how come the Big Dogs don't seem to do the west coast matches

[motosapiens]

I am 100% for sponsored shooters in IDPA. And having shot a sanctioned match or two now with no prize table I can tell you I will never shoot them again.

So you're shooting to get stuff instead of to improve your skills and enjoy yourself? Couldn't you get a LOT more stuff by just skipping matches and buying stuff instead? Seriously......

[Thomas H]

I am 100% for sponsored shooters in IDPA. And having shot a sanctioned match or two now with no prize table I can tell you I will never shoot them again.

So you're shooting to get stuff instead of to improve your skills and enjoy yourself? Couldn't you get a LOT more stuff by just skipping matches and buying stuff instead? Seriously......

Didn't know it had to be an either/or sort of thing...given limited time and resources, can't someone shoot to enjoy themselves and improve skills(though I note that I don't think matches are for improving skills, but instead for testing skills, but that is a different argument) AND prefer to spend their time on matches where you can also get stuff?

Let's see---if I can only make three major matches a year (plus local matches), and my choices (all of which are arguably about the same level of fun/interesting in terms of stages) are such that I can potentially ALSO maybe get something cool in a drawing in some of those choices---why wouldn't I choose matches like that?

Granted, the original poster phrased it more strongly than that. But Moto then made it into an either/or situation, which it simply isn't. All else being equal (which is generally is, for larger matches), I'd tend to pick ones where I could potentially also come home with something valuable over ones where I couldn't. I'm spending the same amount of money, and having the same amount of fun---why not also pick the choice where I can get something cool, too?

[rowdyb]

I shoot major matches to test myself against other shooters across the nation. That's why I pay my own money to fly from CA to North Carolina, Massachusetts, Arkansas, Alabama and all the other states I've shot major IDPA matches at in the past two years. Some I win my class and some I bomb horribly. I don't care about winning locally, so I need to go other places to be tested.

To me, winning is most important. But if I'm choosing two matches to fly to and I know one has a prize table and one doesn't I'm more likely to choose the one with the prize table. I just shot a great match at the North Carolina State IDPA championships a few weeks ago. Great stages, super fair SO's. I wont my class and got a match bump. All good things, but the award was a printed certificate (not a plaque or something more durable) and there was zero prize table or anything. Good stages, good people, I had a good result but I doubt I'll go back as the take home rewards (actual and potential) were kinda underwhelming compared to others I've experienced.

This will sound horrible, but I don't always even like guns. But I always like winning. I don't have a ccw or some other 'real life' reason to shoot IDPA. I do it solely to satiate my competitive desire by beating other people when I've done my best. I practice 5 days a week and shoot a match somewhere every weekend.

If score wasn't kept and positions of finishing recorded I wouldn't do this. At all. But that is just me and my personal way of going about it. Most people who shoot IDPA don't feel the same way I do and I'm cool with that.

[motosapiens]

Let's see---if I can only make three major matches a year (plus local matches), and my choices (all of which are arguably about the same level of fun/interesting in terms of stages) are such that I can potentially ALSO maybe get something cool in a drawing in some of those choices---why wouldn't I choose matches like that?

I guess I just don't even think about the 'stuff' when i decide what matches to go to. I try to make the ones with the best stages and the most competition.

I apparently also don't care as much about 'winning', or I would probably shoot more IDPA. It's certainly much easier to 'win' than it is in USPSA. It's interesting to see how diverse people's motivations are.

Edited March 3, 2014 by motosapiens

[Thomas H]

Let's see---if I can only make three major matches a year (plus local matches), and my choices (all of which are arguably about the same level of fun/interesting in terms of stages) are such that I can potentially ALSO maybe get something cool in a drawing in some of those choices---why wouldn't I choose matches like that?

I guess I just don't even think about the 'stuff' when i decide what matches to go to. I try to make the ones with the best stages and the most competition.

You'll note the part of what I originally said that I have now highlighted in red.

I apparently also don't care as much about 'winning', or I would probably shoot more IDPA. It's certainly much easier to 'win' than it is in USPSA. It's interesting to see how diverse people's motivations are.

Huh. If I'm going to a larger competition, it is because I want to have fun in a bigger venue, and test myself against a larger group of shooters. If I didn't want to do that, I probably wouldn't pay all the extra money.

Motivations for shooting in competitions certainly vary.

[motosapiens]

Huh. If I'm going to a larger competition, it is because I want to have fun in a bigger venue, and test myself against a larger group of shooters. If I didn't want to do that, I probably wouldn't pay all the extra money.

Motivations for shooting in competitions certainly vary.

I may not have been clear. I care very much about improving my own skills and testing myself against better competition on harder and more elaborate stages. I don't care so much about 'winning' (i.e. coming in first in an artificially created category). Winning depends on other people's performances. Shooting my best only depends on my own performance, although certainly improving my own performance is reflected in the overall results.

Edited March 4, 2014 by motosapiens

[Thomas H]

Huh. If I'm going to a larger competition, it is because I want to have fun in a bigger venue, and test myself against a larger group of shooters. If I didn't want to do that, I probably wouldn't pay all the extra money.

Motivations for shooting in competitions certainly vary.

I may not have been clear. I care very much about improving my own skills and testing myself against better competition on harder and more elaborate stages. I don't care so much about 'winning' (i.e. coming in first in an artificially created category). Winning depends on other people's performances. Shooting my best only depends on my own performance, although certainly improving my own performance is reflected in the overall results.

Considering that winning "prizes" (according to IDPA rules) is based on random draw, again, going places that have "prize tables" for IDPA doesn't have anything to do with winning "an artificially created category." And that was the point at hand, wasn't it?

As such, I'm still not understanding your issue with (again, all else being equal in large matches, which it normally pretty much is, which I said in the first place) choosing matches with prize tables versus matches without prize tables. Going to an IDPA match, you can't earn a prize by winning anyway. (Unless, of course, the rules have changed about prizes?) But if there isn't a prize table, you can't get anything. So why not pick a match where you might get something fun through random draw?

Which was the original point---one of the likely reasons that the "big dogs" don't shoot certain matches is that there really isn't anything in it for them. So if the prize table items aren't based on winning, then there is no big draw to going there compared to shooting equally good matches elsewhere where they can win prizes based on skill, instead of random luck.

Wait a second...you said:

I care very much about improving my own skills and testing myself against better competition on harder and more elaborate stages. I don't care so much about 'winning' (i.e. coming in first in an artificially created category). Winning depends on other people's performances.

Doesn't that first sentence "...testing myself against better competition..." contradict the last one "...depends on other people's performances"?

If you are testing yourself against others, then obviously it depends on others.

Anyway----what was the problem with choosing matches with prizes tables, again?

[Bob Hostetter]

Exactly ....

[rowdyb]

Thank you Thomas H

[motosapiens]

Anyway----what was the problem with choosing matches with prizes tables, again?

If you do it, no problem at all. It's just not something I take into consideration any longer. For me personally, I found that worrying about prizes took some of the enjoyment out of competing.

I'm not sure why you care so much if I think about it differently than you. I didn't say you were wrong caring about prizes and wanting to win something in a raffle.

[motosapiens]

Doesn't that first sentence "...testing myself against better competition..." contradict the last one "...depends on other people's performances"?

If you are testing yourself against others, then obviously it depends on others.

No, not unless you read something into it that I didn't say. I enjoy testing myself against others. I don't care that much about 'winning' an artificial category. No need to be offended.

[deacon12224]

I think that IDPA in general is always going to suffer from a lack of "big dog" talent no matter where you are. The rules are open to some amount of interpretation and subjectivity. This is not a criticism, it's just a fact of the sport. This may not be that big of a deal to those out for a fun weekend of shooting with friends, but when you are there because winning is your job and your livelihood, those kind of rules can make you crazy. I'm sure they feel more comfortable in a sport that has a lesser chance of them losing because of some random call that they have little ability to appeal.

[Loves2Shoot]

The rules are open to some amount of interpretation and subjectivity. This is not a criticism, it's just a fact of the sport. This may not be that big of a deal to those out for a fun weekend of shooting with friends, but when you are there because winning is your job and your livelihood, those kind of rules can make you crazy. I'm sure they feel more comfortable in a sport that has a lesser chance of them losing because of some random call that they have little ability to appeal.

In talking with one of the biggest dogs ever, this is spot on the reason he expressed on why he seldom shoots IDPA.

[Thomas H]

Removed because there is no useful reason to continue this discussion.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Thomas H

[ES13Raven]

I also think that for WA in particular, the club that decided no photos or videos didn't help draw shooters who rely on exposure to pay the bills.

Here is the response I got from the MD:

"We banned video some years ago, for a number of reasons. We were looking into liability insurance, and both attorneys and insurers recommended that we no longer allow video of live shooting.

There were also safety, match equity, and privacy issues that we thought important enough at the time.

We will have photographers at the match, and competitors will be provided with a password for viewing the pics post-match."

[Sac Law Man]

There will be several so called big dogs at The Western in Sacramento this year.. I asked several top shooters to attend. Their response was very favorable and positive.