USPSA bound by....

[Sestock]

Wow. It's happening sooner than we expected. USPSA shooters want to eliminate any and all divisions that run by different requirements other than USPSA rules. One thing that made the Steel Challenge fun and exciting was the fact that whatever shooting discipline one came from, there was a division for them. Now the "Elite" minds of some feel that the match should be catered to their rules only. I anticipate that this is just the idle gossip from non-well rounded, "My sport is better than yours", shooting competitors, and not the "official" direction of USPSA. If the match went to USPSA rules only, the number of competitors will drop off significantly and the purchase of the Steel Challenge will become just another revenue losing "Land Deal.

But, if USPSA does eliminate all non-USPSA divisions, just think of the number of competitors looking for a new match! Perhaps the "International Steel Shooting Association" will be formed.

If IDPA would have bought the SC would they still follow USPSA rules?

All I was stating is that any reference to IDPA should be removed from the rules. If SC wants to follow the IDPA rules, then do not acknowledge the fact.

Don't be short sighted or micro minded. USPSA is not going to change the format of the match in the short term, that was part of the agreement. But SC is now part of USPSA and will evolve.

[Alan Meek]

One item here, The Steel Challenge does not have divisions. Types of firearm are listed as categories in the rules.

Alan

[Ron Ankeny]

The Match Director...directed...the match.

Thanks, I needed that.

USPSA shooters want to eliminate any and all divisions that run by different requirements other than USPSA rules.

Such a generality is totally untrue and unfounded. If you read posts by Area Directors, BOD members, and so forth, you will see they all agree the format for the big dawg match will remain unchanged. What we are trying to do is to reverse engineer the venue back to the local level in a fashion that makes sense for the local clubs, will support the most shooters, be successfull, and so forth.

[Singlestack Wonder]

Wow. It's happening sooner than we expected. USPSA shooters want to eliminate any and all divisions that run by different requirements other than USPSA rules. One thing that made the Steel Challenge fun and exciting was the fact that whatever shooting discipline one came from, there was a division for them. Now the "Elite" minds of some feel that the match should be catered to their rules only. I anticipate that this is just the idle gossip from non-well rounded, "My sport is better than yours", shooting competitors, and not the "official" direction of USPSA. If the match went to USPSA rules only, the number of competitors will drop off significantly and the purchase of the Steel Challenge will become just another revenue losing "Land Deal.

But, if USPSA does eliminate all non-USPSA divisions, just think of the number of competitors looking for a new match! Perhaps the "International Steel Shooting Association" will be formed.

If IDPA would have bought the SC would they still follow USPSA rules?

All I was stating is that any reference to IDPA should be removed from the rules. If SC wants to follow the IDPA rules, then do not acknowledge the fact.

Don't be short sighted or micro minded. USPSA is not going to change the format of the match in the short term, that was part of the agreement. But SC is now part of USPSA and will evolve.

I can't speak for Bill Wilson, but if I purchased a well ran, working "machine", that generated capital based on it's availability to persons of all shooting disciplines, I would not change it. Bill certainly knows how to run a shooting organization based on the continued success of IDPA.

On another note, I hardly call elimination of divisions (or whatever the correct term is) of anything that is not USPSA (i.e. SASS, IDPA, etc) "evolving".

[MEC]

Wow. It's happening sooner than we expected. USPSA shooters want to eliminate any and all divisions that run by different requirements other than USPSA rules. One thing that made the Steel Challenge fun and exciting was the fact that whatever shooting discipline one came from, there was a division for them. Now the "Elite" minds of some feel that the match should be catered to their rules only. I anticipate that this is just the idle gossip from non-well rounded, "My sport is better than yours", shooting competitors, and not the "official" direction of USPSA. If the match went to USPSA rules only, the number of competitors will drop off significantly and the purchase of the Steel Challenge will become just another revenue losing "Land Deal.

But, if USPSA does eliminate all non-USPSA divisions, just think of the number of competitors looking for a new match! Perhaps the "International Steel Shooting Association" will be formed.

If IDPA would have bought the SC would they still follow USPSA rules?

All I was stating is that any reference to IDPA should be removed from the rules. If SC wants to follow the IDPA rules, then do not acknowledge the fact.

Don't be short sighted or micro minded. USPSA is not going to change the format of the match in the short term, that was part of the agreement. But SC is now part of USPSA and will evolve.

I can't speak for Bill Wilson, but if I purchased a well ran, working "machine", that generated capital based on it's availability to persons of all shooting disciplines, I would not change it. Bill certainly knows how to run a shooting organization based on the continued success of IDPA.

On another note, I hardly call elimination of divisions (or whatever the correct term is) of anything that is not USPSA (i.e. SASS, IDPA, etc) "evolving".

All it takes is a resentment and a new set of steel plates and you can start your own steel challenge organization. It looks like you have the first part down pat.

[Singlestack Wonder]

Wow. It's happening sooner than we expected. USPSA shooters want to eliminate any and all divisions that run by different requirements other than USPSA rules. One thing that made the Steel Challenge fun and exciting was the fact that whatever shooting discipline one came from, there was a division for them. Now the "Elite" minds of some feel that the match should be catered to their rules only. I anticipate that this is just the idle gossip from non-well rounded, "My sport is better than yours", shooting competitors, and not the "official" direction of USPSA. If the match went to USPSA rules only, the number of competitors will drop off significantly and the purchase of the Steel Challenge will become just another revenue losing "Land Deal.

But, if USPSA does eliminate all non-USPSA divisions, just think of the number of competitors looking for a new match! Perhaps the "International Steel Shooting Association" will be formed.

If IDPA would have bought the SC would they still follow USPSA rules?

All I was stating is that any reference to IDPA should be removed from the rules. If SC wants to follow the IDPA rules, then do not acknowledge the fact.

Don't be short sighted or micro minded. USPSA is not going to change the format of the match in the short term, that was part of the agreement. But SC is now part of USPSA and will evolve.

I can't speak for Bill Wilson, but if I purchased a well ran, working "machine", that generated capital based on it's availability to persons of all shooting disciplines, I would not change it. Bill certainly knows how to run a shooting organization based on the continued success of IDPA.

On another note, I hardly call elimination of divisions (or whatever the correct term is) of anything that is not USPSA (i.e. SASS, IDPA, etc) "evolving".

All it takes is a resentment and a new set of steel plates and you can start your own steel challenge organization. It looks like you have the first part down pat.

Typical un-enlightened comment. I presume if USPSA was ever able to purchase SASS, it would be OK to eliminate single action cowboy guns?

Anyway.............nuff said............

[MEC]

Wow. It's happening sooner than we expected. USPSA shooters want to eliminate any and all divisions that run by different requirements other than USPSA rules. One thing that made the Steel Challenge fun and exciting was the fact that whatever shooting discipline one came from, there was a division for them. Now the "Elite" minds of some feel that the match should be catered to their rules only. I anticipate that this is just the idle gossip from non-well rounded, "My sport is better than yours", shooting competitors, and not the "official" direction of USPSA. If the match went to USPSA rules only, the number of competitors will drop off significantly and the purchase of the Steel Challenge will become just another revenue losing "Land Deal.

But, if USPSA does eliminate all non-USPSA divisions, just think of the number of competitors looking for a new match! Perhaps the "International Steel Shooting Association" will be formed.

If IDPA would have bought the SC would they still follow USPSA rules?

All I was stating is that any reference to IDPA should be removed from the rules. If SC wants to follow the IDPA rules, then do not acknowledge the fact.

Don't be short sighted or micro minded. USPSA is not going to change the format of the match in the short term, that was part of the agreement. But SC is now part of USPSA and will evolve.

I can't speak for Bill Wilson, but if I purchased a well ran, working "machine", that generated capital based on it's availability to persons of all shooting disciplines, I would not change it. Bill certainly knows how to run a shooting organization based on the continued success of IDPA.

On another note, I hardly call elimination of divisions (or whatever the correct term is) of anything that is not USPSA (i.e. SASS, IDPA, etc) "evolving".

All it takes is a resentment and a new set of steel plates and you can start your own steel challenge organization. It looks like you have the first part down pat.

Typical un-enlightened comment. I presume if USPSA was ever able to purchase SASS, it would be OK to eliminate single action cowboy guns?

Anyway.............nuff said............

My point is: Lets see how we can make this successful no matter who owns the organization or what the categories are. If you are not able to set aside past resentments or disagreements then you are always going to look at this with a sour taste.

Why bother unless you are only looking for an arguement.

[Chills1994]

IBTL

[Chills1994]

Seeing how IDPA kinda branched off and started it's own version of 3 gun, then IDPA can just as easily start it's own "steel challenge" type of match venue.

As far as USPSA owning the Steel Challenge AND keeping the IDPA and SASS "categories" (or whatever they're called at the Big Match), I think it is so much of: "he who pays the piper gets to pick the tune". If the USPSA PTB $hit-can all non USPSA "categories" that is strictly their perogative to do so.

Don't get the Big Match in Piru, CA confused with the Big Dawgs Steel Match (in Iowa?):

http://bigdawgsteel.com/

Which, IIRC, is totally NOT sanctioned by any governing body. I think they only have two divisions there: Open and Limited. It is strictly "head's up" and "run whatcya brung" type of event. I think.

[Flexmoney]

Moderator Note: Please cease with the back and forth bickering. If you are up-tight about some of this...don't post here. If you think your favorite game is better than another game, this isn't the place to make that point...don't post here. Find a way to discuss your point of view without attacking or antagonizing others...or, don't post here.

[MEC]

You're right Flex.

I was out of line throwing gas on a situation that doesn't need it. I apologize to Singlestack Wonder, yourself and the other forum members.

Sorry Guys and Gals.

[Jaxshooter]

It is easy to control Divisions in local matches by requiring a minimum number of shooters for it to be offered.

[Carlos]

GUYS - Flex has clarified the issues for us and there are TWO (2) issues impacting this discussion (please pick ONE and STATE WHICH ONE you are talking about in all future posts here):

1) "The" Steel Challenge match, held ONCE per year in Piru California.

I will probably never make it to that match nor will MOST USPSA members, so most really do not care that much what goes on out there. Keep it as is for now if it works. I think prize tables are dumb and would rather see lower match fees, but again, I don't care HOW they do it in California & so I should not comment on "THE" challenge further.

2) The Discipline of Steel challenge - which MIGHT be coming to a range near me (or you).

THAT matters to a whole lot more folks here among the be.com community for our future. Remember, USPSA bought THE WHOLE SHOOTING MATCH - including club matches. That being said, I see Steel Challence being a potential bridge between USPSA and other pistol sports - including those who want to shoot .22s - we've all seen there is demand for .22 shooting opportunities, but not as a traditional USPSA Division). For the club matches, I'd like to see the SASS divisions included too - and as they shoot SA revolvers that no USPSA shooters compete with, why not leave them alone as well? Granted the only results are "combined results" and the divisions are actually "categories" - but lets not alienate people we have not even met & don't regularly meet without giving these different categories a chance.

(thanks Flex).

it is the most succesful pistol match there is.

I would point out, however, that what makes for a good big match, doesn't translate to the local monthly matches. And, that is what the SC organization never capitalized on. I think there were something like 31 listed clubs that were affiliated with the SC organization. Of those, I'll bet that half of them were not current with their dues and such. SC never offered out any support and guidance to the clubs at the local level.

We need to remember that USPSA didn't just buy "a match". If we don't think about it in a way that gets the matches built out on the local level, then we are stuck with just "a match". Thus, lowering the benefits of the purchase.

[Ron Ankeny]

Don't get the Big Match in Piru, CA confused with the Big Dawgs Steel Match (in Iowa?):

Thanks for clearing that up for the readers. By "big dawgs" I was referring to the top shooters at the SC match in Piru, not the venue.

On the bright side, the only critics I have come across regarding the USPSA purchase of the SC have been on the Internet. I haven't heard one negative word locally. I think the idea of local matches, state shoots, etc. will appeal to a lot of folks who just don't have the resources to make the trip to Piru.

Carlos:

Give me your honest opinion. Should our club list all categories (see I learned something here) on our entry form? Should there be a minimum number of shooters in a category to be recognized? For instance, what would be better, to put a lone shooter in their own category or to mix and match? I have no problem using all of the categories, but I really don't want to buy a bunch of trophies that will go in the garbage.

Edited January 23, 2008 by Ron Ankeny

[Carlos]

:

I think the idea of local matches, state shoots, etc. will appeal to a lot of folks who just don't have the resources to make the trip to Piru.

Carlos:

Give me your honest opinion. Should our club list all categories (see I learned something here) on our entry form? Should there be a minimum number of shooters in a category to be recognized? For instance, what would be better, to put a lone shooter in their own category or to mix and match? I have no problem using all of the categories, but I really don't want to buy a bunch of trophies that will go in the garbage.

Hi Ron! I re-read your post from page 2 (folks- Ron & I are talking about the Wyoming State steel match Ron is running - see below).

Looks like its a trophy-only match and you are planning to have trophies done ahead of time. The presents quite a dilema as far as what categories to recognize!

Most simple/least expensive arrangement is only 4 trophies: Limited/Open/Revolver/.22 and call it a day. There will be some disappointed shooters with that system I imagine!

Why would I even bring it up? You let us know:

"Many of you have more attendance at a club match than we have at a state match. In fact, I would wager (barring a crash) that I can pick the top two finishers in each division when I do registration. At our state IPSC match last year we had exactly one production shooter, only two revolver shooters, etc. Would you rather we allow people to combine into fewer divisions, or should we recognize everything and have 0, 1, or 2 shooters per division? The fact if the matter is, around these parts the folks who are really into Steel Challenge are from the ranks of NRA Action Pistol. So, should we start making additional divisions around their rules? As another poster pointed out, we need to eventually migrate towards a uniform rulebook that doesn't try to make divisions all over the place and let shooters gear up accordingly. My whole point is this, collectively USPSA members have a lot of experience and there is no reason why we can't over come any obstacles in the path to success."

I agree there is a way to collectively overcome these obstacles, though I'll leave it to those with more creative ideas & more big match organizing experience to figure out the best solution in this case.

Ron - thanks in advance for making the Steel Challenge (or something darn close to it) a reality outside of Piru.

[B.J. Norris]

Hey guys, please look at the attachment before reading the rest of my post.

Now keeping the chart in mind, USPSA now "owns" three styles of shooting. All three are distinctly different, each with their own set of rules. When Multi-gun was run predominately our of the USPSA Practical Pistol book, it was a disaster, the solution? A completely new set of rules, scoring system and divisions was introduced to USPSA 3-gun/multi-gun. The result being that that wing of USPSA is stronger than it ever has been before.

Steel Challenge does not have divisions in the sense that we, as USPSA, IDPA, etc shooters are used to, a division in SC is equivalent to a category in USPSA. This works in Steel Challenge because of two reasons, less distinction between equipment, and money. It doesn't matter whether your gun holds 10 rounds (I use 10 rd STI mags for steel) or 50, because if you shoot more than 5, you're loosing ground fast. With no power floor, 9mm/38 super is THE caliber of choice, mainly because of expense, but that's not say that you can't shoot .40 or .45, loaded to the PF of your choice. Why have IDPA divisions then? The only answer I can give to that is that is just "feels" right. The majority of USPSA can use their regular gear at little or no disadvantage, whereas most IDPA shooters won't have race gear. Since Steel Challenge is separate from USPSA Practical Pistol and has it's own divisions, I would rather have them set-up so IDPA shooters can instantly see that they have a place to shoot in Steel Challenge, using equipment rules that they are familiar with. Also, Steel Challenge is beyond any dispute the richest pistol match in the world, 2007 alone awarded more than $50K cash to the shooters, a very high percentage of shooters won guns, and I'd wager 80-90% of the shooters got their match fee back in the value of the prize package from the prize table. There's not another match that can claim this, why are we worried about what we need to change about it now that we (USPSA) own it, instead of trying to figure out what makes it work and put that into our (USPSA's) other shooting styles?

USPSA_Chart.pdf

[Flyin40]

Great Chart BJ, hard to argue with that.

Flyin

[JFD]

"The key word there is "like". The BIG match never said they were going to pull from all of the rules of another organization. They don't require the (USPSA "like") Open guns to make 165pf, for instance."

Flex

The equipment rules specifically refer to current IDPA, USPSA or SASS equipment rules for details. I saw no stand-alone equipment rules for the SC. The wimpy PF seems to be the only change specific to the SC.

I think there should be stand-alone SC equipment rules or else USPSA needs to send MDs copies of the IDPA and SASS rule books.

As long as the match is making money and has sponsors, it would be risky to get rid of any divisions/categories. It would be nice to consolidate some of the categories with a lot in common, but that's going to happen anyway at the local level.

[Flexmoney]

The equipment rules specifically refer to current...

Jerry,

I'll have to take your word on that. Somehow, our local club has managed to run a pretty decent monthly steel match for years...withuot us reading those equipment rules.

[Jadepanther]

The SC looks to be pretty hardcore about their dress code too.

Camo and stupid crap on t-shirts gets you immediately uninvited to the match. Good or bad, I agree with this rule.

It is held in Kalifonia, the PC crowd there is pretty tough

Cowboy outfits are encouraged but not actually required for Single-Action competitors.

In reality, all you get for an IDPA or Revolver entry is a letter next to your name on the overall order of finish results, and maybe a special prize from a sponsor if they want to recognize that division, there's no 'scores separated by division' concept. Prize table trips are strictly in order of overall finish.

Like all such things, policing is pretty light-- if the RO notices something really wrong like irons listed and you've got a scope, they'll note it, but otherwise it's up to the competitors to police themselves and each other. That seems to work pretty well. Locally we recognize both IDPA and Production, even though they are very similar.. it just doesn't matter.

wow so if someone finished 1st amongst "USPSA Production" division shooters at the steel challenge they would only be padding the top open/limited shooters prize table, since there the ones that always finish top 10 with very few exceptions, and win nothing but braggin rights. Thats very disapointing, actually that's beyond disapointing, it reprehensable, might as well just through all divisions away. I don't shoot to win money or prizes, but don't charge me a huge entry fee to pad the top (almost always already sponsered) open/limited shooters prizes when I have no chance of winning anything in USPSA production division.

[Chills1994]

MEC on the first page wrote:

FYI: Part of the agenda for the January 26-27 USPSA board meeting is to approve the Steel Challenge Policy Manual. This would probably be the venue to give your 2 cents on the rules for the future of Steel Challenge.

How does one go about giving the USPSA board their 2 cents then, on Jan 26 and 27th?

I did find last year's results here:

http://steelchallenge.com/legacy/steelchal...AIN%20MATCH.htm

I tried running the numbers on the "centerfire pistol" results and out of the 240 competitors they break out as follows (or very close to, thereabouts):

Open = 108 shooters (45.00%)

Limited = 43 (17.91%)

Optic Revolvers = 25 (10.41%)

Iron Sighted Revo = 9 ( 3.75%)

(Combined "USPSA" like shooters) = 185 (77.08%)

IDPA = 51 (21.25%)

Single Action = 4 ( 1.6%)

(Combined "NON-USPSA like shooters) = 55 (22.91%)

There was NOT a "production" category there last year.

My position still stands: if you're gonna call something IDPA, then there should be at least the following:

1. Concealment garments/vests worn

2. Guns/ammo chrono'ed for Power Factor

3. Guns weighed

4. An IDPA box for guns w/ mags inserted to fit in

5. Holsters and mag pouches checked for location, IDPA legality, and distance from body

6. Guns inspected for non-IDPA approved modifications

I still cannot quite wrap my mind around the notion that a USPSA owned event should "kow tow down" to other shooting disciplines when they represent such a small minority of shooters, NOT even 25% of 'em.

[HoMiE]

Isn't a category just if there is a minimum number of competitors, then you just give recognition to those shooting in that category. So, hey, great your first SSP. Yea, your the first LE. Way to go, you made third cowboy shooter.

What's the big deal? It doesn't haven't to be all or nothing since now it is USPSA. There really isn't much to gripe about the rules or equipment. BEEP! Shoot the steel as fast as you can. Why complicate it and make it something it's not.

[Fireant]

This is all cracking me up. Being the shooters we are(keeping the name of the game out of it) it's had for (some) of us to accept a match that runs very well with only a couple of rules and no real need for a rule book. My first SC match was a state level match. I'd been trying to memorize any and all rules like I do for my regular Sat. matches. At the LAMR I asked some questions and this is what the timer runner told me. He said"son, you see those 5 steel plates?" Yes sir, " when the buzzer goes off stand there and shoot them as fast as you can." OK. " then we are going to do it four more times. It doesn't get any simpler than that now does it?"

We need to keep it simple. My two cents to the BOD is to leave the match structure alone. Provide some scoring software and a place to post them in return for the activity fee that would come in. Let existing USPSA clubs run matches and only submit activity fees and let new clubs join that only want to be SC clubs. Let the match directors direct the matches they run. I know more what my club needs than someone 2000 mile away. Leave the big match the way it is.

[rgkeller]

>>Leave the big match the way it is.<<'

A match for sponsored shooters and Southern California shooters.

[Chills1994]

rgkeller wrote:

A match for sponsored shooters and Southern California shooters.

Ya just never know what might be in the works...

Ya just never know...

PS: It would be nice if you had your location listed under your screenname/avatar.