Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Skill vs. Capacity


P.E. Kelley

Recommended Posts

All that "crap" as you so incorrectly call it is proof that gear DOES win the day on certain occasions.

We have golf clubs that "correct" your swing and lower your scores....

We have fishing lures that virtually "guarantee" you a bigger and better catch...

We have motor oils that "improve" your mileage and reduce engine wear...

and of course we have scopes, comps, holsters, bullets, magazines etc...etc..etc...

that IMPROVE your scores and as TGO so deftly stated in a class I took from him, "some of these modifications are necessary because they allow you to make a mistake and sometimes get away with it."

I agree that this "crap" isn't your problem...although it MAY be of interest for the competitor looking for a competitive advantage. You know the one that may be enough to edge out the other competitors for a win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are putting words in my mouth again. If you have a personal problem with me, or my posts, my e-mail address is in my profile. Otherwise you need to quit making the inferences that you are making about my statements.

-ld

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it ME using the words "crap" and "BFD" ? :huh:

Rest Assured, it isn't personal.

It's a difference of opinion...nothing more, nothing less....

I took your "advise" and sent you a note....

My e-mail address is available as well...feel free to "drop me a note". As far as my statements are concerned...I'll stand by 'em. ;)

It's a combo of gear and ability and THAT'S what I'm trying to say here. You can practice all you want with bad gear and it eventually WILL cost you a win. To say it's ability alone simply isn't true. If gear didn't matter...why do we spend so much time and money on developing better "gear"?

I can't say it any simpler than that. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said "crap" and I said "BFD." That does not mean that I attacked you. I did not, however, say that "bad gear" was good enough for the average shooter which is what you seem to be basing your statements upon. I said:

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?

and I stick by that.

-ld

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the spirit of DEBATE only, I wish to offer the following. I remember the following technological advances in IPSC guns from my "infancy" days.

Circa 1978/79. The "long slide" phase. It was a customary practice to "weld up" two Colt slides (usually Gold Cup slides) to make a 6 inch long 1911...just like Mickey Fowler used. My dad had one built for me back then. I was 13-14 years old. I still have it by the way.

Circa 1980/1981. Clark Custom builds the first "pin gun" which was basically a weight threaded on the end of a barrel for the 1911 in 45acp.

Circa 1982, J.Michael Plaxco invents the Plaxco Compensator. He adds "ports" and "chambers" to a barrel weight making what MAY have been the first true expansion chamber compensator.

Circa 1990. Doug Koenig uses a Springfield P9 pistol (Tanfoglio/CZ Copy) in 9x19 major to win the World Shoot. This is a significant turning point marking a turning point in gun development from the single stack to the wide body platform.

The period of the 90's. Para Ordnance offers the first wide body frame (in Aluminum) for the 1911 in 45acp. (other calibers and complete guns would soon follow). Chip McCormick and Sandy Strayer develop the CMC frame that would later become the STI/SVI platform in North America.

Circa 1990. Jerry Barnhart used a prototype mount to attach to Tasco PDP2 red dot scope to his 1911 and wins the Miller Invitational in Fulton NY. I remember this well, I was there to see it and BOY did he and his gear draw TONS of attention.

Circa 1992. Jerry Barnhart, then sponsored by Bill Wilson has a 1911 frame "modified" to accept CZ75 magazines to counter the advantage enjoyed by those using the P9 platform guns.

Circa 1992. IPSC North American Championships, Toronto Ontario. Team Springfield Armory shows up with wide body 1911's built by Jack Weigand of the Springfield Custom Shop on the new Caspian Arms wide body frame. I remember THIS as well because I was there and THIS gear drew even greater attention than the red dot scope that had already become the "competition standard".

The point I'm trying to make here is that if "gear doesn't win the day" NONE of the above development would ever need take place. Yes, practice plays an important part BUT the combo of gear and skill are needed to be successful.

You can win without working at it and you can't work at it without the best tool(s) you can get your hands on. Guys that "win" on a regular basis with bone stock, unmodified guns are very few and far between. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That guy with the Norinco is my good friend Jim Wall. While he got most of the press for his stellar performance with that sight less, fire branded 1911. Another good friend of mine Carl Carbon won Area one that year. Imagine that, you work your ass off to pull in your first area win and you are up staged by a guy who kicks all forms of butt with a ss with no sights!!!

PK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of small points...I think we all agree that OPEN should be What Patrick/Yoda Said:

"Mind that your gun be safe for you and all, and in the shadow of the Force, all other things be permitted..."

As for the rationale for categories with restrictions, like it or not, perception is reality. Yes, we know that the same guys are going to win if we limit the class to T/C Contenders in .45/70 with no sights. HOWEVER, practical shooting--desperatey!--needs to grow, because it's a simple influence equation. More of us = more influence in the overall world of the shooting sports. We have learned the hard way that perception can hurt us badly ("raceguns," "a fortune to compete," "etc."). Why not be smart here?

mb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

{thread drift course correction} <sound of fog horn>

We've wandered off the topic, guys. Back to the subject: is there any good reason to prohibit the use of Beta mags in Open? In Tactical? In Limited?

And of 100 rounds is "too much," then where' the line?

I haven't used a Beta mag, yet, but from the comments made so far it seems that they may not be an advantage. Thus far it seems that getting in and out of position, aquiring the target and hitting it are sufficient challenges on the longer courses at least for the average shooter. I have a reliable 40 rounder and a lot of the time I have to change mags anyway. Just as with the pistol good planning can make that a painless event perhaps even more so if the change in shooting positions is complicated enough.

As for the rationale for categories with restrictions, like it or not, perception is reality. Yes, we know that the same guys are going to win if we limit the class to T/C Contenders in .45/70 with no sights. HOWEVER, practical shooting--desperatey!--needs to grow, because it's a simple influence equation. More of us = more influence in the overall world of the shooting sports. We have learned the hard way that perception can hurt us badly ("raceguns," "a fortune to compete," "etc."). Why not be smart here?

I think MBaneACP makes a good point here. We do need to do some things to attract shooters to the sport. If there is no place for the shooter to compete with gear that they already own they may be reluctant to come out and play.

-ld

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've been trying to grow a new monthly 3-Gun program at AtlantaCC (Indiana) and the #1 reason why people say they won't shoot with us is that they don't have the right guns or equipment. Offering to loan it to them helps in the case of people who are really interested, but a lot of them just don't want to do it for other reasons and choose equipment as the excuse.

I don't think anyone is going to be discouraged by seeing someone using a Beta-C mag. If anything, it might make them want to try shooting with one too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think MBaneACP makes a good point here.  We do need to do some things to attract shooters to the sport.  If there is no place for the shooter to compete with gear that they already own they may be reluctant to come out and play.

I agree and I think Production Division, while not a panacea, has definitely been a huge success. I'll even go so far as saying that it's even more successful outside of the USA, and I believe this is due to the greater restrictions on modifications.

Having said that, the real issue is that the vast majority of gun owners simply have no interest in entering a competitive sports shooting environment, especially one as "demanding" as IPSC, because they primarily view their guns as tools for self-defence or hunting. Organisations such as the GSSF do well because they are relatively simple sports, and the emphasis is more on promoting familiarity with guns, not athletic achievement.

And the same applies to motor vehicles. Most people view their motor vehicles as tools, and only a minor percentage of motor vehicle owners engage in sports with their (or a more advanced) motor vehicle.

If we really want to promote membership development, I still believe we need a dedicated program to entice existing and new gun owners to explore the wonderful world of IPSC, but we need to create an environment which is 50% social and 50% instruction. Dragging people along to matches, where everybody is focussing on their own performance, just won't cut it. We need a more "touchy-feely" environment, where the hosts (us!) focus our efforts 100% on our guests.

Slowly, slowly catchy monkey !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've wandered off the topic, guys. Back to the subject: is there any good reason to prohibit the use of Beta mags in Open? In Tactical? In Limited?

Open: Bring your belt-fed AR if you think it will help

Tactical / Limited: 30 rounds max. I'd prefer 20 max, so that all .308's would be capacity-competitive w/o breaking the bank.

Reloading your rifle is a skill you should have to demonstrate in a match. Beta mags aside, would anyone in their right mind gamble their life in the real world with a POS, soft-steel 40 rounder? Not many takers I'll bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've wandered off the topic, guys. Back to the subject: is there any good reason to prohibit the use of Beta mags in Open? In Tactical? In Limited?

Open: Bring your belt-fed AR if you think it will help

Tactical / Limited: 30 rounds max. I'd prefer 20 max, so that all .308's would be capacity-competitive w/o breaking the bank.

Reloading your rifle is a skill you should have to demonstrate in a match. Beta mags aside, would anyone in their right mind gamble their life in the real world with a POS, soft-steel 40 rounder? Not many takers I'll bet.

You've got my support....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...