AggieMM Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 So if the governing body says something is illegal, I don't have to listen to them if I disagree with their decision? Robert Ray is the rule guy in IDPA like John Amidon for USPSA. Apparently their rulings don't count. My point was that word of mouth, 2nd-3rd hand knowledge based upon a 1:1 phone call, and postings in an unofficial forum are not official rule clarification announcements. If a rule clarification is needed, it needs to be posted on the HQ website, or written into a revised rule book, or in the Tactical Journal. Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvb Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 IDPA has an official means for updating or clarifying rules, they just choose not to use it. The result is "some guy" who maintains "some position" made a decision and told "someone" and we are supposed to know it. From the rule book, "NOTE: The rulebook posted on the IDPA website (www.idpa.com) will be the most current issue." Note that it does not say idpaforum.com. If "rulings" are made, then directly under the book pdf or included with the book pdf should be the rulings. Something that needs to be considered is there are new people to the game who have never been to nationals, never been on idpaforum, and never heard of Robert Ray. All these people know (and should need to know) is there is the book that comes with their membership and it directs them to idpa.com. I was once one of these new people, too. As to the recoil master? Is it a replacement steel guide rod? Is it a competition only device? My opinion doesn't matter. Only the MD's. And his guidance is to follow the book on idpa.com. Obviously based on the discussion going on here, the answer isn't so obvious so the MD has to use his/her best judgement. So do I think we should ignore the rulings? Well, I try to stay current with them to keep myself legal, yet I have never in 8 years seen an official ruling. -rvb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Vigilante Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) In the IDPA Rulebook under "Purpose" it states that "no competition only" equipment is permitted. Does this include mods-presumably so? I just checked out the home page for the STI Recoil Master and this is the first Paragraph: "We all know that one of the most important factors in IPSC shooting is the gun recovery time. The faster you can get the gun back on the A's zone, the faster you can shoot (and hit) your 2nd A zone on the target. There are many techniques and products out there to assist the competition shooter with this. Double-Alpha is proud to endorse the Recoil-Master from STI." It appears the manufacturer is marketing this as a means to reduce recoil for IPSC competition. Whether the Recoil Master actually reduces recoil some say yes and some say no. From this viewpoint it would appear that the device is illegal as it goes against the philosophy of the IDPA. Also note in the 1st paragraph under Purpose, it also mentions "including full charge service ammunition" How many IDPA shooters actually use "full charge" ammunition, I wonder? Accordingly, a FTDR penalty should be issued in instances where this device is used!!! Should the shooter also be DQ'd or forced to use another gun? Also notice that the Recoil Master is marketed to IPSC/USPSA, not IDPA!! Is that because they know the device would be illegal in IDPA? Edited March 9, 2009 by The_Vigilante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry cazes Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 In the IDPA Rulebook under "Purpose" it states that "no competition only" equipment is permitted. Does this include mods-presumably so? I just checked out the home page for the STI Recoil Master and this is the first Paragraph:"We all know that one of the most important factors in IPSC shooting is the gun recovery time. The faster you can get the gun back on the A's zone, the faster you can shoot (and hit) your 2nd A zone on the target. There are many techniques and products out there to assist the competition shooter with this. Double-Alpha is proud to endorse the Recoil-Master from STI." It appears the manufacturer is marketing this as a means to reduce recoil for IPSC competition. Whether the Recoil Master actually reduces recoil some say yes and some say no. From this viewpoint it would appear that the device is illegal as it goes against the philosophy of the IDPA. Also note in the 1st paragraph under Purpose, it also mentions "including full charge service ammunition" How many IDPA shooters actually use "full charge" ammunition, I wonder? Accordingly, a FTDR penalty should be issued in instances where this device is used!!! Should the shooter also be DQ'd or forced to use another gun? Also notice that the Recoil Master is marketed to IPSC/USPSA, not IDPA!! Is that because they know the device would be illegal in IDPA? Hmmm. Interesting thread. I have been lurking for a while in this forum since I am planning to shoot a bit of IDPA this season. Please clarify how any device that is intended to reduce recoil, doesnt add extra weight, and doesnt effect reliability should be excluded in a defensive sport. Theoretically this device should actually enhance reliability. Based on this description, it sounds like a gain in both competition and practical carry guns. Why is this not permitted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Vigilante Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Larry, You make some good arguments that should be directed to the ones who make the rules which haven't been revised or changed for some time. This is why a lot of shooters left IDPA for IPSC. The mag restriction being one of the main reasons. Anyway at the core of the argument is the IDPA philosophy that the main goal is to test the skill and ability of the shooter, not equipment or gamesmanship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) This is why a lot of shooters left IDPA for IPSC. +1 Page 22 #11. The Recoil Master is just a full length guide rod and it is not heavier than common steel. Edit to add: Will the Recoil Master make you move from Sharp Shooter to Master? No. This is just my opinion I don't use one but I do run light springs BK Edited March 9, 2009 by bkeeler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickB Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 As a shooter, SO, and match administrator, I have only the rule book to which I can refer when a rules question arises. The rule book specifically allows changing guide rods, as long as the material is not heavier than standard steel. When I replied earlier, I deleted a reference to a secret, alternate rule book, not knowing that there apparently is one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulture Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 On many STI guns the Recoil Master is standard equipment. How can something be illeagle if it was standard equipment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegot38 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Instead of all this, call Robert Ray at IDPA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Vigilante Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I sent him an email with the question. Who knows when and whether I will receive an answer. Was going to call but it was too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Knight Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) So... My "Oh..." may have been premature... There seems to be quite a debate going on as to whether this is legal or not. Edited March 9, 2009 by Shawn Knight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strick Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 On many STI guns the Recoil Master is standard equipment. How can something be illeagle if it was standard equipment? There are a bunch of guns that come "stock" from the factory with parts that make them illegal for IDPA. Whether they be barrel length, bull barrels, full length steel dust covers, etc... Just because it was on the gun "stock" doesn't make it legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 bull barrels Bull barrels....WTF! I know they are illegal, but why? A.T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sestock Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 First of all the Recoil Master "system" is a waste of time and money. Yes, I have shot a gun with one. There is no advantage using one. Just another gimmick to relieve IPSC shooters of their money. There is nothing in the rule book that says you can't use one if you are so inclined. Surprised it took this long for someone to bash IPSC. The rule book is very vague and puts the MD on the spot to make arbitary rulings based on gut feelings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 How many IDPA shooters actually use "full charge" ammunition, I wonder? If you're competing with a 9mm, the answer would be "A lot." "Full-charge ammunition" and "makes power factor with just enough cushion for comfort" are synonyms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Just a quick note from Moderator Land: this thread is NOT going to turn into an IDPA vs. IPSC debate. If you were planning on posting something along those lines: don't, and save me the trouble of deleting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdmoore Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I see this one exactly as Joe4d. There is an INCLUSIVE list of mods permitted. The next part is a bit more grey. The only option that pertains here is #11. "11. Full length guide rod manufactured of material that is no heavier than common steel." So, there is the judgement. The local MD did exactly the right thing, he examined it and found it to be ok. Other MD's might see it differently. The competitor's responsibility is to decide for himself if it follows #11 ... and whether the MD think's it follows #11. Two major opinions, likely to sway many MD's opinions have been stated (RR's and Ted's). The competitor would do well to research where these two often post thier "interpretations" as many MD's may follow them, or at least independently come to the same conclusion. Of course, this all fits under the umbrella of the dissuading competition only equipment as well. Notice that the verbiage from the site was that it enabled getting sights back on target faster ... NOT that it reduced recoil. It is NOT necessary to reduce recoil to do so (altho that might provide the same benefit). I don't think that getting sights back on track quicker is a competition only mod. If it doesn't cost (degrade reliability for instance) then I want that for all of my guns! But, I don't think they work worth beans. That, plus the opinions of two well known leaders in IDPA rule interpretations would be enough for me not to use one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Of course, this all fits under the umbrella of the dissuading competition only equipment as well. I do not understand this one either. The gun I use in IDPA competition I would never carry. So it is a competition only gun in my mind. Why wouldn't I carry it because it has a 1 3/4-2lb trigger for competition. I do not shoot a lot of IDPA anymore due to all this confusion BK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Knight Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Ok Ok Ok... I have seen a lot of speculation of what people think about this thing, I have seen a lot of what people have read on other forums, and I have seen a bunch of IDPA vs IPSC/USPSA comments. I have NOT seen a definitive answer from a governing body on whether or not this item can be used in IDPA or not. Is there anyone here that is able to Officially say YAY or NAY to this gadget or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cnote Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I was the MD, and I checked the rule book then. And now with an electronic text search. I searched "spring" and springfield ported barrels was the only hit. I searched "recoil" and only ported barrels are mentioned again. No place in the official rule book does it mention using "spring systems" to reduce recoil. Only "weight" is directly mentioned as illegal to the sport. The division was "enhanced" service pistol. The division itself mainly consist of full size 1911s in 9mm anyway. I had the competitor disassemble their firearm, so I could observe the mechanism. It looked just like the double spring system in my ultra compact 1911 that I regularly carry for self defense. It was made of steel and without weighing it, felt to weigh less than a solid steel guide rod would. I deemed it legal. To me, this is a "gray area" just like a close grease ring scoring call....it goes to the shooter. My glock 30 has a double spring in it, if I remember correctly. Its not to often that it gets taken apart, keeps on ticking like a timex! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cnote Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Instead of all this, call Robert Ray at IDPA! I have never received a reply to any question that I have emailed IDPA headquarters, so I do not even bother anymore. Not a bash, I am sure they are busy and have full time jobs along with their hard work to keep a origination going FOR shooters. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHolsted Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Ok Ok Ok...I have seen a lot of speculation of what people think about this thing, I have seen a lot of what people have read on other forums, and I have seen a bunch of IDPA vs IPSC/USPSA comments. I have NOT seen a definitive answer from a governing body on whether or not this item can be used in IDPA or not. Is there anyone here that is able to Officially say YAY or NAY to this gadget or not? Robert Ray monitors this board from time to time. I am sure he will make a ruling on this or reply to someone's e-mail and they will make post his response. Other than Robert, Dru, Joice or Bill I know of no one else that can make a rulling on this. Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdmoore Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Of course, this all fits under the umbrella of the dissuading competition only equipment as well. I do not understand this one either. The gun I use in IDPA competition I would never carry. So it is a competition only gun in my mind. Why wouldn't I carry it because it has a 1 3/4-2lb trigger for competition. I do not shoot a lot of IDPA anymore due to all this confusion BK I only meant that it has to fall within the inclusive list of mods ... i.e. be a case of #11 AND that it can't be deemed competition only equipment. I'm not saying that it does either or both. If you are saying you don't understand the rational behind promoting carry gear (vs gear more aligned with competition) ..well, that's one of those core principals that reflect the rules that are expressed. i.e. instead of only saying race holsters aren't allowed ... they follow up with the rational ... this is a game for carriable gear. In my minds eye, it is written more to help MD interpret the rules that are written vs becoming an actual rule. This may be a prime example of such a case. My opinion only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobMoore Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Robert Ray monitors this board from time to time. I am sure he will make a ruling on this or reply to someone's e-mail and they will make post his response. I think that is part of the problem folks are pointing out. What he says here shouldn't have an affect on MDs ruling over matches. The rulebook, whether printed or electronic from the official website, should be the only thing affecting matches. That is the place to receive official information, not a non-affiliated non-official, private internet forum. Personal opinion time, but I think MDs using clarifications they've discovered here and over at ted's place are simply allowing the inaction of HQ to properly disseminate information to continue. I think if folks make a decision to simply go by the most current rulebook, and ignore second-hand information until it is properly posted (whether that be the IDPA website, tactical journal, whatever they decide and inform the membership of), then HQ will be forced to take corrective action if they want those issues enforced the way they have decided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootemGood Posted March 11, 2009 Author Share Posted March 11, 2009 With all due respect too Robert & Ted how can a ruling on this matter be left too their interpretation of the rules? Do either of these men have the ability too make and/or change IDPA rules? Why can't someone walk over to Mr. Wilson's office and ask what his ruling is, he wrote the rule book. How can a competitor go to a match and decision is up too each MD's interpretation if legal? Seems very simple too me, go ask the man who owns IDPA, his interpretation is the only one that counts. ShootemGood, Robert Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts