-1 Points down = 1 second?

[racerba]

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.

You get 6-10 new shooters every month??? Great...you get 6-10 new shooters that are probably trying out a new game they heard about...The question is......how many come back??? That will tell you if the game is fun and if the new shooters like it or not...if they don't come back, it's probably not fun...and they didn't like it...

Edited May 25, 2016 by racerba

[NewColonial]

I admittedly haven't counted, but I know some do because we talk in subsequent months.

I will most likely be one of the people who will finish lower, until I learn to slow down. But so be it, it's a game. I pay to play it by choice. Like many other business, if I don't like the product I'll stop buying it.

Also, anyone says they shot at match under the new system shouldn't complain about IDPA rules -- if the match isn't following current IDPA rules, it's not an IDPA match. Why complain about the org's rule if the club doesn't follow them anyway?

Am I correct in assuming that everyone who disagrees with the rule changes has written their AD and HQ as well? Just posting to an internet forum and not supplying feedback where it matters is whining, not activism. I suspect the vast majority of shooters don't follow Enos. The dislike of the change is strong here, but I can't recall hearing complaints at matches. Franky, I think it's more of an internet outrage than a real issue.

Edited May 25, 2016 by NewColonial

[IHAVEGAS]

Racknrider:

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: 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.").

Oh boy - labeling anyone who does not agree with you - that always moves things in a good direction (and it ain't like the other side could always do the same thing).

[Steppenwolf]

Gas: Well, it works like this: when you make constructive replies voicing concern over changes that are dictated from HQ AND have some experience with the new scoring system and people reply "why don't you take your ball and go home" or "if you don't like it stop showing up"--what do you expect (and they are "doing the same thing")? Turning the other cheek on Internet forums unfortunately does not work. Those of us that have concerns are voicing them and those that accept what HQ orders without question are being "conformist" (and using the hackneyed "go home if you don't like it" routine).

I am NOT suggesting that anyone "quit" or "take their ball and go home" (I actually want to see the sport prosper, but remain competitive and fun). The "conformists" are telling people to quit or "go home." I shared firsthand experiences with the new scoring system, but get the trite "go home" routine by some. Telling people to "take it or leave it" is not "moving things in a good direction" is it?

Edited May 25, 2016 by Steppenwolf

[NewColonial]

Not thinking it's such a big deal does not make one a "conformist." And what's wrong with saying "if you don't like the game, or management, don't play"? I didn't like the way USPSA leadership was running things, so I left. IDPA is a sport, a game. I doubt there's any sport where all the rules are liked universally. I happen to be ambivalent about this one. I've always thought IDPA was more accuracy oriented than USPSA. If I'm going to be penalized more for my inaccurate shots, that's my problem, not IDPA's.

[Steppenwolf]

I'm going to share my experience and perceptions based on a recent four-stage match using the new scoring system.

It was a relatively difficult stage layout (given the distances to some of the targets, some hard covers, movement, head shots, etc.). I shot SSP.

Stage One: 7 targets and required moving twice (the final target was hidden behind two stacked barrels at the end of the course). I was one point down (one second added to my time).

Stage Two: there were five targets and required moving once, but the final two targets were at/near max-allowed distance and one had a partial hard cover. Three of the targets required a head shot as well (and a couple of the headshots were 10 yards or more). My points down by target: T1: 3 points down, T2: 1 point down, T3: 0 points down, T4: 5 points down, and the last/hardest target T5: 8 points down (two shots in the -3 zone and two shots in the -1 zone).

Stage Three: Had eight targets (there was a "color-coded" initial order of priority established just before you shot). I was zero points down on this stage.

Stage Four: Had three arrays of targets and you had to move twice, shooting each array from a different position (ending the stage prone/shooting from under a spool table). I was zero points down on this stage.

So I had 1 + 17 + 0 + 0 added to my time (no procedurals). I was second place in the match (32 shooters). The winner has ten plus years of IDPA and IPSC shooting and typically wins when he shows up. A couple of other top-level shooters did not make the match, but several other good/experienced shooters did. There were three new shooters and the rest of the shooters had some experience (some have been shooting for several years, but usually do not win).

The next five shooters below me would typically only be behind between 3.5 points to 10 points in a match with the old scoring. In this match the third place finisher had a time of 20.2 seconds vs. my 24.5 seconds on Stage One, but he was down 8 points (vs. my 1 point down). One guy typically shoots fast and normally scores in the top eight places (a six-year Marine veteran), but in the last two matches (with the new scoring) he has dropped to below 50%.

The bottom 60% of shooters in the match had horrible scores and many of them shot more slowly than they normally would (it was "painful" to watch some of them shooting the longer distance targets). Many of the shooters at the match are above-average shooters. The spread between the top five and the remainder was huge. Several shooters made comments after the match ("Well at least I didn't DQ," "I'm here for fun, I just realized I'm never going to win," "Damn, I didn't think I would ever shoot that crappy," . . .). Several complained that the stages were "too difficult"--and I expect that complaint will be reverberated often after the new scoring is implemented. However, making the stages easier will cause the more experienced shooters to exodus.

Second place did not have the same meaning to me as it would have in the old scoring system given the way the overall scores panned out. Even with two or three more of the top area shooters in the match I would likely have scored at least third or fourth place. When I travel to area USPSA matches (50+ shooters in a match) the competition is greater and just getting into the top 20% is a major accomplishment.

[Steppenwolf]

NewColonial:

I am not a quitter and I never tell people to quit if they do not like something. I perceive it as a way to stifle communication by those attempting to keep the sport robust (and those that did not appreciate the HQ-dictated change without specific justification). Once the rule is implemented--there is nothing that can be done about it (until enough people complain). I will still shoot matches after the implementation and will no longer discuss the matter. However, per my above-example, if the matches become too boring then I will stop shooting them.

[racknrider]

If someone shoots a match or two under the proposed scoring change and go into the match with the attitude that they will not like the new scoring system, then they will get exactly what they expect to get. Did any of these shooters adjust their tactics to address the new scoring? My approach will be the same as always, shoot 0s as fast as possible.

As far as new shooters are concerned, I see more new shooters being discouraged by not being able to make the shots on target than by how far they finish behind the winner. In what sport is the scoring designed so that the last place finisher will feel good about themselves when they compare their score to the winner? I can't shoot that far let's make the 3 point line be 10 ft instead or 20 or I can't run that lets shorten the marathon to 17 miles so I can get my participation trophy.

New shooters, in my experience, come back because they had fun with other like minded people. Not because of their final standings in the match. And listening to Joe and Bob complain the whole match about how dumb the organization is does nothing to make a shooters experience more enjoyable.

If IDPA had started with 1 point = 1 sec would the sport now be defunct because it would have been so horrible. I somehow doubt it. I don't think every decision any organization makes is always the right decision but incessant whining and griping does nothing to address the issue. I certainly hope that no one who is considering trying IDPA ever runs across these threads.

[JD45]

It's about time people stop using the term "crying and whining" when people rebel.

We rebelled against Europe. That's how we got here. That's why we fight wars.

It's totally American to rebel.

[Racinready300ex]

Even before this proposed rule I had heard guys say there should be more penalties for points down. And that the game favored speed to much. These guys were typically SS, older, very accurate, and felt they could not win under the current rules. I feel like this rule is really for those guys, I'm sure every club has a few.

The reality is they still wont win, although they will probably finish better. And the 1 or 2 local guys who really spray and pray will probably drop a lot in the standings. And I think that is the goal.

My plan wont change, I'll still try to be the fastest and most accurate at the same time. My guess is it will get easier to be the fastest at least locally. And most accurate will get a little harder, as a lot of guys will just slow down even more to try to be more accurate.

I'm starting to look forward to it.

[racknrider]

It's about time people stop using the term "crying and whining" when people rebel.

We rebelled against Europe. That's how we got here. That's why we fight wars.

It's totally American to rebel.

Agreed. The Founding Fathers would start their own sport with their own rules.

[GMB]

The saddest part of this whole issue is that HQ isn't listening. They do what they want until they figure out that they were wrong. That's why once again we can reload while on the move. Just saying. I just pray HQ will come to their senses.

[Nemesis Lead]

My practical question.....which is better in a "real gunfight?":

1) Two "Down Zero" hits in 1 second (.50 splits).

2) One "Down Zero" and One "Down 1" hit in .5 seconds (.25 splits).

I personally think the answer is number 2. But in IDPA your adjusted time is 1 second for Option 1 and 1.5 seconds for Option 2. Under the current rules, they are equivalent which seems closer to reality.

I think the new rules will get some folks to let their sights dwell on the "Down Zero" zone, which is not a good thing.

But this will not change the rankings in any way except to make the gulf between good shooters and bad shooters even bigger. No one gets good without being accurate in IDPA or USPSA.

Just my 2 cents....

[IHAVEGAS]

My practical question.....which is better in a "real gunfight?":

I see the sport as a game, but, the police and military that I shoot with tend to be accurate and not very fast. This may be more a practical matter (limited practice time available, other priorities, lawsuits, etc) than a deliberate choice though.

[Nemesis Lead]

That is why I put "gunfight" in quotation marks. There is no way that USPSA or IDPA could ever come close simulating a real gunfight, but IDPA is based upon "Defensive Pistol" meaning that it should at least relate to Defensive Pistolcraft as much is possible. In a real "gunfight," speed is important.

[IHAVEGAS]

In a real "gunfight," speed is important.

Depends on whether you have just watched "The good, the bad, and the ugly" or "Unforgiven".

[rowdyb]

My practical question.....which is better in a "real gunfight?":

I see the sport as a game, but, the police and military that I shoot with tend to be accurate and not very fast. This may be more a practical matter (limited practice time available, other priorities, lawsuits, etc) than a deliberate choice though.

They work in teams, have coms, have to deal with by standers, targets that shoot back, walls and rooms, wear armor, have more training and confidence that most suspects/perps, a legal team reviewing their shooting actions and so on. Much more important to be precise and deliberate in most cases.

Speed and surprise are of course used and prized. Having someone pull a gun from the door during a traffic stop is way different than a hostage/house barricade.

IDPA stages on the other hand are all very similar and zero repercussion for doing it wrong. The more people spout off how IDPA should be defensive oriented the greater the changes will have to be to the stages and the shooting to reflect a real world analogy.

Right now they seem to be caught half way between the game side and the real life side. This is a horrible place to be, being neither hot nor cold they get spewed out.

[Jim Watson]

Same song, second verse;

A little bit louder, a little bit worse.

I recall similar debates about 35 years ago between IPSC "Gamesmen" and "Martial Artists."

The Martial Artists favored service pistols, all day wear holsters, and even concealment. They recalled what the "P" stood for.

The Gamesmen wanted optimized match guns, speed holsters, nothing to get in the way of draw and reload. They emphasized the "S."

For a short time, they coexisted with some famous Stock Gun matches being held.

But eventually the Gamesmen won out and are still running things their way.

True, economics, nostalgia, and repressive legislation have led to some new Divisions with more ordinary looking guns, but when you say IPSC - USPSA in 'Murrica -, people think of a guy in shorts, track shoes, shirt covered with advertising, and a complicated gun in a skeletonized holster.

The process continues, I am seeing a good deal of IDPA = IPSC Lite.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Jim Watson

[IronArcher]

While the production division has been one of its most successful and fastest growing divisions.

No complicated guns, no skeletonized holsters. I guess "people" really need to look at what is going on instead of what they "think" is going on.

Not sure what the issue is with people wearing shorts or sponsor shirts... This doesn't happen in IDPA?

[TonytheTiger]

I love this thread. Long live perpetual interwebz arguments!

[v1911]

I love this thread. Long live perpetual interwebz arguments!

We don't have the epic 50 page threads that USPSA does, but we try.

[TonytheTiger]

I love this thread. Long live perpetual interwebz arguments!

We don't have the epic 50 page threads that USPSA does, but we try.

I love those too. The entertainment levels are off the charts.

[Jim Watson]

I don't have anything against shorts.

Are those really sponsor shirts? Are the shooters getting STUFF from all those companies?

I have been offered the opportunity to BUY such garb. Silly, why should I pay to do their advertising?

[cnote]

I don't have anything against shorts.

Are those really sponsor shirts? Are the shooters getting STUFF from all those companies?

I have been offered the opportunity to BUY such garb. Silly, why should I pay to do their advertising?

the guy on the right, ya he is sponsored by the brands on his shirt, getting paid to shoot.... probably not getting rich though

[IHAVEGAS]

Silly, why should I pay to do their advertising?

In the case of USPSA and IDPA, the advertisers on the event shirts get there by supporting the sport in general and/or an event in particular.

So, you buy an event shirt & you are supporting the club that is having the event as well as some of the business's that are enabling the sports. You buy a custom shirt & you are supporting whatever you choose, sometimes charity related or whatever.

That said, I generally only buy one if it looks cool or if it is a memory I want to keep.