MarkS_A18138 Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 Jim,I am for open s/s 10. There are a lot of old s/s open guns about. Put that dot back on the old pin gun and come out and play. Gene ME TOOOOOOO!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 TRYAN, Your welcome as glad to help direct a newbie! CHRIS GRUBE Your too kind! TRyan You've never talked to him in person, have you? You have no idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 Come on George, do you know how hard I have to try to piss off a perfect stranger...oh yeah looks like not very. Your a good drunk...I'm a great AHole! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo radley Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Jim, I am for open s/s 10. There are a lot of old s/s open guns about. Put that dot back on the old pin gun and come out and play. Gene ME TOOOOOOO!!!!!!! So the question is, if you create a new "XYZ" division, who will shoot it? Existing USPSA members, who are active in a another division? Or *new* shooters, who currently aren't, or *active*, USPSA members? IMO, this is the heart of the matter. If you create "Open10", and you pull shooters from another division, you've hurt those shooters that remain in those divisions. Doesn't *everyone* want to shoot a match -- local, and especially a major -- with as many other shooters as possible in your class/division? How many ways are you going to slice this pie? It's just not that big, to begin with. I think this same issue is very real with PSSD, which is why any discussion thereof can't help but involve L10. OTOH, I do believe that PSSD, unlike "Open Revolver", actually has a chance of bringing in new members, with the right marketing; increasing the size of the pie, if you will...That's a big distinction. Could Springfield and Kimber put a USPSA brochure in the literature that ships with new 1911's? Etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipscbob Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 I think it's funny that a sport developed "to learn what worked and what didn't" now creates protected classes to "level the playing field". You can read that on PSSD, PD, Revo, L10 or whatever division you personally don't like, but limiting single-stack to a 'one-design' doesn't seem like the best way to go about it How true. Seems like we have regressed a bit. This used to be a sport populated by innovators. Now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCK Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 I think with more and more states adopting CCW permits, USPSA could be marketed through the CCW instructors via literature passed out in their classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R/T Performance Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 (edited) I must say I just shot the Targeting education match and had a major pain with ammo/brass failures. And was very disappointed that there where only 5 people in the class. $90 entry fee $96 in gas to be compared to the same amount of shooters I could shot a $15 club match on saturday and only spent $15 in gas. I must say that was very disappointing to see such a low turn out. Not that it mattered being I placed 5 out 5 Even revolver had a better turn out. Targeting Education - USPSA Match Livingston Action Shooters 5/19/2007 Division Competitors Limited 38 Limited_10 26 Open 41 Production 25 Revolver 7 Single Stack 5 Total 143 Edited May 22, 2007 by R/T Performance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENE S Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 This is why there are 5 divisions, so you can select just which one you wish to shoot when you arive at your local match. I know at the matches in my area ( area 8) there can be 65 or shooters there. With that many, it helps me to see just where I place in the division that I chose to shoot that day. If there are only 10-15 shooters at a match, then I agree, we may not need another divisions (open rev. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Now don't bring up that the sport was designed to find the best equipment. Last time I said that Flex wanted to change DVC to DVCA for appratus. I believe we should adopt the hanguns with disability act so that every shooter and every gun has a fair and even place to shoot, competition be damned. Please return to beating the horse..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycanthrope Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Some of the best guns in the world are on this board. They may shoot well across all platforms. But....the sustainability of SS is resting upon the opinions of the general masses and new shooters. I'll be the first to admit that I'd love to shoot SS in Area 8, but I don't.... due to not having an accurate classification (IMHO). I shoot 1-2 matches a month due to time constraints and I'm still trying to work my way into M class in Limited and L-10 (it looks like I may make it when the next round of Classifiers are submitted for L-10). Shooting Lim and L-10 with the widebody gives me a good assessment of where I stand in the Classification system. For me, part of every match is seeing improvements that are measurable in terms of the masses. Many of us base goals on class ranking. I see SS as a whole different ball game for myself in terms of match performance. For me, SS success is all about the reload. With mag positions different from L-10 and reloads being a whole lot harder to hit than a 2011 with an ICE magwell (which virtually suck a mag in from across the room) I am not performing on match day with a SS the same as I do shooting L-10 with my widebody. In general, I don't think I own my class in SS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 I am sorry for being late to this conversation, but I have been living in DSL internet Hell for the past 10 days. God created the world in 6 days, but Windstream can't get one Eastern Kentucky Hillbilly connected to the internet in less than 10 days For those who continue to wonder why the classifiers don't count yet, and why the PSSD is limited to the 1911 platform, I would suggest a search as I have explained this numerous times. The original concept of the PSSD is still posted on www.uspsa.org How would allowing 10 round magazines in SSD be different from L-10? I am very, very, very (is that too many) confident that the "P" will be dropped from the SSD effective 1-1-08. Back to sticking pins in my Windstream doll Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 There is no DSL service from Todds Point Gary. I get online thanks to some satellite magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kend Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Gary, any chance you can post a link to the thread with the beszt explanation? I did a search and I don't have time to go through all of that looking for it. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 (edited) I probaly can't find them either, especially when I am still sticking pins in this Windstream doll with one hand I was thinking one night (a dangerous thing sometimes) that there are about a dozen companies producing a 1911 platform. Of those we (USPSA) have been supported in some way or another by a few of them. Some of those are still with us, some are not such as Colt. That being said, we were still not availing ourselves to the marketing and sponsorship opportunities from the remaining companies. So I proposed the idea of a SS division based on the 1911 platform. This was envisioned as a two purpose division. One was to draw in the other companies who produced 1911's to our marketing revenue stream and to also draw them into sponsorships of our shooters and to provide prizes for our prize tables. The second feature was to provide a seamless crossover path from IDPA to USPSA. To do that I needed to craft a division that would allow both CDP and ESP 1911's to compete. I wanted to dispell the old "You need a 3 thousand dollar gun to compete in USPSA" excuse. With Production and SSD we have the opportunity to draw in significant new membership. When we coupled the PSSD with the Single Stack Classic for a National Championship, we saw an increase of 40 new members to USPSA to shoot this match. Some of them were IDPA shooters who had never been USPSA members and some were old members who came back to the sport because of the PSSD. This year the match grew again, filled up very early, and had a waiting list. Springfield is looking as expanding it again and making it a three day event with the match being shot completely in a single day. While some may think 40 new members is insignificant, I disagree. Each of those 40 has the potential to bring in more new members, and those can bring in more members. As I have said before each of us are the best marketing tool we have. At this years Single Stack Nationals, Smith and Wesson stepped up and gave away three M&P pistols, in a drawing, to anyone shooting a S&W 1911. This was exactly what I had envisioned when I tried to draw the other 1911 producers back into our sport. I hope to see more companies step up and get involved, but in my opinion this part has not been pursued agressively enough. Hopefully that will change soon. This venture met with strong opposition and required a significant effort on my part to convince four other BOD members to give it a "test" period of three years. The final vote (which is recored in the BOD minutes) was 5-4 if I remember correctly. It was not an easy thing to accomplish. I often hear the 'Why not a Glock Division" question. My answer to that is when there are a dozen companies producing Glocks, and USPSA is only benefiting from 3 or 4 of them, I'll give it serious consideration. As to the classifiers, the short answer is Dave Thomas was strongly against including classifier data into the data base from a division that was only provisional. Dave is very protective of the classifier data base, as he should be, and his opposition to this would have been the death of the division if I had insisted on them being counted. Therefore a compromise had to be reached or the division would not be in existance today. The compromise was that the classifiers would be archived and included in the database if the division received full status. I didn't like the idea, although I understood it fully, but thought it was a reasonable thing to do to get the division off the ground. I hope this give a clearer understanding of why and how this all came about. Gary Edited May 23, 2007 by Gary Stevens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tungsten Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Thanks for your hard work to that end, Gary. I for one appreciate that someone took the time and initiative to provide a division where I could play with my simple 1911. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sslav Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Now don't bring up that the sport was designed to find the best equipment. Last time I said that Flex wanted to change DVC to DVCA for appratus. Do you feel that "only those with $3,000 open guns need apply" philosophy is better for the sport? Around here Open division comes in third behind production and Limmited - and occasionally fourth behind Lim-10. Do you think that all those shoothers would either run out and spend 3-5 grand on a gun or volonteer to be easy meat for those with open guns? I do not know about anyone else - I'd be looking for another game to play. Apparently that is how IDPA came to be. So the whole "find best equipment" bit was already tried and where it leads to is pretty apparent. I believe we should adopt the hanguns with disability act so that every shooter and every gun has a fair and even place to shoot, competition be damned. Please return to beating the horse..... What a grand idea! Exactly! Lets do exactly that! More divisions will promote more competition - not less. If production division did not exist I would not be shooting USPSA today. Now while shooting production I have fought a losing battle against getting toys to play in other divisions. I eventually broke down and bought a 1911 I am planning to use for PSSD and Lim-10. I know it is only a matter of time before I get a wide body 2011 for limited. And I've been eyeing the S&W 686 collecting dust in my safe thinking of giving it a whirl in the revo division. Who knows - even though I have no interest in it now - there may be an open gun in my future. Production is still the division I have the most interest in. But in my case there is a liekelyhood of one more competitor "in the pipe" for other divisions. That would not have been the case if there was no production division for me to play in. So if another division will give an opening for someone to try this sport who otherwise would not have, lets have another division - or two or five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 We have argued the point many times and many ways. I give up. Lets make a division for everybody and we can all compete against ourself. Match fees can go up 300 bucks so we all get a nice prize too! UnFingbelieveable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCK Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Why do those oppose it? If you dont want to participate in it, then dont, simple as that. I think with the ss and all the other division, it pretty much gives everyone a place to play and compete at a level they are comfortable with. Gary, hanks for all your hard work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kend Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Gary, thanks for taking the time to explain it....again. I appreciate the time and effort you've put into this and I hope it stays but I just don't understand why it has to be a 1911. I do understand your point about getting more companies involved and I agree 100% but I'm not going to buy a 1911 just so I can shoot SS when I have a 945, which is perfectly legal in CDP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 We have argued the point many times and many ways. I give up. Lets make a division for everybody and we can all compete against ourself. Match fees can go up 300 bucks so we all get a nice prize too! UnFingbelieveable! Well, at least then YOU'D have a chance to win! hahahahahahahahahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bdavis Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 Gary, and to whomever may care, The number of 40 new shooters at the SSC was for 2006, we added another 33 shooters (first time USPSA) for the the 2007 match. So that is about 73 shooters in two years and who knows what 2008 holds. Since no one asked me , I would vote for abolition of all divisions, save one IT GOES BANG WHEN I PULL THE TRIGGER division. Everything else is a category. I'd do away with prizes, they have come close to ruining our sport. Let me also state the other side of the equation. I'm not sure I like the USPSA involvement in the SSC. It is a great match, but the last two years we have seen more wannabes, whiners, Range Lawyers and prize hounds that all the previous years combined. It takes a little of the fun out of the match. I'm excited about the potential for an additional day and more new shooters, but it also changes the atmostphere of the match. I guess all things change and all children grow up. Gary, again, thanks for all the work, the dedication and the patience. Bdavis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 I would vote for abolition of all divisions, save one IT GOES BANG WHEN I PULL THE TRIGGER division. Everything else is a category. Other than the name (division vs. category)...what is the difference ? You end up with seperations due to equipment either way, right ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bdavis Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 Actually, no. There would be one National Championship with all categories represented, though the end result could look very similar if not the same. It would save money for the USPSA, but might cost money indirectly due to manufacturers being less excited about the sport and their exposure to the "masses. It would certianly cut down on the prizes and you would not see class winners getting near as much; but then again why should they expect to some grand prize anyway. I think the beauty of the Single Stack Classic (before USPSA involvement) was that a shooter competed with TGO with virtually the same equipment and could really measure himself/herself against the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted May 29, 2007 Author Share Posted May 29, 2007 I think the beauty of the Single Stack Classic (before USPSA involvement) was that a shooter competed with TGO with virtually the same equipment and could really measure himself/herself against the best. Curious, what has changed since the USPSA involvement with the SSC that this does not happen anymore? Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddy_fuentes Posted May 29, 2007 Share Posted May 29, 2007 If I had to measure myself against TGO, I would probably become discouraged and go back to shooting Coke cans. Buddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now