Practical Competition Rules

[joshs]

We've had a number of discussions recently concerning a rules from IDPA, and to a more limited extent, KSTG and USPSA. What rules do you like from the various practical shooting games, and which do you dislike? Please also feel free to share your own ideas to deal with the core rules in practical shooting (scoring, equipment, safety, use of cover, etc.). I'm obviously most interested in what people think of KSTG (http://kstghq.com/) rules, but all discussion is welcome.

[Mr_White]

I like:

Division(s) that allows appendix carry, lasers, MRDS, and WML

Concealment or duty gear

Division(s) where stock-ish service handguns with the associated trigger pull weights are competitive

Accuracy-oriented scoring, as with Minor in USPSA

Less subjectivity, as with fault lines

Open-ended stage planning

Well-populated Divisions where the level of competition is high


I dislike:

More subjectivity, as with cover calls

Rules dictating stage plans

Having to change equipment to be allowed to compete – least annoying is adding a mag pouch or two – changing guns or holsters is a dealbreaker

[Haraise]

I have to agree with the above.

Need: Appendix, MRDS, WML, concealment and duty gear, no dictation of how to go.

Want: Minor power factor being more of a possibility. Accuracy based.

[Mr_White]

One thing this whole discussion now has me thinking about, that I'd not previously considered much: difficulty of a division/sport.

If there were a division/sport that fit me perfectly rules-wise, but in practice it were a small, lowly-populated division, I am not sure whether I'd rather shoot that division against a tiny handful of other people, or stick with USPSA Limited because it's a highly-populous, highly-competitive division...

Shooting both seems like the obvious answer, but I'd probably have to choose one or the other, and I don't know which I would choose.

[orionz06]

I dislike rules concerning holster and reload position and orientation. I greatly prefer my reload forward of my hip, not so far that it is near centerline, just near a flatter part of my body. Even if AIWB is not allowed it is the same with holsters.


Cover... Cover as executed in competition is lame. I would prefer fault lines but also make the cover have left and right barriers, not just corners. Make the shot tight.


Gear wise... I think modern carry firearms are vastly different than back in the day. Stippling, tape, sights, slide mods, and so on should be reconsidered. The equipment race aspect of slide mods has been shown to be almost null. Heavier slides are preferred by more than lighter slides. Let people carve them up. Limit the addition of weight to an enhanced division. MRDS, WML, and lasers are real viable options. Allow them. I am OK with splitting them up a bit. Make a distinction between slide mounted and frame mounted optics. Until frame mounted optics become viable option for concealed carry and duty they should only be open gun material. Minimum trigger pull weights. No minimum firearm weights and have a maximum weight. WML's need to work. Add on lasers need to work.

Power factor... Not a fan. If the premise is defensive we have enough data to argue away power factor.

Stage design... More weak hand only and strong hand only shooting at a greater distance. WHO shots in IDPA, while I won't beat Vogel, aren't as challenging as I think they should be.

Scoring... More like KSTG with scoring zones.

[littlejerry]

I agree with most of what has been posted.

It might be interesting to see USPSA minor scoring biased even further towards accuracy.

I'd like to see some way of introducing a semi blind challenge to a stage. Difficult or impossible to do in a fair way... Could be that 1 of 3 known targets will have a no shoot partially covering it and gets changed after each shooter. Or precise locations change slightly between shooters.

[Alpha Sierra]

USPSA Production rules suit me just fine with one adjustments: freedom to place holster and mags wherever one wants on the belt.

Keep optical sights out of it, form another division for it or shoot open if you want a mini dot on the back of your slide.

Minor/major scoring is BS. A hit on the periphery of the body is just as worthless with .45 ACP as it is with 9x19. Why should someone shooting a more powerful caliber score more points for a non-vital area hit? Because Jeff Cooper said so?

Concealment optional.

Here's the problem. Provided the physical constraints of the problem, solve it any way you want.

[LSP972]

It might be interesting to see USPSA minor scoring biased even further towards accuracy.

.

This. One of the reasons I decided to not "get back in the game" was, when I shot a match after many years of not doing so, one stage in particular that involved a lot of weak-hand-only shooting I did quite well on; almost all "A" hits. A guy on my squad blasted through it, used twice as many rounds, had two complete misses and one penalty (hit hard cover), yet his raw score was higher than mine because he accomplished all of that in less time. Sorry, that's complete BS as far as I'm concerned.

I still shoot one or two matches a year just for grins, but any thoughts of getting back into serious competition were killed by that incident. I'm talking USPSA here; IDPA is another whole conversation.

.

[cclaxton]

LIKES
- A Course of Fire that challenges my ability to shoot fast and accurate..because the complexity or mental challenge.
- A COF that forces me to develop a shooting solution that suits my own abilities, but also challenges master level competitors;
- A lot of flexibility how to design a COF with regard to non-threats, target identifiers, props, movers, etc.
- A COF that is fun to shoot through the use of vehicles, building facades, etc. (Shooting small rifle targets through a facade from an old Huey, then having to jump out of the Huey and run to the shotgun was memorable and really fun)
- humanoid targets with heads.
- higher penalties for hits on non-threats. I like the KSTG scoring for non-threats, 20s for down-zero hit, 5s for other hits.
- Time+Points+Penalties scoring. While hit factor is valuable, using Time+ scoring doesn't stop the MD or the individual from tabulating Hit Factor.
- I think the .5s per down-1 hit is better than the 1s per down-1 hit because a hit in the down-1 area is still a critical hit on a threat and it slows down shooters or forces a makeup when there may be other targets;
- While I like the requirement to keep the muzzle behind the plane of cover, there are plenty of times when it makes sense to push the gun past cover. I suggest that MD's be allowed to specify for each stage or each type of cover whether the shooter is allowed to push past cover. Also, it is difficult to judge for barrels, and irregular objects/props.
- Use of cover whenever cover is available.
- I would like to see more use of soft cover concealment in combination with hard cover concealment, forcing the shooter to solve the shooting problem while getting to hard cover as soon as possible.
- On pistols: If it fits the IDPA box and makes weight for the division, it should be allowed.
- Pistol Divisions that make sense. Right now IDPA SSP and ESP divisions are almost the same in terms of shooting scores. Magazine size seems to be a major differentiator, 45/40major, 9mm/40minor, BUG/380ACP;
- There is a case to be made for cover penalties without fault lines in defensive shooting because there are no fault lines on the floor in real defensive situations. Forcing yourself to learn where to place your foot so it doesn't give away your position IS an important skill. Yes, it means a referee (the SO/RO) has to make a judgement call and mistakes can be made. But this happens in lots of other sports including baseball, football, soccer, etc. The proper training and integrity of the SO/RO is important here. That being said, I also empathize with the view that using fault lines reduces the mistakes made (a SO/RO can still make a mistake even with fault lines...more commonly not catching a cover violation). My view is that this should be at the Match Director's discretion whether to use fault lines or not. This forces a competitor to be more mentally challenged by the COF, and to me that is the primary goal of competitive defensive shooting.
- Ranges that support 180 degree targets. Ranges where you can only shoot downrange and no side berms severely limit COF designs and thus mentally challenging stages.
- Allowing more flexibility for holstering for defense, such as AIWB, or pocket draw, but as long as the gun is concealed and can be drawn safety, I see no issue. (No cross-draws)
- FTN penalties at 5s seem about right, but requiring a down-zero hit to avoid a FTN is too much. If you get two good hits in the down-1 area, no FTN should be given.
- I like the 3x5 size head target zone for down-zero, but it should be 1s for a hit outside it but still on the head, and it should not be a FTN if a head shot is required in the down zero area.
- Finger calls should be of two types: Type A: Finger in the guard or on the trigger with round in the chamber while reloading or not engaging targets and you get only two calls or you get a DQ. Type B: Finger in the guard or on the trigger during a reload, unload, load and make ready when no round is in the chamber..unlimited calls.
- Dropping a loaded mag and requiring retention should be penalized for defensive shooting, but it should not matter whether a round is in the chamber. Counting rounds shot is an important mental skill.
- The ability to add target identifiers such as guns, knives, cell phones, and a badge or POLICE written across them, etc.

DISLIKES
- While I like some running to points of cover or shooting positions, I don't like a lot of running or a lot of distance. Other than getting your heart rate up, it doesn't test shooting ability, and adds an unfair advantage to younger and fit individuals while putting overweight, unfit, or partly disabled (i.e.- guys with bad knees) at a competitive disadvantage.
- non-humanoid targets;
- Too many zones on a humanoid target (i.e. USCA);
- Stupid gun restrictions, such as removing firing pin blocks, Accushadow, etc.
- Shooting boxes...Occasional use of shooting boxes make sense, but I detest them. Also, it just adds setup time and teardown time and cost to replace and maintain them. They are also trip hazards.
- Open Guns in defensive shooting make no sense.
- Restrictions on target identification. Target identification is such a critical skill in defensive shooting and a Cooper Rule: Know your target and what is beyond it. By having two types of targets (threat and non-threat), we are not being challenged mentally to think before pulling the trigger.
- Ranges that have only one downrange berm
- USPSA scoring....gawdawful
Cody

[Lot2Learn]

"Power factor... Not a fan. If the premise is defensive we have enough data to argue away power factor. "

I don't think that is the point. PF is more like a handicap. If your gun is shooting 165pf, it is going to recoil more than an all steel 9mm shooting 130pf bunny fart round. That is why C are more in major. I don't believe it has anything to do with "defensive" scenarios.

[Alpha Sierra]

"Power factor... Not a fan. If the premise is defensive we have enough data to argue away power factor. "

I don't think that is the point. PF is more like a handicap. If your gun is shooting 165pf, it is going to recoil more than an all steel 9mm shooting 130pf bunny fart round. That is why C are more in major. I don't believe it has anything to do with "defensive" scenarios.

Even in that case it shouldn't exist. No one forces anyone to pick a heavier recoiling caliber.

In NRA Highpower Rifle those shooting bolt action rifles in calibers heavier than 223 Remington don't get a different set of scoring rings on the target compared to those who choose to use semi auto rifles in 223.

[joshs]

Even in that case it shouldn't exist. No one forces anyone to pick a heavier recoiling caliber.

In NRA Highpower Rifle those shooting bolt action rifles in calibers heavier than 223 Remington don't get a different set of scoring rings on the target compared to those who choose to use semi auto rifles in 223.

But, Highpower doesn't stress speed to any real extent and not having a minimum PF would mean people could setup a pistol to cycle loads that no one would consider "practical." This has already happened in 3 gun nation. Because the pro series generally doesn't have any targets beyond a 100 yards and lacks a minimum PF, many shooters are shooting a very light load that wouldn't come close to cycling in a standard AR.

[rob_s]

I've never really understood all the hubub about various rules. Most complaints seem to be of the special snowflake variety and not about the good of the game or fairness. Things like "why can't I use my custom blaster 4 million carried in my buttcrack and chambered in 400 dingleberry with my reload in my mouth like I would "in the real world". and "oh, I'm more interested in eating 47 cheeseburgers than being good at the game I claim to love so could we please shoot the whole thing from my toilet? thanks!" just seem silly to me.

My primary beef with most shooting games (sorry, these are not sports) is the scoring. USPSA is just ridiculous, and IDPA is disingenuous (if -1 is -0.5 seconds, then put "-0.5 on the goddamn target).

I like a neutralized/non-neutralized scoring system. We've used one for almost a decade at the carbine matches I started and by the end of a single stage all but the dumbest of shooters have the whole thing sorted.

[Alpha Sierra]

But, Highpower doesn't stress speed to any real extent
Speed is relative. NRA HP rapid fire seems glacially slow compared to USPSA or 3 gun, until you consider that you have 70 seconds to shoot a 10 shot 2 MOA group at 300 yards without optics and with only your body and a sling for support and doing a mandatory mag change on the clock. Recovery from recoil DOES matter in that and those shooting semi auto 223s have a marked advantage.



and not having a minimum PF would mean people could setup a pistol to cycle loads that no one would consider "practical."
Which makes the case for a PF floor, but not for preferential scoring based on PF

[cclaxton]

The application matters here. I just assumed we were talking about Defensive Pistol Shooting and didn't consider stuff like Bianchi.
Cody

[Alpha Sierra]

The application matters here. I just assumed we were talking about Defensive Pistol Shooting and didn't consider stuff like Bianchi.
Cody

There is NO valid reason for giving preferential scoring to those shooting a higher power factor. If you want to talk practical, a marginal hit with a 45 ACP is just as worthless as one with a 9 mm.

Period.

If you want a PF floor to prevent extreme gaming fine. But don't reward inaccuracy by giving preferential scoring to higher PFs. In fact, you, who hates HF scoring, should understand that getting scored major is what makes it possible to shoot a bunch of Cs really fast and beat someone with better accuracy but slightly slower.

[cclaxton]

There is NO valid reason for giving preferential scoring to those shooting a higher power factor. If you want to talk practical, a marginal hit with a 45 ACP is just as worthless as one with a 9 mm.

Period.

If you want a PF floor to prevent extreme gaming fine. But don't reward inaccuracy by giving preferential scoring to higher PFs. In fact, you, who hates HF scoring, should understand that getting scored major is what makes it possible to shoot a bunch of Cs really fast and beat someone with better accuracy but slightly slower.
I am easily convinced on this one. I agree. But sports should support those who like higher PF shooting. Is there a way to make it work for them?
Cody

[orionz06]

Why should they? What is the relevance?

[Alpha Sierra]

But sports should support those who like higher PF shooting. Is there a way to make it work for them?
Why? If someone wants to handicap himself, why should the rest of the field accomodate them.

If you want to shoot something with more recoil, work harder.

[cclaxton]

Why? If someone wants to handicap himself, why should the rest of the field accomodate them.

If you want to shoot something with more recoil, work harder.
A sport should work to be inclusive rather than exclusive. Why do shooters continue to love and shoot their unreliable 1911's?
I am not wise enough to answer that one.
Cody

[orionz06]

By inclusive do you mean allow them to shoot their 1911's? Sure, go ahead. But don't bother with PF.

[Mr_White]

I think Major scoring is a total relic of terminal ballistics thought in 1976 and is pretty asinine at this point.

[Clusterfrack]

I think Major scoring is a total relic of terminal ballistics thought in 1976 and is pretty asinine at this point.

I agree. Even allowing major 9 in Limited would be nice...

[ShooterA]

Cody,

If you believe even a little that IDPA is defensive training, you should not avoid about stages that include running - even a lot of running. If it were real, (you're training, right?), running away might be your best option in many situations.

Your finger scenario B seems to tolerate poor/unsafe gun handling.

Chief in my list of IDPA rule dislikes: EMPTY magazine retention. If the rule is about real world tactics, then we should all be required to carry loose rounds in our pockets (and maybe a loading aid) to reload those precious magazines once we reach cover.

[BLR]

I think Major scoring is a total relic of terminal ballistics thought in 1976 and is pretty asinine at this point.

Why?

[Alpha Sierra]

Why?

A marginal hit with a 45 ACP is just as worthless as one with a 9 mm.

[BLR]

A marginal hit with a 45 ACP is just as worthless as one with a 9 mm.
But its a game. This argument would hold more weight if the score zones better matched anatomy.

That's like saying a TR3 should run in CanAm.

[GardoneVT]

A marginal hit with a 45 ACP is just as worthless as one with a 9 mm.

Beware the danger of unintended consequences.

If PF were to be removed, an incentive to shoot more powerful rounds would be removed with it. If every caliber is to be scored equally , then folks will show up on game day with high capacity long barrel .22LRs and FN 5-7s , ammo loaded to the smallest standard capable of cycling the pistol.

[Mr_White]

Why?

I don't at all dispute that there is a difference between 9mm and .45ACP. I do think the difference is far less than is reflected in USPSA's Major vs. Minor scoring scheme though, where B/C hits are 4 vs. 3 points, and a D is 2 vs. 1 point. That's a 25% or 50% difference for non-A zone hits.

I personally think the difference would be reflected accurately enough by the bigger bullet hitting a more valuable scoring zone a bit more often simply by virtue of being bigger.

Maybe I wrong, but that's why I think that.

[PPGMD]

Honestly I have no issues with USPSA rules. Including hit factor scoring.

Matches with too many hoser stages annoy me. I like some hard shots. Matches without good reload points for production annoy me, as they are typically again hoser stages (high road count with limited movement).

[PPGMD]

A marginal hit with a 45 ACP is just as worthless as one with a 9 mm.

It hardly is that way.

5-3-3-1 for minor, and 5-4-4-2 for major.

It is a balance, particularly for divisions like revolver, single stack, or limited where there is a capacity bonus for minor.

[orionz06]

Was the original reason for PF simply due to ballistics or was it due to capacity?

[cclaxton]

I don't at all dispute that there is a difference between 9mm and .45ACP. I do think the difference is far less than is reflected in USPSA's Major vs. Minor scoring scheme though, where B/C hits are 4 vs. 3 points, and a D is 2 vs. 1 point. That's a 25% or 50% difference for non-A zone hits.

I personally think the difference would be reflected accurately enough by the bigger bullet hitting a more valuable scoring zone a bit more often simply by virtue of being bigger.

Maybe I wrong, but that's why I think that.
I agree. Is there a way to fix the points to better reflect the marginal differences?
Cody

[Alpha Sierra]

Beware the danger of unintended consequences.

If PF were to be removed, an incentive to shoot more powerful rounds would be removed with it. If every caliber is to be scored equally , then folks will show up on game day with high capacity long barrel .22LRs and FN 5-7s , ammo loaded to the smallest standard capable of cycling the pistol.

If you go back through some of my responses on this, you'll see that I am in favor of keeping a PF floor to avoid just that.

[Alpha Sierra]

It hardly is that way.

5-3-3-1 for minor, and 5-4-4-2 for major.

It is a balance, particularly for divisions like revolver, single stack, or limited where there is a capacity bonus for minor.
I was referring to the effects on the body, not on the paper target. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

[Alpha Sierra]

Honestly I have no issues with USPSA rules. Including hit factor scoring.

Matches with too many hoser stages annoy me. I like some hard shots. Matches without good reload points for production annoy me, as they are typically again hoser stages (high road count with limited movement).

Yep

[cclaxton]

Cody,

If you believe even a little that IDPA is defensive training, you should not avoid about stages that include running - even a lot of running. If it were real, (you're training, right?), running away might be your best option in many situations.

Your finger scenario B seems to tolerate poor/unsafe gun handling.

Chief in my list of IDPA rule dislikes: EMPTY magazine retention. If the rule is about real world tactics, then we should all be required to carry loose rounds in our pockets (and maybe a loading aid) to reload those precious magazines once we reach cover.

What I tried to communicate was that: I am not opposed to running within moderation. But this is not a running match,,, it's a shooting match. Just because the range is 40 yards X 30 yards doesn't mean you have to use all of it. IDPA has the problem of not allowing enough movement between shooting positions. But I have been to matches where B class shooters were beating Master shooters because the Masters couldn't run as fast. I don't think that is right.

For mags, I just think if they change it to simply dropping an empty mag is OK whether there is a round in the chamber or not.

Cody

[Alpha Sierra]

I enjoy the physical aspect (running) of many USPSA stages. It adds another stressor and gets your heart rate up (how much depends on you).

And I'm no spring chicken either

[Leroy]

What I tried to communicate was that: I am not opposed to running within moderation. But this is not a running match,,, it's a shooting match. Just because the range is 40 yards X 30 yards doesn't mean you have to use all of it. IDPA has the problem of not allowing enough movement between shooting positions. But I have been to matches where B class shooters were beating Master shooters because the Masters couldn't run as fast. I don't think that is right.

For mags, I just think if they change it to simply dropping an empty mag is OK whether there is a round in the chamber or not.

Cody
I have never seen this. Was there a 20 yard sprint or something? Rob Leatham can't even run and is still in the top ten in any division he shoots at any match. It is also not because he can stand and shoot better than anyone else. Foot speed is not that critical in USPSA, it deffinitely helps, but there are a bunch of real fat and old dudes kicking ass.

[Mr_White]

I have never seen this. Was there a 20 yard sprint or something? Rob Leatham can't even run and is still in the top ten in any division he shoots at any match. It is also not because he can stand and shoot better than anyone else. Foot speed is not that critical in USPSA, it deffinitely helps, but there are a bunch of real fat and old dudes kicking ass.

This is how i understand it to be as well.

[PPGMD]

I agree. Is there a way to fix the points to better reflect the marginal differences?

Simple have it be:
5-4-4-1 for major and 5-3-3-1 for minor. You still get that penalty for shooting minor, and you get to reflect that periphery hits aren't as valuable.

[orionz06]

Why is there a penalty for shooting minor?

[PPGMD]

Why is there a penalty for shooting minor?

Because in most divisions you get more rounds in the magazine, and slightly less recoil.

[ST911]

I'm not versed enough in the scoring to dissect this. Can someone help?

Given a major and minor competitor... How much better does minor have to perform to beat major? How many more mistakes can major make, and still beat minor? Does it make that much difference?

[Mr_White]

I'm not versed enough in the scoring to dissect this. Can someone help?

Given a major and minor competitor... How much better does minor have to perform to beat major? How many more mistakes can major make, and still beat minor? Does it make that much difference?

Heh...it does indeed make a big difference.

As a rough comparison, a person shooting Minor has to shoot half the number of C-zone hits as a Major-scoring competitor, in the same amount of time, to tie them. To beat a Major shooter, a Minor shooter has to do better than that either on points or time or both.

It's a big difference. Especially in circumstances where it becomes convenient for a person to shoot Cs or Ds - such as when there's a no shoot covering most of the A-zone. It's a lot safer strategy to deliberately shoot a C and stay well away from the no-shoot and penalty. It's also convenient to allow Cs shooting on the move. With Major, you don't pay a lot for those Cs - if you shoot A/C on every target that's still 90% of the available points. With Minor, that would be 80% of the available points. It is normally recommended that a person trying to win in USPSA shoots 90 to 95% of the available points.

[orionz06]

Because in most divisions you get more rounds in the magazine, and slightly less recoil.

Do we know this for certain? I've always been inclined to believe it was purely an antiquated ballistics thing.

[PPGMD]

Do we know this for certain? I've always been inclined to believe it was purely an antiquated ballistics thing.

It may have started that way, but with the limited requiring .40 caliber for major, and the magazine limits on revolver and single stack it is simply part of the game now.

[orionz06]

Hmm. Still not sure I agree with it. If someone wants to shoot a gun with less rounds and potentially more challenging recoil go ahead, not my fault. The differences would be reconciled with a possibly more favorable trigger.

[PPGMD]

Hmm. Still not sure I agree with it. If someone wants to shoot a gun with less rounds and potentially more challenging recoil go ahead, not my fault. The differences would be reconciled with a possibly more favorable trigger.

First the guns are typically the same, just different calibers. And in reality what people shoot are pretty much set these days.

Serious limited and open competitors shoot major. Revolver is minor. And single stack depends on the match. Most shoot major, but there are some matches where it is advantageous to shoot minor. For example at the recent IPSC World Shoot Rob chose to shoot minor because the stages favored the increased magazine capacity of minor.

But the difference is that using minor/major scoring the shooter can make the choice. I prefer that to some idiot at headquarters deciding things for me.

[Lot2Learn]

Again, this only applies to Limited, Open, Single stack and revolver. All of the production shooters are scored in minor, so that is why almost everyone shoots a 9mm making 130pf. That round is easy to shoot in plastic guns and really easy to shoot in the metal guns. It is just a given that if you want to be competitive in limited or open, that you are going to shoot major. I don't see too many people complaining about it. The equipment matters in this particular game. Because of that, you are going to see people using/building guns that are at the limit of the rules in order to get every single advantage they can. If you want to handicap yourself and shoot minor, that is on you. At the end of the day, there are a lot of variables, you have to be fast and accurate. This isn't an "or" game.

[PPGMD]

The only people I see shooting minor in a division that is normally shoots major are three gunners, shooting their minor limited guns.

[NETim]

I'd like to see IDPA's prohibition of "retention" devices on flashlights go away.

[ShooterA]

- Finger calls should be of two types: Type A: Finger in the guard or on the trigger with round in the chamber while reloading or not engaging targets and you get only two calls or you get a DQ. Type B: Finger in the guard or on the trigger during a reload, unload, load and make ready when no round is in the chamber..unlimited calls.


I'm still not liking this one.

There is no way for an RO or a SO to know with absolute certainty that there is no round in the chamber for the shooter he is following, thus no way to be able to determine the severity if the infraction.

Add to that, getting in the habit of having your finger on the trigger during ANY manipulation of the gun other that while engaging targets is a recipe for an AD, possibly with injury or death. This is especially true for load, reload, unload.

Sloppy gun handling.

[JV_]

ShooterA - I agree.

[joshs]

I'm still not liking this one.

There is no way for an RO or a SO to know with absolute certainty that there is no round in the chamber for the shooter he is following, thus no way to be able to determine the severity if the infraction.

Add to that, getting in the habit of having your finger on the trigger during ANY manipulation of the gun other that while engaging targets is a recipe for an AD, possibly with injury or death. This is especially true for load, reload, unload.

Sloppy gun handling.

Yes. It's also generally easiest to make accurate "finger" calls during "load and make ready" or "unload and show clear." During the actual course of fire, it is much harder for the RO to tell if the shooter's finger is actually inside or outside the trigger guard because of the usual shooter-to-RO positioning. I've received a number of finger calls while reloading with a P30. Some ROs make finger calls when the shooter's finger is anywhere except indexed on the slide/frame. While I think this promotes good gunhandling, with notable exceptions like my experience while shooting a P30, it isn't what the rules of the game(s) state as far as where the shooter's finger can be. In USPSA, it is an automatic DQ to have a finger inside the trigger guard when not aiming at a target. In several years of shooting USPSA regularly, I've only seen one DQ for a trigger finger violation. I think this is due to the difficulty of determining whether the shooter's finger is actually inside the trigger guard and the high penalty, match DQ, for making the call.

[Mr_White]

Yes. It's also generally easiest to make accurate "finger" calls during "load and make ready" or "unload and show clear." During the actual course of fire, it is much harder for the RO to tell if the shooter's finger is actually inside or outside the trigger guard because of the usual shooter-to-RO positioning. I've received a number of finger calls while reloading with a P30. Some ROs make finger calls when the shooter's finger is anywhere except indexed on the slide/frame. While I think this promotes good gunhandling, with notable exceptions like my experience while shooting a P30, it isn't what the rules of the game(s) state as far as where the shooter's finger can be. In USPSA, it is an automatic DQ to have a finger inside the trigger guard when not aiming at a target. In several years of shooting USPSA regularly, I've only seen one DQ for a trigger finger violation. I think this is due to the difficulty of determining whether the shooter's finger is actually inside the trigger guard and the high penalty, match DQ, for making the call.

I completely agree.

[Wheeler]

I'd like to see IDPA's prohibition of "retention" devices on flashlights go away.

Without a doubt. It's absolutely assinine to force shooters to fumble with a light and a gun, especially when trying to execute a reload.

[taadski]

Without a doubt. It's absolutely assinine to force shooters to fumble with a light and a gun, especially when trying to execute a reload.

While I'm not averse to the idea of allowing retention devices into the game, it seems to me reloading while maintaining control of one's light is a pretty critical weapon manipulation skill. If one is having difficulty doing so (with or without a retention device), the solution is to learn how then to practice. It's a bit of a requisite skill for using a handgun at night, IMO.


t

[NETim]

While I'm not averse to the idea of allowing retention devices into the game, it seems to me reloading while maintaining control of one's light is a pretty critical weapon manipulation skill. If one is having difficulty doing so (with or without a retention device), the solution is to learn how then to practice. It's a bit of a requisite skill for using a handgun at night, IMO.


t

Agreed. However, in my admittedly limited experience, I've come to favor the "O" ring arrangement. That's what I practice with. I'm not in love with tucking the light in an armpit or the belt line when reloading etc.

I don't understand IDPA's reasoning on this issue.

[Wheeler]

While I'm not averse to the idea of allowing retention devices into the game, it seems to me reloading while maintaining control of one's light is a pretty critical weapon manipulation skill. If one is having difficulty doing so (with or without a retention device), the solution is to learn how then to practice. It's a bit of a requisite skill for using a handgun at night, IMO.


t

Everyone has to start somewhere. Most shooters that show up to IDPA matches have never shot with a light, much less in the dark. Claude Werner's solution is to run the CoF multiple times, starting in daylight, with and without the light. I've taught myself to be able to reload a revolver while holding a light so I agree that it's a critical skill. I still stand by my statement that its an assinine rule.

[taadski]

Gents,

My intention was not at all to come off terse. Need more caffeine perhaps. :p

I realize I'm preaching to the choir, but there are any number of suitable means of utilizing a handgun with a light. And while I might appreciate one or more of the accessory based ones, I'm also a bit dogmatic of the basics and I view those one handed light skills (san accessories, that is) as cornerstone skills in working at night.

I appreciate Claude's crawl-walk-run type skill building and it sounds like a potentially cool solution to the problem. I'm not sure how that'd work out at some of our clubs time-wise though. It seems hard enough to get people to spend the few extra minutes it takes to help tear down some days. In a class based environment? Absolutely.




Without a doubt. It's absolutely assinine to force shooters to fumble with a light and a gun, especially when trying to execute a reload.


I guess my point in making the comment was that I don't view IDPA as forcing anyone to fumble anything. We're required to reload our weapons during courses of fire. If fumbles occur, be it day or night, so be it (obvious safety clause inserted), drive on, get the process done and continue the course of fire.

FWIW, I have seen some malarkey (fumbling?) take place with various light accessories too. On more than one occasion, as an example, I've seen folks give themselves bloody lips and in one case a chipped tooth reloading with their handheld on a lanyard. :D Teach cops for long enough and you're bound to witness the full spectrum. My guess is that IDPA's take on the matter is more along the lines of not wanting to require given devices (WMLs, Surefire rings, lanyards, etc, etc…) in order for folks to be competitive. Again, I don't personally feel strongly one way or the other re the rule.


t

[Wheeler]

Gents,

My intention was not at all to come off terse. Need more caffeine perhaps. :p

I realize I'm preaching to the choir, but there are any number of suitable means of utilizing a handgun with a light. And while I might appreciate one or more of the accessory based ones, I'm also a bit dogmatic of the basics and I view those one handed light skills (san accessories, that is) as cornerstone skills in working at night.

I appreciate Claude's crawl-walk-run type skill building and it sounds like a potentially cool solution to the problem. I'm not sure how that'd work out at some of our clubs time-wise though. It seems hard enough to get people to spend the few extra minutes it takes to help tear down some days. In a class based environment? Absolutely.






I guess my point in making the comment was that I don't view IDPA as forcing anyone to fumble anything. We're required to reload our weapons during courses of fire. If fumbles occur, be it day or night, so be it (obvious safety clause inserted), drive on, get the process done and continue the course of fire.

FWIW, I have seen some malarkey (fumbling?) take place with various light accessories too. On more than one occasion, as an example, I've seen folks give themselves bloody lips and in one case a chipped tooth reloading with their handheld on a lanyard. :D Teach cops for long enough and you're bound to witness the full spectrum. My guess is that IDPA's take on the matter is more along the lines of not wanting to require given devices (WMLs, Surefire rings, lanyards, etc, etc…) in order for folks to be competitive. Again, I don't personally feel strongly one way or the other re the rule.


t

Point taken and I didn't view your previous post as terse at all, then again I had already had a few cups of coffee. :-)

I agree that handling a firearm and a light at the same time is a critical skill. It's actually easier for me to operate a pistol and a light utilizing a slightly modified Harries grip than a WML. I'm working on improving that skill as time allows.
Claude runs a low/no light match about once a year with a surprisingly (to me) low turn out. It's understood that the match will take approximately X amount of time and will start in the daylight.
We've run no light matches at indoor ranges in the past. It is logistically challenging, especially if a higher than expected number of shooters turn up.

[NETim]

Yesterday's little indoor IDPA match vividly demonstrated the increasing need for more light for my aging eyes. It was difficult to pick up the sights all too often.

So, a good portion of today's range session was devoted to work with a light in the IDPA approved manner. Placing the light in my armpit was easy. Getting a good grip on it when needed again was dicey, even with a light jacket and no gloves.

But I think I need that light at the next indoor match. Something else to work on.

[joshs]

Yesterday's little indoor IDPA match vividly demonstrated the increasing need for more light for my aging eyes. It was difficult to pick up the sights all too often.

So, a good portion of today's range session was devoted to work with a light in the IDPA approved manner. Placing the light in my armpit was easy. Getting a good grip on it when needed again was dicey, even with a light jacket and no gloves.

But I think I need that light at the next indoor match. Something else to work on.

Have you tried keeping the light in your hand while you reload? I don't have particularly large hands, and I've never had an issue with reloading with a flashlight in my hand. I use a grip similar to what I use for a tac reload.

[NETim]

Have you tried keeping the light in your hand while you reload? I don't have particularly large hands, and I've never had an issue with reloading with a flashlight in my hand. I use a grip similar to what I use for a tac reload.

No. Never thought to try it. :) I have fairly large hands and because I'm a natural righty shooting lefty (cross dominant) I should be to make this work, if I put in the time to practice.

Thanks for the suggestion!

[1986s4]

New practical shooting sport. My ideas:
More latitude with regard to stage design, let's use our imaginations. I would limit the required round count per stage, I like the 18 round limit of IDPA. This keeps it real and affordable for newer shooters. Fault lines yes, make the shots tight and put the shooter in compromised positions.

I would keep power factors and create a division for those pistols/calibers that make the higher PF with factory ammo.

Keep the mag limits of 10+1 and 8+1. So those who live in blighted locals can remain competitive.

Pistol divisions: semi-auto pistol 10+1, semi auto pistol 8+1 higher PF, revolver 5, 6,7 or 8 round. Or have the 8 round revolvers shoot in pistol 8+1.

Concealment required. Holsters must be safe to use and retain the pistol when held upside down.

These are just general rules and would require some massaging but when in doubt this sport would keep it simple. Shoot what you have and promote pistol handling skill and a higher lever of shooting proficiency.

[cclaxton]

Have you tried keeping the light in your hand while you reload? I don't have particularly large hands, and I've never had an issue with reloading with a flashlight in my hand. I use a grip similar to what I use for a tac reload.
If you practice, it is easy to do the reload with the light in your weak hand, if you hold it like a cigar. I had issues with my flashlight because I had not practiced with the little flashlight enough, especially for reloads. Smaller is not easier...well easier for shooting grip, but not easier for aim and reloading since it's almost too small. I may go back to the Fenix.
Cody

[Sal Picante]

A lot of discussion about minor vs major scoring... I dunno. I really like it a lot.

I shoot production primarily, but enjoy the fact that there are almost 2 games in USPSA (minor vs major)... That said, I just try to shoot faster and better than anyone. Kitten the open guys: just shoot faster.

http://combinedresults.info/index.php/match/12948

[Mr_White]

A lot of discussion about minor vs major scoring... I dunno. I really like it a lot.

I shoot production primarily, but enjoy the fact that there are almost 2 games in USPSA (minor vs major)... That said, I just try to shoot faster and better than anyone. Kitten the open guys: just shoot faster.

http://combinedresults.info/index.php/match/12948

Very nice! ;)

Looks like some great shooting.

[Sal Picante]

Very nice! ;)

Looks like some great shooting.

Thanks Boss!

[JaeOne3345]

- While I like some running to points of cover or shooting positions, I don't like a lot of running or a lot of distance. Other than getting your heart rate up, it doesn't test shooting ability, and adds an unfair advantage to younger and fit individuals while putting overweight, unfit, or partly disabled (i.e.- guys with bad knees) at a competitive disadvantage.

How about use discipline with nutrition, exercise, and not be fat? Why should someone get a handicap because they don't take care of themselves?

[cclaxton]

How about use discipline with nutrition, exercise, and not be fat? Why should someone get a handicap because they don't take care of themselves?
The sport should be primarily a competition of shooting skill using cover, concealment, mental discipline, and strategy. if someone wants a footrace, have a footrace.

Some people have limitations that are out of their control, such as bad knee, bad hip, bad back, arthritis (even young people can have arthritis), and other similar ailments. Being overweight and out of shape is certainly in their control most of the time, that is true.

I think you are missing my main point....that IDPA needs to extend their maximum to allow more realistic courses of fire, and that sometimes USPSA makes the distances too n long to where the running time becomes too big a factor.
Cody

[JaeOne3345]

I'm not missing the point.

Realism as you bring up = being fat and having to run/shoot one day.

It is what it is. Same with knees, etc. That's what you brought to to the table. Deal with it.