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

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I strongly doubt the sponsors will recognize that a couple of lost sales here and there are the result of the behavior of one of their shooters.

If you don't like what the shooter did, perhaps you should tell the sponsor directly.

Sorry. Bad clicker.

Edited by STI91
Link to post
Share on other sites

My point exactly. Tell them with your voice and you wallet. They might not care about one unhappy customer...but then again, a lot of successful one's do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I get that there is hesitation to strip the shooter in question of the title, but at the very least, if I were on the BOD, I would get the shooter's side of the story, and then let them know they wouldn't be invited to compete ever again.

So getting the shooter's side of it -- that would just be a mere formality then, to justify the preconceived decision to never invite the competitor again?

That is what Jones said, but I don't think that is what he meant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I get that there is hesitation to strip the shooter in question of the title, but at the very least, if I were on the BOD, I would get the shooter's side of the story, and then let them know they wouldn't be invited to compete ever again.

So getting the shooter's side of it -- that would just be a mere formality then, to justify the preconceived decision to never invite the competitor again?

I didn't realize you would need everything spelled out.

What I was saying is, talk to the shooter, get his side of things,

(insert massive decision tree weighing all the facts including that the shooter is also a sponsor and USPSA doesn't want to lose his money)

Then if it is warranted given the facts, tell the shooter he isn't welcome back ever again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, very briefly. A few days ago Barry Dueck contacted some USPSA BOD members and asked that his scores be vacated and deleted from the MG Nationals. This is only my perspective and not representative of the BOD position (just gotta get that out of the way). Barry said he read the rule book wrong and thought 1x was allowed in HML. I can see how he did it, probably looked at Limited rules instead of HML. I don't think there is any way Barry deliberately decided to shoot the match with a red dot thinking he'd be able to sneak it by match officials and other competitors. Just no way he could have expected the perfect storm that missed it. I'm willing to give Barry the benefit of the doubt that he showed up at the match thinking his gear was legal. I will also say that I've been told a lot of things at matches that weren't true about different rules. This is legal, or that's not. I'm stubborn enough that I don't always believe what other people tell me. I had an RO come up to me at a recent match when I was standing in the safe area and had a magazine on my belt. The RO came up started tugging on the and telling me I was violating the no ammo in the safe area policy. I told him I wasn't, but he was. We disagreed but I stayed in the match. I've had people tell me incorrect rules before. I wouldn't guarantee that if someone came up and told me my comp was too big in Tactical that I would even look in the rule book. I would just assume that I was right and the other person was wrong. If I had already looked before the match, I almost certainly wouldn't. Now you throw on top that the competitor already looked and found wrong info once he's probably likely to look in the same spot again and find the same wrong info.

I'm not saying Barry should have accepted the award, just saying I don't think there was any intention up to the point he was confronted at the awards ceremony about it. Barry is doing what he can at this point to make it right. I don't have a lot else to say on the matter.

And in case anyone is wondering why I'm throwing Barry's name out there. I specifically asked Barry if I could make the information about his withdrawing from the match and his error about the rule book public. I also asked a Mod ahead of time if I could do so. My opinion, and mine alone, is that it's important to get this information out there.

Edited by Chuck Anderson
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am just blessed, or naive, but I have been lucky enough to shoot with some of the best 3-gunners in the country at some of the Major matches including two Multi-gun Nationals. I have never witnessed the sort of behavior that some of the people in this thread complain about taking place. Just lucky I guess. I will even go so far as to say that I have seen nothing but great sportsmanship by some of these same shooters. I won't even start to name names as the thread would go on for pages on that alone. Suffice it to say that I thankfully have not bore witness to any sort of cheating infractions that some of the posters on this thread talk about. I have not been to very many handgun only matches, but when I have gone I have had nothing but good experiences with the shooters at those venues as well.

I do not know Mr. Dueck personally but I have had the chance to talk with him several times while at a match and he has always struck me as a person of character. I know during heated competition things can take place that other competitors may witness, or worse yet just hear about, and then judgement is passed. This is understandable and I am guessing I have been guilty of it myself at times. Hopefully this was one of "those things" that happens and nothing was done with the thought of cheating being at the root of the problem.

I am also hoping that the people personally involved can get together and personally discuss the issues at hand and get some closure to this topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing good will ever come to this issue........ But, if you re-read post #111, that about sums it up.... Those are the facts..!!! Dueck knew, another HML shooter was informed and knew, and all before the shooting was finished.....Thats enough right there..!!! At this point the lights are off, party is over, doors are closed and everyone has gone home.....And unless there is a rule otherwise....The Match is closed and in the books.!! Leave it there, and let him live with it.....

Edited by D.carden
Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew who it was and I knew how this would end. I see nothing that would make me change my opinion of Barry.....pretty much a stand up guy. Wound tight? maybe. Competitor? you bet. Cheater? NEVER.

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just pulled this off of Facebook:

Barry Dueck, winner in the Heavy Metal Limited division of the USPSA MultiGun Nationals has DQ'd himself from the match after discovering that he inadvertently shot the match with a non-compliant optic. Below is a copy of the message sent by Barry to Phil Strader, President of the USPSA several days ago.

"Phil, please invalidate my score in Heavy Metal Limited from Nationals. I Put my gear together specifically to fully comply with what I read in the rules online a couple weeks before the match. After reviewing the rules since returning from the match, my rifle did not comply due to a 1x non-magnified optic. I was confident that I had read the rules correctly but I was incorrect. I will send the Trophy and the prize from the match to Jeff Gross who with my score invalidated won the match. Thank you, Barry Dueck"

USPSA officials have responded acknowledging the difficulty of this situation. Rules where reviewed in to see if Barry's scores could be transferred to the Open Division but since the match was completed this was not possible.

This is an unfortunate incident but not without merit. We can all use a reminder to check and double check our information, and when we find that we screwed up, own it, make it right and move on.



Barry Dueck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barry Dueck was told he was using the wrong equipment before the match ended. He was again told at the banquet before the awards were handed out. He still accepted the title and walked the prize table. Barry Dueck is a dishonorable man, nothing changes that. We move on from here with a stain on our sport he created.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WIth the information that has been presented today, I feel like this topic has run its course. If you have something noteworthy to ad, please e-mail one of the moderators.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...