The New Ipsc/Uspsa Relationship

[Vlad]

I just got my new Front Sight and read the new USPSA position on the IPSC/USPSA rulebook issues. I don't really have a preformed opinion on the subject and I am curious to know if anyone thinks this will work.

I guess it is a two part question

1) Will this change help solve our rules issues or make it worse?

2) Does anyone think there will be any "IPSC" matches besides the 3 designated matches?

[GeorgeInNePa]

I just got my new Front Sight and read the new USPSA position on the IPSC/USPSA rulebook issues. I don't really have a preformed opinion on the subject and I am curious to know if anyone thinks this will work.

I guess it is a two part question

1) Will this change help solve our rules issues or make it worse?

2) Does anyone think there will be any "IPSC" matches besides the 3 designated matches?

For those of us who haven't gotten our Front Sight yet, can you sum up the USPSA postion in a few sentences?

[Matt Cheely]

For those of us who haven't gotten our Front Sight yet, can you sum up the USPSA postion in a few sentences?

+1

[Vlad]

Hmm I'll try. Basically the proposed position of USPSA is that it will be running BOTH IPSC and USPSA matches within the US. The IPSC matches will be run under IPSC rules, the USPSA matches under USPSA rules. USPSA will run a number of qualification matches which will be used for World Shoot slots. Those matches will be level III and ran under IPSC rules.

Local clubs will have an option as running under either of the rule sets. Bruce Gary hints that separate regional, sectional, area, and national matches will "logically" evolve over time.

This is my read of the article and I'm sure I missed some nuances at my first read. My basic understanding is the USPSA will now be an umbrela organization running both IPSC and USPSA matches. As far as I can tell this position would still have to be approved/adopted by IPSC.

Also check the at the bottom of http://www.uspsa.org/bodminutes/20060304.pdf for the official wording.

Here is the text:

Insofar as the International Practical Shooting Federation (IPSC) and its sole recognized affiliate for the United States region, The United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA) share acommon interest in promoting shooting competition, and;

Insofar as USPSA has historical, practical and reasonable needs to deviate in several and various ways from the IPSC rules for the conduct of shooting competitions within the United States, and has continuously maintained a long-standing precedent for doing so, and;

Insofar as neither IPSC nor USPSA desire to detrimentally affect their current affiliation, nor todetrimentally affect the image or operations of the other,

The Board of the United States Practical Shooting Association hereby declares its desire to

resolve this issue in a manner that benefits the interests of both organizations, to wit:

-- The United States Practical Shooting Association will offer and promote IPSC

competition within the United States, in accordance with IPSC rules, and in doing so

fully satisfies its obligations under the IPSC constitution and affiliation agreement.

-- Separately, the United States Practical Shooting Association will offer and promote

other forms of shooting competition within the United States, in accordance with

such rules, policies and procedures as it deems appropriate, with specific details

established by further action of the Board.

Because the United States Practical Shooting Association currently operates under an existing IPSC waiver granting authority for a United States rulebook, and because it is our mutual desire to minimize any disruption to competitors within the United States, it is reasonable and necessary for the IPSC Executive Council to approve our request for an extension of the current rulebook waiver through 12/31/2007.

This approach in no way represents a violation of the IPSC Constitution or the affiliation

agreement currently in effect between USPSA and IPSC, and in fact represents a resolution to a long-standing conflict and a substantial growth opportunity for both organizations. Accordingly, the Board of the United States Practical Shooting Association directs its President, as the Regional Director for the US Region of IPSC, to communicate this direction to the IPSC Executive Council.

Edited April 25, 2006 by Vlad

[BritinUSA]

I can see IPSC matches taking place in the USA in the build-up to a World Shoot. Being able to load 15 rounds in your Production gun will alter the way that it handles and giving our teams the opportunity to shoot some matches with this setup will only help us.

USPSA contains members that are keen to compete at National and International levels and those that just wish to compete at a local level (maybe the occasional state match). We need to provide a sport for both groups without alienating each of them.

This may be a good way of testing the waters to see if the membership is keen to move closer to IPSC or keep the 'USA First' focus of USPSA. Both organisations are striving for the same thing albeit in different ways.

Time will tell if this will work, it will be interesting to say the least.

[Vlad]

I've fixed the spelling and formating of my post above. Sorry if I confused anyone with the intermediate forms.

[EricW]

It is good.

[Crusher]

So anyone getting more than 17 rounds in an STI 126mm tube with Grams guts and a Dawson international basepad I'm all ears. 18 would be nice for a start mag.

[kimel]

Well, time to build a Modified gun.

[shred]

Interesting.. I like IPSC matches and I like USPSA matches. This could be good, though it could get confusing...

"Going to the IPSC match?" "Sure, is it USPSA or IPSC today?"

If they go whole-hog and adopt the IPSC divisions, that could get really entertaining; though the 10-round limited folks won't be so happy.

[spook]

+1

Confusing.

Edited April 25, 2006 by spook

[Jim Norman]

I think a large part of this is our (USPSA) answer to the continued PC push from IPSC. The word I heard was that IPSC was demanding that we only use the "Classic" Target and also wanted to force us to use the IPSC rules without any exceptions. Now I may be overstating this a bit, but there is a definate difference of opinion on how the sport should progress from this point forward. Will we be a PC sport ala IPSC or will be return towards the roots of the sport ala USPSA. We have a tradition of blue-collar gun ownership in the US. Most of the rest of the world does not.

I could go on, but I for one am happy that we have divorced our rule book from IPSC.

Jim

[uscbigdawg]

Sounds like it could work. It's immediate effect will probably be either more US shooters participating in international events (like in Asia, Canada and South America) and/or more international shooters coming to the US.

However, two concerns. First, I'm with BritinUSA in that what's more likely to happen is 6-12 months before the World Shoot, you'll see a boom in the number of "IPSC" matches. While this may not be a bad thing, it's probably not the intent.

Second, what I'd like to see USPSA/IPSC start doing is asking the question of how is _____ bringing new and younger shooters to our sport? I'd like to see our sport grow and not stay pretty consistent in its annual numbers. If I knew what that spark was I'd give it out for free, because of how much I love our game and the people in it. Unfortunately, I don't think this is it.

Just my $0.02.

SPC (P) Richard A. White, Senior Medic

249th MP Detachment (EACF)

Camp Humphreys, ROK

[38superman]

I don't see a lot of promise in this approach.

US shooters that are indoctrinated into our rule book probably won't show a lot of interest in IPSC matches unless they are preparing for a world shoot.

Running matches under two different rules system will just muddy the water and confuse people, especially the newer shooters.

I wouldn't mind seeing USPSA move a little closer to the IPSC rules where it doesn't conflict with US law or represent a hardship for any of our members.

For example, why shouldn't we go to the classic targets for USPSA?

We often shoot them in the states at matches like the Fla Open.

I see no meaningful difference it the two target styles.

Tls

[Cjblackmon]

For example, why shouldn't we go to the classic targets for USPSA?

We often shoot them in the states at matches like the Fla Open.

I see no meaningful difference it the two target styles.

Tls

One of the reasons Frank Garcia told me he runs the Florida Open with the Amoeba targets is because he'd like to see the sport adopted into the Olympics. They don't like the classic "Silloutte style" targets, because it's too human looking. By trying to get shooters to used to amoebas, as they become more widely used, hopefully it will move to an Olympic event.

I haven't received my Front Site yet, what are the major variances between the IPSC rules and USPSA rules?

[Rob Boudrie]

This brings us back to the age old question of "Where is the line?"

- What if we are told that not publishing stage diagrams will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that not offering "Multi-Gun" style competition will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that removing walls, doors, windows, hallways, tables and anything else which depicts an interpersonal enounter involving the use of the defensive sidearm will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that starting from a low ready and not running with the gun will make out sport more palatable?

I would suggest that anyone advocating that we start down this path also state how far down the path USPSA should be prepared to go. There will ALWAYS be the next thing we can offer up on the alter of political correctness and appeasment. Before embarking on such a path, a game plan is necessary.

[Cjblackmon]

This brings us back to the age old question of "Where is the line?"

- What if we are told that not publishing stage diagrams will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that not offering "Multi-Gun" style competition will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that removing walls, doors, windows, hallways, tables and anything else which depicts an interpersonal enounter involving the use of the defensive sidearm will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that starting from a low ready and not running with the gun will make out sport more palatable?

I would suggest that anyone advocating that we start down this path also state how far down the path USPSA should be prepared to go. There will ALWAYS be the next thing we can offer up on the alter of political correctness and appeasment. Before embarking on such a path, a game plan is necessary.

I agree with what you're saying, but if we would like to be an Olympic sport maybe we could change some of our paradigms to adapt. Because if we keep doing what we've been doing, we'll keep getting what we've been getting. Change is not always bad. What if the combination of IPSC and USPSA works out, what if we do like the IPSC rules after all, what if we get twice as many member as we currently have, what if... You never know until you try.

[vincent]

I personally would not like to see USPSA/IPSC shooting as an Olympic event. The Olympics administration is generally anti-gun so I wouldn't want anything to do with that organization. USPSA's efforts are better spent promoting the sport in other ways.

[TxD]

This brings us back to the age old question of "Where is the line?"

- What if we are told that not publishing stage diagrams will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that not offering "Multi-Gun" style competition will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that removing walls, doors, windows, hallways, tables and anything else which depicts an interpersonal enounter involving the use of the defensive sidearm will make our sport more palatable to the Olympics?

- What if we are told that starting from a low ready and not running with the gun will make out sport more palatable?

I would suggest that anyone advocating that we start down this path also state how far down the path USPSA should be prepared to go. There will ALWAYS be the next thing we can offer up on the alter of political correctness and appeasment. Before embarking on such a path, a game plan is necessary.

Best post on this subject so far.

USPSA should decide up front just how much of the camel they want in the tent.

[BritinUSA]

IPSC will never be an Olympic sport... ever

If IPSC/USPSA is trying to move in a direction to make us more acceptable to the Olympic movement then it will destroy the sport.

We don't need the Olympics and they don't want us...

[Matt Cheely]

IPSC will never be an Olympic sport... ever

If IPSC/USPSA is trying to move in a direction to make us more acceptable to the Olympic movement then it will destroy the sport.

We don't need the Olympics and they don't want us...

I totally agree. Being "PC" in a sport that came from trying to shoot the bad guys the fastest isn't ever going to be "PC".

[Genghis]

Considering the rules differences (I've read about 'em, never shot an IPSC match), it seems like a reasonable thing for a USPSA shooter to shoot a few matches under IPSC rules before shooting in a major IPSC match.

I'd bet that the IPSC leadership recognizes that if they get too pushy with USPSA, USPSA will cut all ties and run its own show. As an aside, I wonder what the total membership of IPSC is, compared to USPSA? I'll hazard a guess that IPSC allows USPSA to vary from its rules for this exact reason.

I'd love to see our sport in the Olympics, for a lot of reasons. I can't think of a better way to recruit new members. Our sport is a blast - seeing it on TV will bring a lot of people out for matches. Look at what it's done for curling (just kidding!).

[Vlad]

As an aside, I wonder what the total membership of IPSC is, compared to USPSA?

You find that out, you win a cookie. IPSC keeps on refusing to answer that question.

[Crusher]

In its current format USPSA/IPSC will never be an "Olympic sport". (I wonder if the NRA "Action Pistol" has pursued this path before?)

The question remains how much "bastardization" will the USPSA/IPSC membership allow to make an action shooting sport part of an "Olympic venue" and how significant will these changes be to the current rulebook with ONLY the POTENTIAL to POSSIBLY increase the numbers via several minutes of television coverage every 4 years.

IMHO (from a marketing standpoint) this is NOT a wise path to pursue.

[LPatterson]

Why would we want to be part of the Olympics when there are lots of countries that do not allow firearms to start with. How would you score a match using an Airsoft.

This is America so let's be Americans & let the rest of the world do what it wants. I am tired of calling a company and hearing a recorded message asking if I want English or Spanish. I spent 23 years defending this country so I could speak English and not some foreign language. Mexico invaded this country before & the cry was "Remember the Alamo", now they are doing it one at a time and flying the Mexican flag above the American flag.