Limited Minor

[BritinUSA]

2 minutes ago, Fishbreath said:

Rules design isn't about allowing everything, or about making every option competitive. It's about providing a stable framework on which competition can happen.

Exactly; People are drawn to any sport by a desire to overcome the challenge that it represents, and compare their mastery with others.

I think we need to go back to the original intent of our most popular divisions. There will be those that will leave if that was done, but those that are passionate about the challenge will stay, and perhaps welcome it.

[Jeff226]

35 minutes ago, Fishbreath said:

 

Your transparent attempt at baiting me is noted and ignored.

It isn't bait, how does it affect you if there is a separate limited minor division?  What problem does it cause?

35 minutes ago, Fishbreath said:

Rules design isn't about allowing everything, or about making every option competitive. It's about providing a stable framework on which competition can happen.

Having built in scoring disadvantages in the same division is not a stable framework.  There is no competition if the formula makes over half of the participants in a division non-competitive.  You can buy a 515 cc driver or a 320 cc driver...each time you hit the ball with either it counts as a stroke.  250cc motorcycles don't race 450cc motorcycles in motocross and only get 90% credit for each lap completed.  You don't pair heavyweight and lightweight boxers and give the lightweight boxer 90% credit for the punches he throws.  Etc etc etc.

 

[Jeff226]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

I’m not cherry picking at all, the fact that you think so indicates that perhaps you do not understand the impacts that course design has on the results.

 

IPSC stages at major matches are based on a 3-2-1 ratio, 3 x short stages, 2 x medium and 1 x field course.

 

Short stages in USPSA are generally shot from a single position, not so with IPSC where 9 round stages can incorporate lot of lateral and down range movement. 
 

IPSC’s combination of stages more accurately tests the shooting ability of the competitor than USPSA’s local/state matches that tend to have a few large field stages and perhaps a classifier. 

 

 

I am talking about USPSA and specified USPSA.  The results for USPSA that get quoted here on a regular basis, and can be found on the internet, do not support your assertion in the slightest way.  Major dominates minor in USPSA limited.

[Fishbreath]

9 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

 

What happens if OEM's run the numbers and decide making any gun in 40 or commercial ammo is no longer viable. Then what used to be the most popular division by activity numbers can in only one way be supported entirely by boutique and aftermarket folks. What do we do when everything commercially made 40 goes the way of 38 super for comparison?

 

Should an important division historically to uspsa and important by the number of folks in it only be viable via small/custom/aftermarket shops?

 

disclosure-not my true opinion or forecasting, but a thought exercise alone.

 

I'm not sure things will get as dire for .40 as they are for .38 Super any time soon. I suspect there are probably hundreds of times as many .40 guns out there as there are .38 Super, and I'd be a little surprised to see it entirely dry up in the next decade or two. I can still buy .38 S&W for my 1964 Singapore Police Force Webley, after all.

 

Engaging in the spirit of the exercise, though, I don't see specialized competition gear as a bad thing, necessarily. "Do anything you want, except for a compensator or optics" is arguably a higher barrier to entry than "obtain .40 brass and handload".

[Intheshaw1]

2 hours ago, Fishbreath said:

 

I'm not sure things will get as dire for .40 as they are for .38 Super any time soon. I suspect there are probably hundreds of times as many .40 guns out there as there are .38 Super, and I'd be a little surprised to see it entirely dry up in the next decade or two. I can still buy .38 S&W for my 1964 Singapore Police Force Webley, after all.

 

Engaging in the spirit of the exercise, though, I don't see specialized competition gear as a bad thing, necessarily. "Do anything you want, except for a compensator or optics" is arguably a higher barrier to entry than "obtain .40 brass and handload".

I don't think the market is going to dry up completely, but I do see the possibility of the guys shooting 40 and reloading turning into the 38 super guys looking for every piece of brass.

[Brooke]

10 hours ago, motosapiens said:

i think we have enough divisions for 9mm minor that are based on the most popular guns sold. pretty sure we don't need another one.

Thanks for that!! I have never participated in a sport where so many people want to change the rules to suit themselves. Limited major is a great choice for most limited shooters.

 

If you don't like it pick another division. Try CO or. God help us, PCC. You can have 9mm minor, 50 round mags and all that dumb crap. Why make another division that looks just like that. 

 

I also have a problem when someone starts telling us what people want. You have no basis for that. Just because most people buy an off the shelf gun that shoots 9mm factory ammo means nothing as they become experienced in the sport. Just because some people want to shoot a pea shooter aimed at their junk in an IWB holster is not proof of anything.

 

Pick a division you like and leave the others alone.

 

[motosapiens]

16 hours ago, rowdyb said:

What happens if OEM's run the numbers and decide making any gun in 40 or commercial ammo is no longer viable. Then what used to be the most popular division by activity numbers can in only one way be supported entirely by boutique and aftermarket folks. What do we do when everything commercially made 40 goes the way of 38 super for comparison?

 

40 is not going anywhere anytime soon. You can still easily find 45's, even tho far fewer agencies carry them. fwiw, my agency got rid of all the 9mm guns except for compact backups. Everyone is carrying 40 now.

 

Even if 40 were to go the way of 38 super and 45 (i.e., used slightly less), it would still make sense to have a couple divisions for those calibers, since we all the other ones give a substantial advantage to 9mm.

[jt1207]

On 5/22/2021 at 1:52 PM, Balakay said:

Are you suggesting that new gun owners (women and millennials) have been flocking to their LGS and buying 9mm 2011s?? Highly unlikely. 

 

 

No, I don't think many would suggest that--based on price alone, I think we can rule that out. But there is actual data behind the record numbers of women and millenials purchasing guns in the past year. Limited minor seems to be a great fit to shoot 9mm + guns with >10 mag capacity + iron sights. Would be great to attract people who could experience the fun of shooting in a much more dynamic setting than the static, slow-fire range. 

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, jt1207 said:

Limited minor seems to be a great fit to shoot 9mm + guns with >10 mag capacity + iron sights. Would be great to attract people who could experience the fun of shooting in a much more dynamic setting than the static, slow-fire range. 

I assume you know the whole reason that many LE agencies are transitioning to 9mm. It's because in the name of diversity, they hired weaklings and sissies and scaredy-cats who can't shoot accurately enough to qualify with a 40, so they gotta dumb it down so as to not look politically incorrect and get AOC mad at them.

 

We already have 5 divisions where 9mm is either de-facto required, or at least not a disadvantage most of the time (ss).

[Ssanders224]

5 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

I assume you know the whole reason that many LE agencies are transitioning to 9mm. It's because in the name of diversity, they hired weaklings and sissies and scaredy-cats who can't shoot accurately enough to qualify with a 40, so they gotta dumb it down so as to not look politically incorrect and get AOC mad at them.

 

We already have 5 divisions where 9mm is either de-facto required, or at least not a disadvantage most of the time (ss).

Mmmm, that’s not why departments have been going back in 9mm in droves. 

-.40 isn’t going anywhere, although it’s popularity will continue to wane. 

-Yes, it will continue to be phased out of LE in favor of 9mm (for a variety of good reasons). 
-Shooting .40 in Limited is kind of silly, but it’s a challenge of the division. There’s no benefit to watering it down. 
-There will be plenty of .40 brass for the foreseeable future. 

 

[jt1207]

8 hours ago, motosapiens said:

I assume you know the whole reason that many LE agencies are transitioning to 9mm. It's because in the name of diversity, they hired weaklings and sissies and scaredy-cats who can't shoot accurately enough to qualify with a 40, so they gotta dumb it down so as to not look politically incorrect and get AOC mad at them.

 

We already have 5 divisions where 9mm is either de-facto required, or at least not a disadvantage most of the time (ss).

Reading the above, I think you and I share the same extreme disappointment in what is happening in some LE agencies (I merely have an outsider's view, and I think you probably have a much better finger on the pulse of it).

 

To clarify my position a bit, I am not advocating for yet another 9mm-focused division. I saw this thread as a discussion on the popularity of Limited minor and am thinking through how it's popularity could be increased. I rotate shooting guns in uspsa based on what I feel like shooting at the time and haven't considered minor/major yet even as I know doing so doesn't help me in terms of classification or "moving up" in the sport.  The sport is just so fun and I really like being around the people. And, to be honest, it is a little intimidating to be a uspsa newbie.

[Jim Watson]

Why not allow 9mm Limited Major?

Yes, I know it will obsolete your .40.  There have been a lot of rule changes that obsoleted previous equipment.  It stimulates the economy as everybody has to get on the bandwagon.

Edited May 24, 2021 by Jim Watson

[jt1207]

31 minutes ago, Jim Watson said:

Why not allow 9mm Limited Major?

Yes, I know it will obsolete your .40.  There have been a lot of rule changes that obsoleted previous equipment.  It stimulates the economy as everybody has to get on the bandwagon.

i understand your thought process but I don't think that is the solution. Someone more experienced/knowledgeable than me maybe could chime in here, but I think the reasons 9mm Limited major would be a difficult sell are:

 

1) the high-pressures of the round would make it a higher recoiling round than 40 in a Limited gun (a division that doesn't allow compensators), so that would effectively be a disadvantage rather than an advantage

2) Seems like all the guns we are thinking of when discussing shooting Limited with 9mm are not built to handle 9mm major, so that would not advance the idea of having people shoot something they already have/is already popular

3) Factory-made 9mm major is in short supply, which means many of those who shoot the caliber resort to reloading, which then presents another hurdle for the type of person we are talking about here

Edited May 24, 2021 by jt1207

[RJH]

I'm thinking maybe we should just put dots and comps on limited guns. And maybe allow 380 as well 

[BritinUSA]

Or maybe we could just reset the division rules; Set them in stone if necessary and encourage members to master their division instead of trying to change it to make it easier.

[vluc]

10 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

Or maybe we could just reset the division rules; Set them in stone if necessary and encourage members to master their division instead of trying to change it to make it easier.

For the longest time, going backwards in USPSA stage designs was hardly ever seen, and now it is a regular occurrence.  Perhaps leadership should follow what we see in stage design....

[Racinready300ex]

2 hours ago, Jim Watson said:

Why not allow 9mm Limited Major?

Yes, I know it will obsolete your .40.  There have been a lot of rule changes that obsoleted previous equipment.  It stimulates the economy as everybody has to get on the bandwagon.

 

Really it doesn't. It's kinda like the broken window fallacy. And it's a terrible justification for rules changes. 

 

[Jeff226]

12 hours ago, motosapiens said:

I assume you know the whole reason that many LE agencies are transitioning to 9mm. It's because in the name of diversity, they hired weaklings and sissies and scaredy-cats who can't shoot accurately enough to qualify with a 40, so they gotta dumb it down so as to not look politically incorrect and get AOC mad at them.

 

We already have 5 divisions where 9mm is either de-facto required, or at least not a disadvantage most of the time (ss).

 

They were able to train us all to shoot the .40 at the FBI and HRT is fine with 9mm but they don't use it as testosterone replacement therapy.

 

How many years did you spend in the field before you moved to IT?  

[Jeff226]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

Or maybe we could just reset the division rules; Set them in stone if necessary and encourage members to master their division instead of trying to change it to make it easier.

Great idea.  Imagine how popular USPSA would be today if they just set in stone 30 years ago that it was for .45 acp 1911s only.

[Racinready300ex]

9 minutes ago, Jeff226 said:

Great idea.  Imagine how popular USPSA would be today if they just set in stone 30 years ago that it was for .45 acp 1911s only.

 

But, is the opposite really better? With no rules stability there is really no way to know what will change next year. That's assuming we make it a hole year this time. 

[Jeff226]

1 minute ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

But, is the opposite really better? With no rules stability there is really no way to know what will change next year. That's assuming we make it a hole year this time. 

 

If I remember correctly, most of the rules changes have been geared towards making production and carry optics what people actually want (limited minor and limited minor with optic essentially) and some standardization (holsters/pouches).  Limited has been stable for a while and has most of what everyone is after except this built in scoring error favoring downloaded .40 that forces people to buy guns and reloaders that they wouldn't get otherwise.

 

The problem is they are trying to get where they know we are going incrementally instead of just tearing the bandaid off.  Once we/they quit listening to people that have an unhealthy fear of change...the rules probably will settle. 

 

 

[motosapiens]

13 minutes ago, Jeff226 said:

Limited has been stable for a while and has most of what everyone is after except this built in scoring error favoring downloaded .40 that forces people to buy guns and reloaders that they wouldn't get otherwise.

 

9mm and 45 are also downloaded, and competition guns are sufficiently different from duty weapons that pretty much everyone serious shooting those calibers also buys guns and reloaders that they wouldn't get otherwise.

 

At any rate, i'm not sure there's any particular reason to care all that much whether the real race divisions are using the same caliber or same pistols as the local PD uses. F1 and motoGP don't use anything resembling the car I drive, or the bike I ride on weekends.

Edited May 24, 2021 by motosapiens

[Racinready300ex]

6 minutes ago, Jeff226 said:

 

If I remember correctly, most of the rules changes have been geared towards making production and carry optics what people actually want (limited minor and limited minor with optic essentially) and some standardization (holsters/pouches).  Limited has been stable for a while and has most of what everyone is after except this built in scoring error favoring downloaded .40 that forces people to buy guns and reloaders that they wouldn't get otherwise.

 

The problem is they are trying to get where they know we are going incrementally instead of just tearing the bandaid off.  Once we/they quit listening to people that have an unhealthy fear of change...the rules probably will settle. 

 

 

 

I've yet to see any kind of survey showing what the member ship wants Prod and CO to look like. I find it hard to imagine the majority thought brass and tungsten frame weights were a good idea but here we are. 

[motosapiens]

4 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I've yet to see any kind of survey showing what the member ship wants Prod and CO to look like. I find it hard to imagine the majority thought brass and tungsten frame weights were a good idea but here we are. 

everyone I know personally and have talked to about it (except possbily one guy in oregon) thinks the option to personalize your gun with those things (and others) is a good idea. For sure, the same 10 guys on the this forum are still opposed, for the same old reasons.

 

imho, once the rules allow heavy guns and custom features on factory guns, there's no reason to prohibit people from adding those features and weight to their existing guns.

Edited May 24, 2021 by motosapiens

[jt1207]

34 minutes ago, Jeff226 said:

 

The problem is they are trying to get where they know we are going incrementally instead of just tearing the bandaid off.  Once we/they quit listening to people that have an unhealthy fear of change...the rules probably will settle. 

 

 

 I haven't been around long enough to understand what you are saying here. I obviously get the band-aid reference but what division is headed where?

Edited May 24, 2021 by jt1207