3gun or multi gun?

[Scout454]

Jack -

Blue Ridge did it in Virginia this year and Andy will do it again next year in Kentucky.

[Jack T]

Jack -

Blue Ridge did it in Virginia this year and Andy will do it again next year in Kentucky.

I'll be ready. My long range rifle keeps me out of contention, but that KirkM guy gave me some pointers, so I should be more competetive now.

Jack T.

[M ammo]

MULTIGUN format!!! 3 gun is outdated.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

I hope I get it.

I think of it as, any run and gun that has, more than a pistol. with practical action shooting rules.

call it what you will.

Jim M ammo

[mwx40x40]

I like both, but Multi-Gun definitely brings on more Saftey issues and to be done right usually requires more than one or two RO's to keep an eye on hot weapons left unattended. Also stage designs require a little more attention to detail to keep grounded weapons out of the line of sight and in safe condition.

[Benelli Chick]

MultiGun but call it 3-Gun!

It's a lot of extra equipment, but it's my favorite kind of shooting.

Yes, time and loading has to be considered in course design. The shotgun can be preloaded. The other two guns load quickly. IF you're staging guns a distance, you need to have targets that are easy to score and reset. As stage designers, you just have to keep a balance. The same goes for the whole match. KURT (I spelled it right!) is right. You need a balance of stages. I love a good 3-Gun stage, but I also really enjoyed our long rifle-only stage and the crazy flying birds, shotgun-only stage at Rocky Mountain.

In a whole match, you can have a long stage if you bracket it with shorter stages. When I say long and short, I mean turn around time, not shooting time. That's one of the things you have to take into consideration. But, honestly, if you've never shot a multigun stage, you need to. It can be so fun! (That is if stage design is interesting!) IT seems complicated, with this gun up and down stuff, but with some thought, it goes a lot better than you think! It adds another dimension to the game! And while I'm sure a true 3-Gun Tournament match is fun (afterall, it's shooting) there's nothing more fun than a Multigun match! (With good stages and choices!!)

Just my .02! And I'm so proud of JJ for sensoring himself!

Denise

Edited October 11, 2008 by Benelli Chick

[Truegent2004]

I like 3 gun. As an RO having to stage and clear 2-3 guns a stage can cause delay issues and I dont think MG addds that much fun. I do like IMG scoring though, its so simple....netralized or not neutralized.

[wide45]

90% of the multigun stages I see, suck.

[Benelli Chick]

90% of the multigun stages I see, suck.

You need to go to some different matches!

Edited because I was too grumpy!

Edited October 11, 2008 by Benelli Chick

[M ammo]

Thinking about practical in 3 Gun.

I have a hard time, making up stages that are practical to go from a long gun to a pistol.

If you run out of long gun Ammo, or the gun jambs or, all out fails, you have a practical reason to change a gun in the middle of a stage.

I have made up all kinds of stages, some of them just to do a transition, because our traveling 3 Gunners will see it sooner or later and I want them to have a chance to do it at a local match.

My mind set, in many transitions is to go from pistol, to a long gun.

Or after you run a long gun dry, you have the opportunity to decide to re-load that long gun or draw the pistol.

Then you can work your personal strength and also asses the stage to decide what gun best suits the shooting problem.

[J-Ho]

Here's the way I see it. I don't care if you call it multi gun or 3gun. I like 3gun because it has fewer syllables. It the match involves rifle pistol and shotgun, I'll probably enjoy it. I personally like using as many guns as possible in a stage, and having the choice to engage some targets with whatever gun I want. ( Johnson 3gun anybody?) If someone has a match that is run well and the stages are challenging but still fun I don't think it matters if you use one gun or three on a stage.

[lmccrock]

More than one gun per stage is more fun than one gun per stage. From a "practical" standpoint, it does represent a broken/empty primary with transition to secondary. USPSA will never do it, but there are matches which expect a shooter to hang onto the long gun (Gasp! A sling! ).

Lee

[Jim Norman]

For the record, I like Multi-Gun. BUT two guns max on a stage, Unless it is either a recover and retreat or a door breech. Generally 3 guns on a stage will screw up the flow.

Usually one should start with long gun if one is starting 'armed' but if one is say 'at rest' then starting with handgun and fighting to the long gun is correct.

A "Multi-Gun" (this term seems to have come into use ONLY since USPSA has started using it) should be somewhat physical in its stages, not overly so bu enough to make it raise your pulse and maybe get you flushed at the end of a stage.

For a real challenge, Trooper Class. Carry it ALL, All DAY!

Jim

[LChico]

I voted for Multi Gun, because it gives you the most choices and options. As pointed out, it is not unusual to have a single gun stage or two in a multi-gun match. And some two gun stages and a few 3 gun stages. You also can allow shooters the option of engaging an array or two of targets with the weapon of their choice. I love it when there are lots of options and lots of room for creative stage design.

But if you do a 3 gun aggregate match, you cannot use more than one gun per stage and you cannot decide to shoot the close targets on a short range rifle stages with your pistol. Of course, you can have great, creative stages that are fun to shoot for each of the individual guns. But, as noted earlier, you can include those in a multi gun match, too.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

2008 Ft Benning Statistician

[Blockhead]

I enjoy a match with a balanced multigun format as suggested by several previous posts. There's no question that 2 or more guns on a COF will add complexity for the RO's. The complexity can be mitigated with good planning and stage design. Same with the recycle time. Clearing abandoned guns by an RO (while the shooter is still working the stage down range) can be done safely provided the stage design provides for it, thus allowing targets to be scored/reset more quickly.

This is a good poll 'cause it brings definition to the discussion. A lot of guys out west that don't shoot anything but Multigun aren't aware that there are still matches out there that only run 1 gun per stage in the whole match (I spoke with one today). I gather it's been the topic of some discussion within the USPSA BoD. Hopefully, this string will flush out some usefull feedback.

Edited October 12, 2008 by Blockhead

[duncan]

The ONE time we did a multi gun stage after our usuall 5 stages of handgun was a nightmare. Safety concerns (clearing guns) took forever. We were tearing down well after dark.

This was only 1 stage of 8 hangun-6 shotgun & 24 rifle rounds. If you had 3-4 multi gun stages and 30-40 people, it would take a loooong time.

[lmccrock]

This was only 1 stage of 8 hangun-6 shotgun & 24 rifle rounds. If you had 3-4 multi gun stages and 30-40 people, it would take a loooong time.

Not if there are appropriate staging and clearing areas. Take longer than pistol only? Yes. Extra precautions? Yes.

Lee

[rschoon]

I think 3-gun (1 gun per stage) is a great way for the newer shooter to "get thier feet wet" in this sport. My 10 year old had less to think about as far as what to do next during a stage.

He also shot our multi gun match and did well from the previous "practice" match. USPSA in my humble opinion should consider sponsering both types of matches. They would need to use winscore on the single gun per stage match and perhaps Horner (or another) scoring method for multi guns on each stage in a match.

I personally enjoy multigun format. MGM (time plus), R&R (Horner). I am not sure which scoring system I prefer as they have different strengths.

[Wakal]

Multigun doesn't mean that you have to use all three guns on all stages...as a stage designer, I like being able to pick and choose between all available combinations and permutations of weapons. As a shooter, I like being able to pick my platform according to the stage design.

The folks in Tiger Valley, for example, usually set their stages up so that the competitor (within reason, no rifle on short range steel or pistol on 300 yard paper, for example) can pick the weapon that they want to use to solve the shooting challenge. And of course, the pistol should always be allowed in case the rifle or shotgun goes down

3-Gun...feh. You can shoot 3-gun under multigun rules, but the reverse is not true.

Alex

[jbullgpd]

I like the combo of the two but since I had to pick one over the other I voted for multigun. I like the matches that have both. Like usually 1 stage single for each gun, then a combo of double gun stages and triple gun stages. i like the mix. But a total match of just one gun per stage I don't like. Now for a local match sometimes a range won't allow or accommodate a multiple gun stage so I know my local club only does 3 gun. But when I go to a match I want multigun. I like the transitions, the ability in some matches to choose which gun on what targets, and a guy who is say only a good pistol shooter cant dominate multiple stages. You have to bring your whole game to a multigun....... just my 2 cents...

[Jaxshooter]

In my opinion USPSA should have put thier resources toward multigun due to the potential number of matches annually including Section , Area and Nationals and passed on the SC which is not as broad based for potential members or income.

This is not a political staement and please do not reply in that vain. You should just become the best at what you are already doing before branching out in other areas. So how can we improve to draw like the outlaw matches?

[mactiger]

One thing to consider is that under the current USPSA rules, if you run a traditional "3-Gun", that is, one gun per stage, then you are actually running a tournament. Not so if you do it as a multigun--then it's only a match. Semantics, I know, but the scoring is dramatically different for a 3-Gun tournament.

That said, I like the "multigun". We (USPSA) need to adapt a different scoring system for it, and train people in it's use. We also need to take some advice and learn from other successful matches. I don't like the term "outlaw"--what are they outlawed from? USPSA doesn't own exclusive rights to shooting sports, so other people can run matches the way they want. If they refer to our safety rules, well, good for them, because I think we have some good basic safety rules in place. The rules about switching guns, and what condition they are in could stand to be re-examined, IMO, but our basic safety rules are sound.

I don't think USPSA should abandon long gun shooting at all. There are plenty of "practical" uses for a rifle or shotgun, and we should continue to promote them. We just need to do a (way) better job at organizing and operating the matches.

Troy

[Merlin Orr]

One thing to consider is that under the current USPSA rules, if you run a traditional "3-Gun", that is, one gun per stage, then you are actually running a tournament. Not so if you do it as a multigun--then it's only a match. Semantics, I know, but the scoring is dramatically different for a 3-Gun tournament.

That said, I like the "multigun". We (USPSA) need to adapt a different scoring system for it, and train people in it's use. We also need to take some advice and learn from other successful matches. I don't like the term "outlaw"--what are they outlawed from? USPSA doesn't own exclusive rights to shooting sports, so other people can run matches the way they want. If they refer to our safety rules, well, good for them, because I think we have some good basic safety rules in place. The rules about switching guns, and what condition they are in could stand to be re-examined, IMO, but our basic safety rules are sound.

I don't think USPSA should abandon long gun shooting at all. There are plenty of "practical" uses for a rifle or shotgun, and we should continue to promote them. We just need to do a (way) better job at organizing and operating the matches.

Troy

To you, Sir.

[Jack T]

One thing to consider is that under the current USPSA rules, if you run a traditional "3-Gun", that is, one gun per stage, then you are actually running a tournament. Not so if you do it as a multigun--then it's only a match. Semantics, I know, but the scoring is dramatically different for a 3-Gun tournament.

That said, I like the "multigun". We (USPSA) need to adapt a different scoring system for it, and train people in it's use. We also need to take some advice and learn from other successful matches. I don't like the term "outlaw"--what are they outlawed from? USPSA doesn't own exclusive rights to shooting sports, so other people can run matches the way they want. If they refer to our safety rules, well, good for them, because I think we have some good basic safety rules in place. The rules about switching guns, and what condition they are in could stand to be re-examined, IMO, but our basic safety rules are sound.

I don't think USPSA should abandon long gun shooting at all. There are plenty of "practical" uses for a rifle or shotgun, and we should continue to promote them. We just need to do a (way) better job at organizing and operating the matches.

Troy

Thank you Troy!! Good to see we have some reputable (?) people (Troy M., Alan M., and Chris E.) who have influence with the powers that be taking an active interest. Lots of good things about USPSA Multigun, 3-Gun etc., but the few that need fixin have really come to the forefront. Let's get it right. USPSA owes it to the members to put on a Multigun/3-Gun Nationals of the same quality/attention as the Handgun Nationals and nothing less!!

Jack T.

Edited October 13, 2008 by Jack T

[Stony Lane]

Although some shooters may prefer either multi-gun or 3-gun, wouldn't the actual physical range conditions often dictate which format can best be held? The various range facilties will determine the match format in many cases. Why not allow flexibility for each club/range to adjust the match to fit the facility. More clubs could then host 3-gun/multi-gun matches.

[mactiger]

Although some shooters may prefer either multi-gun or 3-gun, wouldn't the actual physical range conditions often dictate which format can best be held? The various range facilties will determine the match format in many cases. Why not allow flexibility for each club/range to adjust the match to fit the facility. More clubs could then host 3-gun/multi-gun matches.

You are correct, but USPSA doesn't dictate what kind of event is held--the choice is up to the organizers. They can choose to shoot straight 3-gun, or decide on multigun. Or, pick a combo of their liking.

Troy