USPSA bound by....

[Ron Ankeny]

Flex:

I don't know how you do it...moderate with out going nuts that is...

[outerlimits]

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

BJ-i don't think there are walls like your present them on the attachment, just personal preference.

in my case, i started shooting the steel challenge back in 1985...every year thru 2001. gave it up cause it got boring to me.

shot uspsa since about 1986 and still do 3 times a month.

got into 3 gun back in 1990, and shoot that as often as i can.

i see no walls, just opportunities to spend time & money.

[B.J. Norris]

Butch,

I meant in no way that there are walls between shooters, one more fun than the other, etc. Only to show that they must have different rules, administration practices and cannot really be directly compared because even though they are use guns, all are radically different sports.

[Jadepanther]

Does there really have to be a "Big Wall" between uspsa and steel challenge? I love to shoot both.

I would like to see the Steel challenge rules offically clarified and easily available.

I would like to see the movement and saftey rules the same as USPSA, why would there be any reason for it to not be this way?

I would like to compete in area, and state steel challenge matches with Divisions that welcome Steel, USPSA, IDPA, Cowboy shooters. like USPSA Production, or IDPA SSP and the finishers in that division win accordingly, there hard earned money they paid to compete in the match should not just pad the prize tabel for the top xx limeted/open shooters, AND/OR have the the match fee's lowered conciderably.

I currently only shoot local steel matches for fun because the Kalifornia match is to $$$ for me your average B USPSA Production shooter to travel to California and shoot with a production rig (since thats all have) would only pad the prize table for the High over all sponsored open and limited shooters. It shouldn't have to be this way.

The US Steel Nationals that just started last year looks encouraging.

I'm glad to see USPSA buy SCSA and save the sport, and hopefully Improve it.

I don't want to see alot of things changed in SCSA but I do think some think a few things need to be improved.

Divsions that welcome all shooting disicplines and prizes are awarded per division not just high over all.

Standard saftey and movement rules, no reason for them to be differnet in USPSA and Steel IMO.

State and Area Matches with Divisions, and prize tables per Division not just a prize tabel for High Over All.

State, and Area matches in Steel would be awesome with the 2 simple things I just listed, I'm sure the sport would explode with popularity.

*Idea* Keep the Big annual California match the same and call it the "Steel Challenge Classic"

This would make alot of people happy on both sides of the fence.

Edited January 25, 2008 by Jadepanther

[JThompson]

Like my Pappy used to say, "Son, if it ain't broke, don't go messn witit."

[TRNinTX]

I currently only shoot local steel matches for fun because the Kalifornia match is to $$$ for me your average B USPSA Production shooter to travel to California and shoot with a production rig (since thats all have) would only pad the prize table for the High over all sponsored open and limited shooters. It shouldn't have to be this way.

But your "Production" gear would fit nicely in IDPA Stock and I would bet a "B-class" USPSA shooter would finish high enough to have a good pick off of the prize table. Take a look at the 2007 Results

Edited January 25, 2008 by TRNinTX

[Ron Ankeny]

there hard earned money they paid to compete in the match should not just pad the prize tabel for the top xx limeted/open shooters

The current SC rules specifically forbid shooting for money or a prize table other than at the big match in Piru. All other matches are trophy only. It is possible to be the last place shooter across the board, and still be recognized as first place for your category (only shooter).

[Flexmoney]

Like my Pappy used to say, "Son, if it ain't broke, don't go messn witit."

But, it is broken. That is why they don't have a large nation-wide network of clubs...which USPSA (for one) does have.

[Flexmoney]

I currently only shoot local steel matches for fun because the Kalifornia match is to $$$ for me your average B USPSA Production shooter to travel to California and shoot with a production rig (since thats all have) would only pad the prize table for the High over all sponsored open and limited shooters. It shouldn't have to be this way.

But your "Production" gear would fit nicely in IDPA Stock and I would bet a "B-class" USPSA shooter would finish high enough to have a good pick off of the prize table. Take a look at the 2007 Results

Tim,

I'm not up on the wording they use at the big match. Do they go with the IDPA rule book? If so, many (most) of the USPSA Production shooters will be left out of that category, I think? Blade-tech DOH? Uncle Mikes? Sooper Hooper? Holster position? Inner and Outer belt ?

[rgkeller]

The SC "Policy Manual" is an agenda item at the Jan BOD meeting.

[TRNinTX]

Kyle,

You may be right in the technical sense and that is probably one of the rules that needs to be refined.

This is from the Steel Challenge match book:

"Handguns permitted for STOCK SERVICE PISTOL division must be Double Action, Double Action ONLY, or Safe Action and be of 9mm or larger caliber..."

IMPORTANT! The IDPA Divisions shall be governed by IDPA rules for basic firearm and holster description and rule interpretation.

We have only been going for the past three years, but I have yet to see anyone being inspected for holster type or position, belts, or any boxes or scales. Maybe we just call it Stock and adopt Production holster rules since they are more inclusive.

[Flexmoney]

We have only been going for the past three years, but I have yet to see anyone being inspected for holster type or position, belts, or any boxes or scales.

It sure isn't cheap to get to the big match. I would want to be the test case.

And, we aren't just talking about the big match here, right?

Maybe we just call it Stock and adopt Production holster rules since they are more inclusive.

I like that. I think it works as long as there is no measurable difference between an IDPA holster, Single-Stack Division and a Production holster (I don't know that there is?).

[TRNinTX]

Deleted for wrong topic.

Edited January 26, 2008 by TRNinTX

[ChuckS]

I like that. I think it works as long as there is no measurable difference between an IDPA holster, Single-Stack Division and a Production holster (I don't know that there is?).

As Homer would say "DOH"

[Nik Habicht]

I like that. I think it works as long as there is no measurable difference between an IDPA holster, Single-Stack Division and a Production holster (I don't know that there is?).

As Homer would say "DOH"

DOH = Dropped and Offset Holster? :P

[B.J. Norris]

Hey guys, I'm not saying that the Steel Challenge rule book is perfect and nothing should be changed. The movement and safety rules should probably be the same for Practical Pistol and SC, just for the sake of consistency, but not because there's anything wrong with the way they are currently. All I'm saying is that shouldn't be any large changes for at least the first 2-3 years while USPSA gets their feet under themselves running SC the way it is before things start being changed.

But, it is broken. That is why they don't have a large nation-wide network of clubs...which USPSA (for one) does have.

Kyle,

I have to ask, why does this make it broken? I can tell you with certainty that this was not The Mike's focus. Their focus was to put on the best pistol match in the world, and at that, they have been a runaway success

[ChuckS]

I like that. I think it works as long as there is no measurable difference between an IDPA holster, Single-Stack Division and a Production holster (I don't know that there is?).

As Homer would say "DOH"

DOH = Dropped and Offset Holster? :P

Yup

[BSeevers]

If we paid more than a few thousand $ for the SC then it needs to be larger than 300 people once a year match. Too late but I think we are not ready to grow into other sports. I/USPSA/our local club could have put on a psuedo SC without paying for the name. I would call it the Speed Steel Matchup or whatever. Yea you can quote the longevity or whatever but its not exclusive to SC. They worked hard to make it a premier match but so have others and many others will in the future.

I can understand the concept of USPSA being the leader in gun competition but we have nothing to do with IDPA/SC/NRA or whatever. Its our rules that make USPSA a fair and fun sport. I have shot some of those bootleg sports(local combat/steel) and when I showed up too often and won too much, they changed the rules so the local MD could win. That can't happen in USPSA and that's why we need rules for SC too. Well unless we just want it to remain a once a year match but that even requires a "dictator", I think,to be successful.

Not disrespecting Mike just making an analogy.

Frankly just like when ABC company buys DEF company, they can do whatever they want. It would be unwise to tick off current SC customers but I never have attended a SC cause its too expensive for my personal payback. I am the guy you want to attend cause in this world if you ain't growing then you are losing.

I hope this venture works out.

[Jaxshooter]

What is the problem with the SC having a set of rules and USPSA matches having another set of rules? They are different games and need appropriate rules for each. SC needs to have divisions or classes (what ever you choose to call them) for all of the shootimg sports currently recognized. To do anything else will result in loss of shooters who potentionally could become USPSA shooters.

We still have not been told what was paid for the Steel Challenge. This information needs to be given to the members.

[Flexmoney]

Hey guys, I'm not saying that the Steel Challenge rule book is perfect and nothing should be changed. The movement and safety rules should probably be the same for Practical Pistol and SC, just for the sake of consistency, but not because there's anything wrong with the way they are currently. All I'm saying is that shouldn't be any large changes for at least the first 2-3 years while USPSA gets their feet under themselves running SC the way it is before things start being changed.

But, it is broken. That is why they don't have a large nation-wide network of clubs...which USPSA (for one) does have.

Kyle,

I have to ask, why does this make it broken? I can tell you with certainty that this was not The Mike's focus. Their focus was to put on the best pistol match in the world, and at that, they have been a runaway success

That is the broken part. Focus on the big match, not on building out the club structure. What works great for the one big match, doesn't neccisarily translate out into the the local clubs.

I may have been liberal in my use of the term "broken". I did so in hopes of pointing out the big match/monthly match differences.

[bgary]

Late to the thread... sorry!

And that's exactly why we're all hoping that USPSA will keep their fingers out of the Steel Challenge pie and let it proceed and run as it is now. It's not broken. Don't try to fix it.

+100,000,000

We (USPSA) have no desire to break it. The goal is to *learn* how to keep it *growing*, not change it into something it isn't, and kill it. That's already been tried...

And let's not forget the sponsors. It's not just a category to see how you compare to your non-open peers.

IDPA Categories (International Defensive Pistol Association)

Brownell's, Inc. - Custom Defensive Pistol

COLT - Enhanced Service Pistol

GLOCK, Inc. - Stock Service Pistol

One of the *ever*-so-clever things we've already learned from the Mikes is (loosely translated) "don't do things that don't help you put prizes on the table". They basically said that if someone will sponsor a category, it will make it into the match. If no one will sponsor it, it won't be in the match. That seems so simple! Not sure why USPSA never thought of that... .... but we *are* teachable.

One of the reasons for purchasing the SC according to our President and BOD was to expand the scope of the USPSA. The worst thing they could do is eliminating any Divisions currently recognized by the SC. It would do nothing but further alienate IDPA shooters and shooters from other disciplines.

Egg-zactly! Aside from the question of "breaking it when it ain't broken", I can attest that I, personally, am *pumped* about the opportunity to build some bridges between the shooting sports. We've had this "us vs. them" mentality for far too long, in far too many venues, over far-too-trivial issues. Wouldn't it be great if the Steel Challenge can serve as "the common ground", where enthusiasts of any of the "practical shooting sports" can come to play, whether they wear a high-zoot racegun or a tactical vest or a tie-down leather-slap rig? If you can separate "USPSA the corporation" in your mind from "USPSA the style of practical shooting competition", you can see that "USPSA the corporation" has made an investment that has enormous potential to *not* fracture the shooting sports any further, and might just bring us together a little bit. Wouldn't that be cool?!?!?

but no event under the USPSA influence should follow IDPA rules

See above. "USPSA the corporation" bought the Steel Challenge. But there is *no* intention to change the Steel Challenge so that it is completely run under "USPSA style of competition" rules. That would kill it.

Look at it this way. "Pepsico" owns a bunch of "brands". They own, obviously, Pepsi-Cola, and a whole bunch of other soft-drink labels. But they also own "Frito-Lay", with a bunch of snack-food brands, and they own "Quaker", with a bunch of breakfast-food brands. Nobody at PepsiCo demands that all the "Frito-Lay" products be shipped in the same kind of packaging as the Pepsi drinks. Nobody tells the Quaker folks that they have to use the same ingredients and recipes as the Frito products. Etc. They are separate "brands", owned by a single "parent company". They each have to hit their own goals and performance expectations, but they do it on their own unique paths.

That's the most significant thing, IMHO, about USPSA's acquisition of the Steel Challenge. In buying the Steel Challenge, we have acquired "another brand of practical shooting competition". Our third, if you conside "multi-gun" distinctly different from our handgun game (I do). We are *not* going to require the Steel Challenge to use USPSA rules, classifications, etc. We are *not* going to exclude IDPA, SASS, rimfire, etc, simply because they don't fit into the "USPSA division framework". Rather, we're working really hard to make sure that *both* brands - the run-n-gun USPSA style of competition, and the pure-speed Steel Challenge type of competition, *each* succeed according to their own unique paths.

All it takes is a resentment and a new set of steel plates and you can start your own steel challenge organization.

Yeah, probably true. But I'd say two things:

1) the thing that SC fans would resent most would be if we change the SC. We're not. Repeat to yourself as needed

2) as noted above, we want to *strengthen* the shooting sports, not fracture them further. Another "steel challenge org" would hurt all of us.

BJ-i don't think there are walls like your present them on the attachment, just personal preference.

As far as I am concerned... there are. Not between the shooters, but between "the brands". We're going to learn what works and apply it appropriately. We're *NOT* going to make all three disciplines "the same". That would kill them all (great diagram, BJ!)

But, it is broken. That is why they don't have a large nation-wide network of clubs...which USPSA (for one) does have.

Yup. And that's the big "up-side" to the acquisition. The Mikes never had the time/energy to build an org... they were too busy making their match the best match in the world. With our 400-ish clubs, 16,000 members, magazine, existing headquarters staff, etc... we have a chance to "extend" Steel Challenge to a lot of people beyond Piru. *Without* breaking the big match, if we can *also* make it so clubs and members can play at their local club, and get some benefits of "belonging to the org"... we all win. Don't we?

Bruce

Edited January 31, 2008 by bgary