1911 Provisional Division

[tewlman]

thanks for working to improve our sport Gary, i am with you all the way! to all the nay-sayers, just don't shoot it and let the people that want it have fun with it.

i can't say i'd shoot it alot but i know my ss needs the dust blow off it (and the powder residue from the last match i shot it in)

i hope the industry gets behind this and give plenty of support (and money), however it does negate the nead for l10 which came about only as a fix for the clinton ban that no longer is in effect. maybe at the endof the 3 year trial you should drop the division with the lowest head count.

keep up the good work

Steve

[XRe]

Gary,

Are bull barrels ok to use?

And does IDPA allow bull barrels for the 9mm 1911s or is it bushing only?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can anyone answer this?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bull barrels are not OK in SSD (they are "coned" barrels). IDPA appears to allow cone/bull barrels in ESP (9mm SA autos fit here) for pistols w/ barrels shorter than 4.2" (Commander or shorter). Same thing for CDP ("major" PF 1911s fit here). In other words, SSD has the same rules as SSC and IDPA re: the use of bull/cone barrels.

[Chuck D]

Let you in on a little secret Steve...the AWB ban is STILL in effect in a number of States. SS1911 does NOT negate the need for L10. SS1911 isn't and never was designed to be a replacement for L10.

Both Divisions should co-exist and both Divisions should draw significant numbers of shooters. We should be pushing for success in EVERY Division.

[SteveZ]

Let you in on a little secret Steve...the AWB ban is STILL in effect in a number of States. SS1911 does NOT negate the need for L10. SS1911 isn't and never was designed to be a replacement for L10. 

Hi Chuck...yeah I know that L10 is all about the AWB. My post was really out of place...I noted the amount of promotion that the USPSA was going to put toward SSD and have heard comments (or concerns) regarding the lack of participation in L10 (especially at national or area matches)...so I was hoping to find out what might be happening under the hood to resolve that issue.

Realizing that my post was really out of context....I started a separate thread to ask the question.

[tewlman]

chuck my response was more just stiring the pot. i realize that some people need to move to more gun friendly states

i am just perplexed at the negativity that this has recieved. sometimes people are too quick to nay-say something rather than enbrace it and see what happens. there are so many companies that might get on board with this that you can't help but hope that it is a hit. had this come along years ago idpa may not ever have started? i look forward to seeing where it goes.

[MikeFoley]

I totally agree with Tewlman's last post.

[EricW]

Clearly someone already knew about my cheater PC-built 4506 and had to exclude it from the ONLY division in USPSA where it would be competitive.

SS only w/8 rounds max. division = smart marketing move

1911 only =

I like 1911's well enough, but the John Moses Browning shrine-building has gone just a little too far with this one.

[XRe]

I like 1911's well enough, but the John Moses Browning shrine-building has gone just a little too far with this one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personally, I don't see why a Sig P220 or your 4506 shouldn't be allowed to play in this division, eventually. Limiting it to 1911 initially allowed Gary to pull his rules from existing games out there, though, with little modification. Adding in other platforms means a little more complication in the rules - I'd highlight this, though, as a desirable change if the division were to be adopted long term....

[alma]

I like 1911's well enough, but the John Moses Browning shrine-building has gone just a little too far with this one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personally, I don't see why a Sig P220 or your 4506 shouldn't be allowed to play in this division, eventually. Limiting it to 1911 initially allowed Gary to pull his rules from existing games out there, though, with little modification. Adding in other platforms means a little more complication in the rules - I'd highlight this, though, as a desirable change if the division were to be adopted long term....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with the idea that any non-polymer (my 10 round 9mm Glock mags are single stack) single stack gun should be ok to shoot this division. I don't see how anyone with a Ruger .45 single stack would have an advantage.

However the wheels are already set in motion and I am for defining a division and sticking with it.

[XRe]

However the wheels are already set in motion and I am for defining a division and sticking with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree - I'm just saying that, before it's made a permanent division (if it passes acceptance criteria), it would be good to reevaluate for these sorts of things....

[pskys2]

Eliminate Limited 10 (fyi I've shot L10 exclusively for the past several years though I've graduated, hmm gravitated, to Revolver now).

AND

Change Production to:

Allow 1911's and other Single Action firearms.

Minimum Trigger Pull 4# (helps equalize popular real world self defense recommended Single Action trigger pull and slicked up Double Action and Safe Action pulls).

8 round limit in pistol. not magazine if claiming Major (8 round Revo ok, factory 1911 7 round w/1 in chamber ok, btw I've always hated the way a 1911 looks with a 10 round stick, though I used them religiously).

10 round limit if claiming Minor.

Allow .357 Mag/.38 Super as Major.

Iron Sights

Limit Modifications as per Production.

Use Production Holster rules with no restriction on mag/speedloader/clip pouch

placement.

Is this workable? It would shorten the list of divisions, keep production "in the spirit?" Add more work to the RO's (checking trigger pulls, counting rounds, etc...), make less work for Stats (fewer Divisions).

Or would it be better to leave it all alone?

Open - Hair on Fire with Optics

Limited - Balls to the Walls with Iron Sights

Production - What a factory will produce

Revolver - The poor Stepchild with no place to go (but it's still fun)

Sometimes it's good to throw Fertilizer in the pasture and see what grows.

Ohhh! I'm getting a headache, gotta go home and get a whiff of gunsmoke to clear the head.

Dave

[TBF]

Just tell me where, and I and my sinlglestack 1911 45 ACP major will be there.

L10 or L8 / L7 SSlite SS1911 or whatever.

I am absolutely NOT against change.

But, frequent change in rules and stuff is a real turnoff for me personally.

Around here ( KC ) SS1911's are the dominating force in L10.

Would it be a major deal to just exclude doublestack guns from the L10 division ?

Then again look at what I just said about rules changes above ........

I dunno nuthin cept I wanna shoot !

Travis F.

[ctgun]

This sounds like a great idea to get new people and sponsorships into our sport. Although I wish that I could shoot my Sig220 here because there isn't a 10 round mag for it that is worth a damn.

[rmills]

Gary:

Great job in creating the single stack provisional division concept! We eagerly await the creation of the Glock provisional divison!

[et45]

I think that is called GSSF

[Duane Thomas]

Duane are you on the BoD or how were you involved in setting up "The 1911 Provisional Division"?

Nope. I just think it's a great idea - a return to the roots of the sport, what made IPSC great to start with. Simple guns and simple gear, a great way to bring new shooters into the sport, as well as mucho factory sponsorship.

[Duane Thomas]

Bull barrels are not OK in SSD (they are "coned" barrels). IDPA appears to allow cone/bull barrels in ESP (9mm SA autos fit here) for pistols w/ barrels shorter than 4.2" (Commander or shorter). Same thing for CDP ("major" PF 1911s fit here). In other words, SSD has the same rules as SSC and IDPA re: the use of bull/cone barrels.

God, gotta love all those acronyms. I feel like I'm back in the Army.

[Duane Thomas]

Would it be a major deal to just exclude doublestack guns from the L10 division ?

I believe it would. I can hear the whining now, "I have to buy a new gun to compete in L10, this is sooooo unfair!" Better just to leave L10 to the doublestack guys and give singlestackers their own division. That way the guys who want to run their doublestacks in L10 can still play. And everyone's happy. Right?

[Wakal]

...and everyone's happy...except the Match Directors who now have to buy ANOTHER set of trophies in the "I shoot a BLUE gun so I win a BLUE trophy" party held for folks without the intestinal fortitude to play heads-up with everyone else in the existing 10-round single-action Division.

I'm still waiting on an answer to my earlier question about measuring "success" for this "personal vision" of a Limited 8/10 1911/SS-Only Division. Ten to twelve percent participation at the Nationals would be considered "success" of a Division, sayith the BOD member, but inferred therein is that less than ten to twelve percent would be considered failure most dire.

I asked if that 10-12 percent figure given by the BOD member was accurate (and I don't doubt that it was), then we should then abolish L10 and Revolver, since those two Divisions garnered only 9 percent and 3 percent (respectively) at the 2004 Nationals.

No response.

I just want to follow the guidance given in an accurate fashion! Should we follow the BOD member's policy and abolish L10 and Revolver as "unsuccessful" using the criteria established and published by that BOD member in this very thread? I just want to follow the rules...

Alex

[XRe]

God, gotta love all those acronyms. I feel like I'm back in the Army. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can throw more at you if you want

[XRe]

sigh...

...and everyone's happy...except the Match Directors who now have to buy ANOTHER set of trophies in the "I shoot a BLUE gun so I win a BLUE trophy" party held for folks without the intestinal fortitude to play heads-up with everyone else in the existing 10-round single-action Division.

So, who ever said that you *HAVE* to host this division?????????? I don't see anyone twisting your arm into it???

I'm still waiting on an answer to my earlier question about measuring "success" for this "personal vision" of a Limited 8/10 1911/SS-Only Division.  Ten to twelve percent participation at the Nationals would be considered "success" of a Division, sayith the BOD member, but inferred therein is that less than ten to twelve percent would be considered failure most dire.

I think you've gotten an answer on this - you seem to still be pushing this because you apparently have an agenda to discredit the BOD for their slow (or perhaps lack of) progress on approving 3-gun rules that you'll be happy with.

The success criteria for SINGLE STACK DIVISION are laid out in the documentation that Gary has provided, in the stuff posted above, and in your own post. It's a high bar to pass. It in no way shape or form makes any bit of difference to L10 or Revolver. If you'd just stop and think about it for a minute, and realize what it means, it might make a little more sense to you - it implies that there is an expected *large* influx of shooters to USPSA to shoot this new division and make it successful. Adoption of the new division as an official part of USPSA is moot if that influx never happens. Correct me if I'm wrong on this, Gary, please. If it doesn't prove wildly successful, it won't happen...

I asked if that 10-12 percent figure given by the BOD member was accurate (and I don't doubt that it was), then we should then abolish L10 and Revolver, since those two Divisions garnered only 9 percent and 3 percent (respectively) at the 2004 Nationals.

No response.

Frankly, I think you're just being nasty with that, and shouldn't expect a response. The criteria set for the establishment of this new PROVISIONAL division have nothing to do with assessing the success of the existing divisions. In fact, the high bar that is set supports your argument that this would burdensome - if there's not a large growth to the game, and to that division - larger than perhaps two current divisions combined - it won't be shoved down the throat of every match director out there. It's your choice if you want to support it until then.

I just want to follow the guidance given in an accurate fashion!  Should we follow the BOD member's policy and abolish L10 and Revolver as "unsuccessful" using the criteria established and published by that BOD member in this very thread?  I just want to follow the rules...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you want to assess the success of those two divisions, I'd suggest starting by recognizing that these are existing competitive divisions, and their removal is not a simple thing. Perhaps even use the facilities provided on this web forum and start (gasp) a poll. You should also applaud the fact that the BOD has set a very high mark to meet to consider this new division as successful, and not judge existing divisions by the same stick. Consider this - if you were to judge the success of 3-gun in USPSA based on membership participation, do you think it would be any more successful than these divisions you're now seeking to malign??? I frankly can't imagine that it would be.... but does that mean we should also just *stop* pursuing viable 3-gun rules, and stop shooting 3-gun in USPSA altogether????

You're beating a dead, decaying horse, here, Alex. Let it go.

Apologies to the mods, and the other forum members - I'm just getting tired of reading this stuff....

[Hardball]

In my opinion the 1911 Provisional Division can be a substantial addition to the sport.

Several things drive this in me, but I will stick to the simple fact that there are those who choose to shoot what they carry.

Competitiveness in the sport has driven the costs almost like a NASCAR race. To be on the latest and greatest edge of competition these days requires one to throw $3k into the ring on equipment. With the new provisional division, a $400-$500 stock 1911 can be in the game, so to speak, and not have any real negatives. This opens up several avenues into raising membership in USPSA, not the least of which are the folks who currently feel that their only choice is to shoot IDPA. With the current situation within IDPA, this will prove to those shooters that we not only care about their presence and input, but we are willing to set them aside room to come and grow with us. Not to mention the father of three (no reference to myself or anything... ) who wants to get his son(s) into the sport but can't afford to shell out the $9k that it would take for three race guns.

With that said, I believe that there are also companies out there who would love to get involved with IPSC/USPSA but have found it hard to do because they aren't on "the competitive edge" with their products. There are 1911 manufacturers out there who should prove to be valuable resources to freshening the sponsorships, as well as helping control the costs of the sport. Quite frankly, as much as it pains me to say this, the costs have gone almost out of control as far as hardware goes these days. I feel that a bit of competition amongst the manufacturers might just help keep things from getting even worse as the years go by.

There is also the nostalgic point of view. The comments about "the tired John Browning" argument just don't hold water. There are very few designs that have stood the test of time that John Browning's design has. For some, that is justification enough to stick with the tried and true. As with cars, there are those who appreciate the classics, and those who prefer the latest and greatest equipment. If you wish to race F1, then please do, and I hope that it makes you happy. But please bear in mind that your interests do not dictate how others feel. There are still those who prefer to race gocarts.

All in all, instead of complaining about "another division" we should be happy that the BOD is actually paying attention enough to the structure of the sport to try and include everyone's interests, whether or not everyone is happy with it. Point blank, if you like the 1911 Provisional Division, then shoot in it, if not, then shoot Open, Limited, L10, Production, or Revolver. Remember, these divisions were made in an effort to keep the membership happy and give options to the "gear race".

If you don't agree with me, well, so be it. We can agree to disagree. In the mean time, just shoot. Oh, and by the way Wakal, the match directors that aren't happy with the division don't have to host it. There are those like the Florida Single Stack Classic that will handle that for them.

Keep your ears and eyes open folks, FLSSC might just happen soon...

[Wakal]

Don't have to host it yet...

Big word, there, "yet." Once this becomes another Division, it will be.

USPSA/IPSC not garnering sponsorship...whose fault is that? The slap in Smith and Wesson's face over the TSW cartridge? Perhaps the slapdown of the Smith and Wesson AND Taurus 7 and 8 shot revolvers? Maybe the slapdown of Springfield's XD? How about the CZ P01?

Seems like the manufacturers develop sporting equipment FOR US, and we (embodied by the BOD) set up rules to block it. No wonder S&W isn't interested in playing with us (v. ICORE, for example) any more.

My point, despite folks "assigning" me points in the previous few posts, is that there ALREADY IS an existing Division where oldtech is welcome, where folks without those 19 round $20 Glock magazines are welcome, where folks from Socialist Pseudo-American States (that don't recognize the Second Amendment) can play without fear of having to have the high-dollar gee-whiz gizmos to be competitive.

It is called LIMITED 10, and is already here.

IMO, we (as USPSA) missed our chance to lure folks over to the best shooting sport on the planet when Bill Wilson shot himself (so to speak) in the foot by releasing his "new" rulebook and thus alienating a large chunk of IDPA's fan base. Trying to get those CDP folks to come play with a 'special' Division pandering to their fears of inadequacy is, frankly, insulting. Single stacks are perfectly capable guns in their own right, and are (as evidenced by all the folks from all over the Nation remarking...in this thread...about all the locals running SS in L10) quite legal for Limited 10 already, where capacity isn't an issue. Besides...we want the pissed-off revolver shooters (especially those with 5" guns ); we want the ESP folks with the trick 10-round Glocks, and we want the Stock Service guys too. We want everyone to come try our game!

This whole effort is narrowly directed at single stack CDP types and single stack affcionados while cloaked in an attempt to "interest" 1911 sponsors. Hmmm...except that the new uberpimpy bling-guns shown in all the splashy ads are "light rails" and some are even "bushingless barrels", and those can't play in this "vision" of 1911 perfection... As a manufacturer, I'd look at USPSA's history and think "oh, here we go again."

And as a businessman myself, I think I'll start casting aluminum STI single stack grip adaptors (since a metal single stack is just ducky, but plastic...isn't...according to the (provisional) rules) and selling them at cost. That way folks who want to play single stack games can do it with a (metal grip) STI I'll have to ask Dave for permission the next time I'm chatting with him

Was my tongue-in-cheek request for "Revolver Limited 5/Snubby" provisional division all that far off the mark?

Alex

[Jim Norman]

I am not sure how the rest of the worls works, but in the Mid-Atlantic Section we have set match fees for all clubs and set awards schedules.

Division Winner: $ 30.00 (5 in division)

Class Winner: $ 20.00 (3 shooters in class)

Second Place: $ 12.00 (8 shooters in class)

Third Place: $ 8.00 (15 shooters in class)

So, unless there are 5 shooters in the SS Division you don't have a division winner, and you have to have at least three to pay a class. Last month with 63 shooters we have 10 winners and most if not all selected cash.

Having another trophy or prize is the least of my concerns.

While there are several issues I have withthe division, this is not one f them. I'd at teh very least allow any 1911 SINGLE STACK variant, including those with light rails and S*I makes a TRUE SingleStack, I'd allow that too. The idea is to get people into the sport and to get them shooting. Are there other SS guns with SA triggers? If so, then they should also be allowed, but that is to be decided later. As it currently stands: If they come we will build it.

Jim Norman

[XRe]

S*I makes a TRUE SingleStack,  I'd allow that too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Trojans in 5" factory standard config already qualify. The SV SS 5" guns pictured in their catalog are build w/ a bull barrel, and thus don't qualify - but I'd imagine they'll build one w/ a bushing barrel for you that will.