Latest Bod Minutes

[big_kahuna]

Agree with what you said Alan... but this line really got me thinking:

But if everyone still insists on having sub categories let's make them sub categories of open

I know this is humor... and I've read a few "off the wall" suggestions like this one recently. Here's my own ridiculous contribution that no one would buy off on: How about making all the divisions comply to the most restrictive legal environment in any member state? This would level the playing field, same rules for everyone in all 50 states.

That would mean:

maximum mag capacity of 10

no threaded barrels, which means no compensators besides the one-piece Tru-Bor

Race divisions:

Open-10 (ported barrels only, no compensators besides Tru-Bor)

Limited-10

Stock divisions:

Production (unchanged)

Revolver (unchanged)

PSSD (unchanged)

To you race-gun shooters in "free states", there would be some changes... but you can get over it, someone says this is "good for us as an organization". The money you spent on now-obsolete equipment is not an "investment", it's an "expenditure". This is the ultimate way to "level the playing field". We're going to implement the same rules, in all 50 states, all in uniform compliance with Federal and ALL state laws. Plus, as an added benefit, it wouldn't affect Californians / Hwaiians / Massachusians / New Yorkers / etc.

What's that you say? I'm being insensitive to your situation? Why should I infringe on your divisions, preferences, and freedoms? Why should I take away what you already have? How could I render your expensive equipment obsolete with a few votes, keystrokes and signatures?

Welcome to the hell of being a USPSA L-10 shooter in California. Or New Jersey. Or....

[Alan Meek]

But if everyone still insists on having sub categories let's make them sub categories of open

Alan

(I found another .02 on my way home from work)

Big_kahuana

You are correct that it was a joke, yet if you think about that is the way it used to be back in the early 90's when we had no divisons and it was a run what you brung event and high stock and high revolver were recognized.

That is how we have now got to where we are today. People wanted it changed back in the early 90's and now today people would like to kinda change it back.

I will go out on a limb and opine that if USPSA had not created multiple divisions back in the 90's our numbers would be far less than they are today.

For the opinions that we have too many divisions and we are diluting the competitve pool, I do not think that applying that thought to a Level 1 (club) is actually appropriate. Club participation varies from club to club and while a club here in VA is currently pulling in in excess of 80 shooters I know there are other clubs that would consider 20 a large turn-out.

I am not discounting the Level 1 matches as they are a vital piece of the USPSA puzzle. The question that applies is, Do matches that are Level 2 and above have an effect of fewer competitors in a divsion due to the number of divisions USPSA currently has. I do not think the matches in the last year had a lack of competitors for any division that was not in proportion to the overall match participation.

People are going to shoot what people want. Some out of necessity, others out of peer pressure and others will change divisons just because.

Alan

Edited November 23, 2006 by Alan Meek

[Sam38]

Rob Boudrie, your argument was the most intelligent, well reasoned I have seen. That it seems to fit my thoughts is mostly secondary. The health of the the sport must be paramount.

+1

But, if all you say is true why aren't you pushing to make more divisions. The need for Open 10 is already here (Hawaii) and once Open shooters in Kalifornia start retiring from the sport and their magazines get melted down or sent out of state the need will be really pressing!!

Sam Spiteri

Rob Boudrie, your argument was the most intelligent, well reasoned I have seen. That it seems to fit my thoughts is mostly secondary. The health of the the sport must be paramount.

+1

But, if all you say is true why aren't you pushing to make more divisions. The need for Open 10 is already here (Hawaii) and once Open shooters in Kalifornia start retiring from the sport and their magazines get melted down or sent out of state the need will be really pressing!!

Sam Spiteri

[GeorgeInNePa]

Furthermore, I fail to see how eliminating a division that a large percentage of USPSA members shoot on a regular basis is "for the benefit of the organization".

The inclusion of L10 was a bandaid measure implemented because of the Clinton AWB which included large capacity mags...the organization leaped before it looked IMO, and now it is reaping the harvest of that ill advised decision..whatever happens not everyone will be happy with the outcome..

If you want to make the divisions more competitive, do away with the 170mm mags...that will tighten up Open, Limited and Poduction...then perhaps the wisdom of making 9mm major in only Open will be scrutinized...Not picking on the Open shooters, but they have it ALL their way, small caliber major, huge magazine capacity and optical sights...if they had to shoot 40/10 to make major the differential in divisions would not loom as large as it does now...and since this is all conjecture, that is my .02...

It just seems that it has gotten out of control, trying to make a division/category for every single type of pistol made...I suppose single action revolver is next, to cultivate the SASS shooters...Man can you see that, a shooter decked out in 10 gallon stetson, chaps and a bandolier of ammo to shoot a 30 round field course...of course his time could be measured with a sundial, but he would get style points for his dress....LOL

So your solution to the Lim10/SSD dilemma is to gut Open?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's an idea for everyone who thinks there is a dilution of competition due to there being too many divisions.

Post the combined results for EVERY match.

There, everyone shoots against everyone else (even though they really don't).

Happy now?

Edited November 23, 2006 by GeorgeInNePa

[et45]

Open,Single Stack(all designs incl.revolver),and Double Stack(Production sub cat.).

[ipscbob]

Agree with what you said Alan... but this line really got me thinking:

But if everyone still insists on having sub categories let's make them sub categories of open

I know this is humor... and I've read a few "off the wall" suggestions like this one recently. Here's my own ridiculous contribution that no one would buy off on: How about making all the divisions comply to the most restrictive legal environment in any member state? This would level the playing field, same rules for everyone in all 50 states.

That would mean:

maximum mag capacity of 10

no threaded barrels, which means no compensators besides the one-piece Tru-Bor

Race divisions:

Open-10 (ported barrels only, no compensators besides Tru-Bor)

Limited-10

Stock divisions:

Production (unchanged)

Revolver (unchanged)

PSSD (unchanged)

To you race-gun shooters in "free states", there would be some changes... but you can get over it, someone says this is "good for us as an organization". The money you spent on now-obsolete equipment is not an "investment", it's an "expenditure". This is the ultimate way to "level the playing field". We're going to implement the same rules, in all 50 states, all in uniform compliance with Federal and ALL state laws. Plus, as an added benefit, it wouldn't affect Californians / Hwaiians / Massachusians / New Yorkers / etc.

What's that you say? I'm being insensitive to your situation? Why should I infringe on your divisions, preferences, and freedoms? Why should I take away what you already have? How could I render your expensive equipment obsolete with a few votes, keystrokes and signatures?

Welcome to the hell of being a USPSA L-10 shooter in California. Or New Jersey. Or....

AMEN! Well, Said.

[shred]

"Combined" results effectively make every division a sub-division of Open. Seems like there's lots of demand for Combined results.

[Jim Norman]

Combined results do most often make the other divisions a subset of open, Not always though. It depends upon who is there and what they shoot.

Jim

[EZ Bagger]

"Combined" results effectively make every division a sub-division of Open. Seems like there's lots of demand for Combined results.

Combined results are extremely helpful for us newish shooters. We all have specific shooters we want to climb towards, regardless of division.

[Bigbadaboom]

I didn't read every word of every post so I don't know if what I'm mentioning has already been but here goes:

Will a revolver with an 8.5 in. bbl fit the production box?

If the BOD and USPSA as a whole are contemplating holding IPSC matches in the U.S. as we do USPSA matches then why can't the Production shooters who want trigger lb. weight restrictions and IPSC boxes shoot in those matches and leave the USPSA rules as they are?

Why are we going to have two seperate types of matches (USPSA & IPSC) with the same rules? If someone wants weight restrictions on 1911's then why don't they go shoot IDPA? Why is USPSA spinning their rules towards IDPA? Is the Single Stack Society going away when USPSA adopts the Single Stack Division as perminant and if not then, again, why have two seperate sports with the same rules?

[GeorgeInNePa]

"Combined" results effectively make every division a sub-division of Open. Seems like there's lots of demand for Combined results.

BUT, then there's no dilution of competition, eveyone is top, down listed against everyone else.

It will be real easy to tell how you as the 15th Production shooter did against the second Open shooter.

It's like here--->

then it's

here--->

[shred]

Yup, I think it's funny that when we did away with combined results (effectively making each and every division stand on it's own two feet), the loudest hue and cry was to get combined results back "So I can see how I did against Joe over in XYZ division"

At big matches it's less of a problem since you've got enough competition in most of the divisions, but locally, if we didn't have combined, I'd bet there would be a lot more demand to reduce divisions into sub-categories..

[steel1212]

Like some I didn't read all the above so I may have missed something. I have a 3# trigger on my XD if after numerous practicing and matches it creeps below that I now have to shoot it in limited or limited 10. If they get rid of limited 10 I have a gun that I can no longer compete with?

On the other hand I kind of like the idea of a trigger pull restriciton but it will be a major PITA and I wish I had known it before I had the work done to mine

[ysued]

I agree, as my G34 is a regularly manufactured item, in fact, every piece I have in it is a production piece...nothing custom made, nothing specially produced, nothing experimental, yet would not be kosher under the new rules.

Please tell us what would make a G34 Illegal under the new Rules!!!

It fits in the box, then waht's "NOT KOSHER" about it??

vluc, what makes yours not kosher?

I have a dastardly less than 3 pound trigger...much of it due to shooting the gun....

For under $50.00 you can fix that!!!

Get a new Striker, Trigger Bar and Connector!!

Problem solved, you are now Production Legal!!

You don't want to do that??? Shoot Limited!!

[cliffy109]

The "combined results" is the only way a single stack shooter can figure out how he's really doing. There are so few competitors in this division that I often have to look at the combined totals to see how I did against guys that I know are roughly at the same level as I am. I realize and understand that its not a perfect way to compare results as the guys in the other divisions have a capacity advantage, but I at least get an idea.

Its not just a tool for SSD guys either. If two fairly evenly matched competitors want to see how they did against each other and one is shooting L10 and the other is Production, the combined results make that easy. Its just a handy tool to use in judging your individual performance against others outside your division. I like it.

[vluc]

For under $50.00 you can fix that!!!

Get a new Striker, Trigger Bar and Connector!!

Problem solved, you are now Production Legal!!

You don't want to do that??? Shoot Limited!!

Don't know what sets the burr under your saddle.

I'd have no issues shooting limited if I could be competitive shooting minor. I've done it and find that I am not. I'm sure there are quite a few of us who shoot prod. who like the mods that we have been allowed to do, do not want to see them changed, but can't quite agree with folks that insist it be changed.

You don't like it, YOU go shoot something different and quit telling me what you think I should do.

[driver8M3]

...you know, i'm not sure why production shooters are supposed to be so happy about getting jerked around.

if you think changing trigger pull is such a minor adjustment for shooters, just try to institute a new trigger pull rule in limited. then tell everyone that's upset they can fix it for X dollars, or go shoot in open if they want. how do you think that would go over?

[Carlos]

Good point. Why NOT institute the same 3 lb trigger pull minimum for Limited? Is anyone against it and if so, could you explain why?

BTW - I still see no need for a trigger pull in Production (and long waits at the chrono stages). Thus, I am against it unless we adopt it as part of full IPSC rules for Production and all other divisions.

[BBunin]

For under $50.00 you can fix that!!!

Get a new Striker, Trigger Bar and Connector!!

Problem solved, you are now Production Legal!!

You don't want to do that??? Shoot Limited!!

And for those shooting an XD?

Why are you so adamant that the trigger weight must be some arbitrary amount?

[Ara]

BBunin, the trigger weight was suggested by at least one member, not me but I did agree with it. The weight is not arbitrary, per se. Most agencies require no less than 4#, some even 3#. (Mine is 3) Alot of trainers recommend no less than 3, depending on experience. So its industry standard that anything lower is dangerous for carry or self defense and ironically, we allow it.

I am in favor of a trigger weight, maybe for different reasons than most, but I have been for a while now. Maybe its not realistic but I would consider "radical" changes. I didn't want to suggest it sooner because I was hoping everyone would run out of grenades by now.

My idea would be to melt all the divisions except Open into one by

1. trigger weight limit of ____________.

My reason for this is just because we are supposed to be carrying/using guns for everyday carry. A friend pointed out that this would level the different guns more. In other words, how much more advantage does a 1911 with a heavier trigger now have over a Glock? The same friend that said a Glock would never win Lim Nats....

2. We all have the same capacity, whether it be 10 or maybe 15. I would prefer 15 but I am willing to give it up.

3. Change our approach to stage designs, specifically round count in arrays. If say, we never had more than 6 shots, instead of 9 or more as it is now, would 10 be so bad?

4. Power factor. I know I'll catch some heat for this one from a friend who's idea it was.....change the min from 125 to 140. This way you can still reload but it levels the guns a bit.

5. Have the same holster/gear requirements for everyone.

6. Allow almost any mod as long as you don't add or subtract 2 oz. This was also proposed to the board in October.

I know these ideas are a pipe dream but it would for the most part put everyone back into one division and allow most guns to play, including single stacks, like we used to.

I have been shooting IPSC for 18 yrs, started in "stock" with an 8 rd Colt, switched to 10 rd mags, then S_I. Now I shoot production and I am willing to give up whatever it takes to stop dividing our sport. I had a Vanek original trigger and switched to the legal drop in for a 3.25 # trigger. I didn't agree with the ruling for the basis given for it. But I'm ok with it.

While I agree we need to do what we can to try to accomidate all the different guns, I think we need to try to COMBINE all the guns first.

Stand by while I get my vest on....

[steel1212]

My reason for this is just because we are supposed to be carrying/using guns for everyday carry. If I wanted to shoot my carry gun I would be shooting in IDPA. This is a game and there does need to be rules. I'm for the trigger pull rule IF it was instated with the production division. You do it now and you screw people who have lower than 3# triggers already.

2. We all have the same capacity, whether it be 10 or maybe 15. I would prefer 15 but I am willing to give it up. We don't have all the same compacitiy, I shoot a XD 40 and I'm maxed out at 12+1 and with the current rules of 10 I'm still good. Change that and I've got to either get a 9mm or another brand.

3. Change our approach to stage designs, specifically round count in arrays. If say, we never had more than 6 shots, instead of 9 or more as it is now, would 10 be so bad?

4. Power factor. I know I'll catch some heat for this one from a friend who's idea it was.....change the min from 125 to 140. This way you can still reload but it levels the guns a bit. How would raising it from 125 to 140 change anything? WWB 9mm is pretty close to 125 anyways right? Are you saying you would now have to reload to make PF if you shot 9mm?

5. Have the same holster/gear requirements for everyone.

6. Allow almost any mod as long as you don't add or subtract 2 oz. This was also proposed to the board in October.

Stand by while I get my vest on....

Not trying to flame just adding my view on it. Sorry if I missed something that was already said.

[ysued]

First, the first set of Production Division rules were done in an extreme haste, they were/are unclear, ambiguous and full of loopholes that needed countless clarifications and rulings from NROI. Why were the PD Rules so different from IPSC?? I don't know.

The rules were so badly written, the BOD and all members are paying for the bad rules now by having to re-visit the rules. They are going for a more uniform and clear set of rules and closing the loopholes some of us went thtough.

I don't want to tell you what to do, but you were the one that said that you could not use your G34 in Prod, you can, make your trigger Job over 3lbs, I only told you that you could.

BTW, that is what I must do too, for me, I'm not too late, my trigger job on my first M&P is very close, my second M&P left for a Trigger job today, it shall be over 3 Lbs. what is so bad about that??

Now, let me be the devils Advocate, I see the "INTENT" in the Trigger Job minimum, I just think it's going to be a Cluster to enforce!! I'm willing to bet that at Club Lever, not body will enforce it, I know I won't on my Montly Matches in Columbia, MO. Nor do I think I'm going to have time to whip out the Box and measure everybody's gun. But.... The rules were so full of Loopholes that Drilling Extra Holes on your trigger and Changing the Function of your Trigger became accepted. That should have never have happened, nor Milling Slides for Bomar. How can you tell me that Ataking Abridgeport to a XD, Glock or M&P Slide is any different than Texturing a Glock Grip?? But it is!! Milling a Slide is a No-No in IPSC, as it should have been on USPSA, but the rules didn't say so and they should have.

I would like to have some mods on my M&P that I can't have, but if I want to shoot PD, I must do as the Rule Book says without having a cow over it. I follow the rules, they change them, I change with the rules. This is not the first time and it won't be the last time rules have changed in USPSA, I have been a member since 1994, only 12 years, and I have seen tons of changes and I knw there will be more.

For under $50.00 you can fix that!!!

Get a new Striker, Trigger Bar and Connector!!

Problem solved, you are now Production Legal!!

You don't want to do that??? Shoot Limited!!

Don't know what sets the burr under your saddle.

I'd have no issues shooting limited if I could be competitive shooting minor. I've done it and find that I am not. I'm sure there are quite a few of us who shoot prod. who like the mods that we have been allowed to do, do not want to see them changed, but can't quite agree with folks that insist it be changed.

You don't like it, YOU go shoot something different and quit telling me what you think I should do.

For under $50.00 you can fix that!!!

Get a new Striker, Trigger Bar and Connector!!

Problem solved, you are now Production Legal!!

You don't want to do that??? Shoot Limited!!

And for those shooting an XD?

Why are you so adamant that the trigger weight must be some arbitrary amount?

IMHO, I don't care for the Trigger Pull Limit, not for the Weight, but for the Cluster is going to create enforcing it.

[ima45dv8]

BBunin, the trigger weight was suggested by at least one member, not me but I did agree with it. The weight is not arbitrary, per se. Most agencies require no less than 4#, some even 3#. (Mine is 3) Alot of trainers recommend no less than 3, depending on experience. So its industry standard that anything lower is dangerous for carry or self defense and ironically, we allow it.

With all due respect for your level of experience and expertise, I don't give a Hoot what an agency requires or someone training weekend warriors recommends. We're not talking about departmental recruits or tactibillies who need a heavy trigger to keep from shooting their partner/bystanders due to poor trigger-finger control. We are IPSC/USPSA shooters and as such are held to a much higher standard.

I am in favor of a trigger weight, maybe for different reasons than most, but I have been for a while now. Maybe its not realistic but I would consider "radical" changes. I didn't want to suggest it sooner because I was hoping everyone would run out of grenades by now.

My idea would be to melt all the divisions except Open into one by

1. trigger weight limit of ____________.

My reason for this is just because we are supposed to be carrying/using guns for everyday carry. A friend pointed out that this would level the different guns more. In other words, how much more advantage does a 1911 with a heavier trigger now have over a Glock? The same friend that said a Glock would never win Lim Nats....

2. We all have the same capacity, whether it be 10 or maybe 15. I would prefer 15 but I am willing to give it up.

3. Change our approach to stage designs, specifically round count in arrays. If say, we never had more than 6 shots, instead of 9 or more as it is now, would 10 be so bad?

4. Power factor. I know I'll catch some heat for this one from a friend who's idea it was.....change the min from 125 to 140. This way you can still reload but it levels the guns a bit.

5. Have the same holster/gear requirements for everyone.

6. Allow almost any mod as long as you don't add or subtract 2 oz. This was also proposed to the board in October.

I know these ideas are a pipe dream but it would for the most part put everyone back into one division and allow most guns to play, including single stacks, like we used to.

I have been shooting IPSC for 18 yrs, started in "stock" with an 8 rd Colt, switched to 10 rd mags, then S_I. Now I shoot production and I am willing to give up whatever it takes to stop dividing our sport. I had a Vanek original trigger and switched to the legal drop in for a 3.25 # trigger. I didn't agree with the ruling for the basis given for it. But I'm ok with it.

While I agree we need to do what we can to try to accomidate all the different guns, I think we need to try to COMBINE all the guns first.

Stand by while I get my vest on....

The round count and PF arguements has already been debunked so I'll leave them alone.

Ara, you've been doing this for 18 years and seem to fall firmly in the Martial Artist camp. That's cool -- I'm there, too. But not when I'm shooting IPSC/USPSA matches. They are not and never have been a substitute for proper training and practice, just as IDPA has never filled that role (my apologies in advance, to any IDPA-ers who happen to think it's real-training or practice, but most IDPA-ers who know better will agree). Certainly there are some valuable social skills that can be reinforced at USPSA matches, if one so desires. But in no fashion are matches a reflection of the that mystical place so commonly referred to as the 'real world'. I'm guessing you wouldn't advise a student to confuse the two.

USPSA is a sport; high-speed and requiring well-above-average gunhandling skills. We should no more combine all of the different equipment divisions than we should assume, and then group together, all shooters assuming they have the requisite skills to participate at the highest levels of the sport.

6. Allow almost any mod as long as you don't add or subtract 2 oz. This was also proposed to the board in October.

That's the most reasonable suggestion for clarifying Production rules that I've seen yet.

BTW, that is what I must do too, for me, I'm not too late, my trigger job on my first M&P is very close, my second M&P left for a Trigger job today, it shall be over 3 Lbs. what is so bad about that??

Nothing bad, at all. I've been playing with my singlestack Limited10 .45 gun lately and the trigger is set at 3-3/4 lbs. Lots of A's and good times seem to disprove the idea that a light trigger is required (BUT, I love the 1-3/4 trigger on my Limited guns!). But, even though not required, I have no problem with you (or anyone else) having a trigger that goes under 3 lbs. The rules regarding AD's will sort out any problems.

Now, let me be the devils Advocate, I see the "INTENT" in the Trigger Job minimum, I just think it's going to be a Cluster to enforce!!

Absolutely true. I don't want the resposibility of enforcing that one.

I would like to have some mods on my M&P that I can't have, but if I want to shoot PD, I must do as the Rule Book says without having a cow over it. I follow the rules, they change them, I change with the rules. This is not the first time and it won't be the last time rules have changed in USPSA, I have been a member since 1994, only 12 years, and I have seen tons of changes and I knw there will be more.

You been at this about 5 years longer than me, but I've seen enough changes to know I want those changes to be well-considered and well-defined, too.

[blackdragon]

Lets set a record!.. 50 pages!!!!!

Ivan

[big_kahuna]

Nothing bad, at all. I've been playing with my singlestack Limited10 .45 gun lately and the trigger is set at 3-3/4 lbs. Lots of A's and good times seem to disprove the idea that a light trigger is required (BUT, I love the 1-3/4 trigger on my Limited guns!). But, even though not required, I have no problem with you (or anyone else) having a trigger that goes under 3 lbs. The rules regarding AD's will sort out any problems.

I have no horse in this race yet... at least I don't think so. I don't have a single pistol with a trigger pull under 3 pounds (and perhaps that's a contributing factor to my sucky classifier performance). That may change when I install the RS trigger kit that I have been thinking about.

That said, I agree wholeheartedly with ima45dv8's comments above. I have no problem with anybody having a 2 pound or even a 1.5 pound trigger, provided they can safely employ it. Have a negligent discharge and you have a problem, and the rules are in place to ensure you pay for that negligence. My opinion, regardless, is that most USPSA shooters CAN handle a sub-3# trigger safely and effectively FOR OUR SPORTING USES. To go one step further, I would be at least mildly irritated if someone mandated that my heretofore competition-legal pistol was now illegal due to its sub-3# trigger pull. Therefore I fail to see the value in setting an arbitrary minimum trigger pull weight.

I know that if I spent $50, $100, or $150+ on a trigger job that was legal in 2006, and that trigger job became illegal in 2008, I would be extremely pissed. My degree of "pissedness" would be directly proportional to the amount of "expenditure". I would sympathize with any angry shooters thus shafted. I can see how rule-changes might irritate members to the point of quitting.

Moreover, the much-mentioned difficulty in uniformly administering trigger-weight testing makes the issue virtually unworkable IMO.