Open vs CO

[RJH]

1 minute ago, vtecpaoche said:

 

Well, there can be a couple of rules to make it more perfect like magwells and bumping the weight limit now that some CO guns are above the 59 ounce limit.  I'm sure some would advocate for allowing single action guns into CO even though some triggers on DA/SA guns are even better than SA only guns.

I must be honest, I like the magwell idea LOL. As for the rest of it I don't care, if you're shooting minor and a slide Rider I don't think the rest of it matters too much

[Racinready300ex]

7 minutes ago, vtecpaoche said:

 

Well, there can be a couple of rules to make it more perfect like magwells and bumping the weight limit now that some CO guns are above the 59 ounce limit.  I'm sure some would advocate for allowing single action guns into CO even though some triggers on DA/SA guns are even better than SA only guns.

 

I know guys that want exactly that. Add SAO and magwells and they say it'd be perfect. To me then the divisions are all basically the same gun. It would probably make sense to change our name to something like SASS and be 2011 Shooters Society. To me that makes CO just a little bit worse just like the last few changes have. I'd probably shoot something else at that point. 

 

One might also thing that if SAO and magwells make CO rules more perfect. Does that mean Open might have more perfect CO rules then CO? 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Racinready300ex

[BritinUSA]

I think if USPSA continues to diverge from IPSC’s divisions then there is a risk that a competing organization will replace it under the IPSC umbrella. 
 

The divisions have been slightly different since the schism that occurred around 2000, but USPSA is now advocating changes that are completely at odds with the rest of the world..

[RJH]

19 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

I think if USPSA continues to diverge from IPSC’s divisions then there is a risk that a competing organization will replace it under the IPSC umbrella. 
 

The divisions have been slightly different since the schism that occurred around 2000, but USPSA is now advocating changes that are completely at odds with the rest of the world..

I wonder how many USPSA members actually care about that, and how many USPSA members it actually would affect. Other than the very small percentage that goes to world shoots and ipsc events, I have a feeling that the vast majority of USPSA members do not care at all about ipsc

[usmc1974]

11 hours ago, Bakerjd said:

CO should have stayed with the exact same rules as production with the addition of optic required.

Why? 

[ima45dv8]

2 hours ago, RJH said:

Production was adopted in about 99 in  the middle of the Brady Bill so if you went out and bought a brand new glock 17 or any other gun it was only going to have 10 round magazines max regardless of caliber. Making a new division that required more than 10 round mags would have fallen flat from the get-go. If you look back every division created during the Brady Bill years was created as a limited capacity division because low cap mags is all you could get, it had nothing to do with competitive equity of nine versus 45. It had everything to do with the maximum mags anybody could get with a reasonable price were 10 rounders.

 

Yeah, that would apply to new purchases, but that doesn't take into account all of the grandfathered mags people already had (and created). The BoD's published rationales at the time included the exact reasoning I posted. When the AWB expired in 2004 people started clamoring for a lift on the 10-round restriction (an issued as lively today as ever) thinking that was sole reasoning for the limitation. But that didn't take into account the stated goal of getting the tak-tickle crowd to come out with their Ruger P-95's and such.

[SGT_Schultz]

4 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

It's interesting how we decide if rules are good or not. HQ has tweaked and tweaked CO until now in this area it's dominating all the other divisions. So it must be perfect.

 

At the same time we have discussion of "how do we save ____ division?" But in order to increase participation of one division then participation of another division must go down. So if for example we make Prod 140mm mags and suddenly half the CO people ditch their dot and go back to irons did we fix production or break CO? Or both?

 

 

What leads you to assume that this is a zero-sum game?  It's probably not hard evidence or data.

[SGT_Schultz]

2 hours ago, vtecpaoche said:

 

Well, there can be a couple of rules to make it more perfect like magwells and bumping the weight limit now that some CO guns are above the 59 ounce limit.  I'm sure some would advocate for allowing single action guns into CO even though some triggers on DA/SA guns are even better than SA only guns.

 

If that's what you want, Open is waiting for you.

[RJH]

29 minutes ago, ima45dv8 said:

Yeah, that would apply to new purchases, but that doesn't take into account all of the grandfathered mags people already had (and created). The BoD's published rationales at the time included the exact reasoning I posted. When the AWB expired in 2004 people started clamoring for a lift on the 10-round restriction (an issued as lively today as ever) thinking that was sole reasoning for the limitation. But that didn't take into account the stated goal of getting the tak-tickle crowd to come out with their Ruger P-95's and such.

 

LOL, this brought back memories.  I started with a P97 mostly in L10 so i could get major and my son who was 9 at the time started with a P95.   Those guns sucked, but they were what I had/could afford at the time.  When I started I was looking strongly at shooting SASS but I would have needed 2 more guns, but  I could shoot USPSA with one pistol, and had a legal one in the P97, so here we are all these years later 

[Racinready300ex]

11 minutes ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

What leads you to assume that this is a zero-sum game?  It's probably not hard evidence or data.

 

If I got to a major and there are 250 spots and it sells out where do the extra shooters go? If I shoot at a club match that have room for 60 shooters and has a waitlist where do the extra shooters go?

 

Why are we seeing drop off in other divisions and growth in CO? Are you saying people aren't switching divisions? 

[BritinUSA]

If watering down division requirements increases growth then its going to become a real problem with participation.
 

Different areas of the country have fewer ranges available - which equates to fewer shooters that can be accommodated.

 

[ima45dv8]

32 minutes ago, RJH said:

When I started I was looking strongly at shooting SASS but I would have needed 2 more guns,

Yep, plus about $3,000 worth of period authentic clothing!

[Effectus Magis Per Minor]

17 hours ago, Bakerjd said:

CO should have stayed with the exact same rules as production with the addition of optic required.

Here, here

[Bakerjd]

9 hours ago, usmc1974 said:

Why? 

Because that's what would make sense. 

[BillChunn]

8 hours ago, Bakerjd said:

Because that's what would make sense. 

A CO gun was built when it was a provisional division in 2015 by a well known gunsmith in AZ.  The 10 round magazine limit was simply no fun, especially coming from Open division.  The gun was sold less than 6 months after being received.

 

If the magazine limit were still in the rules, then the Sig P320 Legions would not have been purchased and the carbine would be going to all the matches.

 

BC

[Racinready300ex]

I'm crazy, but I'd like to of seen Prod and CO be 15. Then they would be the same other than the optic. I'd of also been cool with them keeping the 45 oz weight limit. Then they could keep the flashlight rule if they wanted. This would get rid of the silly meme guns that weight 62 oz and need the slide lightened to make weight.

 

Whether that weight helps or hurts the shooter doesn't really matter that much. It's the idea that our sport is literally becoming a joke that kind of bugs me. Between constant rule changes, silly gear we use, and president that goes bat s#!t on occasion it's now more respectable to be a IDPA shooter. 

[BritinUSA]

I would have preferred the original Production/Production Optics rules. I have no real preference in 10-15, though I would lean a little more toward 15 for both as that is what they use in the rest of the world.

 

[usmc1974]

My new glock 19 came from the factory with 3 15 round mags. This production. Production no longer needs to be limited to 10 round mags.

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

I would have preferred the original Production/Production Optics rules. I have no real preference in 10-15, though I would lean a little more toward 15 for both as that is what they use in the rest of the world.

 

 

I'm sure it varies by area, but I see a lot more stages that aren't really friendly to low cap shooters. Meaning they don't leave any break in the shooting to fill the gun. Or at least not enough for someone loaded to 8-10. Sometimes I even find myself trying to do a reload in one or two steps with 24 in the gun. It kind of sucks the fun out of the division when the best plan has a standing reloads.  As the average HF climbs the popularity of low cap seems to drop.

 

[BritinUSA]

Stage Design is awful in this country. Back in UK and Europe they used the 3-2-1 ratio for many of the graded matches and higher. The emphasis over there was for more stages, in USA it’s more rounds.

 

We had small 8-10 round stages with movement, medium stages (usually around 12-18 shots) with lots of options.
 

I used to design stages in USA, but got fed up with MD’s telling me to add a a few more targets to get the round count up. 
 

Round-count is everything in USPSA, especially at L1 matches. Which is why you see so many 8 shot arrays.

[BillChunn]

20 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

Round-count is everything in USPSA, especially at L1 matches. Which is why you see so many 8 shot arrays.

 

With the ammunition and component shortage, the clubs around here are just the opposite.  This past weekend was a classifier match with 6 stages.  It was 80 rounds total.  At another club who also had a classifier match that had a field course for a total of 7 stages, the round count was 120.

 

If the match is round-count focused, as in the 200+ variety, that is keeping some people away.  With 9mm selling for 60 cents a round for those that don't reload (the new shooters) that adds almost 50% to the match cost.

 

BC

[konkapot]

Prior to this latest ammo/component madness, BritinUSA was absolutely correct. More rounds=better stages was the mantra for a long time. 8 movement 8 movement 8 movement 8 ifulsc

[Racinready300ex]

I'm pretty sure you're not limited to 8x8x8 etc, you can have more as long as they're available from other locations. I shot a section match a week or so back that on one stage the best plan included standing in one place and shooting 5 paper targets and 2 poppers. 

[SGT_Schultz]

6 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

I'm crazy, but I'd like to of seen Prod and CO be 15. Then they would be the same other than the optic. I'd of also been cool with them keeping the 45 oz weight limit. Then they could keep the flashlight rule if they wanted. This would get rid of the silly meme guns that weight 62 oz and need the slide lightened to make weight.

 

Whether that weight helps or hurts the shooter doesn't really matter that much. It's the idea that our sport is literally becoming a joke that kind of bugs me. Between constant rule changes, silly gear we use, and president that goes bat s#!t on occasion it's now more respectable to be a IDPA shooter. 

 

Agree 100%

[Silverscooby27]

I, for one, am happy that the ammo shortage has reduced the number of memory stages.