Why Mor?

[EricW]

If alternate targets are allowed, I think USPSA scoring could be very effective. A simple way to score a CBS would be to have it as a fixed time event with a weighted scoring system that decreased linearly with increasing radial distance from the center of the target. Yeah, it would take a measuring device, but it's hardly an insurmountable challenge.

[Religious Shooter]

So.... what should we change?

Bruce

I've said it before... I'll say it again.

How about an equipment division that is the "Tactical" of MOR? I want a scope division that is more affordable than Open.

MOR "Hunter" class:

- .308

- 4+1 (or 5+1) round capacity

- fixed magazine

- no compensators

- Optics allowed

- Bipods allowed

Get a stock Savage/Rem/Win and put a decent $400 scope on it and you can actually have gear that has an honest chance to win the division for about $1,000-$1,100.

Keep Open and Limited division and introduce "Hunter" (or whatever you want to call it) class.

Us poor commies with bad eyesight can be in the new class and all you rich capitalists and video moguls can be in Open.

Us poor commies want to shoot too.

[MKuhn]

And shoot you should.

As in all true class systems, the divider is economics and birth placement.

So the classes are

$0.00 to $1000.00 = Commie class

$1000.01 to $2000.00 = Third world class

$2000.01 to infinity = Capitalist class

And it would be a claims race, if your win is challenged you would be required to sell your rifle for the max class amount.

Brilliant!

Warmth and fuszzyness

Mell

[Merlin Orr]

And shoot you should.

As in all true class systems, the divider is economics and birth placement.

So the classes are

$0.00 to $1000.00 = Commie class

$1000.01 to $2000.00 = Third world class

$2000.01 to infinity = Capitalist class

And it would be a claims race, if your win is challenged you would be required to sell your rifle for the max class amount.

Brilliant!

Warmth and fuszzyness

Mell

Ahhh... The claimer race system. I like it!

[George]

So.... what should we change?

Bruce

Absolutely nothing whatsoever!

I like shooting bolt guns and feel that USPSA MOR is a unique thing that is NOT like sniper competitions and should NOT become like standard sniper competitions. Personally, I have no interest in the type of matches Matt mentions earlier and like the USPSA format just fine, thank yew!

BTW, it is called MOR for a reason and I think that reason is valid in the context of this specific match. If USPSA MOR become more like a standard sniper match, that would make the world a lot less interesting place IMHO.

[MattBurkett]

George,

Interesting comment. Have you ever shot a "sniper match"? If you haven't, how can you know if they "make the world a lot less interesting place IMHO"?

You are right the MOR is a unique thing. And it has been unsuccessful.

I thought the idea was to umm GROW a sport (MOR) which has not been successful so far.

Bruce, if there is anyway I can help - please contact me anytime.

Thanks,

Matt

So.... what should we change?

Bruce

Absolutely nothing whatsoever!

I like shooting bolt guns and feel that USPSA MOR is a unique thing that is NOT like sniper competitions and should NOT become like standard sniper competitions. Personally, I have no interest in the type of matches Matt mentions earlier and like the USPSA format just fine, thank yew!

BTW, it is called MOR for a reason and I think that reason is valid in the context of this specific match. If USPSA MOR become more like a standard sniper match, that would make the world a lot less interesting place IMHO.

[Merlin Orr]

Matt

I believe you misread George's post...

I have NOT shot an actual "sniper" match as of this date..I don't think I have anyway. Just what is a "sniper" match. Do you have to wear the ragged suit or is it the rifle or the course or what?

I am hoping to shoot one of these elusive things in a couple of weeks as they are having one right down the road a ways... I guess the shindig at Rifles Only in Kingsville TX will pass for a "sniper" match...?

[George]

Interesting comment. Have you ever shot a "sniper match"? If you haven't, how can you know if they "make the world a lot less interesting place IMHO"?

You are right the MOR is a unique thing. And it has been unsuccessful.

I thought the idea was to umm GROW a sport (MOR) which has not been successful so far.

No, I have not, and as I said, I am not interested. I know what they consist of and to tell the truth, the field craft stuff is just not of interest to me. I was an Eagle Scout in High School and did enough orienteering for my druthers there. I did all the stalking work I was interested in during my deer hunting days. CBS tests, night firing and high angle shooting challenges are not unable to be run under USPSA rules. No one has tried to test those skills in USPSA MOR. It would not be hard to do so under the USPSA rules.

MOR stands for Manually Operated Rifle and as such that name is exactly what attracts me to it. I am interested in shooting "bolt rifles" under duress and at speed with accuracy. USPSA MOR if properly run is fine at providing these things to the competitor. It just hasn't been properly run yet.

Personally, I would rather shoot Metallic Sillouhette, or the NRA High Power Rifle course and the 1000 yard matches yard at Camp Perry than go to sniper style matches. Sniper matches are just a bit too "Tactical" for my tastes anyway. It's the actual shooting itself that me, not the boyscout handbook stuff and the "shoot the right bad guy in the left eye" stuff that the shooting is embedded in at sniper matches. I like to "race" and IPSC is racing with guns. If it ain't on the clock, I don't wanna' rock ;-)

As far as USPSA MOR being unsucessful, well duh!. It hasn't exactly been handled very well in most of the matches that have been run to this date. I will say that Albany actually was a good start for MOR compared to the previous 3 events. 4 total matches over a 5 year period is a pretty lame track record to use to call anything unsucessful. I would venture to say that the reason for it's not so illustrious run is the way it has been handled logistically at most earlier instances, not the rules and the courses of fire used.

There are more sniper matches held in any given year (heck, any given month in Texas) than the sum total number of USPSA MOR matches held to date. If more USPSA style MOR matches were hosted every year at local USPSA clubs, then more folks would gear up, train up and show up and more development of the rules and divisions would occur.

Myself, I kinda' like the USPSA MOR format and think there is plenty of room for a long range rifle game that is all about the shooting and features action courses with movement and props just like IPSC pistol. Call this a 2 MOA game and have appropriate steel targets out to 7-800 yards.

I say fix the logistical problems that USPSA MOR has been unfairly saddled with for most of it's lifespan and give it a real chance before you call it a dead game.

BTW, Matt, I did not say Sniper matches made the world less interesting. Far from it actually. What I did say was that making USPSA MOR "just like" existing Sniper competitions would make the world a less interesting place. That does NOT state in any way that Sniper matches themselves make the world less interesting. What I am preaching about here is enjoying le' difference and railing against the onslaught of uniformity ;-)

Regards,

[EricW]

USPSA needs to align MOR with everyone else if it is to succeed. It should have been "precision rifle" right from the get go.

And you can shoot sniper matches without wearing camo. People just look at you funny is all.

[George]

People just look at you funny is all.

Ain't that a dose of irony ;-/

[Religious Shooter]

I would tend to agree with George that USPSA MOR should be its own animal.

I shoot at a local club that's very precision oriented --- KYL and cold bore at 1" targets at a 100 yards, mini and regular clay birds at 200-300 yards, 12" paper plates and sometimes 3" clay birds at 530 yards. It's all good.

But I like what we did in Albany. The Albany match was basically one stage where you used an MOR on a running assault course and 3 defensive barracks/hold position/crashed helicopter type stages.

You won't see any/many full IPSC targets at 30-50 yards in the precision matches. But I would argue that that skill is as relevant as shooting at a .25" dot at 100 yards.

I see USPSA MOR as being flexible enough to have the dot games (as in Reno) and long distance steel that the other matches have while also having the fast action stages (as in Albany) thats the hallmark of USPSA/IPSC pistol matches. I like variety. And that is what USPSA MOR currently offers.

If you compared them to pistol matches:

Precision matches = bullseye pistol matches.

MOR @ Albany = USPSA pistol match.

[MKuhn]

The label "Precision rifle match" doesn't mean you just stand there and shoot dots. It refers to the type of weapon required. There can be plenty of run and gun, there are many matches that have course that could be way over a mile, and they are timed. Meticulousness ranging, wind estamating, climatic condition evauating are a must, you don't just aim and pull. All this coupled with a lot of movement plus run and gun pistol shooting.

To compare these contest with bulls eye is ridicules. As is referring to the Albany match as some spectacular one of a kind.

Edited October 19, 2006 by MKuhn

[Religious Shooter]

The label "Precision rifle match" doesn't mean you just stand there and shoot dots. It refers to the type of weapon required. There can be plenty of run and gun, there are many matches that have course that could be way over a mile, and they are timed. Meticulousness ranging, wind estamating, climatic condition evauating are a must, you don't just aim and pull. All this coupled with a lot of movement plus run and gun pistol shooting.

Could you name those matches you are referring to?

From what you describe they sound like the ITRC, the recent team match at Raton and the monthly matches at Raton.

I wouldn't call those matches precision rifle matches. They have elements of precision rifle. But IMO they aren't precision rifle matches. Take a look at their names:

ITRC = International Tactical Rifleman's Championship

Monthly Raton Match = "Sporting Rifle Match"

http://demigod.org/~zak/firearms/precision/

Recent team match at Raton = "2006 Practical Rifle Team Challenge"

They don't call themselves "precision" rifle... because they aren't precision rifle matches.

I get the feeling like you/we/I are confusing the issue(s). The thread has snaked into "what should with do with USPSA MOR matches." Or at least that's what I have been posting about.

Do you think a discussion on rule changes in USPSA MOR matches is somehow going to change or is even applicable to the matches you described?

As is referring to the Albany match as some spectacular one of a kind.

I don't see where in my post that I indicated that Albany was somehow one of a kind. I wrote:

You won't see any/many full IPSC targets at 30-50 yards in the precision matches.

That doesn't indicate "one of a kind." And your characterization that I thought Albany was "spectacular" is just plain off. It was a good match. It wasn't "spectacular."

To compare these contest with bulls eye is ridicules.

Again, I don't consider the ITRC type & the Raton matches as "Precision Rifle" matches. So hence... I wasn't comparing those matches to USPSA MOR in my previous post.

[kurtm]

Relig...Have you shot the ITRC or the CMG tactical team challenge? If you haven't how can you say what they are? I would hate to think that a 1200yd target is an easy shot or a 10" plate at 1000yds is not precise, but you must be one hell of a shooter to think there isn't any precision to these matches. Maybe you should come on down and just win all these easy non precise matches, the prize table is very good at both KURTM

[Nik Habicht]

O.K. --- I'll throw my paddle in the pot: Why do we shoot a M.O.R. Nationals at all? Taking a quick look at the USPSA match results for the last five years, it seems that we had 32 shooters in our biggest turnout year. Is M.O.R. shot at the club level? What are the costs/benefits to USPSA of holding a National Championship for a division with a handful of shooters that requires separate stages?

[George]

O.K. --- I'll throw my paddle in the pot: Why do we shoot a M.O.R. Nationals at all? Taking a quick look at the USPSA match results for the last five years, it seems that we had 32 shooters in our biggest turnout year. Is M.O.R. shot at the club level? What are the costs/benefits to USPSA of holding a National Championship for a division with a handful of shooters that requires separate stages?

Nik, the MOR match in Albany used four of the main match stages with minimal re-configuration. It only required having those specific bays ready and staffed one day before the main match. It was a pretty darned good model of how MOR ought to be run in the future compared to the past 3 matches where the stages required completely separate effort to build and design.

The hardest reset was moving the steel on the LD stage in closer for the main multigun match ;-)

I think the way it was handled at Albany this year was an order of magnitude better/easier than it has been handled in the (3) previous matches. I personally think we ought to consider the 2006 Albany version of USPSA MOR as the first sucessful pass at sorting it out properly for the future. Properly managed, it could be a great USPSA/IPSC club tool for getting more folks out to play IPSC with the smokepoles they may already have (read hunting rifles here). Especially in the semi-auto challenged states ;-)

I actually enjoyed the experience of running a large caliber bolt rifle through a CQ stage at 30-40 yard partials. It was a blast seeing how fast I could work the bolt while staying on the scope and chuck rounds in when needed. Speed is fun ;-)

The use of one round per IPSC paper and all the paper being partials was a good design feature and I think this type of match may just hold a lot of attraction for the crowd wanting to shoot a real rifle course without needing 6k of 1/2 MOA capable gear. I ran a $400 POS Remmy Sportsman 78 with under $600 worth of total mods on it including optics. It is a 1 MOA rifle at the best stretch and I still managed a fifth place finish ahead of lotsa' folks running more money in their laser range finders than I had in my whole MOR rig.

I think that USPSA MOR is NOT a precision rifle game, nor should it be one. As I mentioned earlier, make it a 2 MOA game, use appropriate sized steel out to 6-700 yards and let folks get into the game for fun without a 2nd mortgage on the house ;-)

A sporting rifle division would be a very good idea as would a true iron sight division where a properly configured Springfield in 06, or a Mauser in metric could play.

I firmly believe there is room for THIS specific game in USPSA at the national and at the club level. It is an entry level rifle game as far as true precision shooting goes, but as run in Albany this year, it still required you to be a real shooter to get anywhere fast ;-)

[Religious Shooter]

Relig...Have you shot the ITRC or the CMG tactical team challenge? If you haven't how can you say what they are? I would hate to think that a 1200yd target is an easy shot or a 10" plate at 1000yds is not precise, but you must be one hell of a shooter to think there isn't any precision to these matches. Maybe you should come on down and just win all these easy non precise matches, the prize table is very good at both KURTM

Man are you intentionally misreading my posts again?

I wrote:

I wouldn't call those matches precision rifle matches. They have elements of precision rifle. But IMO they aren't precision rifle matches.

To me Precision Rifle doesn't make you go walk a mile and shoot 1-3 targets. Precision Rifle has little movement.

I've never said that those matches were easy. Go ahead and quote me and prove me wrong. Where did I say those matches were easy?

[EricW]

Precision Rifle has little movement.

And what "real world" scenario aside from prairie dog hunting would that correspond to?

Unless the military and Cabelas have both perfected teleportation, the use of a precision rifle would seem to yet involve shitloads of walking.

[George]

Precision Shooting combined with trompin' across hill and dale may have their place in the real world, but you don't see much hoofin' in Palma Rifle and 1000 yard NRA rifle shooting. You will walk a few hundred yards a few times in a day of NRA High Power Rifle shooting, but that's not part of the course of fire. These games are true precision rifle competitions in the full sense of the word as they measure one specific thing, your ability to put a round in the 10/X ring at extreme distances in any wind and require MOA accuracy across the course to excel. That's "real" rifle shooting IMO. especially with the iron sights used.

Ranging and Fieldcraft can be assessed subjectively, but they are not accurately measurable in time, points, or points per second, whereas your target face and the time it took to garner the points on it are. This is what competition is all about, fractions of a second and hundreths of a point.

I see sniper and other fieldcraft oriented shooting events as less of a race for points than as a somewhat subjective way of assessing your capability of doing a specific job in the real world successfully. Me, I am just a competition shooter looking to race my guns to see how fast and accurate I can be.

[EricW]

All I can say, is that if you want to make precision rifle / sniper / whatever the heck you want to call it "practical," then make people take all the crap they brought with them in the truck put on their back and head off for stage el numero uno: The Five Mile Hike.

Anybody ever heard of this thing called "biathlon" before? Are they not "real" rifle shooters?

[SHAWN CARLOCK]

I see both sides of the street from a practical standpoint. Precision autos have their place in the field and precision bolt rifles have theirs. The question is of course about competition. I to feel USPSA should change the event to precision rifle. Precision rifle is all encompassing, speed is an issue, but high reloading round counts are typically not. I feel the precision rifleman trying to hone a skill set should be looking at close targets small, partial, usually moving and with high disaster factor for a miss. I also feel that the PR should be prepared to shoot extended distances. I am not the least bit against letting autos in what is now called MOR. That being said USPSA would need to be very careful to not let precision rifle turn into a tactical/open rifle match. I don't think we need more divisions, my god we have enough classes to choke a horse as is. If uspsa allows autos to run in "MOR" they will rule the roost in 95% of the stages of the past Nationals even if limited to 5 rounds capacity. You can make USPSA scoring work for MOR, you can level the playing field by stage design quite a bit, but the real questions is do we want to shoot MOR or Precision Rifle. I'm in it either way.

[George]

Biathlon is indeed real rifle shooting, but it is not really that precise. It's nowhere even near an MOA accuracy requirement:

http://library.thinkquest.org/J002862/tz.htm

I'm in it either way

I'm also with Shawn on this.

[VNGunfighter]

USPSA divides your score by your time..............

Most all matches "practical field type matches" do also, OR at least give you a par time and if shot in under the time bonus points are awarded

USPSA's idea of MOR is a good concept but putting on the thing at a National Level 3-Gun match is lame-I have shot the 3G MOR's and had a good time, but logisticly a nightmare for match staff and shooters-And most all the super tricked out AR's are capeable of hitting MOR targets, so why not have shooters shoot their AR????

Precision, Sporting Rifle matches and Team Challanges are for a different breed of shooters-These people like to see what their gun can do and what they spent thousands of dollars on-And on the other side of the coin, shooters that know how to read wind, elevation, spot targets and know their rifle and what it is capable of past 700 yards love to come to these matches.

Also the limiting factor for some matches is the range, what can they get away with safely.

TacPro, and Snipers Paradise run matches on their own or rented ranges-Shooting at dots at 100/200 yards, flys at 40 yards, and a moving deck of cards at 50 yards with a belted magnum is NOT FUN at all-These venues are limited on RANGE.

The ITRC, Blue Steel Ranch, CMG's PRTC are all excellent matches-They test both the guns and the shooters.

As far as the "self loading" "auto loading" precision guns I am all for "run what you brung"-And how many more classes does USPSA need???

SO, if you want a precision match, grab your Guilli Suit make a 200 yard stalk under time constraints, if spotted DQ'ed and go home-I will even set the match up.

I'm married, I don't have 2 cents

[Religious Shooter]

And how many more classes does USPSA need???

I don't think we need more divisions, my god we have enough classes to choke a horse as is.

USPSA MOR has TWO divisions. Two.

We have Limited MOR Division and Open MOR Division. That's it.

You have a sea horse if it chokes on that.

How can you guys say we have too many divisions in MOR when we only have two? Is a third division really going to hurt MOR?

I want to have "Hunter" division because I want to see more participation in MOR. Look at what EricW wrote:

.... And ironically, what it's done is make what should have been "Precision Rifle" division (IMO) even more expensive, because building a detachable mag bolt gun generally costs 2X of what one could build an equivalent AR-platform rifle for.

I was seriously considering shooting MOR/Sniper competitions but among other things, I could not come to terms with building a far more expensive rifle that did less simply for the sake of having another game gun. Might as well call it Blunderbuss division.

I actually agree with EricW on something. This shjt is expensive.

Having "Hunter" division will let shooters get into MOR with competitive equipment at a more affordable cost. By my parameters the base competitive rifle in the new division can be had for $500-600 vs. the $1,500-2,000 minimum for MOR Open division.

Limited division in MOR is frankly a joke. Not many shooters are capable of hitting a 1.5 MOA target with iron sights with less than 5 rounds. Heck a lot of the Open shooters had problems with them in Albany. There is no "entry-level" equipment division in MOR.

What it amounts to is that we really only have one viable division in MOR --- Open. One division where the sky is basically the limit (sort of) and hence the cost of competitive equipment can run into the thousands.

How successful would USPSA pistol be if we only had Open? Not very. And yet that's what we have in MOR.

Why don't we replicate one of the features that helped USPSA pistol be what it is today? Let's have a real and viable entry-level division in MOR.

[George]

Why don't we replicate one of the features that helped USPSA pistol be what it is today? Let's have a real and viable entry-level division in MOR

That is indeed the "crux of the biscuit"!

If you could roll into a match and be competitive in a division with a hunting grade rifle and optics combined that didn't cost much over $1k, then we might have something here.

Heck, I'm up and runnin' with some amount of success in Open division and I don't even have 2K into my entire MOR system including reloading gear. Thats after buying some nifty case prep stuff (Gracey power trimmer and power neck shaver) and a bunch-o-new brass (800 pieces) just last month so's I can shoot the heck outa' my rifle before next years match ;-)