What Is A True Ipsc "practical" Target?

[Wakal]

Lets try for some open and honest discussion...I have a straight up question and I can't get a straight up answer.

In another forum (that shall not be named) some IPSC "Rules Committee" heavyweights stated that:

I understand that Texas Stars can be great fun to shoot.

However, they are unlikely to be approved for IPSC matches because they are more of a gimmick than a true IPSC "practical" target.

Certainly as the XXX Reviewer I wouldn't approve a stage that included a Texas Star.

Some people might think it's fun to shoot but, as XXX has already cautioned, you won't get IPSC Level III or higher sanctioning for any match which includes a Texas Star, because it's considered to be a "carnival" prop.

In response, a very well-written gentleman said:

If IPSC is viewed strictly as a shooting game requiring speed, accuracy and power then the Texas Star provides a moving plate rack which requires the shooter to be quick, accurate and in control of a caliber which meets the power floor.

If IPSC is viewed as a shooting sport which tests shooting skills one might need in the real world then the Texas Star provides erratically moving multiple targets which must be engaged quickly and accurately while in control of a caliber which meets the power floor..

And the response:

IPSC has decided "No" for the Texas Star (and also for the "Texas Windmill"). The issue is not about whether they're "a shooting challenge", because shooting tin cans and bowling pins and metallic silhouette animals and various other items are all shooting challenges of varying degrees of difficulty.

The bottom line is that unless and until the General Assembly instructs the IPSC Administration to accept the Texas Star (and/or Texas Windmill), such targets will not be sanctioned by IPSC.

I'm curious as to what we think here. My own opinion, such as it is, is that as long as a shooting challenge is consistant for all shooters, then it is fine. With all the track movers, hanging movers, sliders, swingers (top), swingers (bottom), swingers (sides), swingers on swingers, bobbers, drop turners, turners, plate racks, plates on movers, plates on swingers, (gasp for breath) Texas Stars, Bear Traps, Windmills, et all...in use at major matches on a regular basis, is it too late to draw the line? If not, then where?

And just as an aside, I also like 50 yard standards

Alex

Edited April 10, 2006 by Wakal

[shred]

A lot of the really-funky targets aren't 'approved' at Level III+ IPSC matches for their own reasons (yeah, I know some Area matches got 'approval' a while back and had them).

I think the 'carnival' props are fun to shoot in matches. I'm less sure of them for major matches since shooting performance on some of them is very dependant on if you get to practice on that particular manufacturer of that particular type of target enough--

Take two generic 'B' shooters of similar ability from two clubs-- one with a Texas-Triangle, the other without, and the one 'with' will probably beat the 'without' by more than the difference in their general shooting ability. Is that a good thing? Will it really matter in a 10-stage match?

[LPatterson]

For a change I am going to support IPSC. The only Texas Star (Windmill) I have even seen was at the Race Gun National as a side match. If 1 of the plates is set straight up it allows a method of transition that is not there if two targets are set at the top.

I think it would make a difference in a 10 stage match but a lot less in an 18-20 stage match.

[Ron Ankeny]

I agree with the IPSC decision makers. Texas Stars and Texas Windmills have no place in Level III IPSC matches.

[JFlowers]

I am going to have to buck the crowd here for two reasons; one that follows the rule book and one thats personal.

Personal, first. I like the Texas Star. I think its a great target presentation. I agree with the quotes that Wakal pulled, it does provide a "practical" exercise.

Now the rule book (the following is my opinion). 4.3.1.4 thru 4.3.1.7 give the rules relating to metal targets, with reference to Appendix C3. The only real conditions these put forth are Board Approved, Size, Must Fall or Drop. The Texas Star is not a target, but a presentation of targets. The targets are 5 round metal plates that fall when hit. Round metal targets are approved. They fall when hit. As long as they are properly sized then they meet all three criteria. So then, how do you classify the Texas Star as unapproved without making Round Metal Falling Targets unapproved?

[Loves2Shoot]

Too many target types un-levels the playing field.

[AikiDale]

The IPSC rule book lists the approved types of targets for competition. They include two very specifically defined paper targets and a variety of acceptable steel targets. If a target meets these guidelines then it must by definition be an approved target.

The Texas Star with 8' plates provides an array of 5 approved targets. Whether one shoots them well is not an acceptable criteria. Whether a novice has a more difficult time than a Grand Master is not an acceptable criteria. Whether it simulates something else is not an acceptable criteria. Any target or target array which uses by the book legal targets placed in by the book legal positions must, by the book, be legal.

If there are to be more tightly refined rules for level III and higher competitions then they need to be in the book.

[Flexmoney]

Very well put Dale.

[.40AET]

So then, how do you classify the Texas Star as unapproved without making Round Metal Falling Targets unapproved?

Easily......Get a bunch of guys together who don't like shooting the Texas star and let them vote on whether or not it's "practical".

[EricW]

As long as we're going to continue on with the 2004 rulebook, does it *really* matter what IPSC thinks? Seriously. Who cares what they do?

[wide45]

As long as we're going to continue on with the 2004 rulebook, does it *really* matter what IPSC thinks? Seriously. Who cares what they do?

Can you answer that within the forum guidelines?

Might be better if we we stick to discusing targets.

[GeorgeInNePa]

As long as we're going to continue on with the 2004 rulebook, does it *really* matter what IPSC thinks? Seriously. Who cares what they do?

+1

[Sestock]

There was a Texas Star at the A8 last year and I have shot them at a previous A5.

[JFD]

I definitely agree with AikiDale.

It doesn't hurt that the TX Star is fun to shoot and makes it clear which shooters know what their sights are for.

[ima45dv8]

And there will be a stage at Area 6 with *2* Stars!

[bayoupirate]

None of you must have shot the "Carnival" stage at A4 last year.

The only thing I did like is that they put all of the stars, hammers, tri plates, swinging plates and other assorted fun things all on one stage. At least that way you didn't have to see them in every other stage.

The only two circumstances that I feel the Texas Star could possible be seen as unfair are:

1) Unless the plates can be reset to the exact starting position for each shooter on each run, I guess someone could argue that the course wasn't exactly the same and not equal.

2) If the Texas Star is not in full and complete view, with either some part of the star and possibly some of the plates out of view as it spins and swings and dodges my bullets. One could argue that shooter one had 3 plates in view when he approached it and shooter two had 4 plates to shoot. Shooter one had to wait on plates 4 and 5 to appear after he shot 1,2&3 (he's fast), while shooter two was able to run 1,2,3,&4 and only had to wait on 5 (he'e even faster).

An open texas star, I hate to shoot them, only because I'm not good at shooting them, but I think they are fair and equitable targets for Practical Shooting.

Ok, that's my 2cents

[encoreman]

Okay, what is their definition of practical. This is a game, a fun game. Hey if every shooter has the same targets to shoot at, what is the problem. I have seen the wind be a factor, so what it is the luck of the draw. Let's quit bickering and have fun again. Load and make ready!!

[Chris Keen]

Let's quit bickering and have fun again. Load and make ready!!

HEAR HEAR !!!

+ 2

[Ben Stoeger]

How does IPSC approve double swingers but not the TX star? It just seems wierd to me.

[XRe]

How does IPSC approve double swingers but not the TX star?

It's called "Not Invented Here Syndrome"....

[Chuck D]

Bravo IPSC.

If we're to adhere to even a thread of the founding principles IPSC was developed from...carnival targets should be excluded.

Edited April 11, 2006 by Chuck D

[AikiDale]

But if we did that wouldn't most of our stages be one to four targets within nine feet?

[ima45dv8]

One man's carnival target is another man's "bad guy on the move just like in real life" target.

[ewokUk]

The objections raised by the IPSC over the Texas Star were mainly that it wasn't 'practical'

But a target array that dosen't move once you have have shot the first one isn't practical either???

Also rejecting unusual & difficult stages/arrays seems to be at odds with the IPSC rules:

Rule 1.1.6 Difficulty –

IPSC matches present varied degrees of difficulty. No shooting challenge or time limit may be appealed as being prohibitive. This does not apply to non-shooting challenges, which should reasonably allow for differences in competitor's height and physical build.

As long as the stage is consistant - i.e. the starting conditions of the Star/Windmill must be the same for each competitor, I cannot see any reason to reject this sort of target. Unless the problem is image

If the IPSC want to project a professional image & shy away from 'carnival' props then OK, there are enough open matches where we can shoot fun targets. But the IPSC will have to come up with some rules & definitions of what targets are & aren't acceptable.

[RIIID]

IPSC poppers and IPSC paper targets are missing the top of the target (head). I would say those targets aren't practical, they are just PC.

Rich