2011 and Carry optics

[Racinready300ex]

9 minutes ago, MHicks said:

Given the number of divisions now what about adjusting the number required to count as a classifier? 

 

Does that really help though? I think the idea was to make sure there was enough competition at the match that your performance justified the bump or classification %. Reducing the number just reduces the value of that performance really. And would make it easier to get a higher classification in a less populated division. 

 

edit

A trade off might be reduce or eliminate the total number of shooters from 50 but keep or even increase the number of GM's required at the match. I could use PCC as a good example, I see matches with 40 shooters and 10 GM's that don't count as a classifier because there aren't 50 shooters. Would 10 more lower class shooters really improve the results?

Edited March 10, 2022 by Racinready300ex

[MHicks]

6 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Does that really help though? I think the idea was to make sure there was enough competition at the match that your performance justified the bump or classification %. Reducing the number just reduces the value of that performance really. And would make it easier to get a higher classification in a less populated division. 

 

edit

A trade off might be reduce or eliminate the total number of shooters from 50 but keep or even increase the number of GM's required at the match. I could use PCC as a good example, I see matches with 40 shooters and 10 GM's that don't count as a classifier because there aren't 50 shooters. Would 10 more lower class shooters really improve the results?

 

That's why I worded the question as adjusting instead of just suggesting reducing the number.

[yekcoh]

With the current regime, I won’t be surprised. A flashlight (but not frame weight) and 59oz rules are all retarded. 

those who change the rules never competed at the highest level. 
 

I think former/current national champions should have some voting power in these decisions

 

[BritinUSA]

I think a lot of the rules changes were made to pander to potential new members so they would not have to spend money to alter their equipment to be able to compete. Fact is, anyone with non-compliant guns could compete in Open and easily compare their scores with different divisions using the Practiscore App. 

 

The changes were made to grow the revenue, they were not made to improve the sport. Many people will state that the changes made the divisions more fun. This is another way of saying that it made it EASIER, which diminishes the challenge and concept of competition. 

[motosapiens]

On 3/31/2022 at 11:32 AM, yekcoh said:

With the current regime, I won’t be surprised. A flashlight (but not frame weight) and 59oz rules are all retarded. 

those who change the rules never competed at the highest level. 
 

I think former/current national champions should have some voting power in these decisions

 

I would be interested to know if Nils or Max or Rob Leatham gives any fVcks whatsoever about people being able to personalize their guns a bit. It doesn't seem to have any effect on the results, so why should anyone care?

[motosapiens]

On 3/31/2022 at 11:41 AM, BritinUSA said:

Many people will state that the changes made the divisions more fun. This is another way of saying that it made it EASIER, which diminishes the challenge and concept of competition. 

 

I definitely don't think that 'more fun' and 'easier' are the same thing, or even necessarily related. I don't see any less challenge in CO. The same guys are winning, so I'm not sure what you think got 'easier'.

[yekcoh]

44 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

I would be interested to know if Nils or Max or Rob Leatham gives any fVcks whatsoever about people being able to personalize their guns a bit. It doesn't seem to have any effect on the results, so why should anyone care?

Did I say I care? They think it’s retarded too

[ltdmstr]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

 

I definitely don't think that 'more fun' and 'easier' are the same thing, or even necessarily related. I don't see any less challenge in CO. The same guys are winning, so I'm not sure what you think got 'easier'.

 

Most LE agencies went to 9s not because it performs better, but because 1) it's cheaper in terms of guns and ammo cost and 2) it's easier to shoot accurately.  Particularly for women.  Optics same thing.  Makes it easier to shoot accurately and despite the equipment cost, saves a LOT of money by reducing the amount of live fire training needed.  As for the same guys winning, that's no surprise.  A lot of that is athletic ability vs. actual shooting.  For USPSA, once you get the recoil and reloads down, the rest is figuring the stages and moving through them.  The first three usually happen by the time you're a decent B class shooter.  The fourth depends on things like natural ability, time to train, injuries, age, and a host of other factors.  Many people excel at the first three, but will never win anything or achieve M/GM because they're limited by the fourth, which puts a ceiling on what they can accomplish.  Those that have those abilities are going to excel regardless of what type of gun their shooting, and wether it has an optic or not, minor or major, capacity limits, etc.  So, yeah, the guys that get there can do it pretty much across the board.

[BritinUSA]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

 

I definitely don't think that 'more fun' and 'easier' are the same thing, or even necessarily related. I don't see any less challenge in CO. The same guys are winning, so I'm not sure what you think got 'easier'.

 

The same people would win regardless of what the division requirements are, so it has no bearing on this issue.

 

The extra magazine capacity makes it easier to:

 

1. Plan stages around reloads as most field stages now only require a single reload instead of 2 or 3.

2. Fire more make-up shots (to counter poor accuracy) with less need for a standing reload.

 

The addition of muzzle-weights in the form of weapon lights, tungsten guide-rods etc, make it easier to control muzzle-flip. 

 

Moving the magazine holders to anywhere on the belt makes reloads easier and faster; Though admittedly its not much of a gain as the 23-24 round magazine capacity has all but eliminated the need for fast reloads except on classifiers.

 

Essentially all the changes that the BoD made to CO has made the division easier to shoot; If the concept of these changes was to reduce the necessary skills to be competitive in this division, then it has been successful.

 

If you cannot see this, then you are simply in denial.

 

[yekcoh]

7 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

 

The same people would win regardless of what the division requirements are, so it has no bearing on this issue.

 

The extra magazine capacity makes it easier to:

 

1. Plan stages around reloads as most field stages now only require a single reload instead of 2 or 3.

2. Fire more make-up shots (to counter poor accuracy) with less need for a standing reload.

 

The addition of muzzle-weights in the form of weapon lights, tungsten guide-rods etc, make it easier to control muzzle-flip. 

 

Moving the magazine holders to anywhere on the belt makes reloads easier and faster; Though admittedly its not much of a gain as the 23-24 round magazine capacity has all but eliminated the need for fast reloads except on classifiers.

 

Essentially all the changes that the BoD made to CO has made the division easier to shoot; If the concept of these changes was to reduce the necessary skills to be competitive in this division, then it has been successful.

 

If you cannot see this, then you are simply in denial.

 

They pretty much turned it into open minor. It is certainly the easiest to move up in class in CO though only due to the fact that classification hit factor is taken from production hit factor

Edited April 5, 2022 by yekcoh

[BritinUSA]

The changes made it both easier, and more expensive.

[Boomstick303]

10 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

The changes made it both easier, and more expensive.

 

More expensive how?  If someone chooses to buy all of the extra crap to be "competitive" that's on them.  USPSA does not make someone buy anything.  Most people can be competitive in CO with a variety of cheap CO options in regards to guns.  I think there is more than enough proof on this board at at National events.  All the "extra" crap is not necessary to win.

 

 

11 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

If the concept of these changes was to reduce the necessary skills to be competitive in this division, then it has been successful.

 

What is your definition of competitive?  I guess our definitions are different.  I see a bunch of people participating in CO at every match, that are not really competitive at all.  To be honest 70-85% of USPSA shooters are really just participating are they not?  Meaning they are not working on the skills to be competitive, which would include, faster reloads, (even if it is just one), shooting on the move, blending targets, quick transitions, working on movement skills etc.  The rule changes had zero effect on acquiring these skills to "be competitive".  Did they make it easier to participate competently?   Sure.  To be competitive?  No.

 

I also think way too much of a fuss has been made over the rule changes.  At the end of the day who cares?  Does it affect you?  It shouldn't.  If someone thinks it does, that's on them because its in their head.  If you want to compete at the top levels you can.  All of the changes have zero affect on the people at the top.  You know why?  Because they work their asses off at their craft, their passion.  It shows in the standings regardless of the gun, and or "extras" (which none of the top shooters use really) at the Regional and National level.  

Edited April 5, 2022 by Boomstick303

[motosapiens]

11 hours ago, ltdmstr said:

As for the same guys winning, that's no surprise.  A lot of that is athletic ability vs. actual shooting. 

In my experience, one has to be extremely non-athletic for it to have any effect. I wish it were different because I am far more athletic than average.

[motosapiens]

11 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

 

The same people would win regardless of what the division requirements are, so it has no bearing on this issue.

 

The extra magazine capacity makes it easier to:

 

1. Plan stages around reloads as most field stages now only require a single reload instead of 2 or 3.

2. Fire more make-up shots (to counter poor accuracy) with less need for a standing reload.

 

The addition of muzzle-weights in the form of weapon lights, tungsten guide-rods etc, make it easier to control muzzle-flip. 

 

Moving the magazine holders to anywhere on the belt makes reloads easier and faster; Though admittedly its not much of a gain as the 23-24 round magazine capacity has all but eliminated the need for fast reloads except on classifiers.

 

Essentially all the changes that the BoD made to CO has made the division easier to shoot; If the concept of these changes was to reduce the necessary skills to be competitive in this division, then it has been successful.

 

If you cannot see this, then you are simply in denial.

 

I don't think I'm in denial, I just think every one of your points is wrong.

less magazine capacity doesn't make anything harder. It actually makes stage planning simpler, because you typically have far fewer options. Larger cap mags allow you to be more creative, and take advantage of greater skill and practice.

 

the addition of muzzle weights probably *seems* to a B shooter like it should make a difference, but the actual GM's I know who have tested it say it doesn't, and just observing the very few people who had flashlights at the big matches I worked last year, most of them had *more* muzzle movement than people shooting w/o flashlights. 

 

magazine position makes no measurable difference in reload speed in my experience until you get to the 4th magazine on the belt (really only a thing in SS). Even then, it's like 1/10 second. Not really a thing.

 

The division is not any easier to shoot, in fact it's HARDER to shoot, because now there is dramatically more competition. If you still actually competed, you would know that. The rule changes simply got rid of some annoyances that didn't really have much effect other than annoying people.

[motosapiens]

11 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

The changes made it both easier, and more expensive.

Wrong, as usual. now you can literally win nationals with $1000 worth of gun and optic, but the field is much deeper so you have to actually be good.  It's objectively both harder, and less expensive. 

[Posvar]

This is all sounding a lot like the PCC conversations when that came about. Will be interesting to see where it all leads. 

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

Wrong, as usual. now you can literally win nationals with $1000 worth of gun and optic, but the field is much deeper so you have to actually be good.  It's objectively both harder, and less expensive. 

 

Depends how you look at it. Easier to win nationals isn't really on anyone's mind I don't think. Easier to shoot a stage with 23 round mags than 10? I think it is, I'd bet the average HF of a competitor will be higher under current rules than under the old rules. That makes the division easier to shoot, but certainly not easier to win. Two different things. 

 

Less expensive, also depends how you look at it. Sure you can win with a 1k dollar gun. Under the OG rules you'd probably have a hard time spending 1k on just a gun. You'd defiantly struggle finding a way to spend 2.5k on a gun, but that's easy to drop on a fancy CZ gamed out for this division. 

[Bdh821]

On 3/31/2022 at 1:32 PM, yekcoh said:

 

I think former/current national champions should have some voting power in these decisions

 

 

I agree.  I vote that PCC gets Major power factor! 

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Depends how you look at it. Easier to win nationals isn't really on anyone's mind I don't think. Easier to shoot a stage with 23 round mags than 10? I think it is, I'd bet the average HF of a competitor will be higher under current rules than under the old rules. That makes the division easier to shoot, but certainly not easier to win. Two different things. 

 

ok, if you want to define 'easier' as 'you get a higher hit factor even if you finish further down in the standings'. 

I personally think the only thing that counts in 'easier' is the competition.

 

I have a different view. IMHO, Everything we do is pretty easy. the shots are easy, the gun manipulations and reloads are easy, the physical activities (running a few steps, leaning slightly, occasionally squatting a little) are easy. Pre-teens and the elderly can easily do everything the sport requires. The hard thing is to do them faster and more accurately than someone else, the more competition in your division, the harder it is.

[Bdh821]

 

17 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

ok, if you want to define 'easier' as 'you get a higher hit factor even if you finish further down in the standings'. 

I personally think the only thing that counts in 'easier' is the competition.

 

I have a different view. IMHO, Everything we do is pretty easy. the shots are easy, the gun manipulations and reloads are easy, the physical activities (running a few steps, leaning slightly, occasionally squatting a little) are easy. Pre-teens and the elderly can easily do everything the sport requires. The hard thing is to do them faster and more accurately than someone else, the more competition in your division, the harder it is.

 

I agree for sure.  People always say how PCC is so easy using a rifle in a pistol competition.  As I do agree it makes longer distant shots easier to get, it also makes them easier for the next PCC'er.   That being said, if its so easy, try and beat me.  If it were so easy, why can't I beat Max Leograndis.   after all, it's easy like some say...

Edited April 5, 2022 by Bdh821

[yekcoh]

1 hour ago, Bdh821 said:

 

I agree.  I vote that PCC gets Major power factor! 

ahhhh... PCC... the Lia Thomas division. You go girl

[Posvar]

Just now, yekcoh said:

ahhhh... PCC... the Lia Thomas division. You go girl

oooofffffff

[Bdh821]

12 minutes ago, yekcoh said:

ahhhh... PCC... the Lia Thomas division. You go girl

I tried identifying, didnt work..  

 

11 minutes ago, Posvar said:

oooofffffff

my feeling is hurt

[Boomstick303]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

I think it is, I'd bet the average HF of a competitor will be higher under current rules than under the old rules.

 

What does this have to do with anything?  I bet the hit factors of the 90s were greater than the 80s, the 80s greater than the 70s, etc. etc. etc.  Because of rules changes then versus before.  Better access to training, better instructors today than yesterday.  Everyone is using the same equipment so what does comparing old rule hit factors have anything to do with new rule hit factors?  We are not comparing hit factors of yesterday to today.  Again easier to participate does not equal easier to be competitive.  

 

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

Less expensive, also depends how you look at it. Sure you can win with a 1k dollar gun. Under the OG rules you'd probably have a hard time spending 1k on just a gun

   

What were the pistols options in the OG day?  How many manufacturers actually built USPSA / IPSC dedicated guns in large production numbers in regards to the action shooting sport market let alone how many guns were good enough to compete with?  Growth/demand for sport specific equipment drives up cost.  To cover R&D costs and keep up with demand play a part in driving competition guns up in price as well.  Look at the cost of 2011 pistols and how much they have gone up over the last 2-3 years.  Part of the reason they cost so much is they builders cannot make them fast enough which creates a low supply for a high demand.  I will grant you Infinity was an exception because the cost of their guns has always been high, but so the demand for the guns has been high too.  The rule changes have nothing to do with this rise in the cost of pistols.  Not to mention you can compete at a very high level with a Canik, Glock, Sig, S&W and numerous other pistol a few hundred less than 1K.  This is just a personal observation, but it would seem the pain threshold the majority of shooters seems to be around 1K + $150 for a competition gun.  This has zero to do with how the rules were written or have been changed to.  

 

I sit hear and read all of these people keep cracking on and on about the gun doesn't matter.  Then you read how you are required to buy expensive equipment to be competitive.  That putting dots on you gun, expanded mag capacity, and when the rules allow competitors to put flashlights/weights on our guns makes the sport easier to be competitive (not just  participate).  If these rule changes make everything so easy then where are all of these newly minted Masters and GMs.  

 

 

[Bdh821]

Mason Lane wins 2020 and 2021 USPSA Limited Nationals with a Sig P320 variant.  Nils took 2nd at 2021 Lim Nats with a Canik.  How many 2011 shooters did they beat?