Prod/PCC Nats??

[rowdyb]

I think they said these two were combined simply because of how the numbers and squading for rescheduling the match made them the easiest to combine. 

 

1. Are you surprised there are more pcc shooters registered than prod?

2. Do you feel one group will strongly feel the match was "their style"? 2A. Or can it be truly neutral?

3. If this wasn't required due to exigency, what are your thoughts on this pairing? 3A. Very few squads are mixed, they are a definite majority one division or another. Does this matter?

Edited July 5, 2022 by rowdyb

[BritinUSA]

Practical Shooting is a test of Speed, Power and Accuracy; How can they test the accuracy potential of a rifle without exceeding the accuracy potential of a Production handgun ?

 

If there is to be a PCC Nationals then perhaps it should be a stand-alone event with target presentation that fully tests the potential of the rifle/shooter.

 

[Bwilmot]

Logically you think they would put optic with optic and irons with irons . But when has USPSA ever had any logic 

[Nathanb]

Pcc should be by itself. Rifles vs rifles and courses designed for that 

[Racinready300ex]

I guess someone had to get stuck with prod.

 

PCC should really be with Open or stand alone for a Nationals IMO.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

3 hours ago, rowdyb said:

I think they said these two were combined simply because of how the numbers and squading for rescheduling the match made them the easiest to combine. 

 

1. Are you surprised there are more pcc shooters registered than prod?

2. Do you feel one group will strongly feel the match was "their style"? 2A. Or can it be truly neutral?

3. If this wasn't required due to exigency, what are your thoughts on this pairing? 3A. Very few squads are mixed, they are a definite majority one division or another. Does this matter?

 

1. No

2. Yes. 

2A. Not with that combination of divisions

3. It should be avoided. 

3A. Not much, if at all

[cbrussell]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

I guess someone had to get stuck with prod.

 

PCC should really be with Open or stand alone for a Nationals IMO.

[Nolan]

Poll question?

 

Of the people responding negatively, ie... Rifle vs whatever, how many will actually be attending the match?

 

Just curious.

 

Nolan

[theroryshow]

Quote

Pcc should be by itself. Rifles vs rifles and courses designed for that 

I agree, they should have their own unique setup. I think it would be more interesting for those participating and the spectators. You can keep a similar theme as the pistol matches but extend a few things out to push people to balance speed vs. accuracy. 

[Dirty_J]

11 minutes ago, theroryshow said:

I agree, they should have their own unique setup. I think it would be more interesting for those participating and the spectators. You can keep a similar theme as the pistol matches but extend a few things out to push people to balance speed vs. accuracy. 

They tried that in 2020. It was awful. 
 

Last years Nats paired with CO was great imo. 

[TonytheTiger]

Just out of curiosity, lets say Production and Open got paired up. Would people still say "X division shouldn't have to compete with the other"?

[BritinUSA]

48 minutes ago, TonytheTiger said:

Just out of curiosity, lets say Production and Open got paired up. Would people still say "X division shouldn't have to compete with the other"?

I’m guessing you mean via participation levels? So some people may want to shoot both divisions at a Nationals event ?

[BritinUSA]

1 hour ago, Dirty_J said:

They tried that in 2020. It was awful. 

Curious, what was awful about it? Was it too hard, too slow, not enough competitors ?

[Dirty_J]

19 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

Curious, what was awful about it? Was it too hard, too slow, not enough competitors ?

No. Meaning the stages were dog**** and didn’t do anything especially unique to challenge carbines. Mostly stand and shoot. Not a lot of opportunities to shoot on the move and such. Probably bc Shannon designed most of it. 
 

One stage with some 60+ yd shots and a 50yd swinger. Which was dumb.
 

There were 244 competitors. So turnout was decent. 
 

I don’t get why everyone get so hung up on PCC playing with handgun divisions at Nationals. It’s not a problem at area or state matches.
 

A good stage is a good stage. Doesn’t matter what division you’re shooting. 
 

The only people that ever seem to complain about stage designs are the low-cappers… so they should all be lumped into one match imo. Production SS. Revo. L10. 
 

Let high cap do their thing. 

Edited July 6, 2022 by Dirty_J

[rowdyb]

4 hours ago, Nolan said:

Poll question?

 

Of the people responding negatively, ie... Rifle vs whatever, how many will actually be attending the match?

 

Just curious.

 

Nolan

I am, in Prod

[rowdyb]

As of July 5th

[Boomstick303]

10 hours ago, rowdyb said:

1. Are you surprised there are more pcc shooters registered than prod?

2. Do you feel one group will strongly feel the match was "their style"? 2A. Or can it be truly neutral?

3. If this wasn't required due to exigency, what are your thoughts on this pairing? 3A. Very few squads are mixed, they are a definite majority one division or another. Does this matter?

 

1.  No, is anyone surprised?  Just read threads on how USPSA needs to change the rules of CO to keep production alive, and that tells you all you need to know.  Kind of surprised by the Production numbers at 109.   Curious what that number would be without Limited shooters now shooting it, or has there been any change yet with Limited shooters adding their hat to production Nats, now that they are split?

2.  It can be Neutral, but that is dependent on the stage designers only.  Stage designers could truly design stages for both that would test PCC by giving PCC shooters optional positions to take certain targets to where there was more risk involved in taking the targets from further distances, and giving production shooters a closer position to shoot the same target and/or target array.

3.  Who cares honestly.  It had to be paired with something.  Due to the fact that they had to split it, numbers of participants is the only logical split in my eyes.  

 

I thought the 2020 PCC match was good, but not great.  I had fun, and I did not feel there was stand and shoot from station to station on every stage.  There was plenty of stages where you could blend targets.  You got put in different positions to engage different targets much more than any pistol nationals or level 2 I have ever been to.  Granted that number of matches is low for me so possibly not a great measuring stick.    Stand alone PCC in 2020 tested skills of PCC shooters way better than PCC/CO Nationals did last year.

 

The stand alone PCC nationals at Frost Proof a couple of years ago was great as far as it being a stand alone match for PCCs.  Not sure why they have not continued that event.  If my memory serves me correct the match was full.  Maybe the 2 Gun Nats. took the PCC matches place the last two years as a stand alone event.  After this year and the dismal participation numbers even before the mag issue at Cameo, I cannot see 2 Gun Nats. Being held next year.  So maybe a PCC stand alone event would happen again next year.  Last year at the PCC/CO Nats, there was nothing there that really tested PCC shooters skills.  That was not the case at Frost Proof a couple of years ago.  

 

I don't think its positive or negative.  Its meh, and I am attending PCC Nationals.

Edited July 6, 2022 by Boomstick303

[rowdyb]

10 hours ago, rowdyb said:

I think they said these two were combined simply because of how the numbers and squading for rescheduling the match made them the easiest to combine. 

 

1. Are you surprised there are more pcc shooters registered than prod?

2. Do you feel one group will strongly feel the match was "their style"? 2A. Or can it be truly neutral?

3. If this wasn't required due to exigency, what are your thoughts on this pairing? 3A. Very few squads are mixed, they are a definite majority one division or another. Does this matter?

I'll answer my own questions

1. I actually am surprised.

2. I don't hope this will be the case. I don't mind distance and I don't mind  hosing. But an unrelenting match if hard cover and no shoots might make me whine a little.

2a. Yes, I think it could be neutral. And by that I mean balanced more than anything. 

3. I don't know. Pcc has their act together by now. Only downer is now having to hear the pcc start condition and such.

3a. Again, answering as me alone, I would prefer to shoot on a majority Prod squad. If I was on a 50 50 squad I would look at moving. Unless it moved me to a Prod squad of C and D. Then I wouldn't move.

[MikeBurgess]

21 hours ago, rowdyb said:

I think they said these two were combined simply because of how the numbers and squading for rescheduling the match made them the easiest to combine. 

 

1. Are you surprised there are more pcc shooters registered than prod?

2. Do you feel one group will strongly feel the match was "their style"? 2A. Or can it be truly neutral?

3. If this wasn't required due to exigency, what are your thoughts on this pairing? 3A. Very few squads are mixed, they are a definite majority one division or another. Does this matter?

1, Not really, PCC participation has plateaued and Production continues to fall rapidly (like every Iron sighted division) 

2, Yes

2A, Yes it can be the designers just need to remember that PCC is just a division of USPSA and they shoot the same matches everyone else does all year, the problem comes when they try to make PCC a different sport and "test what rifles can do" its like they think this is a PCC match so I will invent a new sport for this one match.

3, It all depends on what they are trying to accomplish, I think in this case they thought PCC and Production would have less draw and would make the match easier to staff, but if they keep the schedule the same as open and limited then it will likely fill up and negate that. 

3A, I think mixed squads are fine, the only time I could see the squad makeup being an issue is if its all but one or two in a division then they odd one out may have to work harder at making sure they have decent plans as their easy gut check against their squad mates is missing.

 

 

[Bdh821]

IMO, I'm not too thrilled with how USPSA is running things.  That being said, I seriously debate on cancelling PCC/Prod Nats.  I think this kinda speaks volumes as I am on the Super Squad for the second year in a row.  Especially considering I do NOT want to go back to Talladega Alabama again. I went last year, and that was enough of that area for me.  It's unfortunate that PCC wasnt kept to it's own National match.  Also, how Nationals wasn't in a different location.  

 

Altho, maybe my opinion doesnt matter now that I've thought about this more.  Regardless, I'm 99.99% sure I'm out.  The money it'll cost to attend in modern times, I'd rather spend my money elsewhere. 

Edited July 6, 2022 by Bdh821

[rowdyb]

Well I'm still gonna go, hope I do well again and I'll definitely be in tune to the general "feel".

[TonytheTiger]

18 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

I’m guessing you mean via participation levels? So some people may want to shoot both divisions at a Nationals event ?

No, I mean it in the face value way. I hear constantly that pistols shouldn't have to compete against rifles. We never hear anything like Prod shouldn't have to compete against Open, even though the capabilities of an Open gun aren't that far behind a PCC. But it makes sense that we don't hear that, you're only competing against those in your division, even if there's some other guys shooting rifles while you shoot a pistol.

[TonytheTiger]

5 hours ago, MikeBurgess said:

2A, Yes it can be the designers just need to remember that PCC is just a division of USPSA and they shoot the same matches everyone else does all year, the problem comes when they try to make PCC a different sport and "test what rifles can do" its like they think this is a PCC match so I will invent a new sport for this one match.

Agreed. When I shoot PCC in USPSA I do it knowing full well I'm shooting a pistol match. I don't expect or want any concessions in stage design. People ask how that tests a rifle. Well, the test is still to go as fast as possible, and some other guy with a PCC is doing the same thing, so I gotta beat him. 

I shoot plenty of real rifles in real rifle sports, when I shoot PCC I don't expect to do real rifle things with it.

[rowdyb]

8 minutes ago, TonytheTiger said:

Agreed. When I shoot PCC in USPSA I do it knowing full well I'm shooting a pistol match. I don't expect or want any concessions in stage design. People ask how that tests a rifle. Well, the test is still to go as fast as possible, and some other guy with a PCC is doing the same thing, so I gotta beat him. 

I shoot plenty of real rifles in real rifle sports, when I shoot PCC I don't expect to do real rifle things with it.

I agree.

[Darqusoull13]

1. Are you surprised there are more pcc shooters registered than prod?

2. Do you feel one group will strongly feel the match was "their style"? 2A. Or can it be truly neutral?

3. If this wasn't required due to exigency, what are your thoughts on this pairing? 3A. Very few squads are mixed, they are a definite majority one division or another. Does this matter?

1) Not really. Production is mostly dead except for the guys coming for titles after LTD. 

2) I don't understand this question. You design stages and matches to be fun for everyone regardless of division. Designed for minor scoring and accommodating 8 rounds per position, you prod guys should be blazing through any USPSA stages with those extra 3 rounds!

@shred brought a similar point up in a different thread but I'll re-phrase it here. People will whine about PCC being in a pistol match, they will whine about PCC not being in a pistol match, they will whine about a PCC standalone match being host after MG nats and crushing MG attendance, they will do everything except have fun! 

I agree with @TonytheTiger on this. I'm competing against other PCC's. Just like there's not a single Revo shooter comparing their performance to Open, we compete within divisions. And yeah, I also shoot enough "real rifle" games that I don't think the whining about PCC not being tested has any basis in reality. If you want to test a rifle in a rifle application, chamber it in something other than a pistol caliber. 

3) I'd have preferred Irons and Optics Nationals similar to 9 days. Open/PCC is such a fun dynamic in a USPSA match. LTD and Prod don't necessarily pair as well but at the end of the day I'd shoot any permutation of the divisions. I'll answer all 3 questions with one statement. 

As soon as USPSA announced Nationals was Open/LTD and PCC/Prod I kept my PCC entry AND signed up for Open. If there's a USPSA Nationals in a fun location I'm down to shoot it. 

2 Gun - Shot it.
CO - Signed up.
Open - Signed up, borrowed a gat.
PCC - You couldn't keep me away!