PDA

View Full Version : Question:Why IDPA/USPSA?



GardoneVT
01-05-2014, 10:45 AM
In looking at options for a competitive league here, I'm curious about one thing:

Why the difference between IDPA/USPSA? They're both gun gaming, so why the peculiarities regarding weapon features?

Dumb question perhaps, but I have to ask.

ToddG
01-05-2014, 10:50 AM
Why the difference between IDPA/USPSA? They're both gun gaming, so why the peculiarities regarding weapon features?


Why football and soccer?

Why Ford and Chevy?

Why blondes and brunettes?

Alaskapopo
01-05-2014, 10:53 AM
In looking at options for a competitive league here, I'm curious about one thing:

Why the difference between IDPA/USPSA? They're both gun gaming, so why the peculiarities regarding weapon features?

Dumb question perhaps, but I have to ask.

Get ready for an over simplified solution.

IDPA tries to pretend its training and makes the courses of fire easier and makes you wear a concealment garment and limits the guns you can use more.

Gun Divisions are

Stock service pistol
(DA or DA SA type guns Glocks, Sigs etc) 9mm or larger mags downloaded to 10 rounds.

Enhanced service pistol
(Custom single action guns allowed like 1911's in 9mm) caliber minimum is 9mm 10 round mags

Custom Defense pistol
Custom 1911's rule here must be in 45 acp 8 round mags

Stock service revolver 38 special or larger speed loaders only no moon clips.

Enhanced Service revolver
moon clips major power factor 45 acps rule here (625 smith)

IDPA stages don't allow the shooter much latitude in how they are shot. Its pretty much shoot here then move here then shoot some more.

USPSA does not limit the stage design as much and most stages are shoot them as you see them and give the shooter a lot of options on how to solve a problem. Lots more challenging stages and higher round counts.

Divisons

Produciton
(similar to IDPA's stock service pistol) 10 rounds 9mm DA SA or safe action glocks etc.

Single stack (1911's mix of CDP and ESP in IDPA) 10 rounds minor or 8 rounds major.

Limited divisons No comps or optics 140 mm mags (21 round 40sw rule here) 2011 guns
Limited 10 Same as above but limited to 10 round mags.

Open Division Optics and comps allowed 170 mm mags allowed (29 38 super rounds or 28 9mm major loads)

Revolver 8 shot minor or 6 shot major.

I started with IDPA and then shot both for a long time. Boycotting IDPA now because of stupid rule changes recently.

Pat

littlejerry
01-05-2014, 11:24 AM
In looking at options for a competitive league here, I'm curious about one thing:

Why the difference between IDPA/USPSA? They're both gun gaming, so why the peculiarities regarding weapon features?

Dumb question perhaps, but I have to ask.

Most indoor ranges host an IDPA match on a weeknight around me. For USPSA you have to go to the outdoor ranges further out.

My opinion and experience: IDPA is boring and the experience can vary wildly from club to club. This is a function of both the match director and members. Stages are heavily choreographed. There is an abundance of rules surrounding being "tactical", yet many of the rules promote bad tactics from a SD point of view. Some of this again varries from club to club with interpretation and enforcement. "Concealment" is required. For most people this means a weighted fishing vest that they would never wear in public.

USPSA is much more open. Stages are typically much larger and offer many options for solving the problem. In some ways its more gamey, but the sport is more focused on good shooting. You will see a wide range of targets: 0-35 yards, steel poppers, plate racks, IPSC cardboard, plate racks, disappearing, swinging, and moving. Individual stages are typically 20-35 rounds. The competitors are typically a step above the average IDPA match as well.

I'm biased. I want to like IDPA so I can shoot a match on a week night and not blow an entire Saturday but i end up wanting to pull my hair out every time I go. The match director near me is a bit of a prick.

Alaskapopo
01-05-2014, 11:40 AM
Most indoor ranges host an IDPA match on a weeknight around me. For USPSA you have to go to the outdoor ranges further out.

My opinion and experience: IDPA is boring and the experience can vary wildly from club to club. This is a function of both the match director and members. Stages are heavily choreographed. There is an abundance of rules surrounding being "tactical", yet many of the rules promote bad tactics from a SD point of view. Some of this again varries from club to club with interpretation and enforcement. "Concealment" is required. For most people this means a weighted fishing vest that they would never wear in public.

USPSA is much more open. Stages are typically much larger and offer many options for solving the problem. In some ways its more gamey, but the sport is more focused on good shooting. You will see a wide range of targets: 0-35 yards, steel poppers, plate racks, IPSC cardboard, plate racks, disappearing, swinging, and moving. Individual stages are typically 20-35 rounds. The competitors are typically a step above the average IDPA match as well.

I'm biased. I want to like IDPA so I can shoot a match on a week night and not blow an entire Saturday but i end up wanting to pull my hair out every time I go. The match director near me is a bit of a prick.

We shoot USPSA indoors up here in the winter.
pat

nwhpfan
01-05-2014, 12:20 PM
IDPA tries to pretend its training

USPSA makes no illusions of what it is; it is a game that requires you to shoot accurate very fast. USPSA laughs when people accuse USPSA'ers of being gamers...because, it's a game, and the term "Gamer" is redundant.

Don't overlook Speed Steel. Draw, shoot steel real fast...

45dotACP
01-05-2014, 02:52 PM
Why USPSA? I dunno, I just saw that the USPSA match was that week, and the IDPA match was the next week. Didn't know the difference, didn't know how to play, and when I got there, a guy looked at me and said "Hey you're new to this aren't you?" and he showed me the ropes. Since then, I've met awesome people, dramatically improved my shooting skillset and had more fun with a gun than I have ever had previously (excluding varmint hunting of course). I just haven't been able to bring myself to shoot IDPA yet, but I'm sure it'll be just as fun.

My name is John, and I'm a gamer. :p

cclaxton
01-05-2014, 03:34 PM
Why football and soccer?

Why Ford and Chevy?

Why blondes and brunettes?

Don't forget redheads.

Cody

NETim
01-05-2014, 03:40 PM
I'm still at the point in my "career" that being on a timer induces stress, which I believe is a good thing.

Both games do that. Shooting either is fun and helps wring out equipment and improve my skills.

I believe both games need to emphasize accuracy more though.

A course laid out with Hearne's "Hard Head Ted" http://dvctargets.comtargets would be a great challenge IMHO.

ST911
01-05-2014, 04:53 PM
I believe both games need to emphasize accuracy more though.

Design a stage scoring any C/D or -1/-3 as a miss. Bring earpro...for the whining.

cclaxton
01-05-2014, 04:56 PM
IDPA tries to pretend its training and makes the courses of fire easier and makes you wear a concealment garment and limits the guns you can use more.

IDPA stages don't allow the shooter much latitude in how they are shot. Its pretty much shoot here then move here then shoot some more.

USPSA does not limit the stage design as much and most stages are shoot them as you see them and give the shooter a lot of options on how to solve a problem. Lots more challenging stages and higher round counts.

I started with IDPA and then shot both for a long time. Boycotting IDPA now because of stupid rule changes recently.

Pat
Alaskapopo has one opinion, perhaps a bit colored by his dissatisfaction with the rules changes. Full disclosure: I am a Certified IDPA SO.
Here is another:
IDPA
- Is more focused on concealed carry skills;
- Requires concealment because of concealed carry focused, but not during some courses of fire, depending;
- Limits shooters to guns that are more affordable and practical and the average Jane/Joe can buy, thus limiting "OPEN" and highly customized types of guns;
- Does provide great latitude in how to shoot the COF, but because of COVER penalties and SHOOTING PRIORITY penalties gives you an incentive to shoot by "slicing the pie" or near to far. You can shoot it however you want...you just live with the penalties;
- IDPA does not pretend to be training. It does allow you to practice your skills using cover and concealment and is more tactical than USPSA, but NOT tactical training, and, mainly because of safety issues, NOT a true tactical COF.
- One of the main rules that changed is that all reloads must be flat-footed and behind cover if cover is available.

USPSA
- Is more focused on pure competition and incorporates few tactical features;
- Does not require concealment;
- Provides divisions that allow for any types of handguns that are generally safe and ranges will allow;
- Does provide great latitude in how to shoot the COF, but has no cover or shooting priority penalties (You can choose to shoot them that way if you wish),
- Does allow lots of flexibility in where to stow extra mags, how to holster, more rounds in a magazine, etc.

BOTH IDPA AND USPSA
- Due to COF safety concerns restrict how close you can be when shooting steel;
- Due to COF safety concerns restrict going back to targets you have already engaged if doing so would create a muzzle violation or safety hazard;
- Have muzzle and finger restrictions while engaging targets, and may restrict full freedom of movement or moving with finger inside trigger guard;

BCL
01-05-2014, 05:33 PM
IDPA
...
- Limits shooters to guns that are more affordable and practical and the average Jane/Joe can buy, thus limiting "OPEN" and highly customized types of guns;
...



I think this point is highly division dependent. Someone could spend roughly the same amount of money getting into USPSA Production and IDPA SSP and be just as competitive. There is no IDPA equivalent to USPSA's Open Division, but there is to Production (SSP), Limited (ESP), and Single Stack (CDP).

It is well within reason that someone could be as competitive with a $600 Glock (Vogel) as someone else with a $1500 Shadow (Mink).

NETim
01-05-2014, 05:53 PM
Design a stage scoring any C/D or -1/-3 as a miss. Bring earpro...for the whining.

OMG! :)

PPGMD
01-05-2014, 06:53 PM
Imagine that USPSA and IDPA's goal is the same, to make a painting of a tree.

IDPA is like paint by numbers.

USPSA is like someone handing you a blank canvas.

IDPA you get a course description and the rare choice you might have is to shoot the left side first, or the right side.

USPSA is much more free, at a recent USPSA match one stage had a half a dozen ways to shoot it for production. Ranging from playing it safe to running at the very edge (ie no room for make up shots), and then the normal left side vs right side.

Alaskapopo
01-05-2014, 07:04 PM
Alaskapopo has one opinion, perhaps a bit colored by his dissatisfaction with the rules changes. Full disclosure: I am a Certified IDPA SO.
Here is another:
IDPA
- Is more focused on concealed carry skills;
- Requires concealment because of concealed carry focused, but not during some courses of fire, depending;
- Limits shooters to guns that are more affordable and practical and the average Jane/Joe can buy, thus limiting "OPEN" and highly customized types of guns;
- Does provide great latitude in how to shoot the COF, but because of COVER penalties and SHOOTING PRIORITY penalties gives you an incentive to shoot by "slicing the pie" or near to far. You can shoot it however you want...you just live with the penalties;
- IDPA does not pretend to be training. It does allow you to practice your skills using cover and concealment and is more tactical than USPSA, but NOT tactical training, and, mainly because of safety issues, NOT a true tactical COF.
- One of the main rules that changed is that all reloads must be flat-footed and behind cover if cover is available.

USPSA
- Is more focused on pure competition and incorporates few tactical features;
- Does not require concealment;
- Provides divisions that allow for any types of handguns that are generally safe and ranges will allow;
- Does provide great latitude in how to shoot the COF, but has no cover or shooting priority penalties (You can choose to shoot them that way if you wish),
- Does allow lots of flexibility in where to stow extra mags, how to holster, more rounds in a magazine, etc.

BOTH IDPA AND USPSA
- Due to COF safety concerns restrict how close you can be when shooting steel;
- Due to COF safety concerns restrict going back to targets you have already engaged if doing so would create a muzzle violation or safety hazard;
- Have muzzle and finger restrictions while engaging targets, and may restrict full freedom of movement or moving with finger inside trigger guard;
With respect USPSA does not cost much more to shoot if you stick to production or single stack all you need is a few more magazines and more ammo for more shooting. Also if you want to make people use "cover" in USPSA you just set up fault lines. Also IDPA itself does not pretend to be training a lot of folks who shoot it claim to be tactical experts based solely on shooting the game. I am sure you have met these folks. In the end IDPA is another option and if it gets someone shooting thats great. Don't let my bias slow you down. One thing I do like about IDPA is the simple scoring that places a bit more emphasis on accuracy.
Pat

PPGMD
01-05-2014, 07:09 PM
Also if you want to make people use "cover" in USPSA you just set up fault lines.

I've had more hard shots around cover in USPSA due to fault lines than I've ever had in IDPA.

Alaskapopo
01-05-2014, 07:15 PM
I've had more hard shots around cover in USPSA due to fault lines than I've ever had in IDPA.

I agree and in IDPA your not really using cover correctly anyway. This is what I see shooters do, run up to the object labeled as cover lean out like a jack in the box and shoot from outside to the inside target. There is not holding back from cover and slowly slicing the pie so only one target becomes visible at a time. The reason of course is this is slower and you will lose the match. There needs to be a distinction between training and competition. I like both and both in their place not mixed.
Pat

Wendell
01-05-2014, 08:07 PM
A computer-generated teddybear-actor video entitled "IDPA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGgVY6Ref4I)" is worth, like, a million words.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGgVY6Ref4I

IMO

littlejerry
01-05-2014, 08:19 PM
I agree and in IDPA your not really using cover correctly anyway. This is what I see shooters do, run up to the object labeled as cover lean out like a jack in the box and shoot from outside to the inside target. There is not holding back from cover and slowly slicing the pie so only one target becomes visible at a time. The reason of course is this is slower and you will lose the match. There needs to be a distinction between training and competition. I like both and both in their place not mixed.
Pat

I agree 100%. The "must shoot from cover" rule is a joke in practice at the clubs I've shot at. There is no slicing the pie, its lean out as far as you can and engage the targets. Also, "slicing the pie" may not always be the best thing to do in a real situation- shooting on the move may be a more sound decision, but thats a no-no in the world of IDPA. People also consistently crowd cover in IDPA. I've even gotten dinged for not practically dry-humping a barricade before.

The "tactical order" of engagement can be ridiculous at times. If I lean out and see a full silhouette 15 yards away, and half a silhouette 5 yards away, which should I shoot? Is there a correct answer? What if my sights just happen to be aligned on the "incorrect" target when I lean out? Would it be "more tactical" for me to break my aim on a threat, engage another target, and then come back to it?

The biggest problem I have with IDPA is that it claims to be more tactical/realistic/carry/self-defense focused and yet the actual rules(or their implementation/interpretation) are completely contradictory with actual good practice techniques.

At the end of the day the actual shooting and fundamentals are held to a higher standard in USPSA. IDPA focuses more on procedure and choreography.

Alaskapopo
01-05-2014, 08:44 PM
I agree 100%. The "must shoot from cover" rule is a joke in practice at the clubs I've shot at. There is no slicing the pie, its lean out as far as you can and engage the targets. Also, "slicing the pie" may not always be the best thing to do in a real situation- shooting on the move may be a more sound decision, but thats a no-no in the world of IDPA. People also consistently crowd cover in IDPA. I've even gotten dinged for not practically dry-humping a barricade before.

The "tactical order" of engagement can be ridiculous at times. If I lean out and see a full silhouette 15 yards away, and half a silhouette 5 yards away, which should I shoot? Is there a correct answer? What if my sights just happen to be aligned on the "incorrect" target when I lean out? Would it be "more tactical" for me to break my aim on a threat, engage another target, and then come back to it?

The biggest problem I have with IDPA is that it claims to be more tactical/realistic/carry/self-defense focused and yet the actual rules(or their implementation/interpretation) are completely contradictory with actual good practice techniques.

At the end of the day the actual shooting and fundamentals are held to a higher standard in USPSA. IDPA focuses more on procedure and choreography.

Another reason why I am dropping IDPA off of my matches to shoot is its too easy to get the game your playing confused and eat a bunch of penalties because your used to shooting USPSA or three gun. IDPA is harder on the shooter as far as having to remember the rules like tactical order like you mentioned.
Pat

1911Nut
01-05-2014, 09:15 PM
USPSA and IDPA are both games.

They are different enough that they have different rules.

Typically, there are processes in place that provide avenues for changing the rules if the demand for those changes is strong enough. Realistically rules changes take time and are often not too huge in magnitude.

One of the great things about living in this country is our freedom of choice. If a shooter likes IDPA and USPSA, he can shoot in both disciplines. If he only likes one of them, he can shoot in that discipline. And if he doesn't like either of the disciplines, it is his right to choose to not participate.

It is my opinion that non-constructive criticism of any shooting sport creates a division among shooters who choose sides. And that division among shooters is something we CANNOT afford the let happen. We have enough naysayers and enemies of our sport and our Second Amendment rights. We don't need to help them.

YMMV

ToddG
01-05-2014, 11:01 PM
As I said, some people like Fords and some people like Chevys. Some people care so much that they bad mouth the other. Some people care so much they bad mouth the people who choose the other.

Both games have their advantages and disadvantages. Both games wax and wane over time. IDPA wouldn't exist without USPSA; IDPA wouldn't exist without people being unhappy with USPSA. Production wouldn't exist without IDPA; Production wouldn't exist without people being unhappy with IDPA. That cycle will continue.

Some of the things USPSA shooters say they dislike about IDPA are exactly the things I like about IDPA.

Some of the things IDPA shooters say they dislike about USPSA are exactly the things I like about USPSA.

As for the most vitriolic complaints, they're often most appropriately directed at clubs or individuals, not the sport as a whole.

SLG and I shot a few times at a club -- doesn't matter which sport -- where the stages were often ridiculous and some of the shooters, even some of the match officials, thought they knew ten times more about shooting and guns than they did. When it became obvious that was business as usual at this club I stopped going. It didn't change my opinion of the sport. I just didn't like that particular club.

Alaskapopo
01-06-2014, 01:55 AM
As I said, some people like Fords and some people like Chevys. Some people care so much that they bad mouth the other. Some people care so much they bad mouth the people who choose the other.

Both games have their advantages and disadvantages. Both games wax and wane over time. IDPA wouldn't exist without USPSA; IDPA wouldn't exist without people being unhappy with USPSA. Production wouldn't exist without IDPA; Production wouldn't exist without people being unhappy with IDPA. That cycle will continue.

Some of the things USPSA shooters say they dislike about IDPA are exactly the things I like about IDPA.

Some of the things IDPA shooters say they dislike about USPSA are exactly the things I like about USPSA.

As for the most vitriolic complaints, they're often most appropriately directed at clubs or individuals, not the sport as a whole.

SLG and I shot a few times at a club -- doesn't matter which sport -- where the stages were often ridiculous and some of the shooters, even some of the match officials, thought they knew ten times more about shooting and guns than they did. When it became obvious that was business as usual at this club I stopped going. It didn't change my opinion of the sport. I just didn't like that particular club.

For me at least it is not the club as the club shoots both and most of the same shooter shoot both. My opinion is that IDPA is not very responsive to its shooters. In USPSA they listen to the membership and if enough people want something they do it. Such as the 8 shot revolver minor rule. IDPA seems to ignore membership requests. Also what is frustrating is they are not growing with new technology. I understand wanting to keep the money out of the sport to a degree but I would love to see a carry gun open division for guns slide mounted optics, lasers, weapon mounted lights etc. Basically if you can conceal it or if your military or an LEO you can wear it in your duty rig and its safe you can use it. That is how new technology becomes tested. IDPA seems to becoming a 1990's era SAS. As a lover of three gun I was excited about IDPA coming out with their version of multigun until I saw their rule sets. Its basically three gun lite and no one I know wants to play with those rules. Another disappointment.
Pat

cclaxton
01-06-2014, 06:17 AM
I agree 100%. The "must shoot from cover" rule is a joke in practice at the clubs I've shot at. There is no slicing the pie, its lean out as far as you can and engage the targets. Also, "slicing the pie" may not always be the best thing to do in a real situation- shooting on the move may be a more sound decision, but thats a no-no in the world of IDPA. People also consistently crowd cover in IDPA. I've even gotten dinged for not practically dry-humping a barricade before.

The "tactical order" of engagement can be ridiculous at times. If I lean out and see a full silhouette 15 yards away, and half a silhouette 5 yards away, which should I shoot? Is there a correct answer? What if my sights just happen to be aligned on the "incorrect" target when I lean out? Would it be "more tactical" for me to break my aim on a threat, engage another target, and then come back to it?

The biggest problem I have with IDPA is that it claims to be more tactical/realistic/carry/self-defense focused and yet the actual rules(or their implementation/interpretation) are completely contradictory with actual good practice techniques.

At the end of the day the actual shooting and fundamentals are held to a higher standard in USPSA. IDPA focuses more on procedure and choreography.

First, we should all be as positive as we can about all shooting sports. Any shooting sport that gets people to practice in an environment where they are on the clock, in particular, helps build critical shooting skills. It is not IDPA versus USPSA, it's IDPA and USPSA. I shoot both and I recommend both, although I recommend new shooters start with IDPA because, in my experience, it is new shooter friendly.

I disagree with the statement that "must shoot from cover is a joke..., and lean out as far as I can....." First, I think will all agree it is best to shoot from cover, when available, right? And, the IDPA rules say that only 50% of your upper torso may be exposed to the target. If SO's are allowing people to lean our further than that, then that is a penalty. That doesn't stop competitors from leaning out too far. It also doesn't stop shooters from crowding cover. At the clubs I shoot, we specifically tell shooters not to crowd cover. But, the opportunity is there to use cover appropriately. It is up to the competitor to decide HOW to use it...that is a skill issue, not a game issue.

I also disagree with the statement "shooting on the move may be a more sound decision, but thats a no-no in the world of IDPA." That is factually untrue. IDPA encourages the design of COF that includes shooting on the move. Sometimes an entire stage can be shooting while moving, and the Classifier includes shooting while retreating and advancing. Why would you want to step out from behind cover to engage targets in the open and thus expose yourself to the threats?...this makes no sense at all. If you want to have a COF that has you move from one point of cover to another, and engage targets in the open, that is allowed.

When leaning out, it always makes sense to engage the first target you see. If you leaned out too far and saw more than that first target, then that is your fault, not the sport's fault. That being said, COF designs can be flawed or poorly executed. Every club/match has varying levels of skill at running matches. We are all still human and make mistakes. Setting up a COF so that it works well and doesn't tempt shooters to engage targets before their time can be challenging with some COF.

IDPA does not claim to be tactical training, nor combat training. IDPA encourages the use of cover and concealment, shooting priority, and skill development. HOW an individual decides to shoot IDPA is an individual decision. For those who conceal carry, IDPA allows shooters to develop those skills while on the clock, which induces stress. Use of cover and shooting priority is absolutely required for concealed carry situations.

What is tactics?...Tactics is choreography. It's learning to develop skills to know when to move, when to use cover, and when to engage targets. That mental gymnastics is exactly what we want people to practice. IDPA rules are not there to teach individuals the HOW, but to create an environment using cover and priority that allows those skills to develop.

In NO WAY is IDPA contradictory to the goals of concealed carry self defense.

From the perspective of shooting skills IDPA and USPSA hold the shooter to the same standard: accuracy and time, or shooting fast and accurately...they have the same goal there.

There is enough negative in the world. It is better to see the glass half full.
Cody

cclaxton
01-06-2014, 06:27 AM
SLG and I shot a few times at a club -- doesn't matter which sport -- where the stages were often ridiculous and some of the shooters, even some of the match officials, thought they knew ten times more about shooting and guns than they did. When it became obvious that was business as usual at this club I stopped going. It didn't change my opinion of the sport. I just didn't like that particular club.

This is a good point. Also, clubs do change over time. New Match Directors can turn a poorly run match into a great one. The really good clubs usually have waitlists.
Cody

rob_s
01-06-2014, 06:41 AM
For me at least it is not the club as the club shoots both and most of the same shooter shoot both. My opinion is that IDPA is not very responsive to its shooters. In USPSA they listen to the membership and if enough people want something they do it. Such as the 8 shot revolver minor rule. IDPA seems to ignore membership requests. Also what is frustrating is they are not growing with new technology. I understand wanting to keep the money out of the sport to a degree but I would love to see a carry gun open division for guns slide mounted optics, lasers, weapon mounted lights etc. Basically if you can conceal it or if your military or an LEO you can wear it in your duty rig and its safe you can use it. That is how new technology becomes tested. IDPA seems to becoming a 1990's era SAS. As a lover of three gun I was excited about IDPA coming out with their version of multigun until I saw their rule sets. Its basically three gun lite and no one I know wants to play with those rules. Another disappointment.
Pat

If you want IDPA to be more like USPSA, you're in luck. there's a gun game that is exactly like USPSA! It's called... USPSA!

rob_s
01-06-2014, 06:49 AM
The bottom line is that all this back and forth and bitching from one side about the other is sad and pathetic. Especially so given that all most people are doing is defending the game they started shooting first (often only based on locale or internal club politics or a "feeling" at their first match, or what their friends were doing at the time, or any manner of other nonsense reasons that have nothing to do with the game itself) or the game they performed best in (which, again, has little to do with the game) and all of their yammering is really nothing more than defending their position, not any real intelligent evaluation of the "other game".

I shoot both games and listen to both groups whine and complain about their experiences with the other. In general, it just makes the individual whiner sound stupid, since so often their complaints are based in ignorance, inexperience, bias towards their first love, stubbornness, and entering into the "new" game with foregone conclusions and an agenda other than simply shooting and having fun. For every "tactical ted" shooting IDPA as ninja training there's some "gamer" wannabe shooting a $3k pistol in Open and finishing below half the field in Production. both games have their share of hypocrites and half-wits.

Which is why I just go to the match, stand off to the side smoking my cigar until called upon to paste or to shoot, and leave immediately after my last shot fired. Since I started doing that, my enjoyment level at both events increased exponentially.

LittleLebowski
01-06-2014, 07:18 AM
simply shooting and having fun.

That's it for me and that's why I shoot. Personally, I think it's OK to have fun while shooting even if you're not tactical or if you aren't beating everyone.

NETim
01-06-2014, 08:47 AM
What I WILL whine about is the folks who don't pitch in and help tape, paint, chase brass, whatever, to keep the shoot running smoothly. :mad:

This past Saturday morning, it was kinda cool in the indoor range and it didn't take long for many to drift back into the store, where it was warm. Naturally just a handful were left to keep the match running.

Then, when we thought we were done and just beginning to tear down, a guy came running in, upset 'cause he hadn't shot yet. Can't even make the effort yourself to keep tabs on things and get yourself in the queue????? :mad:

Some of us thought ahead and took advantage of today's technology and wore warm clothes. (I kicked it old school and wore a down vest.) If you can afford to buy a gun and ammo, I think you can afford to buy warm clothing.

And no, you're not special. You're unique, just like everyone else. :)

/end of rant

littlejerry
01-06-2014, 08:47 AM
As for the most vitriolic complaints, they're often most appropriately directed at clubs or individuals, not the sport as a whole.

SLG and I shot a few times at a club -- doesn't matter which sport -- where the stages were often ridiculous and some of the shooters, even some of the match officials, thought they knew ten times more about shooting and guns than they did. When it became obvious that was business as usual at this club I stopped going. It didn't change my opinion of the sport. I just didn't like that particular club.

This is absolutely true.

I'm very critical of IDPA because of the bad club experience I've had. Unfortunately this was also my first intro to shooting sports and it really soured my mood towards them.

Then one day I tried USPSA on a whim. It was a ton of fun and I've been going back ever since then.

All of my opinions are based on 2 local IDPA clubs. It is easy to see how the sport could be fun with the right match director. Unfortunately your mileage may vary.

ToddG
01-06-2014, 12:20 PM
If you want IDPA to be more like USPSA, you're in luck. there's a gun game that is exactly like USPSA! It's called... USPSA!

http://cdni.wired.co.uk/620x413/k_n/Like_1.jpg

Don Gwinn
01-06-2014, 03:49 PM
I shot USPSA for exactly that reason--there are two local places to play USPSA, versus zero places to play IDPA.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk HD

Jared
01-06-2014, 06:12 PM
I don't remember exactly why I chose USPSA over IDPA, but I have immensely enjoyed my time with USPSA. It has challenged me in ways I never expected to be, and motivated me to improve my shooting in a way that nothing I had ever tried before did. That said, there are several comments in this thread that are spot on. The third match I ever shot was shot at a different club than the first 2 had been. There were two RO's there (that wound up RO'ing my squad) that I did not care for in the least, and I didn't enjoy that match very much. Had that been my first exposure, I don't know if I would have shot USPSA again. As it was, I knew there was a good club just as close to me, so I simply stuck with the club I liked better. I tried a third club in October, and had the time of my life. The people you are around does make a HUGE difference, regardless of which sport you choose.

I also intend to shoot at least a couple IDPA matches this year. I fully intend to approach it as a different game, play by their rules, and see how I like it. If I enjoy it, then that's a plus, if not, it will be a learning experience.

I do agree that the bickering and such is counterproductive. No more counterproductive than some of the other bickering between different factions within the gun owning community, but still counterproductive.

I suppose rules wise, given what I understand IDPA's mission to be, then ideally if I had taken a class from a respected defensive trainer and practiced the tactics learned there and then took those tactics to a match that they would get me through the match without penalties. From there a shooter would be able to attend subsequent matches and note their scores improving as they trained more and their skill level progressed. I don't know how to write a rule book that would cause this, and having never shot an IDPA match, I dunno how close the current reality is.

With USPSA, I'm very happy with the rules as is. I shoot Production. I like Minor scoring across the board. I like the equipment restrictions. I like the mag capacity restrictions. I wouldn't change much even if I could.

ST911
01-06-2014, 10:08 PM
I shoot both USPSA (Production) and IDPA (SSP) club matches. I shot every match I could in 2013, and will add some travel matches in 2014. My fun, learning, and goals aren't affected by the organization that governs the match. I use simple EDC guns and gear, shoot for fun, and place well.

I don't get the angst and allegiances, and those making it an either-or proposition. However, I'm also an unrelenting Packer fan that enjoys Vikings games at the Metrodome, so perhaps I have larger issues.

BaiHu
01-06-2014, 11:08 PM
What I WILL whine about is the folks who don't pitch in and help tape, paint, chase brass, whatever, to keep the shoot running smoothly. :mad:


Ditto for matches as well as classes. Grrr :mad:

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

GJM
01-06-2014, 11:58 PM
I don't think it is the "tactical" rules that ultimately gives people heartburn about IDPA. I think the problem is the subjective nature of procedural penalties, and how that impacts match results.

Consider Gunsite and the Rogers Shooting School. At Gunsite, you shot all week, and mid-day Friday you received a Marksman, Marksman First Class, or E ticket. The process was anything but transparent, and the tickets were not awarded based on some open tabulation of scores on standard exercises, but rather on the subjective evaluation of the coaches. Often Col. Cooper was quite involved in those behind the scenes determinations. Contrast that with the Rogers School. You shoot the same standardized test six times during the week, and high shooter was the one with the highest cumulative score, with Basic, Intermediate and Advanced tickets awarded based on your highest single score on the test. There was a lot more heartburn with the Gunsite style of "scoring," because of its subjective nature of the evaluation process. Lots of people are unhappy with their scores at Rogers, but that unhappiness is with their own performance, and not with someone else's subjective impression of their performance.

In USPSA, short of a judgment call on breaking the 180 or something similar, there is very little subjectivity in the scoring. Here is your time, here are your points -- done. In IDPA, it seems like there are many more subjective determinations by those running the match, that can greatly influence your score. When folks complain about IDPA, they focus on things that they disagree with "tactically." However, I don't think that is the root of the problem. They are both games, and games often have their unique rules. Today we need to shoot support hand only, with five rounds in a magazine -- OK I can do that. I need to reload standing still, I can do that. And if the penalties for doing things wrong were automatic and generated by a machine, probably still no problem. The rub comes when some guy you don't particularly know or like, probably carrying an XDM under his fishing vest, starts lecturing/banging you with procedurals that feel subjective. Especially when someone else in your squad doesn't get a procedural for doing the same thing. If IDPA could minimize the subjectivity, I think it would go a long way to reducing the heartburn experienced by those participating.

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 12:08 AM
Consider Gunsite and the Rogers Shooting School. At Gunsite, you shot all week, and mid-day Friday you received a Marksman, Marksman First Class, or E ticket. The process was anything but transparent, and the tickets were not awarded based on some open tabulation of scores on standard exercises, but rather on the subjective evaluation of the coaches...

You summed up my Gunsite experience. I shot Weaver until Wednesday when I realized it simply doesn't work for me. So I shot the school test in Iso, I destroyed them getting the highest score in the class. I then dominated the shoot off, despite the fact that my 9mm had trouble knocking down the steel (I would often have to put 2-3 hits where the 45 guys only needed one). And what did I get, Marksman.

Alaskapopo
01-07-2014, 12:16 AM
You summed up my Gunsite experience. I shot Weaver until Wednesday when I realized it simply doesn't work for me. So I shot the school test in Iso, I destroyed them getting the highest score in the class. I then dominated the shoot off, despite the fact that my 9mm had trouble knocking down the steel (I would often have to put 2-3 hits where the 45 guys only needed one). And what did I get, Marksman.
Agreed I will never pay money to go to Gunsite. I would not even go if I got a free class.
Pat

Alaskapopo
01-07-2014, 12:19 AM
First, we should all be as positive as we can about all shooting sports. Any shooting sport that gets people to practice in an environment where they are on the clock, in particular, helps build critical shooting skills. It is not IDPA versus USPSA, it's IDPA and USPSA. I shoot both and I recommend both, although I recommend new shooters start with IDPA because, in my experience, it is new shooter friendly.

I disagree with the statement that "must shoot from cover is a joke..., and lean out as far as I can....." First, I think will all agree it is best to shoot from cover, when available, right? And, the IDPA rules say that only 50% of your upper torso may be exposed to the target. If SO's are allowing people to lean our further than that, then that is a penalty. That doesn't stop competitors from leaning out too far. It also doesn't stop shooters from crowding cover. At the clubs I shoot, we specifically tell shooters not to crowd cover. But, the opportunity is there to use cover appropriately. It is up to the competitor to decide HOW to use it...that is a skill issue, not a game issue.

I also disagree with the statement "shooting on the move may be a more sound decision, but thats a no-no in the world of IDPA." That is factually untrue. IDPA encourages the design of COF that includes shooting on the move. Sometimes an entire stage can be shooting while moving, and the Classifier includes shooting while retreating and advancing. Why would you want to step out from behind cover to engage targets in the open and thus expose yourself to the threats?...this makes no sense at all. If you want to have a COF that has you move from one point of cover to another, and engage targets in the open, that is allowed.

When leaning out, it always makes sense to engage the first target you see. If you leaned out too far and saw more than that first target, then that is your fault, not the sport's fault. That being said, COF designs can be flawed or poorly executed. Every club/match has varying levels of skill at running matches. We are all still human and make mistakes. Setting up a COF so that it works well and doesn't tempt shooters to engage targets before their time can be challenging with some COF.

IDPA does not claim to be tactical training, nor combat training. IDPA encourages the use of cover and concealment, shooting priority, and skill development. HOW an individual decides to shoot IDPA is an individual decision. For those who conceal carry, IDPA allows shooters to develop those skills while on the clock, which induces stress. Use of cover and shooting priority is absolutely required for concealed carry situations.

What is tactics?...Tactics is choreography. It's learning to develop skills to know when to move, when to use cover, and when to engage targets. That mental gymnastics is exactly what we want people to practice. IDPA rules are not there to teach individuals the HOW, but to create an environment using cover and priority that allows those skills to develop.

In NO WAY is IDPA contradictory to the goals of concealed carry self defense.

From the perspective of shooting skills IDPA and USPSA hold the shooter to the same standard: accuracy and time, or shooting fast and accurately...they have the same goal there.

There is enough negative in the world. It is better to see the glass half full.
Cody

Cody with respect 50% of your upper body is a lot. The way cover is used in a match is a joke compared to the way you use it in real life when you think you might actually get shot. The reality is you can't put good tactics on the clock. That is why I feel tactics and shooting competitions need to be kept in separate parts of your brain. Yes competition will hone your gun handling skills and make you a better shooter but a competition rather its IDPA or USPSA is not going to teach what is or is not good tactics.

Pat

GJM
01-07-2014, 12:21 AM
You summed up my Gunsite experience. I shot Weaver until Wednesday when I realized it simply doesn't work for me. So I shot the school test in Iso, I destroyed them getting the highest score in the class. I then dominated the shoot off, despite the fact that my 9mm had trouble knocking down the steel (I would often have to put 2-3 hits where the 45 guys only needed one). And what did I get, Marksman.

I have taken enough Gunsite courses over the years to have collected Marksman, Marksman First Class and E tickets. I think most, but not all, tickets are awarded fairly. However, because the process was not transparent, and largely based on subjective criteria, it was almost impossible to know whether the evaluations were fair. I think it was pretty well accepted, especially by those that knew Col Cooper well, that tall, handsome shooters using the Weaver and a 1911 in a Yaqui slide were a lot more likely to get E tickets than shorter, heavier, long haired shooters using the Iso and a crunchenticker.

Back to IDPA, the more subjective the final score is, the more unhappiness.

Alaskapopo
01-07-2014, 12:22 AM
If you want IDPA to be more like USPSA, you're in luck. there's a gun game that is exactly like USPSA! It's called... USPSA!

Not responding to your shooters will just end diminishing the number of shooters you have in the long run.
Pat

GJM
01-07-2014, 12:24 AM
Agreed I will never pay money to go to Gunsite. I would not even go if I got a free class.
Pat

Pat, Gunsite has an incredible facility, that allows you to do stuff that just isn't possible at most other schools. Many courses are ungraded, and you always have the option of requesting to not be graded in every course. The practical rifles courses, in particular, are world class.

YVK
01-07-2014, 01:10 AM
If everyone agrees that both are games, no less but no more than games, then there is this question

2028

AtomicToaster
01-07-2014, 02:04 AM
While I prefer USPSA, I also help run a local IDPA club.

Things i prefer about IDPA:

-Must draw from 'concealment'
-More slidelock reloads, as a result of the rules
-Scoring system with a greater emphasis on accuracy

Things I prefer about USPSA:
-Shoot 'em as you see 'em
-Longer stages with few restrictions on stage design
-More objectivity regarding penalties

I really like the premise of IDPA, that is, a 'tactically-oriented' shooting game, but there are some things that simply don't translate well to a competitive environment. Not to say that they couldn't have done better, they most certainly could have, but...it is what it is. I treat IDPA simply as a game with a different rule set. I get to design stages for our local IDPA matches often, and though it's frustrating to have to keep within the rules during that process, bite-sized 'tactical' stages can be a lot of fun to put together. As long as you can stand the guys who, during the pre-match safety brief while giving their rundown of the rules, say 'because this is what you should do in a gunfight', IDPA can be a lot of fun. The BIG negative, and damned-near dealbreaker, is, as others have said, the subjectivity of penalties. It's proven very difficult to get consistent cover calls among the SOs in our tiny, fledgeling club. I can only imagine the level of frustration in larger clubs or at higher-tier matches.

I really have no complaints about USPSA. It's a solidly-designed game that manages to be as fair and fun as possible.

At the end of the day, in either sport, I get to run around and shoot through a few courses of fire in a relatively safe environment with people who, in their own ways, share my love of pistolcraft. How can that be a bad day? :)

Alaskapopo
01-07-2014, 03:51 AM
Pat, Gunsite has an incredible facility, that allows you to do stuff that just isn't possible at most other schools. Many courses are ungraded, and you always have the option of requesting to not be graded in every course. The practical rifles courses, in particular, are world class.

With respect I don't want to have Weaver shoved down my throat again. Had that in the Academy despite being able to out shoot my instructors with ISO.
Pat

ToddG
01-07-2014, 08:27 AM
If IDPA could minimize the subjectivity, I think it would go a long way to reducing the heartburn experienced by those participating.

Very astute. Think of how many people boycotted IDPA over the "round dumping" rule.

Beyond that, most of the complaints I hear about IDPA tend to revolve around "it's not like USPSA." I can't reload while running toward the next shooting position; there's too little stage strategy; etc. I believe rob_s addressed the solution to those complaints, above.

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 09:24 AM
...there's too little stage strategy...

There isn't too little stage strategy, there is NO STAGE STRATEGY. It is a rare rare day that an IDPA stage actually gives you a choice of how you shoot it.

And this is a complaint I don't understand, what is wrong with making people think their way through stages, adjusting strategies on the fly as the situation changes? That sounds a lot like how people describe combat.

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 09:27 AM
Pat, Gunsite has an incredible facility, that allows you to do stuff that just isn't possible at most other schools. Many courses are ungraded, and you always have the option of requesting to not be graded in every course. The practical rifles courses, in particular, are world class.

Agreed, Gunsite has fantastic facilities probably the best available to normal people outside of Blackwater. But even when you compare it to Blackwater, Gunsite uses almost all of it's facilities in classes open to civilians, and has natural terrain ranges.

ToddG
01-07-2014, 09:35 AM
There isn't too little stage strategy, there is NO STAGE STRATEGY. It is a rare rare day that an IDPA stage actually gives you a choice of how you shoot it.

And this is a complaint I don't understand, what is wrong with making people think their way through stages, adjusting strategies on the fly as the situation changes? That sounds a lot like how people describe combat.

Sitting around looking at a bunch of targets in a static field and spending 10+ minutes figuring out how best to game it is how people describe combat?

I absolutely get that some people like the strategy aspect of USPSA. It adds a completely different level of complexity to the game, like chess vs Simon Says. But I also get that some people just want to show up and shoot, not figure out how many steps they can save if they shoot Box A before Box B or vice versa.

IDPA is absolutely like shooting a bunch of timed, specific drills -- sometimes complex, sometimes simple. If someone enjoys the added facet of stage planning that USPSA brings then that's all well and good but it doesn't make one better than the other. It's just something some people like and some people don't.

Urban_Redneck
01-07-2014, 09:50 AM
I started shooting IDPA in the spring of 2013. I went in totally blind, the rules and subsequent procedural penalties frustrated me as I felt they unfairly discounted my shooting ability :mad: Cover, tactical sequence, reload with retention, and tactical priority, became my enemy.

After laying off shooting most of the summer and well into the fall, I grew up. I paid close attention to the stage descriptions, I focused on my front sight to get -0 hits, and even began to plan foot work to maintain cover. In a nutshell, I slowed down to my rate of comprehension of the rules. My scores are improving.

While I am still learning, I'll posit that if you are unable to win an IDPA match, you are likely unable to win a USPSA match and vice versa.

$0.02

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 10:22 AM
Sitting around looking at a bunch of targets in a static field and spending 10+ minutes figuring out how best to game it is how people describe combat?

I didn't say that did I?


I absolutely get that some people like the strategy aspect of USPSA. It adds a completely different level of complexity to the game, like chess vs Simon Says. But I also get that some people just want to show up and shoot, not figure out how many steps they can save if they shoot Box A before Box B or vice versa.

This is what people that don't shoot much USPSA seem to miss about stage strategy. There is much more to it than figuring out how to shoot the stage, there is adjusting the strategy as you shoot it. Miss a steel target, having to do a make up shot, did you plan for that shot in your reload points, if not now your reload points might have to change, which might change your shooting order, etc etc.

As I mentioned I've been to some very good matches where the stage designer gives alternate ways to shoot the stage, often the alternate ways have disadvantages (like for example the moving targets if missed off the activator are only available via a prone port). And many times these is much more than saving a couple of steps moving around the shooting area, it may be opting to shoot a long shot and having a more advantageous reload vs an easier close range shot with a standing reload.

By allowing the competitor to design their own stage strategy you can tailor your stage strategy to your shooting skills. I often take longer shots than some of my other competitors.

But that isn't to say that a newbie can't come and join in the fun. Most competitors will help a newbie by giving them a basic stage strategy, it may not be tailored for the shooters skill level if they any beyond the basic level, but it will get them through their first few matches until they can start thinking their way through the stage.

BN
01-07-2014, 10:24 AM
There isn't too little stage strategy, there is NO STAGE STRATEGY. It is a rare rare day that an IDPA stage actually gives you a choice of how you shoot it.


You're shooting at the wrong IDPA clubs. :) At one of the recent stages that I designed, we had around 80 shooters. I think every one of them shot the stage a different way. ;)

Alaskapopo
01-07-2014, 02:18 PM
You're shooting at the wrong IDPA clubs. :) At one of the recent stages that I designed, we had around 80 shooters. I think every one of them shot the stage a different way. ;)

That is not how IDPA stages are typically from my experience either. That is what makes it good for new shooters but boring for more experienced ones. If you have stage designers getting away from that that is good.

pat

JeffJ
01-07-2014, 02:25 PM
You're shooting at the wrong IDPA clubs. :) At one of the recent stages that I designed, we had around 80 shooters. I think every one of them shot the stage a different way. ;)

And 79 got procedurals! I kid, I kid :)

GJM
01-07-2014, 02:33 PM
And 79 got procedurals! I kid, I kid :)

Actually, all 80 shot the stage in an identical fashion. 20 shooters received no procedurals, 20 shooters got 1 procedural, 20 shooters got 2 procedurals, 15 shooters got 3, and the rest had their score sheets changed after the match finished because the match director spotted some procedurals from afar. :)

cclaxton
01-07-2014, 03:17 PM
On Subjectivity of IDPA calls. Last Year I shot the Beast of the East, and they had a dedicated SO whose job was to do nothing other than check for cover violations and foot faults and out of sequence shots. The problem IDPA had in the past was putting all of that, plus watching the gun, plus watching for safety on the Primary SO. The new rules define a Primary SO, a Scorekeeper SO and a Chief SO. Duties may be assigned to each to ensure a fair and efficient match. In fact, all the sanctioned matches that I have shot recently had separate observers when needed. Not all COF need to watch for cover or sequence. I think this has greatly improved the objectivity of the penalty calls. It is not possible to eliminate subjectivity because the superhumans are busy with other things, so we have to use ordinary humans. They are going to make a bad call from time to time.

On IDPA HQ Responsiveness: I had an issue with the liability and accountability of SO's under the version 1 of the rulebook. (We are now on version 1.2). I wrote a respectful private email to HQ explaining which parts of the rulebook has the language that would have made SO's a lawsuit target in the case of injury. They removed all of that language. (I was not the only one pointing this out, I am sure.) But my point is this: They are responsive to the membership when submitted respectfully, and when it is reasonable. However, the advisory board that oversees the shooting parts of IDPA may not agree with the membership on some issues, and they, like any committee, votes and makes a decision about shooting rules. There is often more than one way, and more than two ways to implement a shooting rule, and well-intentioned people can often disagree on how to solve a particular shooting situation. I don't happen to think that makes one of them wrong, but that one point of view simply won the vote/debate that day. IDPA is not a .ORG (although maybe it should be), and that means that they don't have to bend to the will of the membership. But, it has been my experience, that with respectful and thoughtful and wide support, they will make changes. Those changes doesn't always happen as fast as we want it to. In the meantime, I continue to support the sport and enjoy it.

On Playing the Sport: At least 90% of this sport is MENTAL. And to the extent that IDPA forces mental gymnastics on us while shooting a firearm under the clock (stress), then that is a good thing. After all, what we are really doing is training our MINDS to think about safety, safe cover, shooting priority, shoot/no-shoot, ammo management, and malfunction management. It has been my experience that IDPA challenges me mentally much more than USPSA while still stressing accuracy. USPSA challenges me even more to shoot fast and accurate. That is why doing both makes the most sense. And doing KSTG makes me adapt, although I am not ready to appendix carry.

I think IDPA and KSTG are the most approachable for new shooters, and if this helps ordinary people who conceal carry to be better shooters and thinkers and operate reliable hardware, and learn to be safe 100% of the time, then it is a good thing.
Cody

BN
01-07-2014, 03:28 PM
And 79 got procedurals! I kid, I kid :)

Actually we had one DQ for breaking the 180. That's about the only way anyone could have gotten a penalty on that stage. ;) I always try to leave options for the shooter.

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 04:22 PM
It has been my experience that IDPA challenges me mentally much more than USPSA while still stressing accuracy. USPSA challenges me even more to shoot fast and accurate. That is why doing both makes the most sense. And doing KSTG makes me adapt, although I am not ready to appendix carry.

Huh? What?!?

Jared
01-07-2014, 05:04 PM
As much as I hate to say it, I have seen USPSA rules enforced unevenly too. That match that I mentioned previously that I didn't enjoy had that exact problem. I wasn't one of the shooters penalized, but I did watch one shooter get a DQ for something that others were getting verbal warnings for. It was a major distraction. There were other problems that match, but this aspect was the worst.

BN
01-07-2014, 07:52 PM
Why the difference between IDPA/USPSA? They're both gun gaming, so why the peculiarities regarding weapon features?


I just realized that the original question hasn't been answered. ;) I've been shooting IPSC/USPSA since 1980 and I've been shooting IDPA since 1996.

First was IPSC/USPSA where between the early 1980s until the mid to late 1990s, the gun designs were changing every year and a shooter needed the very latest expensive modifications in order to be competitive. Everybody shot in "open". There were no other divisions. Around 1990 USPSA started "Limited" which was supposed to be a place where the single stack 1911s could play, but this also soon turned into an equipment race.

Around 1996 a few top USPSA shooters, along with a few others, started IDPA. Until IDPA there was no place where a stock service pistol could be competitive. With IDPA there was now a place for the common "defensive" pistols that people really carried. The common SSP pistols of the day were Beretta 92s, S&W 5906, Sigs, etc. Striker fired pistols soon came to be popular. Revolvers now had a place in competition as well as the 1911s.

Around 2000, after USPSA saw the sucess of IDPA SSP, they started "Production" for the defensive pistol type.

IPSC was originally to see what equipment was the best. At that time most competitors used .45 ACP 1911s with a few HiPowers and Revolvers. Equipment changed to meet the challenge.

IDPA was to eliminate the equipment war as much as possible and allow competitors to use more common equipment with out having to spend large amounts of money to keep up.

Lots of discussion about bad experiences with both sports. I have shot both and had good and bad with both sports. It is [B][I]ALWAYS[I][B] a local problem. One bad apple can spoil the barrel. Both sports have pretty good but not perfect rule books. Support the shooting sports. If you can't say anything good, then don't say anything at all.

A lot has changed in the last few years and maybe a little history will help. :)

ToddG
01-07-2014, 08:57 PM
This is what people that don't shoot much USPSA seem to miss about stage strategy. There is much more to it than figuring out how to shoot the stage, there is adjusting the strategy as you shoot it. Miss a steel target, having to do a make up shot, did you plan for that shot in your reload points, if not now your reload points might have to change, which might change your shooting order, etc etc.

I don't see how that's any different than IDPA, then. In fact back when dumping was verboten it was a huge issue because you had to be thinking not only about your reload points but whether you could get called for dumping because you called a bad shot but weren't sure exactly how bad.


As I mentioned I've been to some very good matches where the stage designer gives alternate ways to shoot the stage, often the alternate ways have disadvantages (like for example the moving targets if missed off the activator are only available via a prone port). And many times these is much more than saving a couple of steps moving around the shooting area, it may be opting to shoot a long shot and having a more advantageous reload vs an easier close range shot with a standing reload.

Like I said, I get all that and have been to plenty of matches like that. The point is that I've met more than a few people who don't consider "stage strategy" a fun part of a match and/or it doesn't address what they want to get out of a match.

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 09:05 PM
I don't see how that's any different than IDPA, then. In fact back when dumping was verboten it was a huge issue because you had to be thinking not only about your reload points but whether you could get called for dumping because you called a bad shot but weren't sure exactly how bad.

Old round dumping IDPA there was some strategy, but these days except for when the stage description gives you a mandatory task (like strong hand shooting, or a forced reload) there is no thinking involved. Move to P1, lean out shoot targets, move to P2 repeat until end of stage; reload when your gun tells you.


Like I said, I get all that and have been to plenty of matches like that. The point is that I've met more than a few people who don't consider "stage strategy" a fun part of a match and/or it doesn't address what they want to get out of a match.

So the idea of thinking with a gun in your hand is out? You might as well go shoot Bianchi because once you take any strategy out of the game might as well shoot something that actually requires some skill.

ToddG
01-07-2014, 09:11 PM
Old round dumping IDPA there was some strategy, but these days except for when the stage description gives you a mandatory task (like strong hand shooting, or a forced reload) there is no thinking involved. Move to P1, lean out shoot targets, move to P2 repeat until end of stage; reload when your gun tells you.

I'm just not seeing how this is different than the thing that makes USPSA reloads combat-like. If I need make up shots it changes my plan "on the fly" regarding where my reload is going to happen and may even impact what type of reload I choose to do.


So the idea of thinking with a gun in your hand is out?

When that thinking "with a gun in your hand" happens 99% before you draw your gun during you walk through and dry runs?

Anyway, I get that you don't like IDPA. :cool:

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 09:30 PM
I'm just not seeing how this is different than the thing that makes USPSA reloads combat-like. If I need make up shots it changes my plan "on the fly" regarding where my reload is going to happen and may even impact what type of reload I choose to do.

No where am I saying that the shooting it self is "combat like" simply the expectation that you think and adapt your plan as you shoot the stage.

But these are things that IDPA doesn't have, as lets me honest with the standing reloads there is little benefit to stage planning beyond knowing how many targets you need to shoot at each position. Even without round dumping in the old rulebook you could at least plan a RWR during a long hallway.


When that thinking "with a gun in your hand" happens 99% before you draw your gun during you walk through and dry runs?

*sigh* You aren't getting it. You expect that your stage planning before you shoot is the plan you shoot after the buzzer goes off, maybe if you want to lose. Activators will trigger faster than you expect, you will miss shots, targets will take too long to open, all typically require a production shoot to change plans (sometimes radically).

ToddG
01-07-2014, 09:34 PM
Activators will trigger faster than you expect,

But not in IDPA?


you will miss shots,

But not in IDPA?


targets will take too long to open,

But not in IDPA?

I'll give you the last word, dude...

cclaxton
01-07-2014, 09:47 PM
Bill,
I am told that there is a story behind all the IDPA rules and shooting priorities. The one I heard was that shooting SEQUENCE (i.e. 1-1-2-1-1) was debated as whether it could be an option for a shooting priority. One of the founders (Bill Wilson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilson_Combat), John Sayle, Ken Hackathorn, Dick Thomas, Walt Rauch and Larry Vickers), said in response to a challenge: "The guys I shot priority are not complaining." There must be a "story" or justification for every shooting rule in IDPA. Do you happen to know of any of these stories or justifications?
Thanks,
Cody

PPGMD
01-07-2014, 09:49 PM
But not in IDPA?

But not in IDPA?

But not in IDPA?

I'll give you the last word, dude...

And that changes your plan in IDPA how? With exception of a target taking too long to open it changes nothing in IDPA. You reload when your gun goes to slide lock, or at the point that the stage procedure tells you. Regardless of what happens during a stage there are no changes to the stage procedure. During the average IDPA stage there is no thinking beyond remembering the stage procedure (Bill is the exception based on the IDPA clubs I've shot at).

While in USPSA production something as simple as a single miss on a steel target might change your entire plan drastically, it is part of the reason why I carry four magazines on my belt instead of the three that should get me through a stage theoretically.

As I've mentioned before paint by numbers vs blank canvas.

NEPAKevin
01-08-2014, 11:50 AM
"The guys I shot priority are not complaining." There must be a "story" or justification for every shooting rule in IDPA. Do you happen to know of any of these stories or justifications?


The old club course of fire book had a scenario, SS-0003, A Buy Gone Bad" which was a mock up of the alluded to unpleasantness although I heard that for safety reasons, the first two shots are not fired through the table top.

BN
01-08-2014, 12:32 PM
The old club course of fire book had a scenario, SS-0003, A Buy Gone Bad" which was a mock up of the alluded to unpleasantness although I heard that for safety reasons, the first two shots are not fired through the table top.

This stage was used at the 1997 IDPA Nationals. I heard that Walt Rauch designed this stage from an incident in his life. :)
I miss some of the old stages. :(

BN
01-08-2014, 12:56 PM
Bill,
I am told that there is a story behind all the IDPA rules and shooting priorities. The one I heard was that shooting SEQUENCE (i.e. 1-1-2-1-1) was debated as whether it could be an option for a shooting priority. One of the founders (Bill Wilson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilson_Combat), John Sayle, Ken Hackathorn, Dick Thomas, Walt Rauch and Larry Vickers), said in response to a challenge: "The guys I shot priority are not complaining." There must be a "story" or justification for every shooting rule in IDPA. Do you happen to know of any of these stories or justifications?
Thanks,
Cody

I don't know the reasoning behind some of the rules. For background, Bill Wilson, John Sayle and Ken Hackathorn were all top 16 at the USPSA Nationals shooters at one time or another. Been there, done that guys were Ken Hackathorn, Walt Rausch and Larry Vickers. John Sayle is a lawyer and I think Dick Thomas is too. So they had a wide variety of experiences going in to the forming of IDPA.

The original rule book only had 26 competition rules besides the equipment rules. :) The whole rule book was only 11 pages in a digest sized book. Sigh!! I wish we could go back.

cclaxton
01-08-2014, 02:04 PM
And that changes your plan in IDPA how? With exception of a target taking too long to open it changes nothing in IDPA. You reload when your gun goes to slide lock, or at the point that the stage procedure tells you. Regardless of what happens during a stage there are no changes to the stage procedure. During the average IDPA stage there is no thinking beyond remembering the stage procedure (Bill is the exception based on the IDPA clubs I've shot at). While in USPSA production something as simple as a single miss on a steel target might change your entire plan drastically, it is part of the reason why I carry four magazines on my belt instead of the three that should get me through a stage theoretically.As I've mentioned before paint by numbers vs blank canvas.

As others have said here, there are lots of ways to shoot an IDPA COF, just as there are for USPSA. But in IDPA there are a lot more things to think about, such as cover, priority, sequence (if applicable), and reloading. Reloading in IDPA can be just as tricky, whether slide-lock or tactical. Movement may be required in IDPA, whereas in USPSA you can move or stop...your choice. It is more challenging when you are required to move. I often see USPSA shooters run to a point where they can see the most targets, shoot what they can see, then run to the next point and shoot what they can see, etc. In IDPA we can require the shooter to keep moving, thus encouraging the shooter to shoot while moving, even if movement is slight. THAT is the kind of thing that challenges people mentally. Even within that, you can run to a certain point and walk slowly or just walk slowly or walk fast...it is up to the shooter. They can stand still and take the penalties. By adding cover and priority and movement it means your mind has to process more simultaneous activities than USPSA. I am sure you can find plenty of COF in USPSA that are more challenging that some COF in IDPA...but as a sport IDPA clearly requires more thinking.
CC

PPGMD
01-08-2014, 02:34 PM
As others have said here, there are lots of ways to shoot an IDPA COF, just as there are for USPSA.

With rare exceptions, no, not there isn't. The IDPA COF is dictated by the stage procedure. Where as the USPSA stage procedure is typically rather simple, shoot the targets within the shooting area. With exception of having to carry something, or safety rules there is nothing telling you how to move through the stages. Sure some stages might have fairly fixed course of fire due to the way it is setup, but good course designers make it so the competitor can make decisions on how the course of fire is shot. A really good USPSA stage could've a dozen ways to shoot it. Granted I am sure there are some rare stage designers that can design IDPA stages where shooters can make decisions on how to shoot it, but I've never seen it. At best I've seen a stage where you get the choice to shoot the left side, or the right side first.

Anyways you completely missed the point, with IDPA the COF is set, there is no rethinking your plan on the fly. You move when they tell you to move, you lean out from cover, shoot the targets as they become visible (tac sequence stages are rare), and then reload at slide lock unless there is a shoot on the move section. There is almost no thinking on the fly you are simply shooting the COF. That is why if you watch video of a IDPA match except for speed the runs look almost exactly alike. If you miss something or take extra shots the most it changes is when your reload happens which you had no planned point for anyways since there is no benefit to planning where your reloads occur.

cclaxton
01-08-2014, 03:07 PM
With rare exceptions, no, not there isn't. The IDPA COF is dictated by the stage procedure. Where as the USPSA stage procedure is typically rather simple, shoot the targets within the shooting area. With exception of having to carry something, or safety rules there is nothing telling you how to move through the stages. Sure some stages might have fairly fixed course of fire due to the way it is setup, but good course designers make it so the competitor can make decisions on how the course of fire is shot. A really good USPSA stage could've a dozen ways to shoot it. Granted I am sure there are some rare stage designers that can design IDPA stages where shooters can make decisions on how to shoot it, but I've never seen it. At best I've seen a stage where you get the choice to shoot the left side, or the right side first.

Anyways you completely missed the point, with IDPA the COF is set, there is no rethinking your plan on the fly. You move when they tell you to move, you lean out from cover, shoot the targets as they become visible (tac sequence stages are rare), and then reload at slide lock unless there is a shoot on the move section. There is almost no thinking on the fly you are simply shooting the COF. That is why if you watch video of a IDPA match except for speed the runs look almost exactly alike. If you miss something or take extra shots the most it changes is when your reload happens which you had no planned point for anyways since there is no benefit to planning where your reloads occur.

Things can go wrong in IDPA as well, and you do have to rethink your shots. But in USPSA you don't have to worry about cover or priority or movement when they go wrong. Let's make it simple: Clamshell target with nonthreat covering threat and head not disappearing. In IDPA if cover is available, once the clam is triggered you must still be behind cover (the feet in particular). In USPSA you don't need to think about where the feet are at. When a clam is triggered, you only have about 1-2s to get off the shots, so if you have to move to see the target after it is triggered, you MUST be considering cover before you take the shot. Now add another target you see before you see the clamshell that you must shoot while moving. It doesn't take much for the COF to become very mentally challenging. In USPSA you don't need to think about whether you are moving or whether there is cover...get there and shoot. Now don't get me wrong....I will enjoy shooting BOTH of these, and I will be slightly faster in USPSA because I didn't have to care for cover and movement. Now maybe you are arguing that because there is no prescribed COF in USPSA, the variety of possible ways to shoot is greater, I would agree. But once you have decided how you are going to shoot it (Air-gunning it and all), you have a plan that you will attempt to execute. My argument is that plan is a lot more difficult to execute in IDPA because of the simultaneous awareness required for cover and priority.

If you are not convinced, fine by me. We can just agree to disagree.
CC

Alaskapopo
01-08-2014, 09:23 PM
I wish there was more opportunities to shoot USPSA here. In the summer there are lots of choices and IDPA pretty much dies since no one wants to shoot indoors in the summer. In the winter there is only one USPSA match a month and 2 IDPA matches. Since the rotate the USPSA match between Saturday and Sunday that means I can only attend it once every 2 months. I envy you guys down south who can shoot every weekend at multiple different clubs if you want.
Pat

PPGMD
01-08-2014, 09:49 PM
My argument is that plan is a lot more difficult to execute in IDPA because of the simultaneous awareness required for cover and priority.

I would argue that those are core skills, and if you have to think about them you are going to lose. I view it no different than shooting a swinger it should be something that you do without thinking.


I envy you guys down south who can shoot every weekend at multiple different clubs if you want.

Come here in July the envy would stop. I've shot matches where by the final stage I was just in F it lets get this over with. No walk through just get up and shoot it so you don't get a DNF.

Personally I shoot at most one match a month. I spend the rest of the weekends practicing. And I will miss matches due to rain, like I did last weekend.

Alaskapopo
01-08-2014, 10:22 PM
I would argue that those are core skills, and if you have to think about them you are going to lose. I view it no different than shooting a swinger it should be something that you do without thinking.



Come here in July the envy would stop. I've shot matches where by the final stage I was just in F it lets get this over with. No walk through just get up and shoot it so you don't get a DNF.

Personally I shoot at most one match a month. I spend the rest of the weekends practicing. And I will miss matches due to rain, like I did last weekend.
Last year I shot pretty much every weekend at a match (Sunday). But I lost a good shooting buddy who is not stationed at Ft. Benning and the gas costs were starting to hurt because I have to drive 2 and a half hours to get to most matches. So this year I am cutting it back to 2 matches or less a month but I have increased my practice in town. I have bought a fair a mount of steel targets over the last year and now I found if I go out with a friend and work on skills I can get a lot more shooting in than just going to club matches. I still enjoy the matches but financially it was getting hard to keep going as often as I was. My gas bill for the month was getting to be around $500 alone in just travel and match fees and ammo on top of that probably but my spending at $800 to $900 a month.

NEPAKevin
01-09-2014, 11:34 AM
One of the biggest problems with IDPA is that too many people who comment on it seem to miss that the "I" in "IDPA" does not stand for I as in me, myself and... .

edited to add that this comment is not directed at anyone, however, if you are narcissistic enough to take it personally...

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 12:26 PM
These are my experiences with USPSA and IDPA. I am a person committed to competing with his actual concealed carry gear.

USPSA:

There are multiple divisions where I can shoot my carry gear from concealment. The technical challenges are formidable, and there are excellent shooters even at the local level. Even though USPSA isn't promoted as a concealed carry game, I have been welcomed to participate, compete, and to do so largely as I see fit for my own goals and motivations - play the game completely straight up with gamer gear, play the game with concealed carry gear, or to forsake score and play the game as if it were tactical, using the 'cover' available, pieing corners, etc. Anyone at local matches would find it easy to contact the Area Director, who is a voting member of the Board of Directors of USPSA and express opinions, wishes, and make requests directly to him. He's elected by USPSA members. I've seen the simple rules enforced fairly and evenly.

IPDA:

I don't have any experience shooting IDPA, because in an incredible turn of irony, they won't let me shoot my carry gear from concealment, since they declare AIWB illegal. During the Year Of The Tiger Teams, I communicated with IDPA via their requested avenue, which is to say I emailed them. I expressed that I would like to shoot IDPA with my carry gear from concealment (AIWB), and I received a form letter response via email thanking me for my input. I know a number of others did the same. Later, IDPA responded by not only retaining their prohibition against AIWB, but going further and clarifying that AIWB was specifically disallowed while shooting without score at local matches, in addition to the general prohibition.

I would have to put on what amounts to a gamer holster to shoot IDPA. I can use my actual carry gear from concealment in USPSA. The choice for me and my extremely limited match time is easy. And it's made even easier by the fact that, in effect, IDPA told me to take a hike.

cclaxton
01-09-2014, 12:52 PM
I happen to know there was discussion about allowing it, but safety concerns overruled the proposal. Also, it would have complicated the concealment rules. Nothing personal.
CC

NEPAKevin
01-09-2014, 01:02 PM
Also, it would have complicated the concealment rules.


I must be missing something. How would AIWB be any different than any other IWB re. concealment?

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 01:22 PM
I happen to know there was discussion about allowing it, but safety concerns overruled the proposal. Also, it would have complicated the concealment rules. Nothing personal.
CC

cclaxton,

Here is the first founding principle of IDPA:



1.1.1.
Promote safe and proficient use of firearms and equipment suitable for concealed carry self-defense.

I would argue that disallowing AIWB runs counter to that principle. If AIWB is so unsafe, why is it safely allowed in USPSA? Why are so many concealed carriers, such as those on pistol-forum, able to safely manage AIWB carry? If IDPA thinks AIWB is unsafe on its face, that doesn't make me think highly of the intelligence of the people taking that position.

Though unrelated to safety, I think the examples of lasers, MRDS, and WML being disallowed in scored IDPA competition are further examples of betrayal of their first founding principle. I personally know people who carry all those things concealed. And there are more on this forum.

Isn't it also the case that IDPA has no provision in the rules for a person to load and unload their lawfully carried firearms when arriving to and departing from a match? As far as IDPA rules are concerned, you can arrive unloaded and leave unloaded too. That is not in keeping with the practice of safe and effective concealed carry.

I don't think IDPA is as relevant to concealed carry and defensive use of the pistol as it purports to be. To borrow a phrase from John Farnam, "Watch these 'experts!'"

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 01:24 PM
I must be missing something. How would AIWB be any different than any other IWB re. concealment?

Yes, you missed the fact that those of us who carry AIWB are UNSAFE!!!!!! :rolleyes:

GJM
01-09-2014, 01:47 PM
These are my experiences with USPSA and IDPA. I am a person committed to competing with his actual concealed carry gear.


IPDA:

I don't have any experience shooting IDPA, because in an incredible turn of irony, they won't let me shoot my carry gear from concealment, since they declare AIWB illegal.

Neither surprising nor illogical. IDPA caters to a demographic that, some sub set of, has a not insignificant chance of shooting themselves drawing, no less reholstering after loading for the stage.

YVK
01-09-2014, 01:56 PM
I would have to put on what amounts to a gamer holster to shoot IDPA.

So true. Holsters that I bought to be IDPA legal don't withstand any scrutiny to be called a concealment gear. Maybe only if one wears an oversized fishing vest.

IDPA's pretense of being defensively oriented is its weakest spot, and a main cause of member's departure.

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 02:28 PM
IDPA's pretense of being defensively oriented is its weakest spot, and a main cause of member's departure.

IMO they talk out of both sides of their mouth. They will use "That isn't a practical defensive tool/technique." You point out that it is and then they will say "This is a game, but we don't want an equipment race. We want a level playing field."

The fact is that IDPA definition of practical defensive equipment is exclusively what the BOD says it is. The chances of them expanding it is quite low as the BOD selects the replacement members, and they select the Tiger Teams. Berryville has become very much the capitol of groupthink.

_JD_
01-09-2014, 02:45 PM
Hot / cold ranges, arrival and departure are all left up to the clubs.

I've been to matches that had cold safety tables and hot safety tables to load back up before heading home.

**nit including sanctioned matches.

Sent via Tapatalk and still using real words.

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 03:05 PM
Hot / cold ranges, arrival and departure are all left up to the clubs.

I've been to matches that had cold safety tables and hot safety tables to load back up before heading home.

Sent via Tapatalk and still using real words.

In USPSA, it is not left up to the club (some of whom will try to tell you that you can't arrive or leave wearing your loaded firearm.) Provisions exist at all sanctioned USPSA matches to facilitate safe gunhandling by those arriving and departing with loaded guns. Not having those provisions will lead to one or more problems: people who could otherwise carry loaded concealed handguns refraining from doing so, or people sneaking loading and unloading in pointlessly less safe circumstances (in vehicles, while driving, in public outside the range, etc.), both of which are stupid and dangerous in their own separate ways.



2.5 Unloading/Loading Station

2.5.1 If it is possible that some competitors arriving at a range where a
USPSA match is being held may be in possession of a loaded firearm
on their person (e.g. law enforcement officers, persons duly authorized
to carry a loaded firearm, etc.), match organizers should provide an
Unloading/Loading Station to enable such competitors to safely unload
their firearms prior to entering the range, and to safely load their
firearms again on departure from the range. The Unloading/Loading
Station should be conveniently located outside the entrance to the range
(or outside the portion of the range allocated to the USPSA match), it
should be clearly sign-marked and it must include a suitable impact
zone.

2.5.2 Where no Unloading/Loading station is provided, a competitor who
arrives at a match in possession of a loaded firearm and proceeds
immediately to a match official for the express purpose of safely
unloading the firearm shall not be subject to disqualification per the
provisions of Rule 10.5.13.

ToddG
01-09-2014, 03:23 PM
I must be missing something. How would AIWB be any different than any other IWB re. concealment?

Currently it's against the rules of IDPA to put your gun or magazines ahead of the centerline. That obviously precludes AIWB carry. So they'd need to create a new set of rules to cover concealment for aiwb guns (and possibly magazines). I'm quite sure they don't want people putting a fishing vest over an AIWB holster as that would immediately become the de facto standard and have nothing whatsoever to do with concealed carry.


Here is the first founding principle of IDPA:

Seriously? Shall we talk about what some of the founding principles of IPSC were? Jeff Cooper would be spinning in his grave if he saw modern USPSA matches. IDPA was created by quite a few of those early IPSC guys specifically because they didn't like how USPSA had turned its nose up at its "founding principles."

That doesn't make USPSA bad. It's evolved into something different because (a vocal segment of) the membership wanted that.


I would argue that disallowing AIWB runs counter to that principle.

Can I pocket carry in USPSA? How about a shoulder holster? Ankle holster? Fanny pack?

Believe me, I get that the anti-aiwb stance of IDPA sucks. But just because a particular piece of gear that you use is illegal doesn't make the game bad for everyone. If we're honest, the number of people shooting their actual everyday concealed carry rigs in USPSA is ridiculously small. You represent a small minority of people both in terms of shooting USPSA from concealment and shooting from aiwb. The rules of one game just happen to fit your particular choice.

I'm willing to be there are literally 100x as many people pocket carrying a pistol right now, this very moment, than there are people using an aiwb holster. If USPSA doesn't allow pocket carry then it's just as impractical from a CCW standpoint. Nor do I see you complaining about the pocket, shoulder, ankle, etc. holsters in IDPA. So let's not make this about "true to the founding fathers." This is simply a matter of one game let's you play the way you want and another doesn't let you play the way you want.


Though unrelated to safety, I think the examples of lasers, MRDS, and WML being disallowed in scored IDPA competition are further examples of betrayal of their first founding principle. I personally know people who carry all those things concealed. And there are more on this forum.

Again, that's just silly. If the bar was set at "if any person anywhere says he actually carries one" then we'd have folks shooting IDPA with 10/22's.

Can you now use lasers and WMLs in USPSA? I thought both were disallowed.

Have you ever tried getting to know the local IDPA folks to find out if you could shoot aiwb not for score? The one big club I've shot at was more than happy to oblige once they were comfortable with my competency.



Isn't it also the case that IDPA has no provision in the rules for a person to load and unload their lawfully carried firearms when arriving to and departing from a match? As far as IDPA rules are concerned, you can arrive unloaded and leave unloaded too. That is not in keeping with the practice of safe and effective concealed carry. "

Has something changed in USPSA to make it different in this respect? Last time I went to a USPSA match (years ago) we were told we couldn't unload before or load after the match on the range or in the safe area... and that if we did it in the parking lot and someone saw us we'd get banned by the host club.

I've been to countless IDPA matches where all you had to do at the end of the match was tell an RO you wanted to load up for the drive home.

edited to add: Gabe, saw your response while I typed. Do you know if that's a relatively recent (within five years) change? If so it's an awesome one and one that IDPA definitely should copy. If it's not, though, then obviously it's not being followed universally... which gets us back to the "it's more about the club than the sport" thing.

_JD_
01-09-2014, 03:32 PM
In USPSA, it is not left up to the club.

I'm speaking of IDPA. Thought I put that in there but didn't.



2.11. The question of Hot and Cold ranges at the local club level is subject to individual club policy. This issue is the sole responsibility of local clubs and is beyond IDPA control. Matches sanctioned by IDPA are required to operate under the Cold range rule, but may use Hot Bays if desired.
2.11.1. A Cold range is defined as a range where all shooters’ firearms must be unloaded unless under the direct supervision of a SO.
2.11.2. A Cold range with Hot bays is defined as "a range that does not allow loaded firearms in the holster outside of the shooting bays but does allow for loaded firearms in the holster within the shooting bays as directed by and under the supervision of the SOs”. Loaded firearms may only be handled while on the firing line under the direct supervision of a SO.
2.11.2.1. With direct supervision from the SO, an entire squad of shooters will line up across the bay, face down range and will “Load And Make Ready” as a group.
2.11.2.2. The perimeter of the bay will be well defined as well as any area designated as a "Safe Area" where handling of ammunition and loaded firearms is not permitted. A procedure for requesting to be unloaded to exit the bay will be established by the CSO and explained to all participants during the stage briefing. If a shooter for any reason needs to leave a Hot Bay, the shooter must contact one of the SOs in that bay to safely unload the firearm, before leaving the bay.
2.11.2.3. If a shooter for any reason does not wish to load his firearm with the group, the shooter is not to be penalized.
2.11.2.4. As each shooter finishes the stage he/she will be given the “Unload And Show Clear command, and upon completion, his/her firearm will remain unloaded until the next stage. The shooter may then leave the shooting bay if needed without contacting the SO.
2.11.3. A Hot range is defined as a range where each shooter has the choice to carry a loaded firearm at any time. Loaded or unloaded firearms may only be handled while on the firing line and under the direct supervision of a SO.


Sent via Tapatalk and still using real words.

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 03:39 PM
I'm speaking of IDPA. Thought I put that in there but didn't.

I wrote my response assuming you meant IDPA. I was countering with what I think is USPSA's superior, and more concealed carry-oriented rules on that point.

Sal Picante
01-09-2014, 03:56 PM
Seriously? Shall we talk about what some of the founding principles of IPSC were? Jeff Cooper would be spinning in his grave if he saw modern USPSA matches. IDPA was created by quite a few of those early IPSC guys specifically because they didn't like how USPSA had turned its nose up at its "founding principles."


Interestingly, I don't think that the founding principles have actually changed since inception.

http://www.ipsc.org/ipsc/constitution.php#Principles


Practical competition is open to all reputable persons without regard to occupation, it may specifically not be limited to public servants.
Accuracy, power and speed are the equivalent elements of practical shooting and practical competition must be conducted in such a way as to evaluate these elements equally.
Firearm types are not separated, all compete together without handicap. This does not apply to the power of the firearms as power is an element to be recognised and rewarded.
Practical shooting competition is a test of expertise in the use of practical firearms and equipment. Any item of equipment, or modification to equipment, which sacrifices practical functionality for a competitive advantage contravenes the principles of the sport.
Practical competition is conducted using practical targets, which reflect the general size and shape of such objects as the firearm used may reasonably be called upon to hit in their primary intended use.
The challenge presented in practical competition must be realistic. Courses of Fire must follow a practical rationale, and simulate sensible hypothetical situations in which firearms might reasonably be used.
Practical competition is diverse. Within the limits of realism, problems are constantly changed, never permitting unrealistic specialisation of either technique or equipment. Courses of Fire may be repeated, but no course may be repeated enough to allow its use as a definitive measure of practical shooting skill.
Practical competition is free-style. In essence, the competitive problem is posed in general and the participant is permitted the freedom to solve it in the manner he considers best within the limitations of the competitive situation as provided.



I guess we could get hung up on the "realistic" thing, but... Overall, these principles haven't changed.

ToddG
01-09-2014, 04:01 PM
]
I guess we could get hung up on the "realistic" thing, but... Overall, these principles haven't changed.

I won't go through them one by one but surely you have to recognize that some of those principles are only barely recognizable. "Firearm types are not separated, all compete together without handicap" ... I mean I guess if you count "HOA."

But yes, I do think the main point is that what the founders considered "practical" and "realistic" is incompatible with the modern incarnation of matches.

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 04:41 PM
Seriously? Shall we talk about what some of the founding principles of IPSC were? Jeff Cooper would be spinning in his grave if he saw modern USPSA matches. IDPA was created by quite a few of those early IPSC guys specifically because they didn't like how USPSA had turned its nose up at its "founding principles."

That doesn't make USPSA bad. It's evolved into something different because (a vocal segment of) the membership wanted that.

Can I pocket carry in USPSA? How about a shoulder holster? Ankle holster? Fanny pack?

Believe me, I get that the anti-aiwb stance of IDPA sucks. But just because a particular piece of gear that you use is illegal doesn't make the game bad for everyone. If we're honest, the number of people shooting their actual everyday concealed carry rigs in USPSA is ridiculously small. You represent a small minority of people both in terms of shooting USPSA from concealment and shooting from aiwb. The rules of one game just happen to fit your particular choice.

I'm willing to be there are literally 100x as many people pocket carrying a pistol right now, this very moment, than there are people using an aiwb holster. If USPSA doesn't allow pocket carry then it's just as impractical from a CCW standpoint. Nor do I see you complaining about the pocket, shoulder, ankle, etc. holsters in IDPA. So let's not make this about "true to the founding fathers." This is simply a matter of one game let's you play the way you want and another doesn't let you play the way you want.

You are certainly correct that my post was ultimately mostly about me. It makes me feel quite indignant at IPDA that it won't allow me to compete as I carry and I'm sure that shows now that I waded into this thread. But I do think there is a clear difference between the disallowed carry methods of AIWB vs. pocket, shoulder, fanny pack, and ankle carry from the standpoint of the safe and reasonably efficient administration of a match, whereas AIWB is extremely similar to IWB. The others seem much more significantly different to me.

I don't dispute what you are saying there about USPSA's founding principles. But they at least accept my carry method where IDPA does not. To me, that does constitute 'better.' I am allowed to participate in USPSA in a manner that allows me to be more true to myself and my defensive interests, unlike IDPA. That strikes me as ironic and doesn't dispose me well toward IDPA. And I think it's a pretty relevant point to a community like p-f, where so many members appendix carry and are simultaneously interested in defensive and competitive shooting.

I did enumerate other pieces of defensive equipment (laser, MRDS, WML) popular and obviously relevant in the concealed carry community that are not allowed to be used, or used for score in IDPA, but are allowed to be used for score in USPSA. And I don't use any of those three. So it's mostly about me, but not completely so.


Can you now use lasers and WMLs in USPSA? I thought both were disallowed.

Lasers, MRDS, and WMLs are all legal in Open Division in USPSA. At least a person using such can participate and post a score.


Have you ever tried getting to know the local IDPA folks to find out if you could shoot aiwb not for score? The one big club I've shot at was more than happy to oblige once they were comfortable with my competency.

Heh, no. Because I already know those folks from shooting USPSA...and I wasn't going to ask them to ignore the rules once IDPA officially declared that AIWB was not allowed period, including to shoot without score at local matches.


Has something changed in USPSA to make it different in this respect? Last time I went to a USPSA match (years ago) we were told we couldn't unload before or load after the match on the range or in the safe area... and that if we did it in the parking lot and someone saw us we'd get banned by the host club.

I don't know when that rule was put into effect. It is the official rule though, and if I got told by a club or RO something contrary to that rule, I would politely explain the rule to them, and if they persisted, I would leave and immediately contact the Area Director and try to get them straightened out. If USPSA rescinded that rule, and I had to actually sneaky load and unload, or not carry to and from USPSA matches, I would seriously reconsider my participation.

I would also readily add that I think shooting IDPA may be perfectly worthwhile for a lot of people. Stinks for me though, as well as a goodly portion of the other people I personally know who want to compete as they carry. And yes, the view from my high horse is beautiful and panoramic.

Bottom line, as you and so many others have said, is that IDPA can run the game it wants and I can take it or leave it. While that is true, it's also true that I will form an opinion of IDPA based on my perceptions of it and I'll act on that opinion - in this case, by posting my negative opinion on the internet, not giving them money, and referring AIWB-carrying defensive practitioners to USPSA instead.

cclaxton
01-09-2014, 04:55 PM
cclaxton, Here is the first founding principle of IDPA: "Promote safe and proficient use of firearms and equipment suitable for concealed carry self-defense." I would argue that disallowing AIWB runs counter to that principle. If AIWB is so unsafe, why is it safely allowed in USPSA? Why are so many concealed carriers, such as those on pistol-forum, able to safely manage AIWB carry? If IDPA thinks AIWB is unsafe on its face, that doesn't make me think highly of the intelligence of the people taking that position. Though unrelated to safety, I think the examples of lasers, MRDS, and WML being disallowed in scored IDPA competition are further examples of betrayal of their first founding principle. I personally know people who carry all those things concealed. And there are more on this forum.
Isn't it also the case that IDPA has no provision in the rules for a person to load and unload their lawfully carried firearms when arriving to and departing from a match? As far as IDPA rules are concerned, you can arrive unloaded and leave unloaded too. That is not in keeping with the practice of safe and effective concealed carry.
I don't think IDPA is as relevant to concealed carry and defensive use of the pistol as it purports to be. To borrow a phrase from John Farnam, "Watch these 'experts!'"

Well, there is a lot here. Let me address a couple of them.
1) There at least nine different ways to carry concealed. IDPA supports two of them: IWB and Belt Holster. The use of the other methods of concealed carry should not be interpreted as a judgement that they are any more unsafe. The judgement is related to running a safe match that is open to a general membership and to new shooters. These two methods of drawing were considered the most safe and most widely used methods of concealed carry. And, even some types of holsters are not legal because they have been known to create more ND's. http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/26/the-nine-methods-of-carrying-concealed/
2) Lots of organizations make policy decisions that are unpopular or controversial. That doesn't make all the rest of their decisions bad just because YOU happen to disagree with one of their policies. The organization has to be seen as a package deal.
3) Even in USPSA Weapon Mounted Lights and Lasers are only permitted in Open Division. I do, however, think there should be a laser option available in IDPA. I think the problem is how to score it. Also, lasers don't really help you compete very well because you are not calling your shots and instead relying on the laser. WML's should be allowed for low-light or night matches. However, I think there is value in learning to use a flashlight instead and using it for competition. Also, some consider it a way to game the match by adding extra weight to the front of the gun...so in the spirit of fair competition we don't want to force everyone to go buy new holsters and flashlights just to be competitive. There are plenty of places to shoot "fun matches" that will allow lasers and WML's.
4) Actually there is no rule that requires members to arrive unloaded. Except for the NRA and Blue Ridge Arsenal, I don't know of any range that allows you to arrive hot, unless you are a member and a range RO. That has more to do with lawyers and insurance companies and legal liability than IDPA. It is true that, once the match safety briefing is given, all guns must be unloaded, except certain club RO's. That is for safety and liability protection. It also helps to protect the sport. And, BTW, USPSA has the exact same rule. Just about every match I have ever attended has the same rule.

Perhaps you are not seeing the big picture or the glass half full. I would rather people shoot IDPA or USPSA than go to the range and shoot from a stall bullseye style. Both IDPA and USPSA force you to develop critical skills that will be needed in any kind of real-life situation. Is it everything you need to know?...No...but it is an excellent foundation. These sports don't have to be perfect....they just have to be valuable...and in my experience they are incredibly valuable, and with the bonus of being fun too. Also, you get to know and befriend some really great people.

Come on in...the water's fine.
CC

Alaskapopo
01-09-2014, 05:02 PM
Well, there is a lot here. Let me address a couple of them.
1) There at least nine different ways to carry concealed. IDPA supports two of them: IWB and Belt Holster. The use of the other methods of concealed carry should not be interpreted as a judgement that they are any more unsafe. The judgement is related to running a safe match that is open to a general membership and to new shooters. These two methods of drawing were considered the most safe and most widely used methods of concealed carry. And, even some types of holsters are not legal because they have been known to create more ND's. http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/26/the-nine-methods-of-carrying-concealed/
2) Lots of organizations make policy decisions that are unpopular or controversial. That doesn't make all the rest of their decisions bad just because YOU happen to disagree with one of their policies. The organization has to be seen as a package deal.
3) Even in USPSA Weapon Mounted Lights and Lasers are only permitted in Open Division. I do, however, think there should be a laser option available in IDPA. I think the problem is how to score it. Also, lasers don't really help you compete very well because you are not calling your shots and instead relying on the laser. WML's should be allowed for low-light or night matches. However, I think there is value in learning to use a flashlight instead and using it for competition. Also, some consider it a way to game the match by adding extra weight to the front of the gun...so in the spirit of fair competition we don't want to force everyone to go buy new holsters and flashlights just to be competitive. There are plenty of places to shoot "fun matches" that will allow lasers and WML's.
4) Actually there is no rule that requires members to arrive unloaded. Except for the NRA and Blue Ridge Arsenal, I don't know of any range that allows you to arrive hot, unless you are a member and a range RO. That has more to do with lawyers and insurance companies and legal liability than IDPA. It is true that, once the match safety briefing is given, all guns must be unloaded, except certain club RO's. That is for safety and liability protection. It also helps to protect the sport. And, BTW, USPSA has the exact same rule. Just about every match I have ever attended has the same rule.

Perhaps you are not seeing the big picture or the glass half full. I would rather people shoot IDPA or USPSA than go to the range and shoot from a stall bullseye style. Both IDPA and USPSA force you to develop critical skills that will be needed in any kind of real-life situation. Is it everything you need to know?...No...but it is an excellent foundation. These sports don't have to be perfect....they just have to be valuable...and in my experience they are incredibly valuable, and with the bonus of being fun too. Also, you get to know and befriend some really great people.

Come on in...the water's fine.
CC
Weapon mounted lights are a reality on police duty guns, military guns and even a fair amount of citizen CCW holders. Not allowing them in some division is just stupid and again holding to the 1990's SASS principle. Time marches on and IDPA is stuck in the past.
Pat

cclaxton
01-09-2014, 05:09 PM
IMO they talk out of both sides of their mouth. They will use "That isn't a practical defensive tool/technique." You point out that it is and then they will say "This is a game, but we don't want an equipment race. We want a level playing field."

The fact is that IDPA definition of practical defensive equipment is exclusively what the BOD says it is. The chances of them expanding it is quite low as the BOD selects the replacement members, and they select the Tiger Teams. Berryville has become very much the capitol of groupthink.
IDPA Leadership also wants the sport to grow in membership. It is a moneymaking operation. If they thought the net effect was to see membership going down, they will figure that out pretty quickly. Their intention was not to find members who agree with their rules, but to improve the sport. Now they may have got it wrong with some things, but overall, they have not ruined the sport. There are always going to be people who simply don't like the "pseudo-tactics" that IDPA enforces, or the subjectivity of penalties or the secretiveness of their deliberations, or...that it's not USPSA, or whatever. In the end it is a valuable sport, especially for those who are new to action shooting sports, and the rules are unified across the US and the world, and it has kept us pretty safe with few injuries. It is valuable because it has helped tens of thousands of concealed carry holders improve their skills and go on to learn more and go on to shoot USPSA and other shooting activities, such as 3-gun. You need to see the big picture and the glass is more than half full.
CC

MDS
01-09-2014, 05:16 PM
Gawd. I guess I'm just naive about human nature, but this thread is depressing. I'd participate in almost any match with almost any rules if it didn't take all day to shoot for 2 minutes. I like kstg because of the 1-hour commitment (even though I sometimes volunteer to help with the match and that does take all day.)

AIWB, round dumping, cover garments, cover rules, tactical dynamicism, attention to member desire, equipment races, reload-with-ninjitsu, monastic purity of philosophical intent - who cares? If there were an idpa or uspc or 3gun or bullseye or friggin Justin-Bieber-themed match nearby, where I could show up, shoot some stages without big new gear investment, and go home? I'd be on it like brown on kittens. And we'd probably get a lot more "regular folks" to participate in a shooting sport.

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 05:18 PM
I guess we could get hung up on the "realistic" thing, but... Overall, these principles haven't changed.


But yes, I do think the main point is that what the founders considered "practical" and "realistic" is incompatible with the modern incarnation of matches.

I would argue that unless the match involves 50% of the stages involve one target at 3 yards, 40% of the match involves 2-3 targets at 5-7 yards, and the remaining 10% involve more targets at varied distances; that no practical shooting match is realistic.

IMO IDPA had a very valid point once, but with the introduction of production division they've lost 90% of the "But USPSA isn't realistic" argument. Because the IDPA's fishing vests, and contrived tactics isn't realistic either.

And even IDPA's founders have to admit that if it weren't for IPSC's Open Division rifle shooting would be years behind where they are today. As it was IPSC that pushed red dot optics forward to the point that we see today.

GJM
01-09-2014, 05:22 PM
IDPA Leadership also wants the sport to grow in membership. It is a moneymaking operation.

Is IDPA a member owned, non-profit or a private organization with owners that make profits? I assumed it was member owned, but your statement made me wonder.

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 05:25 PM
IDPA Leadership also wants the sport to grow in membership.

Oh that is pretty clear, as IDPA is the only shooting sport where you have to be a member if you want to shoot a second match.

YVK
01-09-2014, 05:28 PM
Oh that is pretty clear, as IDPA is the only shooting sport where you have to be a member if you want to shoot a second match.

Not sure if sarcasm, but I've shot several matches without being a member, and could've continued indefinitely that way.

Alaskapopo
01-09-2014, 05:28 PM
Oh that is pretty clear, as IDPA is the only shooting sport where you have to be a member if you want to shoot a second match.

I did not know that. Has that been a rule for a while because I know clubs that don't follow that rule.
Pat

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 05:32 PM
Is IDPA a member owned, non-profit or a private organization with owners that make profits? I assumed it was member owned, but your statement made me wonder.

Instead of spouting off my opinion, I did a search on the Arkansas Secretary of State's website.

IDPA's filing type is: Foreign For Profit Corporation

USPSA is also a corporation, but I am not sure if they are a non-profit or not as it seems that Washington state doesn't make that distinction.

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 05:34 PM
Not sure if sarcasm, but I've shot several matches without being a member, and could've continued indefinitely that way.

Just because you club doesn't enforce it, doesn't mean that it isn't a rule.


I did not know that. Has that been a rule for a while because I know clubs that don't follow that rule.

AFAIK it has been in the rule book since at least the 2005 revision.

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 05:41 PM
Instead of spouting off my opinion, I did a search on the Arkansas Secretary of State's website.

IDPA's filing type is: Foreign For Profit Corporation

USPSA is also a corporation, but I am not sure if they are a non-profit or not as it seems that Washington state doesn't make that distinction.

Ok I did more research.

Both USPSA and IDPA are registered in Delaware.

USPSA is registered in Delaware as a non-profit. Wikipedia reports that they hold a 501c3.

IDPA is registered in Delaware as a general corporation. And I see no mentions that IDPA holds a 501c3 status.

cclaxton
01-09-2014, 05:42 PM
Is IDPA a member owned, non-profit or a private organization with owners that make profits? I assumed it was member owned, but your statement made me wonder.
It is not member owned and a for profit corporation.
CC

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 05:53 PM
1) There at least nine different ways to carry concealed. IDPA supports two of them: IWB and Belt Holster. The use of the other methods of concealed carry should not be interpreted as a judgement that they are any more unsafe. The judgement is related to running a safe match that is open to a general membership and to new shooters. These two methods of drawing were considered the most safe and most widely used methods of concealed carry. And, even some types of holsters are not legal because they have been known to create more ND's. http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/26/the-nine-methods-of-carrying-concealed/

I don't understand the bolded sentence. Can you clarify?

As to the underlined sentence, sweet. You mean they banned the Serpa? Lulz.

Look, the bottom line to me is that somehow USPSA can safely allow appendix carry in three divisions. Yet somehow IDPA isn't capable of doing so. So, is USPSA not actually safely conducted, is IDPA unable to safely administrate a competition allowing AIWB carry, or is the membership not up to the task of safely carrying AIWB? Or is there some other possibility I am missing?


2) Lots of organizations make policy decisions that are unpopular or controversial. That doesn't make all the rest of their decisions bad just because YOU happen to disagree with one of their policies. The organization has to be seen as a package deal.

Quite correct. It is a package deal. IDPA clarified their stance on AIWB from 'not allowed' to 'not allowed, period, ever, even shooting without score in a local match.' Got it. No thanks. This potential customer rejects that package and chooses a different one from a different company. IDPA's product is not worth my money or time. If they want me to seriously consider participating, they need to change the package to allow me to compete as I carry.

But I think Joyce Wilson made IPDA's position on that point quite clear in the latest Tactical Journal when she quoted Gordon Carrell in basically saying that those of us who wanted IDPA to be different than it is should go find some other competition. Message received, IDPA!


3) Even in USPSA Weapon Mounted Lights and Lasers are only permitted in Open Division. I do, however, think there should be a laser option available in IDPA. I think the problem is how to score it. Also, lasers don't really help you compete very well because you are not calling your shots and instead relying on the laser. WML's should be allowed for low-light or night matches. However, I think there is value in learning to use a flashlight instead and using it for competition.

A person using a laser should still call their shots, using the laser instead of the iron sights. Shot calling should still be happening.

And what kind of flashlight? One without anything that allows it to attach to the shooter? No ring. No lanyard. What year is this? Talk about behind the times.


There are plenty of places to shoot "fun matches" that will allow lasers and WML's.

Again with the 'if you don't like it, go somewhere else.' A person whose gear is rejected by IDPA doesn't even have to go to a 'fun match' - they could shoot a sanctioned USPSA match with lasers and/or WMLs.


4) Actually there is no rule that requires members to arrive unloaded. Except for the NRA and Blue Ridge Arsenal, I don't know of any range that allows you to arrive hot, unless you are a member and a range RO. That has more to do with lawyers and insurance companies and legal liability than IDPA. It is true that, once the match safety briefing is given, all guns must be unloaded, except certain club RO's. That is for safety and liability protection. It also helps to protect the sport. And, BTW, USPSA has the exact same rule. Just about every match I have ever attended has the same rule.

Every single range that I have personally been to for a USPSA match was run correctly, per USPSA rules, and match participants are allowed to unload hot guns upon arrival and reload them before departure, even if it took an explanation of the rules in one case. In several cases, I was thanked by the match officials for not handling my guns in my vehicle.

Frankly, I don't like the cold range aspect of USPSA either, but I recognize they aren't going to change it. Unlike IDPA's prohibition against AIWB, that is something I can live with, particularly in light of the loading and unloading provisions upon arrival and departure in USPSA.

Why does the RO rate an exception to the 'no loaded guns' rule in IDPA?


Perhaps you are not seeing the big picture or the glass half full. I would rather people shoot IDPA or USPSA than go to the range and shoot from a stall bullseye style. Both IDPA and USPSA force you to develop critical skills that will be needed in any kind of real-life situation. Is it everything you need to know?...No...but it is an excellent foundation. These sports don't have to be perfect....they just have to be valuable...and in my experience they are incredibly valuable, and with the bonus of being fun too. Also, you get to know and befriend some really great people.

Yes, it is good that people get out and shoot in a more complex environment. It's too bad that IDPA has a deal-breaking condition for me and some others to do so.


Come on in...the water's fine.

Nope. IDPA has made their position very clear, and that has helped me find my own position on the matter.

ToddG
01-09-2014, 07:31 PM
But I do think there is a clear difference between the disallowed carry methods of AIWB vs. pocket, shoulder, fanny pack, and ankle carry from the standpoint of the safe and reasonably efficient administration of a match, whereas AIWB is extremely similar to IWB. The others seem much more significantly different to me.

I get it the aiwb preference. I, too, have carried aiwb on occasion. :cool:

But I don't agree with the premiss that somehow those other forms of carry are different. And that's my point. If you're going to argue that IDPA doesn't allow all the realistic everyday forms of CCW, those are just as valid ways. And if you're going to argue that USPSA does allow your particular version of everyday CCW, understand that it's a quirk of the rules rather than any specific intent because it doesn't allow any of those other forms, either. After all, the issue was questionable enough that folks checked with Amidon, right?


But they at least accept my carry method where IDPA does not. To me, that does constitute 'better.' I am allowed to participate in USPSA in a manner that allows me to be more true to myself and my defensive interests, unlike IDPA.

The only place where I think it's wrong is that you're equating "Gabe's way" with "better." And while it's better for you there are a ton of people for whom aiwb isn't desirable or necessary (I was one for the ten or so years I shot IDPA before I ever considered aiwb). So for all of those people it's a meaningless prohibition.


And I think it's a pretty relevant point to a community like p-f, where so many members appendix carry and are simultaneously interested in defensive and competitive shooting.

Agreed. But of the PF'ers who are shooting USPSA on a regular basis -- say eight locals per year plus at least one state/regional/national -- how many of them are shooting it concealed from aiwb?

And how many are shooting IDPA or Outlaw IDPA from aiwb?


I did enumerate other pieces of defensive equipment (laser, MRDS, WML) popular and obviously relevant in the concealed carry community that are not allowed to be used, or used for score in IDPA, but are allowed to be used for score in USPSA. And I don't use any of those three. So it's mostly about me, but not completely so.

Shooting for score in Open is little different than having your score listed separate in IDPA, IMHO. I bet I could pretty easily find a thread or two on BE where people don't think accessory-XYZ should force them into Open.

IDPA has legitimate reasons for not allowing those items. You might not agree with them but the reasons -- which are based on expensive gear giving a competitive advantage -- seem to be accepted by the majority of the IDPA community. Now you could say you want an Open IDPA division where all that stuff is allowed and I wouldn't object to such a thing. But that's not their game and their rules.


Heh, no. Because I already know those folks from shooting USPSA...and I wasn't going to ask them to ignore the rules once IDPA officially declared that AIWB was not allowed period, including to shoot without score at local matches.

Fair enough. But you have to admit you're drawing even finer distinctions and creating even finer limitations. You could ask and you probably would be allowed to shoot. Your choice not to ask sounds more like "I don't like IDPA" than "I prefer USPSA" and that's a pretty significant distinction.


I don't know when that rule was put into effect. It is the official rule though, and if I got told by a club or RO something contrary to that rule, I would politely explain the rule to them, and if they persisted, I would leave and immediately contact the Area Director and try to get them straightened out. If USPSA rescinded that rule, and I had to actually sneaky load and unload, or not carry to and from USPSA matches, I would seriously reconsider my participation.

As I said, I am 100% in agreement with the USPSA way of handling this and I wish all shooting venues -- clubs, matches, classes, etc. -- would implement such a rule. Asking people to drive to and from the range unarmed is ridiculous.


Bottom line, as you and so many others have said, is that IDPA can run the game it wants and I can take it or leave it. While that is true, it's also true that I will form an opinion of IDPA based on my perceptions of it and I'll act on that opinion - in this case, by posting my negative opinion on the internet, not giving them money, and referring AIWB-carrying defensive practitioners to USPSA instead.

Like I said, I get "they won't let me play so I'm not playing." That's pretty much my decision, as well. But I don't expand that into "IDPA therefore sucks."


Weapon mounted lights are a reality on police duty guns, military guns and even a fair amount of citizen CCW holders. Not allowing them in some division is just stupid and again holding to the 1990's SASS principle. Time marches on and IDPA is stuck in the past.

Didn't Gabe just say that they're only legal in Open Division in USPSA? So I'm not sure how that makes USPSA a better solution. What I do understand is that it's something a lot of USPSA shooters -- who don't have lights on their USPSA guns -- like to argue about when it comes to IDPA. There's a term for that. It's "straw man."


I would argue that unless the match involves 50% of the stages involve one target at 3 yards, 40% of the match involves 2-3 targets at 5-7 yards, and the remaining 10% involve more targets at varied distances; that no practical shooting match is realistic.

First, I don't think those statistics represent the reality of armed confrontations.

Second, I'm always confused when on the one hand people say IDPA needs to get dumbed down to be realistic and then on the other hand brag about how USPSA is so much more challenging than IDPA. :confused:


IMO IDPA had a very valid point once, but with the introduction of production division they've lost 90% of the "But USPSA isn't realistic" argument.

Gabe can't compete in Production.

If you think running around with four spare mags is "realistic" then we'll simply have to agree to disagree.


Because the IDPA's fishing vests, and contrived tactics isn't realistic either.

I agree about some of the "tactics" being contrived but I'm not sure how USPSA is somehow better. On the one hand you have situational tactics being forced universally instead of situationally; on the other you have no tactics. Six of one, half dozen of the other. Unless, of course, you (a) happen to like IDPA's tactics or (b) like playing free flow with no tactics, in which case your preference is your preference.

But that doesn't make one game better than the other.

As for the fishing vests, again, this is such a stupid argument that the USPSA-pretending-to-want-to-like-IDPA people get so wrapped up over. Did you know that you're NOT required to wear a fishing vest (or any other kind of vest) to compete? And whether you want to admit it or not, there are plenty of people who do in fact where 5.11-style vests out in the world day to day as their concealment garments.

Do you wear your everyday concealment garment when you shoot USPSA? Because if not, then wearing something other than your everyday concealment garment when you shoot IDPA is no different. It's just something you complain about for one sport while not caring about for the other.


And even IDPA's founders have to admit that if it weren't for IPSC's Open Division rifle shooting would be years behind where they are today. As it was IPSC that pushed red dot optics forward to the point that we see today.

True.

Total non sequitur, but true.


Oh that is pretty clear, as IDPA is the only shooting sport where you have to be a member if you want to shoot a second match.

USPSA clubs are required to shoot, I think, a minimum of three Classifier matches per year and they have to submit payment to USPSA HQ for every shooter, not just USPSA members. So I guess I could say, "USPSA charges people to classify even if USPSA won't actually count their classification score or post it!" IDPA takes its tax as an annual membership; USPSA takes its in the form of per-entry fee. Again, the difference is far less meaningful than the "I don't like them and their ways!" arguments...

Chemsoldier
01-09-2014, 08:02 PM
USPSA clubs are required to shoot, I think, a minimum of three Classifier matches per year and they have to submit payment to USPSA HQ for every shooter, not just USPSA members.
Just a clarification, do you mean three "classifiers" a year? Being defined as a single "stage" from the book of classifiers? I have done one "classifier match" that was a one day match consisting of nothing but
classifier stages, but I think there is a limit to how often a club can do all classifier matches...or at least ones that count as classifiers.

ToddG
01-09-2014, 08:08 PM
Just a clarification, do you mean three "classifiers" a year? Being defined as a single "stage" from the book of classifiers? I have done one "classifier match" that was a one day match consisting of nothing but
classifier stages, but I think there is a limit to how often a club can do all classifier matches...or at least ones that count as classifiers.

As I read this document (https://www.uspsa.org/classifiers/Intro.pdf) any match in which a Classifier is shot for score is a Classifier Match.

Chemsoldier
01-09-2014, 08:14 PM
Oops, you are correct, my nomenclature was off. What my club has been calling a "classifier match" is actually a "Level I Special Match."

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 08:20 PM
First, I don't think those statistics represent the reality of armed confrontations.

No you are right I am putting too many multi-target stages.


Second, I'm always confused when on the one hand people say IDPA needs to get dumbed down to be realistic and then on the other hand brag about how USPSA is so much more challenging than IDPA. :confused:

You are confused because we point out that IDPA isn't as realistic as IDPA people claim.


Gabe can't compete in Production.

True, but he can't shoot IDPA either. For the few realistic carry cases that production doesn't cover you still have limited (which Gabe can shoot with his laser off), or open if he wants to use his laser. He can then compare his score against production or limited shooters to get a general idea of where he stands.


If you think running around with four spare mags is "realistic" then we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Nor is the fishing vest.


But that doesn't make one game better than the other.

The difference is that we don't pretend that it is anything but a sport. I believe tactics are something you learn with a qualified instructor.


Did you know that you're NOT required to wear a fishing vest (or any other kind of vest) to compete? And whether you want to admit it or not, there are plenty of people who do in fact where 5.11-style vests out in the world day to day as their concealment garments.

Well when even IDPA management is shooting the match with fishing vests and competition specific OWB holsters, it certainly looks like they are endorsing it.


Do you wear your everyday concealment garment when you shoot USPSA? Because if not, then wearing something other than your everyday concealment garment when you shoot IDPA is no different. It's just something you complain about for one sport while not caring about for the other.

I'm not claiming that I am shooting a defensive sport.


Again, the difference is far less meaningful than the "I don't like them and their ways!" arguments...

I have no issues with IDPA getting it's money, I was simply pointing out that it is pretty clear that they are a for profit corporation.

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 08:21 PM
As I read this document (https://www.uspsa.org/classifiers/Intro.pdf) any match in which a Classifier is shot for score is a Classifier Match.

With clubs that term has changed to refer to special matches with four or more classifier stages.

ToddG
01-09-2014, 08:45 PM
No you are right I am putting too many multi-target stages.

Agree. Which sort of proves my point. It wouldn't be much of a match if stages were statistical representations of reality. But some scenarios are far more realistic tests than others. Three or four shoulder-to-shoulder targets behind each shooting port versus, say, four single targets surrounding a car or inside a house.


True, but he can't shoot IDPA either. For the few realistic carry cases that production doesn't cover you still have limited (which Gabe can shoot with his laser off), or open if he wants to use his laser. He can then compare his score against production or limited shooters to get a general idea of where he stands.

OK. I think we've already pretty well demonstrated that Gabe should shoot USPSA. Constantly harping on the fact doesn't make it a national issue, though. As I said, given how few people shoot USPSA from their "real EDC CCW gear," the complaint that you can't do it in IDPA rings utterly insincere.


Nor is the fishing vest.

I know far more people who carry underneath a 5.11 or similar vest than I know people who carry 4+ spare pistol mags.


The difference is that we don't pretend that it is anything but a sport. I believe tactics are something you learn with a qualified instructor.

How does that even address the point? "Our game is better because almost everyone treats it like a game, while the other game sucks because some people treat it like it's not a game." Who the heck cares? Jimmy Joe Bobbysox can think IDPA is two steps up from BUDS for all I care. That doesn't change the rules.


Well when even IDPA management is shooting the match with fishing vests and competition specific OWB holsters, it certainly looks like they are endorsing it.

I've been out to dinner with most of the people on the current (and past) IDPA BODs. Many of them were wearing 5.11 type vests at the time.

The fact that you keep referring to it as a "fishing vest" just continues to demonstrate that you want to make fun of "them" so "us" can feel superior. There's no meat to any of these complaints. You are angry with IDPA. Fine. We get it. You really need to accept that not everyone is. In fact thousands and thousands of people are pretty happy with it.


I'm not claiming that I am shooting a defensive sport.

Weak sauce. You cannot complain about IDPA's concealment garment rules and then say "USPSA rules don't matter because it's just a game." Ask Bob Vogel if IDPA is just a game. The difference isn't that one is a game. The difference is that you like the rules for one and not the other.

Which brings me to my very first post in this thread:


Why football and soccer?

Why Ford and Chevy?

Why blondes and brunettes?

... and my second ...


As I said, some people like Fords and some people like Chevys. Some people care so much that they bad mouth the other. Some people care so much they bad mouth the people who choose the other.

Seems pretty clear which is the case here.


I have no issues with IDPA getting it's money, I was simply pointing out that it is pretty clear that they are a for profit corporation.

OK. Just FYI, so are all the companies that make all the gear you shoot in USPSA matches.

People confuse USPSA's 501(c)(3) status with the fact that it's member-driven. They're actually two totally different things. A 501(c)(3) membership organization can be set up in a way that no one but the Board has any control over anything. USPSA's 501(c)(3) status simply means they're not paying taxes on the money you send them while IDPA has to. It doesn't affect how much money the people working for USPSA make, etc.

And without getting into the technicalities, I'd be willing to bet you $1,000 that if a USPSA-like organization tried to organize as a non-profit under the current tax rules it wouldn't have a chance.


With clubs that term has changed to refer to special matches with four or more classifier stages.

But just to be absolutely clear, regardless of what clubs want to call it, every time someone shoots an official Classifier in USPSA, USPSA makes money. Correct?

GJM
01-09-2014, 08:52 PM
People confuse USPSA's 501(c)(3) status with the fact that it's member-driven. They're actually two totally different things. A 501(c)(3) membership organization can be set up in a way that no one but the Board has any control over anything. USPSA's 501(c)(3) status simply means they're not paying taxes on the money you send them while IDPA has to. It doesn't affect how much money the people working for USPSA make, etc.

There is a fundamental difference between a 501(c)(3) and a for profit corporation, and it has to do with the ability to distribute profits to the shareholders.

Without seeing how USPSA and IDPA keep their books, pay their staff, handle reserves or profits, and make those numbers transparent, I would have no basis to suggest anything about the two from a governance perspective. Do USPSA and IDPA publish financial statements, with information on employee compensation, benefits and distributions of profits or the handling of their reserve accounts?

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 09:09 PM
I know far more people who carry underneath a 5.11 or similar vest than I know people who carry 4+ spare pistol mags.

I've been out to dinner with most of the people on the current (and past) IDPA BODs. Many of them were wearing 5.11 type vests at the time.

Different crowd around here then, because I've only once seen someone wearing the 5.11 fishing vest. Of course he was the leading "IDPA is defensive training" dude at that club.


OK. Just FYI, so are all the companies that make all the gear you shoot in USPSA matches.

People confuse USPSA's 501(c)(3) status with the fact that it's member-driven. They're actually two totally different things. A 501(c)(3) membership organization can be set up in a way that no one but the Board has any control over anything. USPSA's 501(c)(3) status simply means they're not paying taxes on the money you send them while IDPA has to. It doesn't affect how much money the people working for USPSA make, etc.

And without getting into the technicalities, I'd be willing to bet you $1,000 that if a USPSA-like organization tried to organize as a non-profit under the current tax rules it wouldn't have a chance.

I wasn't the one to bring up profit, nor was it necessarily a slam against IDPA. You can setup a for profit corporation with the same membership accountability rules that USPSA has. USPSA simply decided that it was easier to be non-profit.


But just to be absolutely clear, regardless of what clubs want to call it, every time someone shoots an official Classifier in USPSA, USPSA makes money. Correct?

I was simply pointing out that USPSA's term of classifier match isn't typically used in the same way at the club level. But yes they get $3 per a shooter if you upload the results to USPSA.

PPGMD
01-09-2014, 09:15 PM
Without seeing how USPSA and IDPA keep their books, pay their staff, handle reserves or profits, and make those numbers transparent, I would have no basis to suggest anything about the two from a governance perspective. Do USPSA and IDPA publish financial statements, with information on employee compensation, benefits and distributions of profits or the handling of their reserve accounts?

USPSA is supposed to publish those numbers, but they haven't in years.

I suppose that is something that the membership can hit the BOD with.

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 09:22 PM
I get it the aiwb preference. I, too, have carried aiwb on occasion. :cool:

But I don't agree with the premiss that somehow those other forms of carry are different. And that's my point. If you're going to argue that IDPA doesn't allow all the realistic everyday forms of CCW, those are just as valid ways. And if you're going to argue that USPSA does allow your particular version of everyday CCW, understand that it's a quirk of the rules rather than any specific intent because it doesn't allow any of those other forms, either. After all, the issue was questionable enough that folks checked with Amidon, right?

Those other forms of carry are different from IWB/AIWB because they diverge more from the basic standard of a strong side owb belt carried holster. While loading and making ready, holstering, drawing, and unloading and showing clear :rolleyes: :D, the shooter can remain in an upright, balanced posture and easily keep the gun downrange of the 180, and the holster doesn't require a lot of extra manipulation, nor does the support hand have to get very near the muzzle. This is in contrast to pocket, ankle, shoulder, and fanny pack carry, which all either require a radical postural shift (ankle), extra manipulation (pocket), or automatically break the 180 when the shooter faces squarely downrange and draws (fanny pack, shoulder.)

I'm not saying those are reasons that IDPA or USPSA consider. Those are the reasons I am saying they are different.




The only place where I think it's wrong is that you're equating "Gabe's way" with "better." And while it's better for you there are a ton of people for whom aiwb isn't desirable or necessary (I was one for the ten or so years I shot IDPA before I ever considered aiwb). So for all of those people it's a meaningless prohibition.

Then that's my fault for not being clear – what you are saying is exactly what I meant. Better for me.


Agreed. But of the PF'ers who are shooting USPSA on a regular basis -- say eight locals per year plus at least one state/regional/national -- how many of them are shooting it concealed from aiwb?

And how many are shooting IDPA or Outlaw IDPA from aiwb?

No idea on any of that.


Shooting for score in Open is little different than having your score listed separate in IDPA, IMHO. I bet I could pretty easily find a thread or two on BE where people don't think accessory-XYZ should force them into Open.

IDPA has legitimate reasons for not allowing those items. You might not agree with them but the reasons -- which are based on expensive gear giving a competitive advantage -- seem to be accepted by the majority of the IDPA community. Now you could say you want an Open IDPA division where all that stuff is allowed and I wouldn't object to such a thing. But that's not their game and their rules.

IDPA Open seems like a sorely needed thing in their game. Maybe I am wrong. And I think USPSA needs a Street Division, which is scored Minor for everyone, allows holster and mag pouch placement wherever (that is safe) around the waist, and requires concealment of all holsters and mag pouches.


Fair enough. But you have to admit you're drawing even finer distinctions and creating even finer limitations. You could ask and you probably would be allowed to shoot. Your choice not to ask sounds more like "I don't like IDPA" than "I prefer USPSA" and that's a pretty significant distinction.

No, the reason I don't ask is that I avoid asking people to risk their neck, even their proverbial IDPA neck, by giving me favored treatment or breaking the rules for me or using their position to allow me to break the rules. I might have asked before the clarification from IDPA HQ.

I do prefer USPSA, most fundamentally because that is the only practical shooting competition where I can shoot my carry gear from concealment like I want to. I would have started with IDPA for sure, had my gear been legal there. I probably wouldn't have considered USPSA as soon or possibly at all had it not been for the gear legality issues. My dislike of IDPA is limited and admittedly driven by my butthurt inner timmy. Deep in my mind is an attachment to 'train like you expect to fight.' So deep in my mind, there are mad timmy props for USPSA allowing me to do so, and mad timmy un-props for IDPA not allowing me to do so. All dipped in the irony of the defensive sport role-reversal.


As I said, I am 100% in agreement with the USPSA way of handling this and I wish all shooting venues -- clubs, matches, classes, etc. -- would implement such a rule. Asking people to drive to and from the range unarmed is ridiculous.

...

Like I said, I get "they won't let me play so I'm not playing." That's pretty much my decision, as well. But I don't expand that into "IDPA therefore sucks."

I know I have criticized IDPA more harshly in this thread than I often criticize much of anything on p-f, but I hope I have not given the idea that I think IDPA sucks everywhere for everyone all the time.

Mr_White
01-09-2014, 09:28 PM
Gabe can shoot with his laser off

Just to be clear, I shoot an iron-sighted G34 carried concealed AIWB in Limited Division.

Mr_White
01-10-2014, 10:55 AM
In fairness, here are a few things I dislike about USPSA:

Cold range. I know, I know, this discussion has been done, and I don't have any better solution for the masses with widely varied guns and holsters.

Minor/Major scoring. I don't think 'Major' is nearly as powerful compared to 'Minor' as the scoring makes it out to be. Truly a relic of 1976.

'Weak hand draws' don't actually include drawing with the weak hand. They should be called something else.

I will try to think of more.

ToddG
01-10-2014, 11:05 AM
Cold range. I know, I know, this discussion has been done, and I don't have any better solution for the masses with widely varied guns and holsters.

That's just it. The rules have to pertain to the first time competitor. Also, as a certain female competitor once pointed out to me, it's somewhat necessary when a shooter needs to sit down at the bathroom (given how a lot of competition gear/holsters work). Having to stop the match to clear one person to hit the head would get old fast.


Minor/Major scoring. I don't think 'Major' is nearly as powerful compared to 'Minor' as the scoring makes it out to be. Truly a relic of 1976.

Agreed. While it may not be the solution most desirable to the USPSA crowd, I'd also opine that if Minor scoring became the standard, the cries of "not accuracy oriented enough" would be harder to justify.

OTOH, I think it's legitimate to reward people for shooting guns that are heavier recoiling than the lightest-loaded ammo legal in the game. One thing we've talked about internally with regard to KSTG would be how to count liners: shooting minor, shots that break the line are counted as "out" while shooting major they'd count as "in." It's less than an inch difference (circumference) even for a .45 but it's something.

All in all I think USPSA has a pretty mature and clear set of rules that define the game as the players want it played.

Mr_White
01-10-2014, 11:15 AM
That's just it. The rules have to pertain to the first time competitor. Also, as a certain female competitor once pointed out to me, it's somewhat necessary when a shooter needs to sit down at the bathroom (given how a lot of competition gear/holsters work). Having to stop the match to clear one person to hit the head would get old fast.

True. When I think of 'guns and holsters', I automatically think of guns that don't fire when dropped and holsters that don't just let the gun fall out. Then I remember that there are a whole lot of guns and holsters used in competition that I was not initially considering...


Agreed. While it may not be the solution most desirable to the USPSA crowd, I'd also opine that if Minor scoring became the standard, the cries of "not accuracy oriented enough" would be harder to justify.

Definitely, which is one of the overriding reasons I continue to resist shooting a Major scoring gun in Limited.


OTOH, I think it's legitimate to reward people for shooting guns that are heavier recoiling than the lightest-loaded ammo legal in the game. One thing we've talked about internally with regard to KSTG would be how to count liners: shooting minor, shots that break the line are counted as "out" while shooting major they'd count as "in." It's less than an inch difference (circumference) even for a .45 but it's something.

Yeah, it does seem unfair to get nothing at all for a harder shooting gun. That solution of yours is quite elegant. I really like it. I think it also comports with the current prevailing view of terminal ballistics, or at least with my own views.

jar
01-10-2014, 12:31 PM
People confuse USPSA's 501(c)(3) status with the fact that it's member-driven. They're actually two totally different things. A 501(c)(3) membership organization can be set up in a way that no one but the Board has any control over anything. USPSA's 501(c)(3) status simply means they're not paying taxes on the money you send them while IDPA has to. It doesn't affect how much money the people working for USPSA make, etc.

While the distinction you make is valid and important, people conflate them because USPSA is both. The USPSA BoD is elected by the membership, and USPSA goes as far as to have an independent accounting firm run the elections to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. I shoot matches with my Area Director regularly and both the past and present director have listened to my opinion on rules along with the other members and carried it to the BoD, resulting in the change I supported being adopted. I was an IDPA member for 6 years and I never even knew who the IDPA BoD *was*. It's not on the website and I never saw any kind of organizational bylaws that even gave the structure of it.

Corey
01-10-2014, 01:08 PM
Wow, 13 pages of contention now so I guess I better jump in. I am not calling anyone out directing anything at specific people, just giving my opinion on the two sports and the contention and seeming tribalism of some of the adherents. I started shooting IDPA about 2 years ago. I only shoot about 3-4 matches per year but I also shoot about another 6 or so per year of an “outlaw” IDPA style match that a local range does twice a month. I consider those more of a practice session as they are 3 short stages of indoor shooting geared more toward newer shooters. But they are inexpensive, close by, fun and give me a chance to shoot some steel and do some shooting on the move. I did shoot some USPSA back in the 80’s and enjoyed it a lot even though I wasn’t good at it, but until 2 years ago I had not done any type of competition shooting in about 15 years.

As I said, I currently shoot IDPA. There are some things I don’t like about it and in many ways I like USPSA better. So why do I shoot IDPA? The club that shoots USPA is about twice the distance from me as the club that shoots IDPA and time is a major factor for me right now. Overall the local IDPA club is a pretty good group and matches run smoothly. At my current skill level, IDPA is sufficiently challenging to be fun and keep me interested. I shoot the matches as a way to test and measure my own skill level, not to try and be a national champion or pretend I am getting tactical training out of it. In short, IDPA works for what I want to do right now. When it no longer works for me, I will switch to something else.

IDPA seems to have some subjective rules and rule enforcement seems to be very subjective. One of the first IDPA matches I shot had a stage with several target that you had to shoot from behind cover. I watched the RO give several shooters verbal cover warnings if they leaned out too far when shooting but no penalties were assessed. When I shot I thought I was fine because he didn’t give any warnings, but then I got multiple cover penalties for the stage. When I asked to RO why the other shooters got multiple warnings and no penalties while I had no warnings and multiple penalties his response was “you shot a lot faster than the other guys”. I was ready to get really pissed off and complain about it but then I reminded myself that it was just a local club match with nothing on the line, and I was just there for myself and to improve my shooting skill so it’s not worth getting worked up about it. I would hope that sort of thing would be unacceptable at a major match, but I find it worthwhile for now to shoot with this club so I play the game their way. Yes, there are a couple of tactical timmies at the matches that take the game and themselves way too seriously. They are also usually not very good shooters and there are only a few of them so they are easy to ignore, or laugh at behind their backs.

The arguments about which game is more “realistic” or “tactical” is something I honestly find silly. I got my start in shooting by getting heavily involved in what is probably the most unrealistic, contrived, artificial environment shooting sport there is, ISU 3-position smallbore rifle. I even made it to a fairly high level (got to spend a summer training full time at the Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs). I even had the special shoes and leather pants. The rulebook goes so far as to specify what kind of underwear is allowed. Compared to that sport, both IDPA and USPSA are Tier One uber-ninja tactical, but in the end they are still just games. They have rules, they keep score so play the game. If someone wants to play the game because they are competitive and want to win everything then they should. If someone else wants to play the game a certain way and with certain equipment for their own reasons (like wanting to test themselves with the equipment they normally use, or to work on certain skills that are important to them) then they should find the game that allows them to do that and go shoot. If you think there is a problem with certain rules and the game would be improved by changing them, then work within whatever system the organizers have in place to do that. If you think their game is stupid and the people who play it are fools, then find a different game or even start a new one. Life is too short to spend time arguing with people that they’re wrong for liking different things than you. Better to spend your time shooting the way you want to shoot than trying to convince someone else they are doing it wrong. Personally, would rather dry fire than have that argument.

One final thought on the politics of guns and shooting sports. The more people owning guns, learning to handle them safely, and enjoying them the better it is for all of us. I don’t care what game they play, cowboy action, registered trap, Olympic rapid fire pistol, 3-gun, or F-class; if they find a game they enjoy and play it we all win.

Urban_Redneck
01-10-2014, 01:29 PM
My one, super legitimate gripe about IDPA is ESR division, it exists only to promote the sale of a single, $1000 revolver.

PPGMD
01-10-2014, 01:53 PM
The rulebook goes so far as to specify what kind of underwear is allowed.

Are magic Mormon underpants legal?

Corey
01-10-2014, 02:51 PM
Are magic Mormon underpants legal?

Yes. And I'm speaking from first hand experience.

Drang
01-10-2014, 03:42 PM
...So why do I shoot IDPA? The club that shoots USPA is about twice the distance from me as the club that shoots IDPA and time is a major factor for me right now. Overall the local IDPA club is a pretty good group and matches run smoothly. At my current skill level, IDPA is sufficiently challenging to be fun and keep me interested. I shoot the matches as a way to test and measure my own skill level, not to try and be a national champion or pretend I am getting tactical training out of it. In short, IDPA works for what I want to do right now. When it no longer works for me, I will switch to something else....
One final thought on the politics of guns and shooting sports. The more people owning guns, learning to handle them safely, and enjoying them the better it is for all of us. I don’t care what game they play, cowboy action, registered trap, Olympic rapid fire pistol, 3-gun, or F-class; if they find a game they enjoy and play it we all win.

I normally eschew "+1" posting, but I suspect that Corey sums up the answer for most people in the first quoted paragraph, that is, they participate in the sport they enjoy the most, which may come down to shooting with friends and family, and possibly the "only game in town."

I think that the final paragraph is wisdom that all gun owners should recognize.

ToddG
01-10-2014, 03:49 PM
Awesome post, Corey.

(the IDPA/USPSA one, not the underwear one)

PPGMD
01-10-2014, 04:08 PM
Yes. And I'm speaking from first hand experience.

Doh, I should've checked your location before I made that joke.

Though I am curious why they would regulate a shooter's underwear.

Drang
01-10-2014, 04:17 PM
Though I am curious why they would regulate a shooter's underwear.
Utilikilts?

NEPAKevin
01-10-2014, 04:50 PM
Though I am curious why they would regulate a shooter's underwear.

Speedos would obviously give a competitive advantage. Warriors wear boxer briefs or go commando.

Corey
01-10-2014, 04:53 PM
Doh, I should've checked your location before I made that joke.

Though I am curious why they would regulate a shooter's underwear.

It is to regulate the allowable amount of body support. A back brace or girdle, or leggings with some type of bracing sewn in would give a distinct advantage in standing position. At one time (mid 1970's I think) some shooters tried using ski boots for the standing portion of the matches. The rules were changed to carefully specify allowable shoe designs and materials, as well as to say you have to wear the same shoes through the entire match. Equipment inspection can go as far as using special calipers to measure the thickness of the seams in your clothing and measurements of the tightness of the shooting coat. The idea is to keep everyone as equal as possible in terms of how much body and position support they get from their clothing and other equipment. It sounds silly but at that level you'll try almost anything to pick up a couple of points. I even got to pee in a bottle at some matches.

Now back to your regularly scheduled thread.

cclaxton
01-10-2014, 07:05 PM
One final thought on the politics of guns and shooting sports. The more people owning guns, learning to handle them safely, and enjoying them the better it is for all of us. I don’t care what game they play, cowboy action, registered trap, Olympic rapid fire pistol, 3-gun, or F-class; if they find a game they enjoy and play it we all win.

Very well said, and 100% agreement. We should not be discouraging anyone by putting the sports down. If you prefer one or the other, great. If you prefer neither, great. But let's not poison people from even trying them or continuing to participate.
CC