Idpa Rulebook

[GmanCdp]

since there has been so many questions about rules latlely.... , just who is making up the BOD of IDPA? ....and what are their stats?

Edited October 10, 2006 by GmanCdp

[Chris Keen]

What's a ruKe-book ?

[GmanCdp]

What's a ruKe-book ?

ok Keen....look on your keyboard...my middle finger slipped i stand corrected....

[Chris Keen]

:rolleyes:

just giving ya a hard time.

[PJONES5]

since there has been so many questions about rules latlely.... , just who is making up the BOD of IDPA? ....and what are their stats?

Bill Wilson!!!

And over the years he has some pretty good stats.

And this topic is going to get ugly quick.

PAT

[GmanCdp]

And this topic is going to get ugly quick.

PAT

PJ.. ..i'm not in no way wanting to get this topic started off in a bad way by no means...

just curious as to who else has input on how the rules and incoming comments are spread thru out IDPA whenever the BOD has a meeting..like does the BOD consist of each member represented by each division?? do the area cordinators ,willing have input before, during, and after each meeting??i think the IDPA website would benefit shooters by having a F&Q section directed to the BOD.....this is what i meant by this topic.....it's always easy to tree a coon...but when you can get all the coons from the woods in the same tree.......well you get what i mean...

Edited October 10, 2006 by GmanCdp

[ima45dv8]

Gman, there is no BoD at IDPA. It is Wilson's game. He funded it, he built it, he makes the rules. The membership doesn't get a vote as in USPSA because the membership does not own IDPA. Bill does. Think of it as more of a benevolent dictatorship as opposed to a democratic committee.

Before anyone tries to trot out the old saw of, "Well, that ain't right!", just accept that this is how it is and nasty comments to the contrary will only serve to get this thread closed in record time (which probably ain't a bad idea considering where these threads usually end up).

[freeidaho]

Gman, there is no BoD at IDPA.

Last I knew, the BoD was Bill, Joyce and John Sale. In the distant past it also included Ken Hackathorn, and Tom Givens. Spelling may be poor on these names.

Ken Reed

[GmanCdp]

Gman, there is no BoD at IDPA. It is Wilson's game. He funded it, he built it, he makes the rules..

ok..didnt know that....dont worry i'm not that type of "that aint right guy", unless it's a speedin ticket....

anyway..i just thought that it might be easy to email another person that was on the BOD for any questions that might arise..... i just shoot the game and think that i have some knowledge of the rulebook....not every bit of it..just some..

[RickB]

While there is no voting, IDPA does solicit ideas and feedback from members. Perhaps not the total membership, but from Area Coordinators, who represent shooters in their area. While rule changes were being considered in '04-'05, I was contacted by my AC, asking for input.

[Ted Murphy]

FWIW, there is a bod at IDPA. No corporation can exist without one. It is short, but its Bill Wilson, John Sayle, and Joyce Wilson.

Most folks know of Bill and Joyce, John Sayle is an entrepeneur who manages a large concern and was a former USPSA competitor and (IIRC) captain of a World Shoot Team back in the day.

[Mayonaise]

Other former BoD members are Ken Hackathorn, Walt Rauch and Larry Vickers, and Dick Thomas (I think).

They get a lot of input from the membership. They tend to pay attention to suggestions and ideas that are well founded, formulated and communicated. I'm sure most of the sniping comments found on the internet are ignored.

America is a great place. Can't find something you like. Change it. Can't change it. Create your own. Pretty simple concept.

[ima45dv8]

Ted/Mayo/Ken,

Thanks for correcting my error. Yes there is a BoD at IDPA, just not one in the same sense as USPSA. My fault for answering too quickly while only considering the differences between the two.

Maybe a fair comparison would be that the USPSA Board is elected by the membership (which owns the organization) and are empowered by charter and by-laws to represent the interests of their constituents at the highest levels. The IDPA Board is not elected as the members don't actually own the organization, but rather are clients/customers.

If I'm wrong, I'm sure I'll be corrected (again ).

[Bones]

Members vote annually when their renewal notices arrive in the mail.

New voters register every year. The data shows suffrage is expanding.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Bones

[dcloudy777]

Rick, I'm glad your AC was involved, and thus got the members involved, with the last rule change. But mine was never even consulted, and learned about the rule changes the same time we all did.

DanO

[Chills1994]

Hey Bones, Idon't seem to quite get your comment about suffrage in IDPA.

Having talked with a major internationally known competitor he says that the membership in IDPA is going down. He also says it drops by about 2,000 every time there is a rule book revision.

Everyone else's comments about it being Bill Wilson's company, well, that could explain why it is idpa.com and not idpa.org, like uspsa.org is.

I could be off there as I am not all up on the ins and outs of domain names.

[Mayonaise]

Maybe a fair comparison would be that the USPSA Board is elected by the membership (which owns the organization) and are empowered by charter and by-laws to represent the interests of their constituents at the highest levels. The IDPA Board is not elected as the members don't actually own the organization, but rather are clients/customers.

If I'm wrong, I'm sure I'll be corrected (again ).

Mark,

Now I know you like a vote when rules changes come about. Hey, works for your game and that's great. I don't have to go into why IDPA was created do I? That's exactly why that system doesn't for for this game. End of story. It only seems to bother some shooters, mostly former IDPA shooters that IDPA operates the way it does. You know, there are a lot more people making money off my shooting than Bill Wilson. By your logic I get a vote in how they run their business? Only if I'm a share holder. Do you vote on the salaries for the people who run USPSA/IPSC? Honestly, I don't know.

For whatever reason there's a small, vocal contigient that hates BW and or IDPA for various reasons. Boils down to whining to me. Many just can't say, "Hey, IDPA just isn't for me..." and leave it at that and go play another game. Instead they feel compelled to go online and rant ad nauseum.

Me? IDPA isn't perfect. I have problems with a couple of rules. Rules that were instated to draw lines for the range lawyers. Rules that to me are just don't make sense tactically. They are GAME rules. Deal with it or walk. It's a game afterall.

I get tired of members of this and other forums who don't shoot IDPA or never shot IDPA coming in here blathering on about the rules. What makes them think that those of us who do shoot IDPA care about their opinion?

If you shoot IDPA and have a question or something constructive by all means, let's hear it. Otherwise you're just trolling and wasting BE's bandwidth. Because it always and I mean ALWAYS devolves to IDPA SUCKS BECAUSE....

Hey, maybe it happens in the USPSA forums too. I wouldn't know. I don't shoot the game so my opinions on their rules are MEANINGLESS. Which is why I DON'T POST in those threads!

[/rant]

Mayo

[freeidaho]

Hey Bones, Idon't seem to quite get your comment about suffrage in IDPA.

Having talked with a major internationally known competitor he says that the membership in IDPA is going down. He also says it drops by about 2,000 every time there is a rule book revision.

Okay, I gotta ask. What makes membership numbers of a privately held company available to a secret major internationally known competitor?

Second, what happens to membership in the 4 or 5 years between rulebook revisions?

Thanks,

Ken Reed

Edited October 12, 2006 by freeidaho

[ima45dv8]

Maybe a fair comparison would be that the USPSA Board is elected by the membership (which owns the organization) and are empowered by charter and by-laws to represent the interests of their constituents at the highest levels. The IDPA Board is not elected as the members don't actually own the organization, but rather are clients/customers.

If I'm wrong, I'm sure I'll be corrected (again ).

Mark,

Now I know you like a vote when rules changes come about. Hey, works for your game and that's great. I don't have to go into why IDPA was created do I? That's exactly why that system doesn't for for this game. End of story. It only seems to bother some shooters, mostly former IDPA shooters that IDPA operates the way it does. You know, there are a lot more people making money off my shooting than Bill Wilson. By your logic I get a vote in how they run their business? Only if I'm a share holder. Do you vote on the salaries for the people who run USPSA/IPSC? Honestly, I don't know.

For whatever reason there's a small, vocal contigient that hates BW and or IDPA for various reasons. Boils down to whining to me. Many just can't say, "Hey, IDPA just isn't for me..." and leave it at that and go play another game. Instead they feel compelled to go online and rant ad nauseum.

Me? IDPA isn't perfect. I have problems with a couple of rules. Rules that were instated to draw lines for the range lawyers. Rules that to me are just don't make sense tactically. They are GAME rules. Deal with it or walk. It's a game afterall.

I get tired of members of this and other forums who don't shoot IDPA or never shot IDPA coming in here blathering on about the rules. What makes them think that those of us who do shoot IDPA care about their opinion?

If you shoot IDPA and have a question or something constructive by all means, let's hear it. Otherwise you're just trolling and wasting BE's bandwidth. Because it always and I mean ALWAYS devolves to IDPA SUCKS BECAUSE....

Hey, maybe it happens in the USPSA forums too. I wouldn't know. I don't shoot the game so my opinions on their rules are MEANINGLESS. Which is why I DON'T POST in those threads!

[/rant]

Mayo

Nice rant, Mark, except the small part where you infer that anyone who doesn't actively participate in an activity should not be allowed an opinion. A great many men to have an opinion on abortion, though it's a certainty they will never have to endure one.

I'll grant you that people who don't know the rules of a game should not try to serve as an authority on it. You, of course, are at the top of my list of folks to answer IDPA-related rules questions for that very reason. Beyond rules issues, I'll entertain opinions from almost anyone. I see no need to be exclusionary.

As for the rest, I did exactly what you described when I decided IDPA was not for me -- I channeled my efforts into another game. To date I've not had the urge to go online and rant ad nauseum about IDPA. My memories of IDPA and *most* of the people I met are very positive.

I apparently did a poor job of it before, so let me state for the record that when I originally commented about the BoD at IDPA, I was simply trying (feebly, it turns out) to point out that the IDPA organization is not structured anything like USPSA, is a business belonging to Bill Wilson and not a membership-owned cooperative association, and that the respective Boards operate within different guidelines. I did that in an attempt to steer this thread away from the almost-inevitable, “I don’t like/understand/shoot IDPA and it Sucks” rabbit-hole that so many of these discussions slide into. I hate it when that happens every bit as much as you do. As shooters, we all lose when we attack each other.

[freeidaho]

Nice rant, Mark, except the small part where you infer that anyone who doesn't actively participate in an activity should not be allowed an opinion. A great many men to have an opinion on abortion, though it's a certainty they will never have to endure one.

I believe there is a difference between having an opinion and what goes on here at Brian's little byte of the net under IDPA. It seems that many that don't shoot IDPA are bent on ruining it for anyone else, and/or just stirring as much trouble as possible. That is not "having an opinion", that is "picking a fight."

There seems to be way more "picking a fight" here, than "having an opinion." There seems to be way more condemnation and slander than discussing, learning and sharing.

It is my belief that cutting out the picking a fight, condemnation and slander is what people mean when they aren't interested in the input from those that don't participate in the sport.

Just a guess,

Ken Reed

Edited October 12, 2006 by freeidaho

[Chuck D]

Being new to the IDPA realm I can tell you this from my vantage point...

1.There are considerably less "rules changes" going on in IDPA vs. USPSA.

2. Whereas IDPA added a Division (ESR) USPSA is on the verge of eliminating and/or consolidating Divisions.

3. There is no USPSA-IPSC rules "bridge" to gap in IDPA.

4.Although the membership doesn't have a vote in IDPA matters...USPSA doesn't have the market cornered on membership satisfaction. Yup...they'll listen but the results sometimes leave something to be desired. On the subject of "ownership", Bill Wilson fronted his own money to get IDPA started. USPSA utilized a "different" business model.

5. For my membership dollars...I'd rather have someone tell me how something's "going to be" then have it "be" just that for a substantial amount of time than have to "rehash" or "justify" a rule or policy due to changes in the rulebook that seem to appear everytime the wind blows in a different direction.

* IDPA is the only action/practical type shooting sport I have in my area that will allow me to purchase a gun that fits the criteria for a Particular Division and after said purchase...feel relatively confident that the gun will be "legal" before, during, and after an extended period of time. I have a safe FULL of "formerly" Division legal USPSA guns that were rendered "ill suited" for their intended purpose after a BOD decision that was deemed "best for the sport."

Edited October 12, 2006 by Chuck D

[Mayonaise]

Nice rant, Mark, except the small part where you infer that anyone who doesn't actively participate in an activity should not be allowed an opinion. A great many men to have an opinion on abortion, though it's a certainty they will never have to endure one.

It's not a matter of having a right to an opinion. It's a matter of the weight your opinion carries within the group and it's relevance. You and I are friends. But your opinion on IDPA means nothing to me. Just as my opinion of USPSA/IPSC carries little if any weight.

I'll grant you that people who don't know the rules of a game should not try to serve as an authority on it. You, of course, are at the top of my list of folks to answer IDPA-related rules questions for that very reason. Beyond rules issues, I'll entertain opinions from almost anyone. I see no need to be exclusionary.

Yet that's exactly what happens here Mark. I can't tell you how many people have posted opinions on IDPA rules that were prefaced with "I've never shot an IDPA match".

As for the rest, I did exactly what you described when I decided IDPA was not for me -- I channeled my efforts into another game. To date I've not had the urge to go online and rant ad nauseum about IDPA. My memories of IDPA and *most* of the people I met are very positive.

Mark you and I are both supporters of any and all shooting. I don't care what game you play, just participate and build the sport. If someone is anti (insert your game here) I don't want to hear about it. Stick to your own lane and STFU. We're adults, people are capable of forming their own opinions without all the negativity. I honestly don't know if it happens in the USPSA threads but it's past old over here.

I apparently did a poor job of it before, so let me state for the record that when I originally commented about the BoD at IDPA, I was simply trying (feebly, it turns out) to point out that the IDPA organization is not structured anything like USPSA, is a business belonging to Bill Wilson and not a membership-owned cooperative association, and that the respective Boards operate within different guidelines.

Not necessarily different guidelines. I would say definitely different purpose and objectives. We all know why IDPA was created and why it is run the way it is. BW didn't like the direction of old game (which is as you say a membership cooperative) so he INVESTED his money, took the financial risk, and created his own game and now, as is common these days some people resent that he profits off his investment. Heart be still! I don't care about the finances of USPSA and I don't understand why the hubbub about BW's finances. We're talking $35 a year from the members. I spend more than that on wet wipes for my range bag. Any of you financial wizards do the math and figure out what he nets on IDPA and I'll guarantee you there are better investments out there than owning IDPA.

I did that in an attempt to steer this thread away from the almost-inevitable, “I don’t like/understand/shoot IDPA and it Sucks” rabbit-hole that so many of these discussions slide into. I hate it when that happens every bit as much as you do. As shooters, we all lose when we attack each other.

Mark, with all due respect. I'm just calling people out who decide to come to our end of the pool to relieve themselves.

[Joe D]

I think we need a group hug. The one thing I would change about IDPA is the lack of contact by Bill Wilson. He could vastly improve IDPA by just adding a Question and Answer section to the Tactical Journal or adding a page to the website. I view his refusal to do this as arrogance. I take this as "This is my game, if you don't like it leave."

During the "Great Holster Debate" I was contacted personally by Joyce Wilson to get my input. That was a nice touch, but that did not last long. Couple of things I did not like about that. One, IDPA did not respond to members until they were in trouble. Two, Bill sent his wife to do his job. I feel he avoids any personal contact with members because he does not want anyone questioning him.

Yes, I still feel IDPA would be better off without Bill Wilson. Will I stop shooting IDPA - nope. Will I stop complaining - nope.

[freeidaho]

Yes, I still feel IDPA would be better off without Bill Wilson.

Looking forward to JoeD's shooting sport.

After you have poured your money and your time into it, and made it successful for 10 years, just turn it over to someone else. Sounds like an unusual business plan to me.

Seriously though, have you thought about IDSA or TSA? They were setup specifically to be better at the IDPA game. Of course you will note they are both privately owned corporations, just like IDPA. You will also note, they use mostly IDPA's rules with a few tweaks. Some more lenient, some way more restrictive. They have been so grandly successful you should be able to find a match on any given weekend, anywhere in the world.

Ken Reed

[Jim Watson]

I took my small club from USPSA to IDPA early on because I liked its stockgun approach and because other ranges in the area were setting up in IDPA and I wanted common ground.

I don't think there is anything magic in it; I would cheerfully shoot IPSC, IDSA, TSA, or JoeShoot if somebody who preferred one or another came along and said he would take over running the matches here. I am ready to be a follower not a leader.