PistoleroJesse Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 But where in the rule book does it say that having more than one degree of freedom in adjustment qualifies a holster as a race holster - thats my big issue - a "race holster" is not defined - but left up for each person to make their own determination as to what it is It's not written. Let me clarify, If they do rule against it as a race holster, I think that's going to be the new justification that would eventually get in the rule book. It's the only differentiating factor that I can make any sense out of myself if they rule against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 As I understand things, IPSC allows "race type" holsters in their Production division. I don't know if it was by design, or an oversight and there was no way of getting the genie back in the bottle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbean Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I did. John said he is going to have to look and make sure it's not a race holster. The thing is the rules should be clear cut with no grey area. FWIW I'm more than a little surprised that Ghost didn't send a prototype to Amidon to clear this up before they marketed the holster. What good is a piece of competition equipment if it doesn't meet the criteria for the competition it's designed for? BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braxton1 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 If they do rule on them as race holsters, I think the determining factor would be that there is more than one degree of freedom in their adjustment. That would eliminate just about every Safariland holster with the standard belt loop. You can adjust it for muzzle-forward, straight up, or FBI cant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdm74 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 If they do rule on them as race holsters, I think the determining factor would be that there is more than one degree of freedom in their adjustment. That would eliminate just about every Safariland holster with the standard belt loop. You can adjust it for muzzle-forward, straight up, or FBI cant. Can also do that with blade-tech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 ...and a Fobus (roto). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CZinSC Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I did. John said he is going to have to look and make sure it's not a race holster. The thing is the rules should be clear cut with no grey area. FWIW I'm more than a little surprised that Ghost didn't send a prototype to Amidon to clear this up before they marketed the holster. What good is a piece of competition equipment if it doesn't meet the criteria for the competition it's designed for? BB Because it's perfectly legal for IPSC Production. Ghost International is an Italian company. On their website, it states "It’s appropriate for sport shooting in the categories:· Single Stack, Production, Standard." When you see Production and Standard in the same sentence, that should make a person stop and figure out Which Production is being referred to, because as you may know, there are differences in the rules. Either way, I don't think it is a Race Holster. If the holster covers the gun up to the ejection port, it's not a race holster in my opinion, I don't care how it's attached to the belt ( provided it's less than 2" ). And no, that isn't in the rules, so i can't point to a rule to back that up, it's just my opinion. Should it be clarified in the rules? NO. And here's why. Eliminate the "no race holster" rule altogether. Just leave the 2" stipulation, let people run whatever they want. You think you're going to become a better shooter if you go out and buy a $150-180 CR Speed, or Ghost speed holster? Give it a try. I think you will have a lot of people going out and buying them if you changed the rule, and a lot of those same people will be sorry when they realize the holster is not the reason they are still a D, C, B, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 (edited) I did. John said he is going to have to look and make sure it's not a race holster. The thing is the rules should be clear cut with no grey area. FWIW I'm more than a little surprised that Ghost didn't send a prototype to Amidon to clear this up before they marketed the holster. What good is a piece of competition equipment if it doesn't meet the criteria for the competition it's designed for? BB Because it's perfectly legal for IPSC Production. Ghost International is an Italian company. On their website, it states "It's appropriate for sport shooting in the categories:· Single Stack, Production, Standard." When you see Production and Standard in the same sentence, that should make a person stop and figure out Which Production is being referred to, because as you may know, there are differences in the rules. Either way, I don't think it is a Race Holster. If the holster covers the gun up to the ejection port, it's not a race holster in my opinion, I don't care how it's attached to the belt ( provided it's less than 2" ). And no, that isn't in the rules, so i can't point to a rule to back that up, it's just my opinion. Should it be clarified in the rules? NO. And here's why. Eliminate the "no race holster" rule altogether. Just leave the 2" stipulation, let people run whatever they want. You think you're going to become a better shooter if you go out and buy a $150-180 CR Speed, or Ghost speed holster? Give it a try. I think you will have a lot of people going out and buying them if you changed the rule, and a lot of those same people will be sorry when they realize the holster is not the reason they are still a D, C, B, etc. +1. Off topic: Anyway, a tiny side note. There was an thread (which I can't find right now) where a Production shooter was asking if it was okay for him to use a Bladetech G-17 DOH holster for his G-34. The front end of the gun would be sticking out past the bottom of the holster, but the from the ejection port down to where the holster ends, the gun is covered. As I recall, most everybody said that this satisfied the rulebook "must cover the slide up to, ½" below the ejection port" despite the holster not going all the way down. I didn't want to derail the thread at that time, but I was thinking: what if somebody designs a holster that opens up like a clamshell letting you draw out and forward like on a Ghostholster, but has coverage like the present production legal holsters, would it be production legal? And if it was okay for the front end to be sticking out, how much of the slide "needed" to be covered to provide a smaller clamshell? And back on topic: I'm surprised none of the old-timers are commenting about the transition from leather holsters to Kydex holsters. Some of people at the range told me that it was a revolution at that time, when leather was considered to be a normal holster, while the new Kydex was considered a race holster. Edited May 10, 2012 by Skydiver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Ghost International is an Italian company. On their website, it states "It's appropriate for sport shooting in the categories:· Single Stack, Production, Standard." When you see Production and Standard in the same sentence, that should make a person stop and figure out Which Production is being referred to, because as you may know, there are differences in the rules. Single Stack in IPSC is classic isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
38SuperDub Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 Just got an email from John Amidon The Ghost Stinger is "good to go" in production!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Scott Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Just got one too. My rig is good to go as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenG Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Just got an email from John Amidon The Ghost Stinger is "good to go" in production!!!!!!! This is good news. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Scott Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Next question. How do I prove my rig is legal when a RO tries to bump me to open? I am only a freshman in this sport and don't know the proper course of action for this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperman Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 It's up to the RM. An e-mail from Amidon may, or may not, have an influence on his decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxshooter Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 If Amidon says it is good to go and it is a USPSA sanctioned match then I don't see how the RM can over ride his decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Next question. How do I prove my rig is legal when a RO tries to bump me to open? I am only a freshman in this sport and don't know the proper course of action for this situation. It is NOT up to the RM to interpret rules, only to ensure they are followed! Go to the rulebook and show him this: 11.8 Interpretation of Rules 11.8.1 Interpretation of these rules and regulations is the responsibility of the USPSA Director of NROI. 11.8.2 Persons seeking clarification of any rule are required to submit their questions in writing, either by fax, letter or email to NROI headquarters. Tell him you complied with 11.8 and were informed your holster is legal. That should do it. A good RO/RM/MD would check later to make sure. If after that, an RO bumps you to Open, kindly tell him that you will forward the contravention of the rules on to NROI for review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdphotoguy Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Next question. How do I prove my rig is legal when a RO tries to bump me to open? I am only a freshman in this sport and don't know the proper course of action for this situation. Print off John's email and keep it in your range bag if the problem ever arises Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airic Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Carry a copy of the email with you just in case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenG Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 How about posting a copy of the email? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ac4wordplay Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 (edited) Next question. How do I prove my rig is legal when a RO tries to bump me to open? I am only a freshman in this sport and don't know the proper course of action for this situation. It is NOT up to the RM to interpret rules, only to ensure they are followed! Go to the rulebook and show him this: 11.8 Interpretation of Rules 11.8.1 Interpretation of these rules and regulations is the responsibility of the USPSA Director of NROI. 11.8.2 Persons seeking clarification of any rule are required to submit their questions in writing, either by fax, letter or email to NROI headquarters. Tell him you complied with 11.8 and were informed your holster is legal. That should do it. A good RO/RM/MD would check later to make sure. If after that, an RO bumps you to Open, kindly tell him that you will forward the contravention of the rules on to NROI for review. Mark, 11.8 fails to instruct the reader that correspondence from the DNROI carries any official weight. 11.8 continues with relevant information: 11.8.3 All official interpretations of the rulebook published on the USPSA website (www.uspsa.org) will be deemed to be precedents and will be applied to all USPSA matches commencing on or after 7 days from the date of publication. All such interpretation are subject to ratification or modification at a regular or special meeting of the USPSA Board of Directors. It sounds as if all official interpretations of the rulebook are published on the USPSA website. If so, then a letter from DNROI =/= official interpretation. [aside] It's also interesting that for the period after the publication, yet prior to the "on or after 7days from the date of publication" (as stated in 11.8.3) it would seem that "official USPSA interpretations of the rulebook" need not be observed? [/aside] A letter from Amidon is an opinion (from a person of experience and authority, and as such, one that an RM may be inclined to adhere to) but doesn't carry the weight of an official USPSA ruling/interpretation, and in this situation, indicting any staff for "contravention of the rules" and seeking NROI review seems mistaken and without basis. ac edited to add: I don't care about the holster being discussed, and I'm not trying to find it in violation of Production requirements - I'm trying to discuss/recognize (the limitations of) personal (unofficial) correspondence with DNROI, as opposed to official USPSA ruling/interpretation. Edited May 10, 2012 by ac4wordplay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 If Amidon says it is good to go and it is a USPSA sanctioned match then I don't see how the RM can over ride his decision. Easily done. If it's not addressed in either the rulebook, or on the website as an official interpretation, then it's up to the RM to make the call..... We officiate by written rules. That doesn't mean that prudent RMs won't reach out to more experienced RMs, a member of the instructor corps, or John Amidon if there's a difficult rules question.... Personally I'm o.k. with the holster. The rulebook is silent on holster hangers -- which is how we got the DOH, and a few others.... If it makes 2 inches, and meets the other requirements, it's good to play.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
38SuperDub Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 I'm still going with legal - nobody has any basis otherwise and John seems to agree - a RM wanting to try to say its not legal seems to be very nitpicky when there are usually other issues at a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoleroJesse Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 If they do rule on them as race holsters, I think the determining factor would be that there is more than one degree of freedom in their adjustment. That would eliminate just about every Safariland holster with the standard belt loop. You can adjust it for muzzle-forward, straight up, or FBI cant. That's one degree of rotational freedom (one rotational axis). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 [aside] It's also interesting that for the period after the publication, yet prior to the "on or after 7days from the date of publication" (as stated in 11.8.3) it would seem that "official USPSA interpretations of the rulebook" need not be observed? [/aside] The idea there was that if a match is already in progress, the rules don't change in the middle of that match, because John Amidon issues an interpretation. That interpretation, if effective immediately, could result in competitive inequity..... No match lasts longer than seven days currently -- though I seem to remember an area match where the staff shot the weekend before the match was held..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ac4wordplay Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 [aside] It's also interesting that for the period after the publication, yet prior to the "on or after 7days from the date of publication" (as stated in 11.8.3) it would seem that "official USPSA interpretations of the rulebook" need not be observed? [/aside] The idea there was that if a match is already in progress, the rules don't change in the middle of that match, because John Amidon issues an interpretation. That interpretation, if effective immediately, could result in competitive inequity..... No match lasts longer than seven days currently -- though I seem to remember an area match where the staff shot the weekend before the match was held..... Nik, Thanks for the explanation. Makes sense. Best, ac 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