Rumor has it

[BillR1]

So it looks to me like some folks believe they should be exempt from the the rules that apply to everybody else. Level of match is falsely advertised even though completing a few simple steps would have solved that. Entries are accepted that violate the rules applying to everyone else even though HQ tried to find a solution for that after the fact (probably incorrectly, but they seemed to prefer peace to correctness).

In simpler terms IDPA HQ bent over backwards to cover for either arrogance or incompetence and the little boys in Atlanta took it as an insult and took their bats and balls home.

Have I summarized this correctly?

The gentleman who lists all his contributions to IDPA has IMHO now evened the slate by endlessly complaining on the internet in an inappropriate fashion. People reading this forum can't resolve the issues you have and you know that. Only by working with HQ in a mature adult dialog can you even begin to make your case. Thanks for your contributions and shame on you for your hostility. You obviously do not understand how to achieve change. Most rational folks will run from the confrontational approach you are pursuing

I feel badly for the legitimate shooters affected by this club. (a club that obviously thought they were above the rules!)

Do they get their match fee refunded, since they signed up for an "advertised" Tier 4 match and expected Nationals points accordingly?

Will the order of finish be corrected to eliminate those shooters who were not qualified for this match? (either through invalid classifications or lapsed membership) This could affect awards and match bumps.

....all valid points. I do wonder though if you'd advocate some of the same solutions when a competitor is assessed penalties when an S.O. makes a "subjective" call that adversely effects their score ?

The rules that were broken by this club were not in any way "subjective" or in a gray area. They were clear, published rules AND directives from HQ. Apples and oranges there, Chuck.

Now IF a shooter chooses to go to arbitration and is successful in getting a blatant incorrect call (by an SO or an MD) overturned, then the answer is yes.

[Chuck D]

So it looks to me like some folks believe they should be exempt from the the rules that apply to everybody else. Level of match is falsely advertised even though completing a few simple steps would have solved that. Entries are accepted that violate the rules applying to everyone else even though HQ tried to find a solution for that after the fact (probably incorrectly, but they seemed to prefer peace to correctness).

In simpler terms IDPA HQ bent over backwards to cover for either arrogance or incompetence and the little boys in Atlanta took it as an insult and took their bats and balls home.

Have I summarized this correctly?

The gentleman who lists all his contributions to IDPA has IMHO now evened the slate by endlessly complaining on the internet in an inappropriate fashion. People reading this forum can't resolve the issues you have and you know that. Only by working with HQ in a mature adult dialog can you even begin to make your case. Thanks for your contributions and shame on you for your hostility. You obviously do not understand how to achieve change. Most rational folks will run from the confrontational approach you are pursuing

I feel badly for the legitimate shooters affected by this club. (a club that obviously thought they were above the rules!)

Do they get their match fee refunded, since they signed up for an "advertised" Tier 4 match and expected Nationals points accordingly?

Will the order of finish be corrected to eliminate those shooters who were not qualified for this match? (either through invalid classifications or lapsed membership) This could affect awards and match bumps.

....all valid points. I do wonder though if you'd advocate some of the same solutions when a competitor is assessed penalties when an S.O. makes a "subjective" call that adversely effects their score ?

The rules that were broken by this club were not in any way "subjective" or in a gray area. They were clear, published rules AND directives from HQ. Apples and oranges there, Chuck.

Now IF a shooter chooses to go to arbitration and is successful in getting a blatant incorrect call (by an SO or an MD) overturned, then the answer is yes.

So...if a shooter finds illegal stages at the Carolina Cup or the Indoor Nationals for example then should IDPA step in and correct the matter ? Should the competitor be allowed the option of receiving a refund for the entry fee ? Should the illegal stages be tossed and the results recalculated ?

If the "nothing in a grey area" criteria is accepted as being corrrect is utilized and for the sake of discussion lets agree that you're assessment is correct (I disagree but that's set aside for now)...shouldn't EVERY match of championship status be held to the same standard ?

Again...am I being asked to believe that there are NO other championship status matches that violate some of the very same "cut and dry" rules the Georgia club obviously did ?

Could this be an example of "they did it why can't we?"

[BillR1]

So it looks to me like some folks believe they should be exempt from the the rules that apply to everybody else. Level of match is falsely advertised even though completing a few simple steps would have solved that. Entries are accepted that violate the rules applying to everyone else even though HQ tried to find a solution for that after the fact (probably incorrectly, but they seemed to prefer peace to correctness).

In simpler terms IDPA HQ bent over backwards to cover for either arrogance or incompetence and the little boys in Atlanta took it as an insult and took their bats and balls home.

Have I summarized this correctly?

The gentleman who lists all his contributions to IDPA has IMHO now evened the slate by endlessly complaining on the internet in an inappropriate fashion. People reading this forum can't resolve the issues you have and you know that. Only by working with HQ in a mature adult dialog can you even begin to make your case. Thanks for your contributions and shame on you for your hostility. You obviously do not understand how to achieve change. Most rational folks will run from the confrontational approach you are pursuing

I feel badly for the legitimate shooters affected by this club. (a club that obviously thought they were above the rules!)

Do they get their match fee refunded, since they signed up for an "advertised" Tier 4 match and expected Nationals points accordingly?

Will the order of finish be corrected to eliminate those shooters who were not qualified for this match? (either through invalid classifications or lapsed membership) This could affect awards and match bumps.

....all valid points. I do wonder though if you'd advocate some of the same solutions when a competitor is assessed penalties when an S.O. makes a "subjective" call that adversely effects their score ?

The rules that were broken by this club were not in any way "subjective" or in a gray area. They were clear, published rules AND directives from HQ. Apples and oranges there, Chuck.

Now IF a shooter chooses to go to arbitration and is successful in getting a blatant incorrect call (by an SO or an MD) overturned, then the answer is yes.

So...if a shooter finds illegal stages at the Carolina Cup or the Indoor Nationals for example then should IDPA step in and correct the matter ? Should the competitor be allowed the option of receiving a refund for the entry fee ? Should the illegal stages be tossed and the results recalculated ?

IMO, absolutely!

Also in this case, the shooters themselves complained to HQ about the illegal stages and the invalid shooters.

This is the reason that HQ and the AC should be reviewing and approving the CoFs for Tier 4/"championship" matches. In a Tier 3, this is the ACs job.

"1.1.1. All IDPA rules must be followed for every match at every tier."

In a Tier 3 match...

"1.2.1.3.11. Stages are approved by the Area Coordinator.

1.2.1.3.16. Competitors must be IDPA members.

1.2.1.3.17. Competitors must have a current classification in the division in which they are competing."

For Tier 4 matches...

"1.2.1.4.11. Stages are approved by the Area Coordinators and IDPA HQ."

[Sidewinder6]

The people who are hurt the most are those who did all the right things as members and are now in a lower place or class as the result of the outcome.

This is another +2 as far as they are concerned.

[v1911]

Anyone on this board from the club that hosted the match? I don't do the Facebook thing, so I have no idea if they've posted a response to all of this. Any word on how this effected the standing for that match?

[Chuck D]

Lifted from the IDPA Forum:

"To our GADPA Family,

This purpose of this message is to, hopefully, clear up some of the confusion around the board of director’s decision from last Monday night. We will not be going into the details of who did what to whom. We know that this will not stop all of the questions that everyone will be asking about our announcement but we hope that this will help you to understand our position.

The 2014 IDPA Georgia State Championship was a lot of work and it was well received by the competitors. However, for those of us involved in the administration side of the match, it just wasn’t fun having to deal with the IDPA bureaucracy. The BOD spent hundreds of hours setting up this match. Only those who selflessly donate their time know the hundreds of details that go into putting on a match of this size and quality. It took years to refine the details in order to make the match run as smoothly as possible. It wasn’t perfect and it never will be, but were it not for the GADPA volunteers, there would be no matches at all.

IDPA HQ has for many years made decisions and rules that fall beyond our grasp. Without going into any specifics, their actions have destroyed our confidence in the organization. Specifics will just lead to a shouting contest and solve nothing. As a result of this loss of confidence, the BOD has decided to no longer run IDPA governed matches. GADPA is a not-for-profit organization and all of the work that is put into the shooting sports is for fun. When the fun is gone, the life blood of the organization dies. GADPA has grown from one outdoor match with an average attendance of 36 shooters to 10 indoor matches and an average outdoor match attendance of approximately 100. To put it succinctly, we love the defensive pistol shooting sports!

The BOD made the choice to walk away from IDPA because of the headaches associated with dealing with IDPA leadership. We have no ill will towards IDPA and think that it a good sport for the people that enjoy it, but for GADPA, it is no longer the direction that we would like to pursue. Many other clubs in the southeast and around the country have made the same decision. With 300 members, GADPA is probably the biggest club to make this move and for this reason the decision has stirred quite a bit of controversy. That was not our goal.
We pride ourselves in the comradely that has developed and consider our members family. This decision may not sit well with all of our GADPA shooters and it was not our intent to upset you. However, GADPA is completely comprised of volunteers and is structured as a not for profit organization. Everyone within GADPA is allowed to volunteer their time as they see fit. The BOD has chosen to no longer VOLUNTEER our time toward IDPA.

GADPA will continue to hold defensive pistol shooting matches. We will adopt a set of rules and the members will have an opportunity to provide feedback. This will take some time, but we will not do it without GADPA member input. We will continue to be a defensive pistol shooting sport and have no plans to join USPSA.

In the interim, GADPA matches will be run using current IDPA rules, subject to the MD's discretion as to stage design and course of fire. This will afford the MD the flexibility to adjust the course of fire to enhance the match without fear of IDPA HQ criticism. For example, the MD may add more than the authorized number of non-threats, have stages that require strong hand shooting at longer distances or require support hand shooting on the move, and similar adjustments that are not allowed under the current rules, but can enhance the match and the participant's shooting skills. We will encourage MDs to avoid courses of fire that result in the shooter forming bad habits should they wish to compete in other official IDPA matches, but we won't require that stages be thrown out if a competitor objects. We recognize GADPA's roots and that there are many who will still be competing in that arena.
As far as the indoor matches are concerned, we hope they stay with GADPA, but each match will be free to decide what direction they wish to take. If the MD(s), shooters, and range management wish to form their own IDPA club and join the national organization, they are free to do so. We will not stand in the way. It is our hope that both organizations can coexist without animosity.

Lastly, the BOD recognizes who our customers are -- you the shooter. You got involved in competitive shooting because you enjoyed both the people and the matches we run. That is not going to change!

Sincerely,

GADPA Board of Directors"

[gahunter12]

I am a member of GADPA. So far nothing has really been said. Received a new email today, but it didn't answer any questions. Lots of members still have lots of questions. Looks like they will still operate IDPA style matches using the IDPA rule book as a base to build on, and improve. One of the indoor matches will still run IDPA matches for classification purposes. A lot is still up in the air

[gahunter12]

There you go. That's the email received today. Sad that Georgia may not have a state match next year unless the other local club picks the state match up. They also have a great facility.

[BillR1]

IMO, GADPA needs to refund the match fees to any/all shooters that request if. In addition, IDPA HQ should strike the match from the official records, including all classification changes. When you have that many unqualified shooters participating in a match, there's simply no way of knowing what the legitimate results would've been had the rules been followed. That seems harsh, but I don't see a way to get any valid results from what happened. Sad for all concerned...

[v1911]

Chuck, thanks for posting that.

gahunter12, sorry about your club's uncertain future. I wish you guys the best.

[tootalltrucker]

I was at the match. I was not at the 2013 match but it was a Tier 4 match as listed on the IDPA site. I heard that the reason 2014 was dropped to Tier 3 was due to "open suadding" but the wording on squadding, air-gunning and arbitration is identical on the 2013 and 2014 COF documents. Does anyone think the classification issues are not present in some other matches including the Nationals?

I had a great time at the match and look forward to attending future GADPA matches as well as IDPA matches.