Does 3 gun need a governing body?

[El Guapo]

Thoughts and opinions welcome.

[bigfish]

I don't shoot much 3gun, but of the matches I have shot all but 1 have been outlaw matches. I think one of the problems with a governing body is that unless you live in a area with a lot of 3gun, the matches are going to be local, somewhat informal matches. People see 3gun Nation and think it looks fun and their local club decides to try it. I don't think most places that have local club matches have enough matches or resources to make it worth becoming a sanctioned club. I think most clubs that are interested in anything like that would have already become a 3gun Nation club already or trying to or else they would be running USPSA/IDPA sanctioned matches already.

[ramms123]

I don't see how it really matters what happens. I think it's a good thing that 3 Gun Nation came along to popularize the sport, but a lot of the major matches don't seem to need the help. If I was any good I would say 3 Gun Nation is the best, but considering all my matches are outlaw (local) matches it does not matter to me.

[Mike P]

Not only no, but hell no.

[amccallister]

I like the idea of having a standardized rule set, and I voted for 3 Gun Nation. I wouldn't be disappointed if it was someone else, but they're currently the ones putting in the work and moving the sport forward, so they have my support.

[Alaskapopo]

I like it the way it is. I think that we should all get together on a rule set but that is pretty much been done. I appreciate what USPSA has done for the shooting world but frankly after going to their RO class a few times I don't like the limitations they place on stage designers. If I want to use a non standard target I should be able to. I thought about trying to start a USPSA club where we are at but its just not worth the costs and the restrictions in my opinion. Love to shoot their pistol matches however but for three gun prefer to be able to have some freedom.

Pat

[Moltke]

Whoever comes together as the permanent national governing body, the sport should be set up smartly with intentions behind it's format to reflect the goals of the competition shooting community. Speed, accuracy, skill building, fairness, performance based shooting, fun, etc.

• Rules, scoring and RO'ing need to be standardized across the board to enable shooters to optimize their training, performance and expectations while shooting a match - especially if they're not regulars at a club - or if they're at a championship. People need to know what to expect and train for so they're already used to it on match day.
• Divisions need to be established rigidly and not be too similar. The only difference between TACOPS and TAC IRONS is a magnified optic on the rifle... The only difference with rifles from TACOPS to Open is a secondary optic. The differences are small but significant, but the gaps can be made wider still. Allow shooters to shoot in divisions that are NOT almost identical to one another, or do away with the unnecessary distinctions.
• Scoring needs to have high standards and reflect a combination of speed and accuracy. Both Hit Factor scoring and Time Plus scoring are good ways to do this but for the occassional "hard" shots that make or break a course of fire such as a 50 yard pistol target, 100 yard slug target, or 300 yard rifle target... have those particular shots include a significant penalty.
• Use a national classification system that gives a shooter an idea of their standing against the Pro's who shoot in their division, but don't use classification brackets. Shooters should be able to track their progress against a High Hit Factor, or Fastest Time on Record with a standard classifier using a % - but bracketing shooters leads to sandbagging, gaming the classifier system, and doesn't push people forward.
• 1-N Prize Tables at matches. Its great to have random drawings, and great to have RO drawings, but prizes should be given based on shooting performance between competitors. At no point should a person who came in 178th be getting a prize before some who came in 34th. Without brackets and rewarding top shooters in brackets, the incentive for sandbagging is gone and the only thing that matters is doing your best.

Just my .02 but if you set the conditions for success, the rest will fall in place as people adjust to the sport. I hope that whoever does puts it all together takes this into account.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Moltke

[slymantis]

I dont think a governing body is really necessary. With things like the 3gn pro series it becomes necessary but at an individual match level i dont think its required. Standardized rules would be nice though.

[Lead-Head]

I voted for yes, but by match directors of existing matches. However, I do not really mean what I think that answer means.

Not to come up with rule standardization. Each Md who goes through to work to put in a match should be able to have their own "flavor". That is part if the fun. Not to have a classification system, classifiers in 3 gun are a bit of a joke.

I just think an outlaw points series would be a good idea, with the major outlaw MDs submitting a universal finalized score format to the point series coordinators. Not for profit, sponsored by a big name, nominal membership fee to participate, national champ in each division.

If not this, then no governing body at all suits me just fine. I liked 3 guns structure better 5 years ago when none claimed to be the authority.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Lead-Head

[Stlhead]

What I think we need is someone to charge us extra fees to support a large staff that does not benefit us as the shooters, who could do there best to stifle creativity and fubar the matches that we all enjoy so much. That would be cool.

[Vespid_Wasp]

I don't have an option that I can pick due to the way your poll is worded. There is room for 'outlaw' matches with no governing body and there is room for 3 Gun Nation. Shooters can decide where and how they want to shoot. I like options.

I want to vote 'No' but I don't intend to select a poll choice that makes it seem like I want 3GN to go away.

I can't currently devote the time to 3GN to even bother with joining or getting classified, but that might change in the future.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Vespid_Wasp

[T Bacus]

I could not vote because there is no choice that reflects my views. 3 Gun Nation is different from USPSA which is different from Outlaw matches which is different than IDPA Multigun. In my mind trying to unify all of the 3 gun choices under one set of rules would be like saying USPSA, IDPA, Bianchi and Steel Challenge should all merge into one set of rules so that the competitor has an easier time learning the rules and will always face a consistent challenge at each match.

3 gun unification is an solution searching for a problem that does not exist.

[Glock3422]

One size does not fit all. In anything.

Everyone who takes the time and trouble to put on an outlaw match gets feedback every time someone chooses to shoot or not to shoot their match. People vote with their money and their feet. They also tell their buddies what is good and bad in their experience. Anyone remember the CTI?

I don't belong to any shooting association and don't plan on joining any.

As for two anywhere, I can form my own bad habits without be encouraged by a match format.

I enjoy simple straight up rules that emphasize marksmanship. I am not a fan of a track meet with guns. If foot speed means more than loading a shotgun, someone has really missed the mark on skills. If firing off a couple rounds in the general direction of a target you are not capable of hitting checks the box, the rules are wrong.

Any paper target that doesn't have a head is a joke.

I shoot matches to shoot with my friends. Hand out the prizes, if any, in any order you choose. I can buy anything I want for less than the total cost of most 3 gun matches and then I don't have to try to sell my prize for half price.

[StealthyBlagga]

If we needed a governing body, I think it would have to be USPSA - it's the only organization with the gravitas to do it right. However, I don't think the sport of 3-Gun is there yet. The free market is still helping us decide which rules and which match formats are the winning combination. USPSA has made great strides in aligning its multigun rules with the best practice in the sport, but the mindset is still too pistol-centric with respect to stage design and target policy.

[toothandnail]

Whenever I need a few laughs, I go read the "should this be a DQ forums ? " - ,as per rule 127.842 sub section 3C- 14.2.6.98

ANY match that needs more than 2 pages of rules , not for me. Been there, NOT gonna do that again.

[bigbrowndog]

Most people on this forum would "vote" against "big Government" telling them how to run their lives. so why do you think that we NEED a big governing body to tell us how to run our matches?????????

trapr

[02Fatboy]

No we don't need a governing body.

[The Donald]

We don't need a governing body per say, but there should be some agreement on especially equipment so you don't need 2-3 of each type of gun to be competitive.

[RescueYou]

Yeah, kind of like the United States needs more governing and laws...

[dcloudy777]

Only if the entire governing body is composed of me.

[CraigS.]

I don't think its broken, so why try to fix it ?

when I don't like the rules or the way its ran I find another match to go to, and

if all matches were run under the same organization you would take away the

variety.

[openclassterror]

As long as the existing governing bodies make their rule sets public (so we can emulate at the club level to prep for big matches if we want) I don't see any need to force clubs under an umbrella. We are a 3GN affiliated club, and we have one classifier stage at each match, but all other stages are essentially outlaw. Sometimes local club rules trump the big boys. For instance, our local gun range does not allow shot larger than 7-1/2 anywhere on the range. (board is comprised almost entirely of skeet/trap people who don't understand why anyone would need buckshot or slugs, or even high base 6s to knock over a steel at 40 yds.) So we hafta design our stages around the rules we have at the local level which don't always mesh with the major bodies. Which is one reason our range has an Action Pistol Club instead of IPSC or USPSA, because it is more flexible.

[blairmckenzie1]

I could not vote because there is no choice that reflects my views. 3 Gun Nation is different from USPSA which is different from Outlaw matches which is different than IDPA Multigun. In my mind trying to unify all of the 3 gun choices under one set of rules would be like saying USPSA, IDPA, Bianchi and Steel Challenge should all merge into one set of rules so that the competitor has an easier time learning the rules and will always face a consistent challenge at each match.

3 gun unification is an solution searching for a problem that does not exist.

+1

I like USPSA, but it is a big machine that can be slow to react.

Outlaw is just that, outlaw. If you don't like it don't shoot it.

3GN, to me*, is built for TV, not shooters

Each match has its "flavor", leave them alone.

[Jesse Tischauser]

Having some unification of rules, practices, target, etc is good for the growth of the sport. New shooters and new clubs benefit from having someone or something other than a forum to go to to help get started.

[Mike P]

Having some unification of rules, practices, target, etc is good for the growth of the sport. New shooters and new clubs benefit from having someone or something other than a forum to go to to help get started.

For those who feel they need or want some sort of unification/uniformity then 3GN and USPSA already have them covered.