-1 Points down = 1 second?

[elguapo]

Bill Jordan considered a hit in the belt buckle region good enough for a fast first hit.

He got in more gunfights and killed more people than any IDPA joker ever did, including Joyce.

[Jim Watson]

It is a done deal.

From today's Tactical Brief:

"Last week at the World Championship awards banquet, I announced that the IDPA Board of Directors has elected to increase the Point Down penalty from a half second to 1 second."

I can't this morning find the text of the speech, but recall that it was then being considered. Now it is definite, nothing left to do but revising classifications and redoing the new rules that were supposed to solve all problems. Therefore no timetable.

I think we are being punished for complaining about the flatfooted reload.

[Peplow530]

It is a done deal.

From today's Tactical Brief:

"Last week at the World Championship awards banquet, I announced that the IDPA Board of Directors has elected to increase the Point Down penalty from a half second to 1 second."

I can't this morning find the text of the speech, but recall that it was then being considered. Now it is definite, nothing left to do but revising classifications and redoing the new rules that were supposed to solve all problems. Therefore no timetable.

I think we are being punished for complaining about the flatfooted reload.

Here is the whole thing from the email sent out.

"Last week at the World Championship awards banquet, I announced that the IDPA Board of Directors has elected to increase the Point Down penalty from a half second to 1 second. The BoD is comprised of two MA shooters (both Founders of the sport) and one EX with a combined total of more than 57 years of IDPA experience. This decision was made to keep the sport aligned with the founder's intent of valuing accuracy over speed. As concealed carry holders, which many of our members are, we are responsible for every round that leaves our gun, and IDPA needs to reflect that in our practices. I met with some of the Area Coordinators recently to share this information and the feedback received from them was very positive. There is no hard timetable for this change. Classification scores and other areas will need to reflect the change, and we are already working with some of our scoring vendors on this change. More information will be available as the work progresses and we will make updates on this via the Tactical Journal and Tactical Brief."

[FTDMFR]

So why not just add an additional penalty for mikes?

[Severian]

Another change that will make the game less fun, SLOOOWWWW. Just what is needed, right? NOT!

The notion that IDPA is ANYTHING other than a game is absurd. The statement this"game where people carry guns for self defense...." ignores the fact that if you approached a gun fight using anything that resembled IDPA, you'd be dead.

I like IDPA, I really do, but the damn rule changes designed to "fix" something that is not broken need to stop. If this is an obsession over being different that USPA, please get over it. I shoot both and believe me, they are already VERY VERY different sports.

The notion that the IDPA target really reflects "good hits" on a threat is just wrong. If that is the case the down zero ought to include a triangular zone including the head and upper chest (golden triangle). So what's next, changing the targets to reflect real "kill shots"? And BTW, for sponsors and community relations, yes community relations because we live in the real world, do we really want IDPA to be associated with "training to kill people"? In states like mine, that will NOT help the right to bear arms.

My point is it NEVER FRIGGIN ENDS! Really, STOP ALREADY!

And this is coming from a guy that just started an IDPA program.....

This!

[LeviSS]

I think this sucks.

How's it going to affect the classifier times?

[Not-So-Mad Matt]

How's it going to affect the classifier times?

They said they'd have to adjust the classifier times.

I wouldn't mind seeing a whole new classifier, myself -- one that was quicker to run and a better test of "real" match skills.

[robport]

I think this explains a lot. There had to be some money trail. I got it off the Facebook IDPA page.

[hyasuma]

Lol, I was ESP SS 16th place at World...I made a lot of mistakes...

What problem are they trying to fix?

I was there. At the Banquet.

I had been up for a long time and it was a late night, but I remember this from her speech... "This is a sport where people carry guns for self defense. We are each ultimately responsible for where our bullets go." In my understanding this is implying that accuracy is more important than speed. Joyce also said that she has absolutely no date on when this change could occur, 6 months or 2 years.

Looking at where I placed in the overalls and then using this new scoring I would have been in the same spot. I only saw a few places where the scores would be changed. ESP SS There were some guys close in score but not close in PDs Lets take ESP SS position 15 & 16.

15) 345.43 with 50 PD's and 16) 345.52 with 102 PD's Those two people wouldn't have switched positions on the leader board. But the guys in 17 & 18 would have. again both guys shooting the match in 347 seconds but #17 had 70PD's and number 18 had #77 PD's

I dont agree with the change. But IDPA doesn't always seem to make the best decisions in my mind. To me it seems that want to make it as far from a 'Game' as possible.

[alma]

I was wondering what could have possessed them to make this change and why they thought it was necessary.

One possible explanation: Vickers.

[Butterpuc]

I have shot in non-idpa matches where the outlaw rules basically doubled all penalties, like you have mentioned.

It completely changes the way you shoot. You CANNOT afford to hit anything but -0. Heck 2 shots in a -1 will kill your stage.

Edited: for me it ends up being quite boring because you cannot afford to shoot fast.

Shooting accurately is boring?

It sure isn't boring to me! I really enjoy stages where I finish with very few/no points down, particularly if my speed was good also.

I personally do find it a little boring. But to each is their own. Right? That's why there are so many shooting sports.

I find it very difficult to shoot that 1sec per point match and an uspsa match. Back to back. It's is tough. Maybe I need to do that more often to make me a better shooter.

[MilkMyDuds]

Rule change without the majority of the members behind it is more likely to damage the player base than to improve the sport. A good example is the flatfooted reload. If I were in the BoD I would have suggested a voting mechanism for the members to voice their preferences. After all, IDPA is just a sport, a game, not real world defensive pistol training. A rule change aiming to blur that line is going to not only significantly reduce the fun factor of the sport but also stir up more debates leading to more awareness that IDPA is NOT real world defensive pistol training.

[ac4wordplay]

I think this explains a lot. There had to be some money trail. I got it off the Facebook IDPA page.

Interesting SO range commands for a sanctioned IDPA match.

[Alaskapopo]

Bill Jordan considered a hit in the belt buckle region good enough for a fast first hit.

He got in more gunfights and killed more people than any IDPA joker ever did, including Joyce.

Yawn so?

[Fowlmouths]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1lhtNDj2qc&feature=youtu.be

I think this explains a lot. There had to be some money trail. I got it off the Facebook IDPA page.

I just want everyone to watch out for those training scars! Please make sure if your pistol holds more than 10 rounds you load to capacity. Not doing so will get you KOTS.

[Chills1994]

I think this explains a lot. There had to be some money trail. I got it off the Facebook IDPA page.

In that car stage, the CoF dictated 3 shots per target.

This is a screen capture from that video:

If Larry and Ken get their way, that one target alone would tack on 7 seconds to your raw stage time.

Holy shikeys!

That would eat your lunch in a hurry.

Granted this forum frowns on discussions relating to ballistic effects on humans and animals (i.e. hunting), but I would think 3 pistol rounds in the torsoe would certainly take the fight out of somebody.

About the only other suggestion I can offer up is make it two shots anywhere in the brown equals neutralized. Or one shot in the down zero area equals neutralized. Any target not neutralized adds 5 whole seconds to your raw stage time.

My next best solution would be to shrink the target down with a corresponding shrink in scoring zones, but yet keep the scoring the same where total target points get divided by half.

[elguapo]

Alaskapopo, Bill Jordan's won more gunfights than you too. So I put a lot more stock in what he has to say on the matter over you, Joyce, and most other people.

[elguapo]

Where's that James Yeager gif when you need it?

[Not-So-Mad Matt]

About the only other suggestion I can offer up is make it two shots anywhere in the brown equals neutralized. Or one shot in the down zero area equals neutralized. Any target not neutralized adds 5 whole seconds to your raw stage time.

I think the switch to one-second-per-point would go well with dropping the unwritten rule that each target should get two shots. If a dropped point is worth a whole second, then make-up shots make more sense, and requiring just one shot means plenty of targets will still get two.

More make-up shots also introduces a bit more unpredictability about when and where "emergency" reloads will occur, which seems like a good thing.

[Forrest Halley]

A second per shot and a four pound trigger pull minimum. Well I shoot a revolver, so that doesn't affect me, but the second person shot jazz is just plain meddlesome going toward being more different. Next they'll have you sign an oath renouncing any allegiance to any other shooting sports prior to LAMR.

I think this rule change will be a great boost for production division.

When did people become terrified of having to be accurate?

Edited September 30, 2015 by Forrest Halley

[BillR1]

When did people become terrified of having to be accurate?

This!!^^

[Rob Tompkins]

A possible effect of this change: Standards stages that require weakhand shooting (typical source for lots of points) will take on a new significance in match results. I suspect we will see fewer such stages.

In the video link above to one of Mr. Vickers shooting shows that featured him and Ken Hackthorn at the 2011 Carolina Cup I felt like I was watching Tactical Timmy harping on everything wrong with IDPA. He must have mentioned the 1 point = 1 sec thing 20 times. Also harped on “unrealistic” shots and how “that’s not what you’d do in real life” and “training scars” and teaching yourself to ULSC when in “real life” you should top off then holster, and blah, blah, blah. Bottom line, he had the attitude IDPA was (or should be) “real defensive training / practice” and that the gaming aspect will “get you killed on the streets”.

Based on the IDPA BOD making a unilateral change using rational in line wiht Mr. Vickers' thinking I have to wonder how much sway Mr. Vickers has and what else is likely to change. If Mr. Vickers’ viewpoints expressed in the 2011 video are indicators I could see changes to stage design rules to make the more “realistic” (he harped on fewer targets and unrealistic shots), possibly min trigger weights (he expressed 4lbs was the min for “real life”), and who knows what else would change to avoid “training scars”.

EDIT TO ADD: I've been shooting IDPA for about 7 years, it was the first action pistol game I tried. I'm also a local MD for a monthly IDPA Match. I like the sport because it’s a sport and offers different kids of shooting challenges. If I wanted tactical training / practice I would go do something else. Even with the last few years of controversy I've been an IDPA supporter. However, if the attitude expressed as the driving force behind this change continues I may feel a need to focus on other sports.

EDIT TO ADD II: The change its self is not the issue for me, having a sport more focused on accuracy is not so bad. What gets me is the way the change was made and the general attitude / reasoning behind it that gets me.

Edited September 30, 2015 by Rob Tompkins

[Chills1994]

I left out option C. Which would be "all the above".

Go to two hits anywhere in the brown, but on a reduced size target.

Next time you have an IDPA target handy, poke a hole or two in the headbox area. Stand before a mirror and then hold the target in front of you peering through that hole in the headbox. The target is quite generous in size.

Not getting 2 hits on the brown would mean that target is not neutralized, and you'd get 5 seconds added on.

Edited September 30, 2015 by Chills1994

[IRON99]

EDIT TO ADD: I've been shooting IDPOA for about 7 years, it was the first action pistol game I tried. I'm also a local MD for a monthly IDPA Match. I like the sport because it’s a sport and offers different kids of shooting challenges. If I wanted tactical training / practice I would go do something else. Even with the last few years of controversy I've been and IDPA supporter. However, if the attitude expressed as the driving force behind this change continues I may feel a need to focus on other sports.

EDIT TO ADD II: The change its self is not the issue for me, having a sport more focused on accuracy is not so bad. What gets me is the way the chagne was made and the general attitude / reasoning behind it that gets me.

Rob, this is exactly how I feel.

[dee loo]

EDIT TO ADD: I've been shooting IDPOA for about 7 years, it was the first action pistol game I tried. I'm also a local MD for a monthly IDPA Match. I like the sport because it’s a sport and offers different kids of shooting challenges. If I wanted tactical training / practice I would go do something else. Even with the last few years of controversy I've been and IDPA supporter. However, if the attitude expressed as the driving force behind this change continues I may feel a need to focus on other sports.

EDIT TO ADD II: The change its self is not the issue for me, having a sport more focused on accuracy is not so bad. What gets me is the way the chagne was made and the general attitude / reasoning behind it that gets me.

Rob, this is exactly how I feel.

I hear ya. Well said.