Why does USPSA have its own rulebook?

[matir]

I can't find if this has been discussed previously, but I just read a thread discussing how much effort was put into having a separate rulebook for USPSA vs IPSC.  Why was this done?  What problem is there with the IPSC rules for American shooters?

 

Not looking for a debate over the differences, just a new shooter looking to understand the history of the sport.

[Sarge]

  This would be worth googling. IPSC was created way back right here in the USA. Later on the US branched out to become its own region of IPSC, USPSA.

  Since we are more of a gun culture in a liberal dominated world we shoot humanoid targets, etc. just to name a few.

  So technically we are part of IPSC.

 

Edited January 6, 2019 by Sarge

[jcc7x7]

Better and more relevant question is?

Why does IPSC think it needs a separate rule book: since the game started here!

[ChuckS]

USPSA is an IPSC region. There was once just one rule book. Then there were books with with some US exceptions. They finally diverged in 2004. I'll look later to confirm that date 

Edited January 6, 2019 by ChuckS
Spelling

[shred]

Somewhere between 2004 and 2008 was the final rulebook split.... Before that the USPSA rulebook was the IPSC rulebook with US versions of various rules sprinkled throughout (when that started, IDK. I think it was a thing when I started in the early 1990s).  The 2004 rulebook I have is IPSC-with-USPSA-exceptions while the 2008 rulebook is just USPSA rules.  There may have been rulebooks between those two.

 

The Why is complicated but seems to be working out OK.

 

[matir]

So what is it about the US that requires specific rules?  Are there other regions with their own rulebooks? 

[shred]

n a nutshell, USPSA disagreed with some things IPSC wanted to do or not-do and vice-versa.  IPSC decided they didn't want a plethora of country-specific rulebooks, and mandated every region use the same set of rules (the only exception being changes to meet national laws).  Eventually the parties settled on USPSA doing whatever USPSA wanted as long as they held at least one true-to-IPSC-rules match in the US and the US IPSC Nationals has pretty much been it since.

 

If you want to know what rules were different, there were a bunch, some minor and some not so minor.  A read through the 2004 rulebook will show what they were at the time.  Since then more has changed, some moving closer together, some further apart.

 

http://redbrush.org/articles/USPSA Rulebook 15th Edition.pdf

 

 

[IVC]

Just out of curiosity (I don't know much of the history, I joined USPSA in 2017)...

 

If USPSA is considered a part of IPSC and if a local club wanted to run an IPSC match, which body would end up sanctioning it? If it were IPSC, it would be through the local affiliate, which would be USPSA, which would have different rules from the true IPSC. How does this work in practice?

[DKorn]

10 hours ago, IVC said:

Just out of curiosity (I don't know much of the history, I joined USPSA in 2017)...

 

If USPSA is considered a part of IPSC and if a local club wanted to run an IPSC match, which body would end up sanctioning it? If it were IPSC, it would be through the local affiliate, which would be USPSA, which would have different rules from the true IPSC. How does this work in practice?

 

In practice, there are matches in the US that run runder IPSC rules, but not very many. 

 

The only one that comes to mind is the US IPSC Nationals. 

[StealthyBlagga]

The divergence between IPSC and USPSA rules dates back to at least the early 90s - I remember Americans coming over for World Shoot X (1993 in the UK) with their 140mm magazines wanting to shoot in IPSC Standard Division (ooops). The points of difference grew over time, eventually resulting in a schism and creation of separate rule books as discussed above. As to why, it's a mixture of the US wanting to retain the way things had always been done (higher round count stages, humanoid targets) while IPSC under Nick Alexakos wanting to make the sport more palatable to international governments and the International Olympic Committee (yes, you read that right - he though IPSC could become an Olympic sport ).

 

With the defensive use of firearms becoming more accepted in the US (CCW, constitutional carry etc.) at the same time as gun laws outside the US are becoming more and more restrictive, and with the leadership of the two organizations being unwilling to compromise, this divergence will inevitably continue. In some ways its a pity because I see a lot to like in both rules sets, and uniting them in a flexible manner could actually be good for the sport.

[JayWord]

While most of the comments here are right on, there has always been an issue about responsibility for the firearm.

Unload, show clear, Boom has always been a DQ in the US. Under IPSC rules until the Range Command was changed, it was a warning.

That is why, "Gun Clear, Hammer Down, Holster" was changed to "If Clear, Hammer  Down, Holster."

We tried hard to go to a common rule book in the early 2000's, but it fell apart. USPSA adding additional divisions and dropping others also made it hard.

They are working to try to get closer, but....

 

IMHO.

 

[MikeBurgess]

20 hours ago, IVC said:

Just out of curiosity (I don't know much of the history, I joined USPSA in 2017)...

 

If USPSA is considered a part of IPSC and if a local club wanted to run an IPSC match, which body would end up sanctioning it? If it were IPSC, it would be through the local affiliate, which would be USPSA, which would have different rules from the true IPSC. How does this work in practice?

Any USPSA club Could hold a IPSC rules match. the problem would be when almost every shooter had some sort of equipment rules issue. most shooters would not want to setup for IPSC rules for just a local match. 

 

Just a couple high points 

All divisions but revolver must have all gear behind hip bone like prod +ss so most of your Open and Limited shooters will have to move their rigs around

Standard guns (limited) must fit in a box, makes 140mm mags way to big so new mags for Limited shooters

Production and CO are more restrictive so many guns are not legal under IPSC rules.

on the club side all poppers with heads are illegal so that would be a issue for many/most clubs

 

Beyond that there is nothing stopping someone from running a very IPSC flavored USPSA match.

 

[Mcfoto]

When I browsed the IPSC rule book a couple months ago, I noticed the rule that all ROs be unarmed. Don’t know how we’d deal that with a club match. “I’ll give you the brick when you go bag your gun...”

[matir]

12 minutes ago, Mcfoto said:

When I browsed the IPSC rule book a couple months ago, I noticed the rule that all ROs be unarmed. Don’t know how we’d deal that with a club match. “I’ll give you the brick when you go bag your gun...”

 

I thought you were kidding, but nope, there it is in rule 7.3.3:

 

Quote

A person acting as a Match Official is prohibited from having a holstered firearm while directly accompanying and timing a competitor during his attempt at a COF. Violations are subject to Rule 7.2.2.

 

Separately, I can't figure out why that's under 7.3: Appointment of Officials.  It seems like a pretty silly rule.  I understand why we don't want an RO (or anyone but the competitor conducting the COF) carrying a loaded firearm, but once unloaded, it's just a block of metal on their hip.

[Sarge]

USPSA also prohibits carrying during a COF

 

5.1.9 A competitor must never use or wear more than one firearm during a course of fire (see Rule 10.5.7).

[IVC]

USPSA prohibits second gun. This is not specific to ROs and is there to prevent CCW guns from entering the equation of a "cold range." 

[shred]

3 hours ago, MikeBurgess said:

Just a couple high points 

All divisions but revolver must have all gear behind hip bone like prod +ss so most of your Open and Limited shooters will have to move their rigs around

Standard guns (limited) must fit in a box, makes 140mm mags way to big so new mags for Limited shooters

Production and CO are more restrictive so many guns are not legal under IPSC rules.

on the club side all poppers with heads are illegal so that would be a issue for many/most clubs

 

Beyond that there is nothing stopping someone from running a very IPSC flavored USPSA match.

 

Open can keep their holster position.  Except for .25mm shorter magazines, and no bullets lighter than 120gr, USPSA Open is good to go in IPSC.

 

Single stack likewise pretty much carries over (although a lot more is allowed in IPSC 'classic').

 

The rest take between some and a lot of finagling to convert.

 

 

[MemphisMechanic]

2 hours ago, matir said:

  I understand why we don't want an RO (or anyone but the competitor conducting the COF) carrying a loaded firearm, but once unloaded, it's just a block of metal on their hip.

 

Remember, for a long time mainstream television and a presence at the Olympics was a dream of IPSCs. They wanted their officials to look more like referees, less like gun nuts.

 

Edited January 8, 2019 by MemphisMechanic

[IVC]

4 hours ago, MikeBurgess said:

Any USPSA club Could hold a IPSC rules match.

...

Beyond that there is nothing stopping someone from running a very IPSC flavored USPSA match.

 

If I understand it correctly, when running a match, IPSC and USPSA are technically considered two separate and independent bodies, the way IDPA and USPSA would be considered two completely separate bodies. Even though USPSA is officially part of IPSC, if a club runs an "IPSC flavored match," it's considered just that - a match under different rules by a different organization. Is this correct? 

[MikeBurgess]

 
If I understand it correctly, when running a match, IPSC and USPSA are technically considered two separate and independent bodies, the way IDPA and USPSA would be considered two completely separate bodies. Even though USPSA is officially part of IPSC, if a club runs an "IPSC flavored match," it's considered just that - a match under different rules by a different organization. Is this correct? 

I have not looked into running a match under the IPSC rules, I just assume as a member club of USPSA the USA region of IPSC I would be able to do so.

By running a IPSC flavor match I was referring to running a match under the USPSA rule book but setting the stages in a way that more reflects what you would see at a IPSC match (more short and medium courses, more movers, lower hit factors, turtle targets)

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[HoMiE]

Years ago around 2008, I shot a match in Reno, NV (Fernley) that Johnny Lim put on as a World Shoot warm up match. It was a great match, good mix of short, medium and large stages. Swingers, low ports, and all classic targets. I wish there was more matches with that flavor instead of just large stages with 8-8-8-8 shot target arrays metric sandwich arrays. Would be cool to run the small, medium, large mix but let the 141.25 and 171.25mm be good for open and standard, and production with race holster behind hip with 15 rounds would be nice. 

Edited January 8, 2019 by HoMiE

[Vince Pinto]

On 1/8/2019 at 12:13 AM, StealthyBlagga said:

IPSC under Nick Alexakos wanting to make the sport more palatable to international governments and the International Olympic Committee (yes, you read that right - he though IPSC could become an Olympic sport ).

 

Fake news. IPSC never expected or applied to become an Olympic sport. The only thing we sought was membership of the GAISF (aka Sport Accord), which would merely give us IOC recognition. If granted, this would be a huge benefit for our member regions, but with little to zero cost. 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2019 by Vince Pinto

[regor]

1 hour ago, Vince Pinto said:

 

Fake news. IPSC never expected or applied to become an Olympic sport. The only thing we sought was membership of the GAISF (aka Sport Accord), which would merely give us IOC recognition. If granted, this would be a huge benefit for our member regions, but with little to zero cost. 

 

 

 

Is that still in the works or was the request rejected? If so, what was the rational behind it? 

[Vince Pinto]

18 minutes ago, regor said:

Is that still in the works or was the request rejected? If so, what was the rational behind it? 

 

We were rejected twice previously, but that was solely due to the ISSF objecting under the "competing sport" rules at those times. Apart from their hatred of IPSC style shooting, which is far more exciting, which might affect their growth, they were worried that we would somehow lessen the funding they obtain from the IOC.

 

However, for us, this has nothing to do with money.

 

We continue to pursue GAISF membership, because there is now little to no weight given to the former "competing sport" rule. It's a very long and arduous process, and we continue to plod along. We have a sizeable war chest, so all we need is patience. A lot of patience.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2019 by Vince Pinto

[Vince Pinto]

Double tap.

Edited January 10, 2019 by Vince Pinto