Meeting Agenda

[MWP]

3 hours ago, Joe4d said:

SOrry there is no way anyone will convince me a dot on a revolver in USPSA is gonna make that much of a difference in the score. 
 

There’s no convincing needed. It’s math. There’s countless examples of it, and zero information supporting your argument. 
 

Here’s the steel challenge records- which is just shooting- irons vs dots. 
 

Overall gaps in match records at WSSC:

ISR and OSR- 12%
Production to CO- 7.5%

SS to CO- 12%
Limited to CO- 5%
Limited to open- 6%
rfpi to rfpo- 16%

 

I could break this down to individual shooters if you want, but the numbers are the same…

The gap from Limited to LO at this years nationals was 5%. The person who won LO is not commonly known as a pistol competitor, but the person who won Limited is. LO was 1.5% faster in overall match time, and shot 20% more As. The top 2 LO shooters are the only shooters in a nearly 500 person match without misses. Again, showing the dot is a massive advantage. 

 

 

[pskys2]

49 minutes ago, MWP said:

There’s no convincing needed. It’s math. There’s countless examples of it, and zero information supporting your argument. 

 

 

 

On 1/29/2024 at 9:10 AM, Fishbreath said:

 

100%.

 

Even in dry fire on close targets, which is about the most ideal case for irons, I'm still a little faster with a dot. The advantage only goes up from there.

The top guys agree the dot is a significant advantage, and shoot dots regularly just not in uspsa.  Yet they don't want to see dots in uspsa revolver.

Questions for mwp and fishbtreath especially,

Why? 

Is it the tradition?

Or

Less fun?

Or

Think it will hurt the division?

 

Will you both keep shooting USPSA Revolvers if Dots were allowed?

[testosterone]

1 hour ago, MWP said:

The gap from Limited to LO at this years nationals was 5%. The person who won LO is not commonly known as a pistol competitor, but the person who won Limited is. LO was 1.5% faster in overall match time, and shot 20% more As. 

 

damn, max is a monster, holy s#!t.

[testosterone]

30 minutes ago, pskys2 said:

Is it the tradition?

Or

Less fun?

Or

Think it will hurt the division?

 

I'm not either, but this thread is interesting...

 

yes

no(qualfied)  as mike says, revolver is a spec miata, its mechanical and its all exposed, you have to work hard to get the most out of it.  jay's post offer the same sentiment without the miata reference.   

no, it won't matter, but it does screw up points for IPSC team(probably)

 

The last point is probably the one that matters the most at the bottom from a pure competition standpoint.   I though it said in the USPSA mission statement or bylaws that the point of USPSA is to field competitors to IPSC world shoot.   I went looking and could not find that statement anywhere, but for some reason I vividly remember reading something like that.  It is the case though...and i fully get the argument that of the few thousand active uspsa members in any given year, only a fraction even know about IPSC, nevermind contention for a WS slot.

Edited January 30 by testosterone

[MWP]

36 minutes ago, pskys2 said:

 

The top guys agree the dot is a significant advantage, and shoot dots regularly just not in uspsa.  Yet they don't want to see dots in uspsa revolver.

Questions for mwp and fishbtreath especially,

Why? 

Is it the tradition?

Or

Less fun?

Or

Think it will hurt the division?

 

Will you both keep shooting USPSA Revolvers if Dots were allowed?

Personally, and this is all opinion and not facts- I don’t think it’s the essence of the division. And the basis of the game.  I also don’t think raising the financial bar of entry is going to “bring in” any new shooters. 
 

I also think we, uspsa and it’s members, have ruined a good thing with all these changes and divisions.

 

We have L10 that isn’t relevant- the guns are competitive in other divisions. And if it is relevant then every division should have a 10 twin. 

Co and Lo are the same division. The difference is now triggers and holsters- both of which have been proven irrelevant with the math. 
 

We changed production several times, which was created for any new shooter, in all 50 states, to walk in and buy a gun, add springs and sights and be competitive, and go shoot. Not anymore. Oh and production didn’t survive even after all the changes. 

 

We have too many divisions, too many nuances that don’t actually differentiate the outcome of a match to have these divisions. Production and SS minor could be the same division if we left production at 10, they’re the same speed. 
 

None of these changes brought more shooters to matches. We don’t need more divisions, we don’t need dots on everything- we need to stop looking for a magic pill to make shooting great again, and go make shooting great again. We need stand alone nationals for all divisions, separated by weeks so everyone can have time to prep. We need to create environments people want to show up to, not smack the easy button and put dots on everything because no one wants to go learn to look at their irons. We need to celebrate our champions and reward them accordingly- this motives the next one with fury. 
 

I don’t think this should be an open vote when it comes to it. I think it should be a vote by the people who shoot the division. No one’s coming to revolver because they added a dot, everyone who is already here will just have to fork out the money to stay at the same spot. 
 

Again, I stand to benefit the most from dots going to this division. It’s not up to just me, thank goodness. I want everyone to be heard, but not everyone should get an equal vote either. 
 

I’m voting no. If you vote yes PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE ask for dots and comps to be legal- so we don’t just have to bolt dots on our limited guns and shoot, let the icore open guns come play (in theory that’s where this entire conversation started years ago.)

 

I’ll be at nationals until I’m confident I can’t win it anymore. Dot or no dot, I’m not handing it away. 

 

On a different note- I’m really happy we can all have these conversations and still go enjoy what we love together. What a great world, country and society we live in today were we have these luxuries to worry about such small things in life. I feel very lucky to be alive in this time in our world.

[pskys2]

21 minutes ago, MWP said:

Personally, and this is all opinion and not facts- I don’t think it’s the essence of the division. And the basis of the game.  I also don’t think raising the financial bar of entry is going to “bring in” any new shooters. 
 

I also think we, uspsa and it’s members, have ruined a good thing with all these changes and divisions.

 

We have L10 that isn’t relevant- the guns are competitive in other divisions. And if it is relevant then every division should have a 10 twin. 

Co and Lo are the same division. The difference is now triggers and holsters- both of which have been proven irrelevant with the math. 
 

We changed production several times, which was created for any new shooter, in all 50 states, to walk in and buy a gun, add springs and sights and be competitive, and go shoot. Not anymore. Oh and production didn’t survive even after all the changes. 

 

We have too many divisions, too many nuances that don’t actually differentiate the outcome of a match to have these divisions. Production and SS minor could be the same division if we left production at 10, they’re the same speed. 
 

None of these changes brought more shooters to matches. We don’t need more divisions, we don’t need dots on everything- we need to stop looking for a magic pill to make shooting great again, and go make shooting great again. We need stand alone nationals for all divisions, separated by weeks so everyone can have time to prep. We need to create environments people want to show up to, not smack the easy button and put dots on everything because no one wants to go learn to look at their irons. We need to celebrate our champions and reward them accordingly- this motives the next one with fury. 
 

I don’t think this should be an open vote when it comes to it. I think it should be a vote by the people who shoot the division. No one’s coming to revolver because they added a dot, everyone who is already here will just have to fork out the money to stay at the same spot. 
 

Again, I stand to benefit the most from dots going to this division. It’s not up to just me, thank goodness. I want everyone to be heard, but not everyone should get an equal vote either. 
 

I’m voting no. If you vote yes PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE ask for dots and comps to be legal- so we don’t just have to bolt dots on our limited guns and shoot, let the icore open guns come play (in theory that’s where this entire conversation started years ago.)

 

I’ll be at nationals until I’m confident I can’t win it anymore. Dot or no dot, I’m not handing it away. 

 

On a different note- I’m really happy we can all have these conversations and still go enjoy what we love together. What a great world, country and society we live in today were we have these luxuries to worry about such small things in life. I feel very lucky to be alive in this time in our world.

Well said, thank you.

[Fishbreath]

39 minutes ago, pskys2 said:

Why? 

 

The short version is that I started shooting revolver because it was hard, not because it was fast. I suppose that's tradition, in a sense, or a twisted sort of fun. I agree with MWP—I think a dot goes against the essence of the division, which for me is "it's the most challenging way you can choose to shoot a USPSA match". I'm also in favor of IPSC parity for reasons I've gone over earlier in the thread.

 

I will still shoot revolver if dots are added (although if I get a World Shoot slot, I won't be shooting a dot until after that's done with). Selfishly, I ask you to vote no on compensators if that's a question, because I don't have a straightforward way of putting them on my guns.

[pskys2]

14 minutes ago, Fishbreath said:

 

The short version is that I started shooting revolver because it was hard, not because it was fast. I suppose that's tradition, in a sense, or a twisted sort of fun. I agree with MWP—I think a dot goes against the essence of the division, which for me is "it's the most challenging way you can choose to shoot a USPSA match". I'm also in favor of IPSC parity for reasons I've gone over earlier in the thread.

 

I will still shoot revolver if dots are added (although if I get a World Shoot slot, I won't be shooting a dot until after that's done with). Selfishly, I ask you to vote no on compensators if that's a question, because I don't have a straightforward way of putting them on my guns.

Understood, thanks.

[Joe4d]

5 hours ago, MWP said:

There’s no convincing needed. It’s math. There’s countless examples of it, and zero information supporting your argument. 
 

Here’s the steel challenge records- which is just shooting- irons vs dots. 
 

Overall gaps in match records at WSSC:

ISR and OSR- 12%
Production to CO- 7.5%

SS to CO- 12%
Limited to CO- 5%
Limited to open- 6%
rfpi to rfpo- 16%

 

I could break this down to individual shooters if you want, but the numbers are the same…

The gap from Limited to LO at this years nationals was 5%. The person who won LO is not commonly known as a pistol competitor, but the person who won Limited is. LO was 1.5% faster in overall match time, and shot 20% more As. The top 2 LO shooters are the only shooters in a nearly 500 person match without misses. Again, showing the dot is a massive advantage. 

 

 

100%  Irrelevant.
None of those are valid comparisons to Revolver in USPSA,
  Major irons with 20 round mags reloading probably 3/4 of the stages, to compensated optic with 30 or 31 ? reloading less than 1/4 ?  and still only 6%..    Or games where accuracy is scored much more ?
Or your national LO shooter ? who probably saved that 1.5% because he had a couple less reloads over the match.
Guess we will believe what we want.. I dont see it mattering any more than external vs internal single actions,, but awful lot of wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth over that one as well..
Be interesting over next year or so to see how CO and LO pan out. 

 

[Ice36]

5 hours ago, MWP said:

On a different note- I’m really happy we can all have these conversations and still go enjoy what we love together. What a great world, country and society we live in today were we have these luxuries to worry about such small things in life. I feel very lucky to be alive in this time in our world.

With all the talk about shooting sports and their problems over the last few days. This is a very true statement, and we shouldn't lose sight of it.

[IVC]

22 hours ago, Fishbreath said:

The short version is that I started shooting revolver because it was hard, not because it was fast. I suppose that's tradition, in a sense, or a twisted sort of fun. I agree with MWP—I think a dot goes against the essence of the division, which for me is "it's the most challenging way you can choose to shoot a USPSA match".

This is now getting uncomfortably close to the reasoning behind the IDPA spinoff. The dot goes against the essence of the division as much as all the custom gear goes against the essence of "practical" in USPSA. 

 

We don't shoot SAA revolvers, we don't reload one at a time, we don't reload loose rounds, we have extended releases, chamfered charge holes, actions tuned for very deeply seated softest primers out there, guns that won't fire factory ammo at all. We have race holsters and specialized moonclip holders. These all go against the "essence of traditional revolver." 

 

Reading this thread only made me question my position about whether the current Revo should change to R/O, or there should be an extra R/O division. Some very good points in this thread are about the competitive advantage of the optics and how having only R/O would make basic Revo obsolete. I'm on the fence now, because killing irons in favor of the dot is not a good idea, but it's also not a good idea to kill the dot in favor of the irons based on "tradition" argument. 

[IVC]

Let me pose a question slightly differently.

 

If there was no Revo division in USPSA at all, and we are discussing potentially adding it, what would your position be:

1. Don't add it, we don't need revolvers in the game.
2. Add "Revolver Open" division, where all revolvers can play.
3. Add "Revolver Limited" division, restrictions on the gun, but no gear.
4. Add "Revolver Production" division, legacy rules on gear position behind the hip bones, other restrictions.
5. Add TWO divisions, Revolver Open and Limited.
6. Something else?

My vote would be definitely (5) - it's what Steel Challenge has and what makes the most sense in avoiding killing iron sights in a single division. My next choice would be (2), which seems to be what we are talking about. The reason is that between (2) and (3), the former is more in line with having a race division in a race sport. The next choice would be (3), which is what we have now. 

[Racinready300ex]

5 minutes ago, IVC said:

We don't shoot SAA revolvers, we don't reload one at a time, we don't reload loose rounds, we have extended releases, chamfered charge holes, actions tuned for very deeply seated softest primers out there, guns that won't fire factory ammo at all. We have race holsters and specialized moonclip holders. These all go against the "essence of traditional revolver." 

 

You've gotta draw a line somewhere. Otherwise someone might make the case why does revolver even exist? It's a line drawn somewhere to allow obsolete equipment because people want to shoot them. 

 

5 minutes ago, IVC said:

 

Reading this thread only made me question my position about whether the current Revo should change to R/O, or there should be an extra R/O division. Some very good points in this thread are about the competitive advantage of the optics and how having only R/O would make basic Revo obsolete. I'm on the fence now, because killing irons in favor of the dot is not a good idea, but it's also not a good idea to kill the dot in favor of the irons based on "tradition" argument. 

 

I'm not sure it's a great idea to split the smallest division into two smaller divisions.

 

Not a easy call to make. Two way to look at it, leave it alone to not risk killing something already struggling. Or go for it in hopes it'll some how breath life into the division. I don't think optics make revolver suddenly popular so I'd lean toward leave it alone instead of risking making it worse. 

[Joe4d]

6 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

You've gotta draw a line somewhere. Otherwise someone might make the case why does revolver even exist? It's a line drawn somewhere to allow obsolete equipment because people want to shoot them. 

 

 

I'm not sure it's a great idea to split the smallest division into two smaller divisions.

 

Not a easy call to make. Two way to look at it, leave it alone to not risk killing something already struggling. Or go for it in hopes it'll some how breath life into the division. I don't think optics make revolver suddenly popular so I'd lean toward leave it alone instead of risking making it worse. 

If it was my call, Id allow them..
1.  I agree , its a small division, and dont agree with splitting it.
2. I dont think its a big advantage,, so meh.. why not.
3. Of the non USPSA shooters, the most likely place to draw revolver shooters will be from ICORE open rules shooters... Of the people shooting ICORE most likely to come to USPSA, its probably the Open guys.. Or guys that move to open then decide to try USPSA...
Those of us shooting classic,, probably arnt interested,, or are less likely to be interested.
4.  I would bet if you polled only the existing USPSA revolver shooters, allow optics would be the largest choice.
5. Putting an Optic on vast majority of competing revolvers out there is even easier than on most auto loaders, Almost everyone is using an adjustable sight Smith and wesson.. Screw on mounts been around for years.. Sooo no shipping, milling,  or special new Optic ready guns required.

[IVC]

5 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

5. Putting an Optic on vast majority of competing revolvers out there is even easier than on most auto loaders, Almost everyone is using an adjustable sight Smith and wesson.. Screw on mounts been around for years.. Sooo no shipping, milling,  or special new Optic ready guns required.

This is also a very important point - adding a dot isn't difficult if one wants to play with the dot. 

 

But the question of one vs. two divisions and whether dot should kill irons remains... We'll see how the question is posed when it comes out. 

[Racinready300ex]

30 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

If it was my call, Id allow them..
1.  I agree , its a small division, and dont agree with splitting it.
2. I dont think its a big advantage,, so meh.. why not.
3. Of the non USPSA shooters, the most likely place to draw revolver shooters will be from ICORE open rules shooters... Of the people shooting ICORE most likely to come to USPSA, its probably the Open guys.. Or guys that move to open then decide to try USPSA...
Those of us shooting classic,, probably arnt interested,, or are less likely to be interested.
4.  I would bet if you polled only the existing USPSA revolver shooters, allow optics would be the largest choice.
5. Putting an Optic on vast majority of competing revolvers out there is even easier than on most auto loaders, Almost everyone is using an adjustable sight Smith and wesson.. Screw on mounts been around for years.. Sooo no shipping, milling,  or special new Optic ready guns required.

 

Do icore shooters want to shoot uspsa in general? Or are we chasing unicorns? There appear to be a couple icore clubs 2-4 hours north of me nothing south for many, many miles. So the clubs I shoot at would likely pull zero shooters from icore. Any change in revolver will likely have no effect here. Even those clubs only have 4 open shooters, some of which already shoot uspsa up there. 

 

Have you shot any uspsa matches? Looks like you're a icore Open shooter, will you shoot uspsa if optic are allowed? Is that the thing keeping you away?

 

I get you don't think it's a advantage, but your earlier posts make it seem like you don't understand the scoring system. A Charlie never being tenth of a second in revolver. So getting you to change your mind is understandably impossible.

[Joe4d]

I understand scoring .. but I stand corrected , the 10th second per point works out for major,, which is what I shot when I shot USPSA..  AC only nets 80% not 90..  in minor 
Still say a dot isnt as big of an advantage in revolver as it is in auto divisions in USPSA,,  The guy that can reload 1/2 second faster will win as long as he isnt getting mikes. Just alot more slower reloading..  3 to 4 every stage,, VS open or CO and less than 1 reload per stage.. The accuracy advantage will be a lesser percent in revolver.. Just cant seem to explain it well enough.  No sense hashing it out any more though.. 

far as recruiting ? I suspect the ICORE shooters that want to shoot USPSA probably already do. I bet most of those are probably dot shooters in ICore.. but thats just a guess from a very small subset of the matches I have shot. 
I tend to shoot something different each ICORE or Steel match. Far as USPSA ? I have issues with giving money to the org, and wouldnt take the game serious, I am not a sprinter, and have balance issues. but IF there was a match within an hour of me on a different weekend then the 2 hour away ICORE,, Id probably shoot it regardless of ruleset.. Just doesnt matter all that much to me, and now that I think about it... As far as numbers at a USPSA match,,, probably wont matter to anyone else.. Pick a rule, guys will shoot it, or wont shoot it. Allowing, not allowing , splitting, combining revolver will probably make zero difference in revolver numbers.
 

[Ice36]

5 hours ago, Joe4d said:

If it was my call, Id allow them..
1.  I agree , its a small division, and dont agree with splitting it.
2. I dont think its a big advantage,, so meh.. why not.
3. Of the non USPSA shooters, the most likely place to draw revolver shooters will be from ICORE open rules shooters... Of the people shooting ICORE most likely to come to USPSA, its probably the Open guys.. Or guys that move to open then decide to try USPSA...
Those of us shooting classic,, probably arnt interested,, or are less likely to be interested.
4.  I would bet if you polled only the existing USPSA revolver shooters, allow optics would be the largest choice.
5. Putting an Optic on vast majority of competing revolvers out there is even easier than on most auto loaders, Almost everyone is using an adjustable sight Smith and wesson.. Screw on mounts been around for years.. Sooo no shipping, milling,  or special new Optic ready guns required.

Where I am from the only 2 Icore shooters that shoot uspsa matches other than just club matches both of us shot nationals and we are both classic shooters. There is only one other guy who shoots club matches who shoots limited 6 and limited in Icore. We only have one open shooter and he shoots multiple optic guns in SC including revo, but doesn't shoot revo in uspsa.

 

 

Edited February 1 by Ice36

[Tom Freeman]

Leave Revo alone is still my vote.

 

But.... add in a revo tag to Open and/or LO.

 

Wanna shoot a revo with a dot and ports?  Open.

 

Wanna shoot a revo with no ports and a dot?  LO.

[Makicjf]

54 minutes ago, Tom Freeman said:

Leave Revo alone is still my vote.

 

But.... add in a revo tag to Open and/or LO.

 

Wanna shoot a revo with a dot and ports?  Open.

 

Wanna shoot a revo with no ports and a dot?  LO.

I agree.  Adding Revo to LO/CO ( or it's LOCO they are split) preserves Revo.  

  I'll be blasting away, 8 major pf rounds at a time in open.

    Jason

 

Edited February 1 by Makicjf

[Joe4d]

basically what I have seen going on anyway. With or without USPSA BOD support..
Guys are putting together  revolver squads, but are signing up in either open or revolver and pretty much just shooting among themselves.. 

 

[Racinready300ex]

15 hours ago, Joe4d said:

I understand scoring .. but I stand corrected , the 10th second per point works out for major,, which is what I shot when I shot USPSA..  AC only nets 80% not 90..  in minor 

 

 

nah you still don't fully get it, even with major a Charlie is only a a 10th of a second on a 10 hit factor stage. On a 5 hit factor stage it's two tenths. It's not as simple as just saying x=y. Revolvers don't typically put up 10 HF's on stages major or minor. 

 

15 hours ago, Joe4d said:

far as recruiting ? I suspect the ICORE shooters that want to shoot USPSA probably already do. I bet most of those are probably dot shooters in ICore.. 
 

 

I think this is pretty likely the case, which means this change probably wont help revolver but could still potentially hurt it. 

 

Our Area match currently has 5 shooters, so it's not even a recognized division anyway. So maybe it's worth it. I guess it depends what those 5 dudes want.

 

Side note, it's crazy the Area match currently only has 265 registered shooters when for the last several years it filled to capacity as soon as registration opened. That is more concerning then what happens to 5 revolver shooters. 

[MWP]

2 hours ago, Joe4d said:

basically what I have seen going on anyway. With or without USPSA BOD support..
Guys are putting together  revolver squads, but are signing up in either open or revolver and pretty much just shooting among themselves.. 

 

Where’s this happening? 

[testosterone]

1 minute ago, MWP said:

Where’s this happening? 

Good question, probably a2 around rio?

 

It used to be in a7 and a8, dave/josh/alec/me/dave and a few others would at least get enough entries for the division to be recognized.   I don't think there has been enough in 5+ years now though since alec and josh quit and i gave up.  

[testosterone]

40 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

That is more concerning then what happens to 5 revolver shooters

Board is changing already.  2 years ago this proposition simply would have passed on suggestion.

Distinguished GM would also have passed already.   

Ben Berry causing discussion to pump breaks and stop changing things without member discussion is good(even tho he is the prod 15 proponent which is dumb).

 

Not to derail this thread...