Possible Elimination of ESR

[Fordfan485]

I just don't understand why the division needs to be dropped. How does it cost idpa money to have the division on the books?

[v1911]

Best case scenario, maybe they hope the ESR shooters will join the ranks of SSR. Worst case and probably the actual outcome, those shooters get pissed off and don't renew their membership.

[JohnRodriguez]

I'll continue to shoot my ESR revo with a 165pf at our local club, and if IDPA don't like it, then tuff crap. I also like how people who don't shoot ESR put their .02 in quite a bit, and unfortunately get there opinions heard by IDPA HQ. I was thinking that I was going to renew my membership after the flat foot rule reversal, then they go off and do something stupid again.

The one thing HQ should do is fix the SSR typo and make the PF 150, not 105. what a bunch of baby's, it hurts my hands when I pull the trigger

Edited November 15, 2014 by JohnRodriguez

[Para super]

I will add a few observations. The latest rule change for courses of fire purposely changed the course of fire limitations to make it more difficult for revolvers to compete. 7 shots then a tac reload. I like to shoot revolvers. I had a 625 5 inch before IDPA started. Sold it long ago. I shoot a 66 in IDPA, but with the changes to the courses of fire, there is nothing in IDPA to interest any revolver shooter. I am switching to ESP.

i think that is the intention of the IDPA rule makers. To eliminate the revolver shooters altogether. They should just come out and say it outright.

[logiztix]

i think that is the intention of the IDPA rule makers. To eliminate the revolver shooters altogether. They should just come out and say it outright.

They DID say it in an issue of the Tactical Journal about 2 years ago. I can't put my hands on the issue right now, but there was an entire article floating the idea of getting rid of revolvers completely in IDPA. That was right after I bought my 686, of course.

I know this wasn't your suggestion, but the idea of upping the power factor for SSR to 150 is ridiculous. There isn't a 38 Special round on the planet that will make 150 PF. Nobody should have to run .357 Magnum to make minimum PF in a blended revolver division when IDPA can't even acknowledge that 357 SIG (40 S&W, 10mm & 45 GAP) belong in CDP. If SSR went to 150 PF that would end revolvers altogether, so maybe they WILL actually do it.

The right to comment about ESR is equal for everyone paying their $40 a year to Berryville. I own an ESR rig and have a stale classification in ESR, but won't shoot it anymore because of the current power factor and IDPA's recent clarification on chronograph procedure. I have as much skin in the game as anyone, but I choose to cast my vote by not shooting the division as it sits. It would appear that 97% of IDPA's membership has chosen to do the same.

[ac4wordplay]

... The latest rule change for courses of fire purposely changed the course of fire limitations to make it more difficult for revolvers to compete. 7 shots then a tac reload. ..

Citation please?

[Fordfan485]

... The latest rule change for courses of fire purposely changed the course of fire limitations to make it more difficult for revolvers to compete. 7 shots then a tac reload. ..

Citation please?

Rule last year removed the revolver neutral rule. So now you can have a cof requiring a tac reload after 7 shots. For this revolver it would be reload after 6 then shoot 1 shot and be forced to dump 5 good rounds into your hand and then your pocket. It's a pain in the ass and has no real world purpose. Edited November 16, 2014 by Fordfan485

[enemeth]

2005 Rule Book page 13

CoF 22. CoF should be " revolver neutral" whenever possible.

This is a rule that doesn't require anything definitive. The wording "should" and "whenever possible" is nice but if I questioned a CoF design I couldn't rely on it to win in arbitration. I feel your pain. I suspect the TAC reload after 7 rounds really comes from a shift in CoF design philosophy rather than an enforceable rule change difference between 2005 and 2014. This is also why HQ's philosophy on how to follow up on their announcement to eliminate ESR is an important signal to all revolver shooters as to how we are reguarded as members.

[ac4wordplay]

2005 Rule Book page 13

CoF 22. CoF should be " revolver neutral" whenever possible.

This is a rule that doesn't require anything definitive. The wording "should" and "whenever possible" is nice but if I questioned a CoF design I couldn't rely on it to win in arbitration. I feel your pain. I suspect the TAC reload after 7 rounds really comes from a shift in CoF design philosophy rather than an enforceable rule change difference between 2005 and 2014. This is also why HQ's philosophy on how to follow up on their announcement to eliminate ESR is an important signal to all revolver shooters as to how we are reguarded as members.

Thanks for making my point.

[ChrisC]

Not to troll this thread but we at ICORE would love to have the ESR shooters come over and play. I realize there isn't a lot of clubs that shoot ICORE in most areas but it doesn't take much to start a club.

Edited November 16, 2014 by ChrisC

[21 shooter]

I suspect many here are looking for ICORE matches. They seem to be more "stable" than what we have now.

[tiger49931]

To try to save the division i woul dlove to see or get the numbers on how many people quit or changed divisions when the rule went from 5" to 4" for revolvers. Maybe they should bring the 5 inch rule back to try to save the revo division alot of 5" revolver shooters in uspsa looking for a place to shoot their 6 shot 5" revolvers? Just an idea. I dont shoot esr mainly but i have qualified in it. Make a stand alone event for revolvers that wayt people who shoot in both catagories ( semi and revo) dont have to choose at a state match what you want to shoot the semi you have been really practicing with or the revo you take out evcery once and a while..

[S-Hurt]

Email I received from IDPA HQ after sending them an email with my opinion. I also discovered this is the same email (cut / paste) another club member received after he sent an email:

I am sorry that you do not like the deletion of ESR. I am afraid that it simply had become a “participate and win a trophy” division. For most matches all you had to do is show up and not get DQ’ed and you would take home a trophy. That combined with the fact that it was a division with basically one gun, from one manufacturer in one caliber meant it’s time as standalone division is over.

We are not going to dump ESR in the cold completely. We are looking at folding back into SSR like it was before. Back before 2005 it was one revolver division which ESR guns ruled. With a higher power factor for moon clip guns we think will come back to being a being a skills race, not an equipment one. Maybe by combining the two we will actually achieve a division with enough participation to actually bump up a shooter and be a viable and robust division.

This is a sport, which means competition. When you are not competing against anyone, it is just expensive practice for the shooter and realistically it takes up resources, time and energy that could be used for a division that would be attractive to more competitors.

I know that I probably will not change your mind but as a sport we have to grow and adapt. These changes reflect that drive.

[JohnRodriguez]

I'd like to know what matches that I had to just show up and win a trophy. The state and sectional matches I've shot have all had more then 1 shooter in ESR. Maybe I should send my division champion ESR plaques to the HQ and tell them to stick them where the sun don't shine.

Edited November 17, 2014 by JohnRodriguez

[enemeth]

So they are sorry we don't like it, but because it's a one gun division with poor participation. it has to go.

ESR was created to address the revolver equipment race. Well the equipment race problem has been so well addressed, the rules only leave us with one gun. Now their reason to eliminate us is because it is a one gun division. It's not only one gun now but right from the beginning they limited participation by banning 5" barrels and people had to buy new equipment to eliminate the equipment race. With that type of circular logic no wonder ESR has a hard time getting competitors.

The sport has to grow and adapt, but revolver rules have not even been given a chance at adapting to promote growth. The current rule book doesn't even address SSR or ESR in course of fire design ( except possibly rule 6.26 ), or suggest neutral stages, like the 2005 rules did.

Instead ESR is eliminated to make room for a division attractive to competitors and folded back into SSR. Guess who may be next if SSR has growing pains trying to adapt to moon clips. Not all of revolver's problems are HQ's fault but if you look at the support we get, no wonder this is happening.

Edited November 17, 2014 by enemeth

[Pete Whyte]

I shoot a revolver 98% of the time in all the games, ICORE, USPSA,Steel, & IDPA.My IDPA membership will expire in Dec. I think I will hold off on renewal until I see what happens.When the new rules thing came about last year, I did not take the test to renew my S.O. status. I enjoy all the people I shoot with, & I hope Hq. can get their stuff together. If they do,I hope they spend some of the $40.00 that members send them to print a rule book. Then perhaps some of the members will rejoin. Pete

[BillR1]

I'd like to know what matches that I had to just show up and win a trophy. The state and sectional matches I've shot have all had more then 1 shooter in ESR. Maybe I should send my division champion ESR plaques to the HQ and tell them to stick them where the sun don't shine.

At the last sanctioned match I shot in, there were 3 shooters in ESR. (108 total shooters) All 3 were in different classifications, so all 3 got "trophies".

[Bubber]

Off topic just a little, ICORE is in the process of seeing if a 6 shot limited class would work in ICORE. One could shoot a moonclipped revo in a division against all other 6 shot guns. Giving the 625, 646 and others a place to be competitive. There will more info as it becomes available. There would be no advantage gained but it would be an equal with other moonclipped guns, Check the Revolver thread for some of the info. later rdd

[Not-So-Mad Matt]

At the last sanctioned match I shot in, there were 3 shooters in ESR. (108 total shooters) All 3 were in different classifications, so all 3 got "trophies".

That seems like the rule that needs fixing. Of course, I'm not a big fan of trophies and plaques for doing fine.

[JohnRodriguez]

Well Bill, how about HQ just change the rules to say that at least 3 classified shooter be required to receive a trophy. or is this too simple a fix. as far as the plaques that I have won, non of them say 1st place sharpshooter. they say Overall champion ESR division. This means I beat all a the masters and expert shooters

Edited November 17, 2014 by JohnRodriguez

[BillR1]

Well Bill, how about HQ just change the rules to say that at least 3 classified shooter be required to receive a trophy. or is this too simple a fix.

So if I'm an ESR shooter, I shouldn't expect to get an award for most of the matches I shoot? Keep in mind that I have no control over how many shooters show up in my division. All I know is that I practice and work as hard as anyone to get better. And if an award is not important to ESR shooters, then why not just shoot the match NFS?

IMO, it seems silly to have a separate division that only ~3% of shooters participate in. A division like the Compact Carry and/or the Optics/Laser seems to make more sense for today. The latest email seems to indicate that the ESR shooters will somehow be absorbed back into a combined revolver division. That could be interesting...

Edited November 17, 2014 by BillR1

[Not-So-Mad Matt]

So if I'm an ESR shooter, I shouldn't expect to get an award for most of the matches I shoot?

Most people don't get an award for most of the matches they shoot.

[Thomas H]

So if I'm an ESR shooter, I shouldn't expect to get an award for most of the matches I shoot?

Most people don't get an award for most of the matches they shoot.

And if a shooters hasn't beaten anyone in their division/class, why would they expect to get a trophy? I wouldn't think we should expect participation trophies, though that is something that is an issue with IDPA.

"I showed up! Give me a trophy!"

How about instead "I showed up and got to shoot, but wasn't actually competing against anyone else in my class. Ah well, I can still see how I did against the rest of the people in my division."

I personally think that IDPA shouldn't award even a first place trophy/plaque/award unless there are at least three people in that division/class or category. At the moment lots of people get to take home lots of plaques that don't actually mean anything, because they weren't actually shooting against anyone else.

That's too bad, because it seems to me that it significantly de-values the awards that do mean something.

[BillR1]

So again, if getting an award or recognition is not a big deal, why not just shoot your 625 NFS and not worry about being alone in an antiquated division? What real difference does it make?

[dcloudy777]

Well, IDPA HQ seems to think they should keep getting membership dues just for showing up, why shouldn't ESR shooters think they deserve a trophy?