3gun or multi gun?

[chendersby]

Should USPSA drop multigun and go with traditional 3gun and why?

[vsound]

Based on the comments in the other threads, I don't think the difference between 3 gun and multigun is really a significant issue. Match organization, USPSA support, and inconsistencies in the running of a match are more at issue. I realize 3 gun vs. multigun affects the scoring, but it seems the bigger picture seems to be the whole scoring system, not just whether to do it as 3 gun or multigun.

[norbs007]

Based on the comments in the other threads, I don't think the difference between 3 gun and multigun is really a significant issue. Match organization, USPSA support, and inconsistencies in the running of a match are more at issue. I realize 3 gun vs. multigun affects the scoring, but it seems the bigger picture seems to be the whole scoring system, not just whether to do it as 3 gun or multigun.

What he said.

[NMBOpen]

Can someone provide a brief description of the difference so there can be a more accurate poll?

[Alan Meek]

Chris,

I feel that both should be an option for Match/Organizers to use.

Alan

[StealthyBlagga]

Definitions;

3-Gun: Practical shooting competition where the individual stages require only 1 gun (rifle, pistol or shotgun).

MultiGun: Practical shooting competition where the individual stages MAY require up to 3 guns (rifle, pistol and/or shotgun), with safe transitions required between guns.

I am just generally a fan of 3-gun over multigun, as (IMHO) it simplifies the stages and allows the match director to run a more interesting and satisfying match within any given time, facaility and resource constraints. With my shooter hat on, I like that I don't have to schlep so much stuff to the line. With my RO hat on, I like the simplicity of only having to manage one gun. The perceived value of transitions will vary from shooter to shooter - for me, I can live without them quite happily. I would really prefer to see more 3-gun matches and less multigun, but thats just a personal thing. Come to think of it, I would like to see more 1-gun matches (just rifle, just shotgun etc.), again to reduce the amount of crap I have to bring, and to lower the barriers to entry for new shooters.

Edited October 10, 2008 by StealthyBlagga

[vsound]

Can someone provide a brief description of the difference so there can be a more accurate poll?

3 gun means that each stage is just one gun of the three (e.g. rifle only stage, pistol only stage, shotgun only stage). Multigun can use multiple guns on one stage.

I much prefer the challenge of having to move from one gun to another within a stage.

[Merlin Orr]

Can someone provide a brief description of the difference so there can be a more accurate poll?

3 gun means that each stage is just one gun of the three (e.g. rifle only stage, pistol only stage, shotgun only stage). Multigun can use multiple guns on one stage.

I much prefer the challenge of having to move from one gun to another within a stage.

Ahhhhh..... Not. At least not in any of the matches I have attended that have "3 Gun" in the titles... Which include just about all of the "majors" that are not USPSA.

[StealthyBlagga]

Ahhhhh..... Not. At least not in any of the matches I have attended that have "3 Gun" in the titles... Which include just about all of the "majors" that are not USPSA.

Maybe, but thats more of a semantic argument... match directors can call their matches whetever they believe sounds sexy. I think the definitions given above accurately reflect the distinction between "3-gun" and "multigun" as most understand it.

[TRUBL]

The ONE thing that multigun can offer over 3 gun is the ability for the MD's to allow a shooter in some cases, use the weapon he/she wants to use. In other words, a course of fire may allow you to take some of the targets with any one of the 3 weapons....depending on YOUR individual strengths. (JJ did a great job of this at the 2008 RM3g)

Otherwise, really, to go from one gun to another at a predetermined spot in the course of fire...........then it is kind of the same as a traditional 3 gun.

So.....this all being said, I would much rather see USPSA go into the IMGA format. Then they can actually do multi gun the way it can be done. Otherwise, they should probably just stay with 3 gun. Weapon choice with san angelo scoring would really tax the score keepers and the RO's

Tim

Edited October 10, 2008 by TRUBL

[NMBOpen]

Hard to have a meaningful poll when there is apparent disagreement on the definition, or some MD's interpretation of it. Maybe that confusion is the root of the issue. As a newcomer to the rifle/shotgun world, the 3-Gun format would be a simpler entry point than multi-gun, along with the reasoning of StealthyBlagga.

[ShooterSteve]

I much prefer "multigun matches". If you are "schlepping" this stuff around all day anyway, then lets friggin shoot it!! I didn't dump this much money into my weapons just to shoot one of them!! Yes it takes more time per stage, yes it is more for the RO to keep up with, but so be it. I think it adds more to the stage to shoot one platform over here, and then grab a different gun and continue on. Some of the most challenging stuff you can do is shoot as hard as you can with a pistol for thirty seconds and then grab your fifle for some long range stuff, and you are sucking wind and your heart is beating like it will bust out of your chest and you still have to do the best you can do. It is just more challenging. Yea I know you could do that with rifle only, but it's just more fun with multigun. Isn't that why we do this stuff? Don't we spend all of this money so we can go have fun? That is the bottom line, and to restrict weapon use is, well, less fun. Let's go shoot, and I want to shoot as much as we can.

[RiggerJJ]

MULTIGUN format!!! 3 gun is outdated.

(and yes, most if not all of the outlaw matches call it 3gun, but they use the multigun format!)

jj

[TRUBL]

MULTIGUN format!!!

jj

BULL!!!!!....you know you hate that word!!! Talk about taking something out of context!!! I should go work for MSNBC.

Edited October 10, 2008 by TRUBL

[Scout454]

3 Gun used two or more firearms on every stage long before USPSA coined the term Multigun.

The USPSA 3 Gun format mirrors IPSC. A separate Rifle, Handgun and Shotgun match with combined overall scoring.

Traditional 3 Gun (Multigun) beats the bejesus out of that.

[Merlin Orr]

OK... It looks like it is a "semantic argument" in 3 Gun vs Multigun.... If StealthyBlagga's point is actually valid (and it looks to be) what has meant one thing to me obviously means something different to others.

Per RiggerJJ, what is 3 Gun to me is, I guess, actually Multigun in ( my newly defined) reality.

Edit to add. I have always associated the term Multigun to USPSA matches.

What now? USPSA Multigun format vs "Outlaw" style format Multigun Matches? Is this terminology better?

Edited October 10, 2008 by Merlin Orr

[Chuck Anderson]

I think what Chris was going for with the poll is whether or not USPSA should stick with the current multigun rules that allow multiple guns on a similar stage, and that there are no separate Pistol, Rifle and Shotgun Matches contained within the National match. A current multigun match under USPSA format may use any number of guns on any number of stages. You could have 9 3-Gun stages, or 3 3-gun and a bunch of 2-Gun, or really whatever format the MD wants. Under the old rules it was one gun, one stage. For example, the same 9 stage match would be 3 pistol, 3 shotgun and 3 rifle stages. Seems like an awful lot of gear to schlepp for 3 stages. I also seem to remember a transition year in Vegas where they had a couple of stages with two guns, for example pistol/rifle. The stage would be scored as either a pistol or a rifle stage.

Sorry this was boring as crap for the few matches that I shot. I think part of the problem comes when stage designers decide they have to use every gun on every stage. Have a high round count rifle stage by itself. Or a long shotgun stage. Don't make every stage 8 rounds of this, then 8 rounds of that, then 8 rounds of the other. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[RiggerJJ]

MULTIGUN format!!!

jj

BULL!!!!!....you know you hate that word!!! Talk about taking something out of context!!! I should go work for MSNBC.

Yea, I hate the word "Multigun" I think its g... ummm well, I better be careful, Kelly is watching me...

Yes, the format is what Chris is asking about. 3 gun format is outdated and boring (one gun per stage). multigun format is what most matches use now (any combo of guns in a stage allowed, even more than 3!). the best is choice stages in multigun format that allows even shooting some target with different guns...example is a shotgun/pistol stage with some clay birds that are manditory shotgun, some paper targets that are manditory pistol, and some steel targets that can be shot with either or both.

RM3G will ALWAYS call it 3 gun! (even thou we use the multigun-choice format)

jj

[ShooterSteve]

For those of you who went to Ft Benning last year, remember that there were several stages that were one gun only, for example the pistol only tunnel rat-very creative, the rifle only sniper stage-what a ton of fun!, and the famous john boat for shotgun only-it was a hoot!, but the rest of the match was multigun. It was a fantastic match, so much fun and challenging, a great blend of shooting. The difference is if you go to a match and they say these three are rifle only, and these three are shotgun only....well, that is not going to be as fun. I'm a dedicated USPSA pistol shooter, but the USPSA should look around at the BEST matches and see what the shooters want and go there. It took them a long time to realize that their old set up of only open and limited was costing them shooters. When they went back and added production and revolver, and then single stack, it opened the doors for lots of new people to shoot affordably, but, they lost a ton of people before they saw the light. LOOK at the big matches. LOOK at a match that sells out 200 slots in less than a second. It isn't to hard to see what the shooters want. Ok, I'm off my soapbox.

[kellyn]

I prefer that most stages be one gun oriented with a few multigun stages to spice things up. Too much multigun slows the match down plus it increases the chances for DQs.

[uscbigdawg]

Chris,

I'm a fan of either as I think they allow the opportunity to test different skills with each platform. If USPSA is going to stick with EZWinScore and be consistent with all things IPSC, then USPSA should probably stick with 3-Gun.

If however USPSA really wants to stay in the Multi-Gun business, then frankly, there should be a different and more simplified scoring system (and I don't care which one).

All of this is given that USPSA wants to do one or the other. However, MD's should have the option...again, given a more simplified scoring system is developed or recognized.

Rich

Edited October 10, 2008 by uscbigdawg

[kurtm]

The quick answer is ...who cares what USPSA does, with 6 outstanding LARGE "outlaw" matches per year, USPSA can do what ever they want. I will give you a little secret however...When we planed S.O.F. and RM3G we always planed on two rifle only, one shotgun only, and one pistol only and the other 4 stages a combo, but only ONE all 3. It Kept the match moving and "spiced it up enough". It was always a good mix...but don't tell USPSA...they do things their own way KurtM

[Big Bore]

I think its OK to have some "one" gun stages.

But I like to see 2 if not all 3 guns per stage

[bigbrowndog]

one of the things that is rarely taken into consideration, or so it seems. is reset time for a stage, with a lot of stages using all 3 guns, that can take a lot of reset time, especially when you have people that are not comfortable with guns being cleared while the stage is still being shot. Also the amount of targets generally needed for 2 or 3 guns is greater and so reset time again takes longer, far too often I've seen 20-30-40 targets per stage just to bump up the round count with no regard given to the amount of time it takes to tape and score them.

A mix of 1, 2, or 3 gun stages in a match makes for a good flow of competitors throughout the match, with few to no hold ups or down time.

Trapr

[Jack T]

I prefer that most stages be one gun oriented with a few multigun stages to spice things up. Too much multigun slows the match down plus it increases the chances for DQs.

You got it!! Throw in some stages with a practical Long gun to Handgun transitions and go for it. That first "Multigun in Reno" was a fricking nightmare. I want to shoot not stand arround all day waiting to clear weapons and stage weapons.

I just don't get this three guns on one stage or the practicality of it.

I have the most fun at a typical one gun per stage format. I spent a career in the profession of bearing arms and see this as a sport not a wannabee a gun guy kinda thing. Multigun appears to be more of a paramilitary sport. If I shoot a "Multigun" match, I want to be physically challenged by long movements, obstacles, terrain, etc. Don't do it half ass!!

Most of our venues don't lend itself to the open terrain and such. I watched that RM3G video with Horner and company and I was totally stoked!!! Now where else are you going to be able to do that? Definitely not anywere I have ever shot lately.

Answer: USPSA should stick with single gun stage formats or what they refer to as 3-Gun Format. The rules and venues don't lend themselves to the "Multigun" format.

Now if Kyle Lamb does another 3-Gun, I will definitly be there for that one. Kept having to cancel out because of taskings.

Jack T

Edited October 11, 2008 by Jack T