2005 USPSA 3-gun Nats

[scottmilk9]

I personally dont like the USPSA 3 gun rules, thats why i dont go to many of them.

Measuring myself against the best isnt why Im in the sport, i challenge myself against my own skill level and try to become better. And... last years mystery mountain competitors like, Taran Butler, Bennie Cooley, Miller brothers, Benny Hill, David Neth, matty burkett, mike voight, jake kempton, jerry miculek, Eddie rhodes, kelly neal, etc... etc... I think these are some of the best 3 gun shooters in the world, and Mystery mountain isnt a USPSA match.

I know your trying not to compare the two, but USPSA needs to make some rule changes on 3 gun.

[bgary]

Bruce Gary was not able to be at the match due to being sent to Berlin for work.

Munich, actually. Found out in mid-Sept that I would be traveling for the next several months, which thoroughly hosed my plan to actually *shoot* the 3-gun Nats this year. Was in Munich last week, am in Singapore this week, headed to India next week. Makes it tough to do a 3-day "side trip" to Vegas.

A guy would think that the folks who own the software would be able to...use it.

Thanks, as usual, for that constructive feedback, Alex! The crew doing the stats for this match stepped up to do the first-ever major *USPSA* match under the experimental-to-them San Angelo scoring. In doing so, yes, they used the USPSA software, but they also had to invent processes for handling the scorecards, assessing the "additional penalty points" for minor-firearms, providing appropriate levels of process control for verification and audit-trail, etc, etc.

For that, they have my undying respect and gratitude. Notably, they also should get some *slack*, since their priority was first-and-foremost on getting the results *right*, rather than just slapping something up to the web. If the whispers I'm hearing are correct, this is the first 3-gun Nats in severa years where the results and prize table list were *not* a cluster that had to be sorted out on the fly. That's significant.... and solely due to the efforts of Dave Buell, Bill Davis, Lorna Farrow, and the others who stepped up to do this job. From everything I've heard, they did it well.

BTW, the match was a blast, the weather was great and the new scoring and multi-gun rules were a big winner in Vegas.

Woohoo!

Last year there were 211 shooters, 18 DQs, This year there were 227 shooters, 9 DQs. Much improvement. Better rules, better understanding of multigun and better shooters and ROs.

Woohoo, again! Goes to show (I hope) that when we ask the right questions, and actually listen to the answers, USPSA can provide things that the shooters want.

Is USPSA Multi-Gun ready to go head to head with SMM 3-Gun? And RM 3G and DPMS TriChallenge?

I think that's the wrong question. A better question is, does USPSA *want* to go head to head with SMM3G, RM3G, DPMS3G...? the answer is NOOOOOOOO!

We don't want to *compete* with any of those. We want to be *part* of the multi-gun circuit that those matches already define. That's why we worked so hard, over the last year, not only to study the rules for those matches and move towards them, but also to start dialog with JP and Randy and KurtM and Mike Gibson and others, to start sharing ideas and identifying common ground and exploring ways that we might be able to grow these 4 or 5 separate matches into a cohesive offering with consistency between our rules.

I haven' heard an official match date yet. *IF* the USPSA 3-gun Nationals date for next year conflicts with one of the other matches, I'll fight against it. I don't technically get a vote, since the President of USPSA has all the authority with regard to the Nationals, but... we've put a lot of work over the last couple of years into trying to bring USPSA into the multi-gun community... the *last* thing I want to do, now, is to create conflict and start dividing that community. If I've heard it correctly, that's what Michael Voigt said at the awards, too.

If gear and division recognition were clarified to be as standard as possible, we could all play all games, all of the time with the set of gear we choose. Win, Win Win if the gear requirements are cross platform.

That's the goal. This year, we (I) spent a lot of time looking at the equipment rules for all the big multi-gun matches, and *specifically* designed the USPSA multi-gun rules to be as consistent as possible with those matches. We want to be as standard as possible, and to have the equipment rules in particular be consistent across matches. More to the point, we don't want to be "different"... we want to be "a contributing part of the community". (can't we just al get along? )

HM is what needs to get nailed down. We do that before it gets outs hand and we are good to go

Totally agree, and that was one of the difficulties this year. If you look at the 4 major MG matches (SMM3G, RM3G, DPMS, IronMan), each of them has a different version of HM. Some require pump, some allow auto. Some say .44 or larger, some say .45 only. Some allow scoped rifle, some are irons only. Etc. So, for the USPSA multi-gun rules, we picked the "most common" elements and wrote them into the rules, with the idea that a Match Director could make them more restrictive if he/she chose. So, for example, shotgun is 12ga only, but the MD can restrict it to 12-ga PUMP only, if he chooses.

We took this approach because we wanted to be consistent with the other matches, without setting a precedent that conflicts with the other matches. The *optimal* approach, in my opinion, is for the 4 (hopefully 5, including USPSA) orgs to get together and agree on what HM is, so that we can make it consistent not only across all the "big" matches, but also throughout all the USPSA clubs that want to play this game at the club-match level, too.

I'd also note that there is a bigger issue to sort out, too. Is HM a division (eg, its own separate competition)? Or is HM a "category" that applies to several divisions. In the USPSA language, we currently have 3 divisions (Open, Tactical and Limited). We decided that HM should be a *category", which means there might be a HM winner in the Open division (scoped big-bore rifle, coped big-bore pistol, etc), an HM winned in Tactical (big-bore rifle with single optic), and an HM winner in Limited (iron sights all around). In this particular match, only "Limited" division recognized HM... so iron sights only. But it raises the question, should HM be "its own division", and be completely separate from Open, Tactical and Limited, or should HM be defined "within" those groups? The other 4 matches don't add a lot of clarity here... for example, SMM3G recognizes both pump and auto shotgun in HM, scores them separately within HM but then scores them together for the overall division. Not sure what the right way to do this is, but I bet if we put our heads together we could come up with an approach that works for all the matches.

USPSA needs to make some rule changes on 3 gun

OK.... such as?

Last year, after the first-ever USPSA multi-gun Nats, we asked what needed to be fixed, and we fixed it, including some substantive changes for things that had never been done in USPSA before (grounding hot guns, new scoring approach, etc). So... for those of you who shot *this* year's multi-gun Nats, how did we do? What do we need to do better? Phones are open, representatives are standing by to take your call....

Bruce

Edited October 18, 2005 by bgary

[scottmilk9]

First rule change is the stupid power factor. If someone wants to shoot .223 thats down loaded so be it, they will be the ones taking a risk of not knocking down steel, poor consistency at longer ranges.

Second is the scoring, makes more sense and easier to score if you have one A zone or two hits on paper.

Third is a personal choice, but I like to wear my thigh rig and since Im not military nor law enforcement, by USPSA rules I cant wear one(unless changed in the past year), Most of these holsters give you no time advantage and have some type of locking system, therefore its safer than some of the other holsters on the market.

Those are some of the rules that keep some people from shooting uspsa 3 gun matches.

One last thing, I would like to see HM class be turned into Trooper class, if your not familiar with this, go see how much fun people had at MGM 3 gun and Cav Arms 3 gun in Waco.

[bgary]

OK, thanks.

Your first and second points are related, in my opinion, and they go back a ways. USPSA (indeed, the "combat shooting" games that came before it), were based on the idea of delivering power, accurately, as quickly as possible. That premise became the basis of "DVC" (accuracy, power, speed) which is the defining principle of IPSC and USPSA.

So what?

Well.... many (and I am one of them) still tend to believe that power and accuracy are viable parts of our game. We all know that "puff loads" are a lot easier to shoot quickly and accurately than "real-world" loads... so the scoring reflects that by giving more points to a "full power" hit than to a "lower power" hit.

At the same time, accuracy is important, so the scoring system provides higher scoring values for hits near the center of the target than it does for hits near the edge of the target.

Take those two things together (higher points for accuracy, higher points for power) and you end up with the USPSA scoring system.

Yes, I know that the other big multigun matches use a variant of TimePlus (and, in fact, some of them vary from each other, especially in regard to penalties). But here's my thought on the subject: What are we trying to accomplish with the sport? Is it our goal to make scoring simple? Or is it our goal to recognize and reward those who *shoot* the best?

There's no question that TimePlus is easier to score, both on the range and in the stat shack. And everyone walks away from each stage knowing exactly what their score is. That's great... but (IMHO) it is at the price of *shooting*. TimePlus does not recognize power, so there is no reason (at SMM3G or any of the other big multi-gun matches) to shoot a "real" load. In fact, at some of those matches, people were even shooting "puff loads" thru their "Heavy Metal" firearms, which seems sort of... counterintuitive. Should a C-hit with a full-power .308 really score the same as a C-hit from a barely-made-it-past-the-muzzle hit with a downloaded .223?

At the same time (no pun intended), TimePlus does *not* recognize accuracy. Sure, you get points for hitting the target, or penalties for not hitting the target, but.... should two "edge-of-the-paper" hits really count the same as two A's?

We (the USPSA Board) have spent a lot of time talking about TimePlus approaches and their applicability to USPSA matches. We're continuing to discuss, but... at the moment, I don't know of a TimePlus variant that includes power and speed, and (my personal opinion), power and speed are too important to ignore. So... that is likely to remain a "difference" between USPSA and the other big matches, for now.... quite frankly, I think the DVC approach provides fewer opportunities for gamers to cut corners, and (arguably) does a better job of determining the better *shooter*.

I *hope* that those things do not keep a person from shooting USPSA multi-gun matches. We want to be a game that you want to play, and... ultimately, from the shooters perspective, we think that it is of value to reward shooters for shooting powerful firearms accurately, rather than just ignoring the notion of accuracy and power altogether.

ymmv

Your 3rd point has been addressed - thigh rigs are now legal in USPSA multigun matches, per a revision we pushed thru the Board about a month ago.

Last... HM is thoroughly in a state of flux, in my opinion. I think, first and foremost, the orgs should decide what they want HM to be - there are some significant differences in the definition and equipment rules right now. Second, we should explore the concept of a Trooper class, and see if we should *add* it - I think we would see resistance to basically eliminating HM for everyone except those people who want to carry all their gear all the time... but perhaps there is room for *both* concepts.

I hope you'll give USPSA multi-gun a try. We've worked really hard to make it a game that the multi-gunners will want to play, and in many cases that means we have made our multi-gun rules as much like the big-4 IMGA matches as we can.

Bruce

[Airedale]

"Your first and second points are related, in my opinion, and they go back a ways. USPSA (indeed, the "combat shooting" games that came before it), were based on the idea of delivering power, accurately, as quickly as possible. That premise became the basis of "DVC" (accuracy, power, speed) which is the defining principle of IPSC and USPSA."

Well stated and thank you. Stick with the principles.

"Last... HM is thoroughly in a state of flux, in my opinion. I think, first and foremost, the orgs should decide what they want HM to be - there are some significant differences in the definition and equipment rules right now. Second, we should explore the concept of a Trooper class, and see if we should *add* it - I think we would see resistance to basically eliminating HM for everyone except those people who want to carry all their gear all the time... but perhaps there is room for *both* concepts."

I see Heavy Metal much like revolver in USPSA. Generally, at least in my area, guys shooting HM and revo are 40+ years old and are shooting for the fun and challenge of it. There's rarely any "hosing" in HM (or wheel). Figure out the rules-tell us what they are-we'll shoot it.

Trooper class-I did it for 20 years and get a nice check each month for it. The

Army let me hump gear all over the world. I use a Gator for 3 gun now!

Dave

Edited October 18, 2005 by Airedale

[tewlman]

Trooper class-I did it for 20 years and get a nice check each month for it. The

Army let me hump gear all over the world. I use a Gator for 3 gun now!

Dave

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

come on Dave, you know you want to pack all that gear around at the range!

personnaly I agree with bruce gary on keeping DVC in USPSA multigun. as long as the gear is the same for all the major multigun matches, let scoring be an individual matches own preference. the san angelo worked well and still awarded power and accuracy (i need to work on that last one).

the match went very smooth this year as comparred to last. there were lessons learned from Reno and the same mistakes were not made this time.

I feel that HM should remain a category and not become a full blown division unless there is sufficient participation, at the present there is not.

Edited October 18, 2005 by tewlman

[scottmilk9]

We all know that "puff loads" are a lot easier to shoot quickly and accurately than "real-world" loads

This works with pistol only, try knocking down a larue target at 125yds with puff loads. It just wont happen with anything less than a factory .223.

At the same time (no pun intended), TimePlus does *not* recognize accuracy

I tend to disagree, if you have a rifle thats not properly zeroed, in a timeplus match, your screwed, total time. In the USPSA world if you blow one stage you still have a chance at winning/placing higher than total time match. So how does that promote accuracy.

I think what the majority of the people want is the consistancy in rules, MGA, USPSA or the pirate ships like CAV and MGM. ARRGGH

Bruce, also dont think this is USPSA bashing, its not, you/they do a good job in pistol matches. I just think more people are liking the MGA rules with 2 hits or 1 A alot more. make a new post and do some research as to why Mystery mountain fills up in 3 days, is it due to our weather here in AZ, our range staff, our the type of rules and kind of match it is? I think you'll be surprised.

Best regards.

[SinistralRifleman]

...Second, we should explore the concept of a Trooper class, and see if we should *add* it - I think we would see resistance to basically eliminating HM for everyone except those people who want to carry all their gear all the time... but perhaps there is room for *both* concepts...

Bruce

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If USPSA ever includes Trooper in a recognizeable form...Zak Smith owes me $50.00

Trooper Class as we created it would not work under USPSA rules...given that a shooter can use multiple firearms. There's no way to accomodate for shooters using different firearms of different power factors. If we eliminate fully open anything goes equipment and the ability to reconfigure your guns with anything you've been carrying...well half the appeal and fun of Trooper is gone.

I don't think Trooper Class would fit well within USPSA, or be readily accepted by the types of shooters attending.

We would like to incorporate Trooper into all the major non-USPSA matches. The scoring systems used will work better with it, and the people who would likely want to shoot in Trooper Class are more likely to attend these matches.

.

.

.

.

Along the lines of some other issues I saw discussed in this thread...

Personally from all the matches I have attended I generally see two types of shooters:

1) People who shoot purely for competition, and "winning" is what they are there for.

2) People who shoot for fun and/or practical training value.

Of course there is some over lap between the two.

If it ends up being that we have a schism in 3 Gun shooting where there is a set of matches one group attends and the other does not...I can't say that would trouble me all that much. If we are increasing the number of people shooting competitively (which we should be doing), this is the natural order of things. The more people we have involved in shooting practical action matches, the more diverse we will see these matches become in terms of rules and formats.

[Rob Boudrie]

This works with pistol only, try knocking down a larue target at 125yds with puff loads. It just wont happen with anything less than a factory .223.

If we did away with power factor, wouldn't people start carrying a set of different loads? Some for long range steel; other puff loads for stages with no steel or only close steel or paper only stages?

[ccur]

At the RM3G and SMM3G Time plus isn't really how the stages are ultimately scored..seems like each stage (no matter how easy or hard) is only worth 100 points...So..you can trash a really difficult stage and still be in the game....I personally like comstock as it rewards speed AND accuracy...(What do I know anyway

Cheryl

[Flexmoney]

This works with pistol only, try knocking down a larue target at 125yds with puff loads. It just wont happen with anything less than a factory .223.

If we did away with power factor, wouldn't people start carrying a set of different loads? Some for long range steel; other puff loads for stages with no steel or only close steel or paper only stages?

I know that is what happens at a non-affiliated pistol match in my area. They have some steel targets built with the idea that it took a solid Major load to take them down.

Shooters would bring Major loads for them, mousefart loads for everything else.

[George]

Same thing is already happening with shotgun. Spreaders and shot and buck oh my!

[Chuck Anderson]

I think this was far and away the best USPSA 3-Gun match run yet. The stages were well designed and the rules were, in general, followed well. I did see a couple things that could use improvement. The boxes for leaving or picking up hot guns could use some work. The layout of the pistol box on Stage 6 allowed for the muzzle to point backwards uprange. It should have been a very simple thing to angle the box a little. The other change I would have liked to have seen was doing away with the door opening with long guns. I saw more than one Open shotgunner break the vertical 180 going through the doorway on stage 6. There was no reason that the SG box could not have been placed inside the building to alleviate this.

As far as rules, they seemed to work very well. The only confusion seemed to be on the part of one RO regarding sight pictures. The other was about what exactly constituted a break of the clay pigeons. Originally the ruling was that a single bb hit would not count as hit on the bird. I have to give the RM credit. Instead of taking a, "tough, my range, my rules" attitude. He made some calls and said that he was wrong.

Yes, SMM3G gets a bigger draw. I wouldn't neccesarrily say that is because of the rules though. I think it has a lot to do with the range, staff, stages, prize table and just plain excellent match production that Rio Salado does. This is the same reason that Area 2 (a USPSA match) fills up in about the same time.

[gunny]

I don't mind rules when I fuly understand them.

IMGA's rules are three pages.

USPSA rules need a Philadelphia Lawyer to delinate.

(for example see rule 8.1.1, 6.1.1,6.1.3, 8.1.3 those are fictional numbers but if you have read the rule book you get the idea.)

USPSA does run very safe matches.

I like seeing and using chamber flags.

The 3G NATS rules worked very well.

I wish USPSA would rewrite thier rules in a less complex matrix.

[Flexmoney]

IMGA's rules are three pages.

USPSA rules need a Philadelphia Lawyer to delinate.

I think that may just be the nature of the beast.

One of the bigger "outlaw" 3-gun matches can get by with a shorter list of rules. Likely because the Match Director and crew have been there and done that...with that match...year after year. And, they can call BS on the spot.

With USPSA, you are looking at rules that have to work for the local club match...from sea to shining sea. And, those rules (many coming from the pistol side) have been forged over the years...match after match.

I don't there is really much difference in how things are done on a general basis. It is just that USPSA has tweaked to cover all the little crap that comes up.

With the new USPSA 3-gun rules, however, they are fresh. If there are suggestions to tweaking them, now is a good time.

[3GunF1Guy]

I don't mind rules when I fuly understand them.

IMGA's rules are three pages.

USPSA rules need a Philadelphia Lawyer to delinate.

(for example see rule 8.1.1, 6.1.1,6.1.3, 8.1.3 those are fictional numbers but if you have read the rule book you get the idea.)

USPSA does run very safe matches.

I like seeing and using chamber flags.

The 3G NATS rules worked very well.

I wish USPSA would rewrite thier rules in a less complex matrix.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

At almost everyone of the "outlaw" matches that I have been to they almost always say that in default the saftey rules will be the USPSA rule book. The rules may only be 3 pages but they use the USPSA rule book.

Scott

[RiggerJJ]

Overall, kewl match, very much a USPSA match thou...

Use of chamber flags;

Very inconsistant on the part of individual stage ROs. Some of them wanted them to be used, others didn't! One stage the ROs were rediculous in the requirement of the use of chamber flags, bringing the firearm to the line and general precedures, etc. That stage was fun to shoot, but the grumpy ROs had everyone very nervous...

I believe the rules state that any long gun OUT of a bag must have a chamber flag until LAMR???

Sight Pictures;

again, inconsistant... One stage the ROs allowed sight pictures WITH a loaded firearm...

Don't the rules state that the MD/RM can decide match wide on allowing sight pictures on one target only, but only with a EMPTY firearm???

Heavy Metal, He Man;

As a catagory in a Division? Why? During the awards someone mentioned that the reason only 2 HM shooters were there was because it was only a catagory...and I agree with that. It should be a Division as it is in other major matches!

Random Crono;

In my opinion, random crono doesn't work. Crono everyone, or don't. I don't think random crono is quite fair for all. And throwing out shotgun crono was a bad decision. Most of us use reduced recoil slugs. Some of those rounds don't make crono (520pf) in some guns. So lowering the PF to 480 was the right answer.

Overall the match was hands down a great improvement over Reno in '04. The ROs seemed to know what they were doing, and the match was much better run!

Thanks Carl!

thanks!

jj

[Boulderado]

Hello All:

The 2005 USPSA 3 Gun Nationals was a roaring success compared to previous efforts. This success was due in large part to stage design that was simple, animated props that worked reliably, improved rules, improved scoring system and the weather.

Things that still need improvement:

1) Heavy Metal needs to be a Division and there are many reasons for this. Let me know if you want those reasons. HM division will get HM sponsors ....

a. Pump Gun should be the standard till USPSA is willing to hand out more trophys to folks who want to use autos in HM

b. .44 caliber or larger, Major PF pistol works.

c. I prefer a 10 round pistol magazine limit

d. 9 round max shotgun capacity

e. 20 round rifle mags max

f. Iron sights on all guns until USPSA is willing to to hand out more trophys

2) Shotgun power factor needs to be reduced to 480 or eliminated as a competitive issue.

3) Extra care MUST be given to the design and placement of "safe boxes" and areas for placing safe, hot firearms. R.O.'s need to provide Consistent, Detailed Instructions as to the use of the box or area to limit DQ's.

4) It would be nice if everyone's guns/ammo could be chronoed. However, if random selection is made for the chrono, it must indeed be random AND everyone selected to be chronoed MUST be told Where and When they must go to the chrono station/stage.

5) USPSA limits on Recognition need to be relaxed to alow more competitors to be recognized for their participation and performance within their Division categories and classes. Recognition begets participation!

Things that don't need to be changed:

1) USPSA San Angelo scoring. Frankly I like the different challenge presented by the USPSA paper target A,B, C, D, two hits per target comstock scoring compared to IMGA rules. This is not to say that I don't like the International Multi-gun rules of two hits anywhere or one A zone hit to neutralize a paper target. I like the different challenges preseted by both scoring methods ... don't change either of them now that USPSA uses San Angelo. How is it said? Viva La Differance?

2) USPSA safety rules ... that Standard of all the Gun Games.

Best to all,

Darrell Humphrey, Colorado, USA

[Paule]

Match ran much more smoothly than 2004. (And generally less dust when the wind blew.) RO's did a great job, kudos to all.

Chamber flags are a good idea but only if the RO's have them or we are told in advance to bring them. My wife and I bagged our shotguns and rifles when not shooting and had to use flags made out of shell box lids. We did not complain, but I paid a lot more attention to whether I had a stray piece of cardboard stock in my extractor than where my muzzle was pointing. Counter productive.

Loading and staging of guns still slows the process. A shooter every five minutes leave no margin for error, which led to a few logjams, none too serious. Best I have seen is still the Cowboy Action crowd. Supervised preloading and unloading, both away from the course of fire. Makes the stages go quickly, even for us old folks! Granted, they don't have as many targets to reset, and no pasting, but they still keep things moving along at a snappy pace.

More plaques and trophies. What we need more than anything is more folks shooting 3-Gun overall. Having a lot of these to hang on your "I love me" wall makes it easy to start those conversations on how much fun it is to go to these matches and win an award of any sort. I drove 5000 miles to go to the Nationals. If all I wanted was a nice prize I could have stayed home and got a great one with the gas money.

Major, Minor, HeMan. How about a real change? No one ever shoots a major rifle in Major, and most shoot the lightest shotshells that will cycle their guns, even slugs. Why not make the categories mean something? Bring DVC back to 3-Gun for USPSA, at least.

Major - 165+ Pistol, 250+ Rifle, 550+ shotgun

Minor - 125+ Pistol, 150+ Rifle, 450+ shotgun

HeMan- 180+ Pistol, 340+ Rifle, 650+ shotgun, irons and pump SG only

Full house, big calibers for HeMan, no mouse loads or LR shells for Major, and lots of room for even 20 ga loads in Minor.

Edited October 26, 2005 by Paule

[George]

Major - 165+ Pistol, 250+ Rifle, 550+ shotgun

Minor - 125+ Pistol, 150+ Rifle, 450+ shotgun

HeMan- 180+ Pistol, 340+ Rifle, 650+ shotgun, irons and pump SG only

Full house, big calibers for HeMan, no mouse loads or LR shells for Major, and lots of room for even 20 ga loads in Minor.

Now that we have a manual scoring system that can accurately and easily handle PF within a stage, why not. It makes perfect sense to have major/minor SG if the other two guns are divided by PF too. It means the tweeny can play with almost all factory 20 shells available. It's a tad more hand work, but easily doable if the desire for this is there.

The calibration can be monitored by having the competitors SG/choke and load combo knock over a calibrated popper, if it goes, the combo makes the factor. Calibration is performed with a standard SG, choke and factory load as per the new 2006 world IPSC specification.

[mactiger]

Overall, kewl match, very much a USPSA match thou...

Sight Pictures;

again, inconsistant... One stage the ROs allowed sight pictures WITH a loaded firearm...

Don't the rules state that the MD/RM can decide match wide on allowing sight pictures on one target only, but only with a EMPTY firearm???

!

jj

The (USPSA) rules allow for sight pictures in all variations: loaded, unloaded, etc. USPSA rules all state "NA" where the IPSC rules belabor sight pictures. Although one CRO was not allowing sight pictures on anything other than a wall or something like that, he was most definitely in error. However, ignorance of the rules was evident with the competitors as well--I answered a LOT of elementary questions, some of which astounded me since they came from competitors at a USPSA National Championship.

Troy

[ap3]

Here is another vote for the 3gun Nationals being a success. I was pleasantly surprised how well the pre loading of shooters went for stages and felt the running/timeliness of shooters was well done. I did not like the stage where we holstered hot pistol in race holster. If we are going to have a hot pistol I vote for tactical holsters only. Other than that point, it was a very safe match and well run.

I don't understand why we have shooters on this forum that want to criticize USPSA for what it is not yet, instead of what great progress has been made in regards to 3 gun. We have a USPSA president that has radically advanced 3 gun competition within USPSA and moved us much closer to matches that fit the so called "outlaw" matches. To say you will not shoot USPSA 3gun nationals because you don't like the scoring sounds like a cop out for not being able to compete in that venue. I don't like the small stages and scoring for IDPA, but I still enjoy the competition even if I do lose. Beside the guys that are winning at the "outlaw" matches are also showing up and winning at the 3gun Nationals.

Good things

San Angelo scoring-keep the DVC in the sport.

Pre-loading by RO

Typ 1,2, or 3 grounding rules

multi-gun stages- they just are plain fun!!!

Being located in a destination city

function fire areas

Bad things

holstering hot pistols in a race holster

not enough vendors

Edited October 26, 2005 by ap3

[Sterling White]

(gunny @ Oct 19 2005, 12:49 PM)

IMGA's rules are three pages.

USPSA rules need a Philadelphia Lawyer to delinate.

Flex:

I think that may just be the nature of the beast.

One of the bigger "outlaw" 3-gun matches can get by with a shorter list of rules. Likely because the Match Director and crew have been there and done that...with that match...year after year. And, they can call BS on the spot.

Evolution will occur one way or the other. Lets hope its sooner as the outlaws have figured out rather than later like the struggling Phily lawyers running in snail mode....

Edited November 9, 2005 by gmw2b

[benny hill]

Want to see he-man take off. Let scopes be put on the 308's & it will take off like tactical class did. About 70% of all shooters shoot tactical because a lot of us CANNOT see the iron sights.

[George]

Want to see he-man take off. Let scopes be put on the 308's & it will take off like tactical class did. About 70% of all shooters shoot tactical because a lot of us CANNOT see the iron sights.

As much as I like the purity of HM with irons and even a pump shotgun, I can see Benny's point. With only two HM competitors at the Multigun Nationals this year, we need to look at doing something and this could be what really opens the floodgates. As much as I would like to get the gear and shoot HM, I know I would be less competitive with my aging eyes and irons than I would be with optics. This has to effect folks decision making process, I know it effects mine. Let's face it, a lot of us are actually closer to 60 than 20 in age. I heard something somewhere about the 3 things that you lose with age, Eyes, Knee's and I can't remember the third ;-)