UNITED MULTI GUN RULES NOW!

[bigsaxdog]

uspsa 3-gun rules w/o transitions are very weak(notice i didn't use the s%*k word)! 3-Gun is about transitions, and those favoring matches w/o transitions......(i can't say that here..) i actually like the uspsa major/minor scoring thing, can't get w/ the scoring .223 as major thing, that's weak too. takes points away from all the hosers, makes 'em aim, and they hate that. the problem w/ the major/minor thing is getting good RO's/match directors to get the whole thing right. if " the powers that be" would only invest some of our match/membership dues into a better EZ winscore program, that would be taken care of! kinda like what linda chico said. (oh, i forgot how much i wanted them to buy the "steel challenge". how much was that again???????). don't get me wrong, i really like uspsa pistol matches, but some range lawyers coming out of NROI 3-Gun class......(i can't say that here, either....). nobody's really got a good soulution. and i find this strange when Michael Voigt(sp?) is such a dominant 3-gunner. the biggest problem here is the lack of an efficient scoring system, which would be solved by an updated 3-Gun EZ Winscore w/ power factors. as it is now, the divisions are pretty good. the only question is low capacity handguns having a competitive place in limited/tactical.

[J-Ho]

Blockhead, good comments. I think I understand why some people want to unify rules, but I still say it's a bad idea to forcibly unify anything. Most of the unification talk seems to be coming from USPSA shooters. Please remember there is another large similar shooting sport out there. There is even those revolver only guys. And SASS. Why should we unify 3 gun rules? Should we demand that cowboy shooters have a power factor? Should we demand IDPA to let us drop mags? Should we demand USPSA get rid of single stack? No, that would be ridiculous. Too many people seem to view USPSA as the only game in town. Why must you see 3 gun through the prism of USPSA? USPSA has 3 gun, try to expand it. Work within the sport you enjoy. Demanding that all 3 gun matches should be shot under rule set X is like Republicans demanding the Democrats follow the same primary election rules. Try to make USPSA 3 gun the best you can. Please stop trying to annex my game and make me follow your rules. If you think NOT having a unified set of rules is bad for a sport, trying forcible annexation.

[Blockhead]

J-Ho makes a good point. There has to be an identifiable benefit for belonging for any club or individual to voluntarily adhere to any larger community. Otherwise why would you want to put up with the inevitable challenges that come with with it? I don't think anybody should be annexed or assimilated against their wishes. When a group of people decided there were things they didn't like about USPSA and wanted to do something else they spun off as IDPA. While I don't shoot IDPA, I support their right to pursue their own way.

[M ammo]

I have a question?

What are the club affiliation dew’s for USPSA per year?

[Brazos]

The San Angelo method is hands down the best for ease of use and functionality, IMHO.

How long has the San Angelo method been in the rulebook? 2-3 years? Can you honestly say that it has been widely adopted by the clubs nationwide?

I daresay that it hasn't caught on. Nobody in So Cal is using it. Probably in all of Kalifornia only Richmond uses it. I'm sure there are a couple of clubs in Texas that use it. And maybe 5-10 or so more in other states. It doesn't strike me as being succesful.

I mean if San Angelo is the "hands down the best for ease of use and functionality" why would the BOD OK time plus?

USPSA should allow a unified power factor. A unified power factor allows MG to be scored just like a regular USPSA pistol match (with enhanced valuation on certain targets) and you are rewarding power (unlike time plus).

I never said it was widely adopted by anyone. However, if you use it you will see that it works. And it works well.

Since I am in Texas, I dont really care what they do in California (and frankly alot of whats done in California we can all do without...), but I do think that the SA method has shown remarkable growth in such a short time.

Is it easy for a novice to use? No. But I dont see many novices running 3 Gun matches either... The BOD may have blessed time plus becuase there are so many people out there that cant or wont give a little effort to understanding how to run the program. Time plus is easy. A no brainer. Maybe thats why it appeals to IDPA. (OK, sorry...but we all know its true.)

As far as RO's that cant score a stage becuase they are not Professional RO's...thats pretty lame. Take a lesson in score card writting or take a few minutes to make everyone understand how it works. If us Texas Rednecks can figure it out, the rest of the Nation shouldnt have any trouble.

For the record, I dont think anyone should be FORCED to do anything. But some ways are more right than others...

B

Edited February 16, 2008 by Brazos

[Brazos]

As far as equipment rules go...I'm in the IMGA camp there. USPSA has some work to do on that end...

I don't see it. How can you be in the IMGA camp? Each IMGA match has it's own rules. There is a lack of consistency between the matches.

Where can you wear your pistol mag pouches in Tac Iron/Scope? There is no universal rule with the IMGA based matches.

How many shells can you load in Tac Iron/Scope shotgun? Again... There is no universal rule with the IMGA based matches.

etc.

What's so great with the IMGA equipment rules? What exactly does it have over the USPSA equipment rules?

With USPSA there is one... ONE set of rules. With IMGA? How many differing equipment rules do the IMGA matches have?

Thanks for making my point for me. I dont really care where you carry your mag pouches...put them on a string around your neck or on the back of your hat, I dont give a damn and the rules shouldnt either.

IMGA rules are beauty in thier simplicity when it comes to rules. There are five or six points of eqiupment that could be easily hashed out with the shotgun capacity being the most debated. But if the rules where 9 in the gun and an MD didnt think that was fair he could stipulate only 5 or 6 or 7 or 1 loaded to start. An experienced MD can make the stage force the shooter to do what he wants him to do. If the shooter does what the MD didnt want...then he should have drawn the stage better.

How may different rules do IMGA matches have equipment wise? A few, but I've read most of them and there is very little difference between them that could'nt be accounted for by MD preference.

The difference in equipment rules at IMGA events does not bother me. I wont win or lose because my SX2 only holds 8 rounds and another guy has 9 to start. Neither will you beat me JUST because you have a Beta...bring it, I aint skeered. The scoring system will, and has, created havoc; thats the part I think we could do better.

It suprises me that some here seem to think the solution should also be easy. I dont get that (although in this case it mostly is easy...), if we are in this to please the lowest common denominator then maybe everyone should use bolt guns.

B

Edited February 16, 2008 by Brazos

[Brazos]

I have a question?

What are the club affiliation dew’s for USPSA per year?

$50

B

[Religious Shooter]

What makes you think ONE set of rules is a good idea?

I think a largely one set of EQUIPMENT rules is beneficial.

It is a lot less costly and a lot less time consuming for the active competitor to have generally the same equipment rules.

If I want to shoot HM competitively I need:

- Two sets of rifle magazines. (One set that holds only 20 and one longer set that are longer that allow me to monopod).

- Differing locations of where I can put my pistol magazines (more practice required).

- Three different pistols. (One .40 SS for SMM3G, One .45 SS for USPSA et. al, One 6" .45 for others, etc.).

- Two sets of holsters. (One race type holster with a lock. One "carry" type holster.)

Etc.

If you show/tell this to the beginning shooter that this is the current state of affairs in MG... I'm sure it will act as a deterent in him/her from joining the sport.

[ima45dv8]

It's too bad that a discussion has reached the point of taking shots at California and IDPA in a thread that was supposed to be about a common rule set for 3Gun/MultiGun matches. There are better ways to make a point.

A friendly reminder from the forum guidelines:

Posting Guidelines

Attitude

Please be polite. Or if not polite, at least respectful.

No bickering. Regardless of the subject matter.

Antagonistic, offensive, or quarrelsome tones are not acceptable.

[Religious Shooter]

Thanks for making my point for me. I dont really care where you carry your mag pouches...put them on a string around your neck or on the back of your hat, I dont give a damn and the rules shouldnt either.

The two different sets of rules care. SMM3G cares... an IMGA based match. The rule set that you prefer is inconsistent as to where you can wear pistol mag pouches.

If I shoot in Tactical/Limited in SMM3G with my pistol mag pouch in front I get bumped up into Open. If I do it in other IMGA matches it is OK.

That is flat out lame. And that is the state of IMGA based equipment rules.

IMGA rules are beauty in thier simplicity when it comes to rules. There are five or six points of eqiupment that could be easily hashed out with the shotgun capacity being the most debated. But if the rules where 9 in the gun and an MD didnt think that was fair he could stipulate only 5 or 6 or 7 or 1 loaded to start. An experienced MD can make the stage force the shooter to do what he wants him to do. If the shooter does what the MD didnt want...then he should have drawn the stage better.

Simplicity? How simple can it be if "there are five or six points of eqiupment" that differ from each IMGA match? With USPSA rules that problem doesn't exist. There is one rule set.

Yes you can read the rules. But is that really an advantage that with each IMGA based match you have to reread and refamiliarize yourself with each rule set? Vs. having only one rule set in USPSA? How about just reading and understanding the rules ONCE?

How may different rules do IMGA matches have equipment wise? A few, but I've read most of them and there is very little difference between them that could'nt be accounted for by MD preference.

That MD preference costs $$$$. That MD preference requires the competitor to practice differently from match to match. That MD preference causes the competitor to buy different guns and gear.

The difference in equipment rules at IMGA events does not bother me. I wont win or lose because my SX2 only holds 8 rounds and another guy has 9 to start. Neither will you beat me JUST because you have a Beta...bring it, I aint skeered. The scoring system will, and has, created havoc; thats the part I think we could do better.

So you think that given two shooters with like skills equipment won't matter?

It suprises me that some here seem to think the solution should also be easy. I dont get that (although in this case it mostly is easy...), if we are in this to please the lowest common denominator then maybe everyone should use bolt guns.

The solution should be EASIER. What's the point of making it hard unnecessarily?

[M ammo]

I have a question?

What are the club affiliation dew’s for USPSA per year?

$50

B

Opps,,, I lost the first draft,,, in cyber space,,,

I seem to have thought the Club dues were more that that back in the day.

I have my USPSA # and the nationals is probably the only USPSA match I will shoot this year.

As long as the rules are,, fair,, for the most part,, I’m in

I have lost to the best, before, and I will again.

[Religious Shooter]

I never said it was widely adopted by anyone. However, if you use it you will see that it works. And it works well.

It works so well and it is so easy to use that only a handful of clubs use it?

Come on. Really?

Since I am in Texas, I dont really care what they do in California (and frankly alot of whats done in California we can all do without...), but I do think that the SA method has shown remarkable growth in such a short time.

Where's the growth? Please give examples of the remarkable growth of the SA method.

Do you care what they do in Oklahoma? How about Nevada? Anybody know how many clubs there use the SA method vs. not?

I'm sorry but IMHO the SA method is a bust on the national level.

[George]

Hey Brazos, I have no issues with the CA pokin' thing (heck, I'm the one that has to live with this shjt) and think you are on the right tack with almost everything you are saying. I appreciate reason and logic drawing the conclusions even in the face of hostile fire!

BTW, we do it every which freakin' way out here and that ain't no joke

[Brazos]

It's too bad that a discussion has reached the point of taking shots at California and IDPA in a thread that was supposed to be about a common rule set for 3Gun/MultiGun matches. There are better ways to make a point.

A friendly reminder from the forum guidelines:

Posting Guidelines

Attitude

Please be polite. Or if not polite, at least respectful.

No bickering. Regardless of the subject matter.

Antagonistic, offensive, or quarrelsome tones are not acceptable.

I'm not Taking Shots. Just making observations. If I have mis-understood the rules to define opinion as purgorative, then I shall desist.

R-Shooter, re-read my posts above. Words mean things.

Secondly, I'm not going to debate you point by point because I think its clear we are coming at this from two different angles...you are focused on rules that standardize equipment (becuase you think equipment wins) and that minimizes expense for the shooter. If you are looking for a sport that wont cost much, this aint it. My point is: the rules (equipment AND scoring) should allow the best shooter to rise to the top given a set of equipment rules that are reasonable in application and that allow the shooter to solve the Stage-problem in a free-style fashion that makes the best use of his/her skills. You asked above if two like skill level shooters match up, would equipment not make the difference? Your view is that it is the best STUFF that wins...it's not. The best shooter wins. And that folks, is why we are at the match: To find the best shooter.

I'm glad we all get to shoot different matches with different rules. It adds spice to the game we would be the lessor for it if one set of rules pre-dominated.

I've never been one to sit around and make my business complaining...I prefer solutions. Not everyone feels that way, thats what makes being an MD so much fun!

B

Edited February 17, 2008 by Brazos

[George]

I've never been one to sit around and make my business complaining...I prefer solutions. Not everyone feels that way, thats what makes being an MD so much fun!

Pretty much the same reason I seem to almost prefer putting on matches to shooting them over the last couple years

[J-Ho]

What makes you think ONE set of rules is a good idea?

I think a largely one set of EQUIPMENT rules is beneficial.

It is a lot less costly and a lot less time consuming for the active competitor to have generally the same equipment rules.

If I want to shoot HM competitively I need:

- Two sets of rifle magazines. (One set that holds only 20 and one longer set that are longer that allow me to monopod).

- Differing locations of where I can put my pistol magazines (more practice required).

- Three different pistols. (One .40 SS for SMM3G, One .45 SS for USPSA et. al, One 6" .45 for others, etc.).

- Two sets of holsters. (One race type holster with a lock. One "carry" type holster.)

Etc.

If you show/tell this to the beginning shooter that this is the current state of affairs in MG... I'm sure it will act as a deterent in him/her from joining the sport.

It didn't stop me. I'm not exactly what you would call wealthy either. Wife, two kids my slightly above the national average income doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room. You complain about NEEDING different sets of equipment. None of those things look likes needs to me, more like preferences. If it simply a preference, (not to be rude) deal with it. I am not a big believer in the "need" for a silver bullet or super duper brand X gun to make me shoot better. I've won a few matches shooting about $1600 in equipment. That's all three guns mind you. Ya, I'd like a $2000 pistola, a Benny Benelli, and JP rifle but do I "need" it to be competitive? No. I shoot USPSA Limited with a IDPA holster. Do I win? I'm not sure (I don't have a classification yet) but I do just fine, I've beat friends and get beat by them. Your concern for new shooters sounds nice, but I guarantee that someone who is on a budget will be just fine shooting different rule 3 gun matches. Just remember it's a shooting sport, not an equipment collecting sport.

[Religious Shooter]

If you don't care about equipment... why are you against standardizing it?

It becomes less of a shooting sport and it becomes more an equipment sport if you have inconsistent equipment rules from match to match.

If you have ONE set of equipment rules... you only need one set of equipment. One set.

If you have multiple sets of equipment rules... you need multiple sets of equipment.

If you aren't taking advantage of the allowances that the rules give you on equipment you are not competiting at your potential.

[wgnoyes]

I'm glad to see the USPSA incorporate time-plus in the 2008 MG rules even if it is only for level 1 & 2 matches. I understand that EZ-Winscore will soon support that scoring.

I don't know how "soon" it will be (San Angelo in ezws); I think they've got other things they want to put in first, but whenever it happens, absolutely no one will welcome it more than I!

[J-Ho]

If you don't care about equipment... why are you against standardizing it?

It becomes less of a shooting sport and it becomes more an equipment sport if you have inconsistent equipment rules from match to match.

If you have ONE set of equipment rules... you only need one set of equipment. One set.

If you have multiple sets of equipment rules... you need multiple sets of equipment.

If you aren't taking advantage of the allowances that the rules give you on equipment you are not competiting at your potential.

I never said I don't care about the equipment. I'm against someone else standardizing my equipment for me.

If I beat a guy running open equipment and I shoot irons, how is this an equipment sport?

I shoot different sets of rules, with one set of equipment.

I spend less time thinking about trying to get an advantage by using the rules and more time trying to get an advantage by shooting better.

[Religious Shooter]

I never said I don't care about the equipment. I'm against someone else standardizing my equipment for me.

Didn't the guy who wrote the rules for the match you are shooting standardize your equipment for that particular match? Every time you shoot a match with rules... someone standardized your equipment.

If I beat a guy running open equipment and I shoot irons, how is this an equipment sport?

If you beat a guy running open equipment it means that skillwise you are a better shooter. Chances are that guy you beat isn't as experienced or skilled as you are.

Shoot against a guy who has the same skill level as you and is running Open equipment... who do you think is going to win? There's a reason for the different divisions. Equipment matters.

I shoot different sets of rules, with one set of equipment.

You aren't shooting to your potential if you aren't taking advantage of the rules. Will you admit that you aren't shooting to your potential given that you use only one set of equipment?

I spend less time thinking about trying to get an advantage by using the rules and more time trying to get an advantage by shooting better.

Fine. Again will you admit that you aren't shooting to your potential given that you use only one set of equipment?

All a person has to do to beat you is to use better equipment and dedicate the same (maybe even less) amount of time in practice.

[J-Ho]

I never said I don't care about the equipment. I'm against someone else standardizing my equipment for me.

Didn't the guy who wrote the rules for the match you are shooting standardize your equipment for that particular match? Every time you shoot a match with rules... someone standardized your equipment.

If I beat a guy running open equipment and I shoot irons, how is this an equipment sport?

If you beat a guy running open equipment it means that skillwise you are a better shooter. Chances are that guy you beat isn't as experienced or skilled as you are.

Shoot against a guy who has the same skill level as you and is running Open equipment... who do you think is going to win? There's a reason for the different divisions. Equipment matters.

I shoot different sets of rules, with one set of equipment.

You aren't shooting to your potential if you aren't taking advantage of the rules. Will you admit that you aren't shooting to your potential given that you use only one set of equipment?

I spend less time thinking about trying to get an advantage by using the rules and more time trying to get an advantage by shooting better.

Fine. Again will you admit that you aren't shooting to your potential given that you use only one set of equipment?

All a person has to do to beat you is to use better equipment and dedicate the same (maybe even less) amount of time in practice.

I'll admit I may not be playing the game as well as I could, but the shooting is a different story. I go to shoot, winning is nice, but shooting better than I did last week is better. I'd rather be a good shooter than a good competitor. I'm not putting down those who like to play the game just to win, I'm just stating my preference. I go to matches to learn how to shoot. I'm too new at this to worry about tiptoeing along the boundry lines of the rules.

As to your other points there is one thing they have in common. Choice. I choose to go to a match. I choose not to go to a match. I choose where I put my mags. I choose what type of holster to wear. If I don't like the rules of a certain match, I don't whine about it, I go to a different match.

Insisting that EVERYBODY do things one way is ridiculous. Just like I said before, If you like USPSA rules, or some other set, promote those rules WITHIN that organization. Try to make your group bigger and dominant by gaining members. If you get enough people to play your way, great. I'm assuming you favor USPSA rules. Great. I heard the nationals was wonderful. convince more people to go. Take shooters to area USPSA multi gun matches. But do not go to a "outlaw" match and tell them they are doing it wrong. If they ask, tell them what you think should be different. We want to grow 3 gun, not put a leash on the matches that you don't like. Personally I'd love to see more USPSA matches. I don't know why there aren't more. I'd also love to see more iron sight shooters, but I'm never going to say that a certain number of shooters in a match has to shoot irons.

You seem to be too wrapped up in what other people are doing. You keep wanting me to "admit" I could shoot better if I did things a certain way. ya I could. There is always room for improvement. I know you want things to be done your way, we all do. The difference is MY way involves leaving me alone. YOUR way involves not leaving me alone. Reverse our positions. Which of these sounds better to you?

Forcing your will on others is not the way to get things done. It has a VERY bad track record on this continent.

[SinistralRifleman]

The Free Market will sort all this stuff out. Matches are a product. If you don't like what a particular club/organization/MD is selling spend your money elsewhere. Or take the initiative and get something started that is to your liking. If there is a match that you've been attending and decide to stop because the rules aren't to your liking make sure they know why.

Funny, the parallels I see in this debate and various political issues I actively work on. An organization can't solve your problems, it's up to individuals to take action and effect change themselves.

I wanted a new division created at some of the matches I go to...so I made it happen

There wasn't a rifle only competition locally...so I made it happen (only once a year, but still)

anyone with the time/motivation can do the same kind of things...

[George]

There wasn't a rifle only competition locally...so I made it happen (only once a year, but still)

Hey, same here.

As a news reporter out here usta' say "If you don't like the news, go out and make some of your own"

[Religious Shooter]

You seem to be too wrapped up in what other people are doing.... The difference is MY way involves leaving me alone. YOUR way involves not leaving me alone. Reverse our positions. Which of these sounds better to you?

You know... I could care less what other people do. Do whatever.

But what I don't you think you realize is what the inconsistent rule set is causing the people with my mindset to do. In order to fully compete I truly believe that you need the equipment that takes full advantage of the rules.

With the current rules in order to be fully competitive you are "forcing" me to buy more equipment. If there was a larger consensus on the equipment rules I wouldn't have to buy all this extra stuff.

As far as I'm reading you would largely be unaffected by more common equipment rules. Currently you only shoot one set of equipment. Now in a material sense how is that gonna change if the equipment rules become more uniform? How about absolutely squat?

Forcing your will on others is not the way to get things done. It has a VERY bad track record on this continent.

Are you serious? Nobody is gonna force their will on anybody. I don't see how that's even possible.

What I am doing is offering an opinion. That's it. Nobody here is forcing anybody to do anything.

Insisting that EVERYBODY do things one way is ridiculous.

I am not insisting that "everybody" do things one way. If there is a point to it... go ahead be different.

[Religious Shooter]

I'm not Taking Shots. Just making observations. If I have mis-understood the rules to define opinion as purgorative, then I shall desist...

R-Shooter, re-read my posts above. Words mean things.

So you are not taking shots? So I guess you are not indirectly calling me stupid by writing "words mean things"?

You asked above if two like skill level shooters match up, would equipment not make the difference? Your view is that it is the best STUFF that wins...it's not. The best shooter wins. And that folks, is why we are at the match: To find the best shooter.

?????

Both shooters are at the same skill level. They have the same draw and transition speed. They have the same athletic ability. Skilllwise they are equal. If you gave them the same equipment... they tie.

Then you give one of the shooters better "STUFF". And that one shooter wins.

"The best shooter wins?" No, because the shooters are the same. The equipment is different. Since the shooters are the same... the shooter with the better equipment wins. He/she wins because of the equipment. Not because he/she is a better shooter its because the shooters are the same.

1+.1>1

My point is: the rules (equipment AND scoring) should allow the best shooter to rise to the top given a set of equipment rules that are reasonable in application and that allow the shooter to solve the Stage-problem in a free-style fashion that makes the best use of his/her skills.

Why are you making this point? Are you saying that one of the rule sets doesn't allow this?

If you are looking for a sport that wont cost much, this aint it.

For the most part I've already spent the $$$. What I am looking for is to allow the sport to grow by making it less expensive (and therefore more attractive) for newer and future shooters. The sport is easier to "sell" if the equipment rules was more uniform.