Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Precicion Action Shooting? Anyone heard of this?


SWHlctx

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I know this will piss off some people, but the future might be brighter with headless targets.

And if it comes to my area and concealment garments are NOT REQUIRED, I'll shoot it

A headless target is already designed, since the initial launch is a US launch we went with the humanoid target to start off with but we have one ready for international use if/when we get there.

I'll be glad to shake your hand at a sanctioned match one day. We will find a solution to the cover garment that will be satisfactory to the majority of shooters, if that means no concealment garment period, then it means no concealment garment period. What I can promise at this time is that we will listen to shooters and work our butts off to roll out a sport that appeals to novice shooters as well as elite shooters.

For me personally, I didn't care one way or the other about concealment garments, it adds 0.1 seconds to my draw and more time to a novice shooter's draw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this will piss off some people, but the future might be brighter with headless targets.

And if it comes to my area and concealment garments are NOT REQUIRED, I'll shoot it

For me personally, I didn't care one way or the other about concealment garments, it adds 0.1 seconds to my draw and more time to a novice shooter's draw.

Different draw motion, to be honest, I don't want to have to practice a different motion. That is why I'm against it. I dry fire to hone skills, and don't care to work in another motion.

Don't require it, make it optional and everyone is happy. If it's a +.1 give it to me, but I just don't care to deal with it in training.

Hope you understand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The vest thing just makes your sport to much like idpa thats not a good thing, just think how big idpa would be today without that silly rule, dont make the same mistake and you might be on to something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the lack of a vest makes it too much like USPSA, one might say. I assume the objectors are USPSA trigger timers looking for something to do on their days off.

Of course a competitor at one of the older boring matches where it is the same all the time, things like NRA NM and PPC, will be hard pressed to see a real difference among all four. Four; after all, USPSA has not played by IPSC rules for a good number of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About concealment, you might give some thought to a scoring benefit if certain types of stages are shot wearing it. For example, if you decide to shoot without concealment, you are scored minor. And if you use concealment, you score major. Something like that gives everyone the choices to match their game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They could do that but trying to be all things to all people will chop the entry list up awful fine. You might end up with one or two shooters per division. Kind of like the fast food places that have too many offerings to be fast any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are currently considering three options regarding concealment. 1) requiring it on certain stages, period 2) Not requiring concealment at all 3) allowing shooters to "opt out" of wearing it on stages that require concealment and adding one accuracy penalty to their score for that stage (0.5 second penalty)

Edited by Premieractionshooting
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may consider no concealment required for scenarios with vehicles involved and house settings. No concealment required for a match with less then 6 stages. Registered matches with more then 10 stages require 50% of the stages a shooter must wear concealment. Of course if a shooter feels like he wants to wear concealment then so be it.. I don't like the idea of + this or -this for scoring due to concealment because it would cause a scoring nightmare for the SO's/RO's and MD.

I take it you know the IDPA section here on Enos has provided a great wealth of information for IDPA shooters, while the rest of the website is 100 % pro USPSA, which is also ok.[ to a degree] :lol: But to have shooters just bluntly say I'm not even trying it if I have to wear concealment, I would take that very lightly as a deciding factor for your new sport. How about releasing your rulebook before deciding "no concealment required" is in the book..

Edited by GmanCdp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the course's of fire are going to be scenario based, then I think the concealment requirement should fit accordingly!!! I don't know anyone who wears a concealment garment while they are in their house doing dishes, watching TV etc!!!! I have seen a lot of those kinds of stages and they are just plain dumb. Keep it as realistic as you can. I look forward to giving it a go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But to have shooters just bluntly say I'm not even trying it if I have to wear concealment, I would take that very lightly as a deciding factor for your new sport.

If he does that the new sport will be dead before it even gets started. If you want to do the simulated tack-cool thing we have idpa...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly suspect that, if national CHL shooters poll was taken regarding concealment/no concealment shooting game and how it tracks with their opinions on concealed vs. open carry, you would find the majority of CHL shooters prefer concealment. If that is the case I would suspect that, in a shooting game, they would prefer to shoot what they carry and shoot from how they carry (in most cases). I like that the attempt is being made to blend the predominant shooting sports and am excited to try it on for size at next months shoot at Impact Zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a thought, but my idea of "Precision Action Shooting" is ICORE. Speed counts a lot... but accuracy counts more. If you start missing that 8-inch A Zone a lot, you can't run fast enough to win. ICORE is USPSA+Precision... but with revolvers only.

Why even deal with cover garments in PAS? Why not just say "Here's your mix of steel, movers, paper targets, no shoots... from 3 feet to over 50 yards....and here are fault lines and shooting boxes, and other stuff. And... we will be using the Tombstone ICORE target... but you can shoot semi-autos if you want.

IDPA is shooting themselves in the foot (some say 'the head') with all of their silly 'tactical rules' (which aren't really all that tactical... Berryville just thinks they are)...and USPSA doesn't quite get the point that accuracy still counts, but if you run fast enough all you have to do is hit the target somewhere.

I think a sport... like PAS could have some appeal. If it ever gets to NE FL I'll be first in line to shoot it.

Tombstone targets... ICORE scoring... USPSA rules... yeah, I think that would be fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To those who say scenarios should dictate the use of cover or not, the current rulebook does that already. Concealment is required on 50% of scenario stages. The ones where you're sitting in a recliner or laying on a bed would be no concealment stages.

Me personally, I don't see concealment as a big deal either way. I like shooting without it in USPSA but it doesn't bother me to wear it in IDPA.

On whether or not we will even have concealment, the shooters from the pilot matches will decide that. If I were to make a decision right now it would be concealment required with a 1 AP (point down in current terms) added to the stage total for a shooter who didn't want to wear it on that stage. But I'm not planning on making a unilateral decision, shooters will have the final say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having shot both of the first two test matches and will be at the third one outdoors, I like the conversations and on the spot updates. Yes, different thoughts and approach to some of the more common discussions on the other sports. But it really makes me happy to see so much interest because it shows this sport approach has appeal to many who think much like I do. I like a sport that is interested in the participants views. Can't please us all I know but at least I know we are listened too.

As for the cover, I can go either way since it is a sport. I practice both ways, I carry both ways, I am comfortable both ways, (well not when it is 95 degrees) but even that is handled in the sport, so I am good. It is set up to keep it simple for us AGGIES and that is always a good thing. I think for me for the SOs it will be easier to handle the rules and make it more even for all the shooters across the clubs. Consistency is one thing I see it will bring. Can't wait to shoot one again....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep Jim we will have both prizes for placement and random drawing prizes. Those guys at the top busted their butts to get as good as they are and should reap the rewards.

Our current plan is to pay $5k for each division winner and $5k for high lady at the first national match. That's a ways off but lets you know where we want this to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are going to make it a money match, I suggest you talk to somebody current in ATA trapshooting.

A LOT of money changes hands at a trapshoot, but it is all voluntary by way of options and purses of half a dozen different types. If you just want the competition, you just pay for targets.

I, as the leading (only current) member of Team Mediocre, would not be much interested in attending a match where a substantial part of the entry fee was going to shooters I have no chance of beating. Let the gamblers gamble and the shooters shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...