MARKUSEJ Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 I shot an IDPA match the other day and noticed that during the scoring they were only looking at the marks on the paper from the hole and grease ring. Several times the hole was close enough that if an overlay was used the shooter would have received a better score. It seems like since IDPA does not allow an overlay, most shooters do not realize that FMJ bullets leave a much smaller hole than the actual caliber. This seems kind of strange as it would have you believe that the most effective bullet is a wad-cutter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHARLES D Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 It used to be if there is any question the score goes to the shooter. With the new rule book coming out who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stick Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 if you have to look that close, the shooter gets the benefit of the doubt. The new IDPA rulebook is already out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHARLES D Posted June 29, 2013 Share Posted June 29, 2013 Just read it. Refer to 11.2.8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD45 Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 The problem is, what is looking close? Will a friend give the same look as the guy that hates you, or needs to beat you? I've seen a lot in over 12 years of IDPA. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a shooter get a higher point when the grease ring was over an eighth-inch away from the line. And calling doubles. Good grief with the doubles. IDPA need overlays. Badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeMartens Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 it will slow things down too much to get to the "participation" awards after the flatfooted reloads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErichF Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 IDPA relies too much on which S.O. is your buddy. For as many rules as they have, it has a surprisingly subjective scoring and penalty system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Tompkins Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 if you have to look that close, the shooter gets the benefit of the doubt. The new IDPA rulebook is already out. Just read it. Refer to 11.2.8 This. If you see or feel favoritism is being applied in scoring, complain to the MD, if its the MD doing it complain to HQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARKUSEJ Posted June 30, 2013 Author Share Posted June 30, 2013 During the match people honestly do not understand that the actual diameter is larger than the hole you see. Also because overlays are verboten they have no way to learn this. If I call for my bullet hole to be examined there is no way to point this out and not use an overlay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul-the new guy Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 just shoot -0 hits and you don't have to worry about it. The old rule book said the hit had to only touch the perf. not break it to score I don't know if it is the same in the new rule book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
45 Raven Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 So I am just positive that everyone that is complaining about this took the opportunity to provide feedback to IDPA administration and the tiger teams when that feedback was canvassed . . . . . . right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 The old rule book said the hit had to only touch the perf. not break it to score I don't know if it is the same in the new rule book. The problem (as markusej correctly notes) is that the grease ring on RN bullets is typically smaller than the bullet diameter. I started in IDPA, and didn't realize until I started shooting USPSA how big that difference can be. I had to change a few calls when I first started using overlays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktm300 Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 So I am just positive that everyone that is complaining about this took the opportunity to provide feedback to IDPA administration and the tiger teams when that feedback was canvassed . . . . . . right? There were around 1200 comments by the time they took them down. Of course they ignored the vast majority.......... I did see a comment about overlays. It was ignored as well. Funny thing about different bullet shapes, they make different size holes. Edge hits tend to leave a smaller hole as well. In USPSA, if it's close, I use the overlay I already have in my hand and take a look. It takes less time than taking a long look to see what is going on. There are times when it looks like it will be good that it's not, and times when it looks like it won't make it that it does. Using overlays is not subjective enough for IDPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 I hadn't given this much thought until last weekend. Another shooter commented that his holes were smaller than another competitor's but the same as mine. The other 2 shooters were wielding .45s and I was using my 9 at the time. Turns out the shooter that made the observation was enlightened by the other shooter using LSWC as opposed to his RN. His .45 RN looked to be the size of my 9mm SWC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 So I am just positive that everyone that is complaining about this took the opportunity to provide feedback to IDPA administration and the tiger teams when that feedback was canvassed . . . . . . right? Umm yes it was one of my 10 suggestions. All of which were ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig N Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Overlays would make it too much like (T)hat (O)ther (S)port. TOS like stuff is bad!!! Honestly I think the intent of the shooter gets the benefit of the doubt is if you really have to whip out an overlay to be sure just give the shooter the better score and not worry if it's within 3 cat hairs of the next scoring zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Overlays would make it too much like (T)hat (O)ther (S)port. TOS like stuff is bad!!! Honestly I think the intent of the shooter gets the benefit of the doubt is if you really have to whip out an overlay to be sure just give the shooter the better score and not worry if it's within 3 cat hairs of the next scoring zone. What about the other shooters you just screwed because you gave their competition points they may not hav earned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul-the new guy Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Nothing pisses me off more than hearing someone say yeah give it to him... Just like Corey, what I hear is lets screw everyone is his division and class... But then again, IDPA is the T-ball of the shooting sports... lol I am just kidding don't get you panties bunched up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Nothing pisses me off more than hearing someone say yeah give it to him... Just like Corey, what I hear is lets screw everyone is his division and class... If it's really close, it doesn't bother me. Close judgement calls are an unavoidable aspect of our sport. Sometimes people get lucky on a popper calibration (did the RM screw everyone else?), sometimes bullet holes are oval so the overlay doesn't help much. My view is if you only shoot well enough to beat someone by .05%, then you are allowing an element of chance or judgement into the contest. If you just shoot better, then those occasional lucky breaks won't matter. The same applies to any sport. Sure, the Raiders have been hosed by some unbelievably creative calls over the years (tuck rule, woodson's fumble-recovery that was called a safety, etc...), but that stuff only mattered because the Raiders only played well enough to be pretty even. If they were winning by three touchdowns, a blown call would not matter. At least in shooting we get to call the ref's attention to a possibly blown call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Nothing pisses me off more than hearing someone say yeah give it to him... Just like Corey, what I hear is lets screw everyone is his division and class... If it's really close, it doesn't bother me. Close judgement calls are an unavoidable aspect of our sport. Sometimes people get lucky on a popper calibration (did the RM screw everyone else?), sometimes bullet holes are oval so the overlay doesn't help much. My view is if you only shoot well enough to beat someone by .05%, then you are allowing an element of chance or judgement into the contest. If you just shoot better, then those occasional lucky breaks won't matter. The same applies to any sport. Sure, the Raiders have been hosed by some unbelievably creative calls over the years (tuck rule, woodson's fumble-recovery that was called a safety, etc...), but that stuff only mattered because the Raiders only played well enough to be pretty even. If they were winning by three touchdowns, a blown call would not matter. At least in shooting we get to call the ref's attention to a possibly blown call. If you just shoot better those calls won't matter....wow really? I've lost and won by less that a match point several times. I've seen national championships come down to the same. IDPA has a way to keep the calls from being guesswork they just choose not to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD45 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 It is not an opinion, it is a fact, the rule book is a mess. If you think not having overlays are a problem, just watch the "cover" calls, or lack of them. A three second procedural has cost many people a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cd662 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 They're afraid that overlays are too "game-like" I suspect, in the same vein as many of the other rules. I've gotten screwed on this A LOT. I know one of the above posters may have been being facetious but I absolutely thing a wadcutter is better employed for IDPA. I shoot revolver and started using them for my first cylinder full. Similarly, I love when I hear "...well, I'll give it to you", like it's some sort of wink wink nudge nudge favor that an SO is giving me when the reality is that the hit is there, it exists, if an overlay was properly used. I want the points I earned and I don't want the points that shouldn't be there, is that so much to ask? (Rhetorical question: we all know the answer). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasM Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I lose by more then .05 just so this won't effect me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Stop the posts bashing IDPA. It's not what we are here for. Lets keep this discussion focused on information exchange. - Admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bones Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 (edited) NRA Action Pistol, IPSC, USPSA and ICORE have scored many more 0.355 - 0.452 cal bullet holes in cardboard targets than IDPA. Those sports also explicitly give the competitor the benefit of the doubt. They’ve all arrived at the use of overlays as the fairest, most efficient way of scoring. The argument that a competitor's skill level is a deciding factor in fairly scoring a target is inapproriate at best. Edited July 3, 2013 by Bones 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