Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse

[Putty]

With all the neg. rhetoric on IDPA is there any reason to join and shoot it? I was interested, but now ..............

[Ron Ankeny]

With all the neg. rhetoric on IDPA is there any reason to join and shoot it? I was interested, but now ..............

I that's part of the reason IDPA died locally. Stuff like the Taran Butler fiasco just drives one more nail in the coffin lid. In a way that's too bad because IDPA could be what we make it...

[Middle Man]

With all the neg. rhetoric on IDPA is there any reason to join and shoot it? I was interested, but now ..............

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shoot, sure no problem. I had/have a great time shooting, even didn't hate being a MD, however that 30 bucks was plowed back into ammo. The ROI stinks on membership.

Edited October 6, 2005 by Middle Man

[Genghis]

I believe IDPA is a great sport that could use some improvement. It seems to me that the biggest problem is the inconsistency in applying the rules.

Some of this comes from rules that are ambiguous, and until those parts are corrected this problem will continue to exist.

Some comes from the decisions by many local clubs to ignore rules they don't like, which may result from the methods used to adopt and revise the rules. This problem could be addressed by giving the members and local clubs more of a voice in rules revisions.

Some of the grumbling is based on disagreement with the philosophy behind the rules. But you have to agree that the rules are consistent with that philosophy.

[PHolsted]

With all the neg. rhetoric on IDPA is there any reason to join and shoot it? I was interested, but now ..............

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Have you ever read a review about a movie that came across basically saying it was poor acting,poor plot and down right sucked? Only to come across it latter while flipping channels and after watching it yourself you think "I love this movie" Try it out give it a test drive.

You don't have to join IDPA in order to shoot. You might find you love it then again it may not be for you. But I think you would be better served if you try it yourself and meet the local people shooting in your area rather than taking what you read and see here and on other forums as the gospel.

Patrick

[geezer-lock]

With all the neg. rhetoric on IDPA is there any reason to join and shoot it? I was interested, but now ..............

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...Try it out give it a test drive...

Patrick

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good advice. Your experience at the local level will likely be positive no matter where you are. Folks are more relaxed and helpful if the match doesn't have the phrase "Regional Championship" or some such in the title.

David C

[SteveZ]

You don't have to join IDPA in order to shoot.

In my neck of the woods...if you want to shoot more than one match...you do .... and they enforce it.

[dirtypool40]

at my home club it's in the bylaws that you can't be forced to join anything in order to participate in matches.

They are fighting with IDPA about that now.

IDPA doesn't administer a monthly classification system like USPSA or collect a head count fee per match. I can have anyone that administered the Classification course sign off that I am the level on my card. What's the reason for joining if you are only going to shoot local matches? Since they are threatening my club with de-affiliation, what's the big reason for staying affiliated?

Just playing devil's advocate, but it might be something to give a look.

[ima45dv8]

at my home club it's in the bylaws that you can't be forced to join anything in order to participate in matches.

They are fighting with IDPA about that now.

IDPA doesn't administer a monthly classification system like USPSA or collect a head count fee per match.  I can have anyone that administered the Classification course sign off that I am the level on my card.  What's the reason for joining if you are only going to shoot local matches?  Since they are threatening my club with de-affiliation, what's the big reason for staying affiliated?

Just playing devil's advocate, but it might be something to give a look.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Also just playing devil's advocate....

USPSA receives their operating revenue/fees through mission count, whether the shooter is a USPSA member or not. This is in addition to those membership fees collected from those that choose to join. If you don't join, you still pay.

IDPA receives their operating revenue/fees through annual membership renewals and does away with the per-match mission count fees.

If no one were forced to join IDPA, without the mission count-type system of revenue collection their coffers would run dry in short order.

(I know, I know....BW has tons 'o money, but this IS a business after all.)

[SteveZ]

IDPA receives their operating revenue/fees through annual membership renewals and does away with the per-match mission count fees.

Ok...so why doesn't IDPA do it the USPSA way...charge a small match fee that the clubs have to send in based on headcount....that way IDPA gets revenue from all shooters the same way USPSA does....and there isn't the requirement to join (hence, attracting more shooters to the game).

[Ted Murphy]

Ok...so why doesn't IDPA do it the USPSA way...charge a small match fee that the clubs have to send in based on headcount....that way IDPA gets revenue from all shooters the same way USPSA does....and there isn't the requirement to join (hence, attracting more shooters to the game).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because they don't want to do it that way. IDPA's system is simpler, and while it may inconvenience people who don't feel like spending money on dues, works pretty well.

And as the MD of two clubs, I'd would not want to do the BS of tithing the shooters and sending in the money. And I bet most the other MD's would feel the same way about it.

I think this thread has pretty much deteriorated at this point and is now a bunch of writing and hand wringing about why IDPA is not like USPSA.

Ted

Edited October 6, 2005 by Ted Murphy

[dirtypool40]

ima45dv8 - I thought USPSA also asked shooters to join after a certain number of matches, but then again, I am clearly not up on every rule in either sport.

I'm not sure what the best solution is, but cutting match participation down to those that join after ONE match seems harsh.

I kinda like the mission count idea, better attended clubs send in more money and get more slots to nationals, at least that's the way it's supposed to work.

Who knows, but I would opt for a flexible evolution until things work for everyone.

[ima45dv8]

Because they don't want to do it that way.  IDPA's system is simpler, and while it may inconvenience people who don't feel like spending money on dues, works pretty well.

And as the MD of two clubs, I'd would not want to do the BS of tithing the shooters and sending in the money. And I bet most the other MD's would feel the same way about it.

I think this thread has pretty much deteriorated at this point and is now a bunch of writing and hand wringing about why IDPA is not like USPSA.

Ted

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ted, I bet there's a lot of MD's in USPSA who wish the fees were handled the IDPA way. It is simplier. I have processed more than a small amount of these for USPSA matches and while not a huge pain, it is one more detail to track.

I have to disagree on your assessment of this thread, though. Any time a discussion involves both USPSA and IDPA you have to expect a certain amount of the "why do they do it that way" or "why don't they do it our way" questions/comments. I prefer to think of it as a chance to illuminate the differences between the two organizations.

[ima45dv8]

ima45dv8 - I thought USPSA also asked shooters to join after a certain number of matches, but then again, I am clearly not up on every rule in either sport.

I'm not sure what the best solution is, but cutting match participation down to those that join after ONE match seems harsh. 

I kinda like the mission count idea, better attended clubs send in more money and get more slots to nationals, at least that's the way it's supposed to work.

Who knows, but I would opt for a flexible evolution until things work for everyone.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

USPSA certainly encourages people to join but it isn't a requirement.

It may seem harsh, but without mission count (or someother per-match fee) how would they receive their operating capital? As I said to Ted, it is simpler.

Now, if I was starting a similar venture and I was trying to lure the largest customer base possible from the already-established shooting sports, I wouldn't opt to require membership after one match. That's simply because most strong-willed independent thinkers, which describes just about every USPSA (and IDPA) shooter I've ever met, go on alert when they hear the "required" part. Then again, if I didn't care whether they participated ot not, it wouldn't be an issue.

...Mark

[jkelly]

With all the neg. rhetoric on IDPA is there any reason to join and shoot it? I was interested, but now ..............---Sandoz

Sure, why not try a match or two (if they let you) it's short money and all you lose is a day of practice. Maybe join for a year if you enjoy your first experience, it could happen.

Respectfully,

jkelly

[Ted Murphy]

I have to disagree on your assessment of this thread, though. Any time a discussion involves both USPSA and IDPA you have to expect a certain amount of the "why do they do it that way" or "why don't they do it our way" questions/comments. I prefer to think of it as a chance to illuminate the differences between the two organizations.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Look at the thread title, and tell me if we are still on subject.

Ted

[ima45dv8]

I have to disagree on your assessment of this thread, though. Any time a discussion involves both USPSA and IDPA you have to expect a certain amount of the "why do they do it that way" or "why don't they do it our way" questions/comments. I prefer to think of it as a chance to illuminate the differences between the two organizations.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Look at the thread title, and tell me if we are still on subject.

Ted

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Point well taken.

Even with the drift, I still think it's been a good discussion.

...Mark

[Steve Moneypenny]

"You don't have to join IDPA in order to shoot."

Um, Yes you do, it's in the rule book you can only shoot one match without affiliating. Where as other sports do not require you to join.

I find IDPA clubs are just like USPSA clubs, they are good and bad clubs. I've shot at clubs in each who trapped shooters, (forced 180 traps) (out of sequence traps) etc.

Mike,

We can't tell the yuppies that we think of stuff like that, it scares them.

What will fix IDPA putting more thought into the course design than the story behind why your doing it. It's good entertainment but a pointless waste of SO energy to read all day.

IDPA is an awesome sport, it is the most "new shooter" friendly sport out there. however there needs to be some level of professionalism when brought into the rule book, USPSA has done this, and IDPA is on the right Track but has a long way to come. We cannot leave things up to interpretation, discression and indvidual bias.

Edited for typographical procedurals

Edited October 8, 2005 by Steve Moneypenny