearms into the Nationals might gain more sponsorship from the big manufacturers. Group Single-Stack, L-10, Revo and production together, and group Open and Limited together. Manufacturers are aware of magazine capacity limitations in different States. It might be worthwhile to point out to them when their firearms are being successfully used in competition.

[Chills1994]

didn't Phill post something earlier this year how it would make sense to put Revo and SS together at the same Nat's?

Then some other people chimed in that it might actually increase Revo Nat's attendance.

[Flexmoney]

didn't Phill post something earlier this year how it would make sense to put Revo and SS together at the same Nat's?

Then some other people chimed in that it might actually increase Revo Nat's attendance.

I don't think Phil has forgot about that.

[XRe]

I feel that women shooters currently get a disproportionate amount of recognition and attention relative to their actual participation level in the sport. MHOP made the point earlier and he is entirely correct. The ladies category gets very special attention at nationals. I see no reason to do any more, but I could see pumping the brakes a little bit on promoting ladies category. Perhaps we should treat it the same as the other categories.

... and Ben pisses on the third rail ... (the fourth rail being anything about juniors, of course...)

[lcs]

If you want to shoot production with all your mags loaded all the way up, just shoot Limited minor.

This is one of the best answers to the question so far. Also, how did a discussion and why does a discussion about adding two new divisions almost always turn into a discussion trying to change Production?

Why and others with the same opinion as you, so locked into "you have to change production to X round count" is the only answer! and what the heck does "many people shoot in Glock matches" have to do with USPSA.

Must be the old "Resistance to Change" syndrome.

A- I am 'locked in' to NOT, repeat NOT changing the capacity in Production. It is fine at 10 rounds.

B- The comment regarding Glock matches is that there is yet another venue we can possibly exploit to gain members. Glock match shooters in many cases are shooting the Glock that they own. Many of those ate capped at under 15 rounds with production legal mags. We change the rules, we close them out. Right now they are welcome, we need to let them know that. We change the rules and we tell them your gear is NO GOOD here. Spend money of you want to join in with us.

A---That is pretty much what I meant. I repeat myself , Prod 10 would satisfy all those who live and breath "Production must never change".

B Your argument doesn't make any sense if USPSA had Prod 10 and Production.

Edited December 8, 2011 by lcs

[Chuck Anderson]

A---That is pretty much what I meant. I repeat myself , Prod 10 would satisfy all those who live and breath "Production must never change".

B Your argument doesn't make any sense if USPSA had Prod 10 and Production.

Which, unless we add new members just means we split up the existing 6 Divsions and turn it into 7 Divisions. Several have posted the reasons why adding Divisions just waters down the competition. I just don't see what it would add, other than another National Champion. Have you noticed that you are the only one proposing Prod-10 and Prod-Unl (I'm guessing the unlimited since you haven't specified any other round count) I'm guessing you want a Division for the SP-01, XDM and Grand Power to be able to run their 19+ round magazines? Because those would be the clearly dominant guns.

[Chuck Anderson]

To those that are arguing for 15 round magazines. What advantage is there to add another arbitrary number that will effect existing members. Is there a clamor to increase th magazine size in Limited to 161.25mm? This is basically the same thing. Some folks will have to buy new gear to stay, "competetive" Production is meant to be as equipment neutral of a Division as possible. Yeah the horse left the barn and there are a bunch of things allowed that if I was king of USPSA I'd say no to. But I'm not about to cause a bunch of people to have to go out and buy new gear just because a handful of people want to be able to load their magazines up a little bit more, not even full, just a little bit more.

[Chills1994]

I feel that women shooters currently get a disproportionate amount of recognition and attention relative to their actual participation level in the sport. MHOP made the point earlier and he is entirely correct. The ladies category gets very special attention at nationals. I see no reason to do any more, but I could see pumping the brakes a little bit on promoting ladies category. Perhaps we should treat it the same as the other categories.

... and Ben pisses on the third rail ... (the fourth rail being anything about juniors, of course...)

It's not the first time Ben has brought up what seems to be a disproportionate amount of Front Sight and other coverage focused on the women.

I asked BritinUSA what his kick was with plugging women in USPSA.

And via PM with other members here...other guys have noticed the disproportionate coverage too, and it has kinda rubbed them the wrong way too.

For a while there, I...err...we thought we were going to put on larger or major match at Sparta in 2012. It wasn't really "our" idea. So I started working on the prize table, and PM'ed a few people who had put on major matches. In addition to realizing how much time and work it would be to put on a major match...then somebody else chimed in with "Are you going to recognize _________ category?"

Ugggh.... phoooeeyyy! I'm anti-classifications as it is. Categories and all the possible headaches that brings, I just said "SCREW IT!" so there's no larger match at Sparta in 2012.

[Coach]

If changes were to be made to Production how about this. Stock gun with no modifications. Gun stays as is from the factory. No sights, no trigger work no nothing. Cap the capacity at what ever the factory makes their mags. It would make the rules a lot less complicated and we would not have to police so much stuff with complicated rules. Ten round limit is silly. State with bans would be 10 rounds by default.

[No.343]

This production argument swings to more capacity is better for beginners, then goes to it's better for competition. Beginners figure out after their third match what is good for them and what division they want to shoot. Why change the rules for them? It seems to me that if the real competitors need more than eleven rounds, then they probably already lost that stage to shooters of their own skill level. If you need fifteen rounds to shoot all the steel in your array you lost. If you go one for one and forget to reload before the next array your hosed because of a standing reload on the second array. Maybe I'm wrong on those two points, but I just don't see any need to increase the capacity of production.

Revolver on the other hand would see a beneficial hit factor increase by eliminating the round limit. I think that if you eliminate the round limit the six shooters would be obsolete whether you manipulate major or minor scoring based on capacity. The eight shot revos will win. With the six shooter you WILL do standing reloads, but the eight you might not. It seems pretty simple to me.

[Flexmoney]

If changes were to be made to Production how about this. Stock gun with no modifications. Gun stays as is from the factory. No sights, no trigger work no nothing. Cap the capacity at what ever the factory makes their mags. It would make the rules a lot less complicated and we would not have to police so much stuff with complicated rules. Ten round limit is silly. State with bans would be 10 rounds by default.

Should we do that with "Limited" too. I do believe that was the whole idea of limited.

[kevin c]

Leave Production as it is. My arguments parallel Chuck's in post #258

[Nik Habicht]

GSSF has about 80,000 members.

how many would USPSA have if membership was required to shoot a match?

Not nearly that number, if what I see in the Mid-Atlantic Section mirrors the rest of the country.....

[Nik Habicht]

I don’t really see a point to changing production to 15 rounds.

At the World Shoot when we shot 15 rounds, I really feel it changed the nature of the match. It made it much less difficult than it would have been with only 10 rounds. I was able to shoot extra shots lots of times and not worry about running out of ammunition.

Some people may like 15 rounds better than 10 and others see things differently. I prefer 10.

This!

One of the things that makes production interesting -- in a way that Limited and Open aren't -- is the capacity limit......

One of the ways that Limited and Open are interesting -- in a way that Production/L10/Rev/SS aren't -- is the lack of a capacity limit......

That diversity -- which extends to more than just the guns used -- is why I own and shoot a Limited gun. Production may be my great love, as a division, but I shot my first USPSA match in Limited....

So, for those of you who want to raise the capacity of Production, I'm on board --- but Open and Limited will need to be restricted to ten rounds to keep things interesting.... :devil:

[Skydiver]

I'd like to explore the assertion that most newbies will show up at the range with 3 magazines, and with these 3 magazines loaded to 15, they should have enough to finish a normal COF.

I thought that most guns are sold with 2 magazines, or at least the guns I've been interested in have always sold with 1 or 2 magazines. How was it determined that newbies will show up with 3 magazines? Is there a trend now that new guns are sold with 3 magazines? If they will show up with 3, well then, why not 5?

And if the newbie bought a 1911, increasing the mag capacity up to 15 isn't going to do them a lick of good since the newbie will have to shoot in single stack, limited, or limited 10, and they still don't have enough mags.

Personally, I think that Production should stay at 10. I think that USPSA hit on the right formula that makes that Division interesting with the balancing act that needs to be done between accuracy, speed, and stage planning: diligentia, celeritas, tactica, rather than the classic DVC.

[Chills1994]

skydiver wrote:

...I thought that most guns are sold with 2 magazines, or at least the guns I've been interested in have always sold with 1 or 2 magazines. How was it determined that newbies will show up with 3 magazines? Is there a trend now that new guns are sold with 3 magazines? If they will show up with 3, well then, why not 5?...

You can or should be able to shoot all 32 round and less stages with 3, fifteen round mags.

I think Glock mags are running right around $30 each right now. So two more mags would be $60 bucks plus tax.

Buying the 3rd mag is easier to do when they initially pick up the gun, they can sneak that in with the gun purchase. Buying two other mags at another time, especially when they are not sure they are that interested in the sport yet, might prove difficult to get past their wives.

Coming from a CCW perspective, it makes sense to have one mag in the gun, and two on the belt.

[Skydiver]

Doing a bit of web searching, apparently the current crop of Glocks and XDs are now sold with 3 mags unlike the 2 mags they used to be sold with.

If the newbie went with a FN, HK, or CZ, is the assumption that a newbie will be convince be a gun store employee that they should have at least 3 magazines for purposes of CCW even if the buyer was initially interested in just range use?

And the 3 mag assumption still doesn't cover the newbie who did buy 3 mags, but picked a caliber/gun that only gives them 10-14 bullet capacity. Is the 3 mag assumption further restricted that the newbie would have bought a gun that holds at least 15?

[Nik Habicht]

I agree 100% with badchad, not that anyone cares what I think. It is all about getting more people shooting our sport and shooting cheaper. There are ways to compromise and make most people happy. It just takes a little work.

(below is my personal opinion)

I think what you might be aligning with is Cowboy Action. And, I'm not slighting that a bit. Those are popular shooting events.

A more fundamental question for me is...are we a shooting event...or, are we a competitive shooting event?

What I want out of USPSA is the latter.

I KNOW...from first hand experience...that people want MORE. I watched as a (non- affiliated) match here in Eastern Ohio added more and more (divisions). They went from having competitive events to just having shooting events.

I don't want any more divisions in USPSA. (Steel Challenge...maybe.)

---------------------

I shot my mini Glock 26 in a handful of matches this year. It is a gun I carry. I wanted to run it under match conditions (with the 10 round mags I carry in it). I was able to do so and get a good idea of it's function and performance...in Production division. (after all, we still have PRACTICAL in our name)

I also like to test reloading on the clock....being forced to reload while also opening a door...etc. It's a practical skill set that I think needs tested.

Production works. It is the biggest division in my Section. It is growing. I think it is crazy to mess with it.

We have 2 other divisions that count to 10 rounds.

And, instead of IPSC, I am more concerned with us being on parity with IDPA (also 10 rounds)...so that we can have cross-over shooters (and...we actually DO get them from IDPA...unlike anything else that has ever been mentioned).

So, I am pretty well convinced that 10 rounds in Production is where it's at.

---------------------

Open Revolver... come shoot Steel Challenge, then show me the numbers!!!

--------------------

I've shot with a lot of folks over the years that have shot their G21's in Limited-10. I shoot my Single-stack in Limited-10 from time to time. I've seen plenty of folks show up at matches with their carry G23...which also fits well in L-10.

Every Limited gun fits into Limited-10. (just to stir the pot)

What Kyle says mirrors what I see in the Mid-Atlantic Section......

....and pretty much my thinking from the perspectives of competitor in Production, stage designer, former match director and Section Coordinator.....

[Nik Habicht]

It's kinda getting under my skin that it seems like most everybody thinks this:

Production = beginner's division

beginner's division = Production

[...]

Chills

Unless my memory is getting REAL bad (which is a distinct possibility!), I seem to recall the above is pretty much EXACTLY how Production Division was originally marketed. Not sayin' it should be that way now ... not in the least. Nevertheless, I believe that was the original intent.

It might have been the original intent, but it wasn't the smartest idea the folks who promulgated that ever had...... :P

I was awfully glad on my first USPSA stage that I had a year and a half of IDPA matches under my belt -- and Dave Marques still had to coach me to engage the target that I blew by.....

"Now, turn carefully and shoot that target over there, twice....." as he pointed to about the 175 degree mark from my final position....

[BritinUSA]

It's not the first time Ben has brought up what seems to be a disproportionate amount of Front Sight and other coverage focused on the women.

I asked BritinUSA what his kick was with plugging women in USPSA.

The Jan/Feb 2011 Limited Nationals issue of Front Sight had a total of 7 pages concerning women shooters, out of 88 pages that equates to just under 8%.

Mar/Aprl 2011 Nationals edition about 10 pages out of 80 pages which is 8%

May/Jun about 4 pages out of 80 which is 5% of the total

Jul/Aug edition has just over 2 pages out of 80... 2.5% of the total

Sep/Oct about 3 pages which is 3.75%

Nov/Dec 5 pages which is 6.25%

Total average for 2011 is less than 6.5%

Articles for Front Sight are submitted by volunteers and by USPSA Staff. They are always on the lookout for new articles or match reports, so if the balance is not to your liking then the solution is simple. If that does not work then there is the option of taking the matter up with the BOD and getting them to change the format/amount of the coverage. My articles are written long so the editors can trim them down to the amount that they want.

If the amount of coverage of the women at Nationals is reduced the other articles will have to fill up the space and of course someone will have to write those articles.

As to my reasons for covering the Women at Nationals; That all started on this forum. When Rebecca won her first Nationals there was very little coverage because covering Nationals is next to impossible with just one person. So I volunteered to cover the women's match in 2009, it was exhausting but fun. So I did it again in 2010 and 2011.

I also covered the USPSA Single Stack Nationals (the whole match, not just the women), perhaps you remember the article. I also maintain a web-site that (although focused mainly on women of USPSA) it also has photo's and video of other shooters (including a bunch from the SS Nationals)... There's an interview with Robbie too.

Next year, my plan is to cover SS Nationals and the Womens Nationals, photo, video, articles and (if it all works out, perhaps some live-coverage too).

Covering the women is a blast ! They tolerate all my cameras and they haven't shot me once...yet

[beltjones]

If there is a problem with new shooters not showing up with the right equipment, it's not because they didn't buy enough mags at the gun store when they bought their gun, it's because the uspsa.org website does not have an intuitive, simple, holistic view of everything a new shooter needs to do to be ready for his first match. If something needs to be done to make it easier for new shooters it's on the marketing side, not on the rulebook side.

Also, divisions need to be stable in order to keep shooters involved, and in order to make "investigators" to the sport comfortable with making any purchases necessary in order to get started. The more we dick with Production (or any other division), the less comfortable new shooters will be with beginning USPSA. I mean, I can't count how many times I was ribbed by IDPA shooters (who were potential Production shooters) after that ridiculous ruling about paint in the magwell. Every time we have a bizarro, arbitrary rule change (now CZs can use extended barrels - what?) it turns off people who were wavering about whether they want to give our sport a try.

[The Antichrome]

It's not the first time Ben has brought up what seems to be a disproportionate amount of Front Sight and other coverage focused on the women.

I asked BritinUSA what his kick was with plugging women in USPSA.

Mar/Aprl 2011 Nationals edition about 10 pages out of 80 pages which is 8%

Total average for 2011 is less than 6.5%

Ahem, 10 pages out of 80 is 12.5% ;-)

I have no gripe with the amount of coverage that the ladies get.

They comprised an average of 9.5% of the field at all 6 Nationals this year.

[de03x7]

Why all the hostility toward the women shooters? Can't someone's ego take getting beat by a girl? This past summer we had a fairly regular shooter at a steel match and my daughter cleaned his clock in the shootoff. If looks could have killed I would have had to shoot him. He packed his toys and hasn't been back since. I don't see any need to mess with the divisions we have now. When my wife and I started shooting we loaded our XDM9s full and played in limited minor. We were not going to win anyway so what did it matter how we were scored. For our first 5-6 matches our goal was to not do something stupid and learn how to play. We later picked up XDM45s and started playing in L-10 with them and now we sometimes will shoot the 9s in production and use them for steel matches. After one full summer of shooting we are both classed C in L-10 and in production she is C and I made B. My daughter don't like to reload so has stayed in limited minor with her Ruger SR9. She has stayed in D all summer but if she would have shot production or have shot limited major she would have made C. All three of us have been able to find a place to play with no problem.

[Jim Norman]

Why do we seem to be running two concurrent discussions here. One and the first about whether or not to add a division that has as usual morphed into how can we screw up Production and the second regarding the coverage that women get in Front Sight. We need another splitting of thread here.