New Multigun Rule Proposal

[uscbigdawg]

I just see folks being scared to be tested. Pure and simple.

Rich

What a great argument on your part, Rich.... Whats next? I double dog dare you?

Actually I was going to go for the breach in ettiquette and go straight for the triple dog dare.

Rich

[BigDave]

We can ring the bell for freestyle forever, but we still aren't left with anything that lets match directors test reloads in matches (other than standards).

This is a good thing.

How many shoot USPSA Multigun? A few hundred?

How many of them want to mandate reloads in field courses? Less than 10 posting here?

Let it go.

How many people shoot USPSA (any type) and then engage in these conversations? A handful?

We are still trying to manage rifle shooting with handgun rules. Yeah, we happen to be able to effectively manage shotgun shooting with the same rules, but look at the guns. It is handy that the max capacity of a shotgun in Tactical happens to mirror the capacity of the guns that this sport was bred out of: a 1911 (9 rds.) I don't think it is any accident that the max round count for field courses (pistol) is 32 rds and that happens to exceed, even slightly, the max capacity of any open pistol. The point of that was to, even in field courses, to test reloading.

The rules we run by never considered things like 100 rd mags. Even if you consider the practical origins of rifle shooting (current military methods, LE, etc.), those folks do carry things spare mags, right? What's the point of carrying a spare? That you'll run out? That the mag will break down? You have to be able to simulate that scenario, I think.

[CaseyJ]

Just leave it all alone! if you are tired of being beat by someone with a Beta mag get one and practice! or just Practice!!! There are enough limits and definitions between limited tactical and open, if you think the line is blurry get new glasses!

[Neil Beverley]

We are still trying to manage rifle shooting with handgun rules. Yeah, we happen to be able to effectively manage shotgun shooting with the same rules, but look at the guns. It is handy that the max capacity of a shotgun in Tactical happens to mirror the capacity of the guns that this sport was bred out of: a 1911 (9 rds.)

I would have agreed with your comment prior to 2004 and indeed the SG & R rules were just a bolt on to the HG rules up to that point. However, since then the rules have been separately and significantly developed for each discipline in turn. Admittedly, where possible, there has been an attempt to keep the rules aligned for simplicity across the disciplines, particularly so in the case of the 2 long guns, but a lot are now properly discipline specific. As I mentioned in an earlier post IPSC has a separate Rules Committee Chairman for each discipline (HG/SG/R) and then these people sit together on the Rules Coordinating committee along with 2 others (including John Amidon). The overall IPSC Rules Committee is chaired by Mike Voigt.

I accept that not everything appeals to one and all. We can see that even in these discussions.

However, and I'm going to repeat myself, I am fearful that you are going to see within the USPSA, 3G and MG matches run with a changed HG rule-set and where SG and R haven't been adequately considered at the same time. There WILL be problems.

[Jim Norman]

In truth, I am not sure I ever indicated that I though the line between Limited=Tactical and Open were blurred, Yes Lim and Tac are very similar, Open is very different when you add in SG and HG. Even rifle is very different. Bi-Pod, Multiple Optics etc.

My big push has been and continues to be that we would like the OPTION, not a mandate, but an O P T I O N to insert the occasional required reload into a COF. either to simulate a failure, or to simply make you think and use all of your skills. Yes, tere are some really really fast reloaders out there, but I think that they are the exception.

This whole Hoo-Haa is about whether we can mandate a reload anywhere in the COF after the buzzer. Someone pointed out that the maximum loads for Pistol and SG exist and have for a long time and that they were based upon the equipment available in teh early days. The current state of affairs with Rifle is that we now have a new discipline and there is equipment undremt of a few years ago that tosses a lot of our preconcieved notions on their heads.

I don't want to dis anyone and their investment in a "Beta", All I want to do is on occasion make you do a reload on other than a Standards COF.

I will even entertain that there not be more than 3 or 30% of the number of stages in a match where rifle is used that are allowed to include a Mandatory reload and that such reload not have a specific location or point in the COF where it must be performed other than after the buzzer and prior to engaging the last target provided that at least one stage at a minimum be allowed to include said reload.

I will further accept that this only apply to Multi-Gun and not to rifle only matches or the rifle portion of a 3-gun tournement where in only one gun is used on a given stage.

Jim

[Dan Sierpina]

Jim,

I guess I see nothing wrong with the proposal. It would apply equally to each shooter, regardless of rifle division. Also, a 30 round limit for rifles not in open would keep things similar with pistol limited, and standard/tactical shotgun. When single stack was started, maximum mag capacity was stated, along with production and limited 10. And in a slightly different way, limited.

One other thing I'd like to see is an authorized reduced target. And no, I don't mean hard cover or no shoot on a full size target. I've shot half size targets at multigun matches in Ct. and it makes a difference with clubs that don't have long distances available. like most clubs in the Northeast. There could even be a stipulation that they must be used at distances under 100 yards, but, I think they should be available at all distances. The NRA has used scaled targets for different distances for years. Even then, the targets get adjusted as equiment and skill levels improve.

I know, another can of worms just got opened.

[Jim Norman]

Dan,

Two items.

One, I have said I'd forego the reduced load in order to obtain the required reload on at least one stage IF the designer and Match Director wanted to include it.

Two, I wholeheartedly agree we need a standard USPSA target reduced to about 1/6 the current size. Now before everyone gets excited, I am not talking about a target that is 3 inched wide and 4 inches tall here. That would be a 1/24th scale target. Reduce the actual square inches to 1/6th approximate of the current USPSA target. There are a couple people making such an animal already, all we need to do is get offical sanction for them.

Jim

[uscbigdawg]

Division: Magazine Limit

Open: 170(ish)mm

Limited: 140(ish)mm

Limited-10: 10 rounds

Production: 10 rounds

Singlestack: 8-10 rounds

Shotgun (Open): 10+1 rounds

Shotgun (Limited): 8+1 rounds

Rifle: ????

In every other division/discipline there are limitations on the rounds and/or magazine length. The rules for rifle were done generically with pistol by folks that (possibly) did not consider the use of Beta mags.

To me, the use is a bad thing in our sport as it adds to the gimmicky, negative equipment race criticism that we receive, rather than the innovators that USPSA/IPSC (and Action Shooting in general) has been over the years (and I mean for the last 30). But hey if you want to run, by all means go ahead.

That said, I would adopt a magazine capacity limit for Limited/Tactical. 30 rounds would be my choice, only 'cause it is a "standard" magazine size, dimension, whatever you want to call it for the AR platform (yeah I know not everyone uses an AR but let's be intellectually honest and admit that it's the most popular and therefore can be a basis for rules). For Open, well, even though there's a round limit on the other sections of Open, I'd say either again a magazine length limit (say whatever the longest 45 round mag is) or have no restriction.

If there is a rule not allowing Beta's in Limited/Tactical, it's unfortunate for those that have them, but there should be a line drawn somewhere. This sport, and all the parts of it, have from the start been about testing ourselves in the multiple facets of shooting. This is one major facet that is absent from the skills that we do on rifle. It shouldn't just be tested on a Standard Exercise. It should be tested at every chance a course designer throws it in. Either via round count or shot difficulty. We do it in pistol and we definitely do it with a shotgun.

The argument has been in this thread to set up a Standard Exercise. Again asking folks to be honest, how often do we shoot standards at a club match? Guaranteed it's less at a major match. That said, yeah this will probably change with this discussion (doubt it) but it shouldn't simply be for a specific exercise. We don't reload pistol in only classifiers. Why should rifle have this limitation.

Just my opinion (now that I'm more civil and calm....apologize for any harsh tones in previous posts).

Rich

[P.E. Kelley]

The "practical" use of limiting rounds loaded has been one of safety and skill.

Case in point.

SOF stage with 5 steel plates to be engaged with rifle from the mock skid of a crashed helicopter. The rifle was verified to be loaded with ONLY 5 rounds. After the 5 rounds (easy for the RO to count) the competitor took their rifle with them and engaged pistol targets while moving downrange to the "resupply"of rifle ammunition. Then engaged

additional rifle targets.

Wow virgina count rifle steel in a field course! Made the stage challenge and safe.

How about a shotgun slug El Prez? You know 6 reload 6. Can not within USPSA rules but the outlaw matches can!

I can think of other examples but the point for me is since USPSA rules are still in a state of flux (as an adaptation of pistol rules) maybe some changes for the good can come from a civil discussion.

Patrick

[Dan Sierpina]

Jim,

The targets I was referring to, were 1/2 scale. 1/4 the area. They were 15" high x 9" wide. The A zone was nice and small The matches I shot them at, weren't USPSA sanctioned. They'd even be good for indoor pistol matches. Ooops....that might be a throwback to the "Dark Ages" when standards were very common in matches....and standards that included 50 yards

Pat,

As has been said many times here before, there are merits on not running a USPSA sanctioned 3 gun/Multigun match. I never did make it to SOF, but friends had. Some of the courses were quite ahead of their time.

Edited November 30, 2006 by Dan Sierpina

[uscbigdawg]

SOF stages are great to dig up and torture folks with. For instance, a personal favorite that I thought of that was SOF-ish. 10 birds (SG), 5 USPSA targets (rifle), 10 poppers (pistol). From one box, that way we can dictate which gun and in what order, engage 1 rifle target, then 1 shotgun target, then 1 pistol target. Guns lying flat on the table in front of you, unloaded.

Not too difficult, 'til about the 20th time you've transitioned guns and you're gettin' more than a little tired.

Rich

[Flexmoney]

How about a shotgun slug El Prez? You know 6 reload 6. Can not within USPSA rules but the outlaw matches can!

I can think of other examples but the point for me is since USPSA rules are still in a state of flux (as an adaptation of pistol rules) maybe some changes for the good can come from a civil discussion.

Patrick

Great point !!

Recently, my home club ran a shotgun only match. They ran a stage which was a variation of the El Prez (4-reload-4, slugs, one shot per pass, at 20-25y).

That stage is not a classifier (no SG classifiers) and it is not a Standard Exercise (it was only one string).

That stage couldn't NOT be legal under USPSA rules, as far as I know.

That match was a non-USPSA match. It was a success, and it might become a regular monthly match next year. But, I don't see it becoming an USPSA match.

No mission count for USPSA. No growth for the sport.

As a Section Coordinator, how can I approach that Match Director and suggest he run the match under USPSA? How would the conversation go..."Great match. Now here is what you can't do with your stages (because they don't match up with what we've done with pistol for years). BTW, don't forget to cut USPSA a check for $1.50 per shooter." ???

[Jim Norman]

Kyle, that is in great part our problem here. We run a SG match,a Rifle matchand a Multigun, we are trying to be good USPSA'ers, but there is so much we cannot do that the shooters expect and want that it is difficult to switch over from "Outlaw" to USPSA. We lose mandatory reloads, we lose the ability to mandate cover and instead have to build additinal walls, fault lines and other things so that in effect you are doing what the words: "Reload only behind cover" do with the stroke of a pen.

And No, I am not advocating IDPA rules either. We just need a few minor changes to allow us to mandate a few things like either a maximum inital load and an occasional reload.

Allow this and USPAS Multigun just might take off.

Remember, Multigun isn't a pistol match!

Jim

[uscbigdawg]

Remember, Multigun isn't a pistol match!

Jim

That's what I tell folks (I just usually say, "anybody can shoot just one gun on a stage")!

That said, while I'm not an advocate of anything "behind 'cover'," it is nice to see this and your example Kyle at the club level. That's how 3-Gun started and how it's survived and now thrived. The ability to freelance without range lawyers jumping to the rule book with brows frowned saying, "see but, see but...the rule book says that I you're not allowed to make me shoot that shot or do that skill!".

Nevertheless, I think rather than someone approaching a match and saying, 'this is how we do it in USPSA', maybe USPSA maybe needs to get with the grassroots folks and work out a system IT can conform to.

Rich

[Neil Beverley]

The IPSC rules were changed in January 2006 and now:

• Standard Exercises can consist of a single string
  
• Standard Exercises can be scored Comstock (this only works in single string Standards or where you patch between strings or where you use separate targets)
  

This takes nothing away and instead simply offers more choices to course designers.

The IPSC rulebook and indeed the current USPSA rulebook allow Standard Excercises up to 12 rounds in the case of a compulsory reload.

So, in theory an El P. in SG or Rifle is permitted within the current rules but for the USPSA it would have to be nominated as FT or VC only. Comstock OK in IPSC.

The problem I have with an El P. is that I believe it contravenes Principal 7, but (and I'm not looking to kick something off) so do all Classifiers and Classifiers are here to stay.

So the next issue to resolve is that you (USPSA) are required to have 2 strings to make up a Standard Excercise - so add a second one. String A can be 12 rounds with a compulsory reload, String B could also be n rounds (up to 12 with a compulsory reload). Or it could be something basic like 6 rounds compulsory kneeling. SEs are NOT REQUIRED to use the same targets. You have now introduced introduced compulsory reloads. The skill of reloading quickly in shorter courses will probably be more significant in score than in longer Course. There is no requirement for SEs to be "stand and fire" only courses.

[George]

Here is a Shotgun Prez thread (just posted a new pair of revised versions) where the ability to legally compel shooters to do things and why clubs don't always use strict USPSA rules for 3gun for these very reasons is discussed.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...t=0#entry479363

I am for strict adherence to the book in sanctioned matches, I think clubs deviate more than a little in 3gun/multigun when it's not a sanctioned match (no classifiers = no sanction). See my rant on why we really do need 3gun classifications elsewhere here and suddenly this will make lotsa' sense.

Kyle's point about "how do you get folks to accept a rulebook that doesn't let them do what they want to do, or have been doing" becomes a real problem issue for USPSA and 3gun/multigun at the club level when you take this, that and other threads content into consideration. I would run our 3 multigun events a year as sanctioned matches with classifiers, pay the fees and collect the mission count, but I can't. Why, because there are no 3gun/Multigun classifiers, or classifier system to allow running classifiers, the extra work it takes to make sure everything other stage design volunteers do is by the book is just too darned hard and finally, there aren't enough options in EZ-Winscore and the rulebook to do really special things at matches and get sanctioned.

The 2007 Bay Area Rifle Championship is a good example of a match that is pretty much by the rule book, but deviates just enough that it can't be USPSA beyond Level I unless I drop the Cowboy, Sporting Rifle and Garand categories I added and that I will not do.

In the end I have to agree with Jim about there not being quite enough flexibility within the rules to always do the special things you want to do. I do however still feel that Freestyle is a good thing to protect. I started this sport back in the day when the typical course description (even at larger matches) used the word "only" a lot and told you what to do almost every step of the way. I would not want to return to those days with stage design and course descriptions. No I Would Not!

[Jim Norman]

Not all that hard, You run a singel pistol only stage that is a by the book classifier. Unless you do something like we are discussing here, just set up like it was a pistol only match and you should stay within the rules.

EzWinScore works, albeit a bit clunky using the San Angelo scorring system. You do need to track rifle targets and pistol targets and record the hits accordinly, then add one penalty point for each rifle hit that is not an "A" when the shooter shoots major pistol and minor rifle. If he shoots major all the way that is easy, if he shoots minor pistol and minr rifle, you also need to total all pistol and rifle non "A" hits since shotgun is always major.

It would still be nice to look at the current status of non USPSA three gun and incorporate more of it into USPSA rules, remember, multi-gun is NOT pistol, rifle or shotgun. the rules can be and should be very different.

My opiinon

Jim

[Flexmoney]

? Huh ?

You guys are going to make me get my books out (but, I'd rather you got your's out )

We don't have sanctioned matches any more. We have Level I, II, & III.

And, classifiers are optional, even for Level I, I believe.

Further, we can get special premission to run USPSA "recognized" matches if we ask nicley. (That may be USPSA's real hope in this.)

[Flexmoney]

Neil, it's interesting that IPSC took away the (multi) string requirement for Standard Exercises. And, they can be Comstock. (So, what do you have left to call Standards, positions and reloads?)

So the next issue to resolve is that you (USPSA) are required to have 2 strings to make up a Standard Excercise - so add a second one. String A can be 12 rounds with a compulsory reload, String B could also be n rounds (up to 12 with a compulsory reload). Or it could be something basic like 6 rounds compulsory kneeling. SEs are NOT REQUIRED to use the same targets. You have now introduced introduced compulsory reloads. The skill of reloading quickly in shorter courses will probably be more significant in score than in longer Course. There is no requirement for SEs to be "stand and fire" only courses.

Right. That puts us back to Standards as the only way to test a reload.

If we could lose the two strings aspect, I might make it easier for stage designers.

The 6 rounds, or 12 if there is a mandatory reload, is the hurdle. I'm sure that limitation had to come from Revolver. Absolutely no need for it in Rifle that I can readily see?

[cking]

How about this scenario. Failure to fire, request the shooters magazine, insert a dud round in a random place. That way you will have to reload or least clear the dud. Good practice.

[Neil Beverley]

Neil, it's interesting that IPSC took away the (multi) string requirement for Standard Exercises. And, they can be Comstock. (So, what do you have left to call Standards, positions and reloads?)

Right. That puts us back to Standards as the only way to test a reload.

If we could lose the two strings aspect, I might make it easier for stage designers.

The 6 rounds, or 12 if there is a mandatory reload, is the hurdle. I'm sure that limitation had to come from Revolver. Absolutely no need for it in Rifle that I can readily see?

Flex

I'll outline my thinking on this and I openly admit it was me that campaigned for this change on the IPSC Rules Committee. It wasn't an easy ride.

The thing is that we can already have FT and VC in Short Courses so they didn't make Standards special either.

For me, Standards should have been (are) only about being enable to create specific shooting challenges. This should be the ONLY justification for Standards. For Standards to be Standards because they require 2 strings or more is the worst possible reason to have them.

So if the "reason to be" is shooting related why make it mandatory to have 2 strings? And if we truly want to test: seated, prone, weak hand only (HG), weak shoulder only (SG [but not allowed for rifle]), strong hand only, compulsory reloads, etc. then surely this is the test - the ability to shoot with forced restrictions or added requirements. Why then, when say we're asking for weak hand only, have we previously restricted the challenge to FT or VC only? It's a shooting challenge not a round count challenge or a timed fire challenge. We used to give the competitor a tougher challenge and then made it worse by illogically not permitting Comstock. This against a background of Comstock being the de facto normal scoring type.

We have been careful to take nothing away. You can still have Standards with 2, 3, 4 Strings. In IPSC you can also have a single string. And why not?

We can now have Comstock Standards but we can still have VC or FT. And why not?

This simply gives more scope and more flexibility.

In SG we sometimes test weak shoulder only shooting. In a regular C of F it can be difficult to truly force it upon competitors and the degree of difficulty changes between a 5ft competitor compared to someone who is 6ft 6ins tall. So we would run it as a Standard Excercise. However, under the old rules this wasn't permitted unless we created a compulsory second string simply to conform to a daft requirement in the definition of a Standard Excercise. So to conform we throw in a 6 round kneeling position 6 plate array simply to conform? And what has that got to do with the real desired test, which in this case in weak shoulder shooting. This is the sort of anomaly I hope we have resolved.

As a slight aside to this, and for Level I and II matches only, the rulebook allows for SG (only) "Load One, Shoot One" to be treated as a Standard Excercise. Gun starts empty and the exercise simulates a total blockage/malfunction of the mag tube. Therefore shoot the targets solely by loading one at a time direct into the chamber. As an occasional addition to a match it can provide a new challenge. Difficult to manage with box mags though. See Rule 1.2.3.2.

[Jim Norman]

Neil,

Although we have disagreed in the past, I like this position. Now, if I can allow the shooter to move from one shooting location to another we still have, arguably a "Standards" and can make the shooter reload at a given point. (Yeah, I know, not really a standards because we are not mandating tghe positions that the shooter must use to engage the targets) I am just trying to insert a required reload someplace in what could be a 52 round COF. (31 Rifle and 21 pistol)

Jim

Edited November 30, 2006 by Jim Norman

[Dan Sierpina]

We don't have sanctioned matches any more. We have Level I, II, & III.

Kyle,

I used the term sanctioned matches because of my 10 year absence in USPSA. Sanctioned was what we used long ago.

[Neil Beverley]

Jim

I'm not sure I'm interpreting your post properly but if I am ...... where does it say in the rules that you can't move in a Standard Exercise? Certainly if the briefing says, for example, "shoot prone" then it pretty much makes it a static shoot. But otherwise a certain amount of movement is permitted.

Edited November 30, 2006 by Neil Beverley

[Grump]

That said, I would adopt a magazine capacity limit for Limited/Tactical. 30 rounds would be my choice, only 'cause it is a "standard" magazine size, dimension, whatever you want to call it for the AR platform (yeah I know not everyone uses an AR but let's be intellectually honest and admit that it's the most popular and therefore can be a basis for rules). For Open, well, even though there's a round limit on the other sections of Open, I'd say either again a magazine length limit (say whatever the longest 45 round mag is) or have no restriction.

If there is a rule not allowing Beta's in Limited/Tactical, it's unfortunate for those that have them, but there should be a line drawn somewhere.

One of the things that has *bugged* me in the past is shooting disciplines that appear to be more or less written for specific guns. To drift from "X gun dominates" the sport b/c it works best to "this sport is for Y guns" seems a bit silly and....not "Practical"??

Seems to me that the easiest fix, which *could* give some shooters what they want and expect in matches AND GET in the "outlaw" matches, would be to fudge the sacred "freestyle" rule to have a loophole to *allow* but not mandate use of a reload requirement in no more than 25% of the stages in a match. It could even be written to apply ONLY to rifles, but many of pro-reload arguments could apply to standard-cap magazine pistols... However, the reload must be mandated only somewhere "at the shooter's discretion", such as at any time among the middle 1/3 of targets to be engaged. Maybe? Mandating the reload at a specific shot number or after a specific target just ain't right.

Seems to me that tweaking the rule to allow a downloaded mag start for ONLY such a NON-standard exercise (new course of fire rules here?) that otherwise fits the IPSC model would be just one way to do it. Just don't dare make it part of every stage!

I'd forgotten how restrictive the Standard Exercise rules were. They can certainly test the reloading skill, but that's in a rather boring setting...