My Concerns About Single Stack Division (part1)

[cliffy109]

This is part 1 of a two part subject dealing with the new Single Stack division. I don't want this to sound like a gripe. I'm new to USPSA but have been shooting IDPA for a few years now. I'm also new to this forum and I want to be respectful about this. I'm coming here with the honest hope that somebody of influence will take note and address this.

My concern is the magazine capacity limits in this division. Specifically, I'm concerned about the minor power factor shooters having a 25% capacity advantage over the major PF guys. If the idea of the new SS division is to attract CDP shooters from IDPA, this quirk is going to be a serious barrier to that end. It makes those of us with .45 ACP pistols throw up our hands and say "why bother?"

Here is what I'm talking about. In my first match with the SS division, there were 4 stages. One was a classifier (see my other post about this) and the other three were 20 round stages. Can you see where this is headed already? Major PF shooters had to perform 2 mag changes on each stage where the minor guys had to do 1. That's a total of three additional mag changes during a match. How long does one mag change take for a C or B class shooter? Maybe 2 to 3 seconds multiplied over three stages? That's a pretty big time penalty for the major PF shooters.

What's the purpose of this? Minor PF shooters do have different scoring. I realize that, but that scoring difference is not there to make up for mag changes. Its there because a 125,000 PF is a lot more controllable than a 164,000 PF round and they should be more accurate. There is no difference in magazine capacity in L10 between major and minor so why is there in SS? It seems the only purpose of this is to encourage the use of .38 Super downloaded to minimum velocity.

What can I do about this? As a newish USPSA shooter, I have a few options:

1. Complain about course design. I don't like this option at all. First of all, I have no right to. I'm not one of the guys who has been running these for years and I have not put my time and effort into setting up the course. Second of all, I wouldn't want to. I like high volume stages. I don't mind doing extra mag changes as long as I can look at the end results and compare only to those that I'm in direct competition with. If I were shooting L10, I wouldn't expect my scores to match the Limited or Open shooters and in SS, I wouldn't expect to be on par with the L10 shooters. I would expect to be competitive with those in my division.

2. Tell myself that scores be damned and just have fun. That's a valid option. I could just view USPSA as practice for IDPA and not worry what the score sheet looks like. I don't like this option because I am a very competitive person and I advance and learn by being able to honestly evaluate myself in relation to others. I can't do this if I'm shooting SS major though.

3. I could say screw SS and shoot L10 like I did before. I have the magazines for it. I would prefer not to do this. I like the idea of getting back to the original intent of USPSA/IPSC, but that seems like the only way a person shooting major PF can compete.

I realize this is a provisional division. This magazine capacity issue is certainly something that needs to be looked at. If the minor PF shooters had to download to 8+1, the field would be more level and I think more people would be inclined to get involved. At least that what this shooter thinks.

[al503]

Very good points but I think:

1. you're downplaying the difference between the major/minor scoring

2. the abundance or absence of movers/swingers will make a big difference one way or another. The more there are, the advantage goes to the people shooting major.

[Cameron]

Option 4.

Buy a 9mm SS

I am sure your comments are welcomed. This is the first try at this new division, and I am sure it will evolve before it is final. I do share your feelings about the mag capicity issue, but I am currently not shooting SS division.

[Gregory_k]

I would say screw SS and shoot L10 like I you did before.

Your only shooting against yourself.

[Bigbadaboom]

The save on reloads does not make up for minor scoring. Most shooters that have been in this sport a while and will shoot SS will shoot it at major PF and deal with 8 rnds in lieu of 10 rnds in minor because the points lost don't justify the time saved on the reloads. I'm in the process of building a 9mm SS 1911 for the SS division only to work on my accuracy. I don't expect to be competitive in SS division shooting minor I only shoot other divisions to help train myself for Limited.

[Alan Meek]

Cliffy,

As one that has been playing this sport since 1998, there is no replacement for major.

That is why I am currently building my new .45 for SSD.

I have a perfectly good 38 super for SSD but I know I will need a .45.

Take a look at the Single Stack Classic results history and the Majority there shoot major. The proof is in the pudding.

Alan

Edited February 17, 2006 by Alan Meek

[XRe]

Very good points but I think:

1. you're downplaying the difference between the major/minor scoring

2. the abundance or absence of movers/swingers will make a big difference one way or another. The more there are, the advantage goes to the people shooting major.

+1!!

The prototype for our provisional division was the Single Stack Classic. A lot of big names shooters are at that match, as well as shooters down through the ranks. You'll find the rules are very similar to (and were the basis for) the SSD rules. If you look at the results from last year's match, you'll see that the vast majority were shooting Major. If there were truly an advantage to shooting minor in this format, and gaining that two rounds of capacity, you'd see Rob Leatham and Dave Sevigny shooting minor. You'd also see a greater number of non-GM shooters doing it. I count ten-ish minor power factor shooters out of 180-something? I think you'll find our SSD will have similar percentages.

The trick, much like shooting L-10 or Production, is to plan your reloads to not be flat foot, as much as possible, and to strategize your reloads around your movement - which may mean an extra reload, instead of running the gun dry. Using this sort of planning, I'm able to compete with Limited division shooters using my L-10 gun.

There are obviously going to be cases where you're forced into a plan due to capacity - most of those you're competing against will be in the same boat. This is part of shooting a limited capacity division. You could complain about course design - a better route would be to volunteer to design some courses yourself, and learn how to make them 8 round (or, better yet, 6 round) neutral.

I tend to think you're making a mountain out of a molehill, on this one Don't let two rounds frustrate you - work to change what you can (practice, volunteer for course designs, etc), and start to relish kicking the butts of those who choose to shoot mouse guns in a he-man division!!!

[eerw]

Like the others have said...

there is no replacing major PF scoring..

the one or two around advantage in capacity does not win out over the differences in scoring..

[cliffy109]

The save on reloads does not make up for minor scoring.

Really? I'm not sure that is the case. Let's make a few assumptions. Let's say we have a 20 round stage that I can shoot major in 18 seconds. Let's say I shoot 15 in the A zone, 4 in the C and one in the D for a total score of 93. That makes a hit factor of 5.1667. If a minor shooter were able to shave 2.5 seconds off that time because they didn't have to make a reload, they would have a score of 88 and a time of 15.5 for a hit factor of 5.6774.

Is 2.5 seconds a realistic time for a mag change? Maybe not. Maybe its 1.5 seconds. That still makes for a hit factor of 5.3333. Let's say its a GM shooter and they can perform a mag change with a single stack gun in 1 second flat. That makes for a hit factor of 5.176.

In order for the major to be competitive with minor, a mag change much be performed in less than 1 second and he must shoot the exact same hits as the guy with a 125000 power factor pea shooter. If the guy with the 9mm can squeeze out just one more A zone hit (which is why he's shooting minor in the first place right?) its impossible for the major guy to match the hit factor.

Am I missing something?

[XRe]

A tradeoff, here, though, is that the minor PF shooter risks running dry by only doing one reload. Typically, he'd be doing two, as well. Further - this assumes that they shoot the same time to get the same points. It's a misnomer that minor is a lot faster in the shooting aspects - you may pick up hundredths of seconds, but not seconds. So - at the same speed, the same shooter is likely to shoot the same scores, and, as a minor shooter, may very well be taking extra shots to make up points.

There are risks and rewards to all aspects of the game - leaving one extra round total in the gun for the whole course can turn out disastrous, as well.

For a D class shooter, a 2.5 second reload isn't unrealistic. Realize, though, that you're dealing with a stilted course design, too - it assumes exactly 20 rounds, and that there's only one good spot for a reload... You're not going to find those kinds of courses all the time

The other point you're missing is that in order to shoot better points - not the point of shooting minor, but the requirement of shooting minor - in practice, the shooter must slow down vs. a major power factor gun.

[Shooter Grrl]

[quote

Am I missing something?

Yes, you have missed something - your justification only counts for stand and shoots. In a field course, where you do mag changes on the move, the times will be identical. The guy doing one less mag change will not beat the other by 1.5 seconds!

[cliffy109]

The prototype for our provisional division was the Single Stack Classic. A lot of big names shooters are at that match, as well as shooters down through the ranks. You'll find the rules are very similar to (and were the basis for) the SSD rules. If you look at the results from last year's match, you'll see that the vast majority were shooting Major. If there were truly an advantage to shooting minor in this format, and gaining that two rounds of capacity, you'd see Rob Leatham and Dave Sevigny shooting minor. You'd also see a greater number of non-GM shooters doing it. I count ten-ish minor power factor shooters out of 180-something? I think you'll find our SSD will have similar percentages.

Isn't that match set up to be 8 round friendly? That would explain why so many folks choose to shoot major. If there were several 20 round stages, I would think the results would be a bit different. I am starting to see how this boils down to course design. Keeping the round count to 16 or between 21 and 24 would even things out. Creating required movement at opportune times would also work.

[Bigbadaboom]

Am I missing something?

Yes you are. The larger bullet diameter of the .45 over the 9mm/.38 Super is a huge advantage and comes into play enough to make it so. You are making an example of one stage. Since this sport is 9 round neutral from any shooting position and you can load 9 rounds in your gun shooting major in SS division and a majority of reloads (except for manditory ones) are done on the move the major scoring comes out waaaaaaay ahead of the minor scoring even with the 2 extra rounds allowed. With this stated it comes down to a "I want to be able to be sloppier with my .45 and not get penalized for inaccuracy when VS.ing someone shooting minor". If you get all your hits, call your shots, refrain from shooting faster than you can see and stay positive then with the 9 round neutral rule you should do better than someone shooting on your same level in minor even if they are allowed 20 rounds in a mag. IMHO

[Loves2Shoot]

I think your time would be better spent practicing mag changes. Once you have them down, you will understand why mag capacity isn't as important as you are making it. When shooting L10 I will regularly change a mag after 4 rounds if I have a few steps. It doesn't take nearly 2-3 seconds, maybe a .2-.3 seconds. Multitasking is a good skill to have in this sport.

[JFD]

Go with option #3.

If there were STI, SV, Para, etc guns and race rigs available at the beginning of IPSC, then that's exactly what they would have used right from the start. It's easy for folks to talk about the "intent" of the sport years ago, but they never seem to remember that the only guns available that would run as many rounds as we shoot were 1911s.

If where we are now doesn't reflect what the members wanted, then I'm pretty sure the rules would have taken care of the situation long ago.

At any rate, shoot the division where you have the most fun.

[XRe]

Isn't that match set up to be 8 round friendly?

Haven't shot it, so I don't know for certain. Still - 2 extra rounds would be an advantage even on 8 round "friendly" courses - after all, one makeup shot on a course like that screws everything...

If there were several 20 round stages, I would think the results would be a bit different.

Based on my experience, I don't think it would - on one given stage, it might, but over the course of a match, it will tend to even out, or swing to the advantage of the major PF shooter.

I am starting to see how this boils down to course design. Keeping the round count to 16 or between 21 and 24 would even things out. Creating required movement at opportune times would also work.

This is definitely true. Round count can go up to 32 (also a nice multiple of 8). You cannot be required to fire more than 9 rounds from a given location in a field course - so, in your 20 round examples, there must be opportunity to move twice for it to be a legal course design (a shooter could choose to shoot more than 9 in one location, but shouldn't be required to shoot more than 9).

Course design makes a big difference to a lot of things - even in Limited or Open.

BTW - in general, I'd shoot a stage in SSD just like I do in L-10, except for certain situations. Basically - reload every time I move.... That's regardless of shooting major or minor and having 8 rounds or 10.

[cliffy109]

Whoa... wait a second. There's a 9 round rule on course design? That changes everything. At the match I'm discussing, there were two stages where all 20 rounds were fired from a single position. The other fired 6 shots from one position than a move to a short... ummm.. runway (?) where an additional 14 rounds were fired. In effect, all three stages violated this course design rule.

So, what I'm hearing is that this really is nothing more than a course design problem, right? I can live with that. It just means I need to give a friendly reminder to the guys running our matches about this.

This now makes a lot more sense. No amount of planning or moving can make up just standing there swapping out magazines and there is no such thing as a .4 second mag change when standing flat footed in front of a target. Given the opportunity to change on the run clear all of this up.

[XRe]

Whoa... wait a second. There's a 9 round rule on course design?

There's some leniency in what's considered movement, but, yeah - check out rule 1.2 and all subrules. For field courses, it uses the language "must not require more than 9 rounds from any location or view" - in other words, you could have a smallish area to shoot all rounds from, but you have to change ports in a wall or something like that. You can soak up reloads in those transitions quite handily, as well.

That changes everything. At the match I'm discussing, there were two stages where all 20 rounds were fired from a single position. The other fired 6 shots from one position than a move to a short... ummm.. runway (?) where an additional 14 rounds were fired. In effect, all three stages violated this course design rule.

Sounds like they could've - on the third one, if the runway doesn't require movement on it to get to all the targets, probably so (hard to say without actually seeing the courses, of course

This now makes a lot more sense. No amount of planning or moving can make up just standing there swapping out magazines and there is no such thing as a .4 second mag change when standing flat footed in front of a target. Given the opportunity to change on the run clear all of this up.

Yep, you got it

[JFD]

That sounds like a lot of bad stages, even for a level 1 match where the rules allow for a bit of leeway. I'm not sure if that leeway applies to the 9 round rule or not.

I wonder if you give a few more details on the stages and if you were shooting with a squad full of Open and Limited shooters?

An example of a straight-up illegal stage would be an array of 5 metric targets hidden behind a wall where you could only engage them through a single port. I believe that if the 5th target could also be engaged from another position, then it's legal.

BTW: You have some awesome shooters giving you advice here (then there's folks like me), so you can believe what they are telling you.

[XRe]

I'm not sure if that leeway applies to the 9 round rule or not.

Nope. Just to the Freestyle principle (see 1.1.5). This is to allow Level I matches to be put on without the need for tons of props and setup time, basically....

I believe that if the 5th target could also be engaged from another position, then it's legal.

Correct

[ima45dv8]

I'm not sure if that leeway applies to the 9 round rule or not.

Nope. Just to the Freestyle principle (see 1.1.5). This is to allow Level I matches to be put on without the need for tons of props and setup time, basically....

I believe that if the 5th target could also be engaged from another position, then it's legal.

Correct

It provides leeway on the Freestyle aspect as well as total round count for the stage (that's where some of these 40+ round stages come from).

*I've seen a lot of totally illegal stages setup claiming the "Level I Expection" when it really didn't apply.

[Carlos]

Whoa... wait a second. There's a 9 round rule on course design? That changes everything. At the match I'm discussing, there were two stages where all 20 rounds were fired from a single position. "

-actually, that was not the case. There were two ports and a large free fire zone. The fact that it was technically possible to engage all 10 targets from one port does not invalidate the design. Above, XRe wrote:

"Round count can go up to 32 (also a nice multiple of 8). You cannot be required to fire more than 9 rounds from a given location in a field course - so, in your 20 round examples, there must be opportunity to move twice for it to be a legal course design (a shooter could choose to shoot more than 9 in one location, but shouldn't be required to shoot more than 9)."

Again, no one was required to engage all 10 targets from one spot.

The other array was also 20 rounds (5 targets) as Cliify indicates. However, the shooter was required to make a mandatory reload after engaging the 5 targets once, and then re-engage those same 5 targets. That stage was not a classifier. There are no classifiers in USPSA that use the classic targets. We set that stage up using classic targets around a Classic no shoot.

The final non classifier stage had 6 targets available from multiple points along one long free fire zone. True, it required a reload for L-10, Production, SS and Revolver. However, if you shot on the move, there was no disadvantage over the L & Open shooters (theoretically anyway).

Point is: the divisions are NOT supposed to be equal. You only compete within your division.

Cliffy109 raises an important question though: what about the SS Minor capacity advantage?

Hopefully - back on topic. Discuss.

One more point: Cliffy wrote:

"So, what I'm hearing is that this really is nothing more than a course design problem, right? I can live with that. It just means I need to give a friendly reminder to the guys running our matches about this. "

Not necessarily so; in the past, we have received permission from the Section Coordinator (FN) to use certain props/designs on account of our venue. Our club's range is the following size:

25 yards long by 36 FEET wide. And we run 6 or 7 man squads, one per hour every hour from 3 PM to 9 PM.

Yep- we fit 4 stages in their every month. I'd love to have more room to spread out & build lots of walls, ports, props, add a few dozen more slots, etc. but all we have is 36 feet. There WILL be physical limitations that we face: we can either work around them, or throw in the towel. We plan to work around them (example: in an ideal world, every stage is "engage targets as they become visible" We cannot accomadate that every match for all 4 stages, but we will work around it in a FAIR manner) Anyway, I previously addressed the round count matter on another forum. But rest assured, there was no problem with this month's match design.

D.C. Johnson

www.shootersparadise.com

FN1: In the past, we were permitted to use rubber NuBold plates for safety reasons and we placed them CLOSER than 11 yards (one of the exceptions I mentioned) - it was due to our range limitations. Their use was later discontinued as unfair to some shooters (pass throughs).

Edited February 17, 2006 by Carlos

[cliffy109]

Well, both the stages you mention ended up putting the SS major shooters (all two of us) at a real disadvantage. The barricade window one allowed the L10 and SS minor shooters to make a single mag change while flat footed. The SS major shooters had two mag changes and since I was changing mags anyway, it made sense to move to a better window. The bottom line is that I was moving and changing mags while others within my division didn't have to.

The other ran me dry before the "mandatory" reload. I asked about this during the walk through and got a look like "uh-oh... we didn't think about that." Ten rounds, reload and 10 more without moving your feet works for all divisions except revolver and SS major.

Those two stages really made me wonder why we have the SS major division. The 6 round, move and 14 more did give us the chance to reload on the move so that one wasn't a big disadvantage but the other two were.

Edited February 17, 2006 by cliffy109

[SteveZ]

That sounds like a lot of bad stages, even for a level 1 match where the rules allow for a bit of leeway. I'm not sure if that leeway applies to the 9 round rule or not.

I think it does. The second half of US1.1.5.1 says "or round count limitations." I'd interpret that to mean that the number of rounds mentioned (both in "view" and totals) in short/medium/long courses may not be strictly held to for Level I matches meaning that not only can a stage have more than 32 rounds...but you can also have a view or location require more than 9 rounds.

I know we've all seen stages at club matches where a single view or location is used and more than 9 rounds are fired.

[Carmoney]

There's another thread on this general topic somewhere on the forum, and since that discussion I have looked back at all my match booklets from the major matches I shot last year (including Nationals, 2 area matches, and a whole bunch of state/sectionals), asking myself whether I would have had the advantage with the 10+1 .38 Super SS shooting minor, or an 8+1 .45 SS shooting major. I believe that in about 65-70% of these matches, I would have chosen the .45. The other 30-35% of these matches, I believe there would have been a slight advantage to having the extra capacity of the .38 Super.

(As someone already pointed out, the Single Stack Classic is not a great example to use, since it is decidedly 8-round friendly, the major shooters have a true advantage there.)

At most matches, it would be hard to call which gun to shoot without carefully analyzing the stages ahead of time. Smart single-stack shooters will have both guns available, and do just exactly that.

In this instance, I think "gaming the equipment" will be fun and interesting, and I can assure you that two equally competent and experienced USPSA shooters will look at the stages at the same match and come to differing conclusions on which gun would be best used. To me, that means the rules are set up pretty well.