P.E. Kelley Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Beta Mags in 3 gunning??? Why? Because we can??? Do we collectively believe that our sport will be improved by the use of 50 or 100 round magazines? Is not the goal to improve our shooting and gun handling skills? If, at the next RM3gun or the SMM3gun 10 A+ class guys showed up with 100 round capable rifles, 20 round box magazine shotguns, and the ever-present 27 round pistols, who else could finish in the top 10? Would that be an indication of their superior skill or merely superior capacity? What is our goal with jumping on the greater AND GREATER capacity bandwagon? Don’t get me wrong I too believe that the AWB was just a foolish, feel-good liberal law. But I do remember the bygone days of our sport when “combat shooting” was still what we were doing and flush fit mags just made sense. We all played within the rules (we do now too) but 8 round 45’s are what we had and the same names still led the pack at the majors because of SKILL. So if one of us shows up with a 100 rounder then we ALL have to just to stay EVEN. Is this where we want to go? I am not trying to turn back the hand of time just trying to think ahead. Just had to rant. PK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Pat, The only reason I wouldn't support a mag capacity limit is that outsiders would use it to pound us over the head with it. Aside from that, I would have zero problems with 20 rounds (loaded, not mag capacity) limit to equalize the playing field with the M1A, etc. Shoot 22 rounds w/o a reload, and go home for the day. It would hopefully be another nail in the coffin for stupid 31 round stand and shoot courses. I have to say on the "practical" handgun, that I, personally, made a "practical" decision away from the 8 rounds SS gun. At the same time, I don't have an issue with a 10 round limit to force people to exercise ammo management and preserve the art of the reload. I openly admit that my strategy at the IE 3 gun match was to load 18 rounds in the Glock and hose like hell. Ammo management and accuracy be damned. 10 rounds would put an end to that, hopefully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I might be able to support a capacity limit in Limited, but "Open" already has too many restrictions. And rifle is probably the case where capacity makes the least difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimel Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Control these factors with good course design not a thicker rule book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Is there really a problem with really high capacity magazines screwing up the over all results in 3 gun? I don't think mag capacity is seperating the leaders from the pack. A full auto with an unlimited ammo supply wouldn't help most shooters beat the big dogs. I vote to leave it alone. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimel Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Actually, it would be fun to have a stage where a Beta C was required. Say 60-70 rounds, no mag changes allowed. Have a couple loaner spares laying around for those that don't have one yet (like me...but it's on my list). And not a total psycho hose fest either. Lots of tough shots at decent ranges. Some hosing too just for the heck of it. So what if it takes you 5 minutes to run through the stage. The grin from ear to ear by the end will make it all worth while. That would also be a good endurance test of both the shooter and their equipment. Heck, make it a multi-gun stage with a dozen slugs, 50 or so birdshot and 50 or so pistol rounds. Sounds like an MGM type of stage for sure! (I just gotta get around to shooting that one of these days...maybe 2005!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Beverley Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Mag capacity, especially fixed mag tubes, makes a huge difference in shotgun matches. On the other hand I believe Open should be Open. In the other divisions, for shotgun at least, it makes a lot of sense to control capacity to achieve competition fairness. Then as Pat points out it's skill that counts. IPSC Shotgun Standard division restricts guns to 9 rounds and no detachable mags IPSC Modified Division restricts capacity in a different way by specifying a max overall length of the gun but no detachable mags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Buff Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I'm with Neil on this...a little bit...and a little with EricW... I don't want the sport to become restrictive w.r.t. how to play it and I don't want it to be a "best equipment wins" sport either...thats why the different div's. The rules around SG and HG are nicely defined and acceptable to most...rifle appears to be a different ball game. The manual std and open div's are real different from each other and, to me at least, seem similar to HG and SG div's. Semi-auto std and open however appear, again to me, to be semi-open and fully open div's. Both have comps and are identical to each other except for the optics and bi-pod. Maybe a box for std div mags should be introduced or max capacity or max length. I feel this would separate the div's enough so that the one does not appear to be the "I don't have money for" of the other. This would also make IPSC tournament div's more similar internally and different from the other div's. I shoot HG std and Rifle semi-auto std (getting a semi-auto std SG now) to compete in IPSC tournament std. Maybe rifle div's restrictions should be similar to those of HG and SG to just make it "look" right....? I'll stop japping now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Trust me, with rifle it doesn't matter how many rounds you have on tap if you can't hit what you aim at! Now, those fools with detachable magazine shotguns seem to finish higher than my...errr...their...A-card would normally indicate. And I fear with the 20-round drum, even higher (at non-USPSA matches, of course ). Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I relish the thought of taking on someone in a match, where they are using a Beta mag. Kick their ass, I will. Fully loaded, the things a brick. And it sticks out, getting in the way of a proper hold, banging into doors, walls, etc. The only thing worse than a Beta in an AR is a Beta in an MP-5/H-K 94. In the H-K, you can barely get a hold on the gun, the mag is such a goiter. In something like the MGM Ironman, it might help, but for any run 'n gun stage the advantage is illusory. For Open, leave it alone. For the other categories, come up with a compelling argument for any restriction, and I'll entertain the notion of nixing the Beta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Agreed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBaneACP Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I love the way the old problems/debates come round and round and round again! It seems to me, though, that there's a real opportunity here to be rational. OPEN = anything goes. Period. Beta mags, compensator muzzle brakes the size of a Pittsburg suburb, scope-mounted computers that factor in temperature, wind, distance (coming soon, $3K, save your pennies), hand-held rocket launchers...okay, I exagerate, but I think we NEED an anything goes class to beta-test new *stuff* and to drive experimentation (especially in rifles, which are truly works in process these days) and that class should not have any restrictions that would hamper said experimentation. LIMITED, STANDARD, "NORMAL GUY," WHATEVER CLASS = Restrictions in place aimed PRIMARILY at keeping the sport accessible for both newcomers and those participants who aren't interested in the cutting edge/experimental end of the sport. The restrictions could include *rational* capacity limits (oh heck, how about 20 round rifle; 10 round pistol; 5 or 7 round shotgun?), no optics, military style slash suppressor okay but no wild and wooley competition comps. We don't get dinged by The Other Side for imposing capacity limits on ourselves, because we have stated our reason for those limits, plus we have OPEN class with no limitations whatsoever. We protect our top shooters, our experimenters AND the men and women who just want to come out and shoot WITHOUT going to the next step. And Patrick, in the Real World imitating sport, I hear the Big Box Mags aren't all that popular in Iraq for all the reasons you state. mb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 {slight thread drift} Re: The sandbox. Mike, given the chocie of a box full of Beta mags to turn an M4 into an impromptu SAW, and walking over to the supply NCO and drawing a real SAW, I'll take the walk. Rifles aren't built to be crew-served weapons. And I if have to haul something anywhere that doesn't involve wheels, it won't be a Beta-equipped rifle. But I agree we should allow Open as a wild experimental category. I like the caliber criteria Richard Davis settled on for a lot of categories for Second Chance: anything that doesn't damage the tables. Open should have as the only unbreakable/undebatable rule: "Nothing unsafe to shoot or stand next to." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.E. Kelley Posted October 1, 2004 Author Share Posted October 1, 2004 Excellent points all. I guess I should have been a trifle more clear. Open should be as has been so well stated, "ANYTHING SAFE GOES!" Or, as my shooting buddy Bill says "what part of unlimited don't you understand?". That said, my thoughts were limited to Limited. Patrick....you have taken me to task. Patrick's quote, " For the other categories, come up with a compelling argument for any restriction, and I'll entertain the notion of nixing the Beta". Compelling reason? Sorry no. You have been at this game longer than I so you do remember the days of flush fit mags and less than reliable 1911's. Did we have compelling reasons to change away from 7 round 45's? Yes, when Devel, Mc Cormick, Wilson, etc. gave us 8 round 45's, we ALL HAD to have 8 round mags to keep up with each other and course designs. Comps, dots and cut down speed holsters each can be traced to gain a competitive advantage. Point is, so long as WE ALL have equal gear the impetus is upon the competior to improve his skill level to lead the pack to the finish. I am NOT advocating a return to the days of old, well kinda because He-man /Heavy-Metal is calling my name. But just that we have to look where we are going before we get to the next bend in the road. Thanks for listening PK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Point is, so long as WE ALL have equal gear the impetus is upon the competior to improve his skill level to lead the pack to the finish. Gear does not win the day. The guys that win now do so because they are better not because they have better gear. Since the current system already seems to promote self improvement in order to win why monkey with it? A guy I shoot with once commented that he thought he did pretty well compared to me at a weekly match and that he thought that was pretty good since he was "only shooting a single stack .45." The next week I left my 23 round "gamer gun" in the safe and shot my ss .45. I beat him then as well. I don't always beat him, we are both pretty close a lot of the time, but I don't make excuses about the equipment being the deciding factor. Nor do I think I am anything even remotely special in so far as shooting goes. I, like most shooters, am just in this for the fun factor. There will be those who won't be truly happy until each stage has a rack of identical guns setup and all of the competitors use only that equipment. Even then I am sure someone will claim that the competition was wearing gamer shoes and impractical pants. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 As long as the pants don't malfunction! Knowing this crowd, you'd have to have them turn the gear in after each day's shooting, or someone would be doing a trigger job and glass bedding (or god knows what ) in the hotel room that night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 As long as the pants don't malfunction! Oh, I forgot to mention: Due to previous pants issues Rhino will have to compete in "Open" class. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 [Not a Tactical Operator Mode ON] Would I go kicking in doors in Falluja with a Beta mag hanging out of my gun? No. If I had a team that had to hump gear and rifles over hill and over dale in Afghanistan and wanted to bring serious suppressive fire capability, but not drag a 16lb+ SAW with me, would a couple Beta Mags and my trusty M-16 be on my list of options? A resounding Si! (Hunting has taught me *something*.) Beta mags are not good, nor are they evil. They are tools. One size doesn't fit all. I'll also say that sometimes equipment limitations are a necessary part of good course design. Not every bay has the room to nullify a mag capacity advantage. Course designers should have the option to specify capacity to ensure the match remains a shooting contest. Not many folks will resort to the beta mag on a 24 round stage where the shooter is forced to start with 10 rounds and 10 rounds only in their mag. FWIW, which is infintessimally small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 "Gear doesn't win the day" like the Sun doesn't cause sunburn. We constantly equate success and failure by using the top 2 percent of the membership (a.k.a. the "greats") and expect the remainder to "fall in line". Give Joe Average better gear than he/she now owns and you'll see improvement. Will it instantly make him/her a GM....No. But it WILL improve their scores. Better triggers, better sights and of course MORE BULLETS in a mag can't hurt...certainly it CAN help...and it usually does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Perhaps, but at some point there are diminishing returns issues. A Beta-C mag on a rifle in a typical 3-Gun stage isn't going to help much. If you have to hunker down and hose everything from a fixed position, it makes more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 "Gear doesn't win the day" like the Sun doesn't cause sunburn. We constantly equate success and failure by using the top 2 percent of the membership (a.k.a. the "greats") and expect the remainder to "fall in line". Give Joe Average better gear than he/she now owns and you'll see improvement. Will it instantly make him/her a GM....No. But it WILL improve their scores. Better triggers, better sights and of course MORE BULLETS in a mag can't hurt...certainly it CAN help...and it usually does. Helping the average shooter best the other average shooter is a long way from winning. So the guy with a $2500 S_I comes in 95th and a shooter of identical skill comes in 96th because he was shooting a bone stock Glock. BFD. They both still lost to the guys who practiced their asses off to be at the top. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Winning means different things to different people. To say that someone doesn't "climb the ladder" by purchasing and using better gear is like saying you won't "get fat" by eating lots of cheeseburgers. HOA isn't the only "thing" worth winning at a match How about the classes and divisions? For some (in my opinion most) it IS a BFD. Prove me wrong...park your best gear and use a slingshot at the next match and yes...by all means...win with it because "gear doesn't equal winning" and it's no BFD. Not all modifications are a panacea BUT they have value and can be used to gain an advantage thereby creating additional possibilities for success. To claim otherwise runs contrary to EVERY technological advancement IPSC guns and gear have progressed to for the past 20 plus years. We CONSTANTLY search for a better "tool for the trade". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 To continue on the same tangent...my club runs a pre-planned "bone stock production gun" day. Oddly enough, the same people finish in about the same order. Same thing happened when we threw a "pump shotgun day" for our usual pre-pistol-match single shotgun stage. Same guy who wins with the semi--won with the pump. That said....if one of the other guys had been running tricked out semi, he would have won handily. Lesson learned. High skill plus low-end gear beats low skill plus high-end gear, BUT high skill and low-end gear gets waxed by high skill and high-end gear. There is a diminishing return in there somewhere, but it is Friday and I don't feel like laying out the chart Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 And at what point did I say gear was irrellevant? I said "gear does not win the day." All the other crap that you choose to infer is not my problem. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dunn Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Kick their ass, I will. Is it just me or is Patrick in full on Yoda mode? 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