6-Shot Neutrality and Stage designing

[Forrest Halley]

OK shootist and Pat Jones make great points.

1-5, 9-11, 17 are all the same between cylinder capacity 6-8. 32 is reasonable for a maximum number on a stage. That's five reloads straight up no convenient refills and likely as many as eight if all goes south and I go to war with the stage. Standard loadout guesstimate: 42 rounds in classic, 54-72 limited and open. I assume that most shooters own at least six speedloaders and/or ten moonclips. Loaner gear is likely even better equipped...I support the 32 round limit because reloading marathons take lots of time with bigger squads and it allows for a reasonable estimate for sufficient gear.

[Forrest Halley]

This is why "neutral" needs to be defined concretely with examples by the ICORE folks.

Careful 13 is more than eight as is 24. With no max array number the can of worms is bottomless.

Defining it concretely might have unintended consequences. Maybe the first step is to add some additional information to clarify the intent?

The working definition of no 7-8 shot arrays allows allows for the 6-shot guns to compete when shot well.

I like that idea! It leave stage design wide open with just a minor restriction that keeps the 6 shot guns in the game.

You're likely right about that...I'm giving it thought.

Don't forget about the three even reload array windows. Longer stages are fun too!

[NV Guide]

Fewer rules are better than more rules.

Add a class and delete a rule.

More definition, score modification, etc. ect... All add to the thickness of the rule book.

More rules = BAD

[Cd662]

Chris Comer made the definition so we can end the thread, but I have to end with a response.

"Basically, you could have saved us both time by stating that you had no ideas about preserving six shot neutrality, you preferred eight shot revolvers, and you didn't want to discuss clever stage design. My ideas may not be the answer, but what if they evoke a thought from someone else that is? USPSA had their rule change drastically alter the game in that division with the acceptance of eight shot revolvers. All thanks to folks that didn't pay attention to anything but what they wanted and stated great things about improved participation. It didn't hold water and drove all the six shot minor guns back into the safe. "

Why do people take everything in life so personally? It's cause for high blood pressure. I'm glad you made a bunch of erroneous assumptions. Every single major ICORE match I have shot since I started my participation in ICORE has been with a 6 shot classic gun, with the exception of last year's IRC where I put in a Limited entry with a 6 shot Model 625 competing in the Limited 6 sub category. I have also been overtly critical of stages that carry a high "train wreck" risk for 6 shot guns because I don't think it's fair for them. I posted an example of a good stage in my other post and you clearly didn't take the time to read it.

This is the problem with America right now. Everyone thinks that if someone has a different opinion than them, it's a personal attack and that other person deserve a retaliatory insult. It's amazing. You have no idea about my ICORE track record, my push for fair and equitable competition in stages, or how much I have supported 6 shot guns. I competed in two USPSA Area championships with a 6 shot gun USING SPEEDLOADERS and MINOR SCORING. But yeah, I'm just one of those big 8 shot jerks that's trying to kill ICORE and make people's guns obsolete. It's definitely not like I'm hosting a sanctioned match and giving out an award for Limited 6. Nope. Good job man, you win the internet prize.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Cd662

[jhgtyre]

There will be no further personal back and forth in this thread or I will close it.

Larry Drake
The Moderating Team

[Forrest Halley]

The winner of the internet is laughing at his own foolishness and extending the olive branch to the alleged big bad eight shot guy.

Point well received.

[Shadowrider]

I would imagine this forum represents the largest single online accumulation of ICORE shooters, so I guess the question should be asked here:

How many of you own a gun that is a true "Limited 6" revolver, and don't own an 8 shot?

I seem to run into many more people with 627s and 929s that just don't come to the regional or IRC than anyone else who asks me where to start with their clipped 6 gun. Once again, I think we're asking the wrong questions if we're looking to grow the sport.

I see lots of faces at USPSA Revolver Nationals that I don't see at the IRC. From the top of the pack to the bottom. And the other way around too.

Add me to the list. I'm not good enough to beat anybody though, I just shoot for fun. If I ever get the time to actually practice that will change a little. The reason I bought 50 Hearthco clips and had my 686-0 cut was to just work on shooting technique. My 625 illustrated that I wasn't going to get anywhere anytime soon with it, and as soon as I put it in the safe and picked up the L frame I made C class in USPSA. Plus I'm fortunate enough to get to shoot regularly with Bubber who is known to shoot a 6 shot L frame once in awhile and he holds his own with it, so I know it can be done. Just a long way of saying it's not the arrow, it's the indian. You guys do what you want with the rules, I'm still going to shoot and have fun.

[PatJones]

Lower capacity guns can be competitive with good course design. I don't think limiting a shooting position to 1-5 or 9-11 is good stage design. I can put all 6 on the target, let me use them.

A larger rule book is not "bad". The USPSA rulebook it there to protect the shooter. If you're not designing courses, the course design chapter doesn't even matter to you.

Once we set a definition of 6-shot neutral, will we ban custom revolvers with a capacity greater than 8? I hope not, progress is a good thing.

If you want the 625's to come out in any numbers, institute major scoring. I say 165 PF, and reduce the penalties for B+C zone hits by .5 seconds. Major scoring for 6-shot guns only in limited and open. .357 should be eligible for major.

[Carmoney]

There's a difference in six-shot neutral and six-shot friendly. I'm primarily a Classic shooter and fall into the "same number of unavoidable reloads" camp. I want the opportunity to place well in the overall but if limited or open shooters are using eight shots to take down six steel and I don't beat them, I consider that my fault. I think the "buy an eight shot" point of view overlooks the fact that not everyone has the hand size to properly shoot an N frame revolver. Hopefully defining the term will resolve this issue.

If Molly Smith can shoot her 627 in competition, I'm pretty sure everyone else can handle an N-frame.

[alecmc]

Classifiers aside, why are we worried about this? You are competing against the shooters in your division - Division wins, prizes, awards are all dealt with on a division by division base.

edit - i'll add that I think the "current system" is fine as is. If it just so happens that 8 shooters can come up with creative solutions to make an extra 2 shots worth it, by all means . I just think if you go crazy with making 6 shot a that stage design may start to suffer.

Edited July 22, 2015 by alecmc

[PatJones]

It sucks in USPSA when the course basically requires shoot 6, reload, shoot 2 at every position. As long as ICORE doesn't degenerate to something like that, I don't really care what neutral means. But given that we've heard a couple different local definitions of neutral, perhaps defining it better in the rulebook is a good thing.

[RevoWood123]

Hey guys, been off the board for a few days, finally got some off time. Wow, this thread really generated some talk, more than I had anticipated. That being said, after reading through and catching up, I appreciate what everybody has been saying.

I am one of those guys who shoots a clipped 6-shot 38; why; because I like the smaller frame size, its easier to manipulate in my hand.

I understand that some people's experience with ICORE has been somewhat dull with regards to other sports when the stage designs (being made to fit "6-shot neutral") have ended in just being boring stages with lots of shooting boxes, mandatory reloads, etc. The reason for this thread, at least in my head when I started it, was to see the objective of designing stages that are "neutral" but flow well, don't have mandatory reloads/ boxes and are fun. In my ICORE experience, I feel as though I was blessed with a MD who really had a knack for stage designs; keeping them neutral, high round counts, and lots of versatility for the shooters. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDTFV5hnUFA Here is an example of one of the stages he designed. All the arrays are six shot neutral, that being said, the 8 has the advantage only in make-up shots.

My question could have been worded a bit better I suppose. What I was getting at is that the interpretation of "6-shot neutral", whichever somebody chooses (the 3 that bdpaz listed being predominant), could lead to different outcomes when it comes to stage designs. Under the assumption that all things must be equal and no advantage given to an 8-shot gun, it could lead to mandatory reloads and structured shooting positions, which on field courses, in my experience, are boring. Where as the idea that the stages designed with equal number of reloads "intended"; one could set up a stage that moves and flows, without requiring a mandatory reload, and each arraying being "6-shot neutral" where it does not make sense to carry the extra rounds in the gun to the next stage because it would force the shooter to take a standing reload (which most savvy shooters won't do).

If my interaction in ICORE had been a bunch of forced shooting positions with mandatory reloads, I probably would still shoot it, but I wouldn't be nearly as enthusiastic about the sport. Since I am enthusiastic about the sport, I want people to have a great experience with it like I did. When I hear people aren't, I look for the reasons why. One of those whys has been that ICORE is boring due in part to the designs of stages. I thought that by opening the discussion up, people might get ideas about how to help stage design improve and therefore be more challenging/fun which in turn would help grow participation. I can see that many people here feel strongly about the sport as well and my hope is that through the discussion, we can see ways to improve our sport without necessity of rule changes.

As far as designing stages go, I am the new MD at Silver Creek Conservation Club, and the previous MD left some big shoes to fill. However, I am taking what I learned shooting, and what advice he has been offering to help me to design stages that will challenge shooters, flow smoothly, and make them excited to come back. I don't think that "6-shot neutral" should be done away with, but maybe clarified so that it may open up the doors a little bit for MDs who have really good ideas, but don't think that they can do it because it wouldn't be neutral.

[Bosshoss]

Stu I sent you a PM a couple of days ago in case you haven't seen it.

[bdpaz]

...Where as the idea that the stages designed with equal number of reloads "intended"; one could set up a stage that moves and flows, without requiring a mandatory reload, and each arraying being "6-shot neutral" where it does not make sense to carry the extra rounds in the gun to the next stage because it would force the shooter to take a standing reload (which most savvy shooters won't do)....

This is one valid way to make 6 shot neutral stages but I wouldn't want it to be THE definition. Here is a link to a video of a fairly simple stage that as designed requires an additional reload from the 6 shot guys but it can be done on the move, there are multiple options for both 6 and 8, and if either capacity needs a make up it throws off their reloading plan. The shooter, the world famous star of stage and screen Scott Krushak, is using an 8 shot gun shooting it as 8-8-8. A 6 shot gun could do it similarly as 6-6-6-6 or either could break things up differently if they wanted.

https://youtu.be/aEe05YMt2SQ

Edited July 23, 2015 by bdpaz

[RevoWood123]

The reason I emphasized "intended" was to say that not all shooters will be able to shoot the COF with the same number of reloads, but the intent being to keep it the same for both 6 and 8 shot revolvers. Based on how I interpret "6-shot neutral" is that the 8-shot revo does not have a clear competitive advantage over a 6 (aside from make up shots); therefore the idea that equal # of reloads for both guns is the intent. I may be wrong, that is just how I read it. Like we have said, it is not clearly defined, but it may not need to be either. We can clearly put forth good, fun, challenging stages with either interpretation, and that is what will keep shooters wanting to shoot and maybe get them to get others involved.

[PistolPJL]

I have been the MD for our local matches for several years now, and stage design has always been a task considering all the reasons brought up in this thread. Another consideration is participation in set up. I don't have the luxury of a large crew available any time before match day, so it needs to be simple enough and, conversely, exciting enough to be accomplished with 3 to 6 people in roughly 2 to 2 and a half hours, match day. Those factors being considered, and my own sanity to be protected, I have come upon a formula for every match for the last two years. One speed course ( approx. 17 rds.) A steel course ( usually Steel Challenge 5 plate type ). A classifier so that people who may want to start competing in ICORE don't have to fret over getting classified in a hurry, A field course in the range of 25 to 31 rounds. And finally the dreaded Far & Near stage. Since it is the stage that makes or breaks just about everyone in either the IRC or a monthly match, I believe in practicing it all year.

We get anywhere from 15 to 28 people per match. My stats guy might have a better overall average, but I don't pay attention to that. My philosophy, if you want to call it that, is, I put on a match I would want to shoot. Is it fun for me? Since I am the one making the effort, and no one else really wants to do the commitment, nor responsibility, it only makes sense to me to have this attitude. After 20+ some odd years participating in ICORE, from the first IRC till now, and seeing all the changes, that have both moved the organization forward, and those that have been the constant anchor holding it back, I find this thread about the 6 shot neutral/friendly discussion quite amusing.

My personal belief is that anyone who isn't a Josh, or Jerry or maybe a handful of other revo shooters ( fill in the name of your favorite ) and has the idea that if the course of fire keeps the playing feel level, they will win the match, is ludicrous. If winning was my reason to keep at this for long, I would have stopped about 16 years ago. The way I see it is, you pick your niche and play in it. Whether it be open, limited or classic. I have always based my performance on a few fellow shooters who I compete with regularly and are close to me in all the factors: age, health, division, etc. Yes it is nice to win, but it isn't the reason to compete. It is the people you compete with. It is the fun of running with a bunch of people with the same love of the game.

I help with another match which is called "Speed Gun". It is a speed verses points game, likened, I'm told to the old smoke 'em matches of many years ago. We use mainly stages left over from the weeks previous IDPA match. We then add enough targets to go from the rule limiting 18 rounds of IDPA , and boost them to a 27 to 32 round stage. There are divisions for just about any handgun you can think of. There is usually a little "kink" in each stage to make the shooter think, have to aim a bit more carefully, or move to get to at least one or more targets; just enough to keep it "speed", but put a little hitch in their giddy up. The point being, we get a few people who shoot revo's there, either IDPA oriented or ICORE oriented. Everyone to a person says they don't care if it isn't 6 or 7 or 8 round neutral, it is just fun. We give them a problem, and they figure out how to solve it with what they brought. They don't complain that some guy is using a tricked race 38 super with a 28 round magazine. They aren't competing against him.

My whole point in this discussion is there is a lot of worry over keeping it neutral and not enough of about how to encourage new participation. The biggest factor when new shooters come to my match, is their first exposure to Far & Near. Most have no idea of what their firearm can do at fifty yards. They are just flinging the rounds out there and hope to do better at the closer ranges. I constantly have to explain to them, it's gonna take a lot of time and/or practice, before they will feel confident or, for that matter, even comfortable, shooting this stage. So they do come back and try again, knowing the problem wasn't necessarily their shooting abilities, but rather the stage difficulty and not being better prepared to tackle it. If we could poll all the shooters who shot the IRC once, and never came back, I'll bet F & N was big factor. I'm not saying get rid of it or change it, but we have face the fact, of what it does to a shooter who shoots it for the first time,

I think ICORE has to do more educate and prepare new shooters on what the sport is all about. We need to advertise the sport more. We need to try to get the media, be it print, internet, or TV out to our matches more. We have to remember, ours is a very unique and somewhat precarious organization, in that it is all volunteer. I have seen more than a dozen ideas discussed on how to attract new shooters, and nearly the same amount of reasons tossed in to discourage those ideas. We are our biggest holdup in growing. I wish I had the light bulb idea to close this post, but I don't. I just wanted to add a bit of my thoughts and the majority of these points hold true with the ICORE shooters I compete with.

[RevoWood123]

My philosophy, if you want to call it that, is, I put on a match I would want to shoot. Is it fun for me? Since I am the one making the effort, and no one else really wants to do the commitment, nor responsibility, it only makes sense to me to have this attitude.

The way I see it is, you pick your niche and play in it. Whether it be open, limited or classic. I have always based my performance on a few fellow shooters who I compete with regularly and are close to me in all the factors: age, health, division, etc. Yes it is nice to win, but it isn't the reason to compete. It is the people you compete with. It is the fun of running with a bunch of people with the same love of the game.

We give them a problem, and they figure out how to solve it with what they brought. They don't complain that some guy is using a tricked race 38 super with a 28 round magazine. They aren't competing against him.

My whole point in this discussion is there is a lot of worry over keeping it neutral and not enough of about how to encourage new participation.

We are our biggest holdup in growing. I wish I had the light bulb idea to close this post, but I don't.

PistolPJL, I agree with you, this thread is not the means of making ICORE grow. I agree that we need to have the discussion about what those means are, sharpen our focus and concentrate efforts to help grow. I don't have the answers, but I agree with you that we are our biggest holdup. My idea when starting this thread was to specifically talk about how the current ICORE rule of "6-shot neutral" stage design is not clearly defined and how that has affected stage designing.

One of the things I love the most about ICORE and am looking forward to the most is the fact that there is so much freedom in stage design (field courses). I agree with you, when I design stages, I make it stuff that I would want to shoot. If you have regular attendance from people, then they must be enjoying it as well. I don't believe that a rule change/ definition/ clarification is going to have any bearing on bringing out participation, my hope was that it would encourage fellow MDs that they can do more with their stage designs than they often realize.

I agree with you that I am never competing against the open guy when I shoot limited. But my six shot limited gun is competing against the eight shot guys, which is where the "6-shot neutral" rule was born. The problem with the rule is the misunderstanding that comes along with it, it can be interpreted different ways and therefore lead to different outcomes in how stage design for ICORE is approached. Perhaps the answer is adding limited-6 division and drop the "6-shot neutral", I don't really know. The fact is, per the current and previous rule books, "stage layouts must be 6 round neutral." As long as its there, it is the challenge we as MDs and stage designers face; how to keep it neutral, fun, challenging and flowing smoothly. That keeps the shooters coming back.

The other issue we face is getting new shooters out there. An issue to which I don't have an answer, but am willing to search out because I like my sport and want to see it grow. Also, I want to thank you because you have taken the time and committed so much of it to the sport. For those of us who shoot, we do appreciate what you are doing.

We haven't had ICORE around here in a couple of years, the previous MD wasn't able to make the time for it. He asked other people to take the reigns, but nobody stepped up. I am happy to be the person willing to take the challenge and already have a lot of support from my club and fellow shooters.

[Forrest Halley]

You know, PJL has a nice match layout. You're neutral right up until the field course and even then you can hang if you can recharge the six smoothly enough and it breaks down without static reloads.

[kevinj308]

PJL does do an outstanding job(although if I never see F&N again I'd be ok with that). I'm in the same club and actually shoot a 6 shot limited gun. I know right. My 625 is just cool to me, I dunno.

I've never felt at a disadvantage, I might have one extra reload on the field course if I'm doing everything right. If I'm not that's on me. I'd personally prefer they just drop the 6 round neutral rule and let it go. Level playing field across whatever division you're in. Let the stage creativity happen!

In full disclosure though I have a new 929 in the safe . Just haven't had time to get it ready yet.

Thanks to all the MD's and set up crews that keep it happening

[kevinj308]

You know, PJL has a nice match layout. You're neutral right up until the field course and even then you can hang if you can recharge the six smoothly enough and it breaks down without static reloads.

It's a good layout for the set up crew too. If somebody gets there early just get to setting up F&N or the steel. No need to wait around for a diagram. First person there gets to set up a steel challenge like stage however THEY like it. Doesn't affect the round count of the match.

It's been working really well for the club for a long time. If the guy with the stages has car trouble or something we only have to ad hoc one stage really. It keeps the standing around waiting for direction to a minimum.

Thanks PJL

[bdpaz]

I don't believe any shooter thinks that 6 shot neutral means they can shoot a 625 in Limited and beat Josh or Jerry. That many of you don't understand the fuss over 6 shot neutral stages is a good sign as it means you aren't seeing the stilted, souless stages that can result when it is interpreted as removing any and all advantages of the 8 shot gun.

Here is a video of what I consider to be a fun 6 shot neutral stage from yesterday's ICORE match at Phoenix Rod & Gun Club. 14 close up paper plus 2 mini poppers a bit farther out to mess up the shooter's rhythm. It was arranged so either capacity could shoot until empty before reloading, and there was more than one way to shoot it . (Don't judge me too harshly - it was the last stage of the day, it was hot, and I had a clicker that I thought I had just short stroked and I was running low on moon so I tried pulling the trigger until it came around again which didn't work! )

Edited to embed the video.

Edited August 10, 2015 by bdpaz

[Lentz]

The year that i smoked all the moon clip guns with a speed loader gun was the only year that the stages where truly 6 shot neutral. Every year before and after that there where at least 2 or more stages where the 8 shot guns have an advantage and it was on big field coarse stages where you could gain a lot of time.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Lentz

[bdpaz]

The year that i smoked all the moon clip guns with a speed loader gun was the only year that the stages where truly 6 shot neutral. Every year before and after that there where at least 2 or more stages where the 8 shot guns have an advantage and it was on big field coarse stages where you could gain a lot of time.

What made them truly 6 shot neutral? Were they presented in 6 shot arrays with time to reload between each (so they were shot similarly by both 6 and 8 shot guns) or was there an 8 shot plan and a 6 shot plan with just additional planned reload (or two) for the 6 shooters?

My stage above wasn't ideal because the 8 shot guys could allow for make ups on the poppers in their plan but it was close to neutral as the planned reloads for both 6 and 8 were on the move with the 6 shot guys needing four and the 8 shot guys needing three. The stage winner was shooting Classic so it worked as intended. The targets were grouped (in number of hits) from left to right as 6-2-4-4-2(poppers)-4-2-6.

[seanc]

The year that i smoked all the moon clip guns with a speed loader gun was the only year that the stages where truly 6 shot neutral. Every year before and after that there where at least 2 or more stages where the 8 shot guns have an advantage and it was on big field coarse stages where you could gain a lot of time.

What made them truly 6 shot neutral? Were they presented in 6 shot arrays with time to reload between each (so they were shot similarly by both 6 and 8 shot guns) or was there an 8 shot plan and a 6 shot plan with just additional planned reload (or two) for the 6 shooters?

My stage above wasn't ideal because the 8 shot guys could allow for make ups on the poppers in their plan but it was close to neutral as the planned reloads for both 6 and 8 were on the move with the 6 shot guys needing four and the 8 shot guys needing three. The stage winner was shooting Classic so it worked as intended. The targets were grouped (in number of hits) from left to right as 6-2-4-4-2(poppers)-4-2-6.

It was the 2013 IRC, every array was either 3 paper, 6 paper, 2 paper 1 steel, or 5 steel, or some variation where 8 was no help and carrying 2 or 3 was no help, everyone shot the same 6 shot plans. I think for the polish plate rack at the end of the marathon sprint which had 6 steel on it was the only place where a 6 shooter was in a clutch situation and HAD to go 1 for 1.

[Lentz]

The year that i smoked all the moon clip guns with a speed loader gun was the only year that the stages where truly 6 shot neutral. Every year before and after that there where at least 2 or more stages where the 8 shot guns have an advantage and it was on big field coarse stages where you could gain a lot of time.

What made them truly 6 shot neutral? Were they presented in 6 shot arrays with time to reload between each (so they were shot similarly by both 6 and 8 shot guns) or was there an 8 shot plan and a 6 shot plan with just additional planned reload (or two) for the 6 shooters?

My stage above wasn't ideal because the 8 shot guys could allow for make ups on the poppers in their plan but it was close to neutral as the planned reloads for both 6 and 8 were on the move with the 6 shot guys needing four and the 8 shot guys needing three. The stage winner was shooting Classic so it worked as intended. The targets were grouped (in number of hits) from left to right as 6-2-4-4-2(poppers)-4-2-6.

It was the 2013 IRC, every array was either 3 paper, 6 paper, 2 paper 1 steel, or 5 steel, or some variation where 8 was no help and carrying 2 or 3 was no help, everyone shot the same 6 shot plans. I think for the polish plate rack at the end of the marathon sprint which had 6 steel on it was the only place where a 6 shooter was in a clutch situation and HAD to go 1 for 1.

The 6 shot guns the stages the same as the 8 shot guns. All paper arrays where 2-2-2 and all steel arrays there in clusters of 5, so the 6 guns could shoot the array fast but still had a make up. Thats the true meaning of 6 shot neutral stages.