1911 Provisional Division

[Gary Stevens]

It is stated in the posted rules and mission statement. 10-12 percent of the activities actually offering the provisional division. For instance if the Nationals offered the provisional division, and the total attendance was 300 people, then 30-36 shooters in the provisional division would be considered satisfactory.

[titandriver]

Thanks Gary! That's what I get for not reading the rules & mission statement. Sounds fair to me.

[Mistral404]

Gary,

Thanks for doing all this work. I know you got a lot responses. Some not as positive as it could be. But nonetheless you kept at it. I hope to participate in the SS division. Again Thanks!

[Duane Thomas]

Not sure why this repeated mention of leather holsters. Kydex is also allowd.

[Wakal]

It is stated in the posted rules and mission statement. 10-12 percent of the activities actually offering the provisional division. For instance if the Nationals offered the provisional division, and the total attendance was 300 people, then 30-36 shooters in the provisional division would be considered satisfactory.

Excellent. So, by that logic then we should kill Revolver? After all, in the 2004 Nationals there were only 17 wheelgun shooters out of 497... And look, same match, 43 Limited-10 shooters out of 497 is also less than ten percent; lets kill Limited-10 too. Preach on, Brother Gary!

This is going to fragment the competition base some more, ensuring that everyone gets a prize no matter how badly they shoot. They can just Division-shop around one more Division... Meanwhile, the 3-Gun rules are still broken and poor Bruce Gary can't get enough support on the BOD to fix it, but the BOD can set this "provisional" single stack sub-game up to benefit a handful of folks. Interesting.

I can see Open, Limited, and Production. I'll back Limited-10 so the single-stack guys and the people living in Socialist states don't get their feeling hurt, but another Limited-10 ("Limited-8/10 SS?")? Hmmm...I like shooting J-frames but they are just not competitive against those darn full-underlug six-shot moon-clip revolvers. I think I'll get elected to the Board and then push Limited-5/Revolver, ask for 'input,' and then announce "my vision" to the world as a fait accompli...

Seems a bit strange to me, but what do I know? I'm just a simple caveman match director (Texas State 3-Gun, coming up 21-22 May, eight slots left, act fast ).

Alex

[Duane Thomas]

Meanwhile, the 3-Gun rules are still broken and poor Bruce Gary can't get enough support on the BOD to fix it, but the BOD can set this "provisional" single stack sub-game up to benefit a handful of folks. Interesting.

A "handful" of folks? Time will tell. I think you might be surprised how many people will want to shoot a singlestack 1911 against competition armed only with the same technology.

Hmmm...I like shooting J-frames but they are just not competitive against those darn full-underlug six-shot moon-clip revolvers.

The difference is that J-frames aren't the singlestack 1911 auto pistol, a gun built in the hundreds of thousands (millions?), produced today by double-digit number of manufacturers, that are so popular an entire cottage industy of modifications and after-market parts have grown up around them. They don't have the popularity, the mystique.

I think I'll get elected to the Board and then push Limited-5/Revolver, ask for 'input,' and then announce "my vision" to the world as a fait accompli...

Let's be fair. Gary did ask for input. Now that he's done the work, he's announcing it as a fait accompli. That does kinda happen after the proposal has been approved.

[Wakal]

Duane...he did ask for input...but did you catch this line?

...with all due respect, the reason we don't do all the things you and others suggest is because this was my project and I crafted it to achieve specific goals. I have been very open about my reasons goals and objectives. They are even in print. What it is, it is.

Sounds like one man's quest to me. However, I like Gary's idea that if there isn't 10-12 percent buy-in, that shows lack of interest. According to his reasoning, lets kill revolver and L-10 due to lack of interest at the 2004 Nationals.

And now down to brass tacks...as others in this thread have already commented, this is another way to fragment the shooting sport in an attempt to make sure that "everyone gets a prize." Even folks using double-stack 6.25" barrel Unobtainium-framed full-dustcover 9mm with green Shok-Buffs, or J-Frame snubbies

Perhaps we should spend more time pushing our regular (Open/Limited/Limited-10/Production/Revolver) matches to ALL shooters, and less time attempting to cater to a sub-set by carving out "special" (protected) rules for a few.

Alex

[Gary Stevens]

Well as to the BOD not helping Bruce fix the multi-gun rules I'll say this. I think I know at least as much and perhaps just a bit more than you do about what goes on with the BOD. I am not happy with the speed the BOD moves on many things, but I am just a single member and can only accomplish so much. Having said that, if you can get Bruce Gary to state what you have said on this forum, I'll resign. If you can't then perhaps you owe a few of us an apology who are trying as hard as we can do move things along.

[shred]

So what keeps a Caspian widebody out of this division? Metal frame, fits the box.

Also looks like bull barrels are OK, but coned and flanged are not?

[Wakal]

I'll answer your point if you answer the rest of mine...

My sources inside the Board tell me that several of the 3-Gun shooting Board members are waging a quiet little war against Board members that have NO interest in 3-Gun (members who, frankly, the idea of having two (or GASP, three) pieces of sporting equipment in play at the same time frightens them down to their little knickers). Those BOD members are dragging their feet, hoping 3-Gun goes away.

Now that I answered your point...perhaps you would like to comment on the "my project and I crafted it to achieve specific goals" statement, and perhaps my full and total agreement with your "10-12 percent" statement when applied to other (Limited-10 and Revolver) Divisions at the 2004 Nationals?

And...as Shred asked, why isn't a Caspian wide-body legal? For that matter, I have three P14 that are also metal-framed...although I'd drag out my favorite CDP-legal Wilson CQB for this "Limited 8/10 SS" game

Yours,

Alex

[Schutzenmeister]

Someone tries to do something positive, and this is how he's greeted ... Damnation. It's no wonder so few are willing to put forth any effort to improve this organization.

Gary ... Whether this venture succeeds or fails, I thank you for your time and effort. The rest of you can ... damn, they'll probably pull the post if I keep typing. I'll leave it to your imaginations ... if you have any.

[D.Hayden]

If you don't like it, dont shoot it. If you're not going to shoot it, what do you care?

Good job Gary.

I see a lock on this topic in the near future...

[Gary Stevens]

Unfortunately, I am not allowed to discuss many things that go on in BOD meetings. It is not my choice, it is the rule, and has caused one member to be expelled for doing so.

I can say this though, I think there are differences on 3-gun as opposed to multi-gun. Some of this is based on regionality. I love both the 3 gun and multi-gun matches. My area trys to do everything we can to promote both concepts. I don't know anybody that wants multi-gun to go away. Crafting rules that apply across an entire sport though, such as ours, as opposed to a specific single event is a daunting task. That is about all I am allowed to say.

For the 449th time this venture is about drtawing the 1911 market into USPSA in the form of advertising, sponsorship, and yes even prizes for our shooters. I see the smiles on their faces and I have always thought they enjoyed getting them. It has nothing to do with protecting the 1911 or trying to get everyone a prize. This like everything else is about money. Money for USPSA and money for our state/sectional/and other matches.

As to the Caspian wide body, I assume that is a double column magazine and if you read the mission statement, it states the idea is crafted around the gun John Browning designed with certain upgrades, not incluing double column magazines.

[Nik Habicht]

It does make for some interesting choices now doesn't it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually it makes for no choice. Most production shooters plan on shooting groups of eight when there's steel or moving targets involved. A two round capacity advantage between reloads allows for makeup shots. If it's an all paper stage, production shooters have been known to plan to the tens. I think it's a no-brainer --- the extra points don't make up for not having to do the extra reloads....

I predict that's going to create problems in recruiting IDPA CDP shooters.....

.....but I could be wrong. As long as the Mid-Atlantic Section approves trying the Division, and as long as there's EZWinscore support, Central Jersey Rifle and Pistol Club will make the division available.....

[Jake Di Vita]

If I could get 8 + 1, I would definetely shoot major.

[Chuck D]

I was dead set against this in the beginning BUT it has captured my attention. Instead of nit-picking the rules to death, log on to some of the major manufacturers websites and look at what they offer for SS 1911's

Smith and Wesson went from offering no 1911's to over 12 different variations of production models and Performance Center guns. I won't bother to mention Springfield, Kimber, etc,etc,etc....

USPSA if they market this thing right stands a better than average chance at tapping the sponsorship well on this one.

Keep a stiff upper lip Gary. If you can convince me...you can convince anyone.

[AikiDale]

If I could get 8 + 1, I would definetely shoot major.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jake,

If you would just slow down to Warp 7 you could get all A's and not need the extra Major points....

[shred]

As to the Caspian wide body, I assume that is a double column magazine and if you read the mission statement, it states the idea is crafted around the gun John Browning designed with certain upgrades, not incluing double column magazines.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not really in .45 ACP (more of a column-and-a-half) and the Wilson thing is even closer to 'single-stack'. I agree they aren't in the spirit of the mission statement, but we all know if it's not written down, it's not a rule in USPSA. Anyway, I'm not trying to bash the division, just trying to settle some of the issues before they become issues.

I'm a little concerned about the required mission count and lack of classifier scores. The mission count will probably push clubs to put shooters into one of the more traditional divisions and the lack of classifier scores could be a problem; to wit:

Newbie shows up with a 1911, shoots classifiers for six months and is still a 'U'. Goes to a big match and gets nothing since the MD doesn't recognize U's. Clever sandbagger moves to 1911-division prior to moving up in L-10 or Limited and remains a 'C' (the C is for 'C-sandbag) forever.

[XRe]

So what keeps a Caspian widebody out of this division?  Metal frame, fits the box.

Also looks like bull barrels are OK, but coned and flanged are not?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From "Special Conditions" of the new Appendix, as sent to me by Gary:

16. Only 1911 production type pistols. Must be available to the general public and have their basis in the original 1911 service pistol. Pistols made from components that duplicate the factory originals are acceptable. Factory upgrades such as external extractors, firing pin blocks and other factory installed safety features are permitted.

The intent is pretty clear to me - though it might help to specifically say "Only 1911 single stack production type pistols" instead...

According to Gary, via email, "Coned barrels" includes bull barrels for the purpose of this rule. It could have read "Bushing barrels only, unless shooting 4.2" length barrel or shorter" and meant the same thing.

[alma]

I can see Open, Limited, and Production.  I'll back Limited-10 so the single-stack guys and the people living in Socialist states don't get their feeling hurt, but another Limited-10 ("Limited-8/10 SS?")?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Correct me if I am wrong but this seems like it will be a replacement for Limited 10 division. That makes a lot of sense because whenever my club has a L10 match everyone just shots his or her S_Is loaded with 10 rounds instead of 18. There seems to be no incentive to shoot a genuine SS 1911 even in L10 division. I love the 1911 but if I were to get a gun to be competitive in L10 right now it would be a 2011. This seems like a great idea and I applaud USPSA for taking steps in this direction. Long live the SS 1911!

With a two round capacity difference, it would be silly not to shoot minor.  If I can find some reliable ten round 9mm mags, I may just dust off my Springfield Armory 9mm 1911 next year........

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I like having a true tradeoff between minor and major by giving minor +2 rounds. This would make me more likely to buy a 9mm 1911. At the same time, allowing 10 rounds in a 9mm gun vs 8 in .45 is allowed at the Single Stack Classic. Very few people seemed to trade Major scoring in for Minor +2 rounds.

http://www.1911society.org/overall05.txt

[Gary Stevens]

I'm glad to see the discussion has returned to the nuts and bolts of the provisional division. I have also noticed that those who win the Single Stack Classic all shoot major power factor. Having shot this match myself, almost all of the stages were 8 shot positions, at least the years I have shot it. What this does is put accuracy back into the game, as well as speed and power.

Chuck, when I read your post, I got misty eyed. Having gone back and forth with you so much over so many things, I think at this point I could solve the time-space probem in about a half hour

[John Baier]

[

No L10 Say it ain't so. I need L10 for the major hit factor. One because it lot easier to see a 45 hole than a 9mm and second I really need those 2 extra rounds

That being said, Gary keep up the great work!

[Carlos]

I have not read the specific rules & frankly, I don't need to read them all to know I REALLY LIKE THIS NEW DIVISION!

Good work Gary. I will try to make this happen at the local match I run (www.shootersparadise.com). Can you PM any info on this division & EZWinScore?

Now that I have publicly voiced support for the division, will have to go back & read those rules in detail. Regards,

D.

[Jim Norman]

Gary,

I too will not stand in the way of the division. Scoring is not a problem. Generally there are few if any Rev shooters at our club. If there are none, I will simply replace Rev with SS and alter the output files to reflect the change. For purposes of class, I understand that the shooters highest classification should be used. For turning in a classifier, I will ask the shooters what allowable division they wish their classifer sent in as. On the occasion where all 5 divisions are already represented, it will present more of a problem since we publish overall scores. The individual divisions are not a problem, simply remove one group of shooters from the match, run the report for the substitute division, then resinert the origianl division and move the SS guys over tot he classifer division for submission to HQ.

As I said, the only problem occurs withthe overalls and that is simply a manual change by shooter inthe output files.

It all depends upon whether the shooters in our Section/Area/Club want the division.

Jim

[Vlad]

I've said this before and I still believe it: This is a bad idea. Sorry Gary, I know its your baby and you obvioulsy care about it. I can admire that. But a devision dedicated to a SINGLE pistol design is a terrible idea. I would have been less opposed to a single stack division where other toys like SIG220 could have participated. That would have actually made sense filling a void in the current divion line up. I have no trouble with the idea of a division for slim carry guns with "low" capacity in major calibers.

I shoot L10 with a Springer Milspec. I'll keep on shooting L10 with it, when I'm not shooting production even if the new division is available in my area. Why would I shoot against "better" guns and not make use of the new divison? Because I think it should die. This isnt a case of " trying different things" its a case of trying the same old things after they have been outclassed by other gear (or at least perceived to have been outclassed). It is protectionism.

Further, the exclusion of cone barrel and light rails makes no sense either. More and more companies offer models incorporating those changes. Its true that the world does evolve and that we should try new things. But then lets actually try those new things. The TRP Operator has the heaviest front you will ever see on a single stack. Yes it has less nose flip but it also slows down transitions. It looks cool as hell, but I'm not sure it makes that much of a difference. How can we say we are trying new things if we mandate that the division doesnt allow for anything which wasnt available 20 years ago? It looks to me more like a place designed for people who put down $3000 on a hand made gun and who want a reason to take it out of the safe.

Please understand that this is not meant to be a personl attack, I greatly respect Gary and the effort he put into it. I just think it is effort aimed in the wrong direction.