News From The Equator

[firewalker]

+1 to what Pete said

[BritinUSA]

Jim,

Here you go, this is what I added...

The gun seems different. The gun shown in the WS picture does not look like a CZ-85 Combat...

It looks like a SP-01... Look at the rail under the dust cover in the WS picture. That rail is not there on a CZ-85, also there are serrations on the slide in the WS picture but the CZ-85 does not have serrations at the front of the slide... Vince says that they examined a CZ-85 Combat... ???

[firewalker]

edited for useful content

[JFD]

Give me your e-mail address and I'll use their "e-mail this topic" function to shoot you a copy.

The short version is US shooters are a bunch if "monday morning quarterbacks" in "La-La Land", and of course "seems like our American friends have a hard time believing Dave Sevigny got his *ss whooped by Adam"

The only post you haven't seen here that may be interesting is from Vince: "Hi Folks,

In an effort to further clarify my earlier post, in particular my comment "While it was obvious that the right-hand side of the frame had a minor portion which was shiny, we concluded that this was due to wear & tear", kindly note this means we concluded that the bluing on the gun had worn. In other words, we are not suggesting that the actual steel was worn away due to constant use.

Of course I realise that despite my being one of only six people who physically handled and examined the gun, this will not stop "Monday Morning Quarterbacks" sitting behind computers looking at photos from 7,000 miles away from dismissing my comments, in an attempt to perpetuate their conspiracy theories. So be it.

The only thing which matters to me is that the protest was filed in accordance with IPSC rules, and the Arbitration Committee did their duty, with integrity and with impartiality, and I continue to resolutely stand by our decision."

[Rob Boudrie]

Following the process, rather than complaining about it later, is admirable.

I am impressed that J-Go is willing to post her personal opinions under her name, and not deal in the world of under the table comments and off the record unflattering innuendo. The only reason I have not chimed in with a "+1" is that I was already a fan, so she already had the "1" I can deliver.

Our sport would be better off if following the process, rather than complaining about things later, became the typical way of handling such situations.

My thanks to Julie and Vince for providing us with an overiew of what happened, and saving us all the trouble of sifting through the rumor mill.

[Vlad]

And if the system is broken, or maybe corupt then what?

I have my suggestion and I'll contact my area director. What is yours?

[Fossil]

The way I see from an outside point of view since I was not in Ecuador during the World Shoot, the United States Glock shooters: Bad Losers!!!!

This kid (Adam Tyc) shot very well and you guys were beaten fair and square, nothing to do with trigger guards, skate board tape and all this other mambo jambo. Get over it.

[BritinUSA]

Rob,

I do not think there is a rumor mill. I think there are serious questions as to whether or not the 'process' worked in this case. On the one hand we have Vince stating clearly that the gun they examined was a CZ-85 Combat, even going so far as to include a link to a picture from the CZ's web-site.

On the other hand we have pictures from the World Shoot showing what appears to be a CZ-SP01.

Julie has confirmed on this forum that the gun shown in the WS picture was the one that she saw. This bears little resemblance to a CZ-85.

What gun did the arbitration committee examine ? If you compare the WS picture with the picture of a SP01 that I included above, you can see that the area where the trigger guard meets the frame seems to be different. Was this gun altered, was it the same gun shown to the arb. committee ?

I not chasing windmills here, I'm just asking some questions as to whether something untoward happened at the match.

[BritinUSA]

The way I see from an outside point of view since I was not in Ecuador during the World Shoot, the United States Glock shooters:  Bad Losers!!!!

This kid (Adam Tyc) shot very well and you guys were beaten fair and square, nothing to do with trigger guards, skate board tape and all this other mambo jambo.  Get over it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This has nothing to do with who won, who lost or who came second. There was an arbitration about the gun used during the WS. Questions remain. I do not own a Glock, I do not shoot Production, I am not a US citizen, I couldn't give a damn about who won or lost. I care about the rules and the equal implementation of the rules.

[Fossil]

If that is the case, and from your post I believe you are sincere, who is to say that the arbitration was not done correct.

Vince Pinto explained in detail the procedure they followed, If that is not satisfactory to you, or does not meet with your approval, get involved and try to change the rules.

[XRe]

This has nothing to do with who won, who lost or who came second. There was an arbitration about the gun used during the WS. Questions remain. I do not own a Glock, I do not shoot Production, I am not a US citizen, I couldn't give a damn about who won or lost. I care about the rules and the equal implementation of the rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

+100 to that (except the US citizen part....)!!!

[XRe]

Vince Pinto explained in detail the procedure they followed, If that is not satisfactory to you, or does not meet with your approval, get involved and try to change the rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think Paul's pointing out something that more than a few of us are thinking. Vince's account, and the pics we have from the WS of Adam's gun, don't line up. It's possible that Vince simply made a mistake - though his linking of the CZ-85 Combat into his post would make it seem like that's exactly what he intended. If the arb committee examined a CZ-85, but that wasn't the gun Adam was playing with, there's a serious issue there. Personally, I'm hoping that Vince just made a mistake...

There's also the question of what constitutes "minor detailing" and "factory grips", apparently. The US rules are little more straightforward on this topic, at least - no mods except grip tape and sights....

At the one IPSC match I've shot, there were detailed equipment sheets that were used to record the gun serial number, model, equipment position, etc. Wonder if they had those, and if so, what Adam's said and if it was compared to the pistol presented for inspection???

[chp5]

I still don't see any final standings. I see the final stage results, but that's it. Am I missing something?

[BritinUSA]

Final results won't be published until midnight ET... 9pm PT

[EricW]

I was barely able to get in with my Tru-Grip on.  I was told that it extended up too high and that I might have to trim the top millimeter off.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, I'll be waiting very impatiently for some IPSC high mucky-muck to show me in either the IPSC or USPSA rulebook how and where my stuff's illegal. Don't be nice. Don't show me any kindness whatsoever. Please ban my product. I'm DYING to sell t-shirts that say:

TruGrip: So good, it's banned by IPSC.

Rulebook Gods, hear my prayer.

I would also like to note that TruGrip was previously APPROVED by IPSC after I sent them a sample to evaluate. And yes, that's right, Hell will freeze over solid before I design an "IPSC-legal" version of TruGrip, because I soon as I do, guess what: it will be rendered illegal again.

All in favor of a USPSA-rules World Championships to be held in America, the land of plentiful ammo, say "aye"...

[BigDave]

This isn't a Glock vs. CZ thing. It isn't a US vs [insert name of country] thing. It is a rules thing, folks. No sore loosers. That isn't Dave's style. I don't know Dave well at all, but I have spoken with him on more than one occasion and I am confident that is an accurate assessment. If Adam won with legal equipment and he followed the rules, then Adam Tyc is a stud in my book.

The arbitration process that was conducted seems to have left us with more questions than answers. I'm pretty sure that isn't the intent.

[Nemo]

No results until midnight? WTF?

Anyway, if this boy Tyc won production division, he must've shot a hell of a match. He's definitely talented and congratulations are in order. It's sad his win will be always shadowed, at least before my eyes, by the mistery of his "minorly detailed CZ SP85Combat01".

If after the shootoff's Tyc refused to shake Mr. Sevigny's hand, he could be world champion but in my book he's just a boy.

EricW: "AYE!"

[Steve Moneypenny]

Thanks to Julie for doing the right thing so many didn't for what ever reason. The right thing is sometimes the hardest. Sorry, I don't know her well enough yet to be a fan, but I do commend her actions.

For a lot of us it is hard to believe someone who so easily dominates almost every match he shoots in can be beaten especially by someone we have never seen or heard of.

As for other countries bad mouthing the US.... it happens a lot. an interesting statistic is that the worlds +1 retailer also has the most slander on the web about it. (being wal-mart of course)

[EricW]

The way I see from an outside point of view since I was not in Ecuador during the World Shoot, the United States Glock shooters:  Bad Losers!!!!

This kid (Adam Tyc) shot very well and you guys were beaten fair and square, nothing to do with trigger guards, skate board tape and all this other mambo jambo.  Get over it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fossil,

This is just a symptom of a gigantic problem with IPSC: the rulebook means whatever IPSC wants it to at a particular time. Nobody has a freaking clue what's legal or not. It has nothing to do with one manufacturer over another. Just a few short months ago CZ took it in the shorts when the SP-01 was arbitrarily banned even though it was 100% legal. Virtually EVERYONE, no matter who their sponsor was or what brand gun they shot knew that decision was a crock and said so.

My product is now apparently illegal, even though it was ruled legal over a year ago. There have been no new rule changes regarding grip juju that I know of, yet now, what *was* legal is now not. And quite frankly, I'm pretty sure it's based on a disagreement that I've had with IPSC over these exact type of issues. They're trying to regulate IPSC Production with this nebulous "Spirit of Production" criterion that IS NOT SPECIFIED OR CODIFIED ANYWHERE. The rules are now whatever they want them to be at the time.

Why is this a problem? Who the heck in the firearms industry would give sponsorship dollars to an institution where a product is legal then not legal based on someone's 'tude du jour? Apparently dehorning your production pistol does not contravene the "Spirit" but now adding *previously approved* grip juju does.

I'm not sure that the powers of Nostradamus and Shirley Mac Laine combined can predict what IPSC Production rules actually mean come game day.

Credibility comes from consistency.

[j1b]

Julie - good work. I said it once and I'll say it again. Mr. Goloski you have a lot to be proud of.

As for the rest of it - I'll sign off. It's an integrity issue and hopefully over the coming weeks I'll read answers to the questions I have.

I see the lining in the cloud with Julie's actions but let me be very clear in saying that there is a cloud. And it has nothing to do with anything else other than integrity. That my friends, is a problem.

J

[Alberto Hart]

More than sure that Saul´s DVD will show us Adam Tyc shooting in many stages.

If there´s any close up shot, then the truth will come up.

With almost 1,000 shooters and spectators, more than one probably took pictures if him shooting.

We may start asking that people to send pictures, and compare them to see if anything wrong appears.

I like to be a bad guy.

[davidwiz]

...[edit]...Would those of you with the access that are refering to posts over there mind copying and posting that info here for us peons?

Thank you

Jim Norman

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Would need to get the poster's permission before reprinting it. Not trying to be a $#@!, but that is the right way to go about it.

Edited August 29, 2005 by Flexmoney

[Nemo]

Did I win the WSXIV ONLY ONE STI?

Guess we have to wait for that too...

[carinab]

Congrats to the shootoff winners.  I went with every intention to shoot and at the check in they told us they would have no official ladies or junior shootoff.  We stayed for the end of the open shootoff and left.  I guess they decided differently but it would have been nice to know.  If they did have a ladies shootoff I don't know who was there, but congrats to the winners all the same.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WHAT!! Patrick, Shred, Anyone in Attendance, was J the only one missing from the ladies shoot off or was this a general screw up? Did any of the juniors get the same message? No I don't think the black helicopters are looming but it sure seems odd.

[Jake Di Vita]

My first problem....

Vince stated there was no modifications....which means even though there is a "minor detailing" clause, it does not apply.

I'm sorry, but whomever accuses Julie of screwing with Tyc's concentration by asking to take a picture of his gun is flat out of their mind. If that boy (which is all he is from how he reacted to Dave in the shootoff) couldn't handle something as small as that, he would not even be anywhere close to the top. Obviously there was an ulterior motive to his non-compliance.

Call me cynical, but (hypothetically speaking of course) IF I was using a gun that I knew was illegal and IF I was first cleared by a member of the factory who sponsors me and IF I was then asked to PRESENT my gun to an arb committee, one would assume (being cynical of course) that I would not PRESENT an illegal gun to them.