2011 and Carry optics

[Blaize]

1 hour ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

So you're saying people are not shooting USPSA CO because they won't turn a screw and slide off a magwell that came with their Canik or SIG?

 

I'd rather they'd just stay away then.

and you are exactly one of the people that are bad for the sport. Poor attitude, poor mindset about growing the sport. 
 

gotta do things the hard way just for the sake of it kinda guy.

 

yeah people can easily pop off a magwell, it just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.

 

like the other poster mentioned about his group of friends coming out trying to shoot their “actual” carry guns…. Oh no.. wait, you can’t play with those here.

 

this is why people are actively trying to start new leagues and there are plenty other outlaw matches and other types of shooting events for me to get too deep into USPSA.

 

snd I’m not the only one, I personally know of dozens and dozens of shooters who feel the exact same way.

 

eventually you will have fun playing in the sandbox all by yourself. Have fun buddy. 

[RJH]

1 hour ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Carry Optics began as Production with a dot.  It was that way from day 1.

 

SAO pistols have never been allowed in Production.

 

The weight limit was raised from 35 (approx) to 46 (approx) within a year of CO being created.

 

So the argument that CO was a hider division for lightweight plastic pistols is false.

 

Just like Production, it was never meant to include SAO handguns because those have already plenty of places to be competitive in.

 

So sorry that you don't like DA/SA or striker fired pistols.

 

 

 

Production eliminated 1911's because even way back when people thought 1911s were a huge advantage. Then single stack came about and what the hell happened? The overalls proved that 1911's and production guns shot virtually the exact same scores. So that was the first time it was proven that 19/2011 guns were no actual advantage over plastic guns. Yes I was there, I don't know if you were or not.

 

I don't believe I ever said carry optics was a hider division for plastic guns, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about there. 

 

Sao guns and striker guns can both be competitive in the same division it has been proven in limited and limited 10 Time and Time and Time and Time again, and has been proven if you compare single stack and production numbers in the overalls Time and Time and Time again.

 

When you use logic, and applicable results that have been proven over and over you see that there is no discernible difference in scores between saos and da/sa and striker guns. The people who practice win the people who don't, don't. Not allowing Sao guns in any division is based strictly on feels and not objective results.

 

Sorry you're scared of Sao guns

[RJH]

52 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

i think people would choose a 2011 because' it's objectively faster and easier to shoot. Sure, a few sponsored shooters with lots of talent, resources and drive can overcome the disadvantages of carry/duty guns, but the overwhelming majority of people who spend their own money and don't get paid to shoot are going to go with the high performance option, even if it costs more and is dumb to carry.

 

You misspelled subjectively

 

There are many 2011s that are around 40 ounces, that's less than czsp01s if I remember correctly. So your duty gun reasoning is completely flawed and I show you every time you bring it up how it's incorrect.

 

Get on Google and watch a Matt hempel video. Tell me if you think he's really going to make huge gains by going to a heavy (lol) 2011 over his (lightweight)czsp01, I'm going to go with his scores are going to stay the same. 

 

And yep dumb people will spend their money on expensive guns instead of practice, they buy Accu Shadow twos already.

 

Do you have any truly objective arguments that are based on anything other than your feels that I haven't poked a million holes in already? Like do you have actual results from a match where plastic guns can't keep up with saos? I've discussed many many examples of plastic guns keeping up with saos just fine. Do you have any examples of super heavyweight guns that are not already illegal as far as weight is concerned? Seems like 53 Oz or whatever it is is 53 Oz whether it's an Sao gun or a dasa gun. Cost? There's many examples of low cost Sao guns.

 

All your reasons for keeping saos out of carryouts really just come down to your feels. You sure you don't have a grip like a 12-year-old girl? You sure seem to run off of your emotions like one

[Johnny_Chimpo]

40 minutes ago, Blaize said:

this is why people are actively trying to start new leagues and there are plenty other outlaw matches and other types of shooting events for me to get too deep into USPSA.

 

They have all come and gone and no one remembers what they were.  IDPA is the only one that had any staying power and it's a joke with a suggestions book instead of a rule book and participation that's a fraction of USPSA's.

 

So

And enjoy your outlaw matches

Edited October 19, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[Johnny_Chimpo]

27 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

Production eliminated 1911's because even way back when people thought 1911s were a huge advantage. Then single stack came about and what the hell happened? The overalls proved that 1911's and production guns shot virtually the exact same scores. So that was the first time it was proven that 19/2011 guns were no actual advantage over plastic guns. Yes I was there, I don't know if you were or not.

 

I don't believe I ever said carry optics was a hider division for plastic guns, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about there. 

 

Sao guns and striker guns can both be competitive in the same division it has been proven in limited and limited 10 Time and Time and Time and Time again, and has been proven if you compare single stack and production numbers in the overalls Time and Time and Time again.

 

When you use logic, and applicable results that have been proven over and over you see that there is no discernible difference in scores between saos and da/sa and striker guns. The people who practice win the people who don't, don't. Not allowing Sao guns in any division is based strictly on feels and not objective results.

 

Sorry you're scared of Sao guns

 

It's telling that almost everyone in this thread that is asking for SAO CO is a Limited shooter

[Johnny_Chimpo]

43 minutes ago, Blaize said:

gotta do things the hard way just for the sake of it kinda guy.

 

yeah people can easily pop off a magwell, it just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.

 

 

It doesn't make any sense that I can't play baseball with an aluminum bat.

 

It doesn't make sense that I can't pick up the soccer ball and run with it.  We have hands, why can't we use them?

 

LOL

[RJH]

Just now, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

It's telling that almost everyone in this thread that is asking for SAO CO is a Limited shooter

 

Are they? I haven't been keeping count of what everybody shoots. When I shoot limited I'm still shooting my crapper plastic gun. I also shoot a crapper plastic gun in carryops. I do love my 1911 though in single stack the mostest.

 

I have beat a lot of b class shooters though with my crapper plastic gun in limited when compared to other crappy b class shooters like myself. It's almost like if you're shooting a crappy plastic gun or an Infinity you're still just a b-class shooter if you're a b class shooter, who woulda thunk it

 

It's funny that here I am shooting a plastic gun in carryops yet I realize it's stupid to require them and there are others that just are digging in their heels to keep saos out because of their feelings. But I'm a big fan of objectivity and logic 

[RJH]

10 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

It doesn't make any sense that I can't play baseball with an aluminum bat.

 

It doesn't make sense that I can't pick up the soccer ball and run with it.  We have hands, why can't we use them?

 

LOL

 

Now this, this, is a straw man argument 

 

Pretty sure aluminum bats can be scientifically proven to hit balls further than wooden bats. I don't really care if that matters to the game or not but pretty sure that is a provable fact.

 

Will also be an objectively provable fact that picking up a soccer ball would completely change the game. None of this has anything to do with saos in carry-ops

 

It has been objectively proven multiple times that striker guns can compete head-to-head at the highest of levels with saos. And since that has been proven multiple times across multiple divisions, adding saos to carry outs would not change the game at all. Other than people would get to shoot guns that they prefer

 

 

Come on, give us an objective realistic argument that's not based on strawmen. Facts, we're looking for facts. If you've got some I'll be happy to look into them, but if you're just coming up with BS and trying to look funny on the internet you're  just wasting all of our time.

 

I have already shown cost is a realistic non-issue, weight is a realistic non-issue, Sao versus striker versus da/sa, is not a realistic issue, all proven through actual match results. And it seems like a few other things in this thread. None of these things would change the game or outcome of matches. If you have an argument that's not based on feels let's hear it

 

Have a good one

 

 

 

 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

9 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

Now this, this, is a straw man argument 

 

Pretty sure aluminum bats can be scientifically proven to hit balls further than wooden bats. I don't really care if that matters to the game or not but pretty sure that is a provable fact.

 

Will also be an objectively provable fact that picking up a soccer ball would completely change the game. None of this has anything to do with saos in carry-ops

 

It has been objectively proven multiple times that striker guns can compete head-to-head at the highest of levels with saos. And since that has been proven multiple times across multiple divisions, adding saos to carry outs would not change the game at all. Other than people would get to shoot guns that they prefer

 

 

Come on, give us an objective realistic argument that's not based on strawmen. Facts, we're looking for facts. If you've got some I'll be happy to look into them, but if you're just coming up with BS and trying to look funny on the internet you're  just wasting all of our time.

 

I have already shown cost is a realistic non-issue, weight is a realistic non-issue, Sao versus striker versus da/sa, is not a realistic issue, all proven through actual match results. And it seems like a few other things in this thread. None of these things would change the game or outcome of matches. If you have an argument that's not based on feels let's hear it

 

Have a good one

 

 

 

 

 

Where is this proof?

 

Show your work. 

[deerslayer]

2011s in CO will have an advantage over the DAs due to first shot single action.  Some would argue this a big deal while others wouldn't care about it.  I'm not afraid to shoot against 2011s in CO and I wouldn't go buy one, especially since a decent one would probably run $4000 (ok $2500 if I settle for Taur I mean Stacatto).  

 

I haven't met or talked to anyone advocating for 2011s in CO, but I have read about a few of them on the net and I don't like what some of them say or imply.  The college kids are a good example - why can't I use my magwell?  Why does Major have to be 165?  Why don't the rules fit what I have?  

 

What other game sets the rules based on equipment used by people who don't even play the game?  Does anyone really believe that USPSA membership will increase significantly if the division is changed?

 

I really don't care if 2011s are allowed in CO, but I suspect that their advocates will then begin campaigning for whatever change is next on their list.  

Edited October 19, 2022 by deerslayer

[RJH]

4 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Where is this proof?

 

Show your work. 

 

Go back and read about the last four pages of my post in this thread, I'm not repeating it for you but it's all there. Cost, Nationals victories, gun weights, etc

[RJH]

3 minutes ago, deerslayer said:

 

 

What other game sets the rules based on equipment used by people who don't even play the game?  

 

This is exactly how production and carry-ops came about. Nobody shot production guns and nobody shot carryouts top guns in USPSA until USPSA set some rules for them. You could lump PCC in there as well.

 

Limited guns, revolver, and open guns is what USPSA shooters shot. But then other divisions got added based on what people outside of USPSA were shooting

[deerslayer]

1 minute ago, RJH said:

 

This is exactly how production and carry-ops came about. Nobody shot production guns and nobody shot carryouts top guns in USPSA until USPSA set some rules for them. You could lump PCC in there as well.

 

Limited guns, revolver, and open guns is what USPSA shooters shot. But then other divisions got added based on what people outside of USPSA were shooting

 

Production was introduced in 2000 and may have been the result of the 1994 AWB.  Big magazines were getting harder to find and expensive when they were available.  Whatever the case, how many members did USPSA gain as a result of its introduction?  Was there a mass increase in membership or did existing members just switch divisions? 

 

Has the introduction for CO resulted in a significant increase in membership?  The reduced participation in other divisions indicates that it probably hasn't.  As somebody said earlier, the pie simply got re-sliced.  

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

 

You misspelled subjectively

 

There are many 2011s that are around 40 ounces, that's less than czsp01s if I remember correctly. So your duty gun reasoning is completely flawed and I show you every time you bring it up how it's incorrect.

 

it sounds like you think weight is the only difference. that sounds pretty dumb when you say it out loud because the weight limit wouldn’t change, and is already well over the optimal weight for good and able bodied shooters. i know you know that, so i have no idea what point you are trying to make.

[motosapiens]

53 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

I have already shown cost is a realistic non-issue, weight is a realistic non-issue, Sao versus striker versus da/sa, is not a realistic issue, all proven through actual match results. 

 

you have an unusual understanding of what “proven” means. 

 

cost is clearly an issue. the average 2011 used by uspsa competitors cost about twice what an accushadow costs, and based on my observations while working co nats (were you there?) very few people are shooting accushadows. currently the majority of co guns are in the $900-1500 range.

 

you can pretend that a 2011 isn’t a significant advantage because 3 talented and sponsored shooters have had success without one, but mason still got beat by a noob kid with a 2011.

 

but wutever. its pretty clear that sao in co is dead in the water. it’s probably time to start worrying about how to tweak the rules for limited optics so that 9mm is actually a viable option, instead of just being for sissies and invalids.

Edited October 19, 2022 by motosapiens

[RJH]

3 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

you have an unusual understanding of what “proven” means. 

 

cost is clearly an issue. the average 2011 used by uspsa competitors cost about twice what an accushadow costs, and based on my observations while working co nats (were you there?) very few people are shooting accushadows. currently the majority of co guns are in the $900-1500 range.

 

you can pretend that a 2011 isn’t a significant advantage because 3 talented and sponsored shooters have had success without one, but mason still got beat by a noob kid with a 2011.

 

I gave several examples of 2011's that were cheaper than  high-end dasa guns. I'm not sure why you keep trying to ignore that post, maybe because it disproves your point? If people choose to shoot an SV when there are other options available at a lower cost, they can do that. 

 

There's been more than three talented sponsor shooters that have beaten people with 2011's, I gave some other examples earlier as well, I don't know why you want to keep disregarding that either other than  it disproves your point.

 

Every year somebody gets beat by some noob kid who happens to be an excellent shooter coming up. I remember the first year Nils won nationals they barely had a picture of him in front sight magazine because he wasn't on the super squad, so that point is pretty pointless LOL 

 

Also funny that you try to point out that Mason got beat by some noob kid with a 2011 but want to disregard the fact that he beat 133 other people most of which were shooting 2011s

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

 

Go back and read about the last four pages of my post in this thread, I'm not repeating it for you but it's all there. Cost, Nationals victories, gun weights, etc

 

It's all anecdotal bulls#!t.  I've read it all.

[RJH]

15 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

It's all anecdotal bulls#!t.  I've read it all.

 

 

Actual match placements, not anecdotal

 

Actual gun cost, not anecdotal 

 

Actual overall placement of 2 lol cap divisions,  SS and production, showing interchangeable scores. Not anecdotal

 

Having all this happen for several years consistently. Not anecdotal 

 

 

But,but,  your feels

 

 

 

 

 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

Just now, RJH said:

 

Actual match placements, not anecdotal

 

Actual gun cost, not anecdotal 

 

Actual overall placement of 2 lol cap divisions,  SS and production, showing interchangeable scores. Not anecdotal

 

Having all this happen for several years consistently. Not anecdotal 

 

 

But,but,  your feels

 

 

There is zero analysis done on your "data" it's your subjective interpretation of what it means.

 

Forgive me if I give your conclusions no credibility.

[RJH]

7 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

There is zero analysis done on your "data" it's your subjective interpretation of what it means.

 

Forgive me if I give your conclusions no credibility.

 

No my conclusions have some credibility because people have shown time and again that plastic guns can beat SAO's. And I've listed a bunch of them

 

You seem to come to the conclusion that plastic guns cannot compete with SAOs which is provably false. 

 

Can you show any proof that plastic or DA/SA guns cannot complete on equal footing with SAOs? I'm still waiting....

 

(I will say though, except open. Open is its own thing that is not in this discussion at all as far as I'm concerned)

 

PS if your reasoning is just going to be based off feels as it has been throughout the rest of this discussion save your typing. If you have some match results, hell even your own personal timer results would be something here, I will listen. But if it's just feels, save it for you and Moto's slumber party

 

Have a good one

 

[BritinUSA]

4 hours ago, motosapiens said:

I think it would be reasonable to have some discussion about whether to allow longer mags for minor (we already have a 170mm gauge), and also allow 9mm major (with 140mm mags). 

 

I think it would cause limited to be even less popular, but seems to be the way it's going anyway, so I might as well get some use out of my limited gun.

I think the iron-sight divisions will decline naturally anyway thanks to the improvements in red-dot sights. Just ten years ago, those slide-mounted scopes were hardly reliable, though I did manage to run a Beven Grams enhanced Docter sight for about 18 months on my Tanfoglio Open gun.

 

I’m not a fan of the 170mm magazines outside of Open. If I recall they were only allowed due to a mistake many years ago when the double-stack 9mm open guns started showing up.

[Boomstick303]

Not everyone advocating in this thread for SA guns in CO are Limited shooters but your logic has been full of straw man arguments so why not add another.
 

I kinda of hope that USPSA allows SA only guns in CO along with Mag Wells just to watch the FUDS melt down just like they did over flashlights. 

 

 

[cbrussell]

My reason for first suggesting that SAO guns be allowed in CO was wanting to download my 40 S&W and put a dot on it because I am old and having trouble using iron sights. I don’t think starting a brand new Division at this time is wise, however, maybe if it was Major, maybe. Another observation; there are other manufacturers who make hi-cap SAO guns other than 2011 pattern manufacturers. I think BritinUSA is correct; red dot sights will soon supplant iron sights in the marketplace; are we to ignore those guns just because they are SAO? 
The argument to “just shoot Open” is a poor solution; if that we’re the case there would be only 2 Divisions; Open and Limited. Times change so do Divisions.

Remember, CO was supposed to be Production with an Optic but that is a discussion for another day.

[RVRSE]

12 hours ago, Blaize said:

this is why people are actively trying to start new leagues and there are plenty other outlaw matches and other types of shooting events for me to get too deep into USPSA.

 

I agree and think that the appetite for a new league is growing amongst the up and coming gen Z shooters, many see the ongoing drama with the BOD and a "behind the times" ruleset in some aspects are contributing to this feeling.  Something may not happen soon but there will be a competitor league eventually. 

 

This forum is hardly representative of shooting culture to begin with, many shooters are organizing themselves on other platforms like discord and instagram; this isn't the early 2000's any more and message boards and forums are not the way that many interface with the larger community.  People may think that uspsa is invincible or has staying power but history shows all organizations come and go, especially when some aspects of it don't appeal to new shooters.  Rules about SAO not being allowed in certain divisions, 40sw -which is a dead caliber anywhere else-, and rules against leg strap holsters all need reconsidering.

[Racinready300ex]

2 hours ago, cbrussell said:

 I don’t think starting a brand new Division at this time is wise,

 

I don't like the idea of new divisions, but it's potentially the better solution. Adding a new division gives the guys who want a division for their gun a division. It also give the guys who want CO left alone the division they want. On top of that sponsors are going to like having another division for their pro shooter to win. We can then bring in Staccato without CZ or Glock feeling like they got hosed. And if as many people want SAO-CO then the division will flourish. I would imagine the two CO divisions would still be the top two. Open and limited will suffer the most. 

 

Given the goals of the org, and the fact that we have a BOD that is elected and isn't going to want to piss off to many people. I think this is the most probably outcome. It's the nature of the beast.