Limited 10 Vs Limited

[Vince Pinto]

EricW,

Sorry for the slow response, but I really can't comment for the time being about the situation in Australia, other than to say that nothing is absolutely final yet. There's a glimmer of hope that things will not go the "worst case" scenario, and there is a first-class team of highly motivated and dedicated people dealing with matters.

Lynn,

I have Kevlar knickers - my big concern, due to my advancing years, is where can I get Adult Diapers made of Kevlar ?

[Steve Anderson]

I feel compelled to remind everyone of TGO's lim-10 victory last year with a SS gun.

If you don't believe you can beat a widebody in lim 10, you're absolutely right.

If you believe it can be done, you're absolutely right.

If you prefer a SS gun in lim 10, put a fat honkin' magwell on there and go get 'em.

No reason to make the widebody boys buy a new gun to shoot the factory gun nationals.

SA

[bgary]

I'll add my (totally unsolicited) two cents.

This thread, as well as the one about the USPSA Presidential candidates, are circling around the question of whether or not we have too many divisions.

I think we do. I also think that anyone who has run a club match, and given out mostly 1st-place pins to all 15 shooters who attended, would agree.

OK. [thud]

So, what do we do about it? How could we compress the divisions in a way that makes sense, and does NOT adversely affect shooters or their equipment investments.

My thought - first spouted several years ago, and again every chance I get - is that we should have three divisions.

-- Open (modifications allowed, comps and dots)

-- Limited , or Standard if you prefer (modifications allowed, no comps, no dots)

-- Production (DA first shot, no modifications - factory stock configuration, some trigger work allowed)

What do we do with all the other variations?

In my opinion, we make them categories *within* the divisions.

For example, if a match wants to recognize a "reduced capacity" category within Open or Limited, they could. They could give as many awards as they want to Open-10 or Limited-10 shooters, in addition to the unrestricted Open and Limited shooters, at their discretion.

Similarly, you could shoot a revolver in Open ("Open-Revolver", 8 rounds, comps and dots if you want), or shoot a revolver in Limited (modified, but no comp or dot) or Production (factory stock), your choice.

And, there may be other categories that might deserve recognition, as well. For example, there might be a category for recognizing single-stack guns as a category, within either Open or Limited. Want to dust off that state-of-the-art-in-1987 comped single-stack .45? Well, if there are enough of you out there to qualify as a category, you could have your own match-within-a-match within the Open division. (and, parenthetically, if there are not enough single stacks - or whatever - in a match to qualify as a category, why *should* the match recognize them with an award?)

And, that's the crux of it. This approach would simplify the divisions that a match *HAS* to recognize, while putting all the variations under a structure that is consistent with other categories. If there are enough reduced-capacity Limited shooters in the match to qualify as a category (see Appendix G in the rulebook), then the match can recognize them with awards, just like with Lady, Junior, Senior, etc. It *increases* the flexibility that a match has in tailoring their awards format to their clientele, without forcing them to recognize specific [additional] divisions.

Anyway, that's one possible approach. ymmv.

Bruce

[Chuck D]

I agree with Bruce Gary with ONE exception. What do you do with the states (N.Y. California, Mass. N.J. just to name a few) where a NEW hi-capacity magazine purchase is NOT an option. L10 was designed around a magazine capacity law that as of this writing effects us ALL. If the ban is allowed to sunset...great. I STILL won't be able to purchase a NEW hi-cap mag. Obviously, the ban will not resind for all of us. So, because I'm at the mercy of loser politicians...I'm relegated to a "catagory" instead of a "division" that I now enjoy as a USPSA member?

[Shooter Grrl]

The whole idea was to allow the single stack guys to compete on an even level with the hi-cap guys, but it still doesn't work. It is extremely rare to find a SS guy who can run competitively against a hi-cap guy with downloaded mags and huge mag wells (everything else being equal).

I believe that L10 was NOT created as a place for Single Stacks to shoot. I believe that L10 was created as a place for Limited to play without having to purchase new equipment (or wast the $2-$3k they have currently invested) most notable those in Hawaii and California where 10 round magazines are verboten.

[bgary]

What do you do with the states ...where a NEW hi-capacity magazine purchase is NOT an option. ...  I'm relegated to a "catagory" instead of a "division" that I now enjoy as a USPSA member?

Nope.

Whether you're shooting "standard capacity" or "reduced capacity", you're still in a Division. So, you sign up in Limited Division (for example), and then you *also* sign up for either the "standard capacity" or the "reduced capacity" category. You're now in the running for *two* sets of awards: You're eligible for the normal Division awards (high overall, top Master, 3rd D, whatever) against ALL the Limited shooters, AND, you're eligible for *additional* awards specifically for the category you're in, assuming there are enough participants in that category to warrant recognition.

This means that you get recognized against your peers, because in addition to the overall division awards, you also get recognition among the shooters who shot guns "just like yours". It doesn't hurt the guys who don't have (or don't want to use) hi-caps. It *also* doesn't hurt the guys that *do* have hi-caps and want to use them.

It presents some interesting opportunities. Like, if someone wants to put on a single-stack-only match, right now that is on the edge of the USPSA rules. There is no way to do a "recognized" USPSA match and restrict it to single-stack only. But, with categories, you could do that... you could say that all divisions will be recognized (to comply with the rules), but AWARDS will only be given to shooters in the single-stack category. Presto. People can shoot whatever they want, but the match can still recognize the specific game-within-a-game, if they want.

It also fixes a number of other silly things. Like, why do we maintain separate classifier scores for Limited and Limited-10, when, in fact, almost all of the classifiers are 6-round or 8-round neutral? Is it reasonable to think that a shooter would shoot a classifier differently with a 10-round mag than with a 22-round mag? I suspect not.

Bruce

[Loves2Shoot]

It also fixes a number of other silly things. Like, why do we maintain separate classifier scores for Limited and Limited-10, when, in fact, almost all of the classifiers are 6-round or 8-round neutral? Is it reasonable to think that a shooter would shoot a classifier differently with a 10-round mag than with a 22-round mag? I suspect not.

Bruce

Well, Bruce I am M L10 and A Limited, go figure, I must shoot better with 10 round mags

I agree THAT should be changed.

[Carlos]

A number of good points. As if it were not obvious from my comments on the other thread, I am not in favor of any Division changes in USPSA. That being said, Vince has raised a valid point since in many places (Area 8 for one) L10 is often (if not mostly) shot w/ built Limited STI/SVI .40s downloaded to 10. The divisions seem nearly identical and if all the stages in a match are built 10-round nuetral (i.e. movement between every 10 shots or less), a shooter should be able to complete the course in exactly the same time w/o additional challenge just by putting 10 rounds in his S_I mags instead of 20 or 21. What is the point?

The point is, as Skyalker points out, L10 allows one to comply w/ the '94 magazine capacity ban even if many somehow find a way around it (for now) with certain guns. I can think of replacement tubes for exactly 3 brands: Glock, Para and S_I. Everyone else is SOL & has to hunt around for pre-bans - then hope they don't wear out. That is why we have L10. There is a point to L10 besides providing a home for .45 1911s.

Is there an easy out? I do not think so.

How about .45ACP only? That might get rid of many of the crossover STI/SVs (though I shot a .45 Edge for a while), it would also rule out many common 40s like the Glock22, CZs, EAAs, HK, XD40, 96, Sig, STI BLS, M40, Rugers, S&Ws, Kahrs, etc. etc. etc.

How about Single Stack only? I thought 10 round Glock mags were single stack mags. Also, when I bought my Edge .45, it had the factory single stack grip frame on it - along with all the other features that the traditional single stack guns lack like dustcover, full profile slide, etc. It was a quick mod away from a double stack STI Edge. There are still fat mags that are also "single stack". Seems a bit arbitrary.

Single action, single stack .45 only? Isn't that why we have the Singlestack classic? Besides, that leaves new shooters who happen to own non-1911s or .40s to go play in Limited - and to have to try to hunt down standard caps. I.e., many guns will not have a competitive home in USPSA.

I don't think there is an easy answer. I'd leave the divisions as they are. I would also encourage the new USPSA president to table any further discussion of division mergers until we see the outcome of the AWB.

Erik/Bear wrote: "(That one should stir something up)" Looks like you will have to try harder to get the wheelgun crowd pissed off good buddy! BTW, Bear is the only guy I know who has outright won a mixed-division match shooting a Production division gun (Black Creek last year).

[bgary]

Well, Bruce I am M L10 and A Limited, go figure, I must shoot better with 10 round mags

[laughing and biting my tongue]

I *won't* say anything about "classifier management"

I *won't* say anything about "old scores"

I *won't* say anything about "picking the gun for the match"

I won't, I won't, I won't!

[big grin]

Bruce

[bgary]

WARNING - thread-drift:

Seriously, that actually illustrates (another?) problem with the current system.

Does it really make sense that I have 5 different classifications?

If I have 5 different classifications, which one (?) accurately reflects my most current ability?

What does it mean if I have a B-card in one division, which I actively shoot, and a C-card in other divisions that I have not shot in years (as is currently the case for me)? Are those valid indications of my ability in those other divisions, or somewhat "stale" indications of my ability when I last shot them?

Should I be able to let a classification go stale? For example, would it be reasonable for me to enter a Nationals in Production with my C-card, knowing that I haven't shot a Production classifier for at least the last two years?

Or... does it make more sense to have *one* classification, indicating the demonstrated ability of the *shooter*, no matter what he or she chooses to put in his or her hand?

Food for thought, related (somewhat) to the divisions questions.

Bruce

[Chuck D]

Bruce:

My problem with this ( and you make more than a few GOOD points) is "where is the problem" ? L10 is the one new division that has actually shown growth.

Why on earth would you change a popular division ?

Lets not forget WHY we instituted a L10 division in the first place. It was designed (told to be by A-7 director Rob Boudrie) to be a division in which competitors...new and old...can purchase LEGAL equiptment and compete with it...especially in less "capacity friendly" localities.

Why can't we leave well enough alone?

[bgary]

Two answers (there are at least two problems, in my opinion)

1) Many of the clubs I talk to say that they can't afford to give out pins or plaques or any kind of recognition in *all* the divisions. It is entirely possible (and, at some clubs, likely) that everyone at the match can win a first-in-class pin within their division. In my opinion, that's an indicator that we have too many divisions. While we *have* to recognize divisions, according to the rules, if we reduce the number of divisions and make the variations categories, instead, then matches can award recognition in *only* those places where there are enough shooters to warrant it.

Granted, that's a club-match problem, that may-or-may-not translate at larger matches, but... it is an attempt to solve the problem in a way that decreases complexity and increases flexibility, without "orphaning" anyone.

2) The real problem is not with the divisions we have, but with the divisions that some *want*. Among the most frequent requests I get, are for USPSA to add a new Open-10 division, or a new Open-Revolver division, or a new Single-Stack/1911 division, or.... If we don't come up with a structure that makes more sense, we're going to end up with *10* divisions, and that makes no sense at all. Making a smaller number of divisions, with categories recognized within division, would give us the flexibility to respond to all those types of requests, without making things harder for clubs.

Bruce

[Flexmoney]

Many of the clubs I talk to say that they can't afford to give out pins or plaques or any kind of recognition in *all* the divisions.

You lost me here.

Five divisions = five pins/awards.

If a club is choosing to give out rewards for every class/category as well...then that is that clubs choice.

What is with all the pins in WA anyway???

[Chuck D]

If a club can't afford to give awards...don't.

Lets not dismantle a division because a club can't afford a pin or a trophy.

At my club, we pay one award for every 5 people competing in a division...not enough people...not enough awards. The problem "fixes" itself.

As far as Open 10 or Open Revolver goes...I'm under the impression that the line was drawn at 5 divisions. While I fully agree that we can't have 10 different divisions we can sustain what we already have without making changes that affect those of us that have NO choice by law.

USPSA was good enough to provide those of us affected by Federal, State and Local law a place ( A DIVISION) in which for us to compete with legally obtainable equiptment. I thank them for that and I enjoy tremendously that opportunity. If it were to "go away" so to satisfy a clubs inability to purchase awards, It would be an injustice to those of us whom supported L10 division...once again displacing a portion of the membership ( a-la revolver shooters whom purchased 8 round guns because they were told they could use all 8 rounds in the cylinder BEFORE the rules change) .

When I asked why we needed two seperate classifications for both Limited and L10 divisions, I was told the reason was to give "legitimacy" to the new divisions. How does combining the two divisions further the goal of "legitimacy" ?

I never quite understood why a division that is obviously popular with the membership can't be left alone.

[PhilTerry]

If we need to reduce the number of divisions why not drop revolver - there were maybe 19 revolver shooters entered at the 2002 FGNs and 15 this year - doesn't look like its a big draw!

[Vince Pinto]

Hi guys,

My old mate Bruce and others raised the issue of division and awards, so I'd like to make two comments:

1. Under the rules, a match must recognise (just) one division - the rest are up to the Match Director - and he will obviously recognise only those divisions which are popular in his area (sure, the Nationals are an exception).

2. With five divisions, five categories and teams (not to mention X number of classifications), the days of recognising the "Top 16" (or even the Top 8) are, in my opinion, long gone.

Just ask anybody who attended WSXIII in South Africa about the 6 hour awarding ceremony. Yes folks, I said SIX hours ...................

Of course once again it's the MD's call, but most sports only recognise Gold, Silver & Bronze, and I think we should do the same in IPSC.

I attended the first IPSC Level III match in Beijing, China last year and, at the awarding ceremony, they brought out a 1-2-3 podium (the first time I've ever seen one at an IPSC match), and such a simple idea was fantastic, and it gave the ceremony as much kudos as a Formula 1 awarding ceremony or the Olympics.

If you really want to recognise the Top 8 or Top 16, knock yourself out (at the range?) but, at the official awarding ceremony, give some thought to using a 1-2-3 podium - it's cool.

[xcount]

By all means, IF a division has to go, let's chop revolver. No great loss, right?

However, if cutting one division is good for the sport and helps local clubs with their awards budgets, surely cutting two would be twice as good.

John Amidon once told me everyone has freedom of choice in deciding what equipment to use at a match. And, having made that choice, everyone must live with the consequences of their decision. He was speaking of bringing a six-shooter to a match with 8+8 speed shoots at the time.

But his logic also applies to Production division. Currently, if a shooter wishes to use a Glock or other non-SA pistiol in Open or Limited divisions they are free to do so. They just have to live with their choice.

Why, then, can't that same requirement be applied to Limited 10 division? Instead of having 2 divisions, one for single action guns and one for other actions, why not eliminate Production and have 1 division that mirrors Limited division in rules except that magazines with capacity of greater than 10 rounds are disallowed?

[Duane Thomas]

The answer to this question will become much more clear after we see if the U.S. AW ban is renewed, or a new, worse one is imposed (unfortunately, a likely possibility).

For that to happen, either renewing the current law or passing a new one, it would have to pass a Republican controlled House, then a Republican controlled Senate, then be signed into law by a Republican President. I just can't see that happening.

Just as an aside - though an interesting one I think - Scott Gilbertson of Glock told me he's REALLY looking forward, a year or so down the road, to taking CASES of "Law Enforcement Only" hi-caps to GSSF matches and blowing them out at 20 dollars a pop. Perhaps a good reason to start shooting GSSF?

[Duane Thomas]

IMHO, USPSA should have made Lim 10 SS only. Matter of fact, they should have called it Single Stack. 8 rds max. Holster and mag carriers behind centerline, just like Production. And do the same thing with Revolver regarding holster and equipment.

At the Factory Nats, Michael Voigt was saying that one proposed rules change he really likes, and will push for, is to make the holster/mag pouch(es) rule in Lim-10 the same as Production. I could see it. As for Revolver, I'd leave that the way it is. Revolver shooters get hosed so much, we should give them some advantage. Besides, unlike with an auto pistol, it gets a lot harder to do a reload with a revolver when you can't carry the ammo on the belly.

[Duane Thomas]

I believe that L10 was NOT created as a place for Single Stacks to shoot. I believe that L10 was created as a place for Limited to play without having to purchase new equipment (or wast the $2-$3k they have currently invested) most notable those in Hawaii and California where 10 round magazines are verboten.

Actually, according to Voigt - and as USPSA president, he would know - Limited-10 was created expressly as a place for the single-stack 1911 to play. See my interview with him, enclosed as part of the July Win a Book contest.

[Duane Thomas]

Many of the clubs I talk to say that they can't afford to give out pins or plaques or any kind of recognition in *all* the divisions.

This is a problem with a simple solution, and they found it at the Renton, Washington IPSC club. Instead of having umpteen pins for every division/place/class recognized, they simply have pins with the numbers 1, 2 and 3 on them. You come in 1st Overall, A, B, C, D, Unclassified in any division, you get a 1 pin. You come in 2nd Overall, A, B, C, D, Unclassified, you get a 2 pin. And the same for the 3 pin. Everyone's cool with that, and the club only has to pay for three different pins. They've made it a bit more interesting by having the color scheme be different for each number pin, though except for that - and the number, of course - they're identical.

It's been said, "Geniuis is the ability to make the complicated simple." And this seems to me an excellent example of that rule in action.

[Chuck D]

That's interesting. I've always been under the impression that the seed for L10 was sewn by Area 7 director Rob Boudrie (see www.boudrie.com) as a way for competitors to purchase and compete with post 1994 LEGALLY purchased equiptment....... at least that's what I've been told (and I believe it wholeheartedly) by Rob both in person and via e-mail.

I quote from boudrie.com , " The average shooter is not interested in spending $2000.00 or more to be competitive nor is (s)he likely to have a supply of pre-ban magazines to bring to a match".

As it should be, the Single Stack 1911 should have a home in today's IPSC but nowhere does it say that L10 should be a Single Stack only division. STI/SVI/Para all sell guns with 10 round magazines in the factory box. They should be allowed to compete in L10 just like any single stack pistol should.

In my opinion, what's the difference between a $800 Springfield and a $800 Para Ord.

I wouldn't mind Production Division type holster and mag placement rules for L10. At least if I wanted to "cross pollenate" between Limited and L10 all I would have to buy is a different holster....instead of a different gun.

[EricW]

The answer to this question will become much more clear after we see if the U.S. AW ban is renewed, or a new, worse one is imposed (unfortunately, a likely possibility).

For that to happen, either renewing the current law or passing a new one, it would have to pass a Republican controlled House, then a Republican controlled Senate, then be signed into law by a Republican President. I just can't see that happening.

[Eternal Pessimist Mode ON]

Unfortunately I can.

[John Thompson]

Don't like Lim10?: don't shoot it.

Don't like seeing guys with single stacks competing in a divison other than the one where your high cap gives you an advantage?: Think how it it would be when those guys take their guns and stay home.

[Madmark]

I for one would not make the change. If L-10 went away, I would too. Buying ANOTHER new gun (or slide at least) isn't an option.

LTS, I know I can load 6 in my 7 shooter and be legal. But how competitive would it be if you had 1 missfire for every 7 YOU shoot?

My 686 plus WAS legal when I purchased it. My EAA with ported (lightened) slide is legal only in Limited, competitive only in L10. Some newer shooters cannot change equipment every time the wind blows. Even if we are only talking a holster for some.....

Out of the shooters I introduced to IPSC my first year, One was production, one was L-10 (SS) and 3 were L10 (MPF) using double stack mags. I say leave the divisions alone!!!!