USPSA principles

[Gary Stevens]

Serious question.

 

What do our principle, as listed in our official documents, mean today?

 

Are they just something we talk about and and remember over an adult beverage, or do they really mean something?

[Sarge]

Sorry Gary, where can I find these "principles"? I have red everything I can find on the website and can't find anything. I find direction and and objects and purposes in the by laws but that's all.

[BritinUSA]

There’s a section in the rules about principles. Not sure if that is what is being referred to.

[Gary Stevens]

Page 2 of the new rulebook. 

[Sarge]

Ah. Hadn't made it to the new book yet.

Not sure if this is what you are looking for but:

 

1.

Practical competition is open to all reputable persons without regard to occupation. It may

specifically NOT be limited to public servants.

AGREE

 

2.

Accuracy, power and speed are the equivalent elements of practical shooting and practical

competition must be conducted in such a way as to evaluate these elements equally.

I THINK TOO MUCH EMPHASIS IS PUT ON SPEED WITH ACCURACY FALLING BY THE WAYSIDE.

 

3.

Firearm types are not separated within their respective divisions; all compete together

without handicap. This does not apply to the power of the firearms as power is an element

to be recognized and rewarded.

I THINK HEAVIER GUNS IN CO/PRODUCTION HAVE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGE.

 

4.

Practical shooting competition is a test of expertise in the use of practical firearms and

equipment.

 I FEEL MANY OF THE GUNS AND GEAR WE USE ARE FAR FROM PRACTICAL. OPEN GUNS? CARBINES? BELTS WITH 6-8 MAGS ON THEM?

 

5.

Practical competition is conducted using practical targets, which reflect the general size

and shape of such objects as the firearm used may reasonably be called upon to hit in

their primary intended use.

I AGREE BUT FEAR WE WILL SOMEDAY TAKE THE POLITICALLY CORRECT ROUTE AND STOP SHOOTING HUMANOID SHAPED TARGETS.

 

6.

The challenge presented in practical competition must be done with the utmost safety in

mind. Courses of Fire should follow a practical rationale and simulate hypothetical

situations in which firearms might reasonably be used.

DISAGREE. WOULD WE REALLY CARRY A BRIEFCASE IN A GUNFIGHT? WOULD WE REALLY WADE INTO AN ALLEY WITH 16 ARMED MEN HIDING IN THERE?

WHO CARRIES AN UNLOADED GUN IN A HOLSTER OR BRIEFCASE ANS SPREADS THEIR MAGAZINES ALL OVER THE HOUSE? WHO WALKS THE STREETS WITH A CARBINE?

 

7.

Practical competition is diverse, never permitting unrealistic specialization of either

technique or equipment. Problems are constantly changed. The exception is Classifier

Stages which are used to measure practical shooting skill.

 DISAGREE. IF AN OPEN GUN ISN'T SPECIALIZED I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS.   AND I FEEL CLASSIFIERS MEASURE BASIC GUN HANDLING SKILLS MORE THAN PRACTICAL SHOOTING SKILLS. 

 

8.

Practical competition is freestyle. In essence, the competitive problem is posed in

generaland the participant is permitted the freedom to solve it in the manner he considers best

within the limitations of the competitive situation as provided. 

NOT SURE. STRICTLY FREESTYLE MEANS WE CAN STAND ON WALL SUPPORTS (HOT TOPIC) AND SHOOT, ETC,I GUESS, BUT I SEE THE NEED TO CONTROL THE FREESTYLE ASPECT OF THE GAME. I DON'T MIND A BETTER THINKER FIGURING OUT HOW TO SHOOT A STAGE BETTER THAN I DID, BUT IT DOES BOTHER ME THAT WSB's HAVE TO BE WRITTEN LIKE IRON CLAD LEGAL DOCUMENTS. IT JUST SUCKS THE FUN OUT OF A MATCH SOMETIMES.

 

[RJH]

First time i recall reading the list, assuming the ones Sarge posted is the principals referred to.  I agree with much of his rebuttal and disagree with some of it, but would say USPSA has strayed very far from some of those principals, to the point that if you read that list and look at the equipment used and the way USPSA matches are shot today, you would probably think that list belonged to a different shooting sport.  

 

So, i guess some of them mean something and the other ones not so much

[shred]

Even those principles have been edited over the years when they became inconvenient.  #3 used to not have anything about 'Divisions' in it for example.

 

Ah well, with the new online-only rulebook, we have never been at war with Eastasia.

 

From Jeff Cooper's 1974 "Rules for Practical Pistol Competition".

 

[Steve RA]

Those were basically set down when USPSA started and there was one gun used 99% of the time - the 1911.  Most were basically stock, with some trigger work.  So a lot of them were more applicable at that time than now.  There was also way more physical activity then than now.

[shred]

Jeff Cooper on scopes in his 1974 rulebook...  It's not a new thing that different guns and equipment are less or more competitive than others, just newer that Practical Pistol segregates them.

 

[waktasz]

3 hours ago, Sarge said:

Ah. Hadn't made it to the new book yet.

Not sure if this is what you are looking for but:

 

 

2.

Accuracy, power and speed are the equivalent elements of practical shooting and practical

competition must be conducted in such a way as to evaluate these elements equally.

I THINK TOO MUCH EMPHASIS IS PUT ON SPEED WITH ACCURACY FALLING BY THE WAYSIDE.

 

then design better stages

 

3 hours ago, Sarge said:

3.

Firearm types are not separated within their respective divisions; all compete together

without handicap. This does not apply to the power of the firearms as power is an element

to be recognized and rewarded.

I THINK HEAVIER GUNS IN CO/PRODUCTION HAVE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGE.

Then buy one

 

3 hours ago, Sarge said:

 

8.

Practical competition is freestyle. In essence, the competitive problem is posed in

generaland the participant is permitted the freedom to solve it in the manner he considers best

within the limitations of the competitive situation as provided. 

NOT SURE. STRICTLY FREESTYLE MEANS WE CAN STAND ON WALL SUPPORTS (HOT TOPIC) AND SHOOT, ETC,I GUESS, BUT I SEE THE NEED TO CONTROL THE FREESTYLE ASPECT OF THE GAME. I DON'T MIND A BETTER THINKER FIGURING OUT HOW TO SHOOT A STAGE BETTER THAN I DID, BUT IT DOES BOTHER ME THAT WSB's HAVE TO BE WRITTEN LIKE IRON CLAD LEGAL DOCUMENTS. IT JUST SUCKS THE FUN OUT OF A MATCH SOMETIMES.

 

What is the definition of freestyle? It doesn't mean a stage is a free for all and there are no boundaries or rules of engagement. 

[motosapiens]

as soon as ben retires, no one will think heavy guns are an advantage in prod anymore. we probably have 5 more years before religious ceremonies start exalting lighter guns for faster transitions and draws.

[shred]

These are the Principles from the 1996 rulebook.  #'s 3, 4, 6 and 7 are different from what's in the current book, so its pretty clear the principles aren't completely set in stone.

 

1. PRINCIPLES OF PRACTICAL SHOOTING

 

The following principles are established to define the nature of practical marksmanship. They are accepted by all members of the International Practical Shooting Confederation as conditions of membership.

 

1.       Practical competition is open to all reputable persons without regard to occupation; it may specifically not be limited to public servants.

 

2.       Accuracy, power and speed are the equivalent elements of practical shooting and practical competition must be conducted in such a way as to evaluate these elements equally.

 

3.       Firearm types are not separated, all compete together without handicap. This does not apply to the power of the firearms as power is an element to be recognized and rewarded.

 

4.       Practical competition is a test of expertise in the use of practical firearms and equipment. Any item of equipment, or modification to equipment, which sacrifices practical functionality for a competitive advantage contravenes the principles of the sport.

 

5.       Practical competition is conducted using practical targets, which reflect the general size and shape of such objects as the firearms may reasonably be called upon to hit in their primary intended use.

 

6.       The challenge presented in practical competition must be realistic. Courses of fire must follow a practical rationale and simulate sensible hypothetical situations in which firearms might reasonably be used.

 

7.       Practical competition is diverse. Within the limits of realism, problems are constantly changed, never permitting unrealistic specialization of either technique or equipment. Courses of fire may be repeated, but no course may be repeated enough to allow its use as a definitive measure of practical shooting skill.

 

8.       Practical competition is freestyle. In essence, the competitive problem is posed in general and the participant is permitted the freedom to solve it in the manner he considers best within the limitations of the competitive situation as provided.

[RJH]

I kinda wish some of this had stayed 1990s style  but hell, i like paper rule books too.   I don't think IDPA is the right answer, but i personally generally would prefer something a little more practical and a little less carnival 

[Sarge]

55 minutes ago, waktasz said:

 

then design better stages

 

Then buy one

 

What is the definition of freestyle? It doesn't mean a stage is a free for all and there are no boundaries or rules of engagement. 

I'm talking about across the sport in relation to the principles listed. The typical stages we shoot are shot blazingly fast. Very uncommon to have a headshot stage with targets at 20 yards to slow people down. And there is no denying a heavier gun tames recoil better. I'm not saying FOR ME. I'm talking a general fact. So a heavier gun most likely has an advantage in regards to follow up shots etc. The principle says all guns within a division compete without handicap and that just isn't so.

[Kixx]

4 minutes ago, Sarge said:

The typical stages we shoot are shot blazingly fast. Very uncommon to have a headshot stage with targets at 20 yards to slow people down.

This is untrue where I shoot. If your local clubs only have hoser stages, they need better stage designers. 

 

5 minutes ago, Sarge said:

And there is no denying a heavier gun tames recoil better. I'm not saying FOR ME. I'm talking a general fact. So a heavier gun most likely has an advantage in regards to follow up shots etc.

They might have an advantage in follow up shots, they’re also slower to draw and transition, and most are more difficult to reload as fast as a plastic gun. The DA/SA guns also have the DA shot to deal with. Plastic and metal guns both have trade offs.

 

I’m pretty sure Max does ok with a plastic gun in CO. 

[Sarge]

4 hours ago, Kixx said:

This is untrue where I shoot. If your local clubs only have hoser stages, they need better stage designers. 

 

They might have an advantage in follow up shots, they’re also slower to draw and transition, and most are more difficult to reload as fast as a plastic gun. The DA/SA guns also have the DA shot to deal with. Plastic and metal guns both have trade offs.

 

I’m pretty sure Max does ok with a plastic gun in CO. 

Come on.... This is not about me and my stages. I'm talking area matches and many level II's every season. Shooters like high round count fast stages over tougher accuracy based stages.

And how many times does one have to say, "I'm sure XXXX could do better with a squirt gun than most shooters. Such a tired argument to say a world champion shooter does pretty well.

[Steve RA]

You very rarely, if ever, see any 50yd stages any more.  They demanded a pretty decent level of accuracy.

[IVC]

The principles are pretty standard - they define the general idea behind the sport and the overall direction. If it said "we object to eating meat and members are expected to to meditate twice a week," we'd indeed have a philosophical problem. As they stand, the principles describe the game. 

 

As for accuracy, a few weeks back we had two tuxedo targets at the far side of the bay, at around 40+ yards. The winning strategy was to shoot them with PCC, three rounds each and have no more than one Mike. The next best was to send one quick to the berm and take two Mikes per target, while hosing the rest of the stage. It wasn't a choice between taking time and getting hits vs. missing, it was a choice between taking time and missing and not taking time and missing. It's a game. Sure most of the higher level shooters can hit this target in slow fire, but that's just way too much time and very high risk in case any hit is just a bit off into hard cover. 

 

We all know how the score is calculated. Whoever gets the best score wins. If the targets are reasonably hard, it makes sense to attempt them, otherwise even taking time to engage doesn't guarantee hits, so using alternative strategies all but guarantees better scores. As a B shooter, I beat a bunch of Ms simply because they took the time, but ended up with several Mikes anyway. 

 

You want pure accuracy? It won't happen unless stages are completely static and bulls eye-like. Short of that, when the targets become too hard, you'll get better score by moving on. Those who take time are unlikely to get better hits. That's why bulls eye will never be part of USPSA matches, as it should be. In practice, most of us practice very hard shoots, but not because they will be in matches. Instead, it's to ensure our grip and trigger pull are correct. 

[Hi-Power Jack]

If you want "practical", everyone would be using a 3" barrel compact double action plastic

gun in 9mm, and the entire course of fire would consist of firing 3 shots at a single target,

in low light conditions.  At contact distance.   And the target would be moving fast and set to

punch you (we'll do away with the target using a knife or gun on you).     

 

Hmm,  that doesn't sound like as much fun as current COF's, IMHO.

 

Drawing, shooting multiple targets rapidly and reloading quickly - that makes for standard

skills that are good to have.  The rest of it makes for more FUN.

 

I don't even like IDPA, which is a LOT more practical than USPSA, and even IDPA allows

you to shoot 8-9 "targets" that are totally stationary, in good light.  Not very realistic either.

 

I wouldn't want to shoot any realistic scenarios, I could get seriously hurt - losing a COF

would be painful if it was "realistic".      Even if I "WIN" a COF, I could be hurt.   Imagine

shooting 6 or 12 COF's in a single day, and being punched heavily in each stage ?

 

I like having fun while I hone some basic shooting skills.      

 

If I want to get more realistic, I could leave my TruBor home and bring my S&W M&P C

and a concealed holster - my choice - but I LOVE shooting my TruBor, against other

people shooting their OPEN guns.     

[Joe4d]

PRINCIPLES of USPSA Competition
1. Practical competition is open to all reputable persons without regard to occupation. It
may specifically NOT be limited to public servants.
Agree

 

2. Accuracy, power and speed are the equivalent elements of practical shooting and practical
competition must be conducted in such a way as to evaluate these elements equally.
Disagree, ( Agree with Sarge,, most matches seem to favor speed in scoring.. You very well can miss fast enough to win)


3. Firearm types are not separated within their respective divisions; all compete together
without handicap. This does not apply to the power of the firearms as power is an element
to be recognized and rewarded.
Disagree,,, We created too many divisions for no reason and separated guns for arbitrary reasons. Like trigger type.  

4. Practical shooting competition is a test of expertise in the use of practical firearms and
equipment.
50/50,,, some stuff is out there,, but really if I KNEW I was gonna be in a gunfight with a handgun, Id be strapping on my 21 round major PF 6" STI Eagle  over a pocket 6 shot 9mm.

5. Practical competition is conducted using practical targets, which reflect the general size
and shape of such objects as the firearm used may reasonably be called upon to hit in
their primary intended use.
Disagree,,, Never been attacked by a TexasStar,,,  USPSA is a game, its fun,, thats why we play. No reason to keep the tactical Tim facade. Probably just need to scrap this one.

6. The challenge presented in practical competition must be done with the utmost safety in
mind. Courses of Fire should follow a practical rationale and simulate hypothetical
situations in which firearms might reasonably be used.
Disagree,, Ditto to 5 above.

7. Practical competition is diverse, never permitting unrealistic specialization of either
technique or equipment. Problems are constantly changed. The exception is Classifier
Stages which are used to measure practical shooting skill.
Disagree, We have some specialized equipment extreme,,   Also way matches have become, CLassifiers dont line up with matches. Classifiers tend to be more stand and shoots. Matches more movement.
8. Practical competition is free-style. In essence, the competitive problem is posed in general
and the participant is permitted the freedom to solve it in the manner he considers best
within the limitations of the competitive situation as provided.
50/50... Probably for the most part that I have seen. However always a few overzeolous MD's or RO's that want to add in their opinions, or get caught up with slowing down this group or another.

Take the above with the caveat that I havent shot in about 9 years,, so things could be drastically different. Looking at new job where I am off weekends,, so may get back in the game a time or two.

[Barcode1337]

3 hours ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

If you want "practical", everyone would be using a 3" barrel compact double action plastic

gun in 9mm, and the entire course of fire would consist of firing 3 shots at a single target,

in low light conditions.  At contact distance.   And the target would be moving fast and set to

punch you (we'll do away with the target using a knife or gun on you).     

 

Hmm,  that doesn't sound like as much fun as current COF's, IMHO.

 

Drawing, shooting multiple targets rapidly and reloading quickly - that makes for standard

skills that are good to have.  The rest of it makes for more FUN.

 

I don't even like IDPA, which is a LOT more practical than USPSA, and even IDPA allows

you to shoot 8-9 "targets" that are totally stationary, in good light.  Not very realistic either.

 

I wouldn't want to shoot any realistic scenarios, I could get seriously hurt - losing a COF

would be painful if it was "realistic".      Even if I "WIN" a COF, I could be hurt.   Imagine

shooting 6 or 12 COF's in a single day, and being punched heavily in each stage ?

 

I like having fun while I hone some basic shooting skills.      

 

If I want to get more realistic, I could leave my TruBor home and bring my S&W M&P C

and a concealed holster - my choice - but I LOVE shooting my TruBor, against other

people shooting their OPEN guns.     

 

I think you're hitting the crux of the debate here. It really comes down to what "practical" is supposed to be. It can of course be argued whether that means military/law enforcement training, self defense training, or simply testing the application of "standard skills" as said here.

I think the more all of us realize it's simply a game that tests various skills, the better off we'll be. This is a sport, and like many other sports, I would argue that it got its start based on real-life combat practice (fencing, javelin stuff, etc.). Now, though, it is simply testing various skills that would be useful to those situations but don't qualify as training for them.

[rowdyb]

USPSA is no longer "martial" in any connection like it could be argued it was in the early days. It is not gun-fu. It's Olympic Taekwondo. If you want MMA, do something different.

[Joe4d]

Which is the point I think .  If we arnt following the principles, get them out of the rule book. Or change them. Leaving them in kinda makes a mockery of things.
People like their unpractical gear, spray and pray stages, and Texas Stars.. Its fun,,, it should be , its a game. Think most people get that.. 

[Sarge]

And just to be clear, I love USPSA and the challenges it presents. I'm not in favor of changing the game. I'm in favor of rewording the principles to more accurately reflect what the game really is.

[Sarge]

1 minute ago, Joe4d said:

Which is the point I think .  If we arnt following the principles, get them out of the rule book. Or change them. Leaving them in kinda makes a mockery of things.
People like their unpractical gear, spray and pray stages, and Texas Stars.. Its fun,,, it should be , its a game. Think most people get that.. 

agree 100% just didn't type it fast enough. LOL