Draft Rule Book Poll

[GmanCdp]

"I found out rather quickly is that the objective of IDPA is to find a way to discourage Master level shooters from participating so that it becomes a game for "New" shooters and "retired" shooters"

Are you agreeing, or picking that statement out for a particular reason?

Agreeing, lately it seems to me more and more stages I shoot are geared toward attempts at slowing down the faster shooters, rather than speeding up the slower ones.

+1 to that..

[M1911]

If it truly does require all reloads to be standing reloads, then it is much worse than before.

[John Z Sr]

The "T ball" of the shooting sports, everyone is even and we all can get a trophy for showing up in our vests!!!!

[Mike21STI]

I voted null because the option that I would choose is not there..

[Chuck D]

The "T ball" of the shooting sports, everyone is even and we all can get a trophy for showing up in our vests!!!!

... T ball huh ?

...more "constructive" input. Where are the moderators who should remove posts of this "ilk."

[ktm300]

I too hope IDPA takes a look at their forum and some other available information and makes some adjustments to the soon to be new rule book. I will probably still go shoot one IDPA match a month because I like the people that put on the match. Other than that I will choose to shoot other games.

It's pretty simple to get an 18 round stage in my head when most of the time I am having to keep close to twice that much up there. Once you get used to using cover and going to slide lock there is not much more to keep up with.

For me it's faster to dump a round or two than to RWR and from what I have seen it is a pretty common practice. When I shoot a match and 90% of the people shoot extra shots so they can reload in the best spot. So taking round dumping out was a good thing. Letting me reload when I think it is the best time without making me go to slide-lock would be better but I can waist a round or two now and again.

I hate the idea of making a shooter stand still behind cover and reload. The whole idea that in the middle of a stage that is supposed to be a gunfight I have to stop moving, reload, and then move seems a bit silly. I think the whole idea that speed is a tactic is lost on IDPA.

The "I thought you might DQ so I helped you out by grabbing you. Of course I am giving you a DQ anyway" rule may be one of the worst rules I have ever read. Way to many things can go wrong there I can't even begin to write them all down.

I could go on about stuff but I will stop. From the poll, the vast majority of shooters on this forum seem to think the "update" was a bit of a waste and I agree. I think they broke as much stuff as they fixed, possibly more.

[Loves2Shoot]

I think fixing round dumping and striker fired gun classifications were important to do.

[stick]

only big difference I noticed was pull the trigger instead of hammer down

[Chuck D]

I think fixing round dumping and striker fired gun classifications were important to do.

..me too.

[Chuck D]

I too hope IDPA takes a look at their forum and some other available information and makes some adjustments to the soon to be new rule book. I will probably still go shoot one IDPA match a month because I like the people that put on the match. Other than that I will choose to shoot other games.

It's pretty simple to get an 18 round stage in my head when most of the time I am having to keep close to twice that much up there. Once you get used to using cover and going to slide lock there is not much more to keep up with.

For me it's faster to dump a round or two than to RWR and from what I have seen it is a pretty common practice. When I shoot a match and 90% of the people shoot extra shots so they can reload in the best spot. So taking round dumping out was a good thing. Letting me reload when I think it is the best time without making me go to slide-lock would be better but I can waist a round or two now and again.

I hate the idea of making a shooter stand still behind cover and reload. The whole idea that in the middle of a stage that is supposed to be a gunfight I have to stop moving, reload, and then move seems a bit silly. I think the whole idea that speed is a tactic is lost on IDPA.

The "I thought you might DQ so I helped you out by grabbing you. Of course I am giving you a DQ anyway" rule may be one of the worst rules I have ever read. Way to many things can go wrong there I can't even begin to write them all down.

I could go on about stuff but I will stop. From the poll, the vast majority of shooters on this forum seem to think the "update" was a bit of a waste and I agree. I think they broke as much stuff as they fixed, possibly more.

How with a time based scoring system can "speed as a tactic" be lost on IDPA and 191 voters are a "vast majority of shooters on this forum?"

Edited June 10, 2013 by Chuck D

[motosapiens]

I too hope IDPA takes a look at their forum and some other available information and makes some adjustments to the soon to be new rule book. I will probably still go shoot one IDPA match a month because I like the people that put on the match. Other than that I will choose to shoot other games.

It's pretty simple to get an 18 round stage in my head when most of the time I am having to keep close to twice that much up there. Once you get used to using cover and going to slide lock there is not much more to keep up with.

For me it's faster to dump a round or two than to RWR and from what I have seen it is a pretty common practice. When I shoot a match and 90% of the people shoot extra shots so they can reload in the best spot. So taking round dumping out was a good thing. Letting me reload when I think it is the best time without making me go to slide-lock would be better but I can waist a round or two now and again.

I hate the idea of making a shooter stand still behind cover and reload. The whole idea that in the middle of a stage that is supposed to be a gunfight I have to stop moving, reload, and then move seems a bit silly. I think the whole idea that speed is a tactic is lost on IDPA.

The "I thought you might DQ so I helped you out by grabbing you. Of course I am giving you a DQ anyway" rule may be one of the worst rules I have ever read. Way to many things can go wrong there I can't even begin to write them all down.

I could go on about stuff but I will stop. From the poll, the vast majority of shooters on this forum seem to think the "update" was a bit of a waste and I agree. I think they broke as much stuff as they fixed, possibly more.

How with a time based scoring system can "speed" be lost on IDPA ?

IDPA gives me the impression of trying to downplay speed of movement (as opposed to speed of shooting). It seems to be part of their stated goals to make it less of an athletic sport, and therefore more suitable for the elderly, or large and slow.

Fortunately you can still design creative fun stages that reward foot speed too, and we had a couple of them in saturday's IDPA match. Unfortunately, there is not much creativity allowed in how you actually shoot the courses, but that's not that big a deal, just different from the other game.

[Chuck D]

I too hope IDPA takes a look at their forum and some other available information and makes some adjustments to the soon to be new rule book. I will probably still go shoot one IDPA match a month because I like the people that put on the match. Other than that I will choose to shoot other games.

It's pretty simple to get an 18 round stage in my head when most of the time I am having to keep close to twice that much up there. Once you get used to using cover and going to slide lock there is not much more to keep up with.

For me it's faster to dump a round or two than to RWR and from what I have seen it is a pretty common practice. When I shoot a match and 90% of the people shoot extra shots so they can reload in the best spot. So taking round dumping out was a good thing. Letting me reload when I think it is the best time without making me go to slide-lock would be better but I can waist a round or two now and again.

I hate the idea of making a shooter stand still behind cover and reload. The whole idea that in the middle of a stage that is supposed to be a gunfight I have to stop moving, reload, and then move seems a bit silly. I think the whole idea that speed is a tactic is lost on IDPA.

The "I thought you might DQ so I helped you out by grabbing you. Of course I am giving you a DQ anyway" rule may be one of the worst rules I have ever read. Way to many things can go wrong there I can't even begin to write them all down.

I could go on about stuff but I will stop. From the poll, the vast majority of shooters on this forum seem to think the "update" was a bit of a waste and I agree. I think they broke as much stuff as they fixed, possibly more.

How with a time based scoring system can "speed" be lost on IDPA ?

IDPA gives me the impression of trying to downplay speed of movement (as opposed to speed of shooting). It seems to be part of their stated goals to make it less of an athletic sport, and therefore more suitable for the elderly, or large and slow.

Fortunately you can still design creative fun stages that reward foot speed too, and we had a couple of them in saturday's IDPA match. Unfortunately, there is not much creativity allowed in how you actually shoot the courses, but that's not that big a deal, just different from the other game.

Shooting sports should not be track and field events. Movement is important but it's also important to remember it's a shooting contest NOT a running contest.

IDPA strikes a delicate balance in that aspect....

[motosapiens]

I too hope IDPA takes a look at their forum and some other available information and makes some adjustments to the soon to be new rule book. I will probably still go shoot one IDPA match a month because I like the people that put on the match. Other than that I will choose to shoot other games.

It's pretty simple to get an 18 round stage in my head when most of the time I am having to keep close to twice that much up there. Once you get used to using cover and going to slide lock there is not much more to keep up with.

For me it's faster to dump a round or two than to RWR and from what I have seen it is a pretty common practice. When I shoot a match and 90% of the people shoot extra shots so they can reload in the best spot. So taking round dumping out was a good thing. Letting me reload when I think it is the best time without making me go to slide-lock would be better but I can waist a round or two now and again.

I hate the idea of making a shooter stand still behind cover and reload. The whole idea that in the middle of a stage that is supposed to be a gunfight I have to stop moving, reload, and then move seems a bit silly. I think the whole idea that speed is a tactic is lost on IDPA.

The "I thought you might DQ so I helped you out by grabbing you. Of course I am giving you a DQ anyway" rule may be one of the worst rules I have ever read. Way to many things can go wrong there I can't even begin to write them all down.

I could go on about stuff but I will stop. From the poll, the vast majority of shooters on this forum seem to think the "update" was a bit of a waste and I agree. I think they broke as much stuff as they fixed, possibly more.

How with a time based scoring system can "speed" be lost on IDPA ?

IDPA gives me the impression of trying to downplay speed of movement (as opposed to speed of shooting). It seems to be part of their stated goals to make it less of an athletic sport, and therefore more suitable for the elderly, or large and slow.

Fortunately you can still design creative fun stages that reward foot speed too, and we had a couple of them in saturday's IDPA match. Unfortunately, there is not much creativity allowed in how you actually shoot the courses, but that's not that big a deal, just different from the other game.

Shooting sports should not be track and field events. Movement is important but it's also important to remember it's a shooting contest NOT a running contest.

IDPA strikes a delicate balance in that aspect....

Doesn't bother me if you believe that. Heck, when I get older and slower, I'll probably agree with you.

At any rate, I certainly don't think the other game is a track and field event. I have a track and field background (4:30 mile) and I get my butt kicked by guys that weigh 300 lbs.

[Bob Hostetter]

I didn't expect there to be too many changes suggested by the Tigger Team process because of the individuals that were selected to provide input. Please do not take this as a condemnation of the team members but instead an awareness of their predilection of maintaining the status quo. If you ask people who are comfortable and committed to the current rule set to suggest changes you aren't going to see much because they aren't going to see much that needs improvement. I am surprised that the process took sooooooo long, but I suppose this was to give the membership a feeling that everything was looked at closely. I keep hoping that there is another set of suggestion coming but I doubt it.

If you are going to shoot IDPA as a 'competitive' shooter you just have to realize that the rules are what they are and look at them more as 'stage instructions' then well thought out guiding rules. Just make sure you fully understand the rules for each stage, individually, before you shoot, and smile.

I thought the comment about eliminating the track event portion of IDPA shooting as a great equalizer was cute, because it's not. When you cut the stage down to the most basic requirements it doesn't level the playing field, it instead gives the better shooters a HUGE advantage because ultimately they are.........better shooters. It's the movement, the opening of doors and windows, the silly non shooting things you are asked to do that slows the better shooters down, not the other way around.

O'well, as long as STI keeps paying contingency money for sanctioned matches, I am going to keep shooting IDPA.

[Chuck D]

.... yes, the rules are what they are. Most profound statement I've read here in a long time.

Edited June 10, 2013 by Chuck D

[Rob Tompkins]

In the end shooters will vote with their feet. Its a game and if they dislike the rule set enough they will go else where, if they like the rule set (or can accept it anyway) they'll stay.

No rule set will please everyone all the time, but it only needs to please most everyone most of the time to be sucessful and I suspect that will prove to be the case here.

There was a comment about an IDPA goal is to slow down the fast shooters and not speedup the slow shooters. Remember in the IDPA scoring method every point is worth 0.5 sec. In the other game any COF with a HF greater than 2.0, a point is worth < 0.5 sec, perhaps as little as 0.1 sec or even less (if HF is 10.0 or more). While IDPA is a time based game, it does favor accuaracy more than the other game and add in the penelity effects of a FTN its even more so. I've seen several high speed low drag cross over shooters run some blistering raw times to only end up as an also ran because of points and penelities. Its the nature of the game and if you think its just desigend to punish fast shooters as opposed to reward accurate shooters, then its a game not suited to you.

[ktm300]

How with a time based scoring system can "speed as a tactic" be lost on IDPA and 191 voters are a "vast majority of shooters on this forum?"

How can a rule that stops me from advancing behind cover while reloading be a good idea? To me if I am not shooting, I should be moving, and sometimes I should be shooting and moving at the same time.

Sorry about the wording, it should have been. The vast majority of people on this forum that participated in the poll think the update was a waist.

If you look at the IDPA forum there are more posts about issues than posts saying it is wonderful. Well over 1100 suggestions for changes to the updated rule book also point to at least a few people that think it was not the update they expected.

I think Bob hit the nail on the head with these comments: "I didn't expect there to be too many changes suggested by the Tigger Team process because of the individuals that were selected to provide input."

"If you ask people who are comfortable and committed to the current rule set to suggest changes you aren't going to see much because they aren't going to see much that needs improvement."

Chuck, it is obvious you are one of the people that are " comfortable and committed". That's OK, We just don't agree.

They had a chance to make changes that brought the game up to date. They missed that opportunity It's still a good game and the rules are the rules. I am waiting to see if some of the 1100+ suggestions make it into the rule book when it comes back out.

By the way, I don't think we need USPSA lite, USPSA does run and gun very well. I like that IDPA forces accuracy with it's point structure, I don't mind most of the cover rules. Its a fun game, it just could have been a lot better with some updates. I think it is good to have more than one game to play. It would have been nice to have had half the people on the Tiger teams that were not " comfortable and committed".

[Paul-the new guy]

Shooting sports should not be track and field events. Movement is important but it's also important to remember it's a shooting contest NOT a running contest.

IDPA strikes a delicate balance in that aspect....

Ok, so it is not a running contest... however, why is is a kneeling contest and a laying down contest, and a getting out of a car contest, and a getting up from a chair contest... You argument doesn't have any validity. There are plenty of physical activities besides running that make older, heavier, less mobile people un-competitive. Get into a car trunk and shoot out of it... really? FL state match had low cover in the middle of a stage, getting into and out of a low cover position can cost an otherwise competitive person a match...

[Chuck D]

How with a time based scoring system can "speed as a tactic" be lost on IDPA and 191 voters are a "vast majority of shooters on this forum?"

How can a rule that stops me from advancing behind cover while reloading be a good idea? To me if I am not shooting, I should be moving, and sometimes I should be shooting and moving at the same time.

Sorry about the wording, it should have been. The vast majority of people on this forum that participated in the poll think the update was a waist.

If you look at the IDPA forum there are more posts about issues than posts saying it is wonderful. Well over 1100 suggestions for changes to the updated rule book also point to at least a few people that think it was not the update they expected.

I think Bob hit the nail on the head with these comments: "I didn't expect there to be too many changes suggested by the Tigger Team process because of the individuals that were selected to provide input."

"If you ask people who are comfortable and committed to the current rule set to suggest changes you aren't going to see much because they aren't going to see much that needs improvement."

Chuck, it is obvious you are one of the people that are " comfortable and committed". That's OK, We just don't agree.

They had a chance to make changes that brought the game up to date. They missed that opportunity It's still a good game and the rules are the rules. I am waiting to see if some of the 1100+ suggestions make it into the rule book when it comes back out.

By the way, I don't think we need USPSA lite, USPSA does run and gun very well. I like that IDPA forces accuracy with it's point structure, I don't mind most of the cover rules. Its a fun game, it just could have been a lot better with some updates. I think it is good to have more than one game to play. It would have been nice to have had half the people on the Tiger teams that were not " comfortable and committed".

I appreciate your response but you never answered the question.

...once again even if I accept your statement of "well over 1100 suggestions" that's approximately 10% or so of the total membership and not every change suggested regards the same subject thereby narrowing the arguments even further.

... the most vocal arguments i've encountered consist of moving with an empty pistol from position to position, eliminating 10 rounds only in a magazine, allowing 40/10mm in CDP and allowing the IPSC style speed reload.

Obviously you can draw your own conclusions but I know what it sounds like to me.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Chuck D

[Chuck D]

Shooting sports should not be track and field events. Movement is important but it's also important to remember it's a shooting contest NOT a running contest.

IDPA strikes a delicate balance in that aspect....

Ok, so it is not a running contest... however, why is is a kneeling contest and a laying down contest, and a getting out of a car contest, and a getting up from a chair contest... You argument doesn't have any validity. There are plenty of physical activities besides running that make older, heavier, less mobile people un-competitive. Get into a car trunk and shoot out of it... really? FL state match had low cover in the middle of a stage, getting into and out of a low cover position can cost an otherwise competitive person a match...

It absolutely has validity. I expect movement, I expect low cover, awkward shooting positions, kneeling, and prone.

...and it isn't about old, big, fat, in poor shape, or physically weak shooters.

it IS about reasonable distances between shooting positions. Read the post where I state that movement is important.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Chuck D

[ktm300]

I appreciate your response but you never answered the question.

...once again even if I accept your statement of "well over 1100 suggestions" that's approximately 10% or so of the total membership.

... we do disagree.

Not sure which question I did not answer so I will try and expand a little.

I rephrased the poll answer to cover the fact that not all 20k IDPA members voted. but 96% saying "not much better" or "not better at all" is a pretty big number even with only 195 votes. If you can't see that as an answer I can't do any better.

I think there were 1128 comments the last time I looked before they pulled the comments down. I guess the fact that all 20k members did not put up a comment says the new rule book has a mandate? Over 1100 comments is a pretty big number any way you slice it.

As to speed as a tactic. If you make me stand still while reloading when there is cover available to reload behind you have stopped me from using speed as a tactic in that situation.

By the way, I don't think we should be running 30 yards between shooting positions either, but I am old and fat. Getting into odd places and in and out of odd positions is enough to make me want to get younger and less fat.

[Chuck D]

I appreciate your response but you never answered the question.

...once again even if I accept your statement of "well over 1100 suggestions" that's approximately 10% or so of the total membership.

... we do disagree.

Not sure which question I did not answer so I will try and expand a little.

I rephrased the poll answer to cover the fact that not all 20k IDPA members voted. but 96% saying "not much better" or "not better at all" is a pretty big number even with only 195 votes. If you can't see that as an answer I can't do any better.

I think there were 1128 comments the last time I looked before they pulled the comments down. I guess the fact that all 20k members did not put up a comment says the new rule book has a mandate? Over 1100 comments is a pretty big number any way you slice it.

As to speed as a tactic. If you make me stand still while reloading when there is cover available to reload behind you have stopped me from using speed as a tactic in that situation.

By the way, I don't think we should be running 30 yards between shooting positions either, but I am old and fat. Getting into odd places and in and out of odd positions is enough to make me want to get younger and less fat.

.. the numbers you constantly quote as "pretty big numbers" are extremely small samples of the overall membership. Polling requires a much larger sample to poll from then less than 10% of the population. Nothing can or should be deemed valid from such examples on either side of the issue because the samples are not of significant size and scope to offer an accurate assessment.

my problem is these small samples are what you use to state your claim. You have valid points, you just use skewed statistics to prove them. Larger samples would be beneficial to prove your point.

Reloading behind cover before advancing is an IDPA principle as the belief is that you should't advance from position to position with an empty gun verses the run and gun format of USPSA.

The principles of the sport of IDPA should never be up for negotiation.

[manderson2228]

I

Dont

Participate

Anymore

[motosapiens]

The principles of the sport of IDPA should never be up for negotiation.

Even the principle of using full-power ammo?

I hate to kill kittens, but I'm not convinced that the 'principle' of not being able to reload on the move has much basis in reality.

Not that I really care. Whatever the rule is, I'll play by that rule, enjoy it, and then mock it later on the internet, and also mock those who take it really seriously. It's just a game.

[Jim Watson]

True, only a small fraction of the membership is responding to polls, logging comments, discussing ad nauseam.

Thing is, only a small fraction of the membership carries the operation.

Does 10% of the membership MD or SO large matches?

Does 10% of the membership travel a significant distance to shoot or work?

I doubt it is much if any more.

If the minority of the membership that supports the casual shooters should get alienated, then the organization is headed downhill.