Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!
elguapo

History question

Recommended Posts

Why did the IPSC founders think it was a good idea to make our sport an international thing?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the minutes from the 1976 Columbia Conference:

 

"The purpose of the Columbia Conference was to bring together people who represent the viewpoint of the
practical shooter in all parts of the free world, so that some sort of organization and direction could be
given to the sport of practical pistol shooting."

 

"Practical pistol competition started In Southern California in the late 50’s, and has now spread as far as
Australia, Central America, Europe, and Southern Africa. We feel that it is time that we organized
ourselves into a practical competition program. This was the purpose, of the Columbia International
Combat Pistol Conference."

 

So I guess the answer might be that the sport was already international so why not bring it together?

 

Here is the whole document. Interesting reading.

 

IPSC_1976_Columbia_Conference_Minutes.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was very weird to read.  Some of the principles are still recognizable, others (like their understanding of handgun lethality aka "power") comical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, elguapo said:

That was very weird to read.  Some of the principles are still recognizable, others (like their understanding of handgun lethality aka "power") comical.

You weren't kidding. I enjoyed the part about holster tie-downs being forbidden because, they, "project(s) the image of 'western movies.'"

 

"In other words, tiedowns which work on the belt or on the inside of the wearer’s clothing will be permitted. This artificiality was passed in view of the fact that we are indeed concerned with the image that practical shooting may project to spectators."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man how we have strayed from the original concept....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sarge said:

Man how we have strayed from the original concept....

We've definitely fallen far from some of the original tenets about not having equipment or practices unsuitable for "practical" application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s why Jeff Cooper disavowed IPSC toward the end of his life. I remember reading the org’s response along the lines of “though we can cancel your membership, we can’t change history or your contribution to the sport” or similar words to that effect. That’s also why IDPA came to exist, but that’s a different argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IPSC was 1975, Steel Challenge was 1981, USPSA was 1985, but IDPA was not until 1998.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny because Cooper's 1974 rules said you could use a scope if you wanted, but had to use it the whole match.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but I disagree with some of the direction here.
Sure some stuff turns out to be unpractical,,,  But how do you know until you use them in an open competition ? That which works rises to the top, that which doesnt falls to the wayside. Whats wrong with that ? Those impractical Tasco and Aimpoints are todays trijicon carry optics, and carbine reddots. Impractical comps have been refined to be pretty danged effective and useful. Formed fitted kydex ? and on and on... The unpractical gets refined over time till it becomes very practical or we try something else.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the athleticism required by some outlaw matches is the only good way that I've seen to encourage "practical" equipment and techniques of the type described in this document. The requirement for holster and mag retention, ability to run and move naturally, ability to shoot in a variety of conditions and positions, and carry durable and functional firearms is all inherent in the competition. Significant and potentially confusing or contradictory regulations aren't as necessary.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joe4d said:

Sorry but I disagree with some of the direction here.
Sure some stuff turns out to be unpractical,,,  But how do you know until you use them in an open competition ? That which works rises to the top, that which doesnt falls to the wayside. Whats wrong with that ? Those impractical Tasco and Aimpoints are todays trijicon carry optics, and carbine reddots. Impractical comps have been refined to be pretty danged effective and useful. Formed fitted kydex ? and on and on... The unpractical gets refined over time till it becomes very practical or we try something else.
 

 

The practical is what people use in their daily lives.  When it comes to handguns, hardly anything that is practical looks like what we use in USPSA.

 

When was the last time you saw a 40 oz handgun in the holster of a private citizen or police officer?  Or a holster that barely covers the trigger and not much else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when was the last time you saw a slide mounted reddot ? or a retention type kydex with some kinda instant button release ? Umm couple hours ago. All stuff developed by "Practical" shooters pushing the envelope. Then there are trigger jobs, mag funnels, higher cap mags, .
And Personally If the SHTF or I had to stack at a door to do entry,, you danged skippy my gun would be EXACTLY what I would use at a USPSA match. an STI with 22 rounds of Major power factor ammo I KNOW runs like a top and shoots bulls eyes ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff Cooper resigned from IPSC February 4, 1997 in a letter to Nick Alexakos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Joe4d said:

when was the last time you saw a slide mounted reddot ? or a retention type kydex with some kinda instant button release ? Umm couple hours ago. All stuff developed by "Practical" shooters pushing the envelope. Then there are trigger jobs, mag funnels, higher cap mags, .
And Personally If the SHTF or I had to stack at a door to do entry,, you danged skippy my gun would be EXACTLY what I would use at a USPSA match. an STI with 22 rounds of Major power factor ammo I KNOW runs like a top and shoots bulls eyes ..

 

Sure brah.  If you say so it must be true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Joe4D.  

 

Just because something isn't practical for concealed carry or for police daily use doesn't mean it isn't practical.

My 38SC open gun is a GREAT nightstand gun.  29 rounds of essentially .357 mag, and with the right powder it doesn't have hardly any flash.

Yes I've tested it in low light, and no I wouldn't carry it for daily use.

 

Steve Pitt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, elguapo said:

Hang on honey while I go to the grocery store to get milk

 

3620260298_69014ef574_b.jpg

yep,  in large part due to competition she may actually go to the store with a red dot mounted on the slide of her high capacity carry gun, in a kydex holster

Its just like with race cars,  just because we don't drive to work in F1 cars doesn't mean that a portion of the R and D that makes those the fastest doesn't trickle down to our daily drivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to tell you but outside of RDS, the USPSA world has had little influence on equipment where it matters (concealed carry, military, police).

 

High capacity magazines, kydex holsters, and a bunch of other stuff was developed independently of the sport or at best, in parallel.

 

Now, to be sure, practical pistol sports have had an undeniably tremendous influence in the real world application of hand held firepower where it matters: techniques.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This has been hashed before. USPSA is not tactical training. It’s not tactical practice. If you want to pursue the martial arts aspect of handguns, take an appropriate class from a respected trainer. Individual skills can be honed here, like the draw, grip, stance, reload. Put only a fool would go to a gunfight alone against 13 opponents with a handgun (or PCC 🤣). I don’t shoot my duty gun in USPSA  because I don’t want to mix my game with my life saving tool. Yes this game has drifted afar from its roots, and I’m fine with that. 

NASCAR drivers don’t haul ‘shine & run from Revenuers anymore either. 

Edited by OPENB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OPENB said:

This has been hashed before. USPSA is not tactical training. It’s not tactical practice. If you want to pursue the martial arts aspect of handguns, take an appropriate class from a respected trainer. Individual skills can be honed here, like the draw, grip, stance, reload. Put only a fool would go to a gunfight alone against 13 opponents with a handgun (or PCC 🤣). I don’t shoot my duty gun in USPSA  because I don’t want to mix my game with my life saving tool. Yes this game has drifted afar from its roots, and I’m fine with that. 

NASCAR drivers don’t haul ‘shine & run from Revenuers anymore either. 

 

I don't think you understand the context of the conversation I'm having with others.  But whatever, you be you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, elguapo said:

I hate to tell you but outside of RDS, the USPSA world has had little influence on equipment where it matters (concealed carry, military, police).

 

High capacity magazines, kydex holsters, and a bunch of other stuff was developed independently of the sport or at best, in parallel.

 

Now, to be sure, practical pistol sports have had an undeniably tremendous influence in the real world application of hand held firepower where it matters: techniques.

ummm ur seriously misinformed or a product of a swipe swipe face  in a screen idiot world

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

ummm ur seriously misinformed or a product of a swipe swipe face  in a screen idiot world

 

 

I'm sorry, but that made no sense to me whatsoever.  Could you clarify?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

ummm ur seriously misinformed or a product of a swipe swipe face  in a screen idiot world

 

 

Sure brah, whatever.  You want to be right?  Be right.  I'm over you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...