IDPA deletes flat-footed reload rule, wants feedback on new division

[jetfire]

Just got an email blast from HQ with the following:

The first, and one of the biggest announcements, is on the flatfooted reload. While we thought we were headed the right direction with this, it became obvious that the membership at large did not like this new rule and that we missed the mark by implementing it. The members have spoken using the suggestion tool and we listened. When this version of the rule book becomes effective, the flat footed reload will not be gone. Big cheers all around we are sure.

That's pretty awesome. Also in the same email, IDPA has announced they're going to add a new division, and they want your feedback on which one to implement first:


The final specifics of each option are yet to be determined, as we want the members opinion first on which option to peruse.

Option 1: Compact Carry Pistol (CCP) – this would be for double action or single action guns. This division would be largely like SSP otherwise but the gun size would be limited to guns of M&P compact or Glock 19 size.

Option 2: Laser and Optic Pistol (LOP) – this division would allow for the mounting of a laser or slide mounted optic on the handgun. The optic would have to be mounted between the rear of the ejection port and the rear of the slide. Both single action and double action would be allowed. We might also add revolver to this division.

Remember, the complete requirements are not yet set for these divisions but we want you to tell us the direction to work on. To let us know, please got to www.surveymonkey.com/s/JT6HJDF to make your choice.

I voted for optics carry pistol personally, because I just got a gun with an RMR on it.

The only sad news from this email is that IDPA is killing ESR, which makes me sad but also makes sense, because literally no one shoots ESR. There were less than 10 ESR shooters at Nats this year. But optics! I will totally shoot an optics division in IDPA.

[abu fitna]

Damn... This is definitely a welcome reversal.

I am not sure if I care one way or the other regarding the proposed CCP division, though I do think it would be nice to see more actual carry pieces rather than barely disguised raceguns just small enough to fit in the box and under a fishing vest. I think a laser/optics division would be a good platform for experimentation, and may give the impetus to drive another generation's worth of evolution in the technology (particularly RMR, and maybe even things like emitter positioning and activation for the laser) - but I would likely just be a freerider on this wave, as I am unlikely to move to optics for a long while. Though it would be nice to have really advanced technology tested and ready for when my eyesight gets worse as I get old(er)

[Edwin]

I'm super pissed about the World Shoot being moved from Puerto Rico. "oh hey, we have unprecedented demand for our event to compete outside the continental event! Oh I know, lets fucking move the most successful event we've ever had BACK into the US because that's obviously what people want!"

Flying to Tulsa is expensive too because it's in the middle of nowhere! :mad:

[JHC]

So the shooter will be free to reload on the move right?

[TElmer2]

Personally...I would love to see the addition of appendix carry for IDPA, including appendix reloads. I know, wishful thinking.

I am going to vote for CCP. I think that is a great addition due to the popularity of 19s, M&PCs, etc. I think it would push some people into a new challenge which is always a good thing. What's also awesome as they have said that "G19 size" this includes a lot of firearms. P2000, CZ P-07, SP2022 and other models that people don't shoot but that I have a personal affinity for lol

[jetfire]

So the shooter will be free to reload on the move right?

I don't know how the rule fix will be implemented.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Glock 19 as a compact gun? Huh - did they mean Glock 26 sizes? I don't regard my 19 as particular compact. A gun that normally carries 16 rounds isn't small.

I don't get it. Why not Poppa Glock, Mamma Glock and Baby Glock?

Well, there go my two flat footed penalties - all for naught recently.

[Lon]

That's the smartest move I've seen outta IDPA in years. I'd vote for both if I was a member.

[ST911]

I don't get CCP when written for the G19/M&P C/Sig 229 size. Aren't the guns likely to show up at club matches for that division already running and effectively competing in SSP?

[YVK]

I don't get CCP when written for the G19/M&P C/Sig 229 size. Aren't the guns likely to show up at club matches for that division already running and effectively competing in SSP?

I think the idea is to separate guns that are truly practical for carry from everything else that shows up in SSP. Shooting 4 inch, 24 oz Glock 19 against 4.9 inch 38 oz Beretta 92 is hardly a fair competition, yet they are both SSP now.

I think this is a right move. They should get CCP for compact guns, set a minimum trigger pull weight and allow appendix carry.

[Mr_White]

I think the idea is to separate guns that are truly practical for carry from everything else that shows up in SSP. Shooting 4 inch, 24 oz Glock 19 against 4.9 inch 38 oz Beretta 92 is hardly a fair competition, yet they are both SSP now.

I think this is a right move. They should get CCP for compact guns, set a minimum trigger pull weight and allow appendix carry.

If they allowed appendix I'd actually have a bit of a dilemma.

[YVK]

I meant they should allow appendix carry for all divisions. You and I could shoot in SSP considering our choice guns are generally accepted as a service size, while folks who run 19s/229s/2000 etc can have a fair game within CCP.

I also feel pretty strongly about minimal trigger pull weight.

[Clusterfrack]

Well this is a step in the right direction, and I'm glad that IDPA seems to be listening to its shooters.

I voted for optics as well, because it would add something really different.

AIWB would be a very welcome addition! Maybe next year?

[JV_]

Laser and Optic

[rob_s]

What's the highest anyone has ever placed with a G19 at a major match and/or nationals?

[orionz06]

Seems like some hope and change we can believe in.

[YVK]

What's the highest anyone has ever placed with a G19 at a major match and/or nationals?

Has anyone ever shot a major match and/or Nationals with a G19?

[ST911]

I think the idea is to separate guns that are truly practical for carry from everything else that shows up in SSP. Shooting 4 inch, 24 oz Glock 19 against 4.9 inch 38 oz Beretta 92 is hardly a fair competition, yet they are both SSP now.


What's the highest anyone has ever placed with a G19 at a major match and/or nationals?


Has anyone ever shot a major match and/or Nationals with a G19?

Good points. I think that makes the differences and benefits more apparent at more significant matches.

[Wheeler]

Has anyone ever shot a major match and/or Nationals with a G19?

I personally know of two shooter that shot G19's at the 2001 and 2002 Nats with G19's and one that shot a P239 in 2002. None were 'competitive' shooters in the sense of the game.

[YVK]

I personally know of two shooter that shot G19's at the 2001 and 2002 Nats with G19's and one that shot a P239 in 2002. None were 'competitive' shooters in the sense of the game.

How'd they do in a sense of result placement?

[Wheeler]

How'd they do in a sense of result placement?

The two G19 shooters placed poorly. If memory serves the gentleman shooting the P239 placed low in the rankings but had a single digit points down.

It's prudent to add that these folks weren't shooting to win the game, they were there to shoot the scenarios, if that makes sense.

[rob_s]

I do know of one person that placed extremely well with a Glock 26 at the Florida State Match several years ago, maybe 2005 or 2007 timeframe. But, it was "extremely well" in Sharpshooter, IIRC.

[littlejerry]

Allowing appendix carry of mags and the gun would go a long way for me.

Hell, even allowing mags forward of the hip would be tempting. It would be nice to actually use my carry holster and pouches instead of a specific IDPA gamer rig.

Full cap mags would be fantastic as well.

[rob_s]

Full cap mags would be fantastic as well.

Since this is bound to turn into an IDPA wish-list (if it hasn't already), I have a question....

Why does this matter so much to people? It's something that used to bother me, then I got over it, so I'm curious as to why people cling to it so much, and it is so-often repeated.

[JV_]

Actually, let's not turn this in to a wish list, we've had plenty of those threads.

Let's keep this discussion about the OP and the two options at hand - and AIWB is not in that list.

[BLR]

Since this is bound to turn into an IDPA wish-list (if it hasn't already), I have a question....

Why does this matter so much to people? It's something that used to bother me, then I got over it, so I'm curious as to why people cling to it so much, and it is so-often repeated.

Because people take stuff too seriously.

[JM Campbell]

Optics and lasers....at my local club they let me shoot outlaw with a rmr G17 or m&p9. Granted I do hear a ton of snickering. At the same club held 3 gun match Justin and I ran rmr pistols only and got the " if I had a $500 sight on my pistol I'd shoot that good too".....

Well, why don't you?¿?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[NETim]

Good to hear Capitalism is alive and well in Berryville!!!!

[JHC]

Glock 19 as a compact gun? Huh - did they mean Glock 26 sizes? I don't regard my 19 as particular compact. A gun that normally carries 16 rounds isn't small.

I don't get it. Why not Poppa Glock, Mamma Glock and Baby Glock?

Well, there go my two flat footed penalties - all for naught recently.

17 service pistol, 19 has always in my recollection been classed a compact and the 26 a sub-compact. IDK.

[rob_s]

Thinking about this some more...

I'm not sure the "optics and lasers" option has the cash, interest, and tech to be sustained. Strictly from a participation standpoint there are more barriers to entry in that proposed division, and less people to participate, than in the "compact" division. I like that a new shooter could come out with his ACTUAL carry gun and compete right out of the gate without trying to compete against others with a Glock 34 or similar. I know that when I started out I had no idea what guns other people in my same division were using, nor the advantage that gun might give them.

[cclaxton]

That's the smartest move I've seen outta IDPA in years. I'd vote for both if I was a member.
I am not trying to take credit for any of this. But these changes represent the list of suggestions I sent to HQ back just before the Nationals...with some exceptions.
I recommended the laser/optics division, but I did not recommend the CCP division... I did recommend a BUG division, but I do understand the issues of trying to make a BUG division part of a normal sanctioned match. So, keeping BUG matches separate makes sense. I recommended the combining of both revolver divisions...which by eliminating ESR accomplished that. Of course I recommended revoking flat-footed reloads.

So, I will vote for the Optics Division and here is why: We already have SSP, CDP and ESP divisions for semi-auto's. For a typical sanctioned match of 85 shooters, adding CCP will likely take away more participants from SSP, CDP and ESP, thus reducing the likelihood of match bumps in those divisions. Whereas Optics will mostly attract NEW shooters to the sport and to sanctioned matches and demonstrates IDPA is supporting new technologies. I see more and more people opting for red-dots on their pistols and some claim they are faster. Some people really love their lasers, as well. I think it is great opportunity to see which technologies work better in daylight and gets vendors to improve their technologies. I think these things are the future and by IDPA adopting this now, it shows leadership in the shooting sports.

I am very happy with the press release and I hope to see more changes coming with the new rules. I support AIWB, increasing the number of non-threats available in a COF, bringing back par time shooting, and a number of other stage design improvements. I don't want to outline them here. A different thread is appropriate for that. From this press release, it seems the IDPA HQ is reacting to membership and club pressure. And, that is a good thing.
Cody

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I know that G19s were classified as compacts but that's just silly. If a G19 isn't competitive against a G34 - then the latter is not really primarily a SD gun. When thousands of officers and civilians buy them for real world usage as compared to G34s - yes, some person carries a G34, blah, blah - it really speaks to the game aspect.

That's ok with me, I was just commenting on a silly classification in the real utility of the gun as compared to artificial game classifications. I shoot a G17 or a g19 most of the time. When I take a class - it's the G19 (with the G26 brought as backup or sometimes used).

[ST911]

"Standard", "compact", and "sub-compact" is Glock's categorization for the 17, 19, 26.

It would be interesting to see stats on handgun make/model/caliber usage at matches. Research and data gathering should probably come before decision making. Clubs I've shot in, I see far more G19s than G17s. For the S&Ws, it's full size M&Ps with virtually no M&P compacts. For Sigs, it's all 226s of some sort.

[cclaxton]

I know that G19s were classified as compacts but that's just silly. If a G19 isn't competitive against a G34 - then the latter is not really primarily a SD gun. When thousands of officers and civilians buy them for real world usage as compared to G34s - yes, some person carries a G34, blah, blah - it really speaks to the game aspect. That's ok with me, I was just commenting on a silly classification in the real utility of the gun as compared to artificial game classifications. I shoot a G17 or a g19 most of the time. When I take a class - it's the G19 (with the G26 brought as backup or sometimes used).
My understanding is that the Glock 34 and even the XDm 5.25 came about because of the box size. The IDPA box was designed to accommodate a variety of guns including full sized 1911's. Rather than have different boxes for different divisions, to make matches easier to manage and operate, a single box size was decided upon. It is difficult to use weight to differentiate divisions because of polymer and metal guns being in the same divisions. So that is my understanding as to how we got there.

With all the rules on equipment being so complicated, I have finally come to this recommendation: If it fits in the box and makes weight, you can shoot it at the match. We all know it's not the pistol that makes a winner...it's the skill.
Cody

[JV_]

I am not trying to take credit for any of this. But

People like ToddG have been trying to get lasers in IDPA for a very long time. Heck, look at KSTG, it's IDPA with lasers and fault lines.

RMR/Optics may be new, but realize that a lot of people have been begging for this kind of stuff for years, likely well before you starting shooting IDPA.

[cclaxton]

People like ToddG, have been trying to get lasers in IDPA for a very long time. Heck, look at KSTG, it's IDPA with lasers and fault lines.

RMR/Optics may be new, but realize that a lot of people have been begging for this kind of stuff for years, likely well before you starting shooting IDPA.
Sometimes it just takes enough of us speaking up to get it to the tipping point. KSTG has some very significant differences beyond lasers and optics.

Some KSTG rules should be adopted by IDPA...for instance non-threat scoring.
Cody

Cody

[45dotACP]

If I were a member, I'd applaud all decisions. Yes, I know that a G19 should be competitive against a G34, but if you're talking strictly about a wins perspective...it isn't. Otherwise Bob Vogel would shoot a G19. That said...there are people who shoot G34's and carry just the same every day. There seems to be a fairly decent shooter who does that on this forum but I forget his name :D

And I want a division somewhere where I can shoot guns with frickin lasers!

Thank God...the flat footed reload is dead! And the whole RMR division not having enough cash...I say hogwash. I mean there are guys who shoot Open division in USPSA...people will spend money on the strangest things.

[Wheeler]

I have a sneaking suspicion that folks will vote for the cool factor and got for the RMR/Laser Division and it will die a slow, painful death once folks figure out that it doesn't automatically make them a better shooter. The vast majority of IDPA's membership is made up of casual shooters who show up for the social aspect.
To clarify, I'm not saying the advantage of the lasers or RMR aren't there, they just won't provide the level of improvement most folks are looking for. I'd personally much rather see the Compact Carry Division.

On a slight tangent, myself and several other revolver shooter petitioned IDPA to allow the 7 and 8 shot revolvers to be used at capacity in ESR. Those suggestions were ignored.

[cclaxton]

If I were a member, I'd applaud all decisions. Yes, I know that a G19 should be competitive against a G34, but if you're talking strictly about a wins perspective...it isn't. Otherwise Bob Vogel would shoot a G19. That said...there are people who shoot G34's and carry just the same every day. There seems to be a fairly decent shooter who does that on this forum but I forget his name :D

And I want a division somewhere where I can shoot guns with frickin lasers!

Thank God...the flat footed reload is dead! And the whole RMR division not having enough cash...I say hogwash. I mean there are guys who shoot Open division in USPSA...people will spend money on the strangest things.
You don't have to buy a $500 Trijicon RMR, either. There are plenty of mini red dots under $200. The Burris is about $220 plus mount. I see some cheaper versions for at low as $50. Demand will bring prices down as suppliers manufacture in larger quantities.
Cody

[orionz06]

I wonder if this is catering to the members or sponsors who happen to sell a RDS ready gun? Either way it would be a major step forward for an organization I have been critical of. The willingness to improve is a start, worrying about the right improvements can happen a little later.

[gtmtnbiker98]

I wonder if this is catering to the members or sponsors who happen to sell a RDS ready gun? Either way it would be a major step forward for an organization I have been critical of. The willingness to improve is a start, worrying about the right improvements can happen a little later.
I'm just trying to not get too optimistic.

[cclaxton]

The vast majority of IDPA's membership is made up of casual shooters who show up for the social aspect.
On a slight tangent, myself and several other revolver shooter petitioned IDPA to allow the 7 and 8 shot revolvers to be used at capacity in ESR. Those suggestions were ignored.
I disagree with this characterization of IDPA's membership. That might be true in your neck of the woods, but it is certainly not true in the Mid-Atlantic Region. I see Expert and Master class shooters at well-run matches at AAFG, Thurmont MD, Lower Providence PA, Easton PA, Hollidaysburg PA, Rivanna (Charlottesville, VA), Norfolk County Rifle Range (Chesapeake, VA), Cavalier (Montpelier, VA), and others. There are some clubs that are still building their membership, such as Peacemaker, but people aren't there to socialize. Shooters do like to socialize, but that is discouraged as we like them being ready to paste and reset. Often socializing happens AFTER the match. People are there to shoot, enjoy the sport, talk a little about guns and reloading, and then get home to their loved ones.

If that happens at your clubs, then I see no problem with it. But in my experience people are there to shoot first.
Cody

[cclaxton]

I wonder if this is catering to the members or sponsors who happen to sell a RDS ready gun? Either way it would be a major step forward for an organization I have been critical of. The willingness to improve is a start, worrying about the right improvements can happen a little later.
It is likely both, but I suspect members are driving this harder.
Cody

[Ray Keith]

What is lost by keeping ESR? Even if few shoot it? Comparatively few shoot SSR also, why not get rid of that too?

Just curious what the harm is.

This has nothing to do with the $$$ I have spent in the last 6 months on gearing up to shoot ESR in 2015....

[Peally]

According to their email they're not getting rid of that category of firearms completely so much as planning to roll them into SSR. Not ideal for all revolver shooters but it makes some sense.

[jh9]

According to their email they're not getting rid of that category of firearms completely so much as planning to roll them into SSR. Not ideal for all revolver shooters but it makes some sense.

There's been chatter for years about rolling the two divisions back together. Mostly by allowing speedloader guns at 125 PF and clip guns at 165 PF. I said it would never happen, but I also said USPSA wouldn't do 8 minor which was also discussed for years.

I'm honestly surprised. I've been increasingly critical of IDPA to the point of not shooting it at all anymore and just doing USPSA. This keeps up I might start doing the local club matches again.

[cclaxton]

What is lost by keeping ESR? Even if few shoot it? Comparatively few shoot SSR also, why not get rid of that too?

Just curious what the harm is.

This has nothing to do with the $$$ I have spent in the last 6 months on gearing up to shoot ESR in 2015....
According to my sources there are a number of issues, but the main ones are:
- Sanctioned Match admin increases with the number of Divisions, awards, etc.
- More chances for revolver shooters to get match bumps when you combine them
- Most software built for sanctioned matches is configured for 5 Divisions;
- There just hasn't been enough interest...most revolver shooters have moved to steel matches...that is where more competition exists an more equipment choices.

Cody

[ST911]

You don't have to buy a $500 Trijicon RMR, either. There are plenty of mini red dots under $200. The Burris is about $220 plus mount. I see some cheaper versions for at low as $50. Demand will bring prices down as suppliers manufacture in larger quantities.
Cody

So these will be the next widgets at my IDPA matches that people fuss with as they make ready, and demand alibis for when they fail? :)

[CoThG]

I am not trying to take credit for any of this. But these changes represent the list of suggestions I sent to HQ back just before the Nationals...with some exceptions.
I recommended the laser/optics division, but I did not recommend the CCP division... I did recommend a BUG division, but I do understand the issues of trying to make a BUG division part of a normal sanctioned match. So, keeping BUG matches separate makes sense. I recommended the combining of both revolver divisions...which by eliminating ESR accomplished that. Of course I recommended revoking flat-footed reloads.

So, I will vote for the Optics Division and here is why: We already have SSP, CDP and ESP divisions for semi-auto's. For a typical sanctioned match of 85 shooters, adding CCP will likely take away more participants from SSP, CDP and ESP, thus reducing the likelihood of match bumps in those divisions. Whereas Optics will mostly attract NEW shooters to the sport and to sanctioned matches and demonstrates IDPA is supporting new technologies. I see more and more people opting for red-dots on their pistols and some claim they are faster. Some people really love their lasers, as well. I think it is great opportunity to see which technologies work better in daylight and gets vendors to improve their technologies. I think these things are the future and by IDPA adopting this now, it shows leadership in the shooting sports.

I am very happy with the press release and I hope to see more changes coming with the new rules. I support AIWB, increasing the number of non-threats available in a COF, bringing back par time shooting, and a number of other stage design improvements. I don't want to outline them here. A different thread is appropriate for that. From this press release, it seems the IDPA HQ is reacting to membership and club pressure. And, that is a good thing.
Cody


Then, why are you even mentioning it? It's just a backdoor way for you to try and take credit for it.

[JV_]

It's just a backdoor way for you to try and take credit for it.Which is pretty ridiculous considering how long some fairly influential people have been pushing for it.

[Jay Cunningham]

Cody, if you're the sole reason for this, then yay you.

To All - move on. Please.

[PPGMD]

According to my sources there are a number of issues, but the main ones are:
- Sanctioned Match admin increases with the number of Divisions, awards, etc.
- More chances for revolver shooters to get match bumps when you combine them
- Most software built for sanctioned matches is configured for 5 Divisions;
- There just hasn't been enough interest...most revolver shooters have moved to steel matches...that is where more competition exists an more equipment choices.

I just don't see it. The only cost would be plaque costs, but that only applies if there are enough shooter to warrant a plaque. Administratively the time difference of a 5 division match and a 6 division match should be practically the same.

As far the match software, I find that hard to believe. Practicscrore for example is built for USPSA, but has the ability to run match specific divisions. And there would be enough notice that the programmers can make new versions, and get them out to the MDs.

Match bumps shouldn't matter as shooters are required to run a classifier yearly.

Though I agree that revolvers are dying, if those are the reasons to kill ESR they are pretty weak.

[cclaxton]

Then, why are you even mentioning it? It's just a backdoor way for you to try and take credit for it.
It takes a lot of people asking for the same thing to get things to the tipping point. I am sure there were lots of other people asking for the same things. The only people who can really take credit are staff/executives at IDPA. They are the ones who actually make the decision. It does give me confidence in myself as a competitor and match director that I was in alignment with their decisions.

Cody

[cclaxton]

Match bumps shouldn't matter as shooters are required to run a classifier yearly.
I live for a match bump. I only shoot the classifier in ESP and SSP once a year. A lot of people live for match bumps. The problem is that revolver shooters don't usually have enough people in their division and class except at Tier 4 or 5 matches. By combining revolvers, there is a higher chance more will get bumped. What I see is revolver shooters moving to steel matches...lots of them there.
Cody

[JHC]

It takes a lot of people asking for the same thing to get things to the tipping point. I am sure there were lots of other people asking for the same things. The only people who can really take credit are staff/executives at IDPA. They are the ones who actually make the decision. It does give me confidence in myself as a competitor and match director that I was in alignment with their decisions.

Cody

I didn't interpret that you were crowing about it for ownership. FWIW. Not much I know. ;)

[PPGMD]

I live for a match bump. I only shoot the classifier in ESP and SSP once a year. A lot of people live for match bumps. The problem is that revolver shooters don't usually have enough people in their division and class except at Tier 4 or 5 matches. By combining revolvers, there is a higher chance more will get bumped. What I see is revolver shooters moving to steel matches...lots of them there.

I never understood that attitude. The only plaque that matters is the overall winner for the division. In some sports the cash or prize you get with a class win is nice, but the plaque is worthless.

[Wheeler]

I disagree with this characterization of IDPA's membership. That might be true in your neck of the woods, but it is certainly not true in the Mid-Atlantic Region. I see Expert and Master class shooters at well-run matches at AAFG, Thurmont MD, Lower Providence PA, Easton PA, Hollidaysburg PA, Rivanna (Charlottesville, VA), Norfolk County Rifle Range (Chesapeake, VA), Cavalier (Montpelier, VA), and others. There are some clubs that are still building their membership, such as Peacemaker, but people aren't there to socialize. Shooters do like to socialize, but that is discouraged as we like them being ready to paste and reset. Often socializing happens AFTER the match. People are there to shoot, enjoy the sport, talk a little about guns and reloading, and then get home to their loved ones.

If that happens at your clubs, then I see no problem with it. But in my experience people are there to shoot first.
Cody

Ok

[cclaxton]

I never understood that attitude. The only plaque that matters is the overall winner for the division. In some sports the cash or prize you get with a class win is nice, but the plaque is worthless.
It's not the plaque itself...it's the achievement in a match against other competitors. If all we rewarded was the Division champion, it wouldn't recognize the hard work for those working their way up the ranks. Further, some people will never be competitive against the likes of Vogel, Warren, etc. Many people have physical limits in their eyesight, stature, quickness, and skills. By having match bumps for each class, it makes the sport more rewarding and fun to the rank and file. If we only reward those who win divisions, the sport will be elitist. The sport needs to reward achievement at lower levels of competition.
The plaque respresents achievement and hard work.
COdy

[MDFA]

I welcome the proposed change and voted for CCP. At my club we see more shooters with G19 size pistols than G17 and G34. It's encouraging to see HQ listening to the membership.

[taadski]

Back to practicing my RWRs on the run! :p

Now if they'd only reconsider the use of (real) duty gear at majors…or AIWB [...sigh]

Regardless, ya gotta give em kudos for listening to the membership.


t

[PPGMD]

Back to practicing my RWRs on the run! :p

Round dumping, so you can do a slide lock reload on the run.

[taadski]

Round dumping, so you can do a slide lock reload on the run.

I have no idea what yer talking about. ;)

[cclaxton]

Rules clarifications dated Oct 31. http://www.idpa.com/misc/RC/IDPARulesClarification-v2014-10-31.pdf
These are clarifications only. They do not include the new rules on flat-footed reloading, new divisions, etc.
Cody

[m91196]

By having match bumps for each class, it makes the sport more rewarding and fun to the rank and file. If we only reward those who win divisions, the sport will be elitist. The sport needs to reward achievement at lower levels of competition

Match bumps are the "everyone is a winner" of the shooting sports.

Lame, and I have received them.

[Trooper224]

Match bumps are the "everyone is a winner" of the shooting sports.

Lame, and I have received them.

Well, we do live in the age of the participation medal, where everyone gets a juice box just for showing up.

[Alpha Sierra]

Match bumps are the "everyone is a winner" of the shooting sports.

Lame, and I have received them.

I actually see them as more meaningful than a classifier that can be drilled over and over and over until the desired classification comes up. Sometimes doing that is an accurate predictor of match performance. I think more often than not it leads to grandbagging.

[orionz06]

A match bump is cool, so long as your performance is commensurate. I would think that a bunch of crappy IDPA Experts that were match bumped Sharpshooters is worse than paper Masters. Tough call though. In the end I suspect that if the participation is great enough to prevent this. I would also hope that if someone got a match bump that they could also classify at that level.

[gtmtnbiker98]

Around my area, you have to drive a 100 miles to find competition in IDPA and only 10 miles in USPSA. Hopefully the new rule book will bring the shooters back.

[NETim]

Coming from a registered trapshooting career, I'm used to "match bumps." It's not at all unusual, in a multi-day shoot, to win your class in singles one day and get moved up to the next higher class for the next day's shoot.

Handicap trap is much the same. Win your yardage group or shoot a 98 or better and you "earn" yardage.

It is quite a feat to attain the coveted "AA-27-AA" classification.

I have no problem with "match bumps". More incentive to shoot better IMHO.

[Alpha Sierra]

Tim brought up a good point. Not only are match bumps common in trap and skeet, they are the ONLY way to move up in NSCA sporting clays. There are no classifiers in the shotgun sports, and since sporting clays does not have a uniform course of fire percentages of targets broken can't be used either.

[Wheeler]

Tim brought up a good point. Not only are match bumps common in trap and skeet, they are the ONLY way to move up in NSCA sporting clays. There are no classifiers in the shotgun sports, and since sporting clays does not have a uniform course of fire percentages of targets broken can't be used either.

I thought I was pretty good at sporting clays until I shot a match with registered targets.

[cclaxton]

Match bumps are the "everyone is a winner" of the shooting sports. Lame, and I have received them.
m,
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I just want to point out a couple of things:
1) Match Bumps don't reward "everyone" since match bumps are limited to 1 out of 10 competitors in a division/class.
2) Trophies are normally awarded for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place, depending on the number of participants and 1st place doesn't force a match bump. So, not everyone gets a trophy. There are definitely winners and losers of a match by class and division.
3) Many psychological studies have been done on competitiveness and group dynamics, and there is plenty of evidence in the sports world to show that people are more competitive when they compete in smaller groups. This is why Classifications are used in almost every sport. When we compete against a smaller group of people, we work harder to compete and win. When we compete against a big group of people, we typically don't compete as well. I am sure there are some individuals that do better against a big group, but vast majority of people compete better in small groups of people with similar abilities.
4) Having a classification of competitors helps people of similar ability to compete against each other and beat others of similar abilities. Trying to beat Vogel or Warren is not going to be realistic for someone who is MM/SS level or C/D Class...even B class.
5) The way to make progress up the ranks over time is to have achievable goals and to develop a process that allows us to monitor and test our progress. Match Bumps and trophies award that achievement...it does mean that you beat a bunch of other people of similar abilities.

There are sports for children that do award based on participation. A match bump or even trophies by classification are not the same thing.
Cody

[orionz06]

If the entire group shoots below their level does the winner of said division still get bumped up?

[cclaxton]

If the entire group shoots below their level does the winner of said division still get bumped up?
In IDPA you must beat at least ten members of your class and the class above you. In order to compete in a class you must have been classified at that level of competence or received a match bump (which I argue is the much better way). Most people get classified in a class through the classifier, a smaller percentage have match bumps. So, it is not possible for a whole group to shoot below their level unless a bunch of people cheated on the classifier.

I have competed in dozens of sanctioned matches and here is what I have learned: In order to get a match bump at a sanctioned match, I actually have to be shooting above the 50% percentile of the class ABOVE ME. So, as a SS, I need to be getting scores at or above the 50% point of the Expert level. That is because the competition is so stiff. Although I am sure it happens from time to time, I have never seen a situation where there wasn't at least two out of ten people shooting at a level competitive with the class above them. Now I have seen where the group was very small, such as revolvers, where you only had 3 people. Sample size does matter here.

There is always the possibility that "On Any Given Sunday" the whole group sucked and somebody got a lucky match bump out of it. But I have never seen it. My experience is that competition is fierce and everyone else is looking for that match bump. It took me 1.5 years to get a match bump from MM to SS in ESP, then only six months to get SS in SSP. I got 2nd place at the patriot match and the 1st place guy beat all but one expert and 2/3 of the masters. At Liberty we had at least three shooters who were as fast as the Masters and six faster than half of the Experts in SS class... A lot of it depends on the match and the location of the match.

Because of the classifier, you are shooting against people with AT LEAST your level of ability, and to win you are competing against people of higher ability.
Cody

[Alpha Sierra]

I thought I was pretty good at sporting clays until I shot a match with registered targets.

Yeah, people who think match bumps are so easy should try to punch out of NSCA E class.

[Mr_White]

In IDPA you must beat at least ten members of your class and the class above you.

I would have liked for USPSA to work that way back at Area 1 this year. I'm A class and beat 16 out of 17 A's, and also beat 9 out of 14 of the M's. I would have really liked a match bump to M.

[cclaxton]

I would have liked for USPSA to work that way back at Area 1 this year. I'm A class and beat 16 out of 17 A's, and also beat 9 out of 14 of the M's. I would have really liked a match bump to M.
Then I would say that you deserve to be classified as master. Once you make master and then Grand Master there's not much further to go unless you change to different shooting sports. I enjoy the challenge. one day Master will happen in the meantime keep having fun trying.
Cody

[HiTechRob]

CCP is definitely first option that makes sense for idpa. LOP is IDPA's way to keep folks From going to USPSA in my opinion. LOP is also a legitimate defensive carry or home defense option.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JV_]

Why do we only get an optic/laser or a CCP, it seems like a good argument can be made for both.

[cclaxton]

Why do we only get an optic/laser or a CCP, it seems like a good argument can be made for both.
A typical sanctioned match is 85-100 shooters. Take out 10 for revolver shooters and you get 75-90. Divide the average by 12 semi-auto divisions and you get 6 to 7 shooters per div/class. If you add another division it waters that down even more. I advocate combining SSP AND ESP, and then you could add both new divisions.

And for equipment: if it fits the box and makes weight it should be legal. It's not the gun, it's the skill.
Cody

[JV_]

I advocate combining SSP AND ESPI agree.

[YVK]

And for equipment: if it fits the box and makes weight it should be legal. It's not the gun, it's the skill.
Cody

I shot some Bill Drills at 25 yards with a Glock 19 the other day. Today I shot them again with a Beretta 92. Same skill, same drill, same ammo, same SSP class, different guns, different results.

Any other sport where dimensional attributes of equipment make a difference either limit the differences or create separate categories. You can't have a tennis racquet longer than 28 inches. You can't bend blade of a hockey stick excessively. 650cc bikes don't race against 1100cc bikes. How compact guns are OK to be run against heavier, meatier and longer guns under the same category is above me.

[LHS]

I shot some Bill Drills at 25 yards with a Glock 19 the other day. Today I shot them again with a Beretta 92. Same skill, same drill, same ammo, same SSP class, different guns, different results.

Any other sport where dimensional attributes of equipment make a difference either limit the differences or create separate categories. You can't have a tennis racquet longer than 28 inches. You can't bend blade of a hockey stick excessively. 650cc bikes don't race against 1100cc bikes. How compact guns are OK to be run against heavier, meatier and longer guns under the same category is above me.

Agreed. CCP is the first thing IDPA's done in a while that's made me want to get back into it for more than a monthly club match. CCP is in keeping with the spirit of the sport. I'd even advocate making it IWB-only. If you're going to have a true concealment/realistic carry division, make it so.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Disagree on the IWB part. I've moved from IWB to OWB due to it's ease and body configuration. I can easily and Do conceal a G19 or 26 almost everyday in normal clothing (not shoot me first vests).

An aside, as left handed, I used a Blade-tech IWB for the Glocks - Its kydex or whatever material had some flex and it would consistently press the slide release and pop the mag every so slightly.

Another reason I went to OWB as well as comfort.

[JAD]

I'd like IDPA to go back to the original two classes. They each had a specific individual purpose and I think they worked fine. Inclusivity has been the Achilles heel of the sport.

[orionz06]

Agreed. CCP is the first thing IDPA's done in a while that's made me want to get back into it for more than a monthly club match. CCP is in keeping with the spirit of the sport. I'd even advocate making it IWB-only. If you're going to have a true concealment/realistic carry division, make it so.

Nope. Plenty of folks carry OWB and conceal.

If we're going realistic we can look at things other than the holster.

[BN]

I'd like IDPA to go back to the original two classes. They each had a specific individual purpose and I think they worked fine. Inclusivity has been the Achilles heel of the sport.

I have a 1996 rule book and it lists 4 divisions; SSP, ESP, CDP and SSR. It lists 5 classifications; MA, EXP, SS, MM and Novice.

[cclaxton]

I shot some Bill Drills at 25 yards with a Glock 19 the other day. Today I shot them again with a Beretta 92. Same skill, same drill, same ammo, same SSP class, different guns, different results.

Any other sport where dimensional attributes of equipment make a difference either limit the differences or create separate categories. You can't have a tennis racquet longer than 28 inches. You can't bend blade of a hockey stick excessively. 650cc bikes don't race against 1100cc bikes. How compact guns are OK to be run against heavier, meatier and longer guns under the same category is above me.
Can you publish results of your test
? Also, just to eliminate all variables, should you test against a glock 34 instead?
Cody

[JAD]

I have a 1996 rule book and it lists 4 divisions; SSP, ESP, CDP and SSR. It lists 5 classifications; MA, EXP, SS, MM and Novice.

Mine too, Bill, my reference is apocryphal. ESP was added to accommodate checkered P35s and Supers, and SSR came about as an afterthought spurred by the conference table realization that the only gun half the founders were carrying was a J frame (it is alleged). But at least apocryphally, the sport was conceived as a place for single stack non-comped 1911s and completely as-issued DA / SFA service pistols to have a place to compete. Sez me, #A00379, which is frankly later than the stuff I speak of.

[BN]

Mine too, Bill, my reference is apocryphal. ESP was added to accommodate checkered P35s and Supers, and SSR came about as an afterthought spurred by the conference table realization that the only gun half the founders were carrying was a J frame (it is alleged). But at least apocryphally, the sport was conceived as a place for single stack non-comped 1911s and completely as-issued DA / SFA service pistols to have a place to compete. Sez me, #A00379, which is frankly later than the stuff I speak of.

I was there at Fort Harmar the day when IDPA was formed. However, I was across the road shooting a USPSA match and they didn't consult me. ;) What you say could be how it was. I'm pretty sure that revolver was an afterthought. None of the founders shot revolvers in competition and most of them were shooting USPSA at the time. :) #A00282. LOL

[JAD]

I was thinking someone who's been around longer would come along and sort it out, but then it occurred to me that I was thinking of you.

[Wheeler]

Can you publish results of your test
? Also, just to eliminate all variables, should you test against a glock 34 instead?
Cody

That's a pretty accurate test if SSP and ESP were combined.

[BN]

I was thinking someone who's been around longer would come along and sort it out, but then it occurred to me that I was thinking of you.

I'm probably not the expert you're looking for. :)

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Isn't the development and usage of guns like the Glock 34 introduce a paradox for IDPA? It is gun developed for competition and rarely carried (yes, some small number do). So how is its usage in IDPA true to 'defensive pistol' as compared to a game? To be outrageous - IDPA should not go beyond G17 sized guns - ducking for cover. But unducking - it's all gaming with a small attempt to correlate with carry reality.

If we wanted folks to shoot J frames - I would have the following:

1. One shot mandated per target - with only zeros counting.
2. Reload wherever and however you need to and doing cartwheels if needed.

I know Claude shoots Js in competition and I tried it once in awhile (took his great course on snubbies). I got a round of applause when I hit a far steel with a J. But if I wanted realistic J usage, the standard IDPA isn't realistic (hahaha!). I see four guys - I'm not double tapping two of them (oh, this is getting so silly). But I have been in an incident with four (avoidance and presence carried the day) - but with a Glock (never deployed).

[Wheeler]

Isn't the development and usage of guns like the Glock 34 introduce a paradox for IDPA? It is gun developed for competition and rarely carried (yes, some small number do). So how is its usage in IDPA true to 'defensive pistol' as compared to a game? To be outrageous - IDPA should not go beyond G17 sized guns - ducking for cover. But unducking - it's all gaming with a small attempt to correlate with carry reality.

If we wanted folks to shoot J frames - I would have the following:

1. One shot mandated per target - with only zeros counting.
2. Reload wherever and however you need to and doing cartwheels if needed.

I know Claude shoots Js in competition and I tried it once in awhile (took his great course on snubbies). I got a round of applause when I hit a far steel with a J. But if I wanted realistic J usage, the standard IDPA isn't realistic (hahaha!). I see four guys - I'm not double tapping two of them (oh, this is getting so silly). But I have been in an incident with four (avoidance and presence carried the day) - but with a Glock (never deployed).

I recently shot a Carry Gun only IDPA match in which no reloads were allowed on the belt. I naively showed up with my Model 36, a single Speedloader and two speed strips only to discover that everyone else must actually carry full sized pistols all the times. Except for the guy with a Commander sized 1911 who must use 8 round magazines all the time. :-) None of the stages were five shot neutral or even six shot neutral for that matter.
I went for a specific purpose which was to get a workout with that pistol under match stress along with those particular methods of reloading. I still won the revolver and BUG divisions, mainly because I was the only one in both. ;-)

[YVK]

Can you publish results of your test
? Also, just to eliminate all variables, should you test against a glock 34 instead?
Cody

There is not much to publish, Cody. Shooting it clean with G19 took that much time that it almost became a target practice with six rounds, as opposed to five follow up shots with a Beretta.
I wouldn't mind shooting it against 34, but I don't think it is necessary. While some prefer shorter guns, the overwhelming majority of people I know post better results with 17/34 than 19.


Addressing other aspects mentioned here, I don't think prohibiting guns larger than 17 is something I can get behind. "S" in SSP/ESP stands for "service", and there are many 4.5, 4.9, and 5.3 bbl guns in service. I don't think they should be excluded, but separating "service" vs "carry" would be something I'd like. That's coming from a guy who is appendix carrying a Beretta 92 while typing this.

[Clusterfrack]

The 19 worked very well for me at our local IDPA match today. I took 1st overall by 10s (out of 100s), and won 3/6 stages. 2nd place was a M class shooter using a M&P Pro.

[YVK]

Congrats on a win. Perhaps you're better shooter than them. However, as a general rule, bigger guns rule this sport. I placed 1, 2 and 3 at my last three matches, and no one competitive had anything shorter than 4.5 bbl. I personally don't have problem with somebody bringing in a 26 or 19 and taking it to a full sized crowd, but the opposite...I guess, I'll just be repeating myself.

[Clusterfrack]

Yeah--I agree. I usually shoot a 34 with a Vanek trigger group, Jager striker, etc. I was using the 19 today just to see how well I could do with it.

[Mr_White]

Congratulations, great job!

Did you find the (stock? ) 19 much more difficult than your juiced up 34?

[Clusterfrack]

Thanks, Gabe. This thread encouraged me to give the 19 a try today (also, a worn-out trigger return spring on the 34 and being too lazy to replace it :D).

I usually rack up a few match wins in a year at this match, and am disappointed if I'm not in the top 3, so I wouldn't say the 19 allowed me to do something I can't with the 34.

On the minus side: I was using a JMCK IWB #3, and draws were pretty quick, but couldn't match my usual speed with my gamer Blade Tech Black Ice. As well, I was using Ameriglo Operators on the 19 instead of a Dawson FO, and I dropped a -1 on a target array when I lost the front sight. As well, there were some difficult distant targets obscured by no-shoots, and it felt like it took a few 0.1ths longer to get an acceptable sight picture with the 19. Totally subjective of course because it always feels like forever to me to break a tough shot.

On the plus side: I just love how the 19 feels in my hand. It's my favorite gun, and it's what I carry. I can transition faster SHO and especially WHO with the 19 than with the 34, and there was a long stage of that at this match. As well, I found myself shifting to SHO to deal with some tight cover problems. So, using the 19 seemed to bring out some new IDPA tactics for me. I may keep shooting it for a while just to see where it takes me. (I'll be using my G34 for USPSA of course!)

[cclaxton]

Isn't the development and usage of guns like the Glock 34 introduce a paradox for IDPA? It is gun developed for competition and rarely carried (yes, some small number do). So how is its usage in IDPA true to 'defensive pistol' as compared to a game? To be outrageous - IDPA should not go beyond G17 sized guns - ducking for cover. But unducking - it's all gaming with a small attempt to correlate with carry reality.
This may be a different application, but I know a few guys working in Federal for State and other agencies, and, if they are Glock guys (not all are), they like to carry their Glock 34's. This is anecdotal, at best. But who else knows people who actually use it as their service pistol?
Cody

[orionz06]

Isn't the development and usage of guns like the Glock 34 introduce a paradox for IDPA? It is gun developed for competition and rarely carried (yes, some small number do). So how is its usage in IDPA true to 'defensive pistol' as compared to a game? To be outrageous - IDPA should not go beyond G17 sized guns - ducking for cover. But unducking - it's all gaming with a small attempt to correlate with carry reality.

Wouldn't that eliminate full size 1911's?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That's a gun with a significant carry history and not developed just for the gaming community. I grant you this is a difficult decision but all the equipment nuances indicate a game away from 'defensive'. And that's OK too.

[orionz06]

So would you also rule out STI guns and many other "competition" models? What about fiber optic sights?

[Alpha Sierra]

So long as IDPA, and some of its adherents, continue to search for that majikal combination of guns, gear, and rules that will allow you to have a game that simulates The Real World (TM) the cognitive disonance will remain.

[ST911]

This may be a different application, but I know a few guys working in Federal for State and other agencies, and, if they are Glock guys (not all are), they like to carry their Glock 34's. This is anecdotal, at best. But who else knows people who actually use it as their service pistol?
Cody

Many more LE folks carrying the G35 than the 34. I do expect that to change as they make a caliber switch.

It's authorized a great deal more than utilized.

[cclaxton]

Wouldn't that eliminate full size 1911's?
I think this is the issue. You could introduce a new rule that says only CDP can have a box that big, and the semi-auto's must fit a smaller box. But that makes the admin of the game more complex.

Besides, the genie is out of the bottle (or should I say genie is out of the box?).
No turning back now. People LOVE to shoot their 34's...I love mine too, I made SSP SS with it...but don't let that get around :cool:.
Cody

[Mr_White]

Add me to the folks who find some dissonance in the classically accepted legitimacy of a full size 1911, but simultaneous illegitimacy of the G34/35 because it's too big for most people to carry.

[orionz06]

That would then imply that 1911's are the only suitable 5" pistol for concealed carry. That's ridiculous.

[Alpha Sierra]

What about revolvers? Are 4" wheelguns, which are exactly as long from stem to stern as 5" semis, also gamer pistols?

[cclaxton]

These recent posts are perhaps why I think IDPA just decided on ONE box size for all guns.
I don't have any issue with the 34/35 because there are enough who carry it and use it as a service gun, IMHO.

I am much more peeved about all the rules the eliminate guns that should be allowed, such as FPB removals, Accushadow, "custom shop" guns, "external mods", etc.

If it makes weight and fits the box, it should be allowed.
Cody

[LHS]

Add me to the folks who find some dissonance in the classically accepted legitimacy of a full size 1911, but simultaneous illegitimacy of the G34/35 because it's too big for most people to carry.

Me too. I think that lends even more credence to splitting off a compact division for things like G19s, 92Cs, etc.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Ah, who cares. I shoot for fun and skills practice. I'll shoot my 1911 Commander size or G17 or my J when I feel the mood. I give up. I don't care about divisions and am not a serious, want to win competitor. Sue me for that. Let's all just get along with the game. If IDPA dropped the D - that might solve it. How about IFPA - the fun pistol association. The flat footed controversy kind of killed any real pretense of being truly 'defensive'.:p

[JAD]

Again historically, some people in IDPA were irked when the 34/35 came out because it was developed very clearly to game the rules, maxing out dimensionally and adding competition-specific features. I think it took like 10 minutes for most people to get over it, but that was the sand in the Vaseline.

When I joined IDPA it had two different missions, if not overtly stated certainly embodied in the rules. The first was to introduce defensive shooters to competition by offering a rule set that was friendly to what people were likely to have, that limited modifications so that a new person wouldn't have equipment to buy or modify; and the second was to provide a game for former IPSC shooters who had become disenchanted with the equipment and practices 'required to win' in that sport, who were perceived to want to run heavily customized 1911s.

In those early days it worked pretty well. At both the club and match levels, a FNG like me could shoot his Glock 19 and not feel like he was losing because of equipment, and at the same time rub shoulders with some /very/ cool people who had been out of the game and out of circulation otherwise. The old timers showed those of us with time and resources how to spec (or build) a 1911 that would run, and some of them started screwing with 92's and G17s.

Family demands took me away from the sport, but I'm interested to get back in at the club and match levels and see how much it's changed, and how much of the Sinclair component is still hanging in there.

[Wheeler]

To the best of my recollection, the box was sized specifically for a full sized 1911.


What about revolvers? Are 4" wheelguns, which are exactly as long from stem to stern as 5" semis, also gamer pistols?

Absolutely. The lid of the box won't close completely over the cylinder of a K frame or larger sized revolver. This provides round gun shooters a distinct and some say, unfair advantage on stages where the box is utilized for the start position of the gun on a stage.

[Mr_White]

Any gun that's bigger, more capable, or easier to shoot than the gun we ourselves actually carry is a gamer gun, regardless of how much or little of a compromise the gun we carry is.

[Alpha Sierra]

The equipment race in IDPA SSP is just the exact same as the equipment race in USPSA Production. Except that you need to carry a few more mags in USPSA. And you need to be able to run faster.

[Clusterfrack]

Yup. To me IDPA and USPSA are are equally (ir)relevant to defensive shooting. Sure, in IDPA we need to pretend to be tactical while also trying to win, while in USPSA we just try to win. I like the SSP and Production because they allow me to use guns that are fairly close to my carry guns. But I'm shooting gamer loads that barely make PF in a gun with a fire control group and sights that I would never use for carry.

[cclaxton]

Any gun that's bigger, more capable, or easier than the gun we ourselves actually carry is a gamer gun, regardless of how much or little of a compromise the gun we carry is.
I am curious why it's necessary to label any reasonably sized handgun a "gamer" gun. (OK, well, OPEN guns seem to be in a class by themselves...I grant you that). Why wouldn't it be a matter of degree? If I can shoot 95% as well with my Cz 75 SDP carry gun as my Cz 75 Shadow that I use in IDPA and USPSA, then is the Shadow still a "gamer" gun? What if I change my Cz 75 carry out for a Cz 75 RAMI? Did the SDP suddenly become a "gamer" gun? When I carry my pocket S&W 380ACP instead of the SDP, is the SDP a "gamer" gun now? I am not playing word games. I am just trying to point out that the label is relative, and if it's relative, then wouldn't it will depend on each individual's abilities? This reminds me of a quote from Ignatius Piazza that might be applicable here: "Any gun will do--If you will do."

In a real self-defense situation, wouldn't the mental aspect and and threat recognition a much bigger factor than the 5-10% difference in shooting skill between any two handguns of reasonable size? (I know that is true for me).
Cody

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Running with the young is no longer an option for me. Thus, I shoot for fun. I agree that it would be difficult to find a real world difference in gun fights using G19s vs G17s. A gun by training by gender by incident severity analysis would be a bear to conduct.

By the level on this forum, I think we agree all are games. I try to shoot carry guns as I want the skills practice with them as compared to dressing up like a giant yellow bumblebee with a ray gun looking handgun (but if you like that - go for - I think folks should dress anyway that excites them). Ok, got to lecture on color-opponency - so Good night.

[YVK]

These recent posts are perhaps why I think IDPA just decided on ONE box size for all guns.....


If it makes weight and fits the box, it should be allowed.
Cody

You can use one box entirely differently. Get a box for G19/MPc/P2000. What fits is CCP, what doesn't is ESP/SSP, but everything goes.

[orionz06]

You can use one box entirely differently. Get a box for G19/MPc/P2000. What fits is CCP, what doesn't is ESP/SSP, but everything goes.

I can agree to that, assuming reloads and mags aren't from a larger pistol. No G17 mags in a G19 or M&P mags with a sleeve in a compact.

[Mr_White]

I am curious why it's necessary to label any reasonably sized handgun a "gamer" gun.

It's not. I was gently mocking the common practice on the internet to project one's own priorities, choices, and circumstantial limitations onto everyone else. Like say, if a person who carries a Glock 34 daily chides someone else for 'only' carrying a deep concealment or pocket gun - but that person works in a formal business environment - or a person who works in that formal business environment chiding others for carrying unrealistically large guns that 'normal people can't carry', like G19/17/34, etc.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Haha - normal people can't carry a G34! That's the nub of this issue? How about someone who wears a robe to work and totes a Sig AR-oid 'pistol' under his or her robe? An Uzi in your attache case? That's concealed carry.

Eliminate Practical and Defensive from the game name game. Just say two different set of rules - make your choice. Chicken or Fish.

[Alpha Sierra]

Haha - normal people can't carry a G34!

?

When I feel like it I can comfortably carry a 4" K frame which is just as large and quite a bit heavier than a G34. All it takes is casual clothes with an untucked shirt.

[Mr_White]

Being able to have an untucked instead of tucked shirt seems to me to be the biggest dividing line between a person being able to carry a rather substantial pistol or having to compromise a little or a lot.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Just being a touch sarcastic when the debate revolved down to the G34 as a carry gun. I've carried a SW Model 19. My G26 or 19 is a touch more comfortable.

[orionz06]

Sadly I have been preached to at a match about my gun. At the time I was told a 1911 was more concealable than a 5" M&P 9.

They are out there...

[Peally]

Sadly I have been preached to at a match about my gun. At the time I was told a 1911 was more concealable than a 5" M&P 9.

They are out there...

When it all comes down to it, USPSA, IDPA, 3GN, they're all just games with their own rules. I've been there and listened to those people and all I can do is smile and nod with "Ok grandpa..." being whispered in my head. Some folks are just 100% right in their own world, 100% of the time.

[Sal Picante]

Couple of comments...

1.) I'm glad IDPA is coming full circle on the reloads thing. I hope AIWB becomes something they'd consider too..

2.)

It's not. I was gently mocking the common practice on the internet to project one's own priorities, choices, and circumstantial limitations onto everyone else. Like say, if a person who carries a Glock 34 daily chides someone else for 'only' carrying a deep concealment or pocket gun - but that person works in a formal business environment - or a person who works in that formal business environment chiding others for carrying unrealistically large guns that 'normal people can't carry', like G19/17/34, etc.

I am that person. I'm carrying a Kahr PM9 because I can't risk printing with the CZP01 I usually carry outside of work...

3.) I shot a few local matches with my G23 and won... The grip was goofy and cut the web of my hand a lot, so I just kept using my G22. I won a lot of larger matches with my G22.
I don't think it mattered much, except for the fact that it cut my hand a lot...

[Sal Picante]

Being able to have an untucked instead of tucked shirt seems to me to be the biggest dividing line between a person being able to carry a rather substantial pistol or having to compromise a little or a lot.


+1

[tedbeau]

Personally...I would love to see the addition of appendix carry for IDPA, including appendix reloads. I know, wishful thinking.

I am going to vote for CCP. I think that is a great addition due to the popularity of 19s, M&PCs, etc. I think it would push some people into a new challenge which is always a good thing. What's also awesome as they have said that "G19 size" this includes a lot of firearms. P2000, CZ P-07, SP2022 and other models that people don't shoot but that I have a personal affinity for lol

I think they made the gun requirements to easy. I have shot several tier two matches and I always use my EDC gun a Glock 27 subcompact in 40 caliber. I think allowing the glock 19's in this division is wrong, the maximum barrel length should have been 3.5 or 3.8 inches. Make it a true COMPACT gun class.

Also, are they going to allow the j-frame size revolvers to shoot in this class because I would love to shoot my snubbie.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

We were talking about this yesterday. First, there was a 10 minute debate between the SO and an expert shooter (range lawyer) over the flat footed dance. Give me a break - this is a local club match. Second, allowing a G19 with 8 rounds - why? So G19s don't compete with the 34s. I shoot my 19 or 17 in SSP. I shot my 26 in SSP yesterday.

There should be a category - "Yeah, right - you really carry that, haha!"