Limited Optics

[Balakay]

1 hour ago, Superkaratemonkeyfighter said:

Only that your minus 3 rounds. 

Options abound:

 

Lose 3 rounds

Fit a 9mm barrel to your slide

Get a 9mm top end

Buy a   9mm LO gun +/- sell the .40 gun with irons

Whine on the internet that you aren't competitive in a provisional division

 

[shred]

Clearly the only way to clean this up is add more complexity.  Really.

 

Make a "Mid" PF at ~140.  Scores A=5 C=4 D=1.  Within a couple years nobody will want to shoot 165 PF Open or 125 PF Minor anymore and they can go away.  All the pistols currently in-use will be able to run, and if you must shoot a lot of Deltas, we still have Major PF around or 125 for people that can't handle the mighty recoil of factory 9 loads.

 

Put in a capacity limit to keep the .40 Limited people happy(er).

 

[CHA-LEE]

All of this whining about Division Changes that will "Require" people to buy new stuff always makes me laugh. In my experience, most of the people whining about being Required to buy more/different stuff are the same people who continually buy new/different stuff ALL THE TIME anyway. So what are they really bitching about? If the firearm you are currently using will now be a significant disadvantage (most likely it will NOT be given that top shooters are winning national titles with sub $1K guns today) and you can't afford to buy a different firearm that is better suited to a new division, then you probably shouldn't be competing in a Hobby/Sport that you literally can't afford to do anyway.  

 

The Firearm itself is far from the most expensive piece of equipment if you are serious about competing at the top of the Practical Shooting Sports. In my budget Travel expenses and Entry Fee's are the most expensive items. In 2022 I spent more than $15K in travel expenses and entry fee's ALONE to attend matches. That level of expense is required just to get me to the matches I choose to attend. Ammo is a close runner up at about $10K a year. Guns, Gear, Training, etc ALL cost way less than those other primary expenses.  

 

People easily forget that we are RACING with GUNS. If you are Racing anything the evolution and obsolescence of the equipment is never ending. In the Gun Games, the Firearm is nothing more than a tool used to get job done. When a new Tool does the job more effectively, you get the new tool. Especially when its NOT the primary expense in grand scheme of things.

 

If you are broke and shouldn't be competing in the gun games in the first place, don't whine about the evolution of the firearms pricing you out. Suck it up and use what you have. What you already have is likely never going to be the primary thing limiting your maximum performance anyway. Its the Indian getting the job done, not the Arrow 99% of the time.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

On 12/30/2022 at 11:35 PM, RJH said:

 

a fantasy division has been around a lot longer than practicscore. I used to look at it on easy win score all the time, before practicscore had even been invented.

 

It doesn't matter.  High-over-all is not recognized by USPSA.  It's not a part of the sport's rules or the official match results.

 

Edited January 1, 2023 by Johnny_Chimpo

[BritinUSA]

Let USPSA do it's thing, let IPSC do it's thing.

 

USPSA leaves IPSC - both orgs use a different rule book, vastly different divisions and they will never be reconciled, no loss to either organization.
 

A new IPSC regional directorate is established in USA - those that want to have simplified divisions and be part of the world-wide sport can shoot USIPSC.

 

Those that want a US-centric sport that appeases to the tinkerers, hobbyists - and Phil Strader - can stay with USPSA.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

24 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

Let USPSA do it's thing, let IPSC do it's thing.

 

USPSA leaves IPSC - both orgs use a different rule book, vastly different divisions and they will never be reconciled, no loss to either organization.
 

A new IPSC regional directorate is established in USA - those that want to have simplified divisions and be part of the world-wide sport can shoot USIPSC.

 

Those that want a US-centric sport that appeases to the tinkerers, hobbyists - and Phil Strader - can stay with USPSA.

 

That would take some serious political muscle and maneuvering to make it happen.

[shred]

33 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

A new IPSC regional directorate is established in USA - those that want to have simplified divisions and be part of the world-wide sport can shoot USIPSC.

I'm all for more IPSC matches in the US, but major IPSC matches have mandatory equipment checks beforehand to certify your gear is in compliance with the myriad of rules. 

 

They have a Revo, they have a SS, they have a Production (they used to have 2), they have a CO (they used to have 2), they have a Limited, they have an Open... the only thing missing is PCC and that is a separate thing with IPSC.

 

That doesn't really seem "simplified" to me.

[MikeRussell]

29 minutes ago, shred said:

I'm all for more IPSC matches in the US, but major IPSC matches have mandatory equipment checks beforehand to certify your gear is in compliance with the myriad of rules. 

 

It's not a big deal. Yep, your gun has to fit the box, has to make minimum trigger pull, and everything has to be legit. It's only a pain if you're bad at planning and time management... or you have a lot of people trying to cheat. 

[MikeRussell]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

Let USPSA do it's thing, let IPSC do it's thing.

 

USPSA leaves IPSC - both orgs use a different rule book, vastly different divisions and they will never be reconciled, no loss to either organization.
 

A new IPSC regional directorate is established in USA - those that want to have simplified divisions and be part of the world-wide sport can shoot USIPSC.

 

Those that want a US-centric sport that appeases to the tinkerers, hobbyists - and Phil Strader - can stay with USPSA.

 

I'm fine with that. I'm just not sure how that would play out in my home state, there are maybe 6 clubs in the whole state. 

 

39 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

That would take some serious political muscle and maneuvering to make it happen.

 

Honestly, it would just take money and promises if all the rumors about the organization start proving true. 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, shred said:

I'm all for more IPSC matches in the US, but major IPSC matches have mandatory equipment checks beforehand to certify your gear is in compliance with the myriad of rules.

 

Not sure how's that different from USPSA section and area matches.  All but one that I've been to (admittedly not as many as many of you) has had equipment check at the chrono stage.

[BritinUSA]

1 hour ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

That would take some serious political muscle and maneuvering to make it happen.

Perhaps, perhaps not. USPSA has to send money each year to IPSC (around $10k I think) plus there is the optional funding of a US team for World Shoots. The org also required to organize an IPSC nationals each year.

 

If USPSA voluntarily relinquished their Regional Directorate then a new organization could be formed which would likely be accepted by IPSC.

 

USA and IPSC have different rule-books and divisions are rapidly diverging. 

[BritinUSA]

2 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Not sure how's that different from USPSA section and area matches.  All but one that I've been to (admittedly not as many as many of you) has had equipment check at the chrono stage.

Equipment check is typically at chrono, but at the larger events they usually have an optional check at registration. This gives the competitor the opportunity to remediate any findings before the match starts.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

Just now, BritinUSA said:

Perhaps, perhaps not. USPSA has to send money each year to IPSC (around $10k I think) plus there is the optional funding of a US team for World Shoots. The org also required to organize an IPSC nationals each year.

 

Those are good points, didn't think about them.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

Just now, BritinUSA said:

Equipment check is typically at chrono, but at the larger events they usually have an optional check at registration. This gives the competitor the opportunity to remediate any findings before the match starts.

 

I've seen those courtesy checks at my section match too, offered by the CRO before shooting officially begins.

[BritinUSA]

Just now, Johnny_Chimpo said:

I've seen those courtesy checks at my section match too, offered by the CRO before shooting officially begins.

I thoroughly approve of the practice, not much is worse than getting bumped to open partway through a match. Especially if it can be avoided by a 5 minute check before-hand.

[shred]

How long has it been since you shot an IPSC L3, 4 or 5?  World Shoot (past 2 or 3 at least), Pan American (past 2 that I went to) and European Championships, the equipment check was mandatory and scheduled the days before competition.  

 

Way more than 5 minutes for some divisions and sometimes required multiple experts on-site to make determinations.  Each of my Open mags, even the short ones had to be approved and tagged. 

 

"Simpler?" No.

 

 

[BritinUSA]

So now it's mandatory, what's the problem ?

 

Simpler divisions? Yes, Production and Production Optics are the same except the latter has a dot. They tried a Light version of ProdOptics and it wud not work out, so it sounds like it was merged with ProdOptics.

 

Revolver and SS/Classic are similar to USPSA. Same with Standard/Limited and Open.

The disagreements between USPSA and IPSC have been going on for over 20 years.
 

Split them up, problem solved. 
 

USIPSC and USPSA, this gives the competitor choice over which they prefer, without having to fund an org that they may disagree with. If there's no interest then it will fail, either way USPSA will save some money.

 

[SufferInSilence]

Per Mr. Latham

“The problem is if we now consider the 9x19 round to be the standard and sufficient it should be at a power level commonly encountered. Which is not 125. 125 is silly. 

I’d be on board with a single PF if it were relative to the ammo used for duty or defense. 140-150 is more appropriate.”

 

I’d agree.  125pf for 9mm isn’t as practical as it seems.  There should be some consideration toward an overall PF change however, I travel the country as an instructor for an LE agency.  Our ammo is 124gr Speer Gold Dot and it chronos consistently at 137-139pf across agent’s various approved pistol list: Glocks, P320s, (even my T-fo Stock 2.)  I still use it regularly for matches and training with no issues (except managing more recoil than my 125pf pals) but that hot , premium ammo still wouldn’t make 140pf consistently enough.  
 

The same ammo runs through my Open gun like a boss shooting minor.  It’s like having magical powers If it weren’t for the points difference.  

 

With a PF change, I’d think a lot of Open dudes would eventually puff down to some hotter minor loads and blaze through stages no problem.  

- Add LO to CO, tinker with an overall PF. 

(guys can still shoot whatever pf they want, it’s not like it’s a mandatory PF ceiling, just a floor)

 

Then everyone shoot there fave technology and have fun.  For the “majority” of USPSA members it’s beer league shooting (like a bowling team, archery club etc.)

Remember to have fun guys.  

[Dazhi]

Curious in 2023 and 2024,  whether Limited Optics national champion(s) will compete for the 2025 IPSC world shoot spots with CO national champion(s) if Limited Optics is stand-alone?

Edited January 1, 2023 by Dazhi

[RJH]

15 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

 

 

Split them up, problem solved. 
 

USIPSC and USPSA, this gives the competitor choice over which they prefer, without having to fund an org that they may disagree with. If there's no interest then it will fail, either way USPSA will save some money.

 

 

I don't hate this idea. I would love it if we didn't have to hear about trying to align our rules more closely with ipsc all the time. Pretty sure most people in America would prefer USPSA rule set and saving money is always nice. 

 

I would never shoot ipsc if I had an option just because I don't like their "you can't leave the fault lines rules." As far as divisions it's not a big deal one way or another to be honest though I do prefer uspsa's take on divisions over ipsc's

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

USIPSC and USPSA, this gives the competitor choice over which they prefer, without having to fund an org that they may disagree with. If there's no interest then it will fail, either way USPSA will save some money.

 

If that were to happen I'd seek out clubs affiliated with IPSC

[Johnny_Chimpo]

57 minutes ago, RJH said:

I would never shoot ipsc if I had an option just because I don't like their "you can't leave the fault lines rules."

 

Run faster

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 hour ago, Dazhi said:

Curious in 2023 and 2024,  whether Limited Optics national champion(s) will compete for the 2025 IPSC world shoot spots with CO national champion(s) if Limited Optics is stand-alone?

 

Interesting question.  I know nothing about the process and politics of international team selections.  But it would stand to reason that a division that has no parallel in IPSC would be ineligible to contest for a spot.

[RJH]

12 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Run faster

 

I'm pretty fast, so running would probably actually help me, but it's just kind of dumb

[Johnny_Chimpo]

Just now, RJH said:

 

I'm pretty fast, so running would probably actually help me, but it's just kind of dumb

 

Right.  Of course.