Proposed Multigun rules Posted for comment on uspsa.org

[prolinklt]

I shoot in area 6 multigun match so rule changes have no bearing if there is no match held.

[frag316]

Just a few things after a quick skim, I'll probably have more when I read these more thoroughly.

1) I think we need to have some sort of separate classification for MG. If someone is classified in multiple pistol divisions, which classification do you use? For a guy like Jerry Miculek, who's a GM revolver guy but also a multi-time MG national champ, no big deal. But, as an example, if a guy like Rob Leatham were to get into MG, would he instantly be categorized as a GM because of his pistol class? I think that's a bad idea. At some point, there needs to be separate classifications.

2) The word "gauge" is misspelled on most/all of the charts for the firearms appendices.

3) The way I read the appendices, you can't use a gun like the Saiga or the Akdal Mk 1919 (detachable magazines) in any division but Open. Why is that? As long as the gun meets the other requirements for Tactical or Limited, what's the difference if it has a detachable mag if the mag meets the capacity requirements?

4) With regard to the debate about Heavy Metal Tactical vs Heavy Metal Limited and the 1911 restriction on Heavy Metal Limited, is there a possibility of changing the divisions to Heavy Tactical and Heavy Limited, removing the 1911 and pump restrictions for Heavy Limited, and having a true Heavy Metal division with the 1911 and pump requirement there? You have three mousegun divisions (Open, Tactical, and Limited), why not three real gun divisions (Heavy Tactical, Heavy Limited, and Heavy Metal)?

5) With the seemingly overwhelming enthusiasm for time-plus scoring, I'd rearrange the scoring methods section to put time-plus first, followed by "traditional."

6) As far as I can tell, 8.3.6 and 8.3.7 are an attempt to come up with a time-plus version of the enhanced target scoring piece currently in 8.2.8.2, but it's penalty-based only. Time-plus really needs to have something that reflects enhanced target scoring like traditional scoring does. I think the penalties would only apply if the competitor doesn't make a good-faith effort to engage the targets (and now we're dangerously approaching IDPA FTDR-style issues, I realize). I'm not sure how it would work, I just think the scoring methods are a bit unequal as written here.

7) 8.3.11-8.3.13 are kind of dumb in my not so humble opinion. Why are we awarding points when we can just go off of straight time? I think we're overly complicating the scoring here. The fastest guy overall wins the match. Add up all of the times and the smallest number wins. Or am I missing something here? It seems the awarding of points is to avoid making it look like Outlaw or IDPA.

8) Does 2.3.1 remove the restrictions on putting magazines in pockets like we see in Production and Single Stack (e.g., putting magazines in front pockets as opposed to rear)?

That's what I have for now, maybe more later.

Thanks for the opportunity!

[Chuck Anderson]

7) 8.3.11-8.3.13 are kind of dumb in my not so humble opinion. Why are we awarding points when we can just go off of straight time? I think we're overly complicating the scoring here. The fastest guy overall wins the match. Add up all of the times and the smallest number wins. Or am I missing something here? It seems the awarding of points is to avoid making it look like Outlaw or IDPA.

Almost all, if not all of the IMGA matches (Outlaw) you refer to use the points system for stage points. If you go off of straight time there is a tendency to weight the match almost completely towards the long range rifle stage (s). For example. I shot a rifle only match last month. 6 stages. The first long range stage I spent longer shooting it than I did on the other 5 (including one more long range rifle stage) stages. The point value is a way to equalize the stages to a degree. Otherwise the close fast stages are really a waste of time to shoot.

[Benelli Chick]

"7) 8.3.11-8.3.13 are kind of dumb in my not so humble opinion. Why are we awarding points when we can just go off of straight time? I think we're overly complicating the scoring here. The fastest guy overall wins the match. Add up all of the times and the smallest number wins. Or am I missing something here? It seems the awarding of points is to avoid making it look like Outlaw or IDPA."

Because, unless there are no long stages and no short stages, and all stages are almost identical, total time is a crime!

Seriously, it's very difficult to design stages that are all about the same time. Because if you have a LONG stage, 10 seconds may make very little difference in the point system, but in total time, 10 seconds off a 120 sec stage, doesn't mean you tanked it, but that 10 seconds might lose you the match. Let's say your competitor had a jam on a stage that was 40 seconds long, the jam cost him 8 seconds. That's a LOT of time on a short stage! It still cost him less, though he TANKED that stage!

Very few matches use total time, though 3GN is apparently using it at their matches. While, it's easier to score, if the stages are not basically equal in length, it's not very fair. For 3GN, it's level playing field, all the stages seem to be VERY similar in length, so probably a good decision for what they want to do! No calculation except addition involved for the TV viewer. You can tell where everyone stands immediately. Their choice and it seems to work well for them. But, trying to design stages with just equal length in mind, well, that might not be that much fun!

Just my opinion!

Denise

[DyNo!]

Very few matches use total time, though 3GN is apparently using it at their matches. While, it's easier to score, if the stages are not basically equal in length, it's not very fair. For 3GN, it's level playing field, all the stages seem to be VERY similar in length, so probably a good decision for what they want to do! No calculation except addition involved for the TV viewer. You can tell where everyone stands immediately. Their choice and it seems to work well for them. But, trying to design stages with just equal length in mind, well, that might not be that much fun!

Just my opinion!

Denise

And even then, not everyone involved is a fan of total time scoring in that series. I'm pretty sure the only reason it is done like that is for TV. One second on a 60 second stage SHOULD NOT equal one second on a 12 second stage.

[co-exprs]

I started shooting HM this season and was kinda surprised to find so much fracture in a generally small participation division. I believe in keeping things simple and right now HM isn't simple. I understood the addition of HM scope as there are tons of guys who wanted to shoot HM, but simply didn't have the eyes for it. My shooting buddy Geoff is an outstanding competitor and is blind as a bat. If he can't shoot with glass, he can't shoot. To splinter the division any further only serves to split up the already small group of people who shoot HM. The whole point of HM is to provide a different set of challenges for the competitor to overcome. Heavier recoil and limited round count are the point. The basic rules for HM are fine and doable for most competitors. 308 rifle, 45 pistol and 12ga pump. There is really no point in requiring a 1911 and only serves to limit participation. There are lots of competitors (majority really) who don't like shooting 1911 based pistols in 3G. In addition 1911s are far more expensive than other platforms. No one dictates what rifle platform must be used and to be honest, I like to see some variety in equipment selection. I like 1911s but it's a pointless rule. 8rds vs 10rds... I don't care. I have mags for both, but I have to say again it's a pointless rule. 10rd mags is already challenging to both shoot and sometimes get enough mags onto your belt. 8rd mags makes USPSA matches different from the already established norm which doesn't need to be. I'm an old single stacker and my pistol is more reliable with 8rd mags, but it's still a pointless rule. 1x glass vs irons in HML... jury is still out on that one. Pat Kelly and Kurt Miller demonstrate to the rest us, match after match the merits of iron sights. I'm neither here nor there on the rule, but I do think that allowing the 1x is attractive to many would be HM shooters and doesn't change the parameters of the game or change the challenges in which the HM division strives to exploit.

[Nuke8401]

3) The way I read the appendices, you can't use a gun like the Saiga or the Akdal Mk 1919 (detachable magazines) in any division but Open. Why is that? As long as the gun meets the other requirements for Tactical or Limited, what's the difference if it has a detachable mag if the mag meets the capacity requirements?

What’s the difference?

You’re kidding right?

- After the beep the second mag has no capacity limit.

- 8 shell reload in 6-8 seconds for a tube vs. 2-3 seconds for a mag gun.

- 1 reload in a COF for a mag gun vs. 2,3,4,5,6 reloads for a tube gun.

Leave the mag guns in open.

David E.

[Jesse Tischauser]

Thanks for putting together a single USPSA ruleset for Multigun it should help a lot. I know everyone would like a rulebook that is just one page but that isn't going to happen. That said I'm sure there are some places we can cut a few words, but it would only reduce it by a page at tops. A concern with reducing the verbiage is the intent may be lost, especially with those trying to start up their first multigun match.

2.3.1 During the course of fire, after the start signal, unless stipulated otherwise in the stage procedure, spare ammunition, magazines and/or speed loading devices shall be carried in retention devices, specifically designed for that purpose. Unless specifically prohibited in the Written Stage Briefing, a competitor may also carry additional magazines or speed loading devices in apparel pocket(s) and retrieve and use them

without penalty.

To

2.3.1 During the course of fire, after the start signal, unless stipulated otherwise in the stage procedure, spare ammunition, magazines and/or speed loading devices may be carried anywhere on the competitor without penalty.

Another would be

8.3.7 In order to make long rifle shots “worth shooting” they may be designated as an enhanced penalty target. A miss on an enhanced penalty targets can be up to a 20 second penalty. Only to be used for targets beyond 100 yards.

To

8.3.7 Missed steel targets over 100 yards may be designated as an enhanced penalty of up to 20 seconds.

8.3.6 In order for match flow it may be necessary to limit times per shooter on long range rifle stages and may be used only for Rifle or Multigun stages that have rifle targets set at least 100 yards away. When the shooter "times out," the stage is scored as shot including any misses and FTE penalties. The max time is the time recorded. Minimum time limit is 180 seconds. Time limits should be set for match flow and not as a penalty for slower shooters or to create a fixed time stage. If not specified, the maximum time for any stage (including target penalties) is 500 seconds.

To

8.3.6 Max times may be used on stages with targets farther than 100 yards. Minimum time is 180 seconds, and if not specified is 500 seconds to include penalties. When max time is exceeded RO will call "stop," record max time and score stage as shot to include misses and FTE penalties.

Only actual rule change I would make is setting 12guage as minimum for major in Tactical. I know that is what most shoot now anyways but I would prefer if there was a difference between minor and major shotgun. I've never shot a HF scored multigun so I'm not sure it would matter.

I think leaving the shotgun as 20 or larger is the way to go. There are and hopefully will be a lot more junior and female shooters entering the sport in the future. Having the option of using a 20 gauge without penalty is a good option to have.

[Jesse Tischauser]

"7) 8.3.11-8.3.13 are kind of dumb in my not so humble opinion. Why are we awarding points when we can just go off of straight time? I think we're overly complicating the scoring here. The fastest guy overall wins the match. Add up all of the times and the smallest number wins. Or am I missing something here? It seems the awarding of points is to avoid making it look like Outlaw or IDPA."

Because, unless there are no long stages and no short stages, and all stages are almost identical, total time is a crime!

Seriously, it's very difficult to design stages that are all about the same time. Because if you have a LONG stage, 10 seconds may make very little difference in the point system, but in total time, 10 seconds off a 120 sec stage, doesn't mean you tanked it, but that 10 seconds might lose you the match. Let's say your competitor had a jam on a stage that was 40 seconds long, the jam cost him 8 seconds. That's a LOT of time on a short stage! It still cost him less, though he TANKED that stage!

Very few matches use total time, though 3GN is apparently using it at their matches. While, it's easier to score, if the stages are not basically equal in length, it's not very fair. For 3GN, it's level playing field, all the stages seem to be VERY similar in length, so probably a good decision for what they want to do! No calculation except addition involved for the TV viewer. You can tell where everyone stands immediately. Their choice and it seems to work well for them. But, trying to design stages with just equal length in mind, well, that might not be that much fun!

Just my opinion!

Denise

I concur. Longer stages need to be worth the same as shorter stages as they are all equal tests of the many different 3 gun skill sets. A high round count shotgun stage with 30 rounds is going to take 5 times longer time to shoot than a high round count pistol stage. Those are both viable skill set challenges in multi gun. Same goes for the long range Rifle stages. A 20 round all long range rifle stage can take upwards of 200 seconds. It is no different than a 30 second pistol challenge. It's just different.

Edited June 21, 2012 by Jesse Tischauser

[co-exprs]

I agree Denise. As an example, when shooting one of the local Johnson 3gun matches last year, I edged out my buddy on every stage. 5% here 3% there. We got to the last stage, which was a 12 shot shotgun only stage. Geoff napalmed that little stage, by getting all of his hits and nailing his 4 shell reload. I fumbled the reload and missed one bird. The stage was very fast making every second count. His stellar performance on that one stage earned him the win for the day. I was pissed because I beat him all day and he won it in the 4th quarter with a long bomb. It made that match fun and interesting though. Time plus based on percentage equalizes things by adding value to fast stages. I no longer worry so much about long range rifle. So long as I stay in the hunt on time, I generally do alright overall.

Using the powerfactor and scoring system is fine, however it does introduce some challenges in MG. 1st is turn over time. It is already challenging to get things reset and the next shooter ready to go when a fast turn around is needed. There are considerably more targets and they are spaced much further apart than in a pistol match. Second is in the timeliness and accuracy of scoring. Data entry at major MG matches is already a labor intensive activity. 3rd is logistics. Who's gonna go to a 15 man squad and collect chronograph samples for 3 different guns and then run them all through a chronograph.

[MarkCO]

Using the powerfactor and scoring system is fine, however it does introduce some challenges in MG. 1st is turn over time. It is already challenging to get things reset and the next shooter ready to go when a fast turn around is needed. There are considerably more targets and they are spaced much further apart than in a pistol match. Second is in the timeliness and accuracy of scoring. Data entry at major MG matches is already a labor intensive activity. 3rd is logistics. Who's gonna go to a 15 man squad and collect chronograph samples for 3 different guns and then run them all through a chronograph.

Not that big of a deal when the system is defined. Go to Nationals and see for yourself. With systems like Practiscore and Palms in EZWinscore, no paper system will ever be as accurate nor as fast first time through. We slowed down scoring some at the CO match because no-one had ever run Palms in a MG match before, so we used paper to score Time-Plus, and still had results posted in less than 5 minutes after the last shot fired.

Denise and her staff who have scored RM3G have a system that works, and it is great, but...I doubt that the average match has the caliber of stats to pull it off. Sure, there are some stats Gurus, like Linda, who make it look easy, but trust the stats folks and MDs when they tell you it is not. I don't know if RM3G has, or will, considered using Practiscore or some other electronic scroing system, and I really don't care one way or the other since I know Denise will make it work no matter what (unless they run out of hot-dogs). However, the majority of matches would benefit from using a "better" scoring program and some of these "oh crap" issues we all try to avoid in scoring would go away.

[Dan Sierpina]

Another vote here to keep both Heavy divisions with 12 gauge pump guns and .45 cal Limited 10 guns. A friend asked if a .45ACP revolver could be used for Heavy Metal, under this proposal, he couldn't use a gun with a bigger disadvantage.

[co-exprs]

Can't imagine where he would find room for all of the moon clips, but it would be interesting to watch.

[frag316]

7) 8.3.11-8.3.13 are kind of dumb in my not so humble opinion. Why are we awarding points when we can just go off of straight time? I think we're overly complicating the scoring here. The fastest guy overall wins the match. Add up all of the times and the smallest number wins. Or am I missing something here? It seems the awarding of points is to avoid making it look like Outlaw or IDPA.

Almost all, if not all of the IMGA matches (Outlaw) you refer to use the points system for stage points. If you go off of straight time there is a tendency to weight the match almost completely towards the long range rifle stage (s). For example. I shot a rifle only match last month. 6 stages. The first long range stage I spent longer shooting it than I did on the other 5 (including one more long range rifle stage) stages. The point value is a way to equalize the stages to a degree. Otherwise the close fast stages are really a waste of time to shoot.

"7) 8.3.11-8.3.13 are kind of dumb in my not so humble opinion. Why are we awarding points when we can just go off of straight time? I think we're overly complicating the scoring here. The fastest guy overall wins the match. Add up all of the times and the smallest number wins. Or am I missing something here? It seems the awarding of points is to avoid making it look like Outlaw or IDPA."

Because, unless there are no long stages and no short stages, and all stages are almost identical, total time is a crime!

Seriously, it's very difficult to design stages that are all about the same time. Because if you have a LONG stage, 10 seconds may make very little difference in the point system, but in total time, 10 seconds off a 120 sec stage, doesn't mean you tanked it, but that 10 seconds might lose you the match. Let's say your competitor had a jam on a stage that was 40 seconds long, the jam cost him 8 seconds. That's a LOT of time on a short stage! It still cost him less, though he TANKED that stage!

Very few matches use total time, though 3GN is apparently using it at their matches. While, it's easier to score, if the stages are not basically equal in length, it's not very fair. For 3GN, it's level playing field, all the stages seem to be VERY similar in length, so probably a good decision for what they want to do! No calculation except addition involved for the TV viewer. You can tell where everyone stands immediately. Their choice and it seems to work well for them. But, trying to design stages with just equal length in mind, well, that might not be that much fun!

Just my opinion!

Denise

"7) 8.3.11-8.3.13 are kind of dumb in my not so humble opinion. Why are we awarding points when we can just go off of straight time? I think we're overly complicating the scoring here. The fastest guy overall wins the match. Add up all of the times and the smallest number wins. Or am I missing something here? It seems the awarding of points is to avoid making it look like Outlaw or IDPA."

Because, unless there are no long stages and no short stages, and all stages are almost identical, total time is a crime!

Seriously, it's very difficult to design stages that are all about the same time. Because if you have a LONG stage, 10 seconds may make very little difference in the point system, but in total time, 10 seconds off a 120 sec stage, doesn't mean you tanked it, but that 10 seconds might lose you the match. Let's say your competitor had a jam on a stage that was 40 seconds long, the jam cost him 8 seconds. That's a LOT of time on a short stage! It still cost him less, though he TANKED that stage!

Very few matches use total time, though 3GN is apparently using it at their matches. While, it's easier to score, if the stages are not basically equal in length, it's not very fair. For 3GN, it's level playing field, all the stages seem to be VERY similar in length, so probably a good decision for what they want to do! No calculation except addition involved for the TV viewer. You can tell where everyone stands immediately. Their choice and it seems to work well for them. But, trying to design stages with just equal length in mind, well, that might not be that much fun!

Just my opinion!

Denise

I concur. Longer stages need to be worth the same as shorter stages as they are all equal tests of the many different 3 gun skill sets. A high round count shotgun stage with 30 rounds is going to take 5 times longer time to shoot than a high round count pistol stage. Those are both viable skill set challenges in multi gun. Same goes for the long range Rifle stages. A 20 round all long range rifle stage can take upwards of 200 seconds. It is no different than a 30 second pistol challenge. It's just different.

OK, I admit I hadn't considered all of that. I'm kind of new to 3-gun, and have done almost nothing with course design.

Thanks!

[frag316]

3) The way I read the appendices, you can't use a gun like the Saiga or the Akdal Mk 1919 (detachable magazines) in any division but Open. Why is that? As long as the gun meets the other requirements for Tactical or Limited, what's the difference if it has a detachable mag if the mag meets the capacity requirements?

What’s the difference?

You’re kidding right?

- After the beep the second mag has no capacity limit.

- 8 shell reload in 6-8 seconds for a tube vs. 2-3 seconds for a mag gun.

- 1 reload in a COF for a mag gun vs. 2,3,4,5,6 reloads for a tube gun.

Leave the mag guns in open.

David E.

I probably should have said this better, but what I meant by meeting the capacity requirements is don't let anyone use magazines with a capacity over 9 (or 8) rounds at all. I realize the reloads are faster, but if the capacity overall is the same, I think we're standing in the way of progress by keeping magazine guns in Open only.

[MarkCO]

OK, I admit I hadn't considered all of that. I'm kind of new to 3-gun, and have done almost nothing with course design.

Thanks!

Well then, welcome! Find the nearest major match and volunteer to RO. You will learn a bunch from some of the best people anywhere.

[SteveT-NV]

The proposed USPSA rifle, shotgun and multigun rules are posted at www.uspsa.org. There is a link on the main page.

They are there for member comment and input. Non-uspsa member 3 gunners are also welcome to comment.

Please send your input to me at area2@uspsa.org or post it here.

I know this has been beat to death, but I feel that the shotgun tube length should be limited in tactical. As a relatively new competitor that has already purchased a mag extension, and now knowing I should purchase a longer one is quite annoying. Yes I know it's only another $100, but all those $100 purchases add up pretty quick.

It's not just the equipment race, but it was my understanding that a big part of the shotgun portion of the matches was the competitors ability to reload the shotgun. It's a bit disheartening, that after spending a lot of time practicing my reloads daily for the last six months and now knowing that just buying a longer tube can take away some of that potential advantage.

Thank you for allowing input on the rules.

Steve

[frag316]

OK, I admit I hadn't considered all of that. I'm kind of new to 3-gun, and have done almost nothing with course design.

Thanks!

Well then, welcome! Find the nearest major match and volunteer to RO. You will learn a bunch from some of the best people anywhere.

I'm working on it! The nearest regular match to me is three hours. I'm committed to a bunch of pistol matches this year, but I'm changing my shooting schedule next year to add in some major 3-gun matches (and get stomped while learning).

Thanks!

[Benelli Chick]

"It's not just the equipment race, but it was my understanding that a big part of the shotgun portion of the matches was the competitors ability to reload the shotgun. It's a bit disheartening, that after spending a lot of time practicing my reloads daily for the last six months and now knowing that just buying a longer tube can take away some of that potential advantage. "

You still have to load just as many...so your reload practice is not wasted.

Also, if you have a bunch of ports or whatever, you may not want that long mad tube anyway.

The advantage is that sometimes, you can jam extra rounds in before you make it to the next position, but, I've seen people just THINK and schedule their reloads so they can shoot and always be moving, so it's not a huge disadvantage!

Never fear!!! Your practice was worthwhile!

[co-exprs]

Personally it doesn't matter one way or the other for me. I have 9rd tubes on both of my shotguns and I've never felt the need to add more capacity, or felt outgunned by anyone running a longer tube. There are some matches however which allow 9 in the tube on cruiser starts. I have an 8rd plug which drops in easily if a magazine limit is specified. My only input is that the rule needs to be very clearly written. The shotgun mag capacity and the abandonment rule generated a lot of questions for Marc to answer at CO State MG.

One other observation, and this is about the process of making the rules rather than the actual rules themselves. At Co State MG it was generally understood that 1x optics were not legal in HM. The online rules clearly stated the sighting requirements as iron. One competitor showed up and shot with 1x optics. Upon inquiry I learned that the rule had been changed, but the information was in documented meeting minutes from several months prior and had not yet been updated in the rule set. The sighting rule change didn't have much impact on my performance and had no impact on where I placed in the match (Romero still would have taken my lunch money), but as a general observation, competitors shouldn't have to hunt for the latest changes. I didn't even know to look at the minutes and even though the rule change was several months old, most didn't know about it at all. Either the new rules need to be implemented on a known periodic basis or they need to be updated in the common rule set, immediately upon approval.

[Jesse Tischauser]

The proposed USPSA rifle, shotgun and multigun rules are posted at www.uspsa.org. There is a link on the main page.

They are there for member comment and input. Non-uspsa member 3 gunners are also welcome to comment.

Please send your input to me at area2@uspsa.org or post it here.

I know this has been beat to death, but I feel that the shotgun tube length should be limited in tactical. As a relatively new competitor that has already purchased a mag extension, and now knowing I should purchase a longer one is quite annoying. Yes I know it's only another $100, but all those $100 purchases add up pretty quick.

It's not just the equipment race, but it was my understanding that a big part of the shotgun portion of the matches was the competitors ability to reload the shotgun. It's a bit disheartening, that after spending a lot of time practicing my reloads daily for the last six months and now knowing that just buying a longer tube can take away some of that potential advantage.

Thank you for allowing input on the rules.

Steve

I run a 12 round tube and belive it or not I have been beaten by guys with 8 round tubes.

It isn't an advantage so much but it gives you felxibility when and where you do your loading. You still only start with 8 in the tube.

Edited June 21, 2012 by Jesse Tischauser

[Dan Sierpina]

Can't imagine where he would find room for all of the moon clips, but it would be interesting to watch.

Those wheelgunners are resourceful!

[ziebart]

I think leaving the shotgun as 20 or larger is the way to go. There are and hopefully will be a lot more junior and female shooters entering the sport in the future. Having the option of using a 20 gauge without penalty is a good option to have.

I agree with accomodating junior and female shooters to grow the sport, and am not saying to ban 20 gauge. I just feel that if we require .40/165PF for pistol and 320 PF for rifle we should have a higher PF to disguish major/minor in shotgun as well. Since chronographs can be a problem with shotguns, gauge seems to be the only way. But like I said I have never shot a HF multigun so I'm not sure how much difference minor/major makes since almost all shotgun targets are steel or clays.

[Chuck Anderson]

I run a 12 round tube and belive it or not I ahve been beaten by guys with 8 round tubes.

I've seen you shoot...I believe it.

[Jesse Tischauser]

I think leaving the shotgun as 20 or larger is the way to go. There are and hopefully will be a lot more junior and female shooters entering the sport in the future. Having the option of using a 20 gauge without penalty is a good option to have.

I agree with accomodating junior and female shooters to grow the sport, and am not saying to ban 20 gauge. I just feel that if we require .40/165PF for pistol and 320 PF for rifle we should have a higher PF to disguish major/minor in shotgun as well. Since chronographs can be a problem with shotguns, gauge seems to be the only way. But like I said I have never shot a HF multigun so I'm not sure how much difference minor/major makes since almost all shotgun targets are steel or clays.

I'd have to agree with that although I am not a fan of any of the major/minor stuff in 3 gun. Heck what if I want to shoot .38 super major in HM?