2011 and Carry optics

[Intheshaw1]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

Looks good on the gram 

I worked the hoser stages at our local sectional. Targets all 5 yards and in but some great footwork and reloading skills were needed to be real fast.

 

The gram folks were out there tearing it up on video and I think our highest mike could was in the low teens with most averaging 5-7. Everyone would come in thinking there is no way you can miss a target that close.....

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

 

I got no issues with 140s either. Also have no issue with allowing irons and carry-ops like sinister suggested. But then again I don't care if they let 2011s in either LOL. The best people are going to win regardless of equipment, everybody else is just running for somewhere in the middle, equipment is really not as big a deal as we tend to try to make it most times. 

 

When you look at the overalls and you see a lot of times at majors a carry ops gun is winning HOA, or at least HOA of the pistols, that's when I start to figure most of this doesn't matter, and is academic as we're all really just shooting for fun anyway.

 

I think I know why they made the requirement for the optic, but we can probably get rid of that rule now.

 

And I don't think we should worry about what the top guys can do when making our rules. Divisions are meant to separate equipment and we as a org we need to decide where the lines should be drawn. The biggest issues I have is the constant tweaking of the lines. I don't care where they are just set them and leave them alone. Then I can decide how to move forward for myself. 

[RobW]

On 4/27/2022 at 5:17 PM, BritinUSA said:

All depends on what types of stages people generally shoot. If the clubs that a person attends are mostly high round-count stages then having to reload 2-3 times on every stage can start to get a little tiresome. It's not just the reload itself, its having to clean out the magazines each time to get the dirt out.

 

If your club favors a good mix of short, medium and long - or just the latter two - then 1-2 reloads per stage is not that big a deal and a change to magazine capacity would have little difference.

 

Personally, I think that 15 would have been ideal for both Production divisions (like in IPSC), I think that hits the sweet spot, but again a lot depends on stage design.

For me it's the "eyes getting old" factor. I don't care about stage design, reloads, 15 rounds in production, etc. At this point I'm shooting for fun - it ain't fun choosing between seeing the sights or seeing the target. No fun at all! Open is the way 

[shred]

On 5/19/2022 at 11:18 AM, RJH said:

 

If we are going to do this, I would rather just go with factory flush fit capacity. All the 9s seem to be within a round or so on capacity and then we don't have to count rounds as ROs

 

They tried "flush fitting" factory-capacity in the 1990s for USPSA Limited and IPSC Production.   Manufacturers gamed it.  That's why very old factory STI basepads are huge, why the STI GP6 was popular for about a nanosecond and why the 140mm rule came into being in the first place.

 

[shred]

On 5/18/2022 at 2:37 PM, cbrussell said:

 would rank it something like this. 

 

Not a Revolver

Optics

Capacity >10

Capacity >18

Major Scoring

Capacity >25

Magwell

Compensators

SAO Trigger

 

 

Interesting. Not withstanding capacity, agree that optics has the greatest impact followed by compensators. SAO trigger would be last on my list as well.

 

 

Major beats Optics if capacity is roughly equal.

 

Major irons beats minor dot.  USPSA Lim/CO nats

Major dot beats minor rifle dot.  USPSA Open/PCC nats

 

We'll see if that changes any with the mostly-combined Nats this year although CO is going to hide off by itself to prevent any awkward comparisons ... 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, shred said:

Major beats Optics if capacity is roughly equal.

 

Major irons beats minor dot.  USPSA Lim/CO nats

Major dot beats minor rifle dot.  USPSA Open/PCC nats

 

We'll see if that changes any with the mostly-combined Nats this year although CO is going to hide off by itself to prevent any awkward comparisons ... 

 

Why do people keep giving a s#!t about which division beats another?

 

That's not how this works and that's likely what gives rise to the increasing BS of people wanting to screw with divisions that sometimes they don't even participate in.

 

 

[twodownzero]

50 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Why do people keep giving a s#!t about which division beats another?

 

That's not how this works and that's likely what gives rise to the increasing BS of people wanting to screw with divisions that sometimes they don't even participate in.

 

 

Because there's so many divisions now that everyone just ignores them.  We could have just left things alone and got rid of L-10, but instead we had to give every niche, even rifles, a place to play.  Now we have to pay the price.

Edited May 21, 2022 by twodownzero

[BritinUSA]

• I think L-10 needs to go.
• Revolver is dying on its own (the 6/8 Major/Minor was a stake through the heart of it).
• PCC should have been its own match from the start, they had to fold, spindle and mutilate the handgun rules to accommodate it.
• Single Stack is the origin of the sport, and should always have it own unique flavor of Nationals (like it was at PASA).
• Limited, Production, Open and Production Optics are the top four and the original design/concept of each one complemented and offset the others. 

But the discussion here is just going around in circles, there is only one game in town at this point which is USPSA and the org will follow the 'path of revenue' over the core fundamentals of the sport. 

 

I wish there was choice here; I would like to see a separate organization using the IPSC rules which would allow people to vote with their feet and put their money into the sport that aligns closest to their goals. As it stands we cannot shoot an IPSC match without being a member of this region (USPSA), and I will not be giving any more of my money to USPSA.

[EEH]

I willnot be giving any more of my money to USPSA.

 

• my thoughts exactly.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

2 hours ago, twodownzero said:

 

Because there's so many divisions now that everyone just ignores them. 

 

I don't think you understood what I said.  At all.

 

If everyone is ignoring divisions, why do so many want to compare results across divisions

 

LOL

[BritinUSA]

The lines between divisions - once quite pronounced - have become blurred to the point that it is meaningful (for some)  to compare results between the divisions.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

It's incredible that the people most vocal about CO don't even shoot it.

 

I'd say something about that but it will get me banned.

[twodownzero]

5 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

I don't think you understood what I said.  At all.

 

If everyone is ignoring divisions, why do so many want to compare results across divisions

 

LOL

 

Because the divisions no longer matter.  They just care about the overall results.  Which suggests that maybe we ought to get rid of them entirely and just shoot heads up.

[BritinUSA]

2 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

It's incredible that the people most vocal about CO don't even shoot it.

I’ve been vocal and shot it before it was even a thing, I don’t shoot any more for the simple reason that they broke it.

[motosapiens]

59 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

I’ve been vocal and shot it before it was even a thing, I don’t shoot any more for the simple reason that they broke it.

you broke this thread too, but you keep posting in it.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

2 hours ago, twodownzero said:

 

Because the divisions no longer matter.  They just care about the overall results.  Which suggests that maybe we ought to get rid of them entirely and just shoot heads up.

 

That's what you and maybe 5 people here think.

 

That's not how anyone I know thinks.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

2 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

I don’t shoot any more for the simple reason that they broke it.

 

The overwhelming majority of CO competitors disagree with you.

 

At least in Area 5

Edited May 22, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[shred]

I was only responding to the people that were ranking what 'features' they thought made different competitive differences.  They had 'Dot' being more of a difference than 'Major', which isn't borne out by evidence.

 

I bet if CO was allowed to start from Low-Ready, that would increase participation too.  Lets do that.

 

 

 

[ddc]

12 hours ago, motosapiens said:

you broke this thread too, but you keep posting in it.

 

[twodownzero]

12 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

That's what you and maybe 5 people here think.

 

That's not how anyone I know thinks.

 

If that was true, we would have had no reason to add divisions, other than for rifles.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

5 hours ago, twodownzero said:

 

If that was true, we would have had no reason to add divisions, other than for rifles.

 

Wrong about CO

Wrong about why we have more divisions

Wrong about......

Edited May 22, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[LuvDog]

I think I just need to shoot limited 10 that way I can place more often

[Dr_Z]

On 5/19/2022 at 10:19 AM, Boomstick303 said:

 

 

What does it matter is it is more crowded?

I think it matters at least to me. Here is my situation, I like shooting iron sights. But my local matches have been seeing less and less iron sights shooters. Recently, my local matches on average have 50% if not more people shooting CO. You can't argue that a dot and high cap mags drew the vast majority of new shooters and experienced alike. People who are similar to my skill level pretty much all switched to CO. Now, the only ways to gauge my local match performance are:

 

1. looking at overall match performance. Which is dumb according to many. I say sometime it works, but often heavily depending on the stage design (number of steels and partials, average target distances, reloading or not).

2. Switch shoot CO, which I am decent but still prefer iron for convenience and ego (lol)

3. Forget about assessing match performance locally and go for Level 2+, only a couple of times a year.

 

Should we make the current CO worse in an attempt to rebalance division participation? Probably not a good idea and difficult to execute (people already spent money to config their 141mm mags). Should we make iron divisions more attractive to retain or even gain some participation? I say yes, below is what I am thinking (of course, these are off the current thread topic). 

 

1. Bump production mag capacity to the same as CO, i.e. 141 mm. So, one mag rule for both "production gun" divisions.

2. Bump limited mag capacity to the same as open, i.e. 170 mm. So, one mag rule for both "race gun" divisions. 

 

With that the only specific capacity divisions left will be the classic ones, which I think should be left alone for special flavor.  

[Johnny_Chimpo]

34 minutes ago, Dr_Z said:

1. Bump production mag capacity to the same as CO, i.e. 141 mm. So, one mag rule for both "production gun" divisions.

2. Bump limited mag capacity to the same as open, i.e. 170 mm. So, one mag rule for both "race gun" divisions. 

 

With that the only specific capacity divisions left will be the classic ones, which I think should be left alone for special flavor.  

 

Interesting.  I think that would do the most good with the least damage.

 

It will be interesting if Production gains traction again.  In my area (western Ohio/eastern Indiana) it's virtually dead.  Personally I will not switch back even if your proposal gets adopted.  What drew me to CO was the use of an optic on a production type pistol, not the higher magazine capacity.

Edited June 19, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[Cuz]

8 hours ago, Dr_Z said:

 

1. Bump production mag capacity to the same as CO, i.e. 141 mm. So, one mag rule for both "production gun" divisions.

2. Bump limited mag capacity to the same as open, i.e. 170 mm. So, one mag rule for both "race gun" divisions. 

 

With that the only specific capacity divisions left will be the classic ones, which I think should be left alone for special flavor.  

That’s probably one of the most reasonable suggestions I’ve heard so far.