IDSA -- new shooting sport is organizing

[Jim Scoutten]

I can almost guarantee that the sponsors listed on that page paid nothing for thier exposure on Shooting USA aside from the expense of shipping firearms.  There is nothing underhanded going on.  Shooting USA clearly identifies who's a sponsor.  From the last show, Kalispell cases was a sponsor.  During the segment featuring Kalispell cases, they were clearly identified *as a show sponsor*. 

There's no reason I should expect Eric to carry our water here, but he is exactly right. Sponsors are clearly disclosed, on the air, and on the website. The web banner space is leased by folks who want more visibility to our web visitors. If you've seen the shows, it should be obvious that Smith, Benelli, and Federal are writing big checks to the network. Obviously their products get included in our show-and-tell segments. Smith and Trijicon are supporting the Pro Tips section for Doug Koenig and Michael Voigt, respectively. And Kalispel wanted an exclusive association with the show series. We negotiated that and they now have it, but not until after we drove a truck over one of their cases. Nobody has done that before and it alarmed them that we were going to do it, but the case passed the test so we don't mind a bit declaring them our exclusive supplier. Their product is that good.

But, contrary to "common sense", nobody is paying for editorial on the shows, or for the related support exposure on the website. Eric is right, we did make him pay the shipping to get his grip tape to us, but not a dime for them to appear. It's just a good idea that more people need to know is available, since TGO uses skateboard tape on his XD. And we made Brian E. pay the postage to send a copy of his book, which has also been on the air and is on the website.

Finally, on continuing the myth that USPSA is expensive, that show, and the supporting web page were about Limited and Open Division guns, period. And, with the exception of the Para we called a bargain on the air, Limited and Open guns ARE expensive.

As I began the guns segment in that show I said, "This is one of those shows that will have some of you sending e-mail that I keep showing you guns you can't afford. Well for you, you can shoot in the USPSA Production Division for about $500. But Open and Limited guns are precision made, highly smithed... "

With that intro, we examined the good stuff. There was no Glock, or Smith in the bunch because they don't make high-cap Limited or Open guns.

So quit worrying about USPSA pricing. The Production and Limited Ten Divisions have opened the door to everybody. And we are backing those divisions with plenty of TV... just not in that particular show.

Jim

[BigDave]

Thanks for your comments, Jim. Glad to see you around.

[driver8M3]

Limited...guns ARE expensive.

there must be someone around here that can make GM with a gun that doesnt require financing

[blackdragon]

My 2 cents worth,

1st. If you are shooting defensively, When the lead starts flying your A$% better be behind some hard cover waiting for some one to come and get you.

2nd. Some people like to blame the equipment instead of themselves.

3rd. I still get my A$% handed to me with shooters using box stock pistols and I have been shooting this game for a little while.

Ivan

[Flexmoney]

...

And, with the exception of the Para we called a bargain on the air, Limited and Open guns ARE expensive.

...

There was no Glock, or Smith in the bunch because they don't make high-cap Limited or Open guns.

Jim

Jim,

I appreciate your input here on the forum and on this issue in particular.

I do need to point out something that you aren't aware of (and, as I mentioned in an earlier post...I don't hold you resonsible for not knowing this...USPSA needs to do more to get the word out).

I am a Grand Master...in Limited...and I shoot a Glock.

There are, as of my latest count, about a dozen shooters that have made Grand Master with the Glock. I believe 5 of the 12 did so in Limited Division.

My gun, a Glock35, is a factory refurb that I got on the cheap. I forget what I paid for it, but it is safe to say that it wasn't more than $500. I also don't think it needs much in the way of "after-market" work for it to be competitive (grip-tape, decent sights, and some trigger smoothing).

Just hoping to let you know that not all Limited guns are expensive, and that Glock does make hicap guns (that is almost all they make, actually).

Thanks for your time. If you are ever in Ohio, let me know.

Kyle F.

Ohio Section Coordinator

Glock Shooter.

[Michael Brown]

Back to the original topic of IDSA:

My bet is that this never gets off the ground. I don't think a loosely organized group such as this can create a major shooting sport off disgruntled members of a fairly new organization.

IDPA took off because its time was long coming (a sport directly marketed toward non-competitive shooters in a competitive format) and the people involved were credible and had the background for a venture like this. Plus IDPA was a full-time venture for Wilson and Company until they got it off the ground. The same cannot be said for the folks trying IDSA.

I hope it works (really) but I doubt it.

Michael Brown

[Tangram]

So many words... It flies or it doesn't.

Rick

[vluc]

IDSA Webpage

[EricW]

5) Modification to Handguns

Almost all modifications will be acceptable, as long as the handgun remains safe. Since a match is shorter in duration than a person’s everyday life, it is difficult to simulate the long uncomfortable days of carrying concealed handguns. So modification restrictions should be kept to a minimum. *(We are concerned about guns that might be “weighted”) But don’t want to ban them because “I wouldn’t carry that heavy thing around everyday.” reason

5) Sights

All sights are legal electronic sights. (At this time)

Oh this is just too funny. IPSC Modified guns out of Milt Sparks IWB leather are legal. What a crack up. I want to shoot a match just to watch people whine.

[Steve Moneypenny]

can i use my glock with M6 laser/light. lasers are awesome on CCW guns.. but are no compare to a c-more/docter/j-point for speed/competition

[Rob Boudrie]

USPSA is trying some new marketing programs, however, there are the usual constraints

1. Money - direct mail and ads in gun magazines are not cost effective

2. Clubs - we need a place for people go to to shoot. Most recruiting is done one on one.

3. Polysyllabilism is a problem. IPSC is two syllables, USPSA is five. This does make

a difference in which nomenclature is used to describe matches.

To those of you who say the marketing sucks, I ask - what would you do that does not suck which is both cost effective and affordable?

We have an offer a few years ago for a marketing program - the vendor wanted us to commit to $250K for a year+ long program, and would not make any portion of that fee contingent upon measurable results. I

[EricW]

But Rob,

Wouldn't putting out a version of The Front Sight Annual on newstands GENERATE money? Surely Harris or another firm could make that generate a tidy little profit for USPSA. Glock certainly can't be losing money with the stratospheric advertising rates that Harris charges for the Glock annual.

Wouldn't putting back issues of Front Sight, (the best-written gun magazine on earth) on the web for free GENERATE interest?

There's two zero-dollar to profitable marketing suggestions. The profits of #1 could be poured directly into a mass-media marketing campaign.

I think that putting up tables at gunshows and passing out brochures in gunstores is at best a treadwater endeavor and more likely a losing proposition. IPSC shooters simply are not representative of the median gun-owner. Let's face it, IPSC/USPSA shooters are a very eclectic group and most decidedly NOT who you typically meet at most shooting ranges. Sooner or later, we're going to have to cough up the dough and use mass-marketing to reach the diverse group that is the future USPSA shooter. It's just the way it is.

And we should look toward the obvious, and put TV spots on during episodes of Shooting USA (and maybe Shooting Gallery) and possibly on other channels. And yeah, that's going to take some scratch. If USPSA dues were raised $10/yr, shazam, we'd have a $120K mass-marketing budget. Add that, with the revenue off the USPSA Annual magazine, and we could be in the ball park of a professional marketing program.

Hell, I'd settle for spending $25K on a USPSA marketing video that was *sexy* and exciting instead of the new, milquetoast mantra of "Fun Family and Fair." At least then we could project that on wall at a gun show and draw in the two or three likely candidates who will stick with the sport.

My $.03

[glock-cop]

I'm all for another shooting sport. I don't know when they would shoot. Most of the weekends are filled up in my area with ipsc and idpa. If they hold a match I'll show up and give it a try. They started talking about optics being better. Not many people have optics on thier carry gun. If your going to allow optics, why worry about the holster being seen. Just a thought.

[John Thompson]

I'm not convinced that marketing is the total answer. I have never been able to get anyone I know to try a match and even when people do try one and have fun most don't return. Shooting is just not a priority in most peoples lives.

[Jim Watson]

I think IDSA is a local phenomenon blown up by the Internet from a combination of smooth talk and IDPA rule change dissatisfaction. I think it may well linger but not spread much. There are more little outlaw shoots out there than we may realize.

A problem of most any form of competitive shooting is the perception that you have to be good to start with. I can't count the number of times I have heard: "I'd like to come shoot with you but I'm not good enough." Nearly all the publicity goes to the good shooters and their performance leaving very little coverage of the learning side.

[JFD]

Positive coverage in the gun rags seems to be the key to new shooters. Look how much press IDPA got, and the negative press USPSA received at the same time. It may truely be impossible to undo that damage.

If this provisional SS division starts, maybe we'll rate some gun rag coverage because of it. It IS tailor made for the 1911, and how many freaking 1911s do you see in the gun rags?

I agree that the perception of USPSA as being "too hard" is real. It's hard to market the top level shooting sport as being friendly to newbies. In reality I think it's friendly to anyone with enough guts to simply come to a match. The problem is everyone seems to think we're all TGO quality shooters. Don't I wish!

Maybe we need Shooting USA to follow the D class squad of Production shooters at the Nats and put that on the show instead of the super squad. Instead of TGO and company teaching the secrets of tearing up a stage on the show, they could instead demonstrate how the difficult targets(swingers, etc) are really not bad at all.

If it comes down to it, I'd gladly pay $20 more a year for membership just to boost the marketing budget. I find it hard to believe that as a group, we don't have some people with some effective marketing ideas.

When you get right down to it, we may just be a small group destined to stay the same size. IDPA markets itself to newbie shooters and I believe their membership is still less than ours.

If I read the latest edition of Front Sight correctly, then there is a new display available for placement in local shops. If I were a gun shop owner, I'd push USPSA hard. Where else do you find a group of people who are constantly spending money on guns and accessories.

[Kory]

I heard a lot about USPSA not marketing vey well as the reason why more shooters don't give it a go. I ask myself "Why don't I shoot more USPSA?"

Right now I just shoot steel 99% of the time in a match that barely categorizes equipment. I don't know why exactly, but I don't shoot much USPSA. I should have shot Jojo's USPSA match this morning but I didn't. Tomorrow I will go to the exact same range at the same time and shoot the aforementioned steel match. (I did go shoot as bowling pin match somewhere else this afternoon, and won)

I know I will see the same faces at both matches.

I know my shooting skills work just as well, reguardless of the sanctioning body.

I am not against the gaming, I am there for the competiion.

I try to get shooters to try any match, and 99% never do.

Tomorrow, other shooters will try to convince me to shoot USPSA next Saturday, and I probubly won't.

I am not turned off by the expensive equipment, even though I get told very frequently that my stock (sights, trigger) CZ-75B is keeping me from being competetive. I seem to do just fine with it.

Why don't more shooters shoot USPSA?

I don't know why I don't shoot it more often, I really do enjoy it.

[JT Johnson]

I think that putting up tables at gunshows and passing out brochures in gunstores is at best a treadwater endeavor and more likely a losing proposition.  IPSC shooters simply are not representative of the median gun-owner.  Let's face it, IPSC/USPSA shooters are a very eclectic group and most decidedly NOT who you typically meet at most shooting ranges.  Sooner or later, we're going to have to cough up the dough and use mass-marketing to reach the diverse group that is the future USPSA shooter.  It's just the way it is. 

If we decide to market USPSA, eventually we are going to have decide what USPSA is going to be.

Are we a sport, or are we "practical shooting"?

As a newcomer to USPSA, I would say from what I have seen, is that we are a sport . I would imagine about half the membership may be inclined to agree. The other half of the membership wishes to remain true to the roots of USPSA and keep us on the "practical shooting" path.

If we take the "practical shooting" path we are quite limited to whom we are going to market our product to. Disgruntled IDPA shooters, gunshow commandos, and gun rag magazine readers are not that large an audience nor the type we should be pursuing.

USPSA needs to market itself as a sport and appeal to larger audience. USPSA would have to change to do this.

Can you say goodbye to the metric target?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boudrie asked for suggestions if you thought the marketing sucked. I have one fairly inexpensive one.

We need a downloadable mpeg video on the website introducing USPSA showing safety, Joe and Amy C class shooter, and what to expect at a USPSA match. Without going into more detail, care would have to be taken to make the video.

The video could be distributed via the website, mail the video on CDs to people who request them from the website, and members could pass them out.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Josh

[tightloop]

Well, if you looked at the IDSA web page, you will notice that Len Baxley if the new Pres of the sport...

If any of you remember Len, he was a Nationally recognized IDPA shooter in '99 and 2000 then left the scene....He runs a range in Ferris, Tx and does some photography work to make ends meet.. His past is rather checkered as is the reason that he doesn't shoot anymore, but that is in the past, I guess...

I don't think that the new sport will make it nationally but will enjoy some regional success..I hope it serves the purpose of waking up some of the folks who run the other similar sport, but I rather doubt that...any way, good luck to them...

[chp5]

Possibly one way to get positive press for USPSA is to make Front Sight available on the net in .pdf to all members and non-members.

Front Sight is the best shooting mag out there IMO, but you have to be a member to get it. Post it on the net for free.

Also, we should put together some slick match videos for the public to download as well. Everyone that I show the "hoser-cam" links to loves it! It shows the shooting from the shooters perspective and newbies see it and go, "wow, that looks like a lot of fun!"

[Classic 1911]

An excellent idea, EricW, welcoming new shooters to USPSA. The way to welcome IDPA and former IDPA shooters into USPSA is to have a viable division for them to shoot in, but there are two hurdles. Both concern equipment.

IDPA's SSP already fits into PRODUCTION and production has psuedo practical holster rules. It's close, but not perfect.

The grand IDPA categories of CDP and ESP need a competitive division in USPSA. That would be a division that would adopt wholesale the guidlines set forth for equipment (both guns and holsters) by the Single Stack Society.

It is high time that USPSA returned to its roots and promoted, really promoted a Single Stack Classic Division. The turn out would be phenomenal!!!

And oh by the way. Since each Division competes separately, let's abolish the "overall match winner" concept. It's fundamentally wrong.

[Rob Boudrie]

And oh by the way. Since each Division competes separately, let's abolish the "overall match winner" concept. It's fundamentally wrong.

The overall match winner concept has been removed from the rulebook, and the results upload system in EzWinScore does not support this concept.

The only remaining vestige of the concept in the system is the ability of EzWinScore to generate reports of the unofficial "overall results". I'd love to see that feature go away, but I expect there would be some rather loud complaints.

[tightloop]

It is a thread drift, but in the beginning, you had no divisions, no classes and run what you brung...Personally, I would like to return to that...

[itento]

What a GREAT THREAD! I was a pretty avid USPSA shooter in the late 80's but due to military committment and eventually moving to GUN-UNFRIENDLY parts of the country, I put all my goodies away for a later time. I've since retired to LA (lower Alabama) where I can do CCW and shoot to my hearts content.

Our local gun club used to be affiliated with IPSC/USPSA but now host IDPA matches. At our last meeting I talked to our President about starting a USPSA club. He and some of the veteran members were supportive but cautioned that the reason the old club disintegrated was that the MD/RO's got burned out (a lot more work than IDPA; more targets, all those pepper poppers, paper work (activity sheets and classifier scores), etc).

Well, I'm not discouraged and since I'm retired, I can devote the time to get it started and keep it going. We will start slowly and try and get a concensus of likey shooters in the area as to format, dates, etc.

Why not just be happy with IDPA? Defense is great, but I like offense. I buy guns to shoot (alot). I like reloading and USPSA justifies that. I also like really great guns and hardware. The difference between my production gun and my STI/Caspian/ Hybred open gun is like night and day. My production gun is like a Chevy (works all the time, gets me close, doesn't stand out) while my open is what I like to use to cruise on the weekend. While working up loads for my Production/Limited gun, I can get them inside the Black ring on a 25 yard target. When I pulled out my open gun, I shoot out the Orange center. For me its a matter of confidence.

Does USPSA discourage new shooters? I don't think so. I think this is a club level issue. When I started, everyone I shot with was better than I was. They all were very incouraging and helpful though. I believe that USPSA excells in this area because it encourages good gun handling skills over defensive body postures. Its interesting to me that the IDPA classifier is more like USPSA than IDPA.

Will I shoot IDPA? Absolutely. And, I hope our IDPA club members will also want to shoot USPSA.

Is ther room for other types of shooting? I'd say yes if there is a cadre of people to get it organized and supported and a good organization up top to set guidelines and standards. Personally, I think USPSA has done an outstanding job and should be used as a model for all others. I feel they are OPEN and fair and do not have a conflict of interest.

[carinab]

Well, if you looked at the IDSA web page, you will notice that Len Baxley if the new Pres of the sport...

<snip> His past is rather checkered as is the reason that he doesn't shoot anymore, but that is in the past, I guess...

Not so certain about things being in the past. He seems to be a bad mojo magnet. I wouldn't get too close or too involved.