kamakiri Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Not having been there or seen the gun, I don't feel I have a right to an opinion about what the ruling should have been, but if it LOOKED modified and numerous competitors thought that it was modified, then Julie certainly did the right thing in asking that it be looked into. Too often top competitors get treated as if they have some kind of special status and shouldn't be made to conform quite so closely to all the rules... And I've certainly never seen a trigger guard noticeably worn down from finger friction, or any other incidental contact. I shot my last Production gun until the frame cracked and most of the blueing was worn off the slide and there wasn't any noticeable wear on the trigger guard. It's a shame that there should be controversy like this surrounding Tyc's win (he did end up first in the official results, right?), since he's obviously a hell of a talented shooter who doesn't need an illegal gun (I'm not saying that he did, or didn't, have one) to be competitive at the very top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock35 Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Just thougth an image of a CZ SP-01 might help. Julie, you did the right thing. When people get defensive there is usually a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eerw Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Here is a photo of Adam from an earlier the match in Bali..but you cannot see his gun very well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 To top that, as I was packing up to leave, one of Adam's supporters put his finger towards my face and said I was "b**l S**t." (sorry, but its a quote) That, and I am now on some sort of black list I guess... * * * So... its been a little stressful and I definitely lost a fan base to say the least, but in my heart I felt it was my duty and my right. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh I don't know, I think you may have just INCREASED your fan base <{POST_SNAPBACK}> +1! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 +2 A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRT Driver Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Boy, it sure looks like some material has been removed from the dust cover in front of the trigger guard in that picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eerw Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Boy, it sure looks like some material has been removed from the dust cover in front of the trigger guard in that picture. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> when you look at an SP01 from that angle..that is where the light rail meets the radius..along the front of the triggerguard.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkushner1 Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 I totally disagree. And those of you who know me know I shoot CZ's so there is an obvious bias. But this gamesmanship at it best. Adam was still shooting the match .... thats where I have a problem. I don't know if a protest would have been invalid if filed after Adam finished, and if such is the case, then, I guess I understand. But if Julie could have waited for Adam to finish the match, approach him and do the same, politely as I'm sure she did, thats the way she should have proceeded. Think about it, these are competitors operating at the highest possible level, you approach a guy who is going to win the most important match of his life, with stages remaining, and ask to shoot photos of his gun, just the subconcious banter of knowing a possible protest is to be filed, even if your as legal as you can possibly be, this action is going to create significant distraction. Looks like the committee determined that Adam's SP-01 was legal, but I don't care about that. Julie interfered with Adam's match by creating a distraction he didnt need. And I also truly believe that if Adam in his heart of hearts knew his gun was 110% production legal, that an unnecassary distraction was created that was NOT necessary. Julie should have waited for Adam to finish his match. We are supposed to be a competitive brotherhood/sisterhood where we compete fairly, honestly and as friends. In my sole opinion, this was either intentional gamesmanship or unintentional gamesmanship - either way it was wrong and handled improperly. There will be residual animosity here that will take a long time to heal. I think much less of it could have been created had Julie waited. I am not going anywhere near the Seveigny/Glock connection on this topic, I am commenting solely on Julie's timing. Even the Zen master who makes available this beautiful forum for all to air opinion knows what importance concentration plays at this level of competition and that distraction is possibly a shooters biggest enemy. How could anyone honestly state that this didnt create a distraction for Adam. In closing, if her protest would have been negated by waiting until Adam had finished, then I think the rules need to change, if not, I have to go on record as being very, very dissappointed with the choice of timing. It looks like Adam won Pd and it seems that his gun was legal - A testimonial to Adam's focus and skill - congrats Adam !!!!!. As a side note, Three of the US's top production shooters shoot CZ's (Angus, Matt and Todd), I was cheering for the americans the whole way. jkushner1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistolJim Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 According to the WSXIV web-site forums, we won't get the results until after the shootoffs. Why they do this I simply do not know. There is no reason to keep the results hidden until after the shootoffs. I know of no other competition/sport where the world must wait 24 hours to find the results. This is ridiculous. As to the PD thing. Julie explained that the stage was being repaired, that another squad was in the middle of shooting that stage and that Adam had arrived at the stage and was waiting for the repairs and the rest of the previous squad to shoot. I see nothing wrong with the timing of the request, if he was just about to shoot then I could see that would not be very sporting, in this case I see nothing wrong. At the US Nationals in Oregon, ShootingUSA was asking competitors if they could take pictures of their guns during the match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZGunut Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 I also agree with John, I also admit a strong bias towards the CZ shooters as it is what I shoot and also I live about 10 minutes from Angus and he does all of my CZ work (Plus I buy all of my reloading stuff from him) I also do not want to pour any gas on this fire, but in most ways there is a strong bias twoards the Glock shooters and their legions. Here in AZ I cannot tell you how many "excessively worn" magwell's and bottom of trigger guards I have seen in production. Now I am not comparing local shooters to the worlds best, but what I am saying is all of the thousands of Glock shooters will cry foul over anything they can if and when their top dog loses a match (Do not get me wrong, Dave is an amazing shooter and earns everything he has got and a true good guy) what I am saying is it sure is sweet to see all of those CZ's in the top 10 and it is about time! Plus either conciously or not Julies timing was not appropriate. I for one would never get into another competitors concentartion at a world or national level shoot with the title on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 From what is known on this thread, we can conclude very little except: -the rules were followed by all parties involved. How do we know? There is ONLY ONE opinion that matters here - the official opinion (or ruling) of the arbitration committee. Julie made clear that she has accepted the ruling and also been good enough to provide us with a full explanation to keep down the rumors. Fine work Julie! (thanks also for the daily reports from the match). No one should be surprised or upset that there was controvery; the #1 shooter is always controversial & I believe Dave's sights were protested (as was their right) at the last world shoot. That is simply part of the rules & here, the rules regarding protests were followed (Chapter 11: Arbitration and Interpretation of Rules). Besides, the SP-01 arrived at the World Shoot under a cloud of controversy having been both banned & later re-instated to the Production list in the last months. As for the behavior of the shooter or team member who insulted Julie and topped it off with some sort of hand gesture, - that is a far more serious (and apparently unresolved) matter as I believe that the offending party may have violated Rule 10.6.1 and could be subject to a DQ for what they did to Julie; at a minimum such behaviour was completely un-called for and I for one think an apology to Julie is due. At this point, I doubt it will be pursued & yes, I know that sometimes tempers flair, but when sportemanship breaks down, can we still call this our sport? Julie should never have been attacked in such an uncivilized way for taking measures that are completely within the rules. Sorry that you had to go through that Julie. On a brighter note, congrats to all for putting up with an apparently tough match under some tough challenges; hope to be able to join you at the next world shoot. Regards, D.C. Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Olhasso Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 First off, congrats to the winners. OK, now I can bitch. As I feared when I planned to go the WS, the Production rules here were a joke!! The US Shooters read the rules, read PINTO's interpretations of the rules, and brought appropriate guns to the match that met PINTO's interpretations of the rules. To my knowledge, not a single gun was broken down to check for illegal modificaitons. I know for a FACT that the gun that was protested was ground down under the trigger guard -- if you didn't see it for yourself, then don't comment! The arb committe can call it whatever they want, but gun steel does not wear away simply by 'over use'. I know for a FACT that a glock shooter was not allowed in production because of stippling of the grip. I know that another glock shooter was bumped to open for a grip plug. And yet another shooter was forced into open because the finish was blasted off their slide. In produciton, I personally saw the inside of magwells ground down, the underside of trigger guards ground, sights painted orange and magwells painted to aid in reloading. Obviousily IPSC chooses when and upon whom to enforce its rules. All we are asking of IPSC is to either enforce your rules across the board, or change them to something that makes sense. I you ban internal modificaitons and grinding on frames, then enforce the stinking rule! Oh -- and for this match only, Magwells were allowed on the tangfolio. After this match they are not allowed. WTF is up with that decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 This doesn't have a thing to do with persecuting CZ shooters, it has everything to do with playing by the rules. So, let me get this straight...the guys that are hell-bent on banning replacement sights, trigger jobs, and grip juju in the name of "The Spirit of Production" are OK'ing belt sander work? I'm on my second IPA, and it still makes no sense... Good call Julie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckw Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 (edited) In produciton, I personally saw the inside of magwells ground down, the underside of trigger guards ground, sights painted orange and magwells painted to aid in reloading. Did you <deleted by moderator> file an official protest or is this it? Edited August 28, 2005 by EricW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Ms. Goloski, good call and thank you for stepping up. Sorry you had to endure rudeness from other competitors. Have a safe trip back home! Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precision40 Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Is there any talk of where the next WS might be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kline Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Is there any talk of where the next WS might be? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The next WS is in Indonesia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Lee Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Greetings, As someone watching all this from afar, hindsight- or so it seems to me is 20/20. Placing myself in Julie's shoes, if I were angered, frustrated or otherwise thrown off my center, I doubt that I or anyone else would be thinking about the appropriateness of time. I also cannot count the number of times I have let things "go" only to later regret my inaction. People may not like the timing of her actions, but there is nothing in the rulebook about grievance filing etiquette. She acted in accordance with the rules and more importantly, her conscience. We live in a modern world where everyone at the top of their sport is suspect- Lance Armstrong comes to mind at the moment. Whether it's lightened guns or steroids, if there is a possibility that someone is suspected of having an unfair advantage, investigation is necessary in the name of fairness. What if Julie's complaints were found to have merit? I seriously doubt that she would be feeling joyful. Would people be questioning her timing ? The event ocurred, the gun was determined to be legal and Adam will experience the admiration and support of competitors across the globe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99gski Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Hello All! As to my timing for the protest since this seems to be of some dispute. I was told I could only file the arbitration while the competitor was still actively firing the match. No option to wait, otherwise I would have rather taken that approach. I know how I would feel in that situation which is precisely why after I made the decision to arbitrate, I didn't go over to his squad at all. I stayed with the US Team and took pictures of our boys in action. (So proud of them!!!!!!) It took 40 minutes to get an actual arbitration form and by the end of the day, I literally ran to get the arbitration in on time. If Adam knew, then someone else told him or he was leaving his own yet squad again. He approached me after he was finished match. As far as the picture, I can only speak for myself... I wish I had a nickel for every time someone wanted a picture of my gun. I know I am happy, to show off my sponsors goods at a match, or anywhere for that matter. I believe in what I use. Bottom line, I am sorry I have disappointed some but I believe in following rules and overall sportsmanship. When I see violations it makes me just plain ill. So I did what I thought was right as the rules allow me and give me the right to do. If I am to be faulted for doing what I believe was right within these rules... well I guess some can have that opinion and do. This wasn't about CZ it was about one gun. I am EXTREMELY proud of Angus, Pete, Matt and Todd (PS...everyone wish Todd a happy belated birthday for this week!!!) I can't say enough great things about them. (Especially Turtle ) Thanks for the support from everyone. It means more that you know, so much. With that... Thanks to everyone who made this match such a memorable experience! And I mean that in an AWESOME way!!! all the best, always julie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kline Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Good call Julie. As far as some of the forum members saying the Glock shooters are crying foul, that has nothing to do with it from me. I shoot a Glock in Production, BUT I dont care who shoots what. If they are a nice guy or gal and shoot good, that's great, I personally dont give a crap what they shoot. We're not at war and whoever shoots a Glock is on one side, CZ the other side and STI or Para another side. Because I drive a Dodge truck means I have bias towards people in Fords or Chevy's???????? Come on guys, I dont think it has anything to do with that. Now, if someone is not playing by the rules, as several have stated here already, then everyone, not just Julie, had a right and obligation to step up and say something. The rules and following them are the only things that separate our divisions. Play by your divisions rules or dont play!! As far as Julie distracting or interfering with him, I dont think so. Where do we draw that line guys. Any noise or anyone who does anything towards me before I shoot (apparently his squad wasnt even up!) is distracting and an offensive foul?? This is the big leagues guys, and if he cant take distractions, then deal with it. As far as how Julie was treated, TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!! I have plenty of buddies who shoot CZ's, I dont really give a rip, I base my opinions and friends on the person and shooter, not their equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kline Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Also forgot to add, if Adam had nothing to hide and nothing was wrong with his equipment, why be angry and mostly, how have a "manager" deal with Julie or someone wanting a photo of the gun instead of just dealing with it. That's acting guilty if I ever saw it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckw Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Did you <deleted by moderator> file an official protest or is this it? Bottom line, I am sorry I have disappointed some but I believe in following rules and overall sportsmanship. When I see violations it makes me just plain ill. So I did what I thought was right as the rules allow me and give me the right to do. @EricW: Sorry for the language in my first post, but it makes me mad as hell to think that a great gal like Julie had the guts to pony-up the money out of her own pocket to file an official protest at the match when she felt something was wrong but others just choose to bitch 'n' moan here. Julie: Well done. You deserve to be on the US Team and you make us proud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 I can see both sides of this pretty easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 @EricW: Sorry for the language in my first post, but it makes me mad as hell to think that a great gal like Julie... Chuck, Don't worry, thanks to the miracle of the edit button I was able to edit *my own* post to be...shall we say...more tasteful. We all just need to keep our wits about ourselves and maintain be.com's legendary good manners, or try to anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts