New USPSA Survey

[IHAVEGAS]

23 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

So the handful of diehard 10 round guys

 

I wonder if that effectively translates into, the majority of people who would be effected by the rule change? Don't know, not implying, just wondering. 

 

Edited July 13, 2023 by IHAVEGAS

[truespode]

12 hours ago, IVC said:

I see too much worrying about divisions with just a few shooters. This is unwarranted because people mostly look at the overall standings anyway.

 

I agree.

I also come from a hobby that had a class for all sorts of ages, equipment, etc. It drew people in.

The serious competitors competed against the top talent in their preferred class. Other nobodies like myself just competed in multiple places hoping for a $5 wood plaque It drove up participation.

One thing about our nobodies who have more enthusiasm than talent... we get involved and help. Focusing too narrowly on competitive equity and worrying about what the top 5% are going to spend money on in an "arms race."

Those that don't like a division won't shoot it.

I get the desire to keep things controlled and not get carried away with things but in the end this is fun and a hobby that very very few make money at. Find ways to make it more fun even if you have a rainbow division that only allows people dressed as Unicorns to compete.

Edited July 13, 2023 by truespode

[Fishbreath]

12 hours ago, IVC said:

The problem with this is that you would still have significantly different hardware that makes it uneven, even though it's all "Lo-cap." 

 

Revolver (which I shoot from time to time and hold pretty high classification) is significantly different from a 1911 with polished trigger (essentially a lo-cap Limited gun), which is different from the SA/DA Production guns and the "plastic fantastic" DAO guns. If anything, we could have a "lo-cap" *division* and then within it specific categories such a revo/plastic DAO/DA-SA/SS, etc. But that's essentially the same as keeping the current *divisions* and not mess around with categories. 

 

Thanks for writing this so I didn't have to.

 

For the revolver case specifically, it's not merely that the hardware is uneven, it's also that the handicap varies substantially based on stage design. For instance, if the locap plan involves a reload in a step or two, I'll be slower with a wheelgun. If it involves six or eight feet of movement, it might be almost even. If it's a longer movement, the semiauto pulls ahead again, because it's easier to seat a magazine at a run than it is to land a moon clip in the cylinder.

 

I think there's a plausible argument for '8maj 10min locap semiauto irons' as a division, but I wouldn't want to dive into that until Production/L10 changes settle down. If L10 turns into the awesome bonkers 10-round frame mounted optic division everyone secretly wants, and Production goes to 15, then opening up Single Stack to anything, with the 8 major/10 minor stipulation, makes sense to me. I don't shoot it, though, so I defer to the Single Stack die-hards.

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

I wonder if that effectively translates into, the majority of people who would be effected by the rule change? Don't know, not implying, just wondering. 

 

 

That is one way you could look at it. That's assuming it doesn't effect the 50% of limited shooters shooting minor. Which around here is a higher number then people still shooting production. 

[Racinready300ex]

10 hours ago, louu said:

Nope, Delaware is 10 rounds unless you have a ccw permit then you can have 17, like I said over a quarter of the states are 10 round states. 

 

 

[-JCN-]

I think they should allow optics on Revolvers in Revo division. Smith and Wesson guns have an easy optic mount sight swap and many people who love Revo… also have aging eyes that love dots….

[shred]

22 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

That is one way you could look at it. That's assuming it doesn't effect the 50% of limited shooters shooting minor. Which around here is a higher number then people still shooting production. 

How many of them are regular Lim-Minor shooters versus one-off noobs with noplace else to go and not enough mags that either wander off or pick a different division a few matches later?  I don't think USPSA ever posted that info.

 

Makes a big difference if it's regulars that actually want to do that versus temporary catch-alls.

 

If we just need a catch-all for the new shooters, make an 'anything goes, run what ya brung' Novice division that is only valid for your first four matches and doesn't get classified.

 

 

[Darqusoull13]

14 hours ago, shred said:

I lobbied for 30-round PCC when it started because you can get 30 round mags for nearly any random subgun made since the 1940s, but apparently ROs can't count that high or do math to figure out someone shoots 32 round stage without a reload is up to shenanigans.

 

Can't put limits on my life brah. 61 or bust

[Racinready300ex]

7 minutes ago, shred said:

How many of them are regular Lim-Minor shooters versus one-off noobs with noplace else to go and not enough mags that either wander off or pick a different division a few matches later?  I don't think USPSA ever posted that info.

 

Makes a big difference if it's regulars that actually want to do that versus temporary catch-alls.

 

If we just need a catch-all for the new shooters, make an 'anything goes, run what ya brung' Novice division that is only valid for your first four matches and doesn't get classified.

 

 

 

 

There are certainly lots of holes in the data we're being giving. How many people shooting CO would of preferred not buy a optic but did so to shoot their 9mm hi-cap pistol? I'd bet there's a chunk of those out there too. Especially once they eat a few optics. 

 

 

 

[RJH]

9 minutes ago, shred said:

How many of them are regular Lim-Minor shooters versus one-off noobs with noplace else to go and not enough mags that either wander off or pick a different division a few matches later?  

 

 

 

 

So, I just went back and looked at my local matches to answer this question at least for my area. Here, looks like about 50 to 60% of limited shooters are shooting minor, and out of those 20 to 30% are noobs. Of course those numbers vary a little month to month and match to match but I would say that's pretty close.

 

All the guys shooting limited major have been shooting limited major for years, in other words I'm not seeing new limited major shooters. I'm seeing more of a rotation to minor from those guys, or completely out of the division.

 

 

Also everybody shooting limited, minor, vastly outnumbered the total number of shooters shooting production.

 

 

 

I shot limited for a long time and still do occasionally. I was completely against the idea of eliminating major in limited for a long time, but at this point I would welcome minor only if it kept the division moving. Plus cheap ammo and guns is nice LOL

[whan]

1 hour ago, Fishbreath said:

 

Thanks for writing this so I didn't have to.

 

For the revolver case specifically, it's not merely that the hardware is uneven, it's also that the handicap varies substantially based on stage design. For instance, if the locap plan involves a reload in a step or two, I'll be slower with a wheelgun. If it involves six or eight feet of movement, it might be almost even. If it's a longer movement, the semiauto pulls ahead again, because it's easier to seat a magazine at a run than it is to land a moon clip in the cylinder.

 

I think there's a plausible argument for '8maj 10min locap semiauto irons' as a division, but I wouldn't want to dive into that until Production/L10 changes settle down. If L10 turns into the awesome bonkers 10-round frame mounted optic division everyone secretly wants, and Production goes to 15, then opening up Single Stack to anything, with the 8 major/10 minor stipulation, makes sense to me. I don't shoot it, though, so I defer to the Single Stack die-hards.

 

Certainly true and know I'm essentially screwing over Revo in my proposed L10 catch-all. @IVC you have a valid point on whether it even matters or not that we have a bunch of low-popularity divisions that continue existing. An L10 catch-all only matters if we're trying to consolidate to having only a few divisions that are well populated

 

Perhaps it's not a problem in the grand scheme of things. I do believe the more important task is to make sure that we're not missing any divisions that would actually be popular with the right ruleset. In that vein, I do think production 15 is the right call; I think it would be a reasonably attended division as I believe it has a lot more appeal than production 10. Similarly, the allowance of minor slide-ride 2011s and SAO CZs via LO has already proven to be reasonably popular. Regardless of the outcome of how the differentiation of CO vs. LO turns out, think it's been shown that we will need to have a division those guns can play competitively as there's a lot of demand for it

 

May be a controversial opinion, but I think the most recent divisions USPSA has added have been good moves overall, whether it's LO, PCC, or hi-cap CO. Since being added, all of these three have shown significantly higher participation vs. more legacy divisions like Limited, Production, SS, with the exception of Open. A large part of these new division's success is being in tune with what's popular more broadly outside of USPSA. Like it or not, we are far from immune from those trends. That's why I fear making LO a major/minor division is essentially running counter to those trends - no one shoots .40 anymore outside of USPSA, and so doing so will heavily stunt the popularity of the division, while in contrast the 9mm 2011 is actually gaining significant popularity in the broader sphere

Edited July 13, 2023 by whan

[IVC]

38 minutes ago, whan said:

May be a controversial opinion, but I think the most recent divisions USPSA has added have been good moves overall, whether it's LO, PCC, or hi-cap CO.

...

A large part of these new division's success is being in tune with what's popular more broadly outside of USPSA. Like it or not, we are far from immune from those trends. That's why I fear making LO a major/minor division is essentially running counter to those trends - no one shoots .40 anymore outside of USPSA, and so doing so will heavily stunt the popularity of the division, while in contrast the 9mm 2011 is actually gaining significant popularity in the broader sphere

This is a very good point and it's actually making me change my mind on the "LO major!"

 

While from the perspective of the sport alone it makes sense to have major/minor scoring in any division, it is not the only consideration. If people buy, own and shoot 9mm limited guns, allowing major would *force* them to either get different guns that they wouldn't get outside the sport, or to be at a scoring handicap.

[IHAVEGAS]

1 hour ago, -JCN- said:

I think they should allow optics on Revolvers in Revo division.

 

Do they hold up with wheel guns? My S&W 929 can't shoot some factory target ammo (federal for example) because the recoil impulse shakes the bullets out of the brass. 

[RJH]

13 minutes ago, IVC said:

This is a very good point and it's actually making me change my mind on the "LO major!"

 

While from the perspective of the sport alone it makes sense to have major/minor scoring in any division, it is not the only consideration. If people buy, own and shoot 9mm limited guns, allowing major would *force* them to either get different guns that they wouldn't get outside the sport, or to be at a scoring handicap.

 

 

One other question that you have to ask yourself on the major power factor subject is:  how many people do you see having new major limited guns built?

 

In my area it's pretty much nobody. Everyone that shoots limited major are people that have had guns for years, and those people are siphoning off all the time to other divisions or just deciding to shoot minor in limited anyway. I don't see anybody having new limited guns in 40 anymore and I used to see them quite often. 

 

It would be interesting to ask some of the builders how many 40 cal limited guns they're building now compared to what they have in the past and compared to what they're building now

[IVC]

47 minutes ago, whan said:

Perhaps it's not a problem in the grand scheme of things. I do believe the more important task is to make sure that we're not missing any divisions that would actually be popular with the right ruleset. In that vein, I do think production 15 is the right call; I think it would be a reasonably attended division as I believe it has a lot more appeal than production 10.

Most of us seem to agree on two points in Production: that Production-10 is outdated, and, that Production is a necessary division. The debate is about Production-15 vs. Production-something-else. 

 

My vote is for Production-something-else. I prefer length-based magazine restrictions such as we have in the unlimited capacity divisions (the pistol ones, not PCC obviously, lol). They are easy to enforce, allow some aftermarket modifications, anyone showing up with an actual Production gun doesn't have to worry about loading the magazines incorrectly, and ROs don't have to count rounds or sneak around checking dropped magazines after they counted to 15. 

 

The true lo-cap divisions are the ones that have natural limitations and they should stay that way. Single Stack major is 8 because that's what could fit for the past 100 years. And minor is 10 because that's also what fits. Similarly, revolvers have natural capacity limits. 

[IVC]

4 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

Do they hold up with wheel guns? My S&W 929 can't shoot some factory target ammo (federal for example) because the recoil impulse shakes the bullets out of the brass. 

Those are beefy guns and it shouldn't happen. If something loosens in a 929, it should do the same in most semi-autos. I have two 929s and they are much softer shooting than most lighter semi-autos. I understand target loads will have very light crimp, but this seems excessive. 

[whan]

34 minutes ago, IVC said:

This is a very good point and it's actually making me change my mind on the "LO major!"

 

While from the perspective of the sport alone it makes sense to have major/minor scoring in any division, it is not the only consideration. If people buy, own and shoot 9mm limited guns, allowing major would *force* them to either get different guns that they wouldn't get outside the sport, or to be at a scoring handicap.

 

I agree it makes sense to have major/minor scoring for the sport, though our discussion has raised an interesting question in my mind on the topic.

 

In the broader shooting community, 9mm has dominated because there is a perception/reality that 9mm has significantly closed the gap to 40 and 45 in terms of effectiveness (though almost everyone will agree that 40 and 45 still will have the edge because they're more powerful rounds). Purely just spitballing here, but what if we were to revisit the scoring for major/minor. Likely will not be done since it's a massive overhaul of the sport as a whole, but say if Minor was scored 5/3.5/1.5 instead of 5/3/1, while major was kept at 5/4/2, would that change the dynamic?

 

Say for Limited, would the smaller difference in point differential with minor only dropping an extra 0.5 point for C or D vs. major actually make it a lot closer in terms of shooting between the two? Capacity aside (since 140mm means 4 less rounds, which still allows just 1 reload stage plans on 32rd courses + makeups), would this balance the speed and power portion of DVC better so that there's less of a clear advantage? 

Edited July 13, 2023 by whan

[Racinready300ex]

14 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

It would be interesting to ask some of the builders how many 40 cal limited guns they're building now compared to what they have in the past and compared to what they're building now

 

Somewhere along the way someone...I think the BOD or maybe it was the President on a podcast.  Anyway they said they had reached out and I don't remember the numbers but it was super low compared to the number of 9mm 2011's they build even though at the time there was no real place for those 9mm guns in our sport. 

 

Which isn't crazy. I can think of one guy in my area that comes to mind as having a gun built recently. He's been only shooting limited for years and needed a new gun. He was on the super squad this year or last I forget. So pretty serious about limited. But I've heard rumors even he's considering experimenting. The division is dying, as a former Limited shooter it makes me a little sad. 

[IVC]

Slight change of topic, still related to the survey: major vs. minor scoring.

 

What this thread shows is that the major scoring doesn't adequately account for the higher PF. Alternatively, that the minor scoring over-penalizes lighter recoil. If the scoring was "about right," we wouldn't worry about major being a competitive advantage or affecting the LO, we'd simply say that those who shoot major get the benefit of the scoring at the expense of the recoil.

 

But this clearly isn't the case, and we know it from the Limited. Only in the SS it seems to be somewhat balanced because of the different capacity limits. And, in the Revo, it's the opposite and arguably the most pronounced - because of the very heavy price of reloading, major scoring doesn't nearly compensate enough and 625s are dead. 

 

So, what should the scoring be?

 

I'll add one sort-of-pet-peeve of mine with scoring - zones are not visible and one has to guess, especially when targets are partially covered, distant, or the light is unfavorable. If I can't tell where the A/C line is, I have to shoot for the "middle of the brown" and that takes away the ability to fine-tune shot placement. There are a lot of head shots where the only reason I can't pick the A zone consistently is because I can't see the lines well enough at speed. And counting a minor C as two major Cs is now a big difference. 

[Racinready300ex]

2 minutes ago, whan said:

 

I agree it makes sense to have major/minor scoring for the sport, though our discussion has raised an interesting question in my mind on the topic.

 

In the broader shooting community, 9mm has dominated because there is a perception/reality that 9mm has significantly closed the gap to 40 and 45 in terms of effectiveness (though almost everyone will agree that 40 and 45 still will have the edge because they're more powerful rounds). Purely just spitballing here, but what if we were to revisit the scoring for major/minor. Likely will not be done since it's a massive overhaul of the sport as a whole, but say if Minor was scored 5/3.5/1.5 instead of 5/3/1, while major was kept at 5/4/2, would that change the dynamic?

 

Say for Limited, would the smaller difference in point differential with minor only dropping an extra 0.5 point for C or D vs. major actually make it a lot closer in terms of shooting between the two? Capacity aside (since 140mm means 4 less rounds, which still allows just 1 reload stage plans on 32rd courses + makeups), would this balance the speed and power portion of DVC better so that there's less of a clear advantage? 

 

How about angle though. If we increase the points for minor all that really does is increase the HHF. Is the sport currently suffering from to low of HF's? Or, are we currently going to slow trying to get points and we need to go faster without loosing so many points?

 

With CO shooters occasionally beating Open shooters, I'm not sure increasing the points for minor is the right move. 

[Racinready300ex]

2 minutes ago, IVC said:

So, what should the scoring be?

 

I think if we were starting from scratch today making USPSA the only thing that would make sense is minor. The only reason anyone really shoots major is because it's been around since the beginning. 

 

2 minutes ago, IVC said:

 

I'll add one sort-of-pet-peeve of mine with scoring - zones are not visible and one has to guess, especially when targets are partially covered, distant, or the light is unfavorable. If I can't tell where the A/C line is, I have to shoot for the "middle of the brown" and that takes away the ability to fine-tune shot placement. There are a lot of head shots where the only reason I can't pick the A zone consistently is because I can't see the lines well enough at speed. And counting a minor C as two major Cs is now a big difference. 

 

Side bar...

Personally my eye's kind of suck to begin with. I've pretty much learned to know where the zones are in USPSA and IDPA. It's not a exact science, but neither is my shot calling lol. Occasionally I might walk up to a partial during the walk through to confirm how much A-zone there really is to help me pick a aiming point. You don't really want to aim for the zone anyway, you should look for a small spot you want to shoot. 

[Mcfoto]

In the end, I think you should shoot whoever is fun for you. I love revolver but after two seasons of shooting it in USPSA, I decided to try CO with a cheap Glock and the cheapest dot I could get. The fun factor went way up. Did my scores improve? Nope. But I have ICORE to indulge my wheelie fun. I just put a dot on my 929 for open there and wondering if I should try it out for a game that’s decisively hi cap skewed.

[Racinready300ex]

2 minutes ago, Mcfoto said:

In the end, I think you should shoot whoever is fun for you. I love revolver but after two seasons of shooting it in USPSA, I decided to try CO with a cheap Glock and the cheapest dot I could get. The fun factor went way up. Did my scores improve? Nope. But I have ICORE to indulge my wheelie fun. I just put a dot on my 929 for open there and wondering if I should try it out for a game that’s decisively hi cap skewed.

 

When you say your score didn't improve. Do you mean you average HF's didn't go up?

 

It's hard to imagine someone going from a 8 shot iron sight gun with 3 second reloads to a optic gun with 23 rounds and their score not improve. 

[IVC]

25 minutes ago, whan said:

 

Purely just spitballing here, but what if we were to revisit the scoring for major/minor. Likely will not be done since it's a massive overhaul of the sport as a whole, but say if Minor was scored 5/3.5/1.5 instead of 5/3/1, while major was kept at 5/4/2, would that change the dynamic?

Looks like we were typing the same thing at the same time about problems with major/minor scoring 

 

What you are trying to change is exactly what the problem is. For close A/C shooting at speed, which is the main differentiator between shooting major and minor, the penalty for minor is DOUBLE. It looks like 4 vs. 3 isn't a big deal, but it is because these are "close C-s" that are counted as "points down" (no IDPA pun intended) and the major penalty is 1 point, while the minor penalty is double that, at 2 points. Similarly, D-s are essentially "fliers that were good enough" that turn out to be effectively No-Penalty Mikes in minor, but will score DOUBLE that in major and still count as only 3 major C-s. 

Edited July 13, 2023 by IVC

[IVC]

8 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

You don't really want to aim for the zone anyway, you should look for a small spot you want to shoot. 

 True, of course, but to pick that point you have to either see it, or figure out how to find it. 

 

And remembering that it's "1/3 or 1/4 from the no-shoot" requires you first to remember the fractions, then to recognize it's that target as you're shooting, then to find the edges or reference points and triangulate, then to aim and shoot. Whereas if you could see the lines you could pick that spot by simply centering between the (visible) lines.