Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Should USPSA eliminate Virgina Count?


Sould USPSA Eliminate Virginia Count?  

158 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, ChuckS said:

About Balance :rolleyes::

"1.1.3 Balance – Accuracy, Power and Speed are equivalent elements of USPSA shooting, and are expressed in the Latin words “Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas” (“DVC”). A properly balanced course of fire will depend largely upon the nature of the challenges presented therein, however, courses must be designed, and USPSA matches must be conducted in such a way, as to evaluate these elements equally."

Understood and agree. 

But, I make the Vis decision before the match starts when I sign up and declare major or minor.  After that all I can influence is my speed and accuracy with my chosen power factor.  So, for me, VC is a valid test of my shooting skills and I believe a decently designed VC stage does satisfy the DVC balance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Virginia Count has its place in a match... and the poll suggests that most (87%) of poll participants agree with this assessment.  A component of VC scoring that might warrant consideration for change is the miss penalty.  Penalize extra shots and penalize extra hits... but don't penalize a miss!  The penalty for a miss might be that you simply don't get any points added to your score for that shot.

Think "Par shots" along the line of "Par" Time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

VC allows for increased round count which is always liked by shooters by using multiple strings.

VC allows for stages that include accuracy with an element of speed.

It is not VC that is the problem, IMO, but the design of reasonable stages that use VC scoring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

YES YES YES... KILL IT WITH FIRE !  :devil:

VC is dumb. What conceivable scenario would have you wanting to limit the number of shots you fired, knowing that you had not yet neutralized the target? Ammo should be limited only by how much you have on the belt. I don't agree with everything IPSC does, but this is one area of the rules they got right.

I suspect VC lives on in USPSA only because "invented here" and "Murica".  :D

Edited by StealthyBlagga
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the "Keep VC" camp. There's one club that I shoot at that is really new and doesn't have a ton of bays to setup a bunch of field courses. They instead have 3-4 field courses and then put a classifier and a VC/Standards stage in the smallest bay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StealthyBlagga said:

YES YES YES... KILL IT WITH FIRE !  :devil:

VC is dumb. What conceivable scenario would have you wanting to limit the number of shots you fired, knowing that you had not yet neutralized the target? Ammo should be limited only by how much you have on the belt. I don't agree with everything IPSC does, but this is one area of the rules they got right.

I suspect VC lives on in USPSA only because "invented here" and "Murica".  :D

USPSA isn't really that "practical".  If we were, we'd be a lot more cautious.  Practical-type skills, yes, but our targets aren't shooting back.  

Edited by teros135
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, teros135 said:

USPSA isn't really that "practical".  If we were, we'd be a lot more cautious.  Practical-type skills, yes, but our targets aren't shooting back.  

I'm glad of that !

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2016 at 1:17 PM, ChuckS said:

About Balance :rolleyes::

"1.1.3 Balance – Accuracy, Power and Speed are equivalent elements of USPSA shooting, and are expressed in the Latin words “Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas” (“DVC”). A properly balanced course of fire will depend largely upon the nature of the challenges presented therein, however, courses must be designed, and USPSA matches must be conducted in such a way, as to evaluate these elements equally."

 

The match has to be conducted in a way to evaluate them equally. That doesn't every individual stage does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AWLAZS said:

I am not a fan. I hate leaving a called miss on a target. 

Perhaps that's one of the values of VC.  It makes us accountable to ourselves for every shot, at least on the VC stage. 

"Can you count" (06-03) is another example of accountability.  If you can't count (lose focus) and fire more or less shots, you get to be responsible and can't say "but I MEANT to shoot only five!" and get a reshoot.  (I recently shot it at high B but forgot to turn my camera on, so I missed the opportunity to review my good performance.  Can't get a reshoot (camera) there, but at least I have the memory.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, StealthyBlagga said:

...

VC is dumb. What conceivable scenario would have you wanting to limit the number of shots you fired, knowing that you had not yet neutralized the target? ...

Yes, getting used to VC could get one "killed in the streets" :o

USPSA is not tactical firearms training. Heck, even though it purports to be, neither is IDPA.

Edited by tanks
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, teros135 said:

Perhaps that's one of the values of VC.  It makes us accountable to ourselves for every shot, at least on the VC stage. 

"Can you count" (06-03) is another example of accountability.  If you can't count (lose focus) and fire more or less shots, you get to be responsible and can't say "but I MEANT to shoot only five!" and get a reshoot.  (I recently shot it at high B but forgot to turn my camera on, so I missed the opportunity to review my good performance.  Can't get a reshoot (camera) there, but at least I have the memory.)

If you can shoot 6 shots faster then 5 go for it. Otherwise you just ate some time.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, teros135 said:

USPSA isn't really that "practical".  If we were, we'd be a lot more cautious.  Practical-type skills, yes, but our targets aren't shooting back.  

But, if they were shooting back, wouldn't you rather limit how many shots they could fire at you? Hey, what's good for the goose ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2016 at 4:11 PM, Strick said:

I think you missed my point.  I don't have a problem with the extra shot/extra hit penalty.  I have a little issue with giving me a miss penalty, on top of the loss of points, for a shot that you will penalize me for making up.  If I can't make up a miss then I should not have to eat the extra -10 points.

But it's not applied only to you, it's applied to everyone who shoots the stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...