SCSA - Limited Optics

[GKB]

3 hours ago, Hoops said:

I’m curious, what would be your top 3 things for SCSA growth.  The sport needs growth.

I'm not a Match Director or range owner, so what does SCSA do to support getting new ranges to regularly (not just 1/month or less) SC matches?

 

What is needed for growth is more places running Steel Challenge.  Help that happen.

 

Discount buying program for the required steel and hangers?

Slick, professional, durable signage for each stage?

Slick, professional, durable stage diagrams?

Banners to hang at the range entrance promoting smiling people shooting SC?

Communications/advertising pushing "Drag Racing with Guns!"

Edited September 15, 2023 by GKB

[Darqusoull13]

3 hours ago, Hoops said:

I’m curious, what would be your top 3 things for SCSA growth.  The sport needs growth.  

Well I'll tell you we did what I think will grow the sport at A4. 

 

1) Kids Team Trophy and partnering with SASP. You saw the teams show up. Imagine that at every area and wssc.

 

2) Free kids clinics taught by top pros. MGM Junior camp but at a match they are shooting. 

 

3) Pay for RO certifications. A4 paid for 8 new ROs for our club. Knowing the rules and understanding them has dramatically increased the quality of our matches. 

[GKB]

A new Division isn't going to bring people to SC.  They may shoot the new Division but would still be shooting the match if LO didn't exist.

 

Heard nobody say, "I'd shoot Steel Challenge if only they had Limited Optics."

[outerlimits]

SC ain't what is used to be.  with rimfire and kids running around with dad's guns, it'll never return.  and at this rate there will be a division for everyone.

[Hoops]

1 hour ago, Joe4d said:

1. Spin it off from USPSA so that dysfunctional org has nothing to do with it.
2. an RO program.
3. different stages, (without movement) for majors. 

Definitely like 3.  OL discriminates against disabilities with 4 sec penalty per string.  
 

Item 2 discussed so many times.  Seems like a no-brainer.

[Joe4d]

Personally I wouldnt mind seeing OL go away. It doesnt belong, lots of other games for running.
When you ask people why they go to majors in other games, vast majority know they arnt winning anything.. They go for the stages.. 
texas star, polish rack, sure they could come up with some 5 steel stages for majors. As it is ? I dont see the point.  pay 5-10 times the cost to shoot the same stages, with twice the standing around ? No thanks

[shred]

I think they need more stages, but OL really separates the men from the boys, so I say keep it.

 

[Hoops]

24 minutes ago, shred said:

I think they need more stages, but OL really separates the men from the boys, so I say keep it.

 

Limited Optics aside for a moment, SCSA definitely needs more standard size stages.  There are a lot of ranges that can’t fit OL or SO.

 

maybe you could influence the BOD?

[shred]

1 hour ago, Hoops said:

Limited Optics aside for a moment, SCSA definitely needs more standard size stages.  There are a lot of ranges that can’t fit OL or SO.

 

maybe you could influence the BOD?

Fat chance I think.  I sent them diagrams for Outer Limits and Speed Option with 25-for-35 reduced size plates all drawn in CAD so they could be shot on 25-yard bays years ago and they were not interested.

 

It's possible to get Speed Option identical as far as MOA and positioning of the stop plate.  The far OL plates end up effectively about 3" out of position due to the movement.

 

 

 

[Hoops]

12 minutes ago, shred said:

Fat chance I think.  I sent them diagrams for Outer Limits and Speed Option with 25-for-35 reduced size plates all drawn in CAD so they could be shot on 25-yard bays years ago and they were not interested.

 

It's possible to get Speed Option identical as far as MOA and positioning of the stop plate.  The far OL plates end up effectively about 3" out of position due to the movement.

 

 

 

Looking at 2022 financial statements the BOD’s better be focused on ideas other than increasing fees.  
 

The days of status quo are gone.  New generation of shooters is changing.  Speaking for SCSA, fresh ideas like Limited Optics and adding new stages need to discussed.  
 

IMO….for what that’s worth.  

[Squirrel45]

16 hours ago, Darqusoull13 said:

Well I'll tell you we did what I think will grow the sport at A4. 

 

1) Kids Team Trophy and partnering with SASP. You saw the teams show up. Imagine that at every area and wssc.

 

2) Free kids clinics taught by top pros. MGM Junior camp but at a match they are shooting. 

 

3) Pay for RO certifications. A4 paid for 8 new ROs for our club. Knowing the rules and understanding them has dramatically increased the quality of our matches. 

Good ideas

[Squirrel45]

3 hours ago, shred said:

I think they need more stages, but OL really separates the men from the boys, so I say keep it.

 

More stages would be nice. Iv only shoot SC for a bit over two years and I'm already getting sick of just the 8. Bring back some of the retired stages even.

[Racinready300ex]

52 minutes ago, Squirrel45 said:

More stages would be nice. Iv only shoot SC for a bit over two years and I'm already getting sick of just the 8. Bring back some of the retired stages even.

 

I don't know if this is how it's supposed to work or not, but....

 

A local club at least used to run 1 on the 8 official stages and the rest they just made up. This kind of make it like uspsa with only 1 stage being a "classifier" at every match. I assume this was legal and that they're still doing it. Seemed like a good idea to me. Maybe propose it to the MD, you could even just do one or two custom stages. 

 

I haven't shot that match in several years, it's just far and makes for a really long day. 

[shred]

IME "Outlaw" matches with a mix of real and made-up stages are less popular than matches with only official ones, probably for the classification reason.  The serious SCSA shooters who are probably the meat of a SCSA club will gripe too.  

 

I think its more fun and new shooter friendly if it wasn't the same 8 (or 6) over and over, but the market seems to speak differently.

 

 

[Racinready300ex]

56 minutes ago, shred said:

IME "Outlaw" matches with a mix of real and made-up stages are less popular than matches with only official ones, probably for the classification reason.  The serious SCSA shooters who are probably the meat of a SCSA club will gripe too.  

 

I think its more fun and new shooter friendly if it wasn't the same 8 (or 6) over and over, but the market seems to speak differently.

 

 

 

And this club may not have any serious SCSA shooters. It's been a USPSA club that a few years back added a steel match on a different weekend. So from the beginning that's really all anyone knew. And since it was started by guys that weren't serious SC shooters it's more on the track for being a fun match. 

 

I can certainly see the serious SC shooters are all about leveling up and only getting one shot a month wouldn't work for them. It might make for a better classification system but that depends on the goal. If the goal is get as high as you can shooting all 8 every weekend with several guns is the move. If the goal is for your classification to reflect more what you can do in a match on demand I think less bites at the apple might be a better representation. 

[jrdoran]

This thread has drifted quite a bit from the original LO discussion, however I have observed that Rimfire Challenge matches  are typically quite popular with new / experienced shooters. 

 

It is interesting that each rimfire challenge match can be a bit different and no one seems to worry about any sanctioning body or association.   Fees are also typically half of a SCSA match.   

[old558]

If carry optics is as fast as open why not just let LO guns shoot carry optics?

[rowdyb]

I'd like to see centerfire be the "real" steel challenge and spin the rimfire off into its own, entirely separate thing.

[outerlimits]

7 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

I'd like to see centerfire be the "real" steel challenge and spin the rimfire off into its own, entirely separate thing.

^^^This

 

 

[Hoops]

1 hour ago, rowdyb said:

I'd like to see centerfire be the "real" steel challenge and spin the rimfire off into its own, entirely separate thing.

So I’m putting you down as a Yes for centerfire Limited Optics.

 

 

[rowdyb]

Totally fine if I got that separation of rf from cf

[Hoops]

I think we have about covered the Limited Optics discussion.  There were a lot of good comments about this division.

Based on replies to this topic (pros and cons) and my subsequent discussions with friends who regularly shoot SCSA, my conclusion is LO in SC would be popular.  

 

To avoid topic drift, maybe a new topic called SCSA Open Discussion should be started.  That might be interesting.

 

Thanks for the comments and to those that viewed.

[Hoops]

Apparently I’m not quite finished here.

 

I rarely look at the USPSA shooting topics.  But i decided to look this morning and I found a topic on Limited Optics.  Apparently in USPSA matches LO is becoming a very popular division.  For many of the reasons listed there, it would probably be as popular or more in SCSA.  

[shred]

12 hours ago, rowdyb said:

I'd like to see centerfire be the "real" steel challenge and spin the rimfire off into its own, entirely separate thing.

That's how it used to be back in the day-- RF was a completely separate match from the "main match" that everyone cared about.  Now it seems to be all about the lowest time of the day with a rimfire of some sort.  Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't exactly draw lots of centerfire shooters.

 

SCSA wants to be a "big tent", it probably should add a LO option and just use the Open times and drive on.  What's another division out of the 14 or 16 they already have?  Won't increase participation much IMO though.

 

If there were to separate CF and RF, then they could have some falling steel stages for CF which would be meaningfully different and interesting.

 

There's probably also room for a random-stages match type versus an 'only the holy 8' match (which is sort of funny because the Daves that started SC were not beholden to the same set of stages and did change them from time to time-- Flying M, double-trouble, zig-zag, et al)

 

[Hoops]

1 hour ago, shred said:

That's how it used to be back in the day-- RF was a completely separate match from the "main match" that everyone cared about.  Now it seems to be all about the lowest time of the day with a rimfire of some sort.  Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't exactly draw lots of centerfire shooters.

 

SCSA wants to be a "big tent", it probably should add a LO option and just use the Open times and drive on.  What's another division out of the 14 or 16 they already have?  Won't increase participation much IMO though.

 

If there were to separate CF and RF, then they could have some falling steel stages for CF which would be meaningfully different and interesting.

 

There's probably also room for a random-stages match type versus an 'only the holy 8' match (which is sort of funny because the Daves that started SC were not beholden to the same set of stages and did change them from time to time-- Flying M, double-trouble, zig-zag, et al)

 

When we scored by paper, results were by division.  
 

I think the advancement of tablets and Practiscore has placed too much on the Combined scores…..and at 72 I’m a RF shooter about 90% of the time.  I would highly recommend Practiscore delete the Combined column….it’s worthless in my opinion and puts a false sense on winning.

 

Hey, anyone with Practiscore reading this?