rmills Posted January 7, 2005 Share Posted January 7, 2005 Interesting, we have seen two solid days of extremely negative comments in this forum in regards to IDPA and also personal affronts to Bill and Joyce Wilson. Are the moderators still on holiday? It's interesting to note that after many requested a division for 7 and 8 round revolvers, it's fascinating to see so many complaining about it. No, SVI's and STI's have not been eliminated. All of the equipment I have been using for years is still 100% legal. The new rules clarified many things and created a few new questions that need to be addressed. It was a giant step in a positive direction. At this moment HQ is addressing possible "fubars" in regards to revolver weight issues and others. I wonder what the atmosphere would have been like if IDPA had been the action shooting sport all of these years and IPSC or USPSA was the new sport in town. Imagine the comments.......................... As for the topic "IPSC Membership Drive", please...........................take it to the "other" forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnRodriguez Posted January 7, 2005 Share Posted January 7, 2005 All IPDA did for the 7 and 8 shot revolvers is allow them to load to capacity, it does not say if you can fire past 6 shots. I have read and reread the new ESP class for it and it does not say so, I might be just full of it, but I would like that part clarified before I go looking for a less than 4" 8-shot. As far as the less that 42 ounces, there have not been that many SS 8-shot smiths made and the measure in at 2-3/8 on the barrel length, and are well under 42 oz. ( This would be the gun I would run). Your other choice is the Ti/Sc revolvers and they then to weight in the less than 20 oz range. I don't see the were the weight issue is. Just my 2 cents. If they do allow more that 6-shots fired before reloading, than I might actually join IPDA, but it will only be a annual membership, since they have added the rule were you can be kicked out for using unfair equipment, and/or tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Larry Cazes Posted January 7, 2005 Share Posted January 7, 2005 Interesting, we have seen two solid days of extremely negative comments in this forum in regards to IDPA and also personal affronts to Bill and Joyce Wilson. Are the moderators still on holiday? Actually, since I don't shoot IDPA, I haven't felt an interest in posting anything until now but I have been following them. These threads don't seem any worse than the continuous USPSA L10 division bashing that has gone on recently or the threads concerning the recent release of the new USPSA rulebook. In any healthy organization some civilized dissention can be a positive thing. I wonder what the atmosphere would have been like if IDPA had been the action shooting sport all of these years and IPSC or USPSA was the new sport in town. Imagine the comments.......................... What does USPSA or IPSC have to do with these discussions? All of the threads I've seen have been dominated by those who shoot IDPA primarily or exclusively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted January 7, 2005 Share Posted January 7, 2005 Roy, I mean this in the most respectful way possible, but take a look at it from the other side of the fence: the manufacturer/sponsor. To single out a specific manufacturer's product as "cheating" (in *the rulebook* of all places) by trade name and photo as IDPA HQ has, is extraordinary. I don't know if it's the product of arrogance, ignorance, or what, but it's a huge blunder. It's probably not the message IDPA intended to send, but the industry will have already heard the message loud and clear: Don't waste your time and money trying to work with IDPA. Michaels of Oregon is huge conglomerate on the order of Armor Holdings and Lyman. Why anyone would go out of his/her way to so alienate them defies understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted January 7, 2005 Share Posted January 7, 2005 I am glad to see the 8 shot revolvers finally allowed to compete. It is odd, at least to me, that merely having a revolver that can be loaded with moonclips (kinda old technology) holding 6 rounds disqualifies it from competing against other 6 shooters. The holster thing is a big deal to some, and that is understandable. On our local level it will not matter at all (my bet) because the number of competitors are not large...and the clubs will not be nitpicking about whether 1/2" or 1" of space exists between the holster / pistol and the side of someone's body. I haven't read any personal affronts to either of the Wilsons, but I may have missed something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buff87 Posted January 7, 2005 Share Posted January 7, 2005 I am glad to see the 8 shot revolvers finally allowed to compete. It is odd, at least to me, that merely having a revolver that can be loaded with moonclips (kinda old technology) holding 6 rounds disqualifies it from competing against other 6 shooters. The pf of 165 for "enhanced revolver" doesn't make any sense to me. the new holsters rules are very open to mis-interpreatation by Safety Officers. I don't think that splitting the smallest division (revolver) in two makes any sense at all either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Round_Gun_Shooter Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Interesting, we have seen two solid days of extremely negative comments in this forum in regards to IDPA and also personal affronts to Bill and Joyce Wilson. Are the moderators still on holiday? Bill Wilson, as the owner of the company (IDPA), opened himself up for "personal afronts" when he singled out other companies in a printed staement. As the owner of a company, he showed total disregard for a segment of his customer base with his changes in the product, IDPA Competition, without notifying the paid up customers (Those who hold valid IDPA cards). When I paid my membership fee I purchased a product. With no warning and no notification, the product has changed. I found out about the change on this forum. If I treated my customers this way, I would not be in business long. As for Joyce, I saw only polite responses to her postings so I must have missed something. As for your statement At this moment HQ is addressing possible "fubars" in regards to revolver weight issues and others. No Official word has been posted here or anywhere else I have read that this is true. So far it is unsubstantiated hearsay. I would like to see Mr or Mrs Wilson post on the IDPA web site that this is the case and show the customers that they have at least some respect for their feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 No, SVI's and STI's have not been eliminated. I'm not sure that was ever a question. I still plan to shoot my STI SS 19111. I wonder what the atmosphere would have been like if IDPA had been the action shooting sport all of these years and IPSC or USPSA was the new sport in town. Imagine the comments.......................... Likely similar. But, that isn't the case now, is it? All of the equipment I have been using for years is still 100% legal. Good, for you. For many this isn't the case, though. Many people are finding that the very same gear that they use for daily carry is no longer legal for IDPA match use. Roy, you have to see there is a bit of irony there, right? Given these guidelines or the list, I'd pick the list. I think the end result is another layer of subjectivity has been added, and that is not good for the sport. Interesting, we have seen two solid days of extremely negative comments in this forum in regards to IDPA and also personal affronts to Bill and Joyce Wilson. Are the moderators still on holiday? Yes, the moderators are listening. These same discussions are not unlike debate we had 6 months ago about possible rule changes regarding NRA Action Pistol. The great thing about that, is that at least one of the AP Board members is a regular here, and some of our banter resulted in some positive changes. I forsee something similar going on with some of the snafu's these rules caused, albeit unintentionally (sp?). Yes, the debate is heated, but I think some folks are honestly unhappy with the current state of affairs with IDPA and perhaps even more so regarding how the changes came to pass. Let us not also forget that IDPA is not member driven at the organizational level. Ultimately the buck stops with Bill and Joyce. The rulebook so much as states that, though not in the same words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driver8M3 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 All of the equipment I have been using for years is still 100% legal. well, thats great...for you. how do you feel about all the others who were just told they can no longer use what they have been using, or even worse (or funnier), what they actually use for carry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 These threads don't seem any worse than the continuous USPSA L10 division bashing that has gone on recently or the threads concerning the recent release of the new USPSA rulebook. In any healthy organization some civilized dissention can be a positive thing. That is an excellent point. What does USPSA or IPSC have to do with these discussions? All of the threads I've seen have been dominated by those who shoot IDPA primarily or exclusively. That's an even better point. The obvious implication was that this is a case of "outsiders" throwing stones at IDPA and the Wilson organization, but that is patently false. It's people who regularly shoot IDPA matches expressing their opinions on a sport in which they have a vested interest by way of their paid membership and ongoing participation. Sheesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD45 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 I would like for IDPA to explain one thing. We used to have a holster list. There have been long waits for some holsters to be approved. Now, who approved all of the holsters on the list? It would seem like if you put it on the list it would be good forever, right? In the new rulebook a few that were on the list got moved off the list. Not because of a division change, but for reasons unknown. Somebody needs to remember that they have 12,000 people sending them dues for a sport with no prize money. And we aren't even granted an explaination??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kend Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 and the clubs will not be nitpicking about whether 1/2" or 1" of space exists between the holster / pistol and the side of someone's body. This is exactly what a lot of complaints have been about in the past, inconsistent enforcement of the rules from one club to another. You either go by the rulebook and have IDPA matches or you don't go by the rulebook and have insert-your-name-for-it pistol matches...which is where I think our club is headed now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caspian_45 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 rmills in the threads I have been following I have not seen anyone bashing Bill or Joyce. Please find the post and bring it to the attention of a moderator if you feel it needs editing. Lack of IDPA clubs near me has kept me from competing as much as I would like. And I see no movement towards setting up a club locally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gun Geek Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Lack of IDPA clubs near me has kept me from competing as much as I would like. And I see no movement towards setting up a club locally. Hey - if there are shooting ranges near you (indoor or outdoor) get some buds together and start your own club. Lots of help on this forum (and others). This gives you (slightly more of a) right to call HQ and ask questions - they do seem to reply a little quicker when your name is on their website as a contact for a club. Rhino/Larry - I agree - a little civilized discourse is a good thing. I have only seen a few professional swipes at Bill, and none at Joyce. Bill is a big boy, they aren't personal, and he can handle it. Some squealing in the family is a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Roy, Welcome back. Since you asked --- I'm lurking through all of these posts, and occasionally posting a reply as well. In the couple of instances where I would have commented, had I seen the posts/drifts earlier, another Moderator had already said what needed saying. The other thing that I'm keeping in mind is that a new rulebook was released yesterday --- with a number of changes. I'm cutting people some slack --- and likely will for the next couple of days --- as long as things don't get worse. Last but not least, while I know there's been some IDPA bashing, not every post questioning or disagreeing with parts of the new rulebook is "bashing." It's always been acceptable to politely question or express your opinions about rules here --- it's when the conversation takes a rude or political turn that we have a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 I've been watching all the discussion over the last few days and I must say it's very odd. I have never shot an IDPA match, mostly due to time, but have been planning on doing so in 2005. But now with all the "drama" I'm not so sure I want to be part of it. The part that bothers me most is how the members seem to feel as if they are subjects and not partners in the organization. I don't ever get that feel from USPSA. Maybe someone can inform me of the organiztional structure. Do the have elected officials like USPSA ? Perhaps I'll still try it but not so sure I'd join. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Maybe someone can inform me of the organiztional structure. Do the have elected officials like USPSA ? Nope. What Wilson says is it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 I've been watching all the discussion over the last few days and I must say it's very odd.I have never shot an IDPA match, mostly due to time, but have been planning on doing so in 2005. But now with all the "drama" I'm not so sure I want to be part of it. The part that bothers me most is how the members seem to feel as if they are subjects and not partners in the organization. I don't ever get that feel from USPSA. Maybe someone can inform me of the organiztional structure. Do the have elected officials like USPSA ? Perhaps I'll still try it but not so sure I'd join. Warp, Give it a try. If a group in your area is great, you'll have a good time. If they're not, try a different group. My competitive shooting roots are in IDPA --- without it I wouldn't be in USPSA today. I had the great fortune of shooting with two exceptionally nice groups of IDPA shooters in N.J., unfortunately both clubs folded. Friends of mine are running a match just across the river, but unfortunately on a day I work.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgtsvi Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Ok, here is what I feel about the rule change. It sucks that I have two rigs of gear that I paid over $100 for each set of holsters and mag pouches. That being said, I could go and order new equipment and keep shooting IDPA. My first experience with competative shooting was in IDPA about 2 years ago. I shot my first major match at Texas state and received an FTDR for walking past a target in a shoothouse stage and not firing the minimum required number of rounds. I just took it as expericence and went on to win 1st place at the Nationals that same year. I have never been an IDPA basher. I shot my first USPSA match in Bossier city a couple of months ago and took first place Limited unclassified. I love the loose format of USPSA, as well as the high round count stages. I am a hoser and love to shoot fast. Here is my problem with the way IDPA is heading. If you read the new rules you will see that they are making the game more geared toward low level shooters. This was apparent at the recent Nationals with the excessive number of stages that required six shots on three targets in three different strings of fire. I feel if I am paying alot of money to go to a major match, I should get to shoot complex stages with higher round counts and alot of movement. These stages are what separate the good shooters. Standing still and shooting three targets doesnt allow a top shooter to use his or her best skills. I think IDPA is a great place to start shooting and learning safe gun handling skills. I think it has helped me a great deal and will give me a good base to start shooting USPSA in the future. I am not going to bash Bill and Joyce or their organization. I will thank them for starting a sport that opened the door for other sports that are more suitable for the type of shooting I enjoy. I will shoot some local club matches in my area because of friends I have made. My money will be going toward my new passion of shooting USPSA and three gun. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caspian_45 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Lack of IDPA clubs near me has kept me from competing as much as I would like. And I see no movement towards setting up a club locally. Hey - if there are shooting ranges near you (indoor or outdoor) get some buds together and start your own club. Yes I have thought about doing just that. Without going to great detail I will say that the wife and I had been working the one local range (WVPPS, in Terre Haute,IN) from '95 to'01 (I think thats correct). We helped with both the USPSA and IDPA matches. We both got burned out on the local club level. We asked for help we tried to buy help, but few if any stepped forward to lend a hand. So we started helping with the USPSA Nationals and the PASA club. We have never regreted the change. There just doesn't seem to be much interest for IDPA in east central IL. If a club did get started I would help out as much as possible. I just am not going to do it all. I hope IDPA can get the new holster rules straighten out, because as it sets right now I cannot legally use my equipment. And I am not buying more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Tony and his wife Deb should be commended for their years of service to our club in Terre Haute and I know they're way too busy supporting the shooting sports in other ways (as he mentioned) to start a new IDPA club. The interest for IDPA where he lives just isn't there. We couldn't get anyone to run the IDPA matches after the match director moved away a few years ago. We could even get anyone to volunteer to run a single stage for one of the matches. If someone wants to step into the role at our club, we'd be happy to reaffiliate with IDPA and shoot once a month, but until we get some more bodies, it's just not going to happen. Farther north in Indiana (AtlantaCC), there are lots of people who want to shoot IDPA ... and not too many who want to help on a regular basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caspian_45 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Thank you Rhino. You too should be commended for all the time and energy you provide to the many clubs you particapate at. He gets the scores tallied and emailed within a few hours of getting home from the range. Keeps clud members updated on EVERY thing going on at ALL the clubs he helps with. If I had 10 people like Rhino setting up a new club it would be a breeze. We'd probably fight of who gets to do what. The Terre Haute (WVPPS) club seems to be doing very well. Many people get there early for set up and stay late for tear down. Good People are hard to find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 I feel a group hug is imminent! Thanks for the kind words, Tony! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowsure Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 1) I dont think that a personal attack on anyone's personal views is going to change a thing. After a personal attack that person is usuall ignored alltogether,at least thats what I do. 2) I see the biggest issue here is at the higher level of competitors. These people will travel and spend allot of money to shoot in a years time. They want to be able to shoot @ any club and not have a problem with holsters/gun/class. If you have the money to travel you probably have the money to get a diffrent holster/gun. As I see it most of the local club shooters will run with what they have. If the club has a problem with his/her equipment the decission will be made, do I want to shoot IDPA bad enough to get more gear? Some yes, some no. 3) Everybody hates change. The rule change has some issues as pointed out in the other posts but change it is. My 02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmills Posted January 8, 2005 Author Share Posted January 8, 2005 The part that bothers me most is how the members seem to feel as if they are subjects and not partners in the organization. I don't ever get that feel from USPSA. It's constantly stated here that due to USPSA's elected officers, members have a say in the direction of the organization. If one has been a USPSA member over the last few years, that aspect comes into question with issues such as: a) Spending over well over $100,000 for a piece of land in Washington state located on a flood plain for the purpose of building a non-centralized HQ. This issue was never brought before the membership, we were told after the fact. It turns out that the persons responsible for the purchase never knew the location was on a flood plain. Unless it's been sold recently (and if so, a report should be given to the membership as to the losses incurred), USPSA is still stuck with it. In a "membership owned organization" or whatever term one wishes to use, the authorization for an expenditure that large should have prior membership approval. After many requests to HQ concerning the "TV deal" and how much was spent in securing it, we still do not know the details (i.e. the cost and the services that were to be provided). Just a couple of examples demonstrating that the "other" sport is a not so perfect utopia due to it's "elected" officals as it is stated here often. rant off.................. In regards to the new IDPA rule book, lets start a new topic where: We list specific rules and the issues person have with them in a logical fashion (i.e. Is the S&W 410 not legal in SSR division now due to the rule outlawing moonclip usage? Then state a logical reason why it should be legal. Once the issues are posted, then let's start a new topic to address the issues gathered in the above topic and to determine the logical answer to each of the issues based on everyone's input. Once we have compiled a list of issues and a list of suggested resolutions, I personally will forward them to HQ for their consideration. I will will launch the new topic now................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts