How Can We Make The Sport More Popular?

[Hey QuicksDraw!]

I saw the paintball championship broadcast from Disneyworld. A sport that has participants actualy shooting each other at Disneyworld! I started getting pissed. Why them and not us?

Why can't we be at Disneyworld? What would we have to change? What would we have to add to make it more of a spectator sport? Why don't they like us?

What do we have to do to be accepted? (don't say give up my gun )

[kimel]

It continues to amaze me that a sport which glorifies pointing something that shoots projectiles at another human is acceptable TV for Disney et al but punching holes in paper and knocking down steel is not acceptable.

By its very definition paintball is unsafe gun handling. I have heard horror stories of clubs trying to get paintballers interested in our sport. The unsafe gun handling that has been instilled in them is really rough to break.

I tried paintball once at the insistence of a buddy. I was unable to pull the trigger when I had a human in my sights. The training going back from when I was 5 years old just was too deep. He wasn't endangering me or my family and I wasn't inclined to kill and eat him (although with some fava beans and a nice chianti...). It wasn't fun. I got tagged shortly thereafter and spent the rest of the afternoon determining what the accuracy potential of the "marker" was by plinking at rocks.

I have noticed that the folks at Shooting USA are getting the hang of televising our sport and making it interesting.

Thanks to Shooting USA and Shooting Gallery we now have about 1000% more TV coverage than our pistol sports have seen in 20 years. We need to do what we can to increase this coverage.

[BritinUSA]

I agree wiith you about the whole Paintball thing, I did it once and I wiill never do it again. I had no problem shooting people with a paint gun but I had a real problem when the organisers changed their own rules and said that head-shots are acceptable. I got hit in the hand trying to protect my face from getting hit at point blank range by some nut. My finger swelled up to twice the size, one girl got hit in the lip and split it open. This was before full-face masks, we just had goggles.

As to getting our sport out there we need more magazine articles, they are easier to get than TV coverage and can reach a substantial audience. It's not good putting this stuff in Gun magazines, we need to attract others from outside the sport.

Vince Pinto once mentioned trying to get FM, or GQ magazines or Sports Illustrated to cover the sport, perhaps with the tag line "It's not as exciting as Sex, but it's a hell of a lot safer"...

There are many magazines that appeal to certain demographics. We need to find those that appeal to the 18-40 crowd and pursue it with a goal to getting a favourable article published. I am sure we have a great many people who can write to the appropriate standard.

[rsotelo]

I feel I should chime in on this topic. My avatar is me playing paintball from a few years back. Paintball itself is not much older than IPSC, but one thing you need to keep in mind is that you don't need a wait period, background check, or FFL to buy or sell paintball guns. This aides its popularity. You can go out any weekend and rent paintball gear to play for a day. You really can't do that in IPSC. People see paintball as a game, harmless to most, but see IPSC as dangerous use of firearms. We already know that in MOST political climates, guns are seen as evil. This is rather unfortunate.

Just so you know, the whole Disney thing finally came to fruition after MANY MANY years of negotiation with Disney Corporation and this helped come about from previous dealings with ESPN.

-Ralph

[Kimberkid]

Ralph,

Did you win at Disney?? How many world/national titles is it?

[cking]

Paintball is OK because it likes kids playing with cap pistols.

CowBoy action shooting is OK because it makes feel like John Wayne, and you dressup.

IPSC doesn't involved childhood fanatasies, therefore is not a popular.

[Chuck D]

You'd have to water down the sport SO much that it would cease to look, act and feel like IPSC.

The first step to killing off what's left of the founding principles would be to use a headless target and well all know how popular the Classic target is in most IPSC circles in the U.S.

Sometimes...attention ISN'T a good thing.

[shred]

Yeah, want IPSC to be more popular? Drop the PF to 140 across the board and make 9x19 legal in all divisions. That would make it more popular.

Is that really what we want?

[Yar1180]

I actually came to this sport from paintball. I started paintball in the early 80's and got into it pretty heavily. I played on a sponsored team and competed on the national circuit for a number of years.

Paintball from its inception has always been interested in its public appearance with TV as its goal. This began from it's inception from the NSG days (national survival game). Paintball went through many phases beginning with a pseudo military, survival type image which they identified as a barrier and worked hard to change.

In the late 80's Paintball got "politically correct" and did an overhaul of its image. They did away with red paint because it looked like blood, the camouflage was phased out slowly and replaced by motocross inspired jerseys, and even the term "gun" was replaced by "marker". Paintball sought to separate itself from the "gun" image.

In short the politically correctness of paintball irritated me. I feel paintball as a community should side with the other shooting sports and pool their resources. For USPSA to reach the marketability of paintball I think it would need to sell its soul. Something stupid stuff would need to happen like removing all humanoid shaped targets, changing the way our equipment looked, operated, etc to separate us from the gun stigma.

Looking back at the growth of paintball I don't think it was the TV coverage (actually paintball is very difficult to televise), or the political correctness. The thing that we could learn from paintballs growth is how it focused on the younger players. When I began at 15 I was among the youngest in the sport. Everyone was 30+ because you had to be that age to be able to afford to play. Paintball recognized this would need to change. They created more economically priced equipment; playing fields did things to enable younger players to play (traded labor for field fees and paint). The most important thing was word of mouth. People got out and spread the word, recruited new and younger players. You go to a commercial field now and 90% of the players are under 21. It's all high school and junior high kids. Now that I'm 30 I'm the old guy out there. The age dynamics is what I think is paintballs strength right now. They are going to be strong for a while because of their young base. The advertisers, industry people, and TV media know this. The young people are great about spreading the word about what they are excited about. Something we "older" guys could learn from.

[rsotelo]

Yar1180,

Where are you from? You played around the same period I did. I am sure we know each other if you were on the curcuit. What is your name and who did you play for?

My name is Ralph and I played with Ironmen, All Americans, and Aftershock among others, mostly Aftershock.

You pretty much nailed it. There was an overall image change in paintball. There was a big push in the late 90's to "bring it out of the woods", and into mainstream. No more camo, no more war. Now we have "markers" and "eliminations".

-Ralph

[Rob Boudrie]

The big "issue" with taking IPSC mainstream is the fact that we use real guns which fire real bullets - and modern, semi-auto ones at that.

All the other issues - PC vs. non PC targets; scenarios; etc. are just window dressiing.

Just ask the Aussies who where were told that IPSC would absolutely NOT be accepted as a "qualifying sport" to authorize the posession of handguns with a bore diameter greather than 9mm. There target shape didn't save their 40's and 45's, and it's doubtful removal of walls, doors, tables, etc. would either.

[eric nielsen]

There's a shortage of young shooters - gun and ammo costs are some of the reasons. That it takes time to learn to shoot fast & accurate might be another. To continue some of the What If's [and they are good ones]

What If the Production division dropped its 10-round restriction and allowed up to 20 rounds to be loaded in a mag, regardless of length? Like: Sig, Beretta, XD, Glock...

What If there were matches with stages that looked more like videogames?

What if a TV program showed a group of 18-25 yr old shooters preparing for a stage by jamming 20 rounds of WalMart 9mm ball ammo into their mags, checking on their $550 guns in their $50 holsters. And then going LAMR under the supervision of the RO. And then shooting a stage and having a blast.

A post-shooting interview might have the kid say something like, "I'm not really at a disadvantage with a Production gun as long as I hit the targets. My Dad had this gun sitting in his safe for years but now it's my match gun."

That might help the membership drive.

[Chuck D]

There are regions where the Classic target has "saved" IPSC shooting as a civilian participatory sport...so to state that the target is "window dressing" isn't an accurate assessment. The "real guns with real bullets" analysis is an accurate assessment of why growth and interest amongst the non-shooting public is stagnant at best.

Placing an emphasis on the United States, we need to further develop our junior shooting program, reduce overall equipment costs in entry level divisions and continue to market the sport whenever and whereever possible. In addition...our sport has grown out of and continues to apply principles of "practical" pistolcraft. It's a completely different perceptual activity than say sporting clays. This fact alone may handicap us from becoming as large as the shotgun sports but we must continue to put forth the effort. Once you get the potential member/participant in the door...the greater the chance they'll become "hooked" and stay.

[BritinUSA]

On the subject of Juniors and veering wildly off-topic with this post...

Why doesn't USPSA set up a donation box at Nationals; Not a cash donation, but a used equipment donation box. Where all those shooters that attend Nationals can dump all that old equipment that they don't need/use any more and it can be farmed out to the junior shooters that may need it.

ie.

Old Magazines

Holsters

Mag Pouches

belts

timers

etc.

[Carlos]

How to grow USPSA? Recruit shooters from IDPA & Cowboy Action/SASS shooting.

Many of us already shoot both USPSA & IDPA. This forum has a policy against posts regarding USPSA vs. IDPA - and that is how it should be.

For the IDPA shooters who do not already shoot USPSA, here is an article from the Tactical Journal (their version of FrontSight) entitled "The other IDPA; Prodution Division in USPSA". LINK

It did not occur to me why I did not see my friends from the local IDPA match I help run show up more often at the USPSA match I run. Then I read the IDPA's website a little more closely. Specifically, I looked at the website's document "IDPA Coverletter"; it addresses a problem that largely ceased to exist when USPSA created Production & L10. Then I looked at the IDPA rulebook & frankly, there are some things there that are not very complimentary toward USPSA. I like to believe these things are just oversights that were not corrected in the last revision of the rulebook. But as is, I think that many new IDPA shooters seem to have a bad impression of USPSA even though they have never tried shooting a USPSA match. The article from the Tactical Journal above goes a long way to explaining why its of great benefit to IDPA shooters to spend some time at a USPSA match. Perhaps USPSA could publish an add in the Tactical Journal along the lines of the add posted in the Cowboy Action journal? And for the USPSA shooters who have not tried IDPA - its a great time & a chance to get in some more quality trigger time with like-minded pistoleros in your area.

Regards,

D.C. Johnson

www.shootersparadise.com

[tomfturner]

The biggest thing to remember are the facts that what brought paintball to the public and TV, were 2 key factors that we are having trouble with.

The 2 factors roll into 1 item. Cost and youth interest. If you can convince an 18 year old that he can compete in IPSC with some confidence he will try it and become hooked. However, if you have someone that wants to compete, there are times that cost to become "competitive" are going to become a factor. We may need a way to make some "cost saving" tips available to people faster. Typically you will find out that people spend a lot less money than it looks like they do, but when you first start out you have a plethora of things being advertised to you that can add up to several thousand dollars. Without a nice rich uncle a person in high-school, college, or whatever cannot afford that. That's where we need to get with the program and get the "intro gear" setup.

With paintball you can get a decent gun (not "good" mind you) at Wal-Mart for $50-$100. You're never going to find that kind of deal on any good shooting equipment, but there are deals to be had that can reduce it from the several thousand dollar range. As the younger shooters get older they WILL spend the extra money, just like paintball.

Just my $.02

[Carlos]

Here is another suggestion: forge stronger links between people seeking a Concealed Handgun Permit (CHP, CCW, whatever your state calls it) and competition shooting (either USPSA or IDPA).

I believe that in the last 15 years, there has been a concealed-carry revolution in the USA; now, most states are "Shall Issue" states. More & more people are earning their permits. However, we do not see parallel growth in participation in either USPSA or IDPA. Where is the disconnect?

I think we need to get through to the CCW instructors to have them emphasize the importance of maintaining shooting proficiency through competition. Every student in a CCW class should understand that the class is just a starting point & that they need to get to a couple of competitions before hitting the streets.

Instead, the Permit class is the end of the process for most CCW holders. Obtain permit, carry unfamiliar gun, hope for the best. Many CCW holders (especially in urban areas) have never drawn a loaded pistol from their CCW holster, let alone fired it & tried to hit a realistic looking target.

How do we go about making the link between CCW qualification and competition?

[Rob Boudrie]

There are regions where the Classic target has "saved" IPSC shooting as a civilian participatory sport...so to state that the target is "window dressing" isn't an accurate assessment. The "real guns with real bullets" analysis is an accurate assessment of why growth and interest amongst the non-shooting public is stagnant at best.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know if this is the case or not. The PC target did not didn't save civilian handgun competitions in England, and it didn't save the 40's and 45's in Australia, but the important point is that those who pay the political price must be the ones to make the choice - not someone sitting outside the effected nation who will not suffer the consequences of a bad call.

This decision belongs at the individual nation level. It is clear that it's window dressing in some cases - that was certainly the case in England, where handguns were banned. It it also true in the US where we are far too small to influence any real law, and the PC targets did not preclude the BATF from concluding that practical shooting competitions are not "legitimate sporting use" as defined in the gun control act of 1968.

Where I personally draw the line is when a region tells the World Shoot "We will not come unless 100.00% of the targets are PC, since our government might get mad at us if we compete in traditional practical shooting outside of our country." We should accomodate regions to the extent needed, without lowering the sport to the lowest common demoninator.

[Yar1180]

Another thing paintball has is gun rentals. A junior high kid tells his friends about paintball and they all go running to their parents. The next weekend they get dropped off at the field and they can rent all their equipment and buy their paintballs at the field.

Something similar would need to happen to really pull in the juniors for USPSA. It would be difficult with the liability. Maybe we could do something like airsoft IPSC as a introduction.

I look at SASS and they are doing a lot of things right. They got a great junior program and they have a much more marketable image.

I'm afriad that USPSA has too many things going against it to be truely mainstream in this country. I'm not even sure if I want it mainstream. I liked paintball more before it got super politically correct.

[Yar1180]

Yar1180,

Where are you from?  You played around the same period I did.  I am sure we know each other if you were on the curcuit.  What is your name and who did you play for?

My name is Ralph and I played with Ironmen, All Americans, and Aftershock among others, mostly Aftershock.

You pretty much nailed it.  There was an overall image change in paintball.  There was a big push in the late 90's to "bring it out of the woods", and into mainstream.  No more camo, no more war.  Now we have "markers" and "eliminations".

-Ralph

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ralph my names Ray Wong and I played for Fatal Swoop from 86-98 for the Lively, Great Western, Pan Am, and NPPL curcuits. I knew a ralphie who played for GBD, Shock, All A's. Can't remember his last name. Started with a S.

[Chuck D]

Rob:

Talk to some of the members of regions that RELY upon the Classic target...you'll see that for some...the Classic wasn't an option (Germany for example) it was a necessity. I'm not here to debate the value of the Classic target...that's NOT the issue under discussion. How to grow the sport is the issue. Realization that other regions may need something like the Classic target to keep the sport alive is a good first step. It doesn't apply everywhere nor will it work everywhere.

Thankfully here in the U.S. we don't really need to go this far.

[Rob Boudrie]

Back on topic -

"Real Guns" are the fundamental difference between paintball and IPSC, and the main reason why many of the paintball marketing techniques will not work for our sport.\

So, the real question is to identify what paintball marketing lessons can survive transport into an environment of "Real firearms".

[tightloop]

Haven't we had this conversation before which included how we would promote this sport to make it more popular...I think so...same issues this time....real guns and real bullets...not something that the mainstream liberals who run the networks can tolerate and something that the mainstream urbanite cannot understand...If you wear a driveon rag, baggy pants and point your Glock sideways while saying "I'm going to cap yo a@@" the urbanites understand, but competition shooting...Duh....

If the networks cannot find a way to get people to watch international rapid fire and the Biathlon at the Olympics, we have little or no chance to challenge for time and space on the networks...

My .02 worth....

[j2fast]

Specifically, I looked at the website's document "IDPA Coverletter"; it addresses a problem that largely ceased to exist when USPSA created Production & L10. Then I looked at the IDPA rulebook & frankly, there are some things there that are not very complimentary toward USPSA.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am relatively new to the sport and experienced what Carlos is talking about (sort of). Right after I bought my XD (whole point was an inexpensive gun to get me into Production) I went down to a local shop to pick up a few items. While talking to the shop owner I mentioned shooting in USPSA matches and the basic response was "you don't want to do that, takes to much money to get into USPSA/IPSC, that XD won't do you any good in an IPSC match, yada, yada, yada". The basic jist was I should be shooting IDPA (only thing his club does) which is much less expensive to buy into, etc, etc. I kindly explained the Production division and it's shoot what ya got mentallity (at least to me). He seemed totally unaware that all of the division in USPSA/IPSC weren't an arms race on steroids.

In my novice opinion not only does the sport need to make in-roads with young shooters but also convince shooters with experience that you don't need to spend $3000 or even $1000 to be competitive. My mid $400's XD 40 Tact, UM's pouches, & CQC holster do me just fine in Prod & L-10.

[tomfturner]

As I mentioned earlier, the marketing has to be there to get younger folks involved, and to make people aware that it's not as expensive as they think.

I'll be the first to tell you, that when I first got into this mess, I thought IPSC/USPSA was entirely the open guns. It takes a little marketing to get the image out of someone running a match with a bone stock G17 or XD9 in production to get the message across. If someone could do a commercial for USPSA, of someone running a stage with the production pistol of their choice. Then run the add with a "tricked out" open division gun at the end, and say something like from "this" open division "to this" show a stock XD9, "we've got a place for you". Let them run it on shooting USA or Sighting In, and you'd have a pickup interest, and memberships in all the areas of the US.

We all know that the people that are on the fringes do not shoot matches, but that's because they think they can't with what they've currently got. If you run an ad (like I mentioned) then you can show people doing it, and get the interest up. The other thing to do, would be have Jim Scouten talking with some local USPSA groups, if you could get him in.

If the marketing is there, the membership and interest will follow.