Production bump to Open: stuck declaring minor

[Steven Cline]

Thanks bro!

Wanna know what I think of the idea of letting the shooter re-shoot the stages?

Yes! No, I don't want you to violate the forum rules.

Ya beat me to my own response.

[Sin-ster]

You would need to re-shoot the entire match, cause at the beginning, you declared minor PF. Simple as that. Whether your ammo made major at the start of the match is immaterial, you declared minor, and must be scored as such. If you want to be scored major, you must declare it before the match, but for arguments sake, if you did get bumped to open in the middle of the match, and wanted to get scored major for the remainder of the match, toss the stages you had previously shot, or re-shoot them declaring open major. Either way, its not gonna happen.

This entire thread is making a mountain out of a mole hill, trying to correct an issue that at most might affect .001% or less of actual shooters out there. I wish I could find that dead horse emoticon.....

I agree 100%-- if either of those would be required, it's a very bad idea.

I guess I'm struggling with the "set in stone" nature of a declared PF-- not in terms of Divisions that recognize both Minor and Major and give the shooter the option to choose, and/or use the chrono to verify, but in Production specifically.

[Sin-ster]

Is there a line where people can stand in line to not care about this? Or can we make an appointment?

Sure is!

Right before you click to read the thread, and again before you respond-- don't.

[theycallmeingot]

Moses set it in stone. Deal with it.

[Sin-ster]

Sorry, I disagree. You still seem to think that because the division supports Major, and it wasn't available in the previous division, we should allow redeclaration of power factor. The declaration of power factor at the beginning of the match must stand as the definitive source. They are separate and validated differently. There must be a way of defining a power factor that is set in stone barring a chronograph error and it being tossed. There is no reason to open the gaming door.

We can argue this 15 different ways until were both blue - which we have. I'm not going to agree to your interpretation and at least two other board members don't as well. There's no support to change the rule to allow redeclaration of power factor after the match has begun - for whatever reason.

Indeed, you've got the basis of my interpretation pinned down. (Although I wouldn't call it so much of an interpretation-- I'm pretty much working outside of the rules with these ideas, quite obviously!)

The concrete statement of "delcared PF being a definitive source" actually does away with some of the dancing around the issue we've been experiencing. And it makes sense in every scenario that I can come up with, except (IMO) this one.

Production is a special case to begin with in this regard, and I guess something in my addled brain suggests that it wouldn't be a problem if it were a special case even after the shooter had been bumped out of it.

I'm still unclear as to how this could really hurt the sport, create inequality, etc. And IMHO, that's the only reason to toss the proposed rule change wholesale-- especially with the type of hostility that many are expressing towards it in this thread. (I appreciate your patience and candor, BTW!)

Grumpy's response is a good one and seems to work well with your own-- if declared PF is gospel regardless of "funky circumstances", and subsequent reshoots would be required, it's definitely a no-go. I can get on board with that for sure.

The EZW is another valid reason, if indeed it would be a serious PITA to change. The juice would probably not be worth the squeeze in that event-- until this situation pops up in a more serious situation, at any rate.

I also appreciate the notion of punishing a shooter for violating Division rules-- and can somewhat see the logic of making it doubly harsh for Production, where the restrictions are the tightest.

If I'm missing the full value of any of those three circumstances, that is most certainly the reason why I'm having trouble abandoning my position. At present, there's either nothing concrete in the rule book that clarifies those stances, or much like the rule-in-question, I don't really see any harm that could come of changing what the rule currently says.

[Sin-ster]

Moses set it in stone. Deal with it.

Rest assured-- I'm not losing any sleep over it.

For that matter, it seems as if I'm one of the least emotionally attached to the conversation as it stands-- despite being in the well-berated minority.

[diablodawg]

That guy has a few other divisions he can play in......

So the answer is for a new shooter to play in a division that makesa stock gun less competitive?

All I am saying is score it like everything else, hell, if any division needs a difference it is Production- split times in limited or open guns don't really vary all that much with major vs minor.

I find it funny that we are all about "DVC" except in the most likely division a new shooter will compete in. Then it's just speed and accuracy?

[Flexmoney]

Wouldn't it be more funny if we didn't have a division that a 9mm Glock/XD/Beretta could play in?

And, I really don't understand how a 40 or 45...shooting Major...would be "less competitive" in Limited-10 ??? Stock or not.

[aztecdriver]

Wouldn't it be more funny if we didn't have a division that a 9mm Glock/XD/Beretta could play in?

And, I really don't understand how a 40 or 45...shooting Major...would be "less competitive" in Limited-10 ??? Stock or not.

This. Or better yet let's just let production score major/minor and kill the entire lim 10 division. Wait. Then 9mm would be completely irrelevant because minor sucks.

[Chuck Anderson]

That guy has a few other divisions he can play in......

So the answer is for a new shooter to play in a division that makesa stock gun less competitive?

All I am saying is score it like everything else, hell, if any division needs a difference it is Production- split times in limited or open guns don't really vary all that much with major vs minor.

I find it funny that we are all about "DVC" except in the most likely division a new shooter will compete in. Then it's just speed and accuracy?

There is a power factor for Production. It's just not as high as Major in the other divisions. Production works well as it is. It gives the millions of owners of 9mm's a division they are completely competetive in. If they want to shoot a heavier recoiling gun they are welcome to, but they aren't getting more points for it. This has been covered repeatedly since Production came about. If you make it Major/Minor, particularly if it's limited to 10 rounds, everyone will shoot the Major cal. ammo and we're back to excluding the folks that have 9mms.

Production is easily one of the most popular Divisions in USPSA. Why would anyone want to mess with that.

[Nik Habicht]

Production is easily one of the most popular Divisions in USPSA. Why would anyone want to mess with that.

Thank you. I've been saying this since at least 2003, when the 04 rulebook was being discussed.....

Five years of running and growing a club match and 4+ years of running a section have convinced me that Production just works.... :D

[Steven Cline]

That guy has a few other divisions he can play in......

So the answer is for a new shooter to play in a division that makesa stock gun less competitive?

All I am saying is score it like everything else, hell, if any division needs a difference it is Production- split times in limited or open guns don't really vary all that much with major vs minor.

I find it funny that we are all about "DVC" except in the most likely division a new shooter will compete in. Then it's just speed and accuracy?

Your apparently belief that the equipment makes the difference is in error. The biggest difference between shooters is their skill. A stock gun is competitive if the shooter is competitive. The equipment matters much less. All you need do is watch a shooter right after they have invested in their Limited gun, speed holster and mag holders, reloading gear and so on. Yet for some reason he isn't beating anyone he wasn't beating with his factory Glock 35 in Limited. It's because his skill hasn't increased. Dave Sevigny beat all those Limited guys with their "better" equipment with his mostly stock Glock because he was the better shooter who made the fewest mistakes while shooting the fastest and not sacrificing accuracy.

The shooter will always remain the most critical element. It may be DVC, but there is this monster sized S towering over those three letters.

You are also incorrect in eliminating power from the formula in Production. It's there, but it is a single full power standard to be met. The 9mm standard.

I'm sorry that other's weren't able to help you see it. I hope my post helps/

Edited June 1, 2012 by Steven Cline

[RIIID]

Someone lock this thread, there are people who will never understand how the rules are written. All they want to do is make the rules fit their way.

1-Production is scored MINOR.

2-Power factor can't go up once the match starts, it can only go down or no score.

3-Breaking the rules set for a given Division has its consequences, for Production it is a move to Open and still be scored minor(see #2).

Rich

[GForceLizard]

Technically, he's been shooting Major the whole time; he earned every point he shot, as the scoring comes after the fact. He's already suffered the disadvantage of loading below capacity (if applicable) for those earlier stages, and of course isn't running big sticks, a dot or a comp... No one from Production or Open is going to gripe on terms of fairness to them as rival competitors.

hello, ipsc make very good rule 6.2.53 on this one and it happen tp me one tiem.

IPSC Rule 6.2.5.3

A competitor reclassified to Open Division under Rule 6.2.5.1 will thereafter be subject only to the

provisions of Appendix D1 but is required to continue using the same firearm and sights, unless

Rule 5.1.7 applies. If the competitor’s ammunition satisfies the requirements for Open Major

power factor, his scores for the entire match will be adjusted accordingly.

We could adopt this same type of rule, or not.

[Anopsis]

THAT rule makes perfect sense. Allow Major PF, force them to use the same gun and sights. That negates the possibility of them switching to an Open gun, while not being overly heavy-handed.

The chances of something like that being adopted are practically zero though. People are too resistant to change.

[Skydiver]

THAT rule makes perfect sense. Allow Major PF, force them to use the same gun and sights. That negates the possibility of them switching to an Open gun, while not being overly heavy-handed.

The chances of something like that being adopted are practically zero though. People are too resistant to change.

DNROI's opinion is that equipment reconfiguration is allowed. You'll just need a like minded RM.

Originally, I also thought that swapping sights and changing mag positions wasn't allowed, but the opinion of DNROI is that the reconfiguration is allowed.

See post #22 of the thread "Declaring division, getting bumped to open, and equipment".

Edited June 1, 2012 by Skydiver

[theycallmeingot]

THAT rule makes perfect sense. Allow Major PF, force them to use the same gun and sights. That negates the possibility of them switching to an Open gun, while not being overly heavy-handed.

The chances of something like that being adopted are practically zero though. People are too resistant to change.

It has nothing to do with being resistant to change, and everything to do with it just being a bad idea.

[David.Hylton]

The rules are not broken, this is a tempest in a teapot since applies to so few people.

By shooting major PF ammo in production the shooter has already accepted a competitive disadvantage. It continues if he is reclassified.

If the shooter gets bumped to open and declared major PF, what would happen if he then failed chrono?

Leave it alone. The turn-off of a new shooter argument is unlikely since a new shooter is unlikely to understand the nuances of the scoring nor is a new shooter likely to be significantly impacted by the difference between major and minor scoring.

It is fun to read the discussion though.

[Sin-ster]

It has nothing to do with being resistant to change, and everything to do with it just being a bad idea.

Cripes, be the first to explain why???

[Sin-ster]

Technically, he's been shooting Major the whole time; he earned every point he shot, as the scoring comes after the fact. He's already suffered the disadvantage of loading below capacity (if applicable) for those earlier stages, and of course isn't running big sticks, a dot or a comp... No one from Production or Open is going to gripe on terms of fairness to them as rival competitors.

hello, ipsc make very good rule 6.2.53 on this one and it happen tp me one tiem.

IPSC Rule 6.2.5.3

A competitor reclassified to Open Division under Rule 6.2.5.1 will thereafter be subject only to the

provisions of Appendix D1 but is required to continue using the same firearm and sights, unless

Rule 5.1.7 applies. If the competitor’s ammunition satisfies the requirements for Open Major

power factor, his scores for the entire match will be adjusted accordingly.

We could adopt this same type of rule, or not.

Ugh. For the first time, I favor an IPSC rule over one of our own?

[theycallmeingot]

It has nothing to do with being resistant to change, and everything to do with it just being a bad idea.

Cripes, be the first to explain why???

i feel like others have explained it already, in much more appropriate ways than i can.

i also feel like you're not actually interested in hearing anything that doesn't support your opinion on the matter.

[Nik Habicht]

It has nothing to do with being resistant to change, and everything to do with it just being a bad idea.

Cripes, be the first to explain why???

Really? Here's a non inclusive summation -- and a question for you at the end:

Broad concepts -- competitors in all divisions declare a power factor before the match starts (i.e. before they fire their first shot). Competitors in all divisions may choose minor power factor, competitors in five divisions also have the option of declaring major power factor. Declared power factor is later verified at chrono (where the 3 fastest rounds fired over the chrono are the only rounds in the match to actually "make power factor" and where we give like credit to all of the unmeasured rounds fired at targets on the other stages.) Chrono is only testing for achievement of declared power factor -- if a competitor's ammo does not make the declared power factor, then that competitors power factor declaration is amended -- for a shooter not making the declaration of major, but shooting minor power factor ammo the competitor is reclassified as shooting minor. Competitors declaring minor whose ammunition doesn't achieve the velocities required, are removed from match scoring and shooting for fun.

(There's another huge iniquity that needs to be fixed -- if competitors not achieving their declared power factor are treated differently depending on whether they declared major or minor, perhaps all competitors busting chrono should shoot for no score. :devil: )

Competitors busting divisional requirements are moved to Open division at their declared power factor. If a competitor signs up for Limited 10 Division at major power factor and decides to shoot the same Limited gun he shot at his last match in the 1980s, a single stack chambered in .45 ACP with a comp, that competitor will be moved to open at major power factor. That move to open, major doesn't happen because he's shooting a .45, but because he declared major power factor at the beginning of the match.

Production shooters declare minor at the beginning of the match. Hence they can't re-declare when they move to open. Here's the question for you: Given how few competitors are likely to be affected by the proposed rule change in a given year, and given how annoyed the present membership gets when the rules -- especially the rules affecting production -- are modified what exactly is the benefit to the sport, not to the rare individual, of implementing your desired rules modification? Show me the math -- that large numbers of competitors are both shooting major pf ammo in production and being regularly moved to open division, and I might change my mind....

[Sin-ster]

It has nothing to do with being resistant to change, and everything to do with it just being a bad idea.

Cripes, be the first to explain why???

Really? Here's a non inclusive summation -- and a question for you at the end:

Broad concepts -- competitors in all divisions declare a power factor before the match starts (i.e. before they fire their first shot). Competitors in all divisions may choose minor power factor, competitors in five divisions also have the option of declaring major power factor. Declared power factor is later verified at chrono (where the 3 fastest rounds fired over the chrono are the only rounds in the match to actually "make power factor" and where we give like credit to all of the unmeasured rounds fired at targets on the other stages.) Chrono is only testing for achievement of declared power factor -- if a competitor's ammo does not make the declared power factor, then that competitors power factor declaration is amended -- for a shooter not making the declaration of major, but shooting minor power factor ammo the competitor is reclassified as shooting minor. Competitors declaring minor whose ammunition doesn't achieve the velocities required, are removed from match scoring and shooting for fun.

(There's another huge iniquity that needs to be fixed -- if competitors not achieving their declared power factor are treated differently depending on whether they declared major or minor, perhaps all competitors busting chrono should shoot for no score. :devil: )

Competitors busting divisional requirements are moved to Open division at their declared power factor. If a competitor signs up for Limited 10 Division at major power factor and decides to shoot the same Limited gun he shot at his last match in the 1980s, a single stack chambered in .45 ACP with a comp, that competitor will be moved to open at major power factor. That move to open, major doesn't happen because he's shooting a .45, but because he declared major power factor at the beginning of the match.

Production shooters declare minor at the beginning of the match. Hence they can't re-declare when they move to open. Here's the question for you: Given how few competitors are likely to be affected by the proposed rule change in a given year, and given how annoyed the present membership gets when the rules -- especially the rules affecting production -- are modified what exactly is the benefit to the sport, not to the rare individual, of implementing your desired rules modification? Show me the math -- that large numbers of competitors are both shooting major pf ammo in production and being regularly moved to open division, and I might change my mind....

Ah, yes-- it's a bad idea because the rules are against it at present.

Not singling you out here-- that's been the primary response to why it's a "bad idea", coupled with the "it won't effect many people, especially those who will actually be competitive" line that you added at the end.

How that in any way, shape or form indicates that changing this condition is bad for the sport is beyond me. I'm actually hoping for an answer to that effect, instead of an explanation of how the rules work now-- again and again and again. Flex offered just such an example as it relates to SS and 38 Super; that makes sense, I had not considered it at the time, and I subsequently agree 100% with his assessment. If I seem like I'm "not interested in hearing anything that doesn't support my position", it's because I'm not hearing anything that refutes it, either. We're talking about a change of the rules here-- "because the rules say so" is almost entirely bereft of validity as a response by the very nature of the discussion. If the rules are the problem, they're probably not the solution... (I know, I know-- the rules aren't a problem. Just making a point.)

As to your question:

The benefit to the sport *is* the benefit to the rare individual. They *are* the sport, not the Rule Book. What does it matter if 5 per year would enjoy the rule change, or 500? If there's no loss, only gain... how silly do we have to be to not take steps in that direction?

I'm pretty sure that the current membership gets upset with the rules --especially as they relate to Production-- when they are made more restrictive, often times inexplicably, and require subsequent action on the part of the competitors to come into compliance. Prime example being the 5# trigger weight rule that passed so unanimously, only to be overturned a short time later with equal zeal. The ability to be scored as Major PF after a bump to Open is neither restrictive nor overly generous-- nor is it even that firmly tied to Production! (Per the Rule Book, the competitors entire match will be scored --and in theory has been shot-- in Open Division.) Furthermore, the current rule PROHIBITS such a switch-- so if anything, we're removing regulations, not adding more.

Regardless of declaration, the shooter has been making Major PF throughout the match; he was simply not permitted to declare it by the rules of his chosen Division. (That's not a declaration-- that's a condition. Why not just shoot L10? Because maybe no one at this local club does, and he wants to compete. Maybe his buddy's have a wager going, maybe he's trying to prove about about Major v Minor PF-- does it really matter why?) This is a special case by definition-- it exists only in this specific circumstance. It's only the emphasis placed on the importance of the declaration itself (pretty unfounded, IMHO) that makes a switch to Major scoring even a question...

So let me ask a question...

If the Rule Book were currently worded like IPSC's in regards to this situation... Would you be calling for a more restrictive change that prevented a competitor from violating their "declaration"? Or would you have never considered the need for such a restriction in the first place?

And now for a request...

Can someone, anyone, Bueller provide me with an example, a hypothetical, or even a "cool story bro" as to how a rule change to this effect might cause problems? Not just citing the rules, not pointing out how it's a rare circumstance-- actually coming up with something that could illustrate inequity, a potential for cheating, or anything of that nature as a result of using Major scoring for someone who has been bumped to Open from Production and can meet the power floor?

An example of what I'm looking for might go like this:

"Allowing a shooter that gets bumped to Open to declare Major is inequitable to the competitors in their new Division, and here's why..." (Obviously far from the truth, since according to several posters in this thread, Production shooters can't even be competitive in Open no matter how they're scored. Don't tell Flex, though-- he might start to question his memory of events.)

Thus far, the only truly valid response I've seen is about the problems with EZW and other scoring procedures/programs. As we totally abandoned that contention early on, it still hasn't been fleshed out as to whether or not this is a big problem or a really easy fix...

ETA-- Nik, I wanna reiterate that this is in no way directed solely at you or intended as any kind of a slight. I appreciate the continued discussion and your contributions to the thread!

Edited June 2, 2012 by Sin-ster

[theycallmeingot]

Can someone, anyone, Bueller provide me with an example, a hypothetical, or even a "cool story bro" as to how a rule change to this effect might cause problems? Not just citing the rules, not pointing out how it's a rare circumstance-- actually coming up with something that could illustrate inequity, a potential for cheating, or anything of that nature as a result of using Major scoring for someone who has been bumped to Open from Production and can meet the power floor?

yes. someone signs up for single stack minor shooting a 9mm 1911 with loads that meet the major power floor. he wants to be able to shoot 10 rounds, so he claims minor. it's not a good idea, but it's his choice to make. just like it's anyone's choice to shoot major power factor loads in production. that is also not a good idea, but apparently it's an epidemic, or we wouldn't be going on and on and on about this. he pulls a magazine out of his front pocket after the start signal and gets a bumb to open minor. production shooter does the same exact thing and gets bumped to open with the opportunity to change his declaration to major, after the fact. (an option open to NO other division)

the rules are what they are. the burden is on you to illustrate why the current rules are biased or unfair. instead, you seem to want to change the rulebook just for the hell of it, and just for one division. that would be, by definition, unbalanced and unfair.

the only response that is required to make my point is: the rules are fair, in this regard, right now. do we really need to cater to people who are willingly putting themselves at a disadvantage?

Edited June 2, 2012 by theycallmeingot

[Sin-ster]

Can someone, anyone, Bueller provide me with an example, a hypothetical, or even a "cool story bro" as to how a rule change to this effect might cause problems? Not just citing the rules, not pointing out how it's a rare circumstance-- actually coming up with something that could illustrate inequity, a potential for cheating, or anything of that nature as a result of using Major scoring for someone who has been bumped to Open from Production and can meet the power floor?

yes. someone signs up for single stack minor shooting a 9mm 1911 with loads that meet the major power floor. he wants to be able to shoot 10 rounds, so he claims minor. it's not a good idea, but it's his choice to make. just like it's anyone's choice to shoot major power factor loads in production. that is also not a good idea, but apparently it's an epidemic, or we wouldn't be going on and on and on about this. he pulls a magazine out of his front pocket after the start signal and gets a bumb to open minor. production shooter does the same exact thing and gets bumped to open with the opportunity to change his declaration to major, after the fact. (an option open to NO other division)

the rules are what they are. the burden is on you to illustrate why the current rules are biased or unfair. instead, you seem to want to change the rulebook just for the hell of it, and just for one division. that would be, by definition, unbalanced and unfair.

the only response that is required to make my point is: the rules are fair, in this regard, right now. do we really need to cater to people who are willingly putting themselves at a disadvantage?

Good stuff-- that's the type of thing I've been hoping for!

Of course SS ≠ Production. The shooter in that Division who declares Minor despite being able to meet the Major PF floor is indeed playing to a (perceived) advantage in this decision, by being able to load more rounds in his magazine as a trade off. He is able to make this decision willingly, and so it meets the true spirit of the "declaration"-- as per Flex's earlier example, I agree that he should not be able to change his PF Declaration. He sought an edge by declaring Minor and allowing him to switch can easily (and effectively, as you've shown) argued to be unfair-- not so much to the Open shooters with whom he's now competing, but the SS shooters he has now left to their own devices. IOW-- there's definitely some questionable gaming going on in this example, due wholly to the fact that they are able to decide between Major Scoring and higher magazine capacity.

The option to change PF with the change of Division should not be available to any other Division as only in Production is one not permitted to choose in the first place. As it's a special circumstance, it (perhaps) warrants special consideration-- and as we both agree that there's no advantage whatsoever (perceived or otherwise) in shooting Major PF ammo in a DIvision that only recognizes Minor scoring, there's literally nothing to be gamed or gained by doing so. That means that the restriction is not in fact intended to prevent someone from gaining an unfair advantage, but serves instead as a punitive consequence for an already poor decision.

You are correct-- the burden is on me in this case. And I think I've done a pretty thorough (longwinded?) job of indicating that the double-punishment is a bit on the extreme side. As Production is unlike any other Division in terms of recognized PF, it IMO calls for special considerations-- as per the restriction that currently exists in this regard. And since the only times the Divisions compete against each other is in the Unofficial Combined Results, I submit that the only way in which PF could possibly be construed as unfair is in a situation where one Division is restricted from a Major score in the unfortunate event that a competitor is bumped out of it into Open-- as per the situation we're discussing right now.

If properly substantiated, I agree-- stating that the rules are fair as they stand would be sufficient refutation. But do we really need to punish people who put themselves at a disadvantage, when in fact they have no other choice if they wish to shoot Production? To me, it makes less sense to punish someone who is willing to accept such a handicap without any possible advantage in return-- especially as said competitor is given no other option but to shoot in another Division entirely.