driver8M3 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 No more DOH for Single Stack.if the intent of the rule is no make the DOH illegal, they did a pretty poor job of wording it:Holsters should be suitable for everyday use. Competition holsters of the race gun type are specifically not allowed. "should" is not the same as "must." and later in the rule they use "must" instead. and who is going to decide what is suitable for everyday use? if you ask a hundred people you'll probably get at least 50 different opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Now why would you do that Mr Bond? A proposed "Stock" Division? A big thanks to Bruce for sticking up for L10! http://www.uspsa.org/bodminutes/20061121.pdf He did that because that's what his constituency told him to do. (I asked him the same question a few weeks back.) He was therefore doing his job. Charles had the competitors at this year's Area 6 Championship fill out a multi-page survey at registration and one of the questions on there was about L10. According to him, many more people than not expressed a desire to see L10 go away. I don't share that opinion; the majority of competitors at our weekly South Atlanta Practical Shooters' Club match shoot L10 than anything else, and I told him so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
open17 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 No more DOH for Single Stack.if the intent of the rule is no make the DOH illegal, they did a pretty poor job of wording it:. I suppose that if you can adjust a DOH so that the FRONT strap of the grip is at or above the top of the belt, and the gun is a max of 2" from the torso, then you could use it. None of mine will adjust that high without changing the hanger. But if I do that, it wouldn't be a DOH any longer, would it? I think the wording is just fine. Unless you really really WANT them to develop a list of "approved" holsters? Personally I do not want to go there. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driver8M3 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 (edited) yeah, i didnt see the sentence that restricts the height of the holster, so the DOH would definitely be out. now bladetech will have to come up with a new HOH (high-offset) design! Edited November 17, 2006 by driver8M3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geezer-lock Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Just so you know the minutes also included this notice: 12. USPSA Rules The board turned its attention to the definitions of several divisions. Final rules to be submitted to the membership for input will be done online in the next few weeks. Prepare cogent arguments and line up your support. David C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Just so you know the minutes also included this notice:12. USPSA Rules The board turned its attention to the definitions of several divisions. Final rules to be submitted to the membership for input will be done online in the next few weeks. Prepare cogent arguments and line up your support. David C I know this will probably never happen, but maybe the final rule book should go out to the members as a referendum for an up/down vote. The decisions that are made in the next few months will affect our sport for years to come. If we screw things up, it should be because we, as a group, made the wrong calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 yeah, i didnt see the sentence that restricts the height of the holster, so the DOH would definitely be out. now bladetech will have to come up with a new HOH (high-offset) design! Yep, now all USPSA has to do is require a cover garment and rename the new division Defensive Combat Pistol (DCP) and we'll be all set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 yeah, i didnt see the sentence that restricts the height of the holster, so the DOH would definitely be out. now bladetech will have to come up with a new HOH (high-offset) design! Yep, now all USPSA has to do is require a cover garment and rename the new division Defensive Combat Pistol (DCP) and we'll be all set. Oh, oh! Can we have a rule about not dropping loaded magazines too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Why on earth would you guys go there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Why on earth would you guys go there? Sarcasm? The sport is getting too much like IDPA already with platform/caliber specific divisions. Lets just shoot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
open17 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Oh, oh! Can we have a rule about not dropping loaded magazines too! Why sure---how about calling it FTDM? (Failure to drop magazine). One procedural if the mag doesn't hit the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFD Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Don't forget the rule about not dropping an empty mag if there's a round in the chamber. We may as well go all out I wonder if most L-10 shooters will do like my wife and I, and switch to Limited? A lot of the folks around here shoot L-10 to get the heck away from restrictive rules. That's the only reason I won't shoot Production or the 1911 division. Mr Bond would have been better informed if he had simply checked match results for the area to see that L-10 is well represented at matches. Who really cares what folks who don't shoot the division think? If it could be proved that L-10 or Revolver are causing USPSA to lose money, then it would matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipscbob Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Why on earth would you guys go there? Why on earth would any reasonable person who is watching what is coming out of HQ NOT go there? Just read the last 6 months of front sight and review the minutes from the last few meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket35 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 How about a Podcast with Matt Burkett? He seems to have that stuff already set-up and nailed down. I bet he would be willing to do something like this.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket35 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 If they want a minimalist approach to SSTK, they should just add it to Production Division along with major/minor scoring. After all a box stock 1911 is a "Production Gun", just not double action. And leave all the other divisions along for crying out loud! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Hmm...according to D6/19, Single Stack frames must be made of metal. Looking at a STI exploded diagram, the frame is...metal. The grip is plastic, and since all the innards (and outards?) of a STI are 1911 (except the trigger and mag catch)... Now where did I put that single stack adaptor... Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Merricks Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 2006 Area 6 Championship South River Gun Club 5/7/2005 Division Competitors Limited 128 Limited_10 53 Open 93 Production 74 Revolver 8 Single Stack 11 Total: 367 Guess that there was about 53 that disagreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBlaster Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 I also polled area 3 with the same type of questions, Area 3 polled to keep Limited 10 almost 2-1, so regardless of what I think, thats how I voted, to keep L-10, because thats what the survey says. Emanuel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket35 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Admirable Manny- thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihatepickles Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 The sky is falling! The sky is falling! For goodness sake close this IDPA bashing thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbadaboom Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 They put a weight restriction on SS!!!!!! I just got finished building a 46 oz. 1911 for SS division!!!! I think I'll switch to hunter sillouette. 21. The handgun, with an empty magazine inserted, shall not weigh more than 43 ounces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 For goodness sake close this IDPA bashing thread. I don't think it is about bashing IDPA so much as a concern that some on the BoD appear to want USPSA to become IDPA like. If you enjoy IDPA, great. Shoot IDPA. Just don't change USPSA into IDPA since IDPA is already out there. (It was before my time, but didn't IDPA form as a break away from IPSC for almost the same type of BIPSC vs Practical arguments that have been discussed in Front Sight and on this forum.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortie Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 saw that too... how are they going to enforce that? Who has a scale at the range, not to bring up if it's calibrated. Who's going to build an "official" production gun box, and what if they kill Glock 34's and 35's with the box? Interesting that the BoD seems to keep playing with the divisions that are cheaper to start out in than the divisions that primarily cost big bucks for S_I's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveZ Posted November 17, 2006 Author Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sort of like the whole thing that recently sprang from a mere mention that Single Stack and L-10 divisions were going to be discussed at the BOD meeting. Someone assumed, from a single line item in the agenda, that those divisions were going to be removed. There was no basis for this assumption, just someone's knee jerk reaction, and the subsequent domino effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pskys2 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 I also polled area 3 with the same type of questions, Area 3 polled to keep Limited 10 almost 2-1, so regardless of what I think, thats how I voted, to keep L-10, because thats what the survey says. Emanuel Who and How did you Poll Area 3. I agree it should be kept, but I don't remember a poll. But, then I'm getting awlful forgetful since I hit Senior. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts