Open Division dropping major/minor?

[Darqusoull13]

12 minutes ago, kneelingatlas said:

 

Why?

All hail our Modifried Overlords

[RJH]

1 hour ago, GrumpyOne said:

And quite what?

Quiet, sorry fat thumbs and tiny keyboard   i edited the post for clarification  haha 

Edited April 9, 2019 by RJH

[B_RAD]

I think 9 major is flatter than 9 minor. 

[kneelingatlas]

4 hours ago, obsessiveshooter said:

I'm not really advocating for anything. I was surprised to hear a GM and M level shooter discussing this and I thought it would be a good hypothetical for discussion here. It's kind of the point of these forums, to be able to weigh ideas based on their merits.
The argument for removing PF scoring from Limited falls apart, but those reasons don't apply as convincingly to Open division. So, this thread makes for an interesting discussion. I'll probably learn something.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

 

So you want to discuss dropping major/minor PF in Open, but what does that mean?  Like in Production, all competitors would be scored minor as long as their ammo makes 125PF? or do away with chronos and PF altogether?

Regardless, you make some assertions I don't think there is any evidence to support:
-"a properly tuned well built 9 major pistol will have about the same recoil as a 9 minor open pistol" - "recoil" is as hard to quantify as it is to define, muzzle flip, slap in the hand, muzzle blast, noise.  These are all components of the shooting challenge which are definitely not the same minor vs major
-"controlling the power isn't really something that needs a reward" - as I understand it, minor scoring is a penalty for shooting less potent rounds at the target (it may have also involved some bias towards 1911 vs Browning High Powers), so it has not to do with the shooter and his control, but with the target and the damage done

-"the guns would run more reliably, last longer and potentially be safer" - I'd posit longevity and reliability have more to do with platform choice and component choice than PF, and with regards to safety, is that real or imagined?

[rowdyb]

I'm gonna pull this in a slightly different direction but still true to the original post's tenant. This is the idea that with the loads and equipment being run now the difference isn't enough for there to necessitate a reward in points for controlling the extra power in a gun shooting major vs minor.

 

The reward in scoring isn't met with a commensurately higher physical level of difficulty in shooting major compared to minor.

 

If the above hypothesis could be found to be true, then the historical reason for major and minor scoring is no longer valid. It's just a legacy ideal.

[kneelingatlas]

13 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

I think 9 major is flatter than 9 minor. 

 

Yes, but you have actual experience shooting Open, and that not what this conversation is about!

[rowdyb]

different scoring for major rewards your load chemistry more than it rewards your gun control ability.

[HCH]

36 minutes ago, kneelingatlas said:

 

Why?

 

To be more in line with Limited and SS. 

 

Also, there is no advantage whatsoever to shooting Minor in Open now. 

[teros135]

Because that'll keep the discussion going longer.

(Translated: No good reason at all. )

[ATLDave]

Sports that involve equipment can generally be placed along a spectrum.  One end of the spectrum is focused on neutralizing equipment as a factor.  The other end of the spectrum is focused on equipment experimentation and development as an inextricable part of the sport.  Baseball is an example of the former, while most auto racing is towards the latter.

 

USPSA's approach in Open (and now in PCC, too), is to allow a lot of leeway for experimentation in the development of equipment.  If (some of) the equipment has gotten so good that 9mm major can be shot as effectively as 9 minor, then that is consistent with the experimental ethos.  Part of the original rationale for IPSC/USPSA was to allow competitors to try different techniques and different equipment in order to see what actually worked.   

 

Rather than getting sore about the efficacy of the equipment, we should simply marvel at how good some of the compensators have gotten and how good some of the powders are.  

[B_RAD]

29 minutes ago, kneelingatlas said:

 

Yes, but you have actual experience shooting Open, and that not what this conversation is about!

Well, I guess I'm lost.

[obsessiveshooter]

I'm gonna pull this in a slightly different direction but still true to the original post's tenant. This is the idea that with the loads and equipment being run now the difference isn't enough for there to necessitate a reward in points for controlling the extra power in a gun shooting major vs minor.
 
The reward in scoring isn't met with a commensurately higher physical level of difficulty in shooting major compared to minor.
 
If the above hypothesis could be found to be true, then the historical reason for major and minor scoring is no longer valid. It's just a legacy ideal.

I think the gas working the comp makes Open division a different consideration. Personally, even though my splits are basically the same between my Limited and production gun, it requires more work with the Limited gun to control it. That roughly 10% advantage of major PF scoring is fine with me, as I know I'm contributing more than an extra 10% to get the same result.
Now, we have Open shooters confirming that to them 9 major shoots flatter, so that sort of flips the above.



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[motosapiens]

1 minute ago, obsessiveshooter said:

Now, we have Open shooters confirming that to them 9 major shoots flatter, so that sort of flips the above.
 

 

clearly the 9 major shooters have an unfair advantage (check your major privilege!). We should even higher scoring for open minor because it is so much harder to control. I suggest 6 points for A, 5 for C, 3 for D and 1 for a mike.

 

I also think that since minor shooters have been discriminated against and oppressed, that we should pay them reparations.

[obsessiveshooter]

 
clearly the 9 major shooters have an unfair advantage (check your major privilege!). We should even higher scoring for open minor because it is so much harder to control. I suggest 6 points for A, 5 for C, 3 for D and 1 for a mike.
 
I also think that since minor shooters have been discriminated against and oppressed, that we should pay them reparations.

Finally a voice of reason! Maybe scholarships to shooting classes, funded by Open Major shooters match fees?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[IHAVEGAS]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

Quiet, sorry fat thumbs and tiny keyboard   i edited the post for clarification  haha 

 

What are the odds of picking the wrong spelling and GrumpyOne knowing the difference? 

Buy a lottery ticket on you're way home. 

[HCH]

1 hour ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

What are the odds of picking the wrong spelling and GrumpyOne knowing the difference? 

Buy a lottery ticket on you're way home. 

 

I see what you did there

[RJH]

2 hours ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

What are the odds of picking the wrong spelling and GrumpyOne knowing the difference? 

Buy a lottery ticket on you're way home. 

Ewe no, eye mite

Edited April 9, 2019 by RJH
To fit in more homophones

[pskys2]

5 hours ago, RJH said:

Why even set a minium pf, maybe just do away with power factor and paint steel, i.e., steel just needs marked to score

I'm not saying I agree with it, just the type of guns that would be made to run with it.

[RJH]

2 minutes ago, pskys2 said:

I'm not saying I agree with it, just the type of guns that would be made to run with it.

I was just being silly,   cause i think the whole idea of this thread is silly. No offense intended

[pskys2]

3 minutes ago, RJH said:

I was just being silly,   cause i think the whole idea of this thread is silly. No offense intended

None taken. 

[d_striker]

Recoil in Open major and minor is drastically different.  

 

There are a multitude of variables that will affect this next point, but with my setup, dot movement between 170PF and 150PF loads is about the same even though recoil in the 170PF load is much firmer in the hands.  Also, even though the vertical dot movement is roughly the same distance, the speed at which the dot moves is different.  "Driving" the gun is different between these two loads even though dot movement/distance is about the same.

 

Swapping the lightest recoil and mainspring possible and running 120-125PF Steel Challenge loads is completely different than both above loads.  Less than half the dot movement as above and recoil like a .22.  I could probably hold the dot in the center of the A zone at 40 yards with this load, and rip a .16 split with two in the A zone.  Not so much with the 170PF and 150PF load.

 

To say that recoil is the same between Minor and Major in Open is a flat out false statement.  

 

Whether or not Open should be scored minor is a moot point because it'll never happen.  Just sounds like some grumbling from people that want to finish closer to Open division.  A good analogy would be Nascar drivers trying to neuter Formula 1 to boost their egos.  Who cares?  They are totally different divisions. 

 

A better argument would be to eliminate major and minor and just run one power factor for ALL divisions.  Perhaps 145-150 since most self defense 9mm ammo is around there.  If we were to do this, Open shooters would still be beating other divisions by roughly the same margin.  Open shooters still have the frame mounted dot, comp, and big stick.

Edited April 12, 2019 by d_striker

[shred]

I've been advocating Mid-PF at ~140 PF to match defensive/LE loads and then score C's as 4 points (or just raise Minor or lower Major, same-same)

 

Minor shooters can still shoot 125 PF for that super-soft .22 feel, but within a few years not many will bother.

Major shooters could still get that extra point for a D at 165PF, but within a few years not many will bother.

 

At that point we can whack both Major and Minor and be back much closer to 'real world' caliber choices, plus simplify the heck out of scoring and divisions.

 

 

 

 

[obsessiveshooter]

While the one power factor idea has its merits as a starting point for a new sport, it doesn't make sense as a change for our existing sport. Too many people would lose a significant investment in their .40 limited & SS pistols, as the capacity increase would make 9mm necessary.

This thread in a nutshell poses the question, do comps on major PF open pistols negate the intent behind the major PF scoring reward. I have no skin in the game, I just thought it was an interesting thing on which to hear the different viewpoints. And, for the few comments that actually address the question directly, there have been differing opinions.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[shred]

One of my pet peeves.  Competition pistols and gear are not "investments", they're "expenses".

 

Investments are expected to increase in value over time.  Absent very unusual circumstances, competition gear does not increase in value, especially when used.

 

Rule changes are always affecting competitors gear.

 

 

 

[obsessiveshooter]

One of my pet peeves.  Competition pistols and gear are not "investments", they're "expenses".
 
Investments are expected to increase in value over time.  Absent very unusual circumstances, competition gear does not increase in value, especially when used.
 
Rule changes are always affecting competitors gear.
 
 
 

Sorry, an investment does not have to increase in monetary value. The gain from the purchase could be elsewhere, as in performance. Usage determines meaning, but the above is even found in online dictionary results.
I invest in my performance by taking classes, practicing, and sometimes buying new gear. A machinist might invest in new tooling to expand his capabilities and profit, even though the tooling depreciates over time.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk