PDA

View Full Version : Each point down will now equal 1 second added to your time...



Pages : [1] 2

PPGMD
09-20-2015, 07:06 PM
According to Facebook this was announced at the Whirled Chute. No date on when it will go into effect.

Alpha Sierra
09-20-2015, 07:13 PM
Logic behind this?

PPGMD
09-20-2015, 07:16 PM
Logic behind this?

Because Joyce said so.

Alpha Sierra
09-20-2015, 07:17 PM
Because Joyce said so.

So there is none. Got it, thanks.

orionz06
09-20-2015, 07:20 PM
This has been a suggestion from Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn in the past, as well as others. Of the changes in recent years I don't think this one hurts at all. I'd still like to see some more practical carry gear allowed, even if just mag pouch placement OWB's were allowed forward of the hip. Hell, even just a more forward and canted mag pouch would be a start. The irony is that canting it allows for better concealment for defensive use.

Alpha Sierra
09-20-2015, 07:39 PM
Now IDPA matches will take twice as long

PPGMD
09-20-2015, 07:43 PM
This has been a suggestion from Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn in the past, as well as others. Of the changes in recent years I don't think this one hurts at all.

I doubt that it will have my effect on the game at the upper levels. Most of the shuffling will be at the the mid to low levels with the fast running hosers dropping a position or two to the ones that are almost the same speed but slightly more accurate.

But if you can't sprint into and out of shooting positions you are still going to lose. Because you rarely have a choice on how to shoot a stage, IDPA is more determined by who can move the quickest between shooting positions, and less about the shooting.

KeeFus
09-20-2015, 07:47 PM
LAV & Hackathorn talked about this at the 2011 Carolina Cup during one of our breaks. They were both saying that they were gonna push the issue back then.

PPGMD
09-20-2015, 07:51 PM
LAV & Hackathorn talked about this at the 2011 Carolina Cup during one of our breaks. They were both saying that they were gonna push the issue back then.

And when the fast guys keep winning, what then? Put a NRA Bullseye centered on the center of the 0 down zone?

Alpha Sierra
09-20-2015, 07:55 PM
And when the fast guys keep winning, what then? Put a NRA Bullseye centered on the center of the 0 down zone?

FTDMFR

KeeFus
09-20-2015, 08:15 PM
And when the fast guys keep winning, what then? Put a NRA Bullseye centered on the center of the 0 down zone?

As Im sure others who have shot/learned from them before they put a premium on accuracy. Im sure hats the reason for the rule. I have not been an IDPA member in 2 years...since the flat-footed reload rule came out. Now that has changed, again. Im just glad I don't have to keep up with all the changes anymore.

joshs
09-20-2015, 08:33 PM
And when the fast guys keep winning, what then? Put a NRA Bullseye centered on the center of the 0 down zone?

I don't think it has anything to do with who wins, but whether or not the scoring system promotes the appropriate balance of speed and accuracy that IDPA wants.

taadski
09-20-2015, 08:58 PM
FTDMFR


That made me laugh. :D

PPGMD
09-20-2015, 09:04 PM
I don't think it has anything to do with who wins, but whether or not the scoring system promotes the appropriate balance of speed and accuracy that IDPA wants.

Changing a major aspect of the sport 20 years after it has been accepted.

Alpha Sierra
09-20-2015, 09:06 PM
Changing a major aspect of the sport 20 years after it has been accepted.

Not unheard of. In 1968 the NRA changed the highpower rifle targets from 5V to 10X scoring and made the scoring rings significantly smaller.

abu fitna
09-20-2015, 09:26 PM
Changing a major aspect of the sport 20 years after it has been accepted.

Since there has been talk about this change for more than a decade, by the folks involved in the original scoring design (and others), this is frankly long overdue. Amazed to see movement here, given how ossified IDPA has been.

KSTG anecdotally demonstrated this can be a significant change for the wider field in a number of stage layouts, although separating these effects from concurrent head box scoring zone changes was not clear.

We shall see what comes of this. Movement speed I think will still have more influence on results though.

PPGMD
09-20-2015, 09:30 PM
Not unheard of. In 1968 the NRA changed the highpower rifle targets from 5V to 10X scoring and made the scoring rings significantly smaller.

I think that was more equipment driven.

MGW
09-20-2015, 09:45 PM
Guess I'll have to get rid of my Glock and buy an HK.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

orionz06
09-20-2015, 09:49 PM
Guess I'll have to get rid of my Glock and buy an HK.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And if you shoot an M&P9 just do the best you can.

GJM
09-20-2015, 10:08 PM
I am not patient enough to do the math tonight, but as I recall, despite IDPA's reputation for prioritizing accuracy, the scoring for a miss, depending upon hit factor of the exact USPSA stage, was less punitive than a miss with IDPA scoring than USPSA scoring.

Robbie Leatham jokes that Bill Wilson developed IDPA scoring to have a game based on the pace he shoots. I don't understand this scoring change, on that basis, because although Bill shoots "snake eyes" frequently, he is a lot faster than the new, proposed scoring. Must be increasing the penalty for the LAV's shooting ability.

joshs
09-21-2015, 06:46 AM
I am not patient enough to do the math tonight, but as I recall, despite IDPA's reputation for prioritizing accuracy, the scoring for a miss, depending upon hit factor of the exact USPSA stage, was less punitive than a miss with IDPA scoring than USPSA scoring.

Current IDPA scoring has a HF of 2, which is lower than any USPSA stage I've shot. The proposed change would drop this to a HF of 1. A miss can be a more severe penalty in USPSA, but it would have to be a low hit factor stage.

GJM
09-21-2015, 08:22 AM
Current IDPA scoring has a HF of 2, which is lower than any USPSA stage I've shot. The proposed change would drop this to a HF of 1. A miss can be a more severe penalty in USPSA, but it would have to be a low hit factor stage.

Check this math. With a 4 HF USPSA stage, each point down is 1 divided by 4 or .25 second, making a C in Production or minor worth down .50? With a 4 HF stage, a miss costs the Production shooter 15 points, or the equivalent of 3 seconds?

Peally
09-21-2015, 08:22 AM
You're already fairly well damaged for down points compared to the USPSA I've shot, this frankly doesn't make any sense unless they want to continue with the foolish "this is tactical training" angle.

Of all the stupid things in IDPA that need to change, this is not one of them and their time is better spent elsewhere. They're making it really difficult to want to stay a member, and considering the issues people from the bottom all the way to the top have with the sport I'm having a damned hard time figuring out why it's popular in my area. Must be they don't know any better.

JAD
09-21-2015, 09:05 AM
I recall this being a thing that a significant number of the founders wanted from jump street. They could accomplish the same thing by making the scoring zones smaller (and the whole target smaller, would be OK with me), but that would conflict with keeping the sport accessible to new shooters. Getting a high time is one thing, missing the target is another, I would think.

joshs
09-21-2015, 09:31 AM
Check this math. With a 4 HF USPSA stage, each point down is 1 divided by 4 or .25 second, making a C in Production or minor worth down .50? With a 4 HF stage, a miss costs the Production shooter 15 points, or the equivalent of 3 seconds?

It's still a HF of 2 for IDPA scoring, minor just loses two points for a similar area of the target as a down -1. I consider 4 to be a low hit factor stage, so I don't dispute your math, as I think it confirms my point that a miss is only worth more in USPSA on low hit factor stages. On the affect of a miss in USPSA, it's only 15 points if you assume an "A" hit. Often, at least for me, misses happen where I was already accepting a C/D hit due to target difficulty (partial, mover, etc.), so the miss is really worth between 11-15 points, not exactly 15 points.

cclaxton
09-21-2015, 01:27 PM
First, this is not a done deal. There is no date set and IDPA is in no mood to make any significant changes to the rulebook in the next year or two. They need to stabilize the sport from the 2015 Rule changes. Secondly, it's not a bad idea to get people to shoot more accurately. I will never forget I got beat at the Shoothouse Shootout 2 years ago by a guy who had over 90 points down and a few non-threats to boot, but was fast as hell. I was like 30 points and no non-threats. The point I am making is that it's not a bad idea to slow things down a bit and encourage more accuracy.

But, I am not a strong advocate for the change. I would rather see allowance for more non-threats in a stage, more movement allowed, different targets, simplification of the equipment rules and replacing the CCP division with an optics division. But just my personal opinion and I am but one voice.
Cody

Alpha Sierra
09-21-2015, 01:40 PM
I will never forget I got beat at the Shoothouse Shootout 2 years ago by a guy who had over 90 points down and a few non-threats to boot, but was fast as hell. I was like 30 points and no non-threats. The point I am making is that it's not a bad idea to slow things down a bit and encourage more accuracy.
Just perpetuates the impression that IDPA is for slow, fat guys and will drive younger shooters to USPSA and 3 gun; thanks!

By the by, speed IS a tactic.



I would rather see allowance for more non-threats in a stage, more movement allowed, different targets, simplification of the equipment rules and replacing the CCP division with an optics division.
Sounds like USPSA

orionz06
09-21-2015, 01:48 PM
But, I am not a strong advocate for the change. I would rather see allowance for more non-threats in a stage, more movement allowed, different targets, simplification of the equipment rules and replacing the CCP division with an optics division. But just my personal opinion and I am but one voice.
Cody
Why not advocate more realistic carry gear being allowed, even if not aiwb.



Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

cclaxton
09-21-2015, 01:54 PM
Just perpetuates the impression that IDPA is for slow, fat guys and will drive younger shooters to USPSA and 3 gun; thanks!
By the by, speed IS a tactic.
Speed is not the only tactic, accuracy counts, especially in the self-defense world...


Sounds like USPSA
Let's not start another thread debating IDPA and USPSA. They are both valuable shooting sports that help shooters develop necessary skills. IDPA's strength is use of cover and no shooting boxes and use of standard handguns. IDPA, being a self-defense oriented sport should be slower, fat guys or not...BTW, we have a lot of younger shooters and most people shooting IDPA are NOT fat. Try to get your facts right.
USPSA allows for more speed and more creative shooting...good on ya!
We are both supporting gun rights, building pistol handling and shooting skills, and supporting the industry.
Cody

cclaxton
09-21-2015, 01:57 PM
Why not advocate more realistic carry gear being allowed, even if not aiwb.
Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl
From an administrative POV, I want to simplify the rules on equipment. If I could change it, it would be this: For a given Division, if it fits the box and makes weight, and the safeties have not been disabled, you can shoot it. The rules are complicated enough without a whole bunch of other rules on equipment.
Cody

Alpha Sierra
09-21-2015, 02:32 PM
Speed is not the only tactic, accuracy counts, especially in the self-defense world...IDPA, being a self-defense oriented sport should be slower
I said speed is a tactic. I didn't say that speed is the only tactic

I didn't say accuracy doesn't count

I'd also would be interested in knowing what problem is this rule proposal supposed to fix.

PPGMD
09-21-2015, 02:40 PM
I said speed is a tactic. I didn't say that speed is the only tactic

I didn't say accuracy doesn't count

I'd also would be interested in knowing what problem is this rule proposal supposed to fix.

Because they said so, they want you to shoot IDPA their way, with guns how they picture it, carrying guns their way. IDPA has ever more increasingly gone to what the BOD wants, and damn everyone else's opinion.

Now what would be more interesting is to change the scoring all together.

Make the -0 worth 4 points, -1 worth 2 points, and the -3 worth one pointed. It requires 4 points on the target to neutralize, other wise you get a FTN.

That would change the game all together, making people having to look at the targets and ensure they got the hits they need.

jh9
09-21-2015, 02:52 PM
I will never forget I got beat at the Shoothouse Shootout 2 years ago by a guy who had over 90 points down and a few non-threats to boot, but was fast as hell.

Non-threats in both games eventually get used as penalty targets and nothing more. I've lost count of the number of NTs I've seen that changed a shooting position from "tight" to "never would I do this, ever, for any reason" and yet...this is the CoF and you shoot it.

So some guy plugging some NTs in IDPA doesn't necessarily mean reckless guy who callously shot a bystander. It means the guy who built the stage wanted to add some challenge. If IDPA, USPSA or anyone else wants to get people to take NTs seriously, then either DQ them if they hit one or use the "didn't finish CoF" IDPA math to figure out their final time. Either the NT should be a FTDR-level penalty or the targets should just be removed.

As to having 60 more points down and still winning...I suppose other people can hash out the speed/accuracy ratio. I don't see a problem, but YMMV.

1911Nut
09-21-2015, 03:58 PM
"Just perpetuates the impression that IDPA is for slow, fat guys and will drive younger shooters to USPSA and 3 gun"

Just some experience speaking here: Not all slow fat guys have been that way all their lives, and something along those lines happen to all of us if we live long enough. Be nice!

cclaxton
09-21-2015, 04:59 PM
Because they said so, they want you to shoot IDPA their way, with guns how they picture it, carrying guns their way. IDPA has ever more increasingly gone to what the BOD wants, and damn everyone else's opinion.

Everything in this statement is incorrect. That being said, it is not an elected leadership, as in USPSA. The membership and club operators are IDPA customers and IDPA works very hard to keep their customers satisfied with the sport while continuing to evaluate how to improve it.
Cody

orionz06
09-21-2015, 05:01 PM
The membership and club operators are IDPA customers and IDPA works very hard to keep their customers satisfied with the sport while continuing to evaluate how to improve it.

You're like a god damned paid spokesman.

cclaxton
09-21-2015, 05:04 PM
You're like a god damned paid spokesman.
Is there a reason you had to call me "god damned?"
I am an ambassador for IDPA, and proud of it.
Pretty sure that doesn't mean I deserve to be damned by god.
Cody

PPGMD
09-21-2015, 05:22 PM
You're like a god damned paid spokesman.

He is always a "Champion of IDPA" under pains of perjury.

HopetonBrown
09-21-2015, 06:28 PM
I was 38 points down on my last classifier, a full point per second would've killed my score. Interestingly, 21 people classified that day and only 1 person had less points down.

taadski
09-22-2015, 01:01 AM
I was 38 points down on my last classifier, a full point per second would've killed my score. Interestingly, 21 people classified that day and only 1 person had less points down.



Geeesus! Bunch of God damned hosers!

























:p

taadski
09-22-2015, 01:29 AM
Make the -0 worth 4 points, -1 worth 2 points, and the -3 worth one pointed. It requires 4 points on the target to neutralize, other wise you get a FTN.

That would change the game all together, making people having to look at the targets and ensure they got the hits they need.

Or they could just look at their sights. :p

That sounds like it'd play out pretty similarly to USPSA major scoring; squirt two into the A/C zone as fast as you can and call it good. That'd likely be more efficient and less risky than taking the time to guarantee a -0 with a single shot. Seems like that'd potentially increase the shooting pace for most competitors while decreasing the degree of requisite accuracy. Me thinks that's not the result Joyce and Bill are "aiming at". ;)

But agreed, it'd be interesting though.



t

BN
09-22-2015, 07:41 AM
Has anyone thought about the trees that must die to make more pasters for the shooters who load a target down with shots looking for 2 lucky hits? ;) Targets will need to be changed more often also.

I don't think you would see much difference in raw time with the experienced shooters. They already know how to aim.

I think it will be the less skilled shooters who will suffer. The spread of scores will be greater with the top scores being about the same as now.

YVK
09-22-2015, 07:46 AM
I'd just go all out and also introduce a DQ penalty for a 0 zone hit on a no-shoot. -1 zone no shoot hit would be like 10 min penalty, accounting for initial stabilization of a victim and arrival of EMTs.

cclaxton
09-22-2015, 07:50 AM
Frank Glover told me he hosted a match once where a hit on a non-threat was an automatic elimination from the match. I asked him how that went, he said, "That slowed them down."
Cody

NEPAKevin
09-22-2015, 10:04 AM
Logic behind this?

There is a contest to see who can make up a rule change rumor that will cause the most outrage from people who do not shoot IDPA. Winner gets a case of eighteen year old single malt and the privilege of determining the next year's winner.

Peally
09-22-2015, 10:21 AM
I shoot IDPA, and I think IDPA is 50% stupid as hell and 50% fun, and a lot of that fun has nothing to do with IDPA ;)

A lot of people don't shoot it anymore but still have in the past. That doesn't make their opinions less valid.

rsa-otc
09-22-2015, 10:35 AM
I shoot IDPA at least once per month and from the beginning thought it should have been 1 second per point down. Looking at the last three matches shot where I finished 3rd, 2nd & 2nd overall, scoring at 1 second rather than .5 would have moved me to 2nd, 1st & 1st overall in the match by a 2 to 3 second margin. For the record, while I am neither slow nor fat I have always been an accuracy whore.

With regards to Non threats, in the last sanctioned match I shot, my grease ring touching the outer -3 perf. of a NT moved me from 2nd most accurate to 10th and cost me the Division as well as the class win.

gtmtnbiker98
09-22-2015, 12:00 PM
You're like a god damned paid spokesman.

LMAO, very true.

ST911
09-22-2015, 01:27 PM
I wonder if classifications will be realigned?

Chris Rhines
09-22-2015, 01:38 PM
There is a contest to see who can make up a rule change rumor that will cause the most outrage from people who do not shoot IDPA. Winner gets a case of eighteen year old single malt and the privilege of determining the next year's winner.
I heard something about IDPA requiring verbal challenges before engaging a target, with a procedural assessed if the shooter stutters or repeats himself.

I like Talisker, but 18-year-old Glennfiddich is good, too... :D

Peally
09-22-2015, 01:48 PM
I wonder if classifications will be realigned?

If they changed this rule and didn't change the classification requirements appropriately you'd see a buttload (metric) of Masters and Marksman class shooters.

HopetonBrown
09-22-2015, 01:52 PM
I wonder if classifications will be realigned?

They changed the times for the classifiers not too long ago, didn't do it then.

NEPAKevin
09-22-2015, 02:52 PM
I heard something about IDPA requiring verbal challenges before engaging a target, with a procedural assessed if the shooter stutters or repeats himself.

I like Talisker, but 18-year-old Glennfiddich is good, too... :D

When the points down rule takes effect, the increased importance of accuracy will negate the need for a "most accurate" category award at tier two and higher matches and it will be replaced with a completely subjective "most tactical" award. At tier three and higher matches there may also be MT senior, MT distinguished senior, MT industry and MT lady. :) Glenmorangie works.

BN
09-22-2015, 03:39 PM
When the points down rule takes effect, the increased importance of accuracy will negate the need for a "most accurate" category award at tier two and higher matches and it will be replaced with a completely subjective "most tactical" award. At tier three and higher matches there may also be MT senior, MT distinguished senior, MT industry and MT lady. :) Glenmorangie works.

I wonder if they will bring back the "Ugliest Hawaiian Shirt" contest? :)

Sal Picante
09-22-2015, 03:53 PM
According to Facebook this was announced at the Whirled Chute. No date on when it will go into effect.

So, now IDPA essentially goes to a Hit Factor of 1?

Amazing that the incentive to go slower on the closer/faster targets is now even more or an issue...

Sal Picante
09-22-2015, 04:04 PM
It's still a HF of 2 for IDPA scoring, minor just loses two points for a similar area of the target as a down -1. I consider 4 to be a low hit factor stage, so I don't dispute your math, as I think it confirms my point that a miss is only worth more in USPSA on low hit factor stages. On the affect of a miss in USPSA, it's only 15 points if you assume an "A" hit. Often, at least for me, misses happen where I was already accepting a C/D hit due to target difficulty (partial, mover, etc.), so the miss is really worth between 11-15 points, not exactly 15 points.

If IDPA stages were truly 2 HF, then Misses would cost you 7.5 seconds (or 5 seconds if you consider it a lower bound of just a 10 penalty in your case...).

What is interesting is that IDPA imposes a HF artificially, leading to goofy scenarios...

dsa
09-22-2015, 06:30 PM
IDPA makes my head hurt. When I do shoot it I have to squad with FUN people and have a good time with them. If I try to get competitive I get frustrated and want to rage quit with all the rules nazis and their interpretation of the intent of the rules/stage descriptions. I look at it as hanging out with a few like minded fellow 2A supporters and leave it at that.

Sal Picante
09-22-2015, 06:31 PM
IDPA makes my head hurt. When I do shoot it I have to squad with FUN people and have a good time with them. If I try to get competitive I get frustrated and want to rage quit with all the rules nazis and their interpretation of the intent of the rules/stage descriptions. I look at it as hanging out with a few like minded fellow 2A supporters and leave it at that.


I've just started shooting my carry gun for fun these days in the BUG division.

6 rounds is kinda fun challenge...

Alpha Sierra
09-22-2015, 06:49 PM
I heard something about IDPA requiring verbal challenges before engaging a target, with a procedural assessed if the shooter stutters or repeats himself.

What if I have Tourette's?

Alpha Sierra
09-22-2015, 06:51 PM
IDPA makes my head hurt. When I do shoot it I have to squad with FUN people and have a good time with them. If I try to get competitive I get frustrated and want to rage quit with all the rules nazis and their interpretation of the intent of the rules/stage descriptions. I look at it as hanging out with a few like minded fellow 2A supporters and leave it at that.

The few times a year I go I don't even look at the scorecard. I just try to burn down as hard as I can with no f-cks given.

johncorey
09-22-2015, 06:58 PM
This does not bother me nearly as much as the fact that drilling NTs is not an auto-DQ. That sends the wrong signal, and seems to be in direct disagreement with the raw purpose of IDPA....

orionz06
09-22-2015, 07:08 PM
Frank Glover told me he hosted a match once where a hit on a non-threat was an automatic elimination from the match. I asked him how that went, he said, "That slowed them down."
Cody


Why do they need slowed down? Don't get me wrong, I would like this change but not because people need slowed down. That screams of some old man who is past his prime wanting the youngsters to get off his lawn.


I wonder if classifications will be realigned?

I hope this change happens and there are no changes to classification times.


I heard something about IDPA requiring verbal challenges before engaging a target, with a procedural assessed if the shooter stutters or repeats himself.

I like Talisker, but 18-year-old Glennfiddich is good, too... :D

And if your mindset is shown to be weak you will lose points.

John Hearne
09-22-2015, 07:28 PM
Tom Givens uses 200 seconds for a hit on a NT. I think it sends the right message, you can hit the NT but you REALLY don't want to. You won't go home but you ain't winning anything.

Regarding the 1 seconds, both Hackathorn and Vickers thought that was correct based on their and their student's experiences when trying to balance speed and accuracy - but what do they know....

orionz06
09-22-2015, 07:44 PM
Regarding the 1 seconds, both Hackathorn and Vickers thought that was correct based on their and their student's experiences when trying to balance speed and accuracy - but what do they know....

This should come as no surprise but someone said in a group that people should stick with what the founders intended and there shouldn't be a change.

Chris Rhines
09-22-2015, 07:51 PM
This does not bother me nearly as much as the fact that drilling NTs is not an auto-DQ. That sends the wrong signal, and seems to be in direct disagreement with the raw purpose of IDPA....

I've always thought that a DQ for hitting a no-shoot is not an adequate penalty. IMO, any shooter who hit a non-threat target should be beaten with 1x2 target sticks (used ones, with lots of staples sticking out) by the next three shooters in the squad. The beating would last five minutes for a -0 hit, three minutes for a -1 hit, and one minute for a -3 hit.

(By the way, who should I send my address to for the scotch delivery? At this rate, I'm gonna have enough hootch to last me another two weeks!)

Seriously though, this post is a good illustration of how IDPA tends to confuse the concepts of 'training' vs. 'gaming'. Or, more specifically, 'shooting problems' vs. 'scenarios'.

If IDPA stages are supposed to be realistic simulations of tactical scenarios, then yes, hitting a non-threat should be an automatic DQ. Among other things. If this is the case, though, then every IDPA stage I've ever shot has been an abject failure in the realism department, with regards to number of targets, accuracy requirements, cover management, and really pretty much everything else.

It is not possible, nor even desirable, to realistically model a defensive shooting scenario using static cardboard targets and a timer. It can't be done, and it is stupid to even try.

On the other hand, if IDPA stages are supposed to be challenging shooting problems, to be solved on the clock (like *every single practice drill ever*), then who cares what the penalty is for nailing a non-threat? Think of non-threats as 'penalty targets' if it helps. Now if you think that the penalty beings assessed is too small, that's a matter for discussion. But ask yourself what you're trying to do. If you're trying to encourage shooters to shoot precisely, that's great. If you're trying to punish shooters who 'shoot too damn fast,' well, then you're a douchebag.

Peally
09-23-2015, 09:40 AM
I agree. NT = a DQ? Yeah that'll make it even more fun. It's a sport, and one with convoluted and often pointless rules, not damned training despite what the idiots at HQ are deluded into believing. That's a sure fire way to watch the sport dropped like a sack of crap across my state.

On second thought, let's do that ;)

Sal Picante
09-23-2015, 09:47 AM
I've always thought that a DQ for hitting a no-shoot is not an adequate penalty.

Best troll ever!

Even better idea: each hit on NT = $10 into the prize kitty and you forfeit your claim to any prize!

Sal Picante
09-23-2015, 10:08 AM
With all this talk about penalties, and since I'm stuck on a train this AM:

You know what might make IDPA more interesting? A sliding HF on each stage.

So -1 could mean .25 sec to say, 1 seconds depending on what the stage designer wanted.

Could be neat...

GJM
09-23-2015, 10:11 AM
Best troll ever!

Even better idea: each hit on NT = $10 into the prize kitty and you forfeit your claim to any prize!

Agreed, Chris wins the internetz for the day.

Maybe he can offer a course on IDPA -- AAR to follow.

Chris Rhines
09-23-2015, 10:33 AM
Best troll ever!

I like to think of it less as trolling, and more as demonstrating a point using absurdity. :D


Even better idea: each hit on NT = $10 into the prize kitty and you forfeit your claim to any prize!

I've actually seen this done, both at classes and matches. The standard 3GN penalty for whacking a shot target with a slug, is a small donation to the match supplies fund.

I will say that if you want to induce stress in a shooting problem, making shooters pay for their mistakes in hard currency is a good way to do it.

Peally
09-23-2015, 10:52 AM
With 3GN that might be a bit different since you're possibly destroying range property due to negligence. If someone shot a popper with a slug at a match I was running I'd likely ask them to leave.

All in all though, I'm not made of money and shooting is already a major hobby investment with my income. If a match is charging me based on my performance I'm going to flip that range the bird and never show up again. That goes for stupid ideas like NT shots being DQ's too, fuel isn't cheap and I gotta eat, find somewhere for the dog to hang out, etc to make these things in the first place.

johncorey
09-23-2015, 11:22 AM
So some of you truly believe that shooting a no-shoot/non-threat target in IDPA should not be penalized severely, such as a DQ?

Or am I reading the posts wrong?

Chris Rhines
09-23-2015, 11:34 AM
With 3GN that might be a bit different since you're possibly destroying range property due to negligence. If someone shot a popper with a slug at a match I was running I'd likely ask them to leave.

If I can be serious for a minute here - I think that match DQs should be limited to serious safety violations and unsportsmanlike conduct. Nothing else. I (and 3GN, for whatever that's worth) don't think that whacking a steel knockover plate with a slug falls into either of those categories.

Paying money for hitting no-shoots is something that would (has!) worked well in training classes and group practice sessions. My friends and I sometimes do a variation on that theme, where everyone gets one run on the last drill of the day, and the best time doesn't have to shag brass/clean up the range/pay for beers afterwards. Like that.

Talionis
09-23-2015, 11:36 AM
So some of you truly believe that shooting a no-shoot/non-threat target in IDPA should not be penalized severely, such as a DQ?

Or am I reading the posts wrong?

So you truly believe that shooting a non-threat in IDPA should be penalized with a DQ? That would be one of the most effective ways I could think of to make sure newer shooters never come back. I don't remember the last time I pegged a non-threat in IDPA, but I can sure remember the last time new shooters did.

johncorey
09-23-2015, 11:42 AM
Yeah. 100%. DQ. I've only ever been affiliated with one IDPA club, but our new shooters go through a mandatory safety/shooting class outside of a match, and a strongly suggested match participation sessions as non-shooters. From what I've seen over the years, it's rarely the new guys and gals who drill a NT, but members who've been shooting for a while and are either not paying attention, or are trying to race beyond their speedometer.

markp
09-23-2015, 11:56 AM
Tom Givens uses 200 seconds for a hit on a NT. I think it sends the right message, you can hit the NT but you REALLY don't want to. You won't go home but you ain't winning anything.

Regarding the 1 seconds, both Hackathorn and Vickers thought that was correct based on their and their student's experiences when trying to balance speed and accuracy - but what do they know....

Back in the 90's , Sundog Shooters ran IDPA matches with a +150 NS penalty.
They had a heavy Gunsite cadre, so that may have had something to do with it.

Talionis
09-23-2015, 11:58 AM
I get the idea that you feel IDPA is self-defense training. That's cool, it's just not correct. Shooting games are really good at testing things relevant to self-defense - namely shooting skills under time pressure - but they are not training.

Mr_White
09-23-2015, 12:04 PM
There should be a little jail at each IDPA club where they put you when you hit a no-shoot.

Scoring system: so we have Vickers Count and Limited Vickers - will this new system be called Vickers' Handicap?

orionz06
09-23-2015, 12:08 PM
There should be a little jail at each IDPA club where they put you when you hit a no-shoot.

Scoring system: so we have Vickers Count and Limited Vickers - will this new system be called Vickers' Handicap?

I think Larry has suggested a warning for a hit in a NT when he shot Carolina Cup a few years back.


Vickers Warning[emoji769]

Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

John Hearne
09-23-2015, 12:16 PM
Back in the 90's , Sundog Shooters ran IDPA matches with a +150 NS penalty.
They had a heavy Gunsite cadre, so that may have had something to do with it.

Those were awesome matches. I was only able to shoot two but they were the most heavily oriented towards teaching that I've shot.

For those who don't know, they would often have a local instructor teach a short block and then one stage would use that material.

One of the matches I attended was the season finale. All the stages were pass/fail and included fof. Only one guy passed all of them. There was an unwinnable gunfight and the only winning option was to not start a fight.

At the other I attended, my squad was Chris Dwiggins, Jeff Gonzales, Cory Trapp, and me.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Peally
09-23-2015, 12:33 PM
Yeah. 100%. DQ. I've only ever been affiliated with one IDPA club, but our new shooters go through a mandatory safety/shooting class outside of a match, and a strongly suggested match participation sessions as non-shooters. From what I've seen over the years, it's rarely the new guys and gals who drill a NT, but members who've been shooting for a while and are either not paying attention, or are trying to race beyond their speedometer.

I understand the idea behind it but for a sport (which IDPA is, despite anyone's thinking) that people pay and burn days off to shoot it's a 100% guaranteed way to kill it off almost overnight. This isn't training, and they're not people. People do this for entertainment, despite IDPA trying their best to ruin that. If someone around here did it for anything other than a one off gimmick everyone knew about ahead of time they'd be laughed out of the state.

I'm trying to grasp at how that's an intelligent organization decision in any way shape or form. You might as well indeed start charging people 100 bucks per no shoot target. Punch them in the head while you're at it.

Peally
09-23-2015, 12:34 PM
There should be a little jail at each IDPA club where they put you when you hit a no-shoot.

Scoring system: so we have Vickers Count and Limited Vickers - will this new system be called Vickers' Handicap?

They changed it to "Limited" and "Unlimited" with the latest rulebook, thankfully.

Peally
09-23-2015, 12:41 PM
If I can be serious for a minute here - I think that match DQs should be limited to serious safety violations and unsportsmanlike conduct. Nothing else. I (and 3GN, for whatever that's worth) don't think that whacking a steel knockover plate with a slug falls into either of those categories.

Paying money for hitting no-shoots is something that would (has!) worked well in training classes and group practice sessions. My friends and I sometimes do a variation on that theme, where everyone gets one run on the last drill of the day, and the best time doesn't have to shag brass/clean up the range/pay for beers afterwards. Like that.

I tend to agree but there's the potential for shrapnel there depending on the steel's position. It's double crappy for ranges with low income where that's a popper that won't be replaced for 5 years. Not sure what the exact 3GN rules are but that seems to be the standard around here.

As for paying for no-shoots it's definitely a fun way to force stress in training, but if I'm being required to pay a match fee AND pay for everything that isn't a perfect shot every single match I and everyone else there is going to tell the MD to p*ss off. You might as well just have everyone that's below M class pay three times the match fee for not being good shooters ;)

As an M shooter that doesn't make 6 figures, I still occasionally hit NS targets and I'm not paying anyone anything for them. I'll go to USPSA and save the money for training.

Sal Picante
09-23-2015, 01:11 PM
Ok - so people hate paying for NT hits. Got it...

What about this (rehashing):

You know what might make IDPA more interesting? A sliding HF on each stage.

So -1 could mean .25 sec to say, 1 seconds depending on what the stage designer wanted.

guymontag
09-23-2015, 01:18 PM
There should be a little jail at each IDPA club where they put you when you hit a no-shoot.

Scoring system: so we have Vickers Count and Limited Vickers - will this new system be called Vickers' Handicap?


I think Larry has suggested a warning for a hit in a NT when he shot Carolina Cup a few years back.


Vickers Warning[emoji769]

Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

I did not plan on commenting in this thread as I don't shoot IDPA - but these two comments... man. Ohh man. A thumbs up from Brent Rambo for the both of you.

Glenn E. Meyer
09-23-2015, 01:19 PM
1.
Just perpetuates the impression that IDPA is for slow, fat guys and will drive younger shooters to USPSA and 3 gun; thanks!

Then go. Some of us are older now. I'm 67 and could lose weight. One of the guys I shoot with is 76. My knees are just shot to hell. Give me a kneeling stage and I will take a penalty or take a long time getting up and down. I'll put myself out physically for training but for a fun weekend event - nope.

2. It is a game! It is not training. If you DQ folks for a NS - think they will think highly of the gun world (or think you are a bunch of range Nazis). If you want that intensity - take realistic FOFs. And I've seen folks shoot No Shoots in them a plenty. I've been 'shot' by SWAT qualified police officers - should they have been DQ'ed and left the exercise or do they learn from it.

I remember being in a fun poker circle. Played for pennies and nickels - had a few beers, chilled out. Then someone invited an 'expert' - all kinds of complicated games, raise the stakes to make it 'real' poker. The circle fell apart quickly.

To repeat myself - I'll pay $400 to $800 bucks for a real course and take my lumps. I'm not going to play with I'm a Superstar killer, rule Nazi (except for safety) types on a weekend for fun. So what if I'm slow moving between positions, so what?

I did shoot some of the USPSA matches. There ok but the pomposity of guys with totally unrealistic guns for carry, dressed like giant bumble bees in spandex and rehearsing every shot before a run - equally stupid from a SD perspective of realism. That could be local. The steel guys are just fine and fun.

The shooting games are just that - trigger time and basics practice and fun. FOF classes, skills classes from pros - different situation. If you want to win and have a trophy - good for you.

Peally
09-23-2015, 02:00 PM
Ok - so people hate paying for NT hits. Got it...

What about this (rehashing):

You know what might make IDPA more interesting? A sliding HF on each stage.

So -1 could mean .25 sec to say, 1 seconds depending on what the stage designer wanted.

Could be an interesting way to adjust the speed of a stage but it's a little artificial. Really depends on the stage designer's competency and understanding of his audience.

Honestly I think IDPA is already interesting to a degree. The local issues I see are new shooters struggling to keep up with arbitrary and/or complex rules, and the high end guys simply seeing it for what it is and either putting up with it or moving on. If HQ would finally give up the delusion and realize they aren't a Pat Rogers class I think they'd excel by quite a bit compared to USPSA simply on their marketability and ability to keep their technology up to date.

Nothing they've shown says they will but that's their problem. I had a good laugh at the recent IDPA mag article claiming they revolutionized the world's thinking on reloads though.

Maybe IDPA needs to have an elected board that answers to the membership ;)

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 02:00 PM
***Sigh****
Let's not turn this into another debate about IDPA or USPSA.
Every single master level concealed carry trainer that I have met supports involvement in IDPA and USPSA, with one notable exception. Now I haven't met everybody, so I am sure there are more out there. Irregardless of .5s or 1s per point, IDPA has value as a shooting sport that helps to improve pistol handling, use of cover, moving while shooting, and marksmanship under pressure of the clock.

My view is that IDPA is BOTH a sport and basic training. What I mean by basic training is that shooters have to work to improve their skills, and in that sense it is training. It has some very basic tactics, but I would not call it tactical training. The basic tactics and shooting under pressure help to accomplish the "overlearning" that John Hearne talks about and helps us to learn to shoot using our subconscious which allows our cognitive functions to make critical decisions in a potentially life threatening situation. IDPA is also very approachable by novice shooters, both financially and technically. We can take a totally inexperienced shooter and within 6 matches usually get him/her to follow safety protocols, keep muzzles in safe directions, competently handle reloading, and become a functional IDPA shooter. Depending on their commitment to dryfire practice and live fire practice, they are able to improve their pistol handling and shooting skills under pressure at their own pace. We are all better off with pistol owners learning IDPA than we are with them going to the range once a month and practicing in a stall.

If I place non-threats where they never get hits, then shooters are not being challenged to avoid them. Most master-level shooters know how to avoid them, but we all started as a novice at some point in our shooting careers. (Although Scott Warren may have been born with a pistol in his hand). The penalty for a non-threat needs to be just enough to discourage shooters from hitting them but not too much that it discourages them and they don't enjoy the match. The match needs to balance difficulty with enjoyment/entertainment. In IDPA we embrace the idea that this shooting match needs to be enjoyable. In USPSA the mindset is more serious, as it should be. It is wonderful that we have two sports that offer the full spectrum to shooters.

Also, IDPA can be a great starting point to learning more about self-defense and taking more advanced tactical training that gets them to the next level. In that sense IDPA supports the training industry, and does not compete with it.

I am a supporter of IDPA not because I am obliged to as Area Coordinator, but because I genuinely see the value to novice shooters who are learning and wanting to improve. IDPA also provides the competitive feature that allows them to see how they are progressing against their peers. For $15-30, a novice/marksman level shooter can get practice under pressure and measure themselves against others at IDPA matches. That is a good thing. Let's not get all worked up because they might change the rule, or other rules, or some guys firearm was found to be illegal.

It's all good if we can get safe trigger time under pressure.
Cody

Peally
09-23-2015, 02:02 PM
You're always going to have comparisons. Both have incompetent leaders and they're almost identical sports.

Maybe Foley can change the tide though.

orionz06
09-23-2015, 02:03 PM
I've never received instruction or seen any teaching during a match.


Maybe IDPA is different where you play?


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

Peally
09-23-2015, 02:06 PM
I think he means it gets them thinking about shooting outside of the sport, but honestly both already do that. In my region USPSA and IDPA attract the same types of shooters, the only difference in my eyes is the rulebooks. They're both full of old farts looking to have a good time and jersey wearing competitors.

Mr_White
09-23-2015, 02:10 PM
old farts looking to have a good time

Swingers?

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 02:11 PM
I've never received instruction or seen any teaching during a match.
Maybe IDPA is different where you play?
Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl
All our Safety Officers are encouraged to coach shooters at Tier-1 matches. So, yes, we do provide guidance, tips, and in some cases instruction.
Cody

Glenn E. Meyer
09-23-2015, 02:12 PM
I've never received instruction or seen any teaching during a match.

Not true around here. We are quite supportive of folks. I've seen discussions of grip, placement, sight picture - all kinds of things. We've national champs (one revolver type) who has discussed such with me on revolver usage. After a shooting a stage as taping begins, it's not unusual to point out things to beginners or anyone.

Maybe we are a friendlier group who doesn't care about millisecond wins.

Peally
09-23-2015, 02:12 PM
Swingers?

That's the side match after.

You know it's a damn shame giant purple pimp hats don't have holes for earmuffs now that I think of it.

jh9
09-23-2015, 02:13 PM
Seriously though, this post is a good illustration of how IDPA tends to confuse the concepts of 'training' vs. 'gaming'. Or, more specifically, 'shooting problems' vs. 'scenarios'.

If IDPA stages are supposed to be realistic simulations of tactical scenarios, then yes, hitting a non-threat should be an automatic DQ. Among other things. If this is the case, though, then every IDPA stage I've ever shot has been an abject failure in the realism department, with regards to number of targets, accuracy requirements, cover management, and really pretty much everything else.

It is not possible, nor even desirable, to realistically model a defensive shooting scenario using static cardboard targets and a timer. It can't be done, and it is stupid to even try.

On the other hand, if IDPA stages are supposed to be challenging shooting problems, to be solved on the clock (like *every single practice drill ever*), then who cares what the penalty is for nailing a non-threat?

In the latter case it should simply be called a penalty target and ideally not be humanoid in shape. In that case I'd have no problem with the way we do things (occasional NTs just to make a shot harder).

If not, though, then IDPA needs to stop with the whole "yeah, this is a bystander/hostage but not really so go to town". Even playfully suggesting, in a formal competitive environment, that murdering some schmuck that didn't get out of the way fast enough is ok is...just...not ok. It's almost like saying "black targets represent black people" then saying "why's everyone so pissed off? It's just cardboard."

orionz06
09-23-2015, 02:13 PM
All our Safety Officers are encouraged to coach shooters at Tier-1 matches. So, yes, we do provide guidance, tips, and in some cases instruction.
Cody

What standards are they held to, knowledge/teaching wise?


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 02:14 PM
You're always going to have comparisons. Both have incompetent leaders and they're almost identical sports.
Maybe Foley can change the tide though.
I disagree. The leaders are not incompetent. Some of the members are way too critical. Life is not perfect, the sports are not perfect, and leaders are not perfect. The question is do the sports still provide safety and value to the members...and I think BOTH provide a very high value considering the cost to attend and compete.
Cody

Peally
09-23-2015, 02:15 PM
In USPSA you're not supposed to shoot the white people, only the brown people.

Glenn E. Meyer
09-23-2015, 02:20 PM
I have a set of UK gun magazines before their bans. That's when they had handguns sports. Their editorials denounced our humanoid targets as examples of American fanatic blood lust in emphasizing killing in a 'sport.'

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 02:20 PM
What standards are they held to, knowledge/teaching wise?
Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl
Not sure I understand your question, but each Safety Officer has a senior mentor who works with them to not only understand how to be a competent match official, but also acts as role models for how to coach novice shooters. It is a team effort is most cases. All SO's must take the Safety Officer test and attend a Safety Officer class, much like the RO classes for USPSA. Some clubs will have better shooters than other clubs, and better coaches. But all IDPA clubs are encouraged to coach new shooters and help intermediate shooters get better. I find this to be true at many USPSA matches as well, although to a less extent.
Cody

Peally
09-23-2015, 02:24 PM
I disagree. The leaders are not incompetent. Some of the members are way too critical. Life is not perfect, the sports are not perfect, and leaders are not perfect. The question is do the sports still provide safety and value to the members...and I think BOTH provide a very high value considering the cost to attend and compete.
Cody

Agree to disagree.

jh9
09-23-2015, 02:27 PM
I have a set of UK gun magazines before their bans. That's when they had handguns sports. Their editorials denounced our humanoid targets as examples of American fanatic blood lust in emphasizing killing in a 'sport.'

I'm ok with that...for threat targets. No need for kid gloves in that regard.

But I'm not ok with the casual treatment of non-threat targets. For entirely different reasons.

Was there an implication there?

Peally
09-23-2015, 02:31 PM
Ahhhhhhh the old metric vs classic debate.

You're either faceshooting people or faceshooting turtles. Frankly I like turtles more. Those Brits are a PETA member's nightmare.

jh9
09-23-2015, 02:32 PM
Ahhhhhhh the old metric vs classic debate.

You're either faceshooting people or faceshooting turtles. Frankly I like turtles more. Those Brits are a PETA member's nightmare.

No no, faceshooting is ok if they're bad people. Faceshooting is bad if they're not.

I am undecided on the shellhooting of simulated turtles. On the one hand, ninja turtles. On the other hand, snapping turtles.

Jury's still out.

guymontag
09-23-2015, 02:50 PM
Not true around here. We are quite supportive of folks. I've seen discussions of grip, placement, sight picture - all kinds of things. We've national champs (one revolver type) who has discussed such with me on revolver usage. After a shooting a stage as taping begins, it's not unusual to point out things to beginners or anyone.

Maybe we are a friendlier group who doesn't care about millisecond wins.

The USPSA club in Austin does the above from what I've seen. College Station (Brazosland) USPSA too.

What else are you supposed to talk about while shooting a match? Work? :p

BigT
09-23-2015, 03:23 PM
Not sure I understand your question, but each Safety Officer has a senior mentor who works with them to not only understand how to be a competent match official, but also acts as role models for how to coach novice shooters. It is a team effort is most cases. All SO's must take the Safety Officer test and attend a Safety Officer class, much like the RO classes for USPSA. Some clubs will have better shooters than other clubs, and better coaches. But all IDPA clubs are encouraged to coach new shooters and help intermediate shooters get better. I find this to be true at many USPSA matches as well, although to a less extent.
Cody
L1 or not it's still a competition. And not the venue for coaching.

Added to that I've seen plenty SO's who have no business coaching anyone on the sport of shooting of any form.

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 03:38 PM
L1 or not it's still a competition. And not the venue for coaching.
Added to that I've seen plenty SO's who have no business coaching anyone on the sport of shooting of any form.

In the current IDPA Safety Officer Training program we specifically state that SO's are encouraged to coach new/novice shooters at Club Matches. While it is still a competition, the members at all clubs where I have been a MD want to help each other get better. This is a key difference in the social atmosphere between IDPA and USPSA...not to say there aren't very helpful USPSA clubs, such as Quantico and Thurmont. This is one of the reasons that IDPA is more friendly to new shooters.

THere are always going to be differences between SO's...that is the nature of humans. The role of the MD and the Area Coordinator is to help SO's be competent and able to coach. That will vary by region...remember this is a VOLUNTEER staff.

Frank Glover said something just recently: "One of the main problems is trying to turn IDPA into USPSA." We need to keep to the core principles of IDPA and not get suckered into gaming the self-defense out of the sport.
Cody

BigT
09-23-2015, 04:05 PM
The members of my IPSC club want to assist each other in improving their skills sets too. They just appreciate a match isn't the place for this. I honestly think your statement about idpa being more friendly to new shooters is nonsensical. That's more a club thing than a sport thing. Though I'm one of those weirdos who thinks not applying the rules isn't a synonym for newbie friendly.

I couldn't give a shit if Jimmy can't shoot is or isn't a volunteer when he decides to aggressively share his tiny bit of pretend knowledge with a new shooter who will get worse following it. No I'm not saying that all or most SO's fall into that category but I've seen them , and they're often the ones most keen to "train" newbies.

Your last paragraph contradicts your others. I've never received any coaching in a self defense shooting.

johncorey
09-23-2015, 04:07 PM
I get the idea that you feel IDPA is self-defense training. That's cool, it's just not correct. Shooting games are really good at testing things relevant to self-defense - namely shooting skills under time pressure - but they are not training.

I think IDPA is many a thing, "training" is not one of them. This is me rehashing common knowledge here, but IDPA was set up to take the gaming aspect out, and add realism. Just because many shooters nowadays feel it has become a game of sorts does not make it so. I approach IDPA as a simple check on learning. Cold bore, zero warm up, show up and go, check on learning. Part of that check is target discrimination under artificial stress (the buzzer and a crowd). I place a high value on not hitting no-shoot targets, since that does kind of matter. A lot. If shooters are running through a stage, and do not bother to properly ID their targets and non-targets, then what the heck is the point? And then to follow that up with, in my eyes, and incredibly dismissive attitude of 'oh, well, better try harder next time', defeats the purpose of IDPA even more so.

Having had to target discriminate in real time tends to ingrain that fairly solidly into the mental motions of squeezing a trigger each time.

johncorey
09-23-2015, 04:14 PM
I understand the idea behind it but for a sport (which IDPA is, despite anyone's thinking) that people pay and burn days off to shoot it's a 100% guaranteed way to kill it off almost overnight. This isn't training, and they're not people. People do this for entertainment, despite IDPA trying their best to ruin that. If someone around here did it for anything other than a one off gimmick everyone knew about ahead of time they'd be laughed out of the state.

I'm trying to grasp at how that's an intelligent organization decision in any way shape or form. You might as well indeed start charging people 100 bucks per no shoot target. Punch them in the head while you're at it.


I guess we have incredibly different values placed on target discrimination when running a firearm. I completely disagree that IDPA is a "one off gimmick". That would be a rather grand waste of my time.

How is it not an intelligent decision to reenforce the entire purpose of IDPA? Remove the gaming aspect, add realism/defensive pistol applications.....tagging a cardboard bystander doesn't really factor into that. The only shooting competition I would truly consider a game, and very much so enjoy, is Steel Challenge.

orionz06
09-23-2015, 04:16 PM
The last time I got "advice" from someone at an IDPA match they told me lights on guns were dumb and they shot with a tea cup grip. Actually every time I've gotten advice has been from someone who used a grip other than what is "normal" and accepted. They also sucked. I am sure there are some good ones but a $20 match isn't the place for teaching. I'm sure they think they're helping but it's probably doing more harm.

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 04:29 PM
The last time I got "advice" from someone at an IDPA match they told me lights on guns were dumb and they shot with a tea cup grip. Actually every time I've gotten advice has been from someone who used a grip other than what is "normal" and accepted. They also sucked. I am sure there are some good ones but a $20 match isn't the place for teaching. I'm sure they think they're helping but it's probably doing more harm.
If that is happening, then that needs fixed. None of the SO's I have trained or who work matches I attend would attempt to give advice unless they knew what they were talking about. MOST of the coaching I do is actually very basic: lean to get shots behind cover rather than going to combat footing, don't pull the mag out, let the mag drop, don't crowd cover unless it makes sense tactically (such as barrels), slow down and get your hits, go home and practice your reloading, etc. It is not "teaching" it is coaching, and there is a difference. We do offer IDPA Skills Classes where we actually teach.
Cody

Glenn E. Meyer
09-23-2015, 04:42 PM
It's sort of like sport Judo as an argument. Is it self-defense or a sport? Why can't I bite you or poke you in the eye?

Of course, it is not a realistic self-defense scenario. Most scenarios, I would just run away. It reminds me of the NTI. One run had a house you had to enter with pizza. You open the door and there is blood. Go search and save whomever. One participant refused to go in as it wasn't realistic. Duh - that wasn't the point. There was another where you were in a shopping center and you had to go down a hallway. I, at first, said - I won't. The SO said you must as it is part of the exercise.

There is not realism in a really, real sense. So you don't use a super blaster and stand in the open - it's still not real. You want real - you need well planned, scripted and refereed FOF.

As IPSC became more of game, IDPA was a touch of course correction but still a game. My champion level friends tell new shooters that.

As far as idiot advice - you are on the Internet. I've seen the teacup grip from good ol' TX boys who shoot that way cuz Daddy taught them and he was a Marine! No offense to Marines. I shoot with retired Marines who are excellent performers and skilled.

Alpha Sierra
09-23-2015, 04:54 PM
I have a set of UK gun magazines before their bans. That's when they had handguns sports. Their editorials denounced our humanoid targets as examples of American fanatic blood lust in emphasizing killing in a 'sport.'
Who gives a shit what the British think?

Anyone?

Buehler?

HopetonBrown
09-23-2015, 04:55 PM
We had a SO tell us we were press checking wrong by going over the top and pulling the slide back from in front of the ejection port using the web between out thumb and index finger. He said he was an Instructor, as if that's worth anything.

Alpha Sierra
09-23-2015, 04:58 PM
I guess we have incredibly different values placed on target discrimination when running a firearm. I completely disagree that IDPA is a "one off gimmick". That would be a rather grand waste of my time.

How is it not an intelligent decision to reenforce the entire purpose of IDPA? Remove the gaming aspect, add realism/defensive pistol applications.....tagging a cardboard bystander doesn't really factor into that. The only shooting competition I would truly consider a game, and very much so enjoy, is Steel Challenge.

I've seen way more no shoots in USPSA stages (as a % of the total targets) than in IDPA stages. And no shoots hurt your score more in USPSA.......

NEPAKevin
09-23-2015, 05:09 PM
Around these here parts, and most others I have been to, hitting a non-threat is not just points down, its points down and a busting of the balls from your friends and fellow shooters. Although, I have seen this mitigated by prior designation of the NT on a tight head shot as something along the lines of the "mother-in-law" or "democrat" target.

While I disagree that IDPA matches are training, I do believe that they often provide incentive for improvement and have seen the growth of organized practice sessions as well as competition oriented classes taught by established shooters filling quickly while the more "tactically" oriented get cancelled for lack of participation. People can criticize IDPA all they want, but the reality is that it is a popular venue particularly for novice shooters who are geared toward self defense and concealed carry and has brought many female and young people into competitive shooting. It would not have grown as large an organization as it is with out merits that out weigh the derision of the nay-sayers.

Peally
09-23-2015, 05:17 PM
I guess we have incredibly different values placed on target discrimination when running a firearm. I completely disagree that IDPA is a "one off gimmick". That would be a rather grand waste of my time.

How is it not an intelligent decision to reenforce the entire purpose of IDPA? Remove the gaming aspect, add realism/defensive pistol applications.....tagging a cardboard bystander doesn't really factor into that. The only shooting competition I would truly consider a game, and very much so enjoy, is Steel Challenge.

We must, when I shoot a game I don't lose sleep over shooting a brown paper target with hands painted on it, nor do I consider IDPA, USPSA, 3-Gun, or any other game of any tactical usefulness past a way to test my fundamentals against skilled shooters and the clock.

If you consider IDPA anything more than a game I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 05:17 PM
Around these here parts, and most others I have been to, hitting a non-threat is not just points down, its points down and a busting of the balls from your friends and fellow shooters. Although, I have seen this mitigated by prior designation of the NT on a tight head shot as something along the lines of the "mother-in-law" or "democrat" target.

While I disagree that IDPA matches are training, I do believe that they often provide incentive for improvement and have seen the growth of organized practice sessions as well as competition oriented classes taught by established shooters filling quickly while the more "tactically" oriented get cancelled for lack of participation. People can criticize IDPA all they want, but the reality is that it is a popular venue particularly for novice shooters who are geared toward self defense and concealed carry and has brought many female and young people into competitive shooting. It would not have grown as large an organization as it is with out merits that out weigh the derision of the nay-sayers.
Price has a LOT to do with this. Shooters can go shoot for $20 for 20 matches for the cost of one weekend $400 course, and get tips and help from other shooters at the match. I am not saying the $400 course isn't worth it...just saying for many the cost is a big factor.
Cody

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 05:21 PM
We had a SO tell us we were press checking wrong by going over the top and pulling the slide back from in front of the ejection port using the web between out thumb and index finger. He said he was an Instructor, as if that's worth anything.
We all have stories like this, but it is not the norm. We work to identify those issues and get them corrected.
I know of at least two long-time IDPA shooters who were removed from their official positions because of poor safety practices or violating the training program. If you do know of names you want to send to me, please PM me and I will talk to the Area Coordinator for that area and we will work to get that corrected. We can't fix stuff we don't know about.
Cody

johncorey
09-23-2015, 06:41 PM
We must, when I shoot a game I don't lose sleep over shooting a brown paper target with hands painted on it, nor do I consider IDPA, USPSA, 3-Gun, or any other game of any tactical usefulness past a way to test my fundamentals against skilled shooters and the clock.

If you consider IDPA anything more than a game I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.


Perhaps my words in post #110 will help you understand how I view IDPA.

If you consider target discrimination as not something worthy of application, then I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.

Peally
09-23-2015, 06:56 PM
Oh it's quite important, in USPSA it costs me ten points, it's basically a goodbye to your ranking on the stage. IDPA it's about equivalent.

Alpha Sierra
09-23-2015, 07:26 PM
Perhaps my words in post #110 will help you understand how I view IDPA.

If you consider target discrimination as not something worthy of application, then I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.

Oh please...........enough with the drama

Glenn E. Meyer
09-23-2015, 07:55 PM
Thank you for that, Alpha. :o

johncorey
09-23-2015, 08:09 PM
So this is fine:

Post #119
If you consider IDPA anything more than a game I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.


But this is not:

Post #122
If you consider target discrimination as not something worthy of application, then I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.




And, Roger.

GJM
09-23-2015, 08:17 PM
Assessing large penalties for hitting no shoot targets is really just another way of tweaking the hit factor towards accuracy. I have yet to see a single shooter handle no shoot targets in any IDPA or USPSA match in a manner that would be acceptable to me if I was the good guy down range. It is not tactical when a timer is involved.

YVK
09-23-2015, 08:27 PM
Setting game vs training vs realism argument aside..

Despite a complete practical uselessness of an NT marked with a pair of hands, a gun, a color scheme or whathaveyou, I've never failed to "discriminate" one. However, I've shot perhaps two or three non-shoots in my short competitive career either trying to push my speed, or taking a riskier shot, or both. After all, competition is also a testing ground that offers me a chance to tease out my capabilities and see what I can or can't do. My chance of repeating that mistake, whether games or something else, goes down with each error committed during such testing.
DQ for a NT shoot would completely take away a self-exploration and testing value of this sport. Screw that.

Glenn E. Meyer
09-23-2015, 08:34 PM
I suggest that you immediately give first aid to the NS and then call a lawyer. This is getting a touch ridiculous for a gun game where people want it to be something it is not. Like I said (yawn), realism might be found in quality FOF. I've seen people quite upset when they shoot an innocent in such. In IDPA, it's a learning moment for technique.

In shotgun class, we practiced a buckshot hostage rescue shot - that gave us a hint of shooting a innocent with a touch of realism for all the shotgun wonder weapon HD folks.

Alpha Sierra
09-23-2015, 08:49 PM
So this is fine:

Post #119
If you consider IDPA anything more than a game I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.


But this is not:

Post #122
If you consider target discrimination as not something worthy of application, then I'm afraid there's nothing more I can say to you other than I'm glad you're having fun and keep on doing what makes you happy.




And, Roger.

It's a game, just like USPSA is a game. Both of their rules penalize shooting no shoots so I avoid them. Sometimes I hit them, then I figure out what I need to do to go faster and not him then.

I don't beat myself over it nor to do I beat others over the head with self righteousness when they do. Because game.

Believe it or not most people can separate game from reality and know that's really baaaaaad to shot some who shouldn't be shot IRL.

johncorey
09-23-2015, 09:03 PM
It's a game, just like USPSA is a game. Both of their rules penalize shooting no shoots so I avoid them. Sometimes I hit them, then I figure out what I need to do to go faster and not him then.

I don't beat myself over it nor to do I beat others over the head with self righteousness when they do. Because game.

Believe it or not most people can separate game from reality and know that's really baaaaaad to shot some who shouldn't be shot IRL.


My post was to illuminate the hypocrisy between considering one post, yet not the other as 'drama'. As for differentiating between a cardboard no shoot, and a fleshy no shoot, that's not how I was raised. It's just simply not my reality. If a dude drills a no shoot in training, the follow on hot wash is "I royally Fd up, here's why/how I royally Fd up, and I will never royally F up again." If that dude tried to justify with "well, you see, this is just make belief, but I got this no problem when we're on the clock", it would result in a pretty expedient dismissal. So the mental separation between "game and real life" in this matter is not real. Either you are a virgin or you are not. The reality is that shooting someone/something who/which is not supposed to be shot, is about 10% actual trigger work, and 90% simply not paying enough attention.

Talionis
09-23-2015, 09:13 PM
YVK touched on this and I agree; I think there seems to be a disconnect between the idea that non-threat targets are somehow something to be ID'd and avoided while shooting a scenario, and the idea that a non-threat target is basically a high stakes penalty zone used to obscure the real target.

I don't recall seeing anyone actually peg a non-threat target because they had mistaken it for a regular target, but I have seen essentially everyone hit a non-threat because of poor shooting. Since most new competitors also happen to be poor shooters, giving them a handy DQ at their first few matches might not be the best idea.

Talionis
09-23-2015, 09:23 PM
My post was to illuminate the hypocrisy between considering one post, yet not the other as 'drama'. As for differentiating between a cardboard no shoot, and a fleshy no shoot, that's not how I was raised. It's just simply not my reality. If a dude drills a no shoot in training, the follow on hot wash is "I royally Fd up, here's why/how I royally Fd up, and I will never royally F up again." If that dude tried to justify with "well, you see, this is just make belief, but I got this no problem when we're on the clock", it would result in a pretty expedient dismissal. So the mental separation between "game and real life" in this matter is not real. Either you are a virgin or you are not. The reality is that shooting someone/something who/which is not supposed to be shot, is about 10% actual trigger work, and 90% simply not paying enough attention.

Ah, ok. We have very different purposes in shooting competitions, I can dig it. Mine is just to push myself to get better at shooting, and to have fun. I choose to engage in training for tactics and self-defense in contexts other than weekend competitions. Speaking only for myself, having hit my share of no-shoots and non-threats, it has not made me more likely to do so should I need to defend myself for real. In fact, the skills I have gained in competition (two of which are what many would consider extreme speed and a high level of accuracy) would very likely stand me in good stead in that very unlikely event.

I appreciate that you may live in a different reality which may require you to put yourself in harms way regularly, and where the increased exposure to potential mistakes is best mitigated by an extreme focus on never making a technical mistake at the expense of speed.

Alpha Sierra
09-23-2015, 09:27 PM
My post was to illuminate the hypocrisy between considering one post, yet not the other as 'drama'. As for differentiating between a cardboard no shoot, and a fleshy no shoot, that's not how I was raised. It's just simply not my reality. If a dude drills a no shoot in training, the follow on hot wash is "I royally Fd up, here's why/how I royally Fd up, and I will never royally F up again." If that dude tried to justify with "well, you see, this is just make belief, but I got this no problem when we're on the clock", it would result in a pretty expedient dismissal. So the mental separation between "game and real life" in this matter is not real. Either you are a virgin or you are not. The reality is that shooting someone/something who/which is not supposed to be shot, is about 10% actual trigger work, and 90% simply not paying enough attention.

I don't think you and I are even on the same planet, to be completely honest. Cause I don't know what the F you're talking about.

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 09:33 PM
Assessing large penalties for hitting no shoot targets is really just another way of tweaking the hit factor towards accuracy. I have yet to see a single shooter handle no shoot targets in any IDPA or USPSA match in a manner that would be acceptable to me if I was the good guy down range. It is not tactical when a timer is involved.
Isn't the pressure of time a factor in a real gunfighr? Don't we practice tactics under the pressure of time?...
Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

cclaxton
09-23-2015, 09:34 PM
Setting game vs training vs realism argument aside..

Despite a complete practical uselessness of an NT marked with a pair of hands, a gun, a color scheme or whathaveyou, I've never failed to "discriminate" one. However, I've shot perhaps two or three non-shoots in my short competitive career either trying to push my speed, or taking a riskier shot, or both. After all, competition is also a testing ground that offers me a chance to tease out my capabilities and see what I can or can't do. My chance of repeating that mistake, whether games or something else, goes down with each error committed during such testing.
DQ for a NT shoot would completely take away a self-exploration and testing value of this sport. Screw that.
Agreed.
Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Mr_White
09-24-2015, 01:36 AM
I don't recall seeing anyone actually peg a non-threat target because they had mistaken it for a regular target, but I have seen essentially everyone hit a non-threat because of poor shooting.

Completely agree with your posts, especially this observation. Well said.

Peally
09-24-2015, 08:11 AM
Thinking about it last night it'd be interesting if there was a way to score people based on how they handled a situation (maybe FoF) that didn't involve arbitrary judges. You could dispense of all the pseudo competition-tactical stuff and just be a true defensive organization teaching people how to fight.

Sal Picante
09-24-2015, 08:32 AM
A few guys like Talionis and YVK have brought up really good points... I'll add that I think there is a huge benefit to learning how to play either game and learning how to make mistakes in a low(er) pressure situation. (I think that is part of any sport.)

Lest the thread drift too far and becoming muddied with the pros-cons of USPSA and IDPA, I think the original intent of IDPA was to weight stages to a low hit factor and make the scoring simple.
They've certainly succeeded in that.

I wonder, however, if the actual number of penalties shot by most "rank-and-file" folks will decrease or stay the same?

My guess? Raw stages times will be slower overall, however the number of penalties will actually stay the same...

cclaxton
09-24-2015, 08:40 AM
I don't recall seeing anyone actually peg a non-threat target because they had mistaken it for a regular target, but I have seen essentially everyone hit a non-threat because of poor shooting. Since most new competitors also happen to be poor shooters, giving them a handy DQ at their first few matches might not be the best idea.

I have seen mis-identification. On multiple occasions, and not just novice/marksman level. I designed a stage of three targets with one non-threat, all same height. There were three shooting positions all from cover. The farthest was 15 yards. The last/closest shooting position was at three yards. One guy put a perfect pair in the head of the non-threat because he was going too fast. He was an expert.

Another stage I designed revealed the head of the non-threat overlaying a threat target around cover. About 6 shooters nailed the head of the non-threat. The heads were separated by at least a foot.

I had another stage with moving non-threats which was shot as a blind stage. (Legal is IDPA) Sure enough, people nailed non-threats.

Target identication is a key part of IDPA. I would like to see a wider variety of threat and non-threat targets available and more blind stages.

It sure would be great to get part time stages back into IDPA.

Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Talionis
09-24-2015, 08:52 AM
Raw stages times will be slower overall, however the number of penalties will actually stay the same...

Fully agree. We both know that shooting slower doesn't guarantee better hits, and most people aren't good at shooting more carefully.

Talionis
09-24-2015, 09:03 AM
Target identication is a key part of IDPA. I would like to see a wider variety of threat and non-threat targets available and more blind stages.


Setting aside the general practicality of setting up blind stages regularly and actually keeping them blind; within IDPA (Or USPSA) in general target identification takes place during stage walkthrough for any shooter that has half an idea of what they are doing. It's part and parcel to any shooting game with a time element that to be competitive one must make the "shoot this, don't shoot that" decisions before ever actually stepping up to the line.

I certainly have no objection to an individual choosing not to look at a stage and essentially shooting blind, forcing themselves to make shoot/no-shoot decisions on the fly, but by their nature IDPA/USPSA are competitions, and shooting that way is not really competing.

Glenn E. Meyer
09-24-2015, 09:18 AM
Blind stages - perhaps at some high level organized match. At the local level, we all have to tape. So, how about that?

BN
09-24-2015, 09:25 AM
6.9.2
While blind stages are not allowed in IDPA, portions of a stage can have moveable non-threat
indicators to allow for a shooter to make a shoot/no shoot decision as part of the CoF. These targets must
be hidden from the view of the shooter prior to reaching the
shooting position where the shoot/no shoot
decision is made. In order to maintain a level playing field for all shooters, the first target and the last
target will not be eligible as non-threats

JAD
09-24-2015, 09:29 AM
Blind stages - perhaps at some high level organized match. At the local level, we all have to tape. So, how about that?
No word of a lie it's awkward. First shooter tapes his own hits, and tapes the hits of the second shooter. Second shooter hangs out and tapes the hits of the third, usw. It's good to have Timmy Tactical shoot first since he will be at a disadvantage, having not heard the number and cadence of shots of the other shooters. When I used to run these at the club level I would often have my fellow timmies throw shots downrange off the clock as they went through to try to mitigate that. The safety officers also shoot at an obvious advantage, which is difficult to mitigate.

It slows the match down gigantically. It is worth it at the club level; I would not do it for score at a major.

The funnest stages of competition I ever shot were at the Kansas City Indoor, created by Jim Hewins and Doug Smith (and a bunch of us youngsters). Blind, in the dark, on clothed McCaig poppers, about half of which were head only, and enough of which had no head plate that you couldn't cheat by just defaulting to the noggin.

johncorey
09-24-2015, 09:38 AM
The funnest stages of competition I ever shot were at the Kansas City Indoor, created by Jim Hewins and Doug Smith (and a bunch of us youngsters). Blind, in the dark, on clothed McCaig poppers, about half of which were head only, and enough of which had no head plate that you couldn't cheat by just defaulting to the noggin.

We still roll those out for our Christmas match. It's interesting to see guys keep dinging away at the head plate, and nothing happening.

JAD
09-24-2015, 09:41 AM
Ich schoss ihn, aber er hat nicht gefallen!

Peally
09-24-2015, 09:49 AM
I've only ever shot one truly blind stage (at a club match). It was definitely fun but it was near impossible to keep people from gaming it and figuring out where stuff was prior to shooting. Part of that could have been mitigated through controlling shooters sitting around watching, but for a club match it was no big deal. It's definitely a match choke point though.

cclaxton
09-24-2015, 09:49 AM
Setting aside the general practicality of setting up blind stages regularly and actually keeping them blind; within IDPA (Or USPSA) in general target identification takes place during stage walkthrough for any shooter that has half an idea of what they are doing. It's part and parcel to any shooting game with a time element that to be competitive one must make the "shoot this, don't shoot that" decisions before ever actually stepping up to the line.

I certainly have no objection to an individual choosing not to look at a stage and essentially shooting blind, forcing themselves to make shoot/no-shoot decisions on the fly, but by their nature IDPA/USPSA are competitions, and shooting that way is not really competing.
You need to try the shoothouse at Lewisberry, PA. It is definitely competing...competing on avoiding non-threats and threats with badges and hidden threats. Shooting is not just about time and accuracy, but about target identification, proper use of cover, target discovery, etc. "Didn't you think to check the closet?" (Bad guy in there).
Cody

Glenn E. Meyer
09-24-2015, 09:51 AM
At our local level - we can have 12 shooters on a squad. There can be 7 targets. Add up the time for having one person only tape. Forget it - for a weekend game.

We do the moving hands trick once in awhile, while the shooter looks the other way. Maybe, I don't care if I 'win' or if I'm training for Die Hard - Glenn's Adventure on the weekends. My bad. I probably won't go to the Nationals and do realistic stages that start in a bathtub.

cclaxton
09-24-2015, 09:51 AM
Blind stages - perhaps at some high level organized match. At the local level, we all have to tape. So, how about that?
The SO and the person who just shot tape the stage. Takes more time, but it works.
The designer of the stage runs the first SO, then each SO gets run by the previous SO, etc.
Cody

cclaxton
09-24-2015, 10:03 AM
Blind stage from WV State with moving non-threats.
Cody
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5sEME0ASXjWVFRHMEgxLU1zN1E/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5sEME0ASXjWVFRHMEgxLU1zN1E/view?usp=sharing

Alpha Sierra
09-24-2015, 10:08 AM
Cody's definition of shooting is not just about time and accuracy, but about target identification, proper use of cover, target discovery, etc.

Fixed it for you

cclaxton
09-24-2015, 10:24 AM
Fixed it for you
So you think that misquoting me is fixing anything?
I should have said "Defensive shooting is not just about...." But then again, we were talking IDPA and isn't that assumed?
Cody

johncorey
09-24-2015, 10:42 AM
Ich schoss ihn, aber er hat nicht gefallen!


Precisely.

Sal Picante
09-24-2015, 10:47 AM
The reason blind stages are no longer a thing:

http://www.wisconsinshooters.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=484

Ben trolling (with a point, tho) at his finest.

Mr_White
09-24-2015, 10:59 AM
Threat ID and assessment is hugely dependent on behavior.

"Assessing" cardboard targets generally requires making a shooting decision based solely on the Ability represented by the cardboard target, which is only one part of real threat ID and assessment.

Real people with empty hands may or may not be a deadly threat. Real people with a weapon in hand may or may not be a deadly threat. The all-important behavior that differentiates them is wholly absent in cardboard targets.

No matter whether it's determined by the color of the target, or something depicted on the target, I have a hard time getting very excited about a lack of realistic threat ID and assessment in competitive shooting. That's simply not something that it can provide.

Peally
09-24-2015, 11:07 AM
Been using the Wisconsin shooters site for forever to get all my match info scores and stages, and only now did I realize they have a forum.

But yeah blind stages suck for majors. A lot of stuff that sucks for majors is still fun for a club match though.





Also it's bizarre as hell seeing Ben's posts from that long ago. I know he has his roots in IDPA but it's still weirding me out. Also I love the drama in that thread.

Alpha Sierra
09-24-2015, 11:23 AM
So you think that misquoting me is fixing anything?
I should have said "Defensive shooting is not just about...." But then again, we were talking IDPA and isn't that assumed?
Cody

Jesus Christ, learn to have a sense of humor. The amount of butthurtness in this thread is approaching epic

Alpha Sierra
09-24-2015, 11:35 AM
Been using the Wisconsin shooters site for forever to get all my match info scores and stages, and only now did I realize they have a forum.

But yeah blind stages suck for majors. A lot of stuff that sucks for majors is still fun for a club match though.





Also it's bizarre as hell seeing Ben's posts from that long ago. I know he has his roots in IDPA but it's still weirding me out. Also I love the drama in that thread.

And this is why I let my membership expire and why I only shoot the very occasional IDPA-ish match......


On another note, I am constantly amazed by how "gamey" some shooters get at a match like this one. I'm not accusing any particular person here, so no one reading this should take this personally. I saw people doing everything they could just short of taking sight pictures, holstering their firearms in such a way as to make their draw that fraction of a second faster, using downloaded handloads that seemingly barely made the power floor for their division, etc. What is it about a sanctioned match that brings this out in people? There's no monetery reward for winning a division or class.

It seems to me that if a shooter has that big of a competitive streak, they'd be better off in IPSC/USPSA where that type of action is practically expected.

I don't think that anyone can argue that this sort of behavior falls within the purpose of IDPA:

"IDPA is a shooting sport that uses practical equipment including full charge service ammunition to solve simulated "real world" self-defense scenarios".

But the realist in me realizes that some people feel the need to push the letter of the rule as far as they can instead of sticking to the intent. All we can do as S.O.'s is call people out when they obviously break the rules, and try to minimize the opportunity for people to do so in the first place.

Sal Picante
09-24-2015, 11:36 AM
The amount of butthurtness in this thread is approaching epic

So are you saying you don't shoot much IDPA and aren't used to it?

cclaxton
09-24-2015, 11:52 AM
Threat ID and assessment is hugely dependent on behavior.

"Assessing" cardboard targets generally requires making a shooting decision based solely on the Ability represented by the cardboard target, which is only one part of real threat ID and assessment.

Real people with empty hands may or may not be a deadly threat. Real people with a weapon in hand may or may not be a deadly threat. The all-important behavior that differentiates them is wholly absent in cardboard targets.

No matter whether it's determined by the color of the target, or something depicted on the target, I have a hard time getting very excited about a lack of realistic threat ID and assessment in competitive shooting. That's simply not something that it can provide.
Agree cardboard targets are not like real humans with hands. BUT, if we are self-defense oriented, then wouldn't we want to train our mind to assess a target before engaging it? My view is that we are still training our subconscious to see a target and assess before pulling the trigger. The more we practice that, the more automatic it becomes, and the faster we can get at assessing a target. It doesn't matter whether we are looking at cardboard black hands or real hands, we are looking for *something* that identifies it as a non-threat. The reason I advocate to allow more non-threats is because I want to have stages that increase the number of shoot/no-shoot decisions they need to make to exercise and practice that so it does become automated. Then, the cognitive mind has more capacity to problem solve and better think through a situation.
Cody

cclaxton
09-24-2015, 11:58 AM
Jesus Christ, learn to have a sense of humor. The amount of butthurtness in this thread is approaching epic
If you are going to joke around, please do it without misquoting me. A man's word is something we should honor.
Cody

NEPAKevin
09-24-2015, 12:31 PM
Another way to put shoot/no-shoot identification into a stage is to have an array of appearing targets of equal priority which have the threat indicator changed between shooters. Someone makes a popper that triggers a disappearing flip target which I have seen at major matches tasked for this purpose.

Mr_White
09-24-2015, 12:51 PM
Agree cardboard targets are not like real humans with hands. BUT, if we are self-defense oriented, then wouldn't we want to train our mind to assess a target before engaging it?

Yes, but threat ID and assessment in competitive shooting is an inherent weakness of the activity that will need to be shored up by engaging in actual tactical training and practice that involves human behavior so that realistic threat ID and assessment may be practiced. Looking for hands/weapons, whether painted on the target, or real objects held in real hands, does not by itself constitute proper threat ID and assessment. It only comprises one part of it.


My view is that we are still training our subconscious to see a target and assess before pulling the trigger. The more we practice that, the more automatic it becomes, and the faster we can get at assessing a target. It doesn't matter whether we are looking at cardboard black hands or real hands, we are looking for *something* that identifies it as a non-threat. The reason I advocate to allow more non-threats is because I want to have stages that increase the number of shoot/no-shoot decisions they need to make to exercise and practice that so it does become automated. Then, the cognitive mind has more capacity to problem solve and better think through a situation.

I don't think that's going to cause a lot of shoot/no-shoot decisions. I think that mostly happens when people look at the stage before they shoot it. You can definitely make the technical shooting harder by including a bunch of no-shoots. I think it will have minimal or nonexistent impact on deciding whether to shoot or not.

Speaking on your terms directly to the point you are trying to make though: To the extent people may get faster at what you describe, they are going to get faster at looking for empty hands or a weapon, then engaging based solely on that - it won't be based on behavior since the targets don't have any. That is not getting faster at proper threat ID and assessment. That is getting faster at incomplete threat ID and assessment. It might be good if the inherent superficiality were completely obvious, like when you decide to shoot something based on the color of the cardboard. Color of the cardboard does not deceptively translate into a botched version of A-O-J. I don't think it's very wise to condition people to assess for A only, instead of A-O-J.

I don't really think it's that big a deal though, because I think people can tell the contextual difference between real life and a shooting competition. I just don't think threat ID and assessment occupies a very huge place of importance when it comes to live fire competitions. And ironically, an obsession with trying to make live fire competitions against cardboard and steel targets 'realistic', appears to detract from the very real benefits that competitive shooting can actually provide.

Confusing competition with training can be a real problem.

Alpha Sierra
09-24-2015, 02:33 PM
I think people can tell the contextual difference between real life and a shooting competition.
Not johncorey.....evidently

PPGMD
09-24-2015, 03:04 PM
I don't really think it's that big a deal though, because I think people can tell the contextual difference between real life and a shooting competition.

Caleb once said something to the effect of "The people who can't tell the difference between real life concealed carry and competition, shouldn't be doing either."

Chris Rhines
09-24-2015, 04:11 PM
Anyone can tell the difference. A lot of people refuse to.

HopetonBrown
09-24-2015, 05:02 PM
Sounds like I'm not taking IDPA seriously enough.

orionz06
09-24-2015, 05:15 PM
You need to empty your mind and let IDPA in. It's not a game, it's life. Respect the vest. Train IDPA today!

taadski
09-24-2015, 08:34 PM
You need to empty your mind and let IDPA in. It's not a game, it's life. Respect the vest. Train IDPA today!


It sounds like you're just scared Cody is gonna whoop up on ya on all the blind stages and then embarrass you by coaching you about your teacup grip in front of the squad.

Don't be so defensive.



































:cool:

Mitch
09-24-2015, 09:21 PM
Jesus Christ, learn to have a sense of humor. The amount of butthurtness in this thread is approaching epic


So are you saying you don't shoot much IDPA and aren't used to it?

I've never been to an IDPA match, is it really that bad? I'm sure it varies from club to club, but I don't think I could put up with that.

MGW
09-24-2015, 09:35 PM
I've shot a few matches. It isn't that bad unless you take yourself to seriously. It's a game. It's kinda fun. I shoot mostly indoor matches in the winter because it's better than freezing my ass off at the range by myself. I've actually met a few people that I enjoy talking to.

Edit to add I've shot one GSSF match so far. The GSSF match didn't suck but I like IDPA better. Plan on shooting a couple USPSA matches this winter for fun also.

Sent from my grey matter using telepathy.

PPGMD
09-24-2015, 09:54 PM
I've never been to an IDPA match, is it really that bad? I'm sure it varies from club to club, but I don't think I could put up with that.

It also varies squad to squad. When I was squaded with like minded gamers, it was fun.

But when squaded with a bunch of timmies, the day moved really really slowly.

YVK
09-24-2015, 11:14 PM
Anyone can tell the difference.

Sometimes I wonder if I could do it well enough if it wasn't for the ROs constantly orienting me to where I am at by yelling "Cooover!".

orionz06
09-24-2015, 11:17 PM
Sometimes I wonder if I could do it well enough if it wasn't for the ROs constantly orienting me to where I am at by yelling "Cooover!".

You're supposed to yell "COVERING" as you fire when they say that.

markp
09-25-2015, 12:02 AM
You're supposed to yell "COVERING" as you fire when they say that.

I am so using this next match^^

Alpha Sierra
09-25-2015, 04:04 AM
It also varies squad to squad. When I was squaded with like minded gamers, it was fun.

But when squaded with a bunch of timmies, the day moved really really slowly.

This

LittleLebowski
09-25-2015, 05:19 AM
I've never been to an IDPA match, is it really that bad? I'm sure it varies from club to club, but I don't think I could put up with that.

I need to try an IDPA match.

Alpha Sierra
09-25-2015, 07:01 AM
I need to try an IDPA match.

Don't try to go too fast

FTDFMR

LittleLebowski
09-25-2015, 07:20 AM
Don't try to go too fast

FTDFMR

I have a hard enough time going fast at USPSA matches :D

rob_s
09-25-2015, 07:39 AM
I've never been to an IDPA match, is it really that bad?
No, it isn't



I'm sure it varies from club to club,
yes, it does



but I don't think I could put up with that.
No, you shouldn't.



IDPA is the current whipping boy for the cool kids. It's neither that bad, nor that good, and if you give it a few years the pendulum will swing back the other way. It's just the cycle of the industry/hobby. Most people lose interest and move on before they ever witness the cycle.

That said, IDPA is full of people that do a disservice to the game (these are not sports) without even realizing it and/or with the best of intentions. Our own Cody is a great example of that, as I think that in his zeal he's dissuaded more people on this forum from ever trying IDPA than he has convinced them of its usefulness in turning them into death-dealing super-ninjas.

JAD
09-25-2015, 07:44 AM
As a person who was involved in idpa early and pretty heavily, and one who maintains his membership even though I haven't shot a match in 12 years, I agree strongly with Rob. I think to a degree that the irritating shill work we see is partially a product of the hypercritical attitude of the cool kids, so you all suck.

Peally
09-25-2015, 08:01 AM
You're supposed to yell "COVERING" as you fire when they say that.

That is beautiful.

Alpha Sierra
09-25-2015, 08:06 AM
As a person who was involved in idpa early and pretty heavily, and one who maintains his membership even though I haven't shot a match in 12 years, I agree strongly with Rob. I think to a degree that the irritating shill work we see is partially a product of the hypercritical attitude of the cool kids, so you all suck.

I gave IDPA its fair shake and its how I got started in handgun sports. I grew bored with being told how to do everything and tired of the subjectivity and dramatic variation in match officiating.

I tried USPSA and immediately saw much higher quality of officiating and much more stimulating shooting challenge. My switch was also helped along by the fact that in my area USPSA matches attract more people and consequently the caliber of the competition is greater.

USPSA level II matches around here (Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky) routinely fill to capacity with 250 - 350 shooters and end up with good sized wait lists. The 2014 OH IDPA state match had a whopping 136 shooters. That's what in my business is called a clue.

Sal Picante
09-25-2015, 08:21 AM
It's neither that bad, nor that good, and if you give it a few years the pendulum will swing back the other way. It's just the cycle of the industry/hobby.

I shot a lot of IDPA, got jaded by the lack of competition at the local/regional level, then really decided to hang it up with the flat footed reload stuff.

After a while, though, I missed the camaraderie of the guys at the club - good dudes that actually put on a great match. Sure I piss in their corn flakes a lot by shooting in a bathrobe and bunny slippers, a Hawaiian shirt, etc but it is fun. I feel like I can just relax a bit.

I think things really depend on the club/local scene...

rsa-otc
09-25-2015, 08:37 AM
I think things really depend on the club/local scene...

QTF

The clubs I shoot at have hardly any of the problems leveled at IDPA. Of course the one was started by and populated a LEO Trainers. And the second the match director is a LEO trainer and a high number of LEO participants. So they may have a different atmosphere compared to others.

Peally
09-25-2015, 08:52 AM
Pretty much nail on the head. I got started in IDPA and still shoot it to hang out. I shoot my USPSA to have a difficult challenge with heavy competition dropped on my lap.

IDPA is my social event, USPSA is where I get my improvement.

cclaxton
09-25-2015, 09:16 AM
Lots of replies, and I am trying to have a vacation Weekend in Virginia Beach at the Neptune Festival. I will shoot IDPA match today at Norfolk County Rifle Range in Chesapeake. Then, trying to ride bike, work out hard and see International Sandsculpting competition. Will post pics.

IDPA works to improve the oversight and the rules so that shooters will have a more consistent experience, and that is a process that takes time. We have some fresh area coordinators coming into the sport and we are working on continuing education to improve the sport. If you have not tried IDPA, then you should at least give it a chance.

IDPA is not trying to be tactical training, but the more shooters we introduce to action shooting, and use of cover, identifying targets, moving targets, various shooting positions, and a variety of distances, the more shooters that will become proficient at gun handling and action shooting and basic target identication. (Sure, more advanced training would be desireable with real humans to be fully proficient and fully prepared, but the average shooter doesnt have the time or the money for that. IDPA is at least a start. )The more we practice these skills, the more we automate these actions and decisions. And we all know that is better than practicing at a stall and thinking we can then defend ourselves with a pistol when it really matters. The more shooters in IDPA, the more that will eventually take tactical courses, learn the legal issues, take hand to hand courses, learn to use pepper spray, and be ready to act in a smart, legal, justified, and reasonable manner.

See everyone on Monday...enjoy your weekend.
Cody


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

GJM
09-25-2015, 09:24 AM
As a general rule, in USPSA it is permitted unless expressly forbidden, and in IDPA it is forbidden unless expressly permitted.

BN
09-25-2015, 09:35 AM
I think things really depend on the club/local scene...

Very much this. I hear about things happening and I can't imagine. This is in any sport, not just IDPA.

PPGMD
09-25-2015, 09:37 AM
As a general rule, in USPSA it is permitted unless expressly forbidden, and in IDPA it is forbidden unless expressly permitted or you are a sponsor.

FTFY

orionz06
09-25-2015, 09:50 AM
IDPA is not trying to be tactical training, but the more shooters we introduce to action shooting, and use of cover, identifying targets, moving targets, various shooting positions, and a variety of distances, the more shooters that will become proficient at gun handling and action shooting and basic target identication. (Sure, more advanced training would be desireable with real humans to be fully proficient and fully prepared, but the average shooter doesnt have the time or the money for that. IDPA is at least a start. )The more we practice these skills, the more we automate these actions and decisions. And we all know that is better than practicing at a stall and thinking we can then defend ourselves with a pistol when it really matters. The more shooters in IDPA, the more that will eventually take tactical courses, learn the legal issues, take hand to hand courses, learn to use pepper spray, and be ready to act in a smart, legal, justified, and reasonable manner.

See everyone on Monday...enjoy your weekend.
Cody


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

But you just said it was training... Standing near a barrel is not use of cover, no matter how many times you keep saying it.


IDPA can be a great game and it's far easier to make it casual than other games. The rule set is very easy to tweak and use as a basis for a renegade match. It could be much better but people seem to fight it.


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

Glenn E. Meyer
09-25-2015, 11:14 AM
The SO and the person who just shot tape the stage. Takes more time, but it works.

Time X 95 to 110 Degrees temperature. I'll go for getting the stage done with 12 shooters on a squad and then 5 stages. Thus, we try to hustle and I'll forgo my improvement of death dealing visual search skills for a class or two. I prefer not to heat stroke out (which I've seen).

Mr_White
09-25-2015, 01:58 PM
I don't find people's critical attitudes toward IDPA very surprising. They do a lot of stuff that pisses people off. They reap what they sow. It's really that simple. Same for every shooting organization. People talk about what they don't like about USPSA too.

Chris Rhines
09-25-2015, 02:01 PM
I don't find people's critical attitudes toward IDPA very surprising. They do a lot of stuff that pisses people off. They reap what they sow. It's really that simple. Same for every shooting organization. People talk about what they don't like about USPSA too.
Not 3-gun, though. 3-gun is perfect in every way. :D

Mr_White
09-25-2015, 02:08 PM
Not 3-gun, though. 3-gun is perfect in every way. :D

Heh, I have some criticisms of USPSA. But not enough to make me not do it.

Peally
09-25-2015, 02:27 PM
USPSA is largely administrative problems, thankfully. They suck but at the club level they aren't noticed as badly. That being said people that pay attention are pretty damn critical of them.

3-Gun is lame, that's 3-gun's problem :D

PPGMD
09-25-2015, 02:48 PM
I don't find people's critical attitudes toward IDPA very surprising. They do a lot of stuff that pisses people off. They reap what they sow. It's really that simple. Same for every shooting organization. People talk about what they don't like about USPSA too.

I think the fact that USPSA has elections changes where blame is placed for HQ actions. Instead of going fuck USPSA, I say fuck Phil Strader and the ED.

While due to the fact that the members have no say in IDPA, and were in fact told "If you don't like our rules leave," when a person has an issue with IDPA, it is fuck IDPA.

Mr_White
09-25-2015, 03:17 PM
I think the fact that USPSA has elections changes where blame is placed for HQ actions. Instead of going fuck USPSA, I say fuck Phil Strader and the ED.

While due to the fact that the members have no say in IDPA, and were in fact told "If you don't like our rules leave," when a person has an issue with IDPA, it is fuck IDPA.

Totally agree...

Here's the way I phrase it for myself:

I would have tried IDPA, but my personal priority is to have fun by trying to cultivate a high level of technical skill with the gear I really carry, the way I really carry it. That's how I like to do it. Since that's prohibited for me in IDPA, I shoot where it's allowed (USPSA.)

Then, a bunch of people asked for appendix carry to be allowed in IDPA. They responded by fortifying the rules to even more forcefully prohibit AIWB, including at the club level and for shooting without score. And released a statement telling us they didn't care if people who didn't like the rules went elsewhere; they'd still be there when we wanted to come back.

So let me reflect their statement on the matter when I say: I want to have fun by using the power of competition to force improvement of my technical skills, using what I really carry the way I really carry it. I cannot be a participant in every shooting organization. So, I'll take IDPA up on its offer to go somewhere else, and while IDPA is busy being stuck in the past and discouraging innovation, I'll be over here in USPSA, shooting my carry gear from concealment, and encouraging every defensive handgun shooter I can to join that organization. I've brought many in already. I'll still be here and I'll welcome IDPA when it is ready to renounce its nonproductive prohibitions and give up misguided notions that cause the perpetual confusion of competition and training.

It's hard not to be critical of an organization that thinks I am going to sign the kind of garbage posted below. Lol at 'PAINS AND PENALTIES OF PERJURY'! Who the hell do they think they are?



IDPA Indoor Nationals Match Participant Code of Conduct

1. I will follow all of the safety rules of IDPA and Smith & Wesson.

2. I will follow all commands and instructions of the Match Director, Safety Officers, and any official representative of Smith & Wesson.

3. I have read and will abide by the rules in the current IDPA rulebook.

4. Prior to and during the match, I will refrain from the use of alcohol, substances, or medications that may negatively impact my ability to participate safely in the match or that may impact the safety of other match participants or bystanders.

5. I will not communicate with others in a threatening, harassing or abusive manner, and will not engage in the use of off-color remarks and jokes or profanity during the course of my participation in the match. I will not physically touch another person participating in an IDPA event without their consent unless it is necessary to address an immediate safety issue.

6. I will treat all match participants with respect. I will not participate in any discriminatory actions or behavior against others for any reason, including, but not limited to, their IDPA classification, shooting abilities, race, sex, religion, age, disability or national origin.

7. I will represent my sport in a professional manner through my behavior and dress, in accordance with the standards established by the Match Director and Smith & Wesson.

8. I will refrain from disparagement or inappropriate criticism of IDPA or other shooting sports, their officials, and rules of match competition.

9. I will always be a champion for IDPA and promote IDPA in the best light possible.

10. I understand that the failure to follow this Code of Conduct or any other commands or instructions of the Match Director, any Safety Officers, or any official representative of Smith & Wesson may result in my disqualification or exclusion from participation in the IDPA Indoor Nationals at the sole discretion of Smith & Wesson, and may also result in the revocation of my IDPA membership.



SIGNED UNDER THE PAINS AND PENALTIES OF PERJURY THIS ____ day of February, 2014.

Signature: __________________________________
Printed Name: _______________________________
Witness: ___________________________________

Peally
09-25-2015, 03:27 PM
Smith & Wesson has individual safety rules?

With all the ass pinching (throws them off their game bro, no homo), stealth pasting people on the back, ribbing, and complaining about IDPA my regular squads would be the anti-christ of that match.

Mr_White
09-25-2015, 03:44 PM
Smith & Wesson has individual safety rules?

With all the ass pinching (throws them off their game bro, no homo), stealth pasting people on the back, ribbing, and complaining about IDPA my regular squads would be the anti-christ of that match.

Then your squad would suffer THE PAINS AND PENALTIES OF PERJURY! Anyone know what those are? Because I'm not sure, unless they mean they are going to put us in jail.

Alpha Sierra
09-25-2015, 04:53 PM
Then your squad would suffer THE PAINS AND PENALTIES OF PERJURY! Anyone know what those are?

Constipation, most likely

Alpha Sierra
09-25-2015, 04:56 PM
I think the fact that USPSA has elections changes where blame is placed for HQ actions. Instead of going fuck USPSA, I say fuck Phil Strader and the ED.

While due to the fact that the members have no say in IDPA, and were in fact told "If you don't like our rules leave," when a person has an issue with IDPA, it is fuck IDPA.

I know, right?

rob_s
09-25-2015, 07:38 PM
It's hard not to be critical of an organization that thinks I am going to sign the kind of garbage posted below.

Especially when one is going around looking for excuses to be critical.

Alpha Sierra
09-25-2015, 08:09 PM
Especially when one is going around looking for excuses to be critical.

Say what? There's plenty to be critical about USPSA too.

But here's the difference

In USPSA we tell the management to FOAD and we get new management. Because membership

In IDPA, management tell shooters to FOAD (you can go somewhere else if you don't like our rules). Because customers.

Mr_White
09-25-2015, 08:33 PM
Especially when one is going around looking for excuses to be critical.

Definitely so. And I only named a couple of things that I personally really dislike. There are many more complaints that can be made than just those.

If I sound resentful of IDPA's ironic rules against AIWB, it's because I am. :D

Clusterfrack
09-25-2015, 09:23 PM
8. I will refrain from disparagement or inappropriate criticism of IDPA or other shooting sports, their officials, and rules of match competition.

9. I will always be a champion for IDPA and promote IDPA in the best light possible.

... these pretty much rule out everyone I know.

cclaxton
09-26-2015, 10:51 AM
I think the fact that USPSA has elections changes where blame is placed for HQ actions. Instead of going fuck USPSA, I say fuck Phil Strader and the ED.

While due to the fact that the members have no say in IDPA, and were in fact told "If you don't like our rules leave," when a person has an issue with IDPA, it is fuck IDPA.
Members do have a say, but they don't have the FINAL say.

There are lots of people who carry appendix and shoot IDPA without complaining and see the benefit and value of IDPA. you only draw once in a COF.

Until you have actually shot IDPA a few times and given IDPA a chance, your opinion on this matter is questionable.

IDPA views members as customers, and they try to keep them satisfied but not everyone wants to be a happy customer. Pay it forward, or you get out what you put into it.

Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

orionz06
09-26-2015, 11:04 AM
You get out of it what you put into it so long as what you expect out of it is actually realistically possible. THAT is where vestites continue to push people away.


Show up, put on your competition specific holster, competition specific mag pouch, competition specific super hero cape, and shoot 120 rounds in 4 hours.

nwhpfan
09-26-2015, 11:08 AM
I just wanted to add about -1 going from .5 seconds to 1 second. To me, that would change the sport immensely!

I shot a NRA Tactical Police Competition once. TPC is essentially 3 gun with very much IDPA similar rules. And -1 is 1 second. I was B class in USPSA at that time and I won by division! I couldn't believe it; I went so slooowwwww too just by gaming the points system.

I would agree that -1 = 1 second on the IDPA Classifier may more accurately reflect higher skilled "Master" shooters though...

GJM
09-26-2015, 12:31 PM
At the end of the day, I don't care how they score hits. IDPA is a game, and whatever the rules are, that is what you do to play the game.

TGO does a great demo, shooting the same array with a range of scoring methods, ranging from any hit counts, to USPSA, to IDPA, to only A/-0 counts, to anything out of the A is s DQ. Good shooters figure out the game, and set the speedometer accordingly.

Glenn E. Meyer
09-26-2015, 01:54 PM
5. I will not communicate with others in a threatening, harassing or abusive manner, and will not engage in the use of off-color remarks and jokes or profanity during the course of my participation in the match. I will not physically touch another person participating in an IDPA event without their consent unless it is necessary to address an immediate safety issue.

Oh, I guess I should get a Failure Not to Say Lurid Things penalty at most matches. I think when my 1911 jammed a couple of matches ago when I was having a good day - I might have yelled something like "Intercourse, Coitus, offspring of female dog" a few times. I find that such utterances intimidate the jammed round to leap out of the ejection port to aid in clearing.

PPGMD
09-26-2015, 02:35 PM
Members do have a say, but they don't have the FINAL say.

There are lots of people who carry appendix and shoot IDPA without complaining and see the benefit and value of IDPA. you only draw once in a COF.

Until you have actually shot IDPA a few times and given IDPA a chance, your opinion on this matter is questionable.

IDPA views members as customers, and they try to keep them satisfied but not everyone wants to be a happy customer. Pay it forward, or you get out what you put into it.

If there are no elections the members have NO say except with their wallets. The only thing that the IDPA board listens to is MONEY, either a sponsor complains, or enough members quit.

And who says I haven't shot IDPA? Because if you do, you obviously haven't read any of my posts. I have the vest, complete with the patches from the clubs I shot, I have the membership cards, complete with classifications. I've shot major matches.

I am not current because Joyce was pretty clear, if I didn't like the changes I could GTFO.

BigT
09-26-2015, 03:01 PM
Members do have a say, but they don't have the FINAL say.

There are lots of people who carry appendix and shoot IDPA without complaining and see the benefit and value of IDPA. you only draw once in a COF.

Until you have actually shot IDPA a few times and given IDPA a chance, your opinion on this matter is questionable.

IDPA views members as customers, and they try to keep them satisfied but not everyone wants to be a happy customer. Pay it forward, or you get out what you put into it.

Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk



Ive been doing it a little over ten years as I recall. May I have an opinion yet?

Does wanting to be a happy customer translate into appreciating what the benevolent overlords choose for you and being grateful for it? Because dude, that's how your posts read.

Im one of those weirdos who finds it ironic in a game that is apparently uber defensive in nature , I drive to the range , take off my actual carry gear, and them put on gear I will never ever carry to play. I'm not averse to using range specific gear at all , just that I find it peculiar when something pretends to be what it isn't, and the defenders refuse to consider any possible debate on the topic.

cclaxton
09-26-2015, 06:59 PM
You get out of it what you put into it so long as what you expect out of it is actually realistically possible. THAT is where vestites continue to push people away.


Show up, put on your competition specific holster, competition specific mag pouch, competition specific super hero cape, and shoot 120 rounds in 4 hours.

You mean like how USPSA walks on with their carry gear and shoots?....that is a ridiculous straw man argument.

Anyone in IDPA can walk on and shoot their carry gear....well in USPSA you probably need an extra mag pouch or two.

Just because participants want to compete with a larger gun doesn't eliminate the defensive nature of using cover without a shooting box, using concealment, shooting in tactical priority, moving required while shooting, etc.

At every match I host I find a few purists who actually do use their carry gun. I use a slightly larger version. Of my carry gun...same CZ platform.

Besides, we all know it isn't the gun....it's the skill that wins matches.

Again, it's not tactical training but it is basic training that reinforces good tactics and pistol handling and shooting skills. It is a helluva lot better than standing in a stall and shooting targets and then thinking you can defend yourself effectively.

And, getting more people involved in IDPA or USPSA advances pistol skills and gun rights.

Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

orionz06
09-26-2015, 07:27 PM
It's not USDSA is it?




Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

BigT
09-27-2015, 12:44 AM
You mean like how USPSA walks on with their carry gear and shoots?....that is a ridiculous straw man argument.

Anyone in IDPA can walk on and shoot their carry gear....well in USPSA you probably need an extra mag pouch or two.

Just because participants want to compete with a larger gun doesn't eliminate the defensive nature of using cover without a shooting box, using concealment, shooting in tactical priority, moving required while shooting, etc.

At every match I host I find a few purists who actually do use their carry gun. I use a slightly larger version. Of my carry gun...same CZ platform.

Besides, we all know it isn't the gun....it's the skill that wins matches.

Again, it's not tactical training but it is basic training that reinforces good tactics and pistol handling and shooting skills. It is a helluva lot better than standing in a stall and shooting targets and then thinking you can defend yourself effectively.

And, getting more people involved in IDPA or USPSA advances pistol skills and gun rights.

Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


But I can't walk in and use my carry gear. Because it's specifically disallowed. Even though it's suitable enough for everyday carry that I , use it for every day carry. I can't use my everyday carry gear for IPSC either, but it doesn't pretend to be realistic in any way.


It also doesn't eliminate the defensive bad idea of retreating to cover when shooting back right frikken now is the better tactic. It doesn't eliminate the fact that cover(well magic bullet defeating barrels) seem a lot more available in idpa matches than they do in my day to day life. Or that it teaches you that anything you can't see is bullet defeating. Etc etc.


The the whole it's not the gun it's the skill thing only goes so far. As an extreme and silly example Vogel with a LC9 ain't winning the Worlds. Even though he's a shooting machine , the right gear does make a difference. And if it didn't I doubt Robert would've given us the advice in gear set up that he did. Down to the finest detail.

Idpa can can be a fun sport. And if that's all the true believers argued it would be hard to argue back. But as soon as you start using the word training you destroy your argument. No competition is training. Competition is a great environment to test your ability to apply a particular skill set under conditions over which you have no control. But that's not training.

HopetonBrown
09-27-2015, 02:44 AM
But I can't walk in and use my carry gear. Because it's specifically disallowed.

If you carried in a shoulder holster would you whine about USPSA allowing it? It's a game. Like golf with a gun. Not training. Have fun. Quit complaining.

LittleLebowski
09-27-2015, 07:45 AM
You mean like how USPSA walks on with their carry gear and shoots?....that is a ridiculous straw man argument.


I do. punkey71 does as well as Mr White and JMS. No silly vests bought for the sole purpose of gaming"training."

I even helped put Mr White's experience to a blog post regarding actually competing with his carry gear: http://rationalgun.blogspot.com/2014/03/uspsa-as-competitive-environment-for.html

_JD_
09-27-2015, 09:04 AM
As for the points down/ time. I'm OK with the change. The guys that win will still win and the guys at the bottom will stay at the bottom. Locally there might be a little shuffle in the 3rd-6th slots and the rest of the middle of the pack but I don't see it as a big issue.

Honestly I see it more as lip service regarding a focus on accuracy than an actual focus on accuracy.

A lot of the commentary in this thread re: no shoots and misses pretty much proves that point.

orionz06
09-27-2015, 10:53 AM
If you carried in a shoulder holster would you whine about USPSA allowing it? It's a game. Like golf with a gun. Not training. Have fun. Quit complaining.

USPSA doesn't pretend to be defensive...

Peally
09-27-2015, 11:31 AM
I shoot USPSA with my carry gear (albeit without concealment unless the weather is terrible). I'd like to point out that "gamer" gear is largely irrelevant (at least in production) until you hit the Master/GM levels. If you're competent with decent carry gear it's entirely possible to be beating guys using open race guns with compensators and optics.

_JD_
09-27-2015, 11:57 AM
Members do have a say, but they don't have the FINAL say.

There are lots of people who carry appendix and shoot IDPA without complaining and see the benefit and value of IDPA. you only draw once in a COF.

Until you have actually shot IDPA a few times and given IDPA a chance, your opinion on this matter is questionable.

IDPA views members as customers, and they try to keep them satisfied but not everyone wants to be a happy customer. Pay it forward, or you get out what you put into it.

Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
You know where else you only get to draw once? A gun fight ;)

The guys that want to run AIWB aren't typically trying to win competitions. They are trying to get more reps with their carry gear in a varying environment / start conditions that you don't aways get couple with a live fire fire environment.

One draw to 1st shot is pretty damn important in the big scheme of things.

BigT
09-27-2015, 01:37 PM
If you carried in a shoulder holster would you whine about USPSA allowing it? It's a game. Like golf with a gun. Not training. Have fun. Quit complaining.


If you read the post I was quoting you would notice the bit about how "anyone in IDPA can walk in and shoot their carry gear" which I was responding to. Because it's not true.

My entire post was in response to codys. That context makes your other comments confusing to me. Because I said the same thing.

Ps my IPSC (not USPSA) gear doesn't resemble my carry gear in the slightest. I don't give a shit. But I don't pretend it does either.

NEPAKevin
09-27-2015, 09:22 PM
USPSA doesn't pretend to be defensive...

Or International. It does, however, cling to that practical moniker.

orionz06
09-27-2015, 09:24 PM
Or International. It does, however, cling to that practical moniker.

And does it miss the mark?


prac·ti·cal
ˈpraktək(ə)l/
adjective
1.
of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas.

Alpha Sierra
09-27-2015, 09:33 PM
Or International. It does, however, cling to that practical moniker.

Newsflash: there is nothing practical about the contrived rules and scenarios that are IDPA

BN
09-28-2015, 06:06 AM
We shot a club match yesterday that used one second per point scoring. My wife and I both shot at our normal speed. It used scenario stages similar to what you might see at an IDPA match but different. I made up a down 1 and should have made up a couple more. ;)

I have shot 1 second per point before doing drills with a group, but I think this my first match. Take aways are: I think it would be advantageous to scan targets after shooting and make up shots. I made up a down 1 while moving through the open. Good thing this wasn't an IDPA match. ;)

I might try shooting a .45 with semi wad cutters so I can see the holes better.

I don't think this will have much impact if IDPA starts using this. They have a bunch of other stuff that should be fixed before they do this.

NEPAKevin
09-28-2015, 11:23 AM
And does it miss the mark?


prac·ti·cal
ˈpraktək(ə)l/
adjective
1.
of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas.





Newsflash: there is nothing practical about the contrived rules and scenarios that are IDPA

Relaaaaaax. No need to get all Defensive. :)

Glenn E. Meyer
09-28-2015, 11:43 AM
In my last IDPA match (where I met distinguished P-F members!) - my squad had an adorable 9 year old girl. She shot a 22LR M&P. The SOs were very helpful and instructive. While not fast, she had reasonable accuracy on complicated stages. Thus, some groups are nice to beginners. One guy shot a G43 - not that I'm a superstar (haha) but I shot a G42 better the match before.

Mr_White
09-28-2015, 12:28 PM
Until you have actually shot IDPA a few times and given IDPA a chance, your opinion on this matter is questionable.

I think pretty much everyone's opinion on any matter is questionable. I am not special! ;)


There are lots of people who carry appendix and shoot IDPA without complaining and see the benefit and value of IDPA. you only draw once in a COF.

Sure. People compete for all kinds of reasons. I have no issue with anyone who shoots IDPA or USPSA the way they want. Lots of people use competition-specific gear for both those games, some of which has very little commonality with what they actually carry and how they carry it, some of which has a lot of commonality but is not 1:1, and a few people use gear that is 1:1 or extremely close to it. Those are all great and I have no quarrel with the people who do any of it. All those routes do have value and that's other people's business and their own decision to make for themselves. For someone whose core motivation is to get as sharp as possible with their carry gear, they will be best served by using their actual carry gear, or as close as allowed under the rules. That's the decision I make for myself.

No shooter is ever going to hear a word of criticism from me over the gear they choose to compete with. And I honestly don't think those criticisms silently either. Their gear is none of my business, and I truly don't care if people like driving race cars. They are actually doing me a great service by setting a high bar for me to compete against, which is only to my benefit. What's even better is that dynamic plays out even at the local level. I don't have to go to a big match to get my ass kicked - I can get my ass kicked by Open shooters at a local match any time I want! Every USPSA match has a high level of competition for me to try to overcome.

The stance I take with the organizations themselves, is very different.

On one hand, you have USPSA, which does not currently purport to be explicitly defensive in nature, makes no attempt to enforce its vision of correct tactics, and has a widely inclusive rules structure that allows many different handguns, accessories, and modifications. Lights, lasers, MRDS, stippling, AIWB, are all allowed somewhere in USPSA. So there is no criticism for me to make that the organization isn't defensive enough or requires cookie cutter tactics. That's not what they say they are about, and I am free to use "tactics" in USPSA if I want to do that. They are also immune to the criticism of requiring unrealistic equipment, because my real equipment is welcome in USPSA.

On the other hand, you have IDPA, which does purport to be defensive in nature and to simulate self-defense scenarios and real life encounters, using practical gear and practical guns. They say "competition-only" equipment is not permitted. They assert a certain vision of tactics through the rules.

But for me to shoot IDPA, I would factually have to use equipment that is unrealistic for me. And I'm personally committed to using my actual carry gear for competitive shooting. I am a bigger Timmy than IDPA itself.

A point I have tried to make in a number of discussions here is that all training and related activities are unrealistic in most ways. You can make one or a few aspects realistic, but everything else will generally be bogus. And so it is with action pistol competitions like IDPA and USPSA. Tactics and the dynamics between opposing wills driving living breathing bodies that move and maneuver, are all quite unrealistic and have little bearing on real life. What is realistic is the technical use of the handgun integrated with movement, across a range of shooting problems. Because one is actually using a real handgun, really handling and shooting it, while really moving around and addressing lots of different shooting problems.

IDPA foolishly focuses on the elements of competition that will be inherently unrealistic. USPSA wisely focuses on the elements of competition that will be very realistic (if a competitor chooses to use gear relevant to the rest of their life, if that is something they care to do.) Those are also the elements of competition that are most objectively measurable and conducive to one of the biggest benefits - which is to have a difficult and fairly administered competition populated by many highly skilled participants.

The ironic cherry-on-top with IDPA is that I cannot compete as I carry in a game that purports to be about exactly that. I'm not even allowed a place at the table. I cannot shoot at a disadvantage in a tougher division, nor can I shoot without score at the local level. How committed are they really, to the use of 'practical gear and practical guns', and disallowing 'competition-only' equipment, when many shooters' very reasonable, actual, factual, equipment is excluded under the rules, while so many shooters do use competition-exclusive guns, holsters, and concealment? Doesn't that put IDPA on a similar level as USPSA with all its race gear, except without being honest about it?

Bottom line is that I want to compete as I carry. I can do that in USPSA and I can't do that in IDPA. USPSA gets a pass on a lot of this stuff because it doesn't take a high-minded tactical position and wag its finger at people. IDPA does not get a pass, because that's exactly what it does.


Anyone in IDPA can walk on and shoot their carry gear

That's simply not true.


You mean like how USPSA walks on with their carry gear and shoots?

What's funny there, is that a wider range of carry gear in allowed in USPSA than in IDPA.


getting more people involved in IDPA or USPSA advances pistol skills and gun rights.

Totally agree.


If you carried in a shoulder holster would you whine about USPSA allowing it?

There is no equivalency between AIWB and a shoulder holster, or for that matter, pocket or ankle carry, all of which get brought up from time to time in this discussion.

There are articulable factors that make shoulder, pocket, and ankle carry substantially different from an AIWB or strong side belt-mounted holster. Shoulder holsters have muzzle direction issues. Pocket holsters usually require two hands and transferring the gun and holster from hand to hand in order to get the gun holstered and in the pocket. Ankle holsters require a substantial change in posture to draw from. AIWB is extremely similar to strong side holsters when it comes to administrating a shooting competition.

cclaxton
09-29-2015, 08:39 AM
I don't think this will have much impact if IDPA starts using this. They have a bunch of other stuff that should be fixed before they do this.
This is my opinion as well. I would like to see the equipment rules simplified, and increased number of non-threats allowed, increased movement distances allowed, and more variety of targets allowed (i.e.- different non-threat images, pictures staple on targets, different colors to vary target engagement, etc.).

I am also a supporter of AIWB but only after taking and passing an AIWB qualifications course and test.
Cody

Glenn E. Meyer
09-29-2015, 09:09 AM
Interesting comment on the Ruger TV show last night about IDPA. The host says to the Ruger employee that was demonstrating IDPA procedures that IDPA is 'training'. The employee hedges and says that some see it like that but for others it's a competition. Why do I watch those silly shows? Fear the Walking Dead though was quite realistic training about zombie invasions. :rolleyes:

Jim Watson
09-29-2015, 12:14 PM
We shot a club match yesterday that used one second per point scoring.

I think it would be advantageous to scan targets after shooting and make up shots.
I might try shooting a .45 with semi wad cutters so I can see the holes better.



Too many people do this already. I consider it bad practice and try to call my shot and move along. I am already old and fat and slow enough that I don't need to hang around scoring my target on the clock.

PPGMD
09-29-2015, 12:20 PM
Well it is officially announced here, so the past swipe that this was a rumor made to smear the sport was uncalled for.

http://www.multibriefs.com/briefs/idpa/idpa092915.php


Last week at the World Championship awards banquet, I announced that the IDPA Board of Directors has elected to increase the Point Down penalty from a half second to 1 second. The BoD is comprised of two MA shooters (both Founders of the sport) and one EX with a combined total of more than 57 years of IDPA experience. (Ed note - who probably don't even shoot the sport anymore) This decision was made to keep the sport aligned with the founder's intent of valuing accuracy over speed. As concealed carry holders, which many of our members are, we are responsible for every round that leaves our gun, and IDPA needs to reflect that in our practices. I met with some of the Area Coordinators recently to share this information and the feedback received from them was very positive. There is no hard timetable for this change. Classification scores and other areas will need to reflect the change, and we are already working with some of our scoring vendors on this change. More information will be available as the work progresses and we will make updates on this via the Tactical Journal and Tactical Brief.

Accountable for every round, LOL. If they increased the penalty for a complete miss, and made everything Limited Vickers, that could achieve it. But this hardly achieves the "ideals" that that shooters are responsible for every round that leaves the gun.

Peally
09-29-2015, 12:25 PM
Sweeeet fixing what ain't broke and leaving the currently burning parts aflame. Nice work IDPA.

orionz06
09-29-2015, 12:29 PM
Is it really that? They've merely skewed things a little and make math a smidge easier.


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

Peally
09-29-2015, 01:00 PM
Fixing something that isn't broke? I'd say so. No one I've ever met ever has even hinted that the scoring system needs to change. That's not why people are quitting the sport.

All this is in my eyes is a company wasting time and resources on pointless endeavors when there's enough legitimate complaints about IDPA to fill Lake Superior.

Alpha Sierra
09-29-2015, 04:11 PM
I look forward to more dynamic shooters crossing over to our ranks

Sal Picante
09-29-2015, 04:13 PM
I look forward to more dynamic shooters crossing over to our ranks

Ugh... We're already at capacity up here near Chicago...

cclaxton
09-29-2015, 05:01 PM
So, it's official they want to change the points system, but there is no timeline.
For me, that means I won't spend time on it until it happens.

It's not going to affect the value to us as shooters: use of cover, use of concealment, shooting in tactical priority, reloading behind cover (or not when allowed), and target identification, shooting on the move, fun scenarios, etc. For $15-30 a novice shooter can quickly develop their safety protocols, pistol handling, their shooting skills, reloading, some fundamental tactics, and have fun doing it a their local clubs and sanctioned events.

As match director I do my best to create self-defense scenarios that make sense and allow shooters to practice and perform under stress of the clock. I will also continue to shoot USPSA as it allows me to push myself on speed and enjoy shooting tips from my fellow squad members. In fact I will be at Fredericksburg PS this coming Sunday.

If you have not tried IDPA, please feel free to PM me and I can help you get started.
My next matches are Tue, Oct 13 at the NRA Range, and
Sat, Oct 17 at Thurmont, MD.

To detractors, you are always welcome...but you won't find me saying bad stuff about other shooting sports.

Cody

Jim Watson
09-29-2015, 05:30 PM
So, it's official they want to change the points system, but there is no timeline. For me, that means I won't spend time on it until it happens.

Yup, that's the official way to handle it.
But when the word went around that the flat footed reload was going to be dropped in the (present) rules revision, it was GONE immediately except in sanctioned matches.

45dotACP
09-29-2015, 05:41 PM
Ugh... We're already at capacity up here near Chicago...
Painfully aware of same. I try to hop on the occasional match or skills session in Lombard but thats like once or twice a month and working nights and alternating weekends means means I needs more options now that I have my big kid job.


Too bad there's no website with a calendar of matches/practice sessions for the northern IL/Southern Wisconsin region eh? ;)

PPGMD
09-29-2015, 07:32 PM
Well it looks like Vickers and Hackathorn were the two Masters on the BOD that pushed this change. Two people that haven't shot IDPA in years as far as I can tell based on my scores search.

cclaxton
09-29-2015, 09:14 PM
Well it looks like Vickers and Hackathorn were the two Masters on the BOD that pushed this change. Two people that haven't shot IDPA in years as far as I can tell based on my scores search.
Yeah, has nothing to do with them being founding members and working self defense trainers and acting in the role that the board expects. If they shot a lot of IDPA, accusations of conflict of interest would go flying. Some people just want to criticize IDPA no matter what they do.

Hackathorn: "Well, by the late ‘80s, most of us had seen USPSA (United States Practical Shooting Association), that’s IPSC in the United States, go off on an extreme tangent that had very little to do with reality, in my opinion. I was fed up with it and I disassociated myself from it. Even Bill Wilson, whose company has made a lot of money based upon the 1911 and competition shooting, finally said, “This is ridiculous. I’ll start my own organization,” and he called me, along with some other people, and said, “We’re going to get [competitive shooting] back on course. Are you with me?”

Bill, myself, Dick Thomas, Walt Rauch, John Sayle and Larry Vickers were the original founding board members of the International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA). We wanted to get back to where you used real guns, the guns you carry for self defense. The end result is that IDPA today, from a competition standpoint, is probably the most relevant of all the self-defense type pistol shooting sports, I think.

But it’s all good. I tell people if you’re shooting cowboy action, at least you’re out shooting. If you’re shooting IDPA, you’re shooting; if you’re shooting USPSA, you’re shooting; if you’re shooting Steel Challenge, you’re shooting. Bowling pins? At least you’re out shooting and you’re enjoying yourself. But if you were to ask me, “OK, I carry a gun for self defense, which of these activities is the most relevant to my needs?” I would probably say, “You should try IDPA.”"

Cody


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

orionz06
09-29-2015, 09:21 PM
It's not going to affect the value to us as shooters: make believe use of cover, pretend use of concealment, shooting in tactical priority, reloading behind cover (or not when allowed), and target identification, shooting on the move, fun scenarios, etc. For $15-30 a novice shooter can quickly develop their safety protocols, pistol handling, their shooting skills, reloading, some fundamental tactics, and have fun doing it a their local clubs and sanctioned events.


Had to tweak it slightly....



I don't get what the issue is with the rule change. I hope they tighten things up on classifications though. This would be a chance to make things a little more spread out.

cclaxton
09-29-2015, 09:24 PM
Had to tweak it slightly....



I don't get what the issue is with the rule change. I hope they tighten things up on classifications though. This would be a chance to make things a little more spread out.
I see the only way that you can make a point is by misquoting me.

I don't miss quote you please don't miss quote me.
Cody

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

PPGMD
09-29-2015, 09:31 PM
Yeah, has nothing to do with them being founding members and working self defense trainers and acting in the role that the board expects. If they shot a lot of IDPA, accusations of conflict of interest would go flying. Some people just want to criticize IDPA no matter what they do.

I disagree, the people on the board should be active shooting members of IDPA. Decisions on how the sport is run shouldn't be made by people that haven't been on an IDPA range in years. That is what gives you shit like the flat foot reloads, and all the other times that IDPA has shot itself in the foot. Each time over the objections of people that actually shoot the sport.

orionz06
09-29-2015, 09:31 PM
IDPA use of cover is make believe... Don't get your vest ruffled.