Max Michel interview regarding making changes to the sports

[IronArcher]

IDPA seems to have a logical solution

[PatriotMRD]

Ignoring advice from two of the best known shooters in the game is exceptional....for its ignorance. All this tough guy crap from you and groups like the NRA is eventually going to be the downfall of the gun sports.

You do realize that gun ownership and sentiment are rapidly expanding. The number of woman embracing firearm ownership is at an all time high. What is being done is working very well for us. No reason to turn and run with our tails between our legs now.

I fail to see how the people that are the backbone of our sport or the #1 organization defending our rights will be the downfall of the sport.

[Craig N]

May as well go to the 2 shot anywhere on target like 3 gun and just let it be a foot race.

[cnote]

May as well go to the 2 shot anywhere on target like 3 gun and just let it be a foot race.

I believe he was going close to this in the interview , simplify scoring , eliminate DVC, go IDPA + time scoring

[PatriotMRD]

I'm actually surprised there is such strong feeling about this. Does anyone really think the B zone is needed since it scores same as a C?

Does it really matter what the target is? they both reward accuracy with multiple scoring zones and in fact both are humanoid targets with the turtle just being a torso/centre of mass target.

I personally could care less between the metric or classic target.

Where does the paranoia about IPSC not allowing 'aggressive' movement or "running forwards" come from? I shoot under IPSC rules and have plenty of running down range, up range, sideways, wobbly bridges, weird props (starting in a porta-loo, starting in a car, climbing onto a scaffold, cooper tunnels etc), To be honest the main differences I've observed in lvl2 ipsc vs lvl2 USPSA are - obviously metric targets vs classic, the lack of texas stars and polish plate racks in ipsc, and the fact that ipsc matches follow a ratio of 2 long stages, 4 mediums and 6 shorts (for a typical 12 stage lvl 2, for higher stage numbers it's still stays close to that 6/4/2 ratio), uspsa tends to have higher round count and a higher ratio of longer stages.

Other than that they are basically the same.

Divisions are pretty much the same:

classic = single stack (in fact IPSC classic is more open as it allows bull barrels)

production = production (limited to 15 rounds in IPSC vs 10 in USPSA and IPSC restricts modifications a little further than USPSA)

standard = limited (basically the same)

open = open (the only real difference is mags are 170 in IPSC and 171.5 in USPSA)

I know bugger all about revolver... Production optic is on trial in USPSA and IPSC is looking at something similar too.

Both have 'all courses are freestyle' as one of the cornerstones of their rules.

both are mainly comstock (IPSC is all comstock these days)

Both have the same A/(B)C/D scoring.

both have major/minor in all divisions except production.

Powder factors are slightly different in major (5 PF points).

IPSC is perhaps more concerned about appearance in certain regions and some countries have funny laws that inhibit IPSC ( cannot shoot while moving in germany for example) but otherwise they are pretty much the same deal.

Be careful what you ask for. IPSC would radicalize stage design. The targets are first, then you can't run forward because that is aggressive.

If people want IPSC, move to Europe.

stage design between IPSC and USPSA is pretty close. USPSA tends towards higher rounds count stages and allows for some more 'uniqe' props and targets (stars etc). I'm not sure where you get the no running forward thing from.

Change the target or don't change it - it's hard to believe that is a big driver on whether the sport is "mainstream." Is it mainstream in countries that use the ipsc target? Popular on television, draw lots of spectators, outside sponsors, etc.?

I agree with this. Whilst I don't think changing target diminishes the sport in anyway I also agree it won't make it more palatable for the mainstream. In places that shoot IPSC it's just as much as an outcast as USPSA is in the US. It would take a lot more than target changes to bring a large piece of the population around.

I certainly don't think Max is some kind of heretic for suggesting there be some attempt to bring the sport to a wider audience. I do think it's a very difficult task though.

And I can hear the main stream media that some of you are just chomping at the bit to expose our sport to. "Today USPSA acknowledged that it will no longer be shooting at targets which are humanoid in appearance which is the norm in more other advanced societies ". Then ten years from now, "USPSA has banned the use of firearms that fire live ammunition in order to be more in step with other advanced societies. They will only be permitted to use air soft toy guns. And by a majority vote of IPSC members, USPSA will only permit shooting while stationary in order to appear less aggressive".

Trust me, someday......

IPSC already banned humanoid targets, wearing camouflage and tactical type clothing some time ago. It's not that far fetched to foresee them going further to remove the appearance of "paramilitary aggression". Shooters in Europe intentionally wear colorful clothing and paint their guns and equipment in bright colors to emphasize the "sport" aspect and prove they are not a threat to the government and try to keep the sheeple from getting nervous.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised to hear "We need to get rid of the big, scary, high-capacity, magazines".

[TonytheTiger]

May as well go to the 2 shot anywhere on target like 3 gun and just let it be a foot race.

Oh heavens no!

I love 3 gun but you can spot a USPSA shooter at a 3 gun match a mile away. They're fast AND they shoot towards the middle of a target. Any hack can get two hits anywhere...

[Darqusoull13]

Moto, the day anyone on this forum tries a back flip on a snowmobile I'll buy them a 6 pack. At MOST, I've brought MAYBE 20 people to action shooting matches in the past year. Yet, after seeing a snowmobile back flip happen on TV, you remembered it. That's the kind of exposure I want for this sport!

The difference is that after seeing action shooting at the X-Games almost any person can buy (borrow, run-what-they-brung) a Production rig for under a grand and go out and try a match. If you don't think we should be trying to reach millions of people, that's fine. I do, it's possible, and more than anything I want to see what happens when a JJ Watt or Michael Phelps level athlete starts shooting as a junior then after 10 years of disciplined training later shows up at Nationals. I bet they would look a lot like Max.

Steve, the way I got my "gamer" friend out shooting was showing him a video of a mag dump with an Open Division Saiga. Turns out he had always wanted to shoot a gun, and wouldn't you know it, I had plenty that he really liked to shoot.

I honestly think if you put on a level 1 match with either target not too many people would give a shit. I will still go and I think most people here would too. If you want to put on a televised match sponsored by Monster with GoPro having first person perspectives on every pro and an NFL style "Skycam" then maybe using the IPSC targets wouldn't be so bad.

[Gooldylocks]

Moto, the day anyone on this forum tries a back flip on a snowmobile I'll buy them a 6 pack. At MOST, I've brought MAYBE 20 people to action shooting matches in the past year. Yet, after seeing a snowmobile back flip happen on TV, you remembered it. That's the kind of exposure I want for this sport!

The difference is that after seeing action shooting at the X-Games almost any person can buy (borrow, run-what-they-brung) a Production rig for under a grand and go out and try a match. If you don't think we should be trying to reach millions of people, that's fine. I do, it's possible, and more than anything I want to see what happens when a JJ Watt or Michael Phelps level athlete starts shooting as a junior then after 10 years of disciplined training later shows up at Nationals. I bet they would look a lot like Max.

Steve, the way I got my "gamer" friend out shooting was showing him a video of a mag dump with an Open Division Saiga. Turns out he had always wanted to shoot a gun, and wouldn't you know it, I had plenty that he really liked to shoot.

I honestly think if you put on a level 1 match with either target not too many people would give a shit. I will still go and I think most people here would too. If you want to put on a televised match sponsored by Monster with GoPro having first person perspectives on every pro and an NFL style "Skycam" then maybe using the IPSC targets wouldn't be so bad.

I think it would be quite interesting to try and get a match like that to happen. Has anyone here seen RedBull Rampage? It is a freeride mountain bike event in the Utah desert. The best in the world all come there and throw down the craziest, most progressive riding on the planet. They have live feeds from the air and ground based cameras, and within moments of completing a run the GoPro footage is up and ready for review. I am certain we are no more than one generation away from live feed GoPros, but even without it we could easily have the footage playing before the stage was reset, and with the fancy drones out there we could have some really cool angles and video.

[BritinUSA]

The drone stuff is a problem, they are noisy as heck and even with ear protection they would quite the distraction to the competitor.

…but even without it we could easily have the footage playing before the stage was reset

I've been doing that since 2012…

[Darqusoull13]

Drones are getting better with regard to noise. At the last big match I was at over 180 people looked up and "Oooh'ed" when the drone flew over the end of the shooters meeting. You can get some amazing angles with the drone. Think classic 3rd person views from any video game following the shooter through a course of fire. There are even drones that follow a RF wristband.

Either way, drone or no drone, companies that support action sports are starting to notice. The Red Bull cars have been to matches. It's not some fantasy, it just takes real effort to show them the value, just like any other sponsor.

[Gooldylocks]

The drone stuff is a problem, they are noisy as heck and even with ear protection they would quite the distraction to the competitor.

…but even without it we could easily have the footage playing before the stage was reset

I've been doing that since 2012…

Yes. But you don't advertise it outside of our little world. And I was specifically referencing the GoPro footage, not just the 3rd person. A sponsor like Red Bull (who sponsors just about any crazy event you can come up with) or Monster could bring in a large amount of viewership that would otherwise not be there.

Hell, Redbull has their own online TV channel.

[rowdyb]

This kinda related to where this topic has gone now, so I'll bring it up again. I had an interview with a sports agent in LA who also represent Shaun White and Travis Pastrana. Names you probably recognize. In our conversation about shooting (they also represented some Olympic biathletes as well) and such here are some of the questions they asked me:

Is what you do in the Olympics?

Is it on television?

How many people in the US do this?

How many people in the world?

Is there a regular competition circuit?

How many print magazines devote coverage to this sport?

How many Youtube, Facebook and other social media followers do you have? The big names?

Can you sell a product branded with your name?

The rest of the questions were about me personally, so no pertinent to here and the idea of turning action pistol shooting into a TV sport people make money at doing.

These people wanted to deal with Red Bull/Monster level of sponsorship, media and athlete exposure. They didn't care about humanoid targets, major or minor scoring, how long a match takes or whatever. It was a numbers/eye balls/exposure game. I wanted to talk them about a deal worth tens of thousands of dollars and they wanted to deal in the millions. I don't think anyone in our org has the experience in sports, marketing and branding to guide us into this kind of leap.

Do you want this to stay amateur and something you do locally? Or do you want it to be something people can get paid real money to do. And not just a dozen, but hundreds of athletes. Because if you do, it will change. Look at the rise, and fall, of other alternative sports to see how it might go for us.

I'd love to get paid a living wage for my ability to shoot a pistol in competition Right now the only way for any of us to do that is to teach or to work for a large gun related company. I asked Bob Vogel at SHOT about his upcoming matches. He said anything other than National or World level events were not worth it as he made no money. His weekends were more fruitful to his pocket book teaching classes.

While I said I'd like to see action pistol shooting be the type of thing hundreds of us get paid to do, I'm not sure I'm ready for the paradigm shift that would bring to our sport.....

Edited February 17, 2016 by rowdyb

[BeerBaron]

I'm actually surprised there is such strong feeling about this. Does anyone really think the B zone is needed since it scores same as a C?

Does it really matter what the target is? they both reward accuracy with multiple scoring zones and in fact both are humanoid targets with the turtle just being a torso/centre of mass target.

I personally could care less between the metric or classic target.

Where does the paranoia about IPSC not allowing 'aggressive' movement or "running forwards" come from? I shoot under IPSC rules and have plenty of running down range, up range, sideways, wobbly bridges, weird props (starting in a porta-loo, starting in a car, climbing onto a scaffold, cooper tunnels etc), To be honest the main differences I've observed in lvl2 ipsc vs lvl2 USPSA are - obviously metric targets vs classic, the lack of texas stars and polish plate racks in ipsc, and the fact that ipsc matches follow a ratio of 2 long stages, 4 mediums and 6 shorts (for a typical 12 stage lvl 2, for higher stage numbers it's still stays close to that 6/4/2 ratio), uspsa tends to have higher round count and a higher ratio of longer stages.

Other than that they are basically the same.

Divisions are pretty much the same:

classic = single stack (in fact IPSC classic is more open as it allows bull barrels)

production = production (limited to 15 rounds in IPSC vs 10 in USPSA and IPSC restricts modifications a little further than USPSA)

standard = limited (basically the same)

open = open (the only real difference is mags are 170 in IPSC and 171.5 in USPSA)

I know bugger all about revolver... Production optic is on trial in USPSA and IPSC is looking at something similar too.

Both have 'all courses are freestyle' as one of the cornerstones of their rules.

both are mainly comstock (IPSC is all comstock these days)

Both have the same A/(B)C/D scoring.

both have major/minor in all divisions except production.

Powder factors are slightly different in major (5 PF points).

IPSC is perhaps more concerned about appearance in certain regions and some countries have funny laws that inhibit IPSC ( cannot shoot while moving in germany for example) but otherwise they are pretty much the same deal.

Be careful what you ask for. IPSC would radicalize stage design. The targets are first, then you can't run forward because that is aggressive.

If people want IPSC, move to Europe.

stage design between IPSC and USPSA is pretty close. USPSA tends towards higher rounds count stages and allows for some more 'uniqe' props and targets (stars etc). I'm not sure where you get the no running forward thing from.

Change the target or don't change it - it's hard to believe that is a big driver on whether the sport is "mainstream." Is it mainstream in countries that use the ipsc target? Popular on television, draw lots of spectators, outside sponsors, etc.?

I agree with this. Whilst I don't think changing target diminishes the sport in anyway I also agree it won't make it more palatable for the mainstream. In places that shoot IPSC it's just as much as an outcast as USPSA is in the US. It would take a lot more than target changes to bring a large piece of the population around.

I certainly don't think Max is some kind of heretic for suggesting there be some attempt to bring the sport to a wider audience. I do think it's a very difficult task though.

And I can hear the main stream media that some of you are just chomping at the bit to expose our sport to. "Today USPSA acknowledged that it will no longer be shooting at targets which are humanoid in appearance which is the norm in more other advanced societies ". Then ten years from now, "USPSA has banned the use of firearms that fire live ammunition in order to be more in step with other advanced societies. They will only be permitted to use air soft toy guns. And by a majority vote of IPSC members, USPSA will only permit shooting while stationary in order to appear less aggressive".

Trust me, someday......

I just don't see it. IPSC and USPSA split many years ago. there is still a P in IPSC and last I checked it stands for 'practical' which still the founding principal of the sport. Along with the motto DVC which ensures that anything called IPSC will attempt to measure speed, power and accuracy. IPSC did try to stop ben stoeger wearing shorts to a world shoot presentation dinner which some may argue is a little too PC, but they really haven't watered down the shooting or 'practical' aspects of the sport.

Countries banning stuff is one thing (ie no shooting on the move in germany, or local capacity limits on handguns - this includes many US states already). but I don't see the paranoia about IPSC trying to make the sport watered down.

BTW, I personally have no desire to expose the sport to mainstream media coverage. I agree it's unlikely it'll ever become a popular spectator sport without first turning it into something that is unrecognizable as ipsc/uspsa, that's not something I'd want.

for those who want to dress up like an 'operator' and use a 'duty' gun (as opposed to a 'competition' gun) and shoot behind cover etc they can shoot IDPA. USPSA has already distanced itself from that and is obviously much closer to IPSC in philosophy than it is to IDPA.

Anyone who thinks USPSA is anything other than a shooting game with 'some' practical heritage is kidding themselves. Anyone who thinks being a USPSA GM makes them a gunfighter is just not right.

I don't think necessarily Max was talking about totally changing everything to get TV $$ either. He was just throwing out some ideas about ways to make the sport appeal to a wider audience. That's all.

Someone mentioned people thinking mini pepper poppers are small children. misconceptions like that do harm us. yes it may be only in small ways but if we could remove a few of those misconceptions and put a better face on things as a whole isn't that a good thing?

I still don't see how changing the target would bugger up the shooting.

[Chills1994]

Steel challenge or head to head falling steel would make for some good tv.

Yes, it does, or rather it did back in 1994.

This was posted on page 1, but I will post it again:

https://youtu.be/SYl_iMYbIQg

That was televised on ESPN back in 1994.

I can't remember if there was a second Colt Pro Shoot Out in 1995, and if it ever got ESPN coverage.

[Chills1994]

Moto, the day anyone on this forum tries a back flip on a snowmobile I'll buy them a 6 pack. At MOST, I've brought MAYBE 20 people to action shooting matches in the past year. Yet, after seeing a snowmobile back flip happen on TV, you remembered it. That's the kind of exposure I want for this sport!

The difference is that after seeing action shooting at the X-Games almost any person can buy (borrow, run-what-they-brung) a Production rig for under a grand and go out and try a match. If you don't think we should be trying to reach millions of people, that's fine. I do, it's possible, and more than anything I want to see what happens when a JJ Watt or Michael Phelps level athlete starts shooting as a junior then after 10 years of disciplined training later shows up at Nationals. I bet they would look a lot like Max.

Steve, the way I got my "gamer" friend out shooting was showing him a video of a mag dump with an Open Division Saiga. Turns out he had always wanted to shoot a gun, and wouldn't you know it, I had plenty that he really liked to shoot.

I honestly think if you put on a level 1 match with either target not too many people would give a shit. I will still go and I think most people here would too. If you want to put on a televised match sponsored by Monster with GoPro having first person perspectives on every pro and an NFL style "Skycam" then maybe using the IPSC targets wouldn't be so bad.

I think it would be quite interesting to try and get a match like that to happen. Has anyone here seen RedBull Rampage? It is a freeride mountain bike event in the Utah desert. The best in the world all come there and throw down the craziest, most progressive riding on the planet. They have live feeds from the air and ground based cameras, and within moments of completing a run the GoPro footage is up and ready for review. I am certain we are no more than one generation away from live feed GoPros, but even without it we could easily have the footage playing before the stage was reset, and with the fancy drones out there we could have some really cool angles and video.

Pivothead glasses supposedly already have the ability to live feed or live stream with their SMART glasses:

http://www.pivothead.com/press-releases/2014/5/12/pivothead-wearable-imaging-to-demo-smart-eyewear-live-hd-broadcast-capabilities-at-nab

[motosapiens]

I think it would be quite interesting to try and get a match like that to happen. Has anyone here seen RedBull Rampage? It is a freeride mountain bike event in the Utah desert. The best in the world all come there and throw down the craziest, most progressive riding on the planet. They have live feeds from the air and ground based cameras, and within moments of completing a run the GoPro footage is up and ready for review. I am certain we are no more than one generation away from live feed GoPros, but even without it we could easily have the footage playing before the stage was reset, and with the fancy drones out there we could have some really cool angles and video.

Good analogy to red bull rampage. It makes total sense for some smart entrepeneur to create an action shooting event that would be extreme and tv ready. It makes no sense to try to convert uspsa into that kind of event.

[MilkMyDuds]

Who would be the audience (besides maybe 30% of the USPSA members and potentially some IDPA members, totaling less than 10k) when some entrepreneurs "create an action shooting event be extreme and TV ready"? Where is the money in that? If I were one of those entrepreneurs I won't be dump enough to invest money in it.

[Racinready300ex]

Didn't we just have the IPSC world shoot here in the states? Don't they use only the PC turtle targets? Was that on ESPN? Maybe we should see if we can get that type of exposure at IPSC nationals and if works then consider making changes to USPSA.

We will soon have 8 divisions, and now we want to change targets. At this rate in another year or two I wont even recognize USPSA.

[motosapiens]

Who would be the audience (besides maybe 30% of the USPSA members and potentially some IDPA members, totaling less than 10k) when some entrepreneurs "create an action shooting event be extreme and TV ready"?

imho there won't be an audience for it, but at least uspsa won't be screwed up in the process of discovering that.

[MilkMyDuds]

Who would be the audience (besides maybe 30% of the USPSA members and potentially some IDPA members, totaling less than 10k) when some entrepreneurs "create an action shooting event be extreme and TV ready"?

imho there won't be an audience for it, but at least uspsa won't be screwed up in the process of discovering that.

Exactly. It's a catch 22 - if you want to cater the audience who will make the sports a bit more "for profit" you will change your sport; but you don't know until you change your sport. I guess only if some uber rich comes along and do the above experiments knowing he/she will lose money, without touching how the sport works.

[Sarge]

I think the changes would have to be pretty drastic to make it enjoyable for most to watch.

I don't even like to watch my squad mates shoot a stage!

[motosapiens]

Who would be the audience (besides maybe 30% of the USPSA members and potentially some IDPA members, totaling less than 10k) when some entrepreneurs "create an action shooting event be extreme and TV ready"?

imho there won't be an audience for it, but at least uspsa won't be screwed up in the process of discovering that.

Exactly. It's a catch 22 - if you want to cater the audience who will make the sports a bit more "for profit" you will change your sport; but you don't know until you change your sport. I guess only if some uber rich comes along and do the above experiments knowing he/she will lose money, without touching how the sport works.

Precisely. Enduro and hare and hound are still there, and still awesome for participants and still such for TV, but there's some made for TV stuff like endurocross too. I have no problem with that.

I would have had a HUGE problem with someone wanting to make the national enduro series a bunch of laps on a 2 mile course with tv cameras everywhere.

[dmshozer1]

I've mentioned this before and the similarities are not perfect but the pro beach volleyball crowd went through exactly what we're discussing here back in th 1980s ... At that time there was a well established circuit of events with incrediable athletes but no money, no TV & no way to make a living ... Within 2 years of making an effort to get organized they had a major TV deal, money flowing in for prizes, etc. And unlike us, there we not already 25,000 people spending lots of money on teh sport for the sponsors to reap the rewards .... After all, what do you need to buy to play beach volleyball ...

Now when you win a event the 2 player team can split a check of up to $50,0000

It can be done but it's difficult ....

Ratings went way up when the women started to wear thongs!

[teros135]

What about those child sized metal targets we shoot at?

We don't have any child targets (sized or in appearance).

(Is this a troll from the anti-2nd Amendment lobby?)

[Sarge]

What about those child sized metal targets we shoot at?

We don't have any child targets (sized or in appearance).

(Is this a troll from the anti-2nd Amendment lobby?)

I have heard the occasional reference to mini poppers resembling children when mixed with daddy and mommy poppers.