USPSA 3-Gun rules suggestions

[BigDave]

I don't like the idea of messing with the safety on a shotgun, other than putting in the FIRE position. I simply think it is unsafe to be messing with a safety that is (1) in such an akward position to engage and (2) that close to the trigger. I'd much rather see there be a requirement to CLEAR the weapon by firing extra rounds in safe direction than for folks to be messing with a safety. Plus, I'd rather be uprange of a clear shotgun than one that was on "safe".

KURT - yeah, USPSA has its issues with 3-gun/multi-gun but we are working on them. That is why this conversation is taking place, okay?

[kurtm]

BigDave:

This conversation is taking place because someone wanted magazine "limits" in limited and tactical. It just kind of morphed into the USPSA rule thing, because the person posting the "desired" restrictions wanted it for ALL 3-gun matches not just USPSA. I find it "funny" that when people talk about restrictions it is always to the level of what they have, in this case "30 round mags" is directly aimed at the AR market, not the M1A, Fal, or even SKS ( it was a joke, but it made a darn good point). If we are to limit the magazine capacity to "even the playing field" we MUST consider the lowest capacity, not just what is convenient for ourselves. In this guise I would even be happy with a 5 round mag limit, because that is what a Mini-14 comes with, and that is what they can use in California I am told. I really would like to hear why Religious Shooter wanted a 30 round moritorium rather than say 20, or 10, or even 5.

I know that USPSA is trying to change the rules they want to live by. I know Bruce Gary, is doing the best that he can. I applaude the effort of all that are trying to get these changes made FOR USPSA and ONLY USPSA. The rest of us that fill our matches to capacity every year will probable continue in the same vein we have been, as I have never heared or even seen on a post match critique the opinion that magazines should be limited in any way.

I think Bruce Gary has a good idea of what I think the rules should be, as all he had to do was pull up the rules for SMM3-G or RM3-G. I do like the comstock ideas he has come up with in another thread, and I think there is hope for USPSA. I have even decided to give another large "pistol only" match a try again in the future just to see, but I think right now I'm still full from my last experience with USPSA. 180 traps and advisarial R.Os just don't increase my level of match shooting enjoyment ( NOTE: DISCLAIMER!! this IS NOT a comment on the Double Tap Championship, as thier R.Os were great ) BigDave I am not picking on USPSA, although it sure sounds like it, I am advers to the " there ought to be a rule" mentality that seems to follow any large club, when it is just a rule for rules sake! Hey what about S.C.C.A?? Man I could do a couple of pages on them!! Wheres the Friday Flame war when needed? KURTM

[BigDave]

Kurt -

We're talking about USPSA rules, period. I've re-read this entire thread and its about USPSA rules and where we're going.

I'm going to default and any others who shoot all of the other big matches (RM3G, SMM, etc.) and ask some heads up questions:

What seperates an Open rifle from a Tactical rifle?

What should seperate an Open rifle from a Tactical rifle

Why, in the effort to make a distinction between divisions, is a 30-round limit NOT a good idea? Other than pi$$ some folks off, if that rule came into effect tomorrow, what effect would it have on the competition?

I think it is ludicrous and an insult to those who have a vested interest in seeing USPSA Multi-Gun succeed (and it will) to suggest that we're talking about adding rules for rules sake. We're taling about adding rules to differentiate the divisions so they each stand on their own. If USPSA/IPSC really wanted to go the IMGA/RM3G route, Mike V. would have seen to that long ago IMO.

[George]

What seperates an Open rifle from a Tactical rifle?

- Use of Bipod (not always disallowed in Tactical at all Non-USPSA matches)

- Use of more effective muzzle brake in Open (no size restriction)

- Use as many sights of any type you want in Open

At the moment that is all that separates open from tactical and each one of these advantages is of questionable value IMO anyway.

Just to piss everyone off, I'm thinking Limited should really be Limited and not be allowed a muzzle brake and secondary sight systems in addition to a 30 round mag limit.

Tactical ought to be able to have a brake and a single non-optical/electronic secondary sight system. The magazines should be limited to 30 also.

These changes would make each division enough different that the reason for having that division would actually be valid compared to a different division.

At the moment the only real differences between Open and Tactical are the shotgun and pistol used. The rifle makes little difference and in a rifle only match, Tactical would be a moot division as it stands.

--

Regards,

[Larry White]

George, hard to call tactical moot when its drawing more shooters than any other divison at USPSA 3 gun. The diffrences in equipment are suffient. Lets just fix whats broke, and thats scoreing, hot weapons handling and the RO issues.-----Larry

[George]

Hey Larry,

Sorry about not being clear there. I am not calling Tactical moot overall, it is the best thing that has happened to 3 gun in years. What I am saying is that in a rifle only match, open and tactical are pretty much the same division. Without the Limited pistol and shotgun a tactical rifle is pretty much an open rifle as far as the points per second it can gather in the hands of a good shooter.

--

Regards

[Wakal]

Yep. Swap out the dot for a set of iron sights (on the handguard), or be like a lot of folks and run an illuminated low-power or low-power variable. With the F2 comp and the other, lesser, "limited-legal" comps out there, there just are not many working rifle comps that DON'T meet the 1" by 3" rule.

Bang, Inc's .308 comp (what in the hell was Jerry thinking?) and the awesome JP "Tank Brake" are the only two that I can think off...offhand...that would be Open based on size.

I like Tactical rifle a lot. Of course, I think that Limited rifles should be...limited...to nothing better than a factory A2, A1, or stock "can opener" M16 flash hider (ducks to avoid beer cans and tomatoes)...

AlexF2compsrule,askmeaboutthemWakal

[kellyn]

Just to piss everyone off, I'm thinking Limited should really be Limited and not be allowed a muzzle brake and secondary sight systems in addition to a 30 round mag limit.

Good idea! I'm not pissed off in the slightest.

[cking]

To Benny

No optics for Limited only. I'm at the bifocal stage and I've spent in last year about $600.00 on different glasses trying to compensate. Finally my last pair the cheapest worked. Bifocal strength in dominate eye so the front sight is sharp like it used to be. The other eye set for infinity. Takes a awhile to get used to them, and I still can't see the holes in distant targets like I used to, but I can aleast hit them now that I can see the fuzz on that front sight again.

[kurtm]

BigDave:

The divisions are ALREADY differentiated. Limited has IRON SIGHTS ONLY. No optic, no bi-pod. Tactical allows ONE optical device. OPEN allows well...anything. I fail to see that a capacity limit defines a division, when it is already quite clearly defined. WHY HAVE YOU IGNORED THE LOWER CAPACITY FIREARMS???? NO ONE HAS YET TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION! Or ar we saying that Limited and Tactical are AR-15 divisions because that is what you guys own? Since the divisions are CLEARLY defined It sure looks like we are making rules for the sake of making rules. The tone I get is that you would enjoy "pi$$ing some people off", by making them change magazines. If you want to test that skill put it in the course discription not the rule book! You guys must think that the top shooters don't know how to change a magazine, and rely only on "technology".

If you plan to limit Limited any further you will kill the division. There were exactly 33 of us Iron sight shooters at the last USPSA Nationals, and like 127 "tactical" shooters. Yes I used "high capacity mags" at the Nationals. Have you ever tried to hit a 285 yard 10" flash target from your wealk side using your weak eye with IRON sights?? it tends to "dry out" a carbine rather fast, so as we are testing these skills we are now going to requier lots of mag changes?? LUNACY!!

Out side of about 7 people here on this thread I have NEVER heared ANYONE want a magazine capacity restriction. Are 7 people to now "define" a division?? Put it up to a forum vote, lets see what the masses say!!

Don't consider IPSC to be the same as USPSA. IT ISN'T!! We all share some rules but the differences are night and day! YOU WILL NEVER SEE MULTI-GUN at an IPSC MATCH!!! They think that is just short of mercenary training! and dangerous! Wich is just fine, IPSC has to work for all countries, USPSA works just for the USA.

Since there is "no big difference" between a "tactical" rifle and an "open" rifle, why not just revert to the way it used to be?? limited and open, we can just ignore the biggest division at any 3-gun match, then you can slap on any round restriction you wish for limited....after all....why not .....its' limited isn't it? USPSA can go back to fielding 60-70 person 3-gun Nationals.

You are right about one thing though, this thread was mainly about USPSA rules. I must have read into it something that wasn't there, but I still stand by what I stated. For years and years there haven't been magazine restrictions on rifles in USPSA, Why at this late date do you now want them?? Oh and bye the bye I didn't realise that you were on the board for making 3-gun rules along with Bruce. Good job!! KURTM

[Wakal]

I, for one...having already been screwed over by a arbitrary and capricious "capacity limit" by USPSA some years ago...am not advocating a capacity limit in any way, shape, or form. Period. Shotguns either

I like Comstock scoring on all paper targets, recognizing rifle major/minor AND pistol major/minor on combined stages.

I'm intrigued by the idea of designated "high-dollar" targets (say, 20-point 300 yard steel plates...just an example...), and would like to try it at a major match.

I like grounding hot guns (safety on, pointed in a safe direction).

I like holstering (and reholstering) hot pistols (safety on).

These things I like.

I'm not keen on time-plus scoring. I found SMM3G's scoring system to be kind of silly, especially with real rifles (instead of poodle shooters).

I don't like magazine restrictions.

These thinks I don't like.

Alex

[outerlimits]

Just to piss everyone off, I'm thinking Limited should really be Limited and not be allowed a muzzle brake and secondary sight systems in addition to a 30 round mag limit.

just to piss off the rest of the growing numbers that shoot tactical, give 'em a 20 rd mag and let them monopod all they want, with a cmore or aimpoint. there's something basically wrong with having more $$ into a scpoe (TA-11) than the damn gun.

flame on...

[BigDave]

Kurt,

First of all, let me apologize. If you took any of my posts personal, that certainly was not the way I intended them. I, for one, respect your opinion on these matters . Your experience and sucess demands it. In case you hadn't already figured this out, my experience in 3-gun is virtually nil (but that's about to change). I figured that I had something to add here simply because I really didn't have a whole lot of outside influence weighing in on my opinions.

I am begining to see your point about the magazine issue. I'm still not 100% (but closer) with you, but wouldn't you agree that if one was inacted that capacity would be a better way to go than length (like the pistol divisions?), no? At least that way the .260/.308 crowd wouldn't get alienated if that happened. I do believe that mag length/mag capacity limits do have their place in these sports. They are simply one of many tools that can be used to seperate and differentiate divisions. Whether or not they are good tools, that seems to be a matter opinion. The whole argument of "just because we have done it in the past means we shouldn't do it now" doesn't wash with me. Tradition gets us in trouble too often, for simply the sake of tradition. If there is going to be a rule, let's make it make sense and be to everyones benefit. If not, to hell with it.

Pi$$ing people off - making them mad? No, at least not intentionally. Making people think, go through a thorough thought process? You bet. USPSA has chance here to make a good framework for multi-gun competition and I, for one, want to make sure that we think this thing up one side and down the other. I, like you, want to see this thing succeed. The thing I keep reminding myself of is this: experts blew up Chernobyl. Of course we're not talking about spilling nuclear fallout over the whole of Europe, but I hope you see my point.

I'm on the board? Hmmm. Missed that one.

BTW - Since you like dark beer, I'll be happy to trade you a bottle of Dogfish Head 120 minute IPA (20% alchohol) for some weakhanded loading lessons.

[MattBurkett]

BigDave, why is the safety on an SG such an unsafe thing to put on? Location near the trigger? For some reason that doesn't make sense. Sorry but then we would have to relocate the mag catch on a 1911 away from the trigger for reloads. It is basically the same action as putting on the safety on an SG. That rule they came up with this year is simple, makes sense (to me at least) and a hell of a lot safer than speed unloading - we know how many DQ's that has caused.

Wakai, "I'm not keen on time-plus scoring. I found SMM3G's scoring system to be kind of silly, especially with real rifles (instead of poodle shooters)." Sorry, but, do you have a reason other than you think it is silly?

===========

I think with our age group of shooters, I would consider getting rid of limited as a concept in USPSA. Our average shooter is 35-60 with vision issues. A single scope on the rifle fixes that problem. Let them use one since the rifle is so different than the Hg or Sg. Well some of the time it is when the stages actually have some distance to them otherwise we just end up with a pistol match that we shoot with a rifle. (IMO 200 yards is not a long shot with a rifle!)

Leveling the playing field is BS. The people that are going to win will get the best most advantageous equipment and then still shoot better (and win) while other people bitch that something is not fair.

Why do the div's work at all IMG matches and not in USPSA?

Why is the scoring system SO MUCH MORE efficient in IMG and not in USPSA? It is retarded for a 3 gun match to run comstock scoring. It is slow to score, difficult for stats to enter, prone to errors, seemingly impossible with different PF guns, hard to administrate, etc...

Wonder if anyone is ever going to shoot a minor shotgun? (.410)

Okay, done complaining for the night - going to go try and get better. Been sick for almost a week and a half.

[Wakal]

Comstock rifle is just as hard as Comstock pistol, and USPSA seems to be handling that just fine...and has been for years. Combined stages (rifle/pistol) just need a score sheet with columns for both weapons systems and a CRO able to speak English.

"...two alpha, rifle...alpha, pistol, charlie, rifle..." Works for the Texas State 3-Gun, after all, so it can't be that hard

SMM3G silly? Yeah, lets talk about that. Two just-break-the-perf D's are the same as a single A? A solid C with a .308 results in a failure to nutralize and a five second penality? Two crease-the-target "D" hits with a poodle-shooter are better than a single "C" with a M14? And this is realistic?!? Yeah, the crummy one-shot performance with a .308 and the exceptional man-stopping performance of a .223 is why my troops are coming back from Iraq raving about that "new" M14 weapons system...

SMM3G is probably about as good as it gets with time-plus, I suppose...but it sure isn't USPSA. We reward POWER and ACCURACY along with SPEED...not just pure speed with some hosing targets here and there. SMM3G taught me that with time-plus, points are abolutely irrelevant...as long as you can chuck two rounds anywhere on a wide-open target fast, you are fine. Just like Whose Line, the points don't matter Of course, I figured that out too late and ended up 19th. Sigh.

Alex

[kurtm]

Senor DavidGrande ( AKA BigDave ):

I am going to go out on a limb and assume you guys are wanting equality in these divisions.

I am not offended I am frustrated. The Divisions are well differentiated. For Tactical and limited we CAN NOT just look at the rifle!! There are two other guns to be considered as well. We can't have dot sights/optics on either one of these other two and NO comps or porting. They ( USPSA ) have decided to go with a round restriction for the SG. and a length restriction for pistol mags. So lets see, all shotguns hold the same amount, pistols can vary quit a bit from lets say 15 (stock .40 Glock) to 22 round capacity, (for a LIMITED leagal Para P-16), and now all rifles are going to hold 31 rounds. You now have two of the 3 with equality...but one of the three with a 46% advantage ( just in rond amount not in skill if use ). Now I know that you are thinking "well just buy a base pad for the good old Glock and it is less a disparity. YEP that would be fine, Grams makes a fine base pad that would even hold 20 rounds for the Glock, for around $50.00 per mag. ( probably not legal in some states) Now lets jump to the good old rifle for $20-25 dollars I can LEGALY purchase ( probably not in all states) a 40-45 round magazine for my AR, giving me a 50% advantage over a 30 rounder. 46% - 50% seems quit equitable, in other words about the same! Now the rifle and Pistol are on equal footing and the shotgun is on equal footing as well, but the user would have to make the CHOICE to avail themselves of these "add ons" As someone in the "fashion world" once said "accessorize!! , But what about the poor shmoe that only has a rifle that accepts 20 round magazines or even 10 rounders SOMEONE PLEASE ANSWER WHY 30 ROUNDS????!!!

I know, we need to restrict "LIMITED", as a PISTOL division to lets say 15 rounds, a wide body .45. By changing the PISTOL Division within USPSA we would now gain equality in all 3 with out the "moronic" magazine LENGTH rule we now have. Not only would we now have a panacea for the 3-gun world we could PI$$ off just a FEW more folkes .

USPSA has been "hosting" a 3-gun Nationals since at least 1993. This is nothing new!! 40 round mags for rifles have been around since 1966 when Richard Miller and Dick Beutell finished the AR-18 project for Fairchild Aircraft/ Armalite. I thought I would add this to your thoughts. Pork has been "traditionally" cooked VERY thouroughly. Why?? Because if you don't you might end up with a very bad invassion of parasites that bore into your muscles called Trichina, usually fatal (but no more so than dieing ). SOME traditions are fairly good, such as though shall not kill, steal, neighbors wife, etc. If it wasn't a problem lo these many years why in 2005 is it now?? The 1994 omnibus crime bill provisions pertaining to firearms HAVE SUNSET. It is now LEGAL and econmically feasable to own these types of magazines, Why would a shooting organisation VOLANTARILY NOW decide to restrice them??

To answer another post as to why we allow comps in Limited, It was directly related to the 1994 crime bill. Many AR-15s came from the factory that way, rather than banning these carbines from competition and only allowing bare barrels it was decided that since it was hard to purchase an AR without some form of Comp it would be allowed. Now even the military is installing them on rifles so I think we are going with that one.

Yep, experts blew up Chernoble, and landed man on the Moon, and came up with all sorts of Anti-Biotics, and Hydrolic brakes for cars, and Jet aircraft technology, and radar, and.....well you get the "drift" ( I had to throw in just one good pun ) Besides our experts can beatup thier experts! We only leaked

For one bottle, I will show you how to wear the shell carriers. For a 6 pack I will give you a lesson, but get it BEFOE I drink the 6 pack

The Board remark was related to your "Vested Interest" statement, as this usually has to do with stock options for board members and others "High Up" in a corp. Since USPSA is a non proffit it was a little joke but I forgot the smily face, so I will catch up on it now

WAKAL:

Thats what I have been saying for years on this forum, .223 is a CARBINE, not a real rifle!!!! YEA BABY! 1 C zone or better for a .308, dead insurgents can't be wrong!!! KURTM

[XRe]

Excuse some more comments from a 3-gun ignorant guy???

It seems to me that power factor is, essentially, irrelevant in USPSA rifle competition. Even though we score it, within most divisions, the .223 is ruling caliber, due to recoil profile, and mag capacity. No??? If everyone shoots minor, doesn't that render power factor a moot point? How does one restore the Wis to the equation, so that Comstock scoring actually *means* something in rifle?? Otherwise, for rifle competition, the difference between Comstock scoring and straight time-plus is, essentially, nil.

IMG scoring - vs. "real life" wounding, etc, does seem a little wierd, but those are the rules they use. How close to "real life" do these *games* need to be??? Not an argument for or against either system - but something to consider. I understand the roots of these games, but.... how much does Open class really resemble "real life" anymore, anyhow? I think my first issue needs to be resolved before this really means anything in USPSA rifle context...

Capacity limits in Limited - well, as long as the rules are the same for everyone, what does it *really* matter, in the end??? If you're going to limit mag capacity in 3-gun Limited, though, limit it to something that encourages Major PF use - 20 or less - you want to go "real world" anyhow, right??? And - in the spirit of keeping things level across equipment (which is what limiting mag capacity is, in effect) - limit handgun and shotgun capacity as well. I'd suggest 10 rounds for pistol and whatever the lowest common denominator is in shotgun w/ a "shorter than the barrel" mag extension (8?). I don't know if mag capacity limits are a proper solution to anything, but....

I'll go hide under a rock, now - apologies if I'm way off base.

[Boulderado]

Rather than argue or pontificate or whine, I'd like to just apply the K.I.S.S. principle to USPSA's 3-gun rules and scoring method/program cunundrum.

First: USPSA needs to create what is commoly called a Heavy Metal/He-Man Division for .308 or larger bore rifles, 20 rounds max loaded in a Magazine, Shotgun: 12 Ga pump, 9 rounds Max loaded to start any stage, no speedloaders. Pistol: .45 or larger bore, 10 rounds max in any mag at any time. All firearms are scored as MAJOR using the current USPSA comstock scoring pograms, and the HM/H-M Division, like all othr USPSA Divisions are treated like a seperate match like USPSA's pistol Divisions.

Second: The existing USPSA 3-gun Divisions, Open, Tactical, Limited must each be treated as a separate Matches like USPSA's pistol Divisions. Rules for firearms remain the same with the exception that they are all scored MAJOR.

Rationale: Anyone who has shot in Heavy Metal/H-M knows a 20 rnd .308 in the hands of MOST shooters cannot compete in "the Game" with the .223 and similar rifles. HM/H-M is a growing Class/Division in IMG that deserves USPSA recognition and will grow the overall sport just like the USPSA Production, Limited and Limited 10 Divisions have grown the sport. Power is NOT a Factor in 3-gun under IMG rules and USPSA needs a good set of rules that will work for their RO's and computerized scoring. Right now under IMG rules if I shoot Tactical Iron aagainst Kurt Miller he can use a 9 MM pistol with no disadvantage or overtly real advantage over me using a .40. He'll use a .223 rifle and 12 ga auto and so will I. Will he beat me in a match because he is shooting a "minor" pistol? Nope. He will beat me because he is better than I am overall and he is also 30 years or so younger... Lat year atthe USPSA 3 gun Nationals in Reno I recall beating him on one rifle stage where you wer forced to shoot strong hand, weak hand .. Anyhow folks I hope you and see the beauty of the K.I.S.S. principle for the sake of the sport. Power factor? Foragetaboutit ...

Best To All,

Darrell Humphrey

[Boulderado]

Whoops!

Forgot to mention that for now my recommendation for Heavy Metal/He-Man Divison must be iron sights for all firearms ... as in USPSA 3- gun Limited Division. If the Division really takes off as in large numbers of participants and a clamor for optics arises, split the Divison into HM/H-M Scoped and Iron Divisions scored as separate matches just s is being done with Tactical and Limited. May the K.I.S.S. principle prevail !!!

Best To All ...again,

Darrell Humphrey

[3GunF1Guy]

I am advers to the " there ought to be a rule" mentality that seems to follow any large club, when it is just a rule for rules sake! Hey what about S.C.C.A?? Man I could do a couple of pages on them!! Wheres the Friday Flame war when needed?   KURTM

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hope you mean The "Sports Car Club of America" when you say the S.C.C.A.

And really they aren't that bad. Have you seen NASCAR or the worst one of all "Formula 1". Of course in auto racing pushing the rules can win or loose you a race. In the shooting sports it's more about the shooters ability than an equipment race.

Scott Peterson

[kurtm]

Darrel:

for what it's worth I shoot a .40 6" Fat Free Triangle built pistol, no little 9mm need apply! That would make you 76 years old and I really dought that you are that old! Yes you did beat me on that stage. That stage cost me first place as I was only 11 whole match points behind Bennie Cooley when it was all said and done. Good for Bennie, bad for me, good for you! ANYONE can tank a stage, but I was smiling when I got done!

Scott:

Oh yes! Sports car club of America! I was likening the whole lot of different divisions to what USPSA is doing. I remember going to one of thier "parkinglot cone races" with My old Datsun pickup and getting placed into a "prepaired" class because my stock truck had a K&N aircleaner in the stock filter holder. I see similarities! KURTM

[Boulderado]

Kurt:

I was using the 9mm as an example. You should know that I know you shoot a .40. I did not know that you are almost as old as Eddie Rhodes. So, we have to drop the difference to 17 years ....

You sure picked up on the 9mm .40 stuff and the fact that I out shot you on that one stage, BUT I have not heard your take on my offering the USPSA my K.I.S.S. principle rules. ???? What say you Kurt?

Best regards,

Darrell

[Paule]

It seems to me that power factor is, essentially, irrelevant in USPSA rifle competition. Even though we score it, within most divisions, the .223 is ruling caliber, due to recoil profile, and mag capacity. No???

I think the reason .223 is king has more to do with the availability (lack) of longer range targets that can react differently to minor/major calibers reliably. Virtually no one uses paper targets beyond 50-75 yards, most stop short of that. Two A's are pretty easy and fast at those ranges with a .223 or a .308. So C and D hits are a non-issue. At 100-400 yards you just don't see paper, which would give major some advantage to offset the potential loss of speed, but no one wants to deal with scoring and pasting far down range. All the longer targets are reactive steel, where the only real advantage for major calibers is when it blows a gale. BUT, what if there were steel targets that went down with any major hit, but required a much more precise hit from a .223 to react? could even the playing field back out, AND make the choice of rifle much more interesting. It wouldn't take a lot more, just some tweaking of course designs, to make major and minor rifles competitive with one another.

[3GunF1Guy]

Here we are squabling "round capacity" when the real stuff to address for USPSA is the multigun stuff like grounding of hot weapons and such, Getting R.O.s up to speed on "all 3", and the problem with the major minor thing in scoring

-- we're fixing the "grounding of hot weapons"

-- we're developing an RO course addendum *just* for long-guns

-- we're working on the major/minor thing

-- we think we have a way to do the scoring "right"

And, notably.... nobody from the USPSA side that *I* know of is trying to "make up new rules" for things like rifle mag limits or barrel length.

Bruce (I *like* having choices... isn't that what practical is about?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought I would bring this back up to the top of the list to see how the "new" USPSA 3-gun rules were coming along?

Bruce are you there?

Scott

[alma]

How about scoring everything minor except for heavy metal division.

Almost everyone shoots a minor rifle and shotgun targets are mostly knockdowns. The only change would be with the pistols. Most people could load a softer load for a pistol and going from 18 to 22 rounds would not be a big advantage for someone shooting a 9mm.

This would let us use the current scoring program without any changes. It would also place a higher emphasis on accuracy.