-1 Points down = 1 second?

[Jim Watson]

So if nothing changes, why change?

Nobody would complain if the scoring had been 1:1 from the start, as the Historians tell us. (But whatever happened to the .3 second targets? Nobody mentions that any more.)

It's not the scoring, it's the CHANGE. Like the now you see it, now you don't Flat Footed Reload.

If it won't make any significant difference in match placement, why change?

(But if you think the difference between first and third is immaterial, you need a new sport.)

If you are at the top of your division with speed now, can you tweak your shooting a second at a time?

[v1911]

I should clarify. It won't make a difference for the better shooters. Where it can make a positive difference is by forcing those pray and spray types to work on being better marksmen.

[IronArcher]

If 1 sec/point is "better" than .5 sec/point and .3 sec/point, why stop there? Why not 2 sec/point? Or 5 sec/point?

If DOUBLING the penalty for a point "won't change anything", why not bump it up double again?

It's not fear of change, it's fear of change for the worse.

Very few have argued that this will be a big improvement.... Only that it won't change anything.

I see zero benefit from this rule.

[Thomas H]

Where it can make a positive difference is by forcing those pray and spray types to work on being better marksmen.

Those folks already aren't winning, and it isn't making any difference to how they are deciding to shoot. Is there some reason you feel they deserve to be penalized more?

[v1911]

Where it can make a positive difference is by forcing those pray and spray types to work on being better marksmen.

Those folks already aren't winning, and it isn't making any difference to how they are deciding to shoot. Is there some reason you feel they deserve to be penalized more?

It's definitely the exception and not the rule, but I've witnessed a few shooters that place rather well (locally) placing a premium on speed rather than marksmanship. Some of those shooters are top 3 finishers or at the very least, top 5 overall. I don't see this rule some much as penalizing those shooters as much as rewarding the guys that take the time to get their sights on target and edging out the guys that pray and spray.

Maybe I'm more a "half full kinda guy".

[IronArcher]

So why should the guys that take their time be rewarded?

To get everyone to take their time?

Sounds as exiting as a bullseye match.

[Brooke]

If a guy can shoot fast enough (under current 0.5 rule) to finish in the top 3 or top 5 with sub-desirable accuracy (whatever that is) good for him and it proves the current penalty is about right.

One of the criticisms of IDPA is it forces everyone to shoot exactly the same way. There is no room for a different strategy. Your comment says there is room for a different approach if a guy shoots fast enough with reasonable accuracy. That's a good thing. It eliminates the cookie cutter reputation of IDPA.

Very few have defended the desirability of this rule change because it seems to offer nothing of practical value to the sport and you just cited a case where it removes creativity from a sport needing more creative opportunities. Bullseye is not very popular and reducing creativity in strategy makes IDPA more and more uninteresting.

[v1911]

So why should the guys that take their time be rewarded?

To get everyone to take their time?

Sounds as exiting as a bullseye match.

Why? Because we're playing a game that was founded around self defense. And while we can all agree that these scenarios don't really simulate that, accuracy is the primary goal. It always has been.

Off topic. I don't know if many of you guys are experiencing it as well, but our club is seeing a huge spike in new shooters each week. Maybe it's the tax return shooters, but we're getting 3-4 new shooters attending various matches each week. All age ranges. They must not have Internet, because according to many of us, IDPA is about to be the most dull thing next to watching paint dry.

Edited May 25, 2016 by v1911

[Brooke]

So why should the guys that take their time be rewarded?

To get everyone to take their time?

Sounds as exiting as a bullseye match.

Why? Because we're playing a game that was founded around self defense. And while we can all agree that these scenarios don't really simulate that, accuracy is the primary goal. It always has been.

Off topic. I don't know if many of you guys are experiencing it as well, but our club is seeing a huge spike in new shooters each week. Maybe it's the tax return shooters, but we're getting 3-4 new shooters attending various matches each week. All age ranges. They must not have Internet, because according to many of us, IDPA is about to be the most dull thing next to watching paint dry.

If they cared about accuracy they would not have separated compact guns from the standard guns they can't compete with. They deliberately created a division for less accurate guns while ignoring the red dot opportunity to improve everyones accuracy. If it's a defensive scenario, it appears to me that speed would a major factor as well as accuracy. I don't go around getting in gun fights but it seems to me that the guy that gets the first hit has a major advantage even if that hit is only marginally accurate. That may not be true in a war, but most hoodlums are going to retreat if they get hit anywhere. The guy who aims too much might never get a shot.

[rowdyb]

As I've said over and over again the issues are these:

1. It does nothing in equal measure to balance the effect of a good hit, Procedural or miss have on your score. You're messing with one part of the equation and not the others. A -3 hit is equal in its effect to one's score as a PE? That is poor thinking.

2. Most importantly, it changes the proportion of your score from error. This is the big problem. Not that one is shooting slower or faster with the bugaboo in their mind of what the new penalty for a point down is.

3. For the stated intent to reflect the idea that "we must be accountable for all the rounds we shoot" (paraphrased from Joyce at the dinner) this further continues the to muddle the line between the game/sport crowd and the real life/edc group.

4. In years of shooting idpa all over the country I had never never never ever heard someone complain about this. You can hear a lot of complaining but this was something I'd never head anyone ever say, "Man I wish they'd change a point down to a second down. IDPA would be soo much better then."

Fix1. All scores and penalties and times would need to be tweaked. I'd love to see an inducement for accuracy by rewarding a target with a -0 score on it of taking a second off your raw time. Wanna jack up the penalties? Balance it out with a greater reward then for accuracy at speed.

Fix2. Don't change anything. But I think if the balance issue in #1 is addressed I really could live with the change in proportion of the scores due to error.

Fix3. There is no fix, it just is what it is.

Fix4. Gut the tiger teams and the core group making the decisions. Have the groups making these decisions and committees come from the members choices, not from the top down. Or at least make them public rather than secret.

[racerba]

Why? Because we're playing a game that was founded around self defense. And while we can all agree that these scenarios don't really simulate that, accuracy is the primary goal. It always has been.

In true self defense, you do not stand there for any amount of time trying to get an accurate hit. Nor does the bad guy going to just stand there and wait for you to shoot accurately. If accuracy is the primary goal, bull's eye is the game for you...or even PPC.

[IHAVEGAS]

If you guys worry 5% as much about the important stuff (draws,reloads,trigger control,etc) as you do about the totally unimportant stuff, you have all got to be Master class & above !!

Just sayin.

[Steppenwolf]

What was the specific problem that required fixing? (The diktat from HQ is being justified after-the-fact with the "round accountability" argument as Rowdy noted).

I've been at two matches using the new scoring. The spread between the top shooters and newer (and less experienced) shooters widened considerably.

What I want to see is that all IDPA classifications are no longer valid and everyone has to re-shoot the classifier using the new scoring. There was one stage set up as Stage 3 of the IDPA classifier. Many of the Marksmen scored at novice level. When over 50% of the classified shooters drop down a classification you will start to hear the howling (unless they tweak the classifier to make it easier). Why do they have to change the classifier under the new scoring? If the Central Party Committee ("HQ") is correct about accountability then make people shoot the classifier using the new scoring. They won't because all the Master Level shooters that are dropped a classification will howl. If you must increase time to allow for "more accurate shots" then you are indeed moving IDPA toward bullseye shooting.

YouGiveMeGas: Why don't you send that "pearl of wisdom" to Joyce and IDPA HQ? If what you assert is true then they need to refocus on important stuff and not "totally unimportant stuff" such as Tiger Teams changing the rules by diktat.

Watch this video of KC Eusebio running a stage competition style compared to Larry Vickers running it with a "defensive mindset" style. Which is more fun? Larry Vickers said "You'll be able to time me with a sundial." This folks is the future of IDPA.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Steppenwolf

[NewColonial]

9.2.5 Shooters may not go down in Classification except for permanent physical disability or for other irrevocable reasons. IDPA HQ will determine when this is appropriate and make the necessary adjustments to the Classification Database.

According to IDPA rules, you can't drop down in classification, no matter what subsequent scores are.

Of course, if the match used -1 scoring, it wasn't actually an official IDPA match, so anything is possible I guess.

[racknrider]

Pretty sure the classifier times will change too.

The level of emotion over this presumed change is amusing. It's a game. If you don't like the rules, take your ball and go home.

[NewColonial]

The level of emotion over this presumed change is amusing. It's a game. If you don't like the rules, take your ball and go home.

This. ^^^

I keep hearing how IDPA rule changes are driving people away, yet I see 6-10 new shooters every month at one of the places I shoot. And overall attendance is growing, despite the fact that a nearby club shoots the "other sport" on the same day.

[Steppenwolf]

Wow, you guys are convincing. Everyone shut up and do what HQ orders and stay in your lane. I keep hearing how wonderful the rule change will be. I have to follow orders or take my ball and go home. Have you two shot using the new scoring system yet? Well?

My reply to you "Nuts!"

[IronArcher]

As far as the "practical" aspect of it, I would MUCH rather be the first guy to shoot and hit a lung shot (-3) than get shot wasting time making sure I got a heart shot!

As for the "responsible for every round fired" Double the penalty for mikes and/or count the penalty for Mikes that the shooter made up (the later being more in line for being responsible for EVERY shot, the former being more suited to this game).

[Brooke]

As I've said over and over again the issues are these:

1. It does nothing in equal measure to balance the effect of a good hit, Procedural or miss have on your score. You're messing with one part of the equation and not the others. A -3 hit is equal in its effect to one's score as a PE? That is poor thinking.

2. Most importantly, it changes the proportion of your score from error. This is the big problem. Not that one is shooting slower or faster with the bugaboo in their mind of what the new penalty for a point down is.

3. For the stated intent to reflect the idea that "we must be accountable for all the rounds we shoot" (paraphrased from Joyce at the dinner) this further continues the to muddle the line between the game/sport crowd and the real life/edc group.

4. In years of shooting idpa all over the country I had never never never ever heard someone complain about this. You can hear a lot of complaining but this was something I'd never head anyone ever say, "Man I wish they'd change a point down to a second down. IDPA would be soo much better then."

Fix1. All scores and penalties and times would need to be tweaked. I'd love to see an inducement for accuracy by rewarding a target with a -0 score on it of taking a second off your raw time. Wanna jack up the penalties? Balance it out with a greater reward then for accuracy at speed.

Fix2. Don't change anything. But I think if the balance issue in #1 is addressed I really could live with the change in proportion of the scores due to error.

Fix3. There is no fix, it just is what it is.

Fix4. Gut the tiger teams and the core group making the decisions. Have the groups making these decisions and committees come from the members choices, not from the top down. Or at least make them public rather than secret.

Excellent! Thank you. Send it to HQ

[racknrider]

Wow, you guys are convincing. Everyone shut up and do what HQ orders and stay in your lane. I keep hearing how wonderful the rule change will be. I have to follow orders or take my ball and go home. Have you two shot using the new scoring system yet? Well?

My reply to you "Nuts!"

Or let's take the opposite approach and whine and bitch about every decision that HQ makes. If the rule will ruin the sport for you, you should find something else that you enjoy. If I hated IDPA as much as some of these posters I'd never shoot it again.

[IHAVEGAS]

The level of emotion over this presumed change is amusing.

I guess the bright side is that if your life is so perfect that you have time to get worked up about trivial things, then you really have a whole lot to be happy about.

Making the choice to get worked up is something everyone is free to do I guess. No offense to anyone intended, but it is kind of entertaining.

[JD45]

Why? Because we're playing a game that was founded around self defense. And while we can all agree that these scenarios don't really simulate that, accuracy is the primary goal. It always has been.

In true self defense, you do not stand there for any amount of time trying to get an accurate hit. Nor does the bad guy going to just stand there and wait for you to shoot accurately. If accuracy is the primary goal, bull's eye is the game for you...or even PPC.

[JD45]

The poster above said it perfect!

You also don't do the slow motion walk while shooting. Or shoot on the move at a guy holding someone hostage.

[Racinready300ex]

The level of emotion over this presumed change is amusing. It's a game. If you don't like the rules, take your ball and go home.

This. ^^^

I keep hearing how IDPA rule changes are driving people away, yet I see 6-10 new shooters every month at one of the places I shoot. And overall attendance is growing, despite the fact that a nearby club shoots the "other sport" on the same day.

Wow, you get 60-120 new shooters a year. Your match must be huge by now. My local club gets a couple new shooters at most matches. But, some how the total turn out seems to stay around the same. Odd, isn't it?

I think people get worked up because they enjoy the game and don't want it to become less enjoyable. Some of us have a lot of time and money invested into this, and if it isn't fun anymore all that is wasted. Sure we can go do something else but what if we don't want to? What if we like it the way it is? Just a thought.

[Steppenwolf]

Racknrider:

I didn't say it would ruin the sport for me. I have only "bitched" about one decision of HQ (the one second scoring dictated change that was made without any specific practical rationale). I appear to be the only person in this conversation that has shot two matches under the new scoring (and thus have firsthand experience with its results).

I enjoy showing up at matches and beating people that think the new scoring will somehow benefit them (but the level of competition seems to be decreasing as people slow down--which is not fun). The new and inexperienced shooters will become frustrated as the gap between the top shooters and their scores widens considerably. But, you see, everyone is "reading through" the key points on this thread. The IDPA Conformist Jedi mind tricks aren't working. I normally have better things to do with my time, but I do enjoy the "IDPA non-shooting game" (this forum).

Racinready: Point well taken about having a lot of time and money invested. I can repeat ad nauseum that I've shot two matches using the new scoring system and the majority of feedback is not positive, but the IDPA Conformist party card-carriers seem to have issues reading carefully (translated for you "take your ball and go home" repliers: "Until you shoot a match using the new scoring system perhaps you should listen a bit more before making brash comments.").

Edited May 25, 2016 by Steppenwolf