P.E. Kelley Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 http://ipsc.invisionzone.com/index.php?sho...ic=7028&hl= I think the link works if you are registered. Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 http://ipsc.invisionzone.com/index.php?sho...ic=7028&hl=I think the link works if you are registered. Patrick Interesting, especially for all the poo poing that has been done in the past when a few Regions tried to get a Single Stack Division. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lugnut Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I'm not registered.. any hints? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I'm not registered.. any hints? Nope, it is pretty vague Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Well, Uncle Vinny did use the word "innovative" and says it will make the SS competitive.... Hmmmm... WTF is going on here...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Well, Uncle Vinny did use the word "innovative" and says it will make the SS competitive.... Hmmmm... WTF is going on here...? Boy if those words don't worry me. lol lol Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slabbie Shooter Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 DOH allowed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 can we be a little less cryptic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 can we be a little less cryptic? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffwalsh Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I signed up for the Extreme Euro Open in the Czech Republic in June and single stack is a stand alone division. There are 11 shooters signed up. Check it out.... EEO shooters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Well, Uncle Vinny did use the word "innovative" and says it will make the SS competitive.... Hmmmm... WTF is going on here...? The only thing I can think of is that it has something to do with the scoring system to make SS's competitive. 1 shot per target? Highest score per target counts (AC=AA, CD=CC)? My guess is as good as anyone's, but I like to guess so I post it anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Guessing..could be fun. How about an "alibi"...for gun malfunctions. Is IPSC still at 9 rounds max per position ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Guessing..could be fun. How about an "alibi"...for gun malfunctions. Is IPSC still at 9 rounds max per position ? Yes still 9 rounds. Both Single Stacks and 8-shot revolvers could play better @ 8 rounds per array. But that might be something Flex, IPSC going to 8 rounds. I'd like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 How about this: Maximum required shots per position does not mean you have to have that number just that you cannot require more. SS as a stand alone division, gee, sort of like all the other divisions, really, Open and limited are not scored together, why would we think that SS would be scored together with another division. SS is 'Competitive" if you don't try to run it in standard or Limited. I am surprised that IPSC is or may be proposing a division that has a round count limit. That was always one of Mr. Pintos arguments re USPSA Production. He didn't want to set a limit in any divisoin since somegovernment somewhere would decree that if you only needed X to shoot a division, why did you need more to shoot any division. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 How about this:Maximum required shots per position does not mean you have to have that number just that you cannot require more. SS as a stand alone division, gee, sort of like all the other divisions, really, Open and limited are not scored together, why would we think that SS would be scored together with another division. SS is 'Competitive" if you don't try to run it in standard or Limited. I am surprised that IPSC is or may be proposing a division that has a round count limit. That was always one of Mr. Pintos arguments re USPSA Production. He didn't want to set a limit in any divisoin since somegovernment somewhere would decree that if you only needed X to shoot a division, why did you need more to shoot any division. Jim IPSC has been looking at making a 15 round count limit in production Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 How about this:SS is 'Competitive" if you don't try to run it in standard or Limited. I am surprised that IPSC is or may be proposing a division that has a round count limit. IPSC has been looking at making a 15 round count limit in production IPSC tosses around a variety of PD mag cap limits, but with the exception of Revolver (already capped at 6, has been forever), any proposal along those lines is met with a lot of resistance. The byzantine mag rules in IPSC may break the camel's back someday, but not anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caps Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 I am surprised that IPSC is or may be proposing a division that has a round count limit. That was always one of Mr. Pintos arguments re USPSA Production. He didn't want to set a limit in any divisoin since somegovernment somewhere would decree that if you only needed X to shoot a division, why did you need more to shoot any division. You must be confusing your old pal with another Mr. Pinto - the one running the Global Village has been plugging for a 15 round limit for ages. It's other people who've been arguing about Governments adopting tougher capacity rules based on IPSC rules. The SS "teaser" is interesting though. The question is will their plan be "shock & awe" or "shockingly awful"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary1911A1 Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Well, Uncle Vinny did use the word "innovative" and says it will make the SS competitive.... Hmmmm... WTF is going on here...? The only thing I can think of is that it has something to do with the scoring system to make SS's competitive. 1 shot per target? Highest score per target counts (AC=AA, CD=CC)? My guess is as good as anyone's, but I like to guess so I post it anyway Sounds like the old Paladin concept that Rick Miller tried to get off the ground years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIIID Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Just a guess, IPSC SS Div. will not be compatible with USPSA SS Div. Like no box, no weight limit,no mag limit, equipment placed any where........................ Anything that will cause confussion between the two. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Just a guess, IPSC SS Div. will not be compatible with USPSA SS Div. Like no box, no weight limit,no mag limit, equipment placed any where........................Anything that will cause confussion between the two. Rich That is what I've been thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Capizzo Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Just a guess, IPSC SS Div. will not be compatible with USPSA SS Div. Like no box, no weight limit,no mag limit, equipment placed any where........................Anything that will cause confussion between the two. Rich Yes, its the line about "we try to innovate, not copy" that worries me. Heaven forbid either group copies the other one. Why would anyone copy something that already in place and successful? As I say at work, "we need to quit 'improving' things, its killing me". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Just a guess, IPSC SS Div. will not be compatible with USPSA SS Div. Like no box, no weight limit,no mag limit, equipment placed any where........................Anything that will cause confussion between the two. Rich I doubt that. I think both USPSA and IPSC have learned that discrepancies between the rules work for no one. Might be wishful thinking though. IMO (as a European IPSC shooter) I think IPSC should look closely (equipment-wise) at the USPSA division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 My guess, and it is only that, would be that they would try to do something logical with single stack. Like making it a division for single stacks, not just 1911's. Since there are a lot of countries involved in IPSC, many of them do not have the heritage with the 1911 that the US does. However the HK P7M8, Sig 220, S&W 4506, 3913 etc. could make good guns for competition, especially for folks with smaller hands. Maybe innovative could mean actually allowing the majority of single stacks types into the division called single stack instead of picking one arbitrary set of rules and saying the 1911 is the only way to go. 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