ciscoip Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 Frankly, if Amidon's opinion in the email becomes an official ruling, I'd be happy. I'll admit it's probably one of the few rulings where I mine and his reasoning are in agreement. That said, I also see Nik Habicht's point; I would think that the ideal thing would be to add a "competitive advantage" clause to the Production appendix similar to the Single Stack appendix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Nik - Thanks. I have been playing this game for far too long and there are more than a few instances where we as an organization have become too nice (to put it nicely) on how to shoot the sport. Frankly, the rules don't need to be as detailed as they do. Basically they need to state: - What we shoot at - What we shoot at them with - Here's what happens to you if you don't do it safely While the crux of the rules as they stand now do this, the fact that this is a point of significant discussion shows that a minority of folks have contaminated a relatively simple sport and degraded it to the point where we have to explicity spell out every little thing because we can't hurt peoples' feelings. When you look at the simplicity in the rules of other shooting events it boggles the mind why our rule book is SOOOO involved....and that's just the pistol book. Anyways...enough of that rant. Glad this is worked out. Next topic...global warming? Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Troy,So then if you have a Production legal pistol other than having some extra holes drilled in to the side from a removed scope mount is that not legal? I say this because the next question is that are we asking people to buy a new pistol because they change divisions and there's basically a cosmetic change to the pistol? Rich Actually, I was addressing the "local match so it doesn't matter" idea as well as the origins and intent of Production division, and not the holes in the frame. I don't make those calls, so I don't even care to speculate. I see that you wrote to John, and he thinks it should be legal, and I happen to agree with that; nevertheless, those holes are, strictly speaking, an external modification. I agree that it seems that we take some rules to extremes, but without many of them being specifically spelled out, and in minute detail, they are open to many different interpretations. That leads to more trouble than having a fat rulebook, in my opinion. Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) So now, as long as the mod is not a competitive advantage, you can do it?!?! We're going down a slippery slope here. I was bumped to open a few years ago for a "mod" that was not a competitve advantage!!!! Edited January 8, 2009 by racerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Jones Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 So now, as long as the mod is not a competitive advantage, you can do it?!?! We're going down a slippery slope here. I was bumped to open a few years ago for a "mod" that was not a competitve advantage!!!! Without making a judgment on the specific issue in this thread..... There is a big difference between non-functioning holes in a frame and your "mod" to your slide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 There is a big difference between non-functioning holes in a frame and your "mod" to your slide. And it's also different than the non functioning sticker you made me take off at Area 8? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolex Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I saw that sticker-yup- it really made you an open shooter it did! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 OK if this guy showed up at a Section or State match, what would happen there? Those folks have to consult the rule book, and the rule book says NO external modification, it's obviously that. There is nothing in there about rather that external mod is an advantage or not. How can a RM or MD prove or disprove that it does or does not offer a tactical advantage? What is an advantage to one might be a hindrance to another. That's not something for match staff to have to argue. A rule should be written to keep the match staff from having to, wait, it already has been NO EXTERNAL MODIFICATIONS. You make an exception for one guy then you have to do it for the next one. If you want to shoot Production and Open, two frames are the cost of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I have to disagree Bobby. It's on that MD/RM to make that call. Just 'cause it's not in the book doesn't make it illegal. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Merricks Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 One more reason to shoot open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Hefta Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I just had a little piece of grip tape on my Glock 34 in the wrong place at the 2007 Prod Nationals and I was trown into Limited, I didn't think that I was doing anything wrong and it for sure was not giving me a competitive advantage, but the rules are the rules and I broke one of them, I'm a big boy and I didn't quit I just loaded may mags to capacity and finished the match. It doesn't matter if its a local match or the Nationals rules are rules and we all should abide by them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I have to disagree Bobby. It's on that MD/RM to make that call. Just 'cause it's not in the book doesn't make it illegal.Rich Rich it IS in the book Bro, how are you not getting that. No external modifications, NONE. You talk about how the sport is getting over complicated and the rules keep getting worse and growing, dude I hate to say it but it's because of guys like you trying to fight the good fight. Now, because of this, something will have to be added to the rule book. Instead of telling the guy "hey man it sucks, but no external mods, it's in the rule book that way". Then the guy accepts it and he shoots the gun in Open division. If he wants to play in Production he has to pay just like any shooter that wants to shoot in Production. How much plainer can it get? NO EXTERNAL MODIFICATIONS. If you add an "advantage" clause then you are going to have make provisions for testing to rather or not it is an advantage and pick some kind of committee. It's just better to leave it at NO EXTERNAL MODIFICATIONS and everything is real plain and real simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I have to disagree Bobby. It's on that MD/RM to make that call. Just 'cause it's not in the book doesn't make it illegal. No - it's not up to the MD/RM to make their own decision. They have to follow the rule book. It is in the rule book that this mod is ILLEGAL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 No external modifications, but grip tape, grip texturing, the Glock butt plug and changing sights are all external mods. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Those are external modifications specifically approved by the rule book. There are even stipulations on where you can and cannot add tape or stippling. It's all in there, and they say no other external mods. But you keep rocking, get more sh!t added to the rule book. In one of your previous posts you say that all these rules are making you want to quit the sport, yet it's people like you that want to tweak and play every angle on the rule that cause it to get worse. Don't be a part of the problem Bro. The rule book is written and it's clear and concise. I'll buy the guy a Glock frame to keep the rule book from growing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvb Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) ....open to many different interpretations. That leads to more trouble than having a fat rulebook, in my opinion.Troy So now, as long as the mod is not a competitive advantage, you can do it?!?! We're going down a slippery slope here. Those two statements sum it up perfectly. If you have a RULE and open it to INTERPRETATION regarding when it applies, you create the opportunity for the sport to be officiated differently at different clubs and by different people. Few opportunities for interpretation is something I appreciate about uspsa. -rvb Edited January 8, 2009 by rvb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) Bobby - My point is that the rules should basically be general guidelines. However, given the specific demands of Production, I suppose it needs to be explicit otherwise where does it stop. My optimism is that people will see a modification to a gun that serves another purpose and does not provide a competitive advantage (even Amidon stated that) and that would be good enough. I will always lobby for the shooter. Had to have a lengthy and at times heated 'discussion' with my CRO at FTB3G who I worked the match for 3 days with. Not a similar issue, but will always fight the fight when it comes to protecting the shooter from, in my opinion, unneccessary scrutiny. Anyways...on a lighter note. Thanks for the e-mail, web link and chattin' yesterday. That was awesome! Can't wait to shoot with you and your guys some time. Rich ETA: For those that tremble at potential interpretations, I site again the simplicity of the rules of more successful matches at IMGA 3G events. Edited January 8, 2009 by uscbigdawg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I agree Rich, and my vote goes to the shooter too, I just don't think the rules need to be changed. I am coming from this at the angle of "give them an inch and they will take a mile". I'd hate to see the BOD give up even 1 more inch because in my mind the rules will continue to grow and grow and grow. Hope that software works out for you. If you ever get out to the East Coast let me know, I have some long range steel that needs beating up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 And we'll see if we can't get you out west for next year's TBRC. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Sounds like fun! Got details? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Jones Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 There is a big difference between non-functioning holes in a frame and your "mod" to your slide. And it's also different than the non functioning sticker you made me take off at Area 8? The allowance on slide modifications is pretty specific. Nothing in there concerning function or advantage. I could have waited until it was challenged on one of the stages. My decision would have been the same but your match status would have changed. I thought you would prefer the kinder/gentler option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 The allowance on slide modifications is pretty specific. Nothing in there concerning function or advantage. I thought that the non-allowance/allowance on external mods of frames were also specific. Nothing in the rule book mentions function or advantage either. That is right up to JA's decision in that last post. So now, you support the legality of applying stickers to the frame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Jones Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 The allowance on slide modifications is pretty specific. Nothing in there concerning function or advantage. I thought that the non-allowance/allowance on external mods of frames were also specific. Nothing in the rule book mentions function or advantage either. That is right up to JA's decision in that last post. So now, you support the legality of applying stickers to the frame? You can try to put words in my mouth...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 racerba - You can shoot any match with me and I'll supply the stickers. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 So now, you support the legality of applying stickers to the frame? You can try to put words in my mouth...... It was a question...note the question mark at the end of the sentence. Since you agreed with JA's statement that since it was not an advantage, it would be legal. Since you adamently stated that the slide rule was set in stone, no interpretation can be had. I stated that the frame rule should also be set in stone. Now, since JA made that post, it seems that the frame is NOT set in stone and interpretations seems to be accepted as long as it is interpretted by JA. Before that, everybody seems to agree that the hole was an unacceptable modification. Now it is acceptable? So I posed a question to you on your stance on the matter. I am not trying to put words in your mouth. As far as the post by JA - it would seem to be acceptable. Am I wrong? If I am please point out as to which point I am missing. Why would the slide rule be set in stone and the frame would not? 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