2022 Rulebook Released

[njl]

On 3/14/2022 at 7:25 PM, Sniperboy said:

WHut??  "(CCP) Power Factor reduced to 105" this all seems so arbitrary and capricious.

 

Lowering it makes some sense.  A load that makes PF in my G34 might not make PF in my G19 and really might not (some of mine don't) make 125PF in my G26.  The G26, if shot in BUG-S, already had a lower PF requirement.

[MHicks]

If you're reloading ammo you may find that you need to have different loads for different guns in the same caliber if you're trying to load just above the minimum for your longest barreled gun. ⁹

[extremist]

On 3/14/2022 at 6:25 PM, Sniperboy said:

WHut??  "(CCP) Power Factor reduced to 105" this all seems so arbitrary and capricious.

I would guess it has to do with the P365/Springfield Hellcat/Smith & Wesson Shield Plus with their short barrels having a hard time meeting 125PF with most 115gr Factory Ammo.  And these are the most popular carry guns that people will be shooting in CCP now with 10 round bump.

[njl]

1 hour ago, extremist said:

I would guess it has to do with the P365/Springfield Hellcat/Smith & Wesson Shield Plus with their short barrels having a hard time meeting 125PF with most 115gr Factory Ammo.  And these are the most popular carry guns that people will be shooting in CCP now with 10 round bump.

 

Those are really BUG guns though, and to me, it would have made sense to raise the mag capacity limit in BUG-S and CCP.  There's no shortage of guns legal for both divisions with 10 (or more) round mags.

[matteekay]

3 hours ago, njl said:

Is that a local IDPA club rule or a rule established by the range/gun club where the IDPA club shoots?

 

Range rule.

[zombywoof]

Carry Optics killed production in USPSA.

 

I'm guessing the 15 round limit in SSP is to keep it relevant.

[Jim Watson]

Agree.

 

The difference is that USPSA CO is Production (SSP) with a dot but IDPA CO is ESP (Single Stack) with a dot.

 

So there was plenty of room in the guns for USPSA to increase capacity but not IDPA.

[Thomas H]

On 3/18/2022 at 10:44 AM, Sorpe said:

Rule 4.12.1.3 refers to cut away or painted targets. If you want a head shot, use a non-threat target upside down to block all but the head area. Or use it right-side up and eliminate all but a little of the -1 and  -3 areas on the body. Of course, you're still somewhat limited by the rule allowing only one NT per every two threat targets. 

 

That's my point---you can't use hardcover to make partials that require tight shots.  And putting a non-threat in front of it creates a VERY different target presentation.

 

This makes the new rulebook significantly different from the old one with regard to what kinds of target presentations we can make in scenario stages.  (And it doesn't make much sense to me, since it isn't like the bad guys can't be well-hidden behind cover.  I wonder what the justification for the new "no more than half of the target" limit was?)

[Dr_Z]

14 hours ago, zombywoof said:

Carry Optics killed production in USPSA.

 

I'm guessing the 15 round limit in SSP is to keep it relevant.

Agree with you. Hell, its killing limited too. 

[njl]

So, in SSP, with 50% more ammo in each mag, will anyone adjust their strategy (shoot a little faster and more extra shots)?  
 

I can’t look for the holes and decide if a make up shot is called for quick enough for it to make sense, but I can spend an extra .3s or so per target on insurance…probably just the longer shots. Still not sure how that’ll work out. 

[RangerTrace]

I can't understand why they would give SSP the 15 round mag capacity and no ESP etc??  Make no sense unless they are trying to save the division..

[Johnny_Chimpo]

18 minutes ago, RangerTrace said:

I can't understand why they would give SSP the 15 round mag capacity and no ESP etc??  Make no sense unless they are trying to save the division..

 

I can't see any other reason

Edited March 22, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[Johnny_Chimpo]

6 hours ago, njl said:

So, in SSP, with 50% more ammo in each mag, will anyone adjust their strategy (shoot a little faster and more extra shots)?  
 

I can’t look for the holes and decide if a make up shot is called for quick enough for it to make sense, but I can spend an extra .3s or so per target on insurance…probably just the longer shots. Still not sure how that’ll work out. 

 

You could try calling your shots......

[Racinready300ex]

8 hours ago, njl said:

So, in SSP, with 50% more ammo in each mag, will anyone adjust their strategy (shoot a little faster and more extra shots)?  
 

I can’t look for the holes and decide if a make up shot is called for quick enough for it to make sense, but I can spend an extra .3s or so per target on insurance…probably just the longer shots. Still not sure how that’ll work out. 

 

Think that one out. 6-9 targets, and 3 tenths per. That's 1.8-2.7 seconds per stage that you're giving to someone who can shoot quickly and accurately. A good run in IDPA is going to be -0 to -1 with the only make up shots being ones you planned for round dumping purposes. 

 

Now as you move down in the standings you'll probably find this strategy will work. But at some point along the way it'll be holding you back.

[JWhit]

9 hours ago, njl said:

So, in SSP, with 50% more ammo in each mag, will anyone adjust their strategy (shoot a little faster and more extra shots)?  
 

I can’t look for the holes and decide if a make up shot is called for quick enough for it to make sense, but I can spend an extra .3s or so per target on insurance…probably just the longer shots. Still not sure how that’ll work out. 

I think more people will change strategy based on the empty mag/1 in chamber reload.  If loaded to division capacity 10+1, a shooter can reload on an even number and finish the stage.  This negates most tactical reload decisions and reduces round dumping.  The SSP 15+1 will likely still result in slide lock reloads toward the end of a stage.  Standards stages often have reduced load starts, so 15 won’t matter much there. SSP will have a slight advantage on low round count scenario stages, but it won’t overcome the advantage of a dot by any means. So no, won’t change strategies based on SSP 15; but if shooting ESP/CO/CCP, most definitely yes based on new reload rules. 

[Jim Watson]

1 hour ago, JWhit said:

I think more people will change strategy based on the empty mag/1 in chamber reload.  If loaded to division capacity 10+1, a shooter can reload on an even number and finish the stage.

 

I know I will; I plan to practice the "Cooper reload."

Early days, there were people shooting 9+1 with conventional magazines so as to get five targets to slide lock and not have to reacquire the same target.  

 

Of course a sadistic MD can throw in a Popper to keep it from coming out even.

[Racinready300ex]

2 hours ago, JWhit said:

I think more people will change strategy based on the empty mag/1 in chamber reload.  If loaded to division capacity 10+1, a shooter can reload on an even number and finish the stage.  This negates most tactical reload decisions and reduces round dumping.  The SSP 15+1 will likely still result in slide lock reloads toward the end of a stage.  Standards stages often have reduced load starts, so 15 won’t matter much there. SSP will have a slight advantage on low round count scenario stages, but it won’t overcome the advantage of a dot by any means. So no, won’t change strategies based on SSP 15; but if shooting ESP/CO/CCP, most definitely yes based on new reload rules. 

 

Yeah I think on shorter 12-15 round stages it's going to help SSP. We se a decent number of 12 round stages here.

 

But on the 17-18 round stage, the SSP guy is probably going to need to round dump a few so he can reload into the last position. You may even find yourself still needing to tac-load. 

 

Round dumping will still be pretty common, just now you'll be dumping one less before the reload. 

 

[robertbank]

What I cannot understand is how is it that the country that put a man on the moon births a wonderful sport administered by folks who are incapable of producing a well written rule book.   eg We are told told:

"A.1.3.3 Removable grips may be changed to another style or material that is similar to factory configuration and do not weigh more than 2.00 oz. more than the factory standard weight for that model. Grip modules are not considered removable grips for this division."

 

Further down we are told:

"A.1.3.6 Frames may be replaced with identical frames from the same manufacturer."

When does a grip module for the Sig 320 become part of or become the frame or does it ever?  I ask because I recently installed a Wilson Combat grip module on my Sig 320 Xfive. Does that put me in ESP?

The magazine or Ammunition Carriers " 8.6.2.3 Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the magazine is completely concealed..  No mention in this section as to how moon clip or speed loaders are to be placed other than than all equipment must be concealed per  8.7.1.  

 

If I have missed anything or there are sections which address my points raised please let me know.  I do hope my initial observation regarding writing a rule book is wrong but given the history of IDPA rule writing since 2005.....

 

I suspect there is more of this.

 

Take Care

 

Bob

Edited March 22, 2022 by robertbank

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, robertbank said:

What I cannot understand is how is it that the country that put a man on the moon births a wonderful sport administered by folks who are incapable of producing a well written rule book.   eg We are told told:

"A.1.3.3 Removable grips may be changed to another style or material that is similar to factory configuration and do not weigh more than 2.00 oz. more than the factory standard weight for that model. Grip modules are not considered removable grips for this division."

 

Further down we are told:

"A.1.3.6 Frames may be replaced with identical frames from the same manufacturer."

When does a grip module for the Sig 320 become part of or become the frame or does it ever?  I ask because I recently installed a Wilson Combat grip module on my Sig 320 Xfive. Does that put me in ESP?

The magazine or Ammunition Carriers " 8.6.2.3 Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the magazine is completely concealed..  No mention in this section as to how moon clip or speed loaders are to be placed other than than all equipment must be concealed per  8.7.1.  

 

If I have missed anything or there are sections which address my points raised please let me know.  I do hope my initial observation regarding writing a rule book is wrong but given the history of IDPA rule writing since 2005.....

 

I suspect there is more of this.

 

Take Care

 

Bob

 

I was wondering about the Wilson grip thing too. First thought it's Wilson, that probably helps.

 

Second thought you can buy a Wilson 320, is that gun legal in SSP? If so I would think using parts from it would be okay similar to old rule books. 

 

I want to ask my AC TBH. 

[ddc]

1 hour ago, robertbank said:

What I cannot understand is how is it that the country that put a man on the moon births a wonderful sport administered by folks who are incapable of producing a well written rule book.   eg We are told told:

"A.1.3.3 Removable grips may be changed to another style or material that is similar to factory configuration and do not weigh more than 2.00 oz. more than the factory standard weight for that model. Grip modules are not considered removable grips for this division."

 

Further down we are told:

"A.1.3.6 Frames may be replaced with identical frames from the same manufacturer."

When does a grip module for the Sig 320 become part of or become the frame or does it ever?  I ask because I recently installed a Wilson Combat grip module on my Sig 320 Xfive. Does that put me in ESP?

The magazine or Ammunition Carriers " 8.6.2.3 Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the magazine is completely concealed..  No mention in this section as to how moon clip or speed loaders are to be placed other than than all equipment must be concealed per  8.7.1.  

 

If I have missed anything or there are sections which address my points raised please let me know.  I do hope my initial observation regarding writing a rule book is wrong but given the history of IDPA rule writing since 2005.....

 

I suspect there is more of this.

 

Take Care

 

Bob

 

I was hoping for a clean sheet rewrite which resulted from an analysis of previous rule book issues.

 

I should have my head examined. What was I thinking...

[Sorpe]

On 3/21/2022 at 10:38 AM, Thomas H said:

 

That's my point---you can't use hardcover to make partials that require tight shots.  And putting a non-threat in front of it creates a VERY different target presentation.

 

This makes the new rulebook significantly different from the old one with regard to what kinds of target presentations we can make in scenario stages.  (And it doesn't make much sense to me, since it isn't like the bad guys can't be well-hidden behind cover.  I wonder what the justification for the new "no more than half of the target" limit was?)

Agree. And I think most everyone is wondering what the reasoning is behind many of the changes not least this one. 

[matteekay]

52 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

I want to ask my AC TBH. 

 

Please do. I want to elevate as many of these issues as possible so the AC's can talk to HQ and hopefully clarify things.

[Thomas H]

17 minutes ago, Sorpe said:

Agree. And I think most everyone is wondering what the reasoning is behind many of the changes not least this one. 

 

I actually like a number of the changes, many of which I think will be very helpful for the shooter.  Or at least don't take anything away from the fun, and give shooters more choices.  (Seeing if 15 rounds actually makes much of a difference to this sport, letting people finally carry AIWB, getting rid of the stupid "there is a round in the gun, so you have to retain a completely empty magazine because we say so!" rule, as examples.)

 

Many of the ones that I think are either poor choices or poor wording....tend to mostly be making things much harder on stage designers and SOs.     I think they are making it much harder for people to design good, fun, interesting stages to shoot, and therefore people will occasionally start to contrive ridiculous things, which is not a good direction to go.

 

(Though there are others like the grip module thing and the ESP "now nothing is legal even though the opposite was meant" wording that makes me wonder why no one hired a decent procedural writer.  There are people who literally get paid to write clear instructions, and it is definitely a skillset that this rulebook needs!)

[Thomas H]

8 minutes ago, matteekay said:

 

Please do. I want to elevate as many of these issues as possible so the AC's can talk to HQ and hopefully clarify things.

 

Getting a lot of that done early, right away, would be a good thing.

[MarilynMonbro]

2 hours ago, robertbank said:

The magazine or Ammunition Carriers " 8.6.2.3 Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the magazine is completely concealed..  No mention in this section as to how moon clip or speed loaders are to be placed other than than all equipment must be concealed per  8.7.1.  

 

If I have missed anything or there are sections which address my points raised please let me know.  I do hope my initial observation regarding writing a rule book is wrong but given the history of IDPA rule writing since 2005.....

 

I suspect there is more of this.

 

Take Care

 

Bob

They removed a lot of the rules regarding speed loaders and moon clip carriers that were in the 2017 rulebook.    It just needs to be concealed now