Idpa Rulebook

[Joe D]

Ken, most of my ill feelings toward Bill Wilson would go away if he just added a Q&A section to either the TJ or the website. If he does not want to answer questions directly then appoint someone to. I don't care for his lack of contact with members.

TSA looks to be interesting. I just have a problem with the founder's habit of quoting himself on the website.

The only real issues I have with the IDPA rules boils down to a few rules. 1. Having to retain an empty mag unless I am at slide lock. 2. Not being able to do a reload if I happen to be caught in the open. 3. This is the granddaddy of all dumb rules. Trying to determine if someone dumped rounds to get to slide lock.

[Jane]

Ken, most of my ill feelings toward Bill Wilson would go away if he just added a Q&A section to either the TJ or the website. If he does not want to answer questions directly then appoint someone to. I don't care for his lack of contact with members.

TSA looks to be interesting. I just have a problem with the founder's habit of quoting himself on the website.

The only real issues I have with the IDPA rules boils down to a few rules. 1. Having to retain an empty mag unless I am at slide lock. 2. Not being able to do a reload if I happen to be caught in the open. 3. This is the granddaddy of all dumb rules. Trying to determine if someone dumped rounds to get to slide lock.

Joe,

I think a lot of people would love to see a rules FAQ on the IDPA website. IDPAforum has attempted to start a small 'unofficial' rules clarification section, but it's had very little activity.

As for your specifics... I don't know the rationale for retaining an empty mag. What I would GUESS is that unless you're counting rounds, you won't KNOW the mag is empty unless your gun is at slidelock. The classes I've taken at Front Sight and elsewhere have emphasized that in a stressful situation you're unlikely to count rounds accurately. For example, cops asked how many rounds they shot in an encounter are often wildly off in their estimations.

If you're "caught in the open" seems to be addressed on page 43 of the current rule book:

If a competitor shoots to slide lock with targets

still remaining to be engaged from a specific firing point, the

competitor does NOT have to duck behind cover while reloading,

if you are using cover adequately while firing it will also be

adequate cover while reloading. Keeping an eye on your threat

zone while reloading is a sound tactic in the real world.

I nearly called a guy for rounds-dumping in a match Saturday. (I was reading his mind). Then he read my mind and knew that thought had passed through the blondeness, so he sprayed three on each of a couple of other targets to divert me But even though I had read his mind and knew he had read mine, I let it drop there...

[solaritx]

As stated by others, there are a few rules that could be revisited. Overall, as a game it is generally a good one.

I also feel that the major problem with IDPA, as Vincent stated so well, is that there is inconsistancy not so much in the rules, but in the way the rules are understood and enforced across the IDPA "world".

Many of us have contacted IDPA for "rule clarification" and have gotten back personal e-mails on what and how that rule should be used. Great for those that have the information but what about all the others that might be thinking the same thing?

I believe what we need is a part of the website in the "member's only" section for rule clarification and questions. That way people can contact IDPA and get information on how "Berryville" wants that rule understood and enforced and that information would be given to everyone, not just one or two members. Match Directors, SO's and members could go there and see if their questions have already been answered. This would be helpful in two ways: 1) Headquarters would not have to spend time and money answering the same question over and over to multiple members 2) there would be a centralized place to go and get answers and clarification to questions about IDPA rules.

I know this has been suggested before but in light of Vincent's statements, it would go a long way in having EVERYONE use the rule book the same and thus one can expect to go to Texas or WA or FL or AK and expect the same calls, the same rules and the same rule enforcement.

Yours Shooting and ducking

Garry N

[freeidaho]

Ken, most of my ill feelings toward Bill Wilson would go away if he just added a Q&A section to either the TJ or the website. If he does not want to answer questions directly then appoint someone to. I don't care for his lack of contact with members.

TSA looks to be interesting. I just have a problem with the founder's habit of quoting himself on the website.

The only real issues I have with the IDPA rules boils down to a few rules. 1. Having to retain an empty mag unless I am at slide lock. 2. Not being able to do a reload if I happen to be caught in the open. 3. This is the granddaddy of all dumb rules. Trying to determine if someone dumped rounds to get to slide lock.

Joe D, everyone;

I'm not sure those things are worth all the anxst, but it is your stress to handle not mine. Bill is, who he is, just as you are, or I am. I have no idea what he thinks, or why he does what he does. My ESP has been broken since birth. Wish I could read minds like y'all.

He has however appointed Robert Ray as a liason for all things IDPA. He posts and sometimes answers posts on other less hateful discussion groups. Like it or not, no HQ person is coming within a Texas mile of this discussion group. It is indeed that bad. So in a way people here continually demanding their pound of flesh, year after year are perpetuating the problem.

The funny thing is that the empty mag thing has been explained about a billion times, by people that have actually been shot at and know that the last thing on your mind is counting rounds. Why that is not sufficient is beyond me. I don't mean to open up that war again, sorry.

Not reloading in the open is a red herring. You saw the COF description, you correographed your little shooting dance, you should have left cover with enough rounds in the gun. If after all that, you misjudged, you should be within a step or two of cover anyway. Very few COFs that I have seen require more than the capacity of the gun when in the open, with the exception of revolvers. Revolvers shooters may have a real issue.

The truth is IDPA is not going to be like the other shooting sports, and some people want to have a tantrum over it. Not directed at you specifically JoeD.

Funny thing is you see many of the same issues on the USPSA part of BE.com. The difference is that people that don't shoot USPSA don't log in there and continually post "nanner nanner nanner, I told you your sport has issues." Again, not directed at you.

Ken Reed

[Mayonaise]

While I agree with Joe on one rule issue (initiating a reload only when behind cover) the other two (empty mag and round dumping) what I consider "game integrity" rules. With the emphasis on the word game. Would the game change much of they were removed? Not a lot but some. But they exist because there is a defense minded basis for them as already mentioned above. You won't be counting rounds in a gun fight and you shouldn't be dumping rounds in a gunfight for at least two obvious reasons. Since there are logical foundations for those two rules I have yet to hear a well communicated argument against them. I have yet to see anyone busted for dumping rounds unless it was blatantly obvious and they earned it.

Joe, From what I hear BW isn't all that involved in the day to day anymore.

What we are missing is an official training syllabus for the SOI's. That will eliminate most of the variances out there on how rules are interpreted. The biggest issue I see currently are SO's that are certified but still not really solid on the rules. Something that USPSA definitely has over IDPA IMO.

[Joe D]

Ken, no offense taken. I am somewhat vocal in my opinions. I have never been one of those that just stands quietly in line. The problem I have with Robert's position is he really can't make any decisions.

Jane, that does not cover the situation I am talking about. What I am referring to is if I am moving from one cover point to another and engaging targets as I am moving. If I happen to have a miss or fail to knock down a popper and find myself at slide lock in the open I have to go to cover to even start a reload.

[Mayonaise]

If I happen to have a miss or fail to knock down a popper and find myself at slide lock in the open I have to go to cover to even start a reload.

I'm with you Joe. It's not called an "Emergency Reload" for nothing.

[Joe D]

I would like to know where he posts. Folks in his position do probably need a thick hide. That comes with the job. Most of the complainers, me included, would probably quieten down a bit if we had someone that a least heard our complaints/suggestions.

[Jim Watson]

Oh no, he hit my "dumping" button.

That is contradictory bogus bs.

First you tell me that a stage is Vickers Count, defined by "as many shots as desired may be fired." and then that "Intentional round dumping to gain a competitive advantage will result in a twenty second FTDR penalty." You cannot have it both ways, the dumping penalty means the SO can keep me from firing as many shots as I desire.

Dumping in a gunfight? If that is what you call shooting until the threat is absent, I'll dump. Jeff Cooper once demonstrated as expert witness for a court case that it is possible to shoot a man eight times before he can fall down.

[Mayonaise]

Jim,

I know it's a sore spot for you but I've seen people dump into a berm to get to slide lock. So, are you going to call it for one and not the other? fFrom teh game stand point how is it different than some one intentionally not reloading to complete a string or COF? It's no different if the intent is to gain an advantage in time and score.

When in doubt the call goes to the shooter. When it's blatantly obvious that the shooter is trying to gain a better score then it's a fair call. Naturally and astute MD or course designer can solve the issue before the stage is ever shot.

Mark

[Joe D]

Jim will usually just shoot a -3 so he can make that up to get to slide lock. OTOH we could just make every stage Limited Vickers. That would take care of the dumpers like Jim. I can't begin to tell you how many times I have seen him dump rounds. I OTOH would never do that!

Edited October 12, 2006 by Joe D

[BlackKnight]

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.

Joe, if you want answers about rules, contact your IDPA Area Coordinator, he/she should be on the website, along with Safety Officer Instructors, and the like. As in any organization, there is a "chain of command", and those AC's are responsible for making sure the rules are applied equitably and fairly, whether you like them or not! Input from all shooters is appreciated, and at the AC meetings, many points are brought up and decided upon, as in any corporation or business model. If you truly want an "inside track" then work with your local AC to voice your displeasure or express your wants and needs. I try and respond to anyone who has inquiries or issues in my Area, whether I agree or not with all the rules, whether they make sense or not, they are the rules. There is no "true" democracy, not even in the shooting sports community. If you want a different form of IDPA or Defensive Pistolcraft, feel free to "come up with the cash" and form your own.

[Jim Watson]

Mark,

The MAIN problem I have with "dumping" is that it is contradictory.

What part of Vickers Count = "as many rounds as desired may be fired." can be reconciled with "Intentional round dumping to gain a competitive advantage will result in a twenty second FTDR penalty"

Vickers count does not question the purity of my DESIRE to fire more than the scored number of shots. Yet the dumping provision gives the SO the power to decide that.

Make them all Limited, I don't care, but the rules are directly contradictory and cannot both be followed.

And here is a hot flash for everybody. EVERYTHING I or any other match shooter does is meant to gain a "competitive advantage." The rules just limit how far we can go. Level playing field, and all that.

[Mayonaise]

Vickers count does not question the purity of my DESIRE to fire more than the scored number of shots. Yet the dumping provision gives the SO the power to decide that.

Jim, it's obvious when you see it. And I know you've seen it. You shoot with Joe D.

It's a tough judgement call to make so it has to be pretty damn obvious. In almost 10 years of IDPA shooting I've seen it called once and have never called it that I recall. So it's hardly worth going on about.

Blacknight, I'd be willing to wager that Joe is better versed in the rules than his current AC.

Mark

[Fireant]

I like to consider myself a goodwill ambasador for the shooting sports. I'll shoot anything and even try my best to promote any shooting game(i'm not good at any of them really, I just like to fling lead). Even if it's not my cup of tea. I hate to see one group bash another, if we don't stand united the anti's will take us down one small group at a time. The lady's have a protected forum on this site, I wonder if Brian would do the same for IDPA rules and general discusions? That way if your just bashing the game you can be locked out of that section. Then maybe the IDPA powers, whether it's Robert, BW, or Mrs. BW would feel more comfortable or at ease addressing members that want to better the game.

[Joe D]

I hate to be negative about your idea, but if you are holding your breath waiting on Bill Wilson to join any constructive conversation about IDPA I had better dial 911 for you.

I shoot both IDPA and USPSA. I see problems with both games. Difference is USPSA listens, BW does not.

There is a Q&A section in the Front Sight. The President has his own section. Bill's lack of comments is, IMO, more of an arrogance issue than anything else. If it is a cost issue dump Ken's Corner.

[freeidaho]

Oh no, he hit my "dumping" button.

That is contradictory bogus bs.

First you tell me that a stage is Vickers Count, defined by "as many shots as desired may be fired." and then that "Intentional round dumping to gain a competitive advantage will result in a twenty second FTDR penalty." You cannot have it both ways, the dumping penalty means the SO can keep me from firing as many shots as I desire.

Dumping in a gunfight? If that is what you call shooting until the threat is absent, I'll dump. Jeff Cooper once demonstrated as expert witness for a court case that it is possible to shoot a man eight times before he can fall down.

Jim, everyone;

With all due respect, and I really mean that, you are being a bit deceptive here. Vickers means shoot as much as you want to get good hits. It does not mean shoot as much as you want to get a perfectly timed reload. Everyone I know in IDPA is smart enough to know the difference, it is a simple concept. The rest is about personal integrity. It is a clearly written rule, and that is sufficient for most people. That it is tough to call, seems to make some folks think it isn't a rule. Go figure.

By comparison, I guess that means cheating on ones wife, beating their kids, or stealing from the neighbors is okay, just because it is hard to detect.

If you follow any dumper around for a whole match, you know like being squadded with them, you will indeed clearly see a pattern of convenient reloads preceeded by firing extra shots. Not extra shots on more difficult targets, or more shots on distant targets, but more shots when a reload would be really nice. It ain't rocket surgery. Those dumping and trying to explain it away, ain't fooling anyone. Shooters notice these things, and make mental notes. Hmm, guess I can't trust that guy as far as I can throw him, is what I think when I see it. We have two guys in our club that do it, the rest seem to get the rule just fine.

Just $.02 cents from deep in the boonies in Idaho, maybe we see thing different here. Dunno.

Ken Reed

[GmanCdp]

Ken, no offense taken. I am somewhat vocal in my opinions. I have never been one of those that just stands quietly in line...

yeah you guys should see him in the lunch line at a match....... i've seen him.

If you follow any dumper around for a whole match, you know like being squadded with them, you will indeed clearly see a pattern of convenient reloads preceeded by firing extra shots. Not extra shots on more difficult targets, or more shots on distant targets, but more shots when a reload would be really nice. It ain't rocket surgery. Those dumping and trying to explain it away, ain't fooling anyone. Shooters notice these things, and make mental notes. Hmm, guess I can't trust that guy as far as I can throw him, is what I think when I see it. We have two guys in our club that do it, the rest seem to get the rule just fine. Just $.02 cents from deep in the boonies in Idaho, maybe we see thing different .....

Ken, i'm by no means beating my chest....but i've shot enough state,regional matches in the last couple years 'over here' in the mid-south region..to know that everybody that goes to a match to shoot in a competetive nature, will know when to shoot that extra rnd to get to slide lock...you can S.O. a match and watch shooter after shooter after shooter...all day long..if there are 50 ssp shooters and 50 esp shooters and 90% of those shooters use a 10 rnd mag...then you can just set back and place bets all day long on which T2 or T3 is going to get the extra shot..so that going to the next aray of targets,T4,T5,T6.. the shooter will be at slide lock ...by shooting CDP,we are stuck in the middle,when it come to getting in that sweet spot for a reload... those revolver guys rock...6 reload,6 reload 6..

and that's another topic in its own...

Edited October 14, 2006 by Duane Thomas

[bruce282]

I shoot as many IDPA matches as I do USPSA matches so I thought I'd add my thoughts.

Jane said "The classes I've taken at Front Sight and elsewhere have emphasized that in a stressful situation you're unlikely to count rounds accurately..snip". While I totally agree with that, IDPA is a game. I don't believe anyone when given the LAMR doesn't have a plan of some kind in mind (unless it's a totally blind stage). My plan normally goes to hell in hand basket as soon as the buzzer goes off.

I agree with Jim on round dumping. If the rules say I can shoot until happy, how can an SO give me a FTDR for shooting more than the number rounds that he/she thinks I should have fired. Make it one way or the other, but it can't be both.

And if you wanted to exclude any "competitive advantage", then as has been voiced in other threads, have a standard gun, holster, vest, and ammunition. People reload .40's to shoot softer than my WWB 9mm in my Glock, that's a ""competitive advantage" and should earn a penalty. And to those who would say "You could reload", I say "Why should I, I though we were using 'full power service ammo'. From page 4 of the rule book

IDPA is a shooting sport that uses practical equipment including full charge service

ammunition to solve simulated “real world” self-defense scenarios.

I don't see bunny fart loads be considered full charge.

Later on page 4 it says

No “competition only” equipment is permitted in IDPA matches....

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the BladeTech Stringray belt attachment a competition only product? It was specifically designed for IDPA competition, along with the Woolrite vest, and all the new equipment that came out to be "IDPA legal" after the last rule change.

I know this is all nit-picky stuff, but since a lot of IDPAer's seem to lump "gamers" and "range lawyers" together as undesirables, if the rules were cleaned up to get rid of the silliness and contradictions then a lot of the ammo these folks use would be gone.

I like IDPA, and will continue to support with my dollars. All trigger time is good trigger time.

Bruce

Editted to remove duplicate text.

Edited October 13, 2006 by bruce282

[Jim Watson]

Ken,

I hear what you are saying, but when it gets down to a public debate on what a rule MEANS versus what it SAYS, it is a good example of the faults a lot of people find in IDPA.

My threshhold is relatively high and the only two things that really get up my nose (as Mrs Slocombe of 'Are You Being Served' says) are "dumping" and the 2005 requirement to take cover before dropping an empty magazine instead of as soon as I realize the gun is empty.

Doesn't keep me from shooting, though.

[freeidaho]

Ken,

I hear what you are saying, but when it gets down to a public debate on what a rule MEANS versus what it SAYS, it is a good example of the faults a lot of people find in IDPA.

My threshhold is relatively high and the only two things that really get up my nose (as Mrs Slocombe of 'Are You Being Served' says) are "dumping" and the 2005 requirement to take cover before dropping an empty magazine instead of as soon as I realize the gun is empty.

Doesn't keep me from shooting, though.

Jim,

Indeed, if it were my sport, I would not have the go to cover to reload rule. I agree with they guy that said he believed that it is an administrative rule, like one knee down. I've been shot at, and sometimes you run like hell, and sometimes you shoot back. In the case of IDPA we always shoot back, until we run the gun dry.

However, I didn't mortgage my business and house to start a shooting sport. I haven't poured 10 years of my life into making it a success. So I will happily shoot the sport of someone who has, and make the best of it.

That brings up another point. It seems that there are two camps in IDPA, those that make the best of it, and those that try their best to make the worst of it. I'm glad you are in the former bucket.

Take care.

Ken Reed

[freeidaho]

What we are missing is an official training syllabus for the SOI's. That will eliminate most of the variances out there on how rules are interpreted. The biggest issue I see currently are SO's that are certified but still not really solid on the rules. Something that USPSA definitely has over IDPA IMO.

Mark,

I can't recall where I read it but I read it recently, the new SOI materials are out.

Ken Reed

[Joe D]

I resemble that comment about my loads being "bunny fart" loads. They are mouse fart loads thank you!

[bruce282]

I resemble that comment about my loads being "bunny fart" loads. They are mouse fart loads thank you!

Sorry Joe, mouse farts they are.

Bruce

[Joe D]

Bunny farts would have way too much recoil for me.