IDPA - appendix carry?

[miller_man]

Thought this might make interesting conversation.

What is PF thoughts on if IDPA were to allow appendix carry? I can hear the powers that be "UH, NO - NO, NOT HAPPENING". What do you think it would take for them to ever allow it to happen?

Example - what if you had to have 2 separate classifier results of expert or better before being cleared to shoot from appendix? Do you think that would show a competent level of safe gun handling skill and awareness to be trusted to shoot from appendix?


I know there are some pretty valid arguments against - there are a lot of new shooters in IDPA, I would bet it is the first action pistol sport people try, and especially brand new shooters in general. I don't think it would be good at all to allow new shooters or unkown shooters to show up and shoot from appendix - but I think IDPA can't or at least shouldn't continue to ignore an elephant in the room, people can and do safely shoot from appendix position. Lot's of folks safely shoot, train, practice and even compete from appendix. I feel or think that number of people continues to grow - but then again, maybe I just go to more classes with these people and follow more of them on instagram.

Thoughts?

[miller_man]

I know IDPA just probably doesn't care and "we've been doin it this way fer years".

I shoot USPSA and IDPA and like and appreciate them both. I have a vision of a perfect world where I could shoot USPSA from my gamer gear and shoot IDPA from appendix and only have to practice with 2 different set ups. Mixing in a third set up of gear to train and practice with is growing old. I know I could just not shoot IDPA but I have fare more IDPA matches available that are closer and easier on my schedule to attend. I do find IDPA to be a fun, good sport to shoot but GAWD I hate wearing and shooting in a vest. I don't do strong side concealed cause - I never have carried there, it is painful for my shoulder and it doesn't conceal at all for me.

I would love to play the game that requires concealment with my actual concealed carry position. Maybe I'm just dreaming. Or maybe all the old timers will retire some day and a new group of leadership will look at it differently.

[snow white]

I shoot uspsa exclusively in the appendix position from concielment. I see no reason why it should be against the rules. Yes there are new shooters in idpa but the same goes for uspsa and It does not seem to be a problem there. I will say I'm an outlier and I get allot of sideways looks when I go to a new club where I'm not known. The key is to be well practiced. Once people see me shoot for the first time they ease up and come around to what I'm doing. I usually end up with compliments from people by the end of the day.

So yes I agree with you, I see no reason why IDPA limits people's choices in thier carry positions when other competitive shooting sports let it go without issue.

[Mr_White]

I get their concerns but would like them to allow it. The last time it was brought up, the leadership seemed to double down on not just prohibiting AIWB, but making sure that charitably-minded match directors knew it wasn't allowed even at the club level for no score.

[snow white]

I get their concerns but would like them to allow it. The last time it was brought up, the leadership seemed to double down on not just prohibiting AIWB, but making sure that charitably-minded match directors knew it wasn't allowed even at the club level for no score.

Hey man, I just want to let you know you were my inspiration years ago to compete with my carry gear from concielment. I too find it to be extremely satisfying! My goal this summer is to make master with my carry gear.

[jeep45238]

I wish the'd allow it - I dislike some things about IDPA, but there is something mentally challenging about having to complete a problem according to their recipe for order of operations. I find it helps me think while shooting better.

It's also the reason why I'm switching platforms, running a dot, and a light, from appendix and shooting USPSA in this setup, and will probably just do PCC for IDPA.

[Mr_White]

miller_man: Availability of a certain type of action pistol sport is a great reason to go with that sport. If there's IDPA but no USPSA, I think it's a great idea to shoot IDPA even if the equipment situation is not ideal.

---


Hey man, I just want to let you know you were my inspiration years ago to compete with my carry gear from concielment. I too find it to be extremely satisfying! My goal this summer is to make master with my carry gear.

That is awesome! Thank you for saying so. I have always found it really fun and satisfying and I'm glad you do too. Good luck in your journey to make Master - keep at it and I bet you will make it!

[Clay1]

I've been playing locally with a G19.5 with a comp and a full size X300 in a tenicor appendix holster. That rig just shoves me into open class. Truth is that it doesn't matter what class. I still compete and get better with my carry gun.

And yes, I get the strangest looks at new clubs.

I would like to try to shoot some simpler courses of fire at the local IDPA club once in a while. Note: it is my carry gun and that is always what IDPA promoted: shooting what you actually carry.

[MGW]

I think IDPA is in a position to gain back production shooters from USPSA. I think IDPA could help themselves by allowing AIWB. I would love to shoot carry optics from AIWB. I don’t think it’ll ever happen. My local IDPA club is all but dead. Last time I went there were about 12 shooters and most of them were 60 or older. No new blood in the pipeline here in that sport. USPSA in my area is heavily skewed to open and PCC. Carry optics is growing too.

Speaking of USPSA I really don’t know what their current line of thinking is on equipment rules. Production for an actual concealed carry gun doesn’t really exist in USPSA any longer. Carry optics is basically open now. I wonder if they are going to bring in two new divisions, CO and Production light, to be more closely aligned with IPSC?

[miller_man]

miller_man: Availability of a certain type of action pistol sport is a great reason to go with that sport. If there's IDPA but no USPSA, I think it's a great idea to shoot IDPA even if the equipment situation is not ideal.

---




I am super fortunate - both are pretty available in my area. I am much more interested and invested in USPSA, but I have found I do enjoy partaking in both. But I only get 1 saturday a month to be able to attend USPSA (which limits it to my availability (family schedule)) and plus it eats up a majority of a Saturday. Compare to the IDPA, 1st and 3rd Thursday nights - 3-4 hours, lot less time invested, on a lot less important/busy day and it's twice a month. But still, I will choose USPSA to be "my" action pistol sport, no contest.



I have myself shot a couple months of USPSA from AIWB (don't we all secretly wanna be another Gabe White?!?) and plan on probably doing so again in the future but I have a goal to make master class in Carry optics first.

[GJM]

A local multi division GM shoots his 19/RMR from concealed AIWB in Open. There are very few stages where a fast draw means anything in USPSA.

[miller_man]

I think IDPA is in a position to gain back production shooters from USPSA. I think IDPA could help themselves by allowing AIWB. I would love to shoot carry optics from AIWB. I don’t think it’ll ever happen. My local IDPA club is all but dead. Last time I went there were about 12 shooters and most of them were 60 or older. No new blood in the pipeline here in that sport. USPSA in my area is heavily skewed to open and PCC. Carry optics is growing too.

Speaking of USPSA I really don’t know what their current line of thinking is on equipment rules. Production for an actual concealed carry gun doesn’t really exist in USPSA any longer. Carry optics is basically open now. I wonder if they are going to bring in two new divisions, CO and Production light, to be more closely aligned with IPSC?

I really agree, I seriously do think IDPA could gain a LOT of shooters back with allowing AIWB, especially allowing carry optics to be - you know, like lots of people actually carry.

Ya, USPSA has lot all sense of "production" or "carry". I think carry optics with 15rd mags would be a nice middle ground and get rid of the "poor mans open" beliefs.

Speaking of that, in USPSA a magwell is not allowed in CO, correct? I believe they are allowed in IDPA CO.

[miller_man]

A local multi division GM shoots his 19/RMR from concealed AIWB in Open. There are very few stages where a fast draw means anything in USPSA.

One of the best things about USPSA - you can show up with whatever you want and shoot.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

My body doesn't accommodate Appendix carry. So, I'm not concerned for myself. I might suggest that if it troubles a club, they might run a dry fire test of new folks to see they are safe. Yeah, this is a pain to do but the club I'm going to join (if we ever open, get the guns back, blah, blah) does have a safety course and test first - or so they tell me.

Also, if reattaching an organ is elective surgery, that is a consideration, given the closures.

[MGW]

Correct on no magwells in CO.

I think for most people that want to compete from AIWB limited minor is probably the best fit. It rules out an optic and light but you can do anything else you might want to do. Gabe and Les (probably others) have proven you can be competitive there.

I didn’t realize you could shoot from appendix in open. Being competitive there is probably not going to happen. Isn’t open major only?

[Clay1]

I shoot open minor.

[BN]

but I think IDPA can't or at least shouldn't continue to ignore an elephant in the room,

Thoughts?

IDPA has been ignoring elephants in the room for decades. :(

[Clusterfrack]

The key difference between IDPA and USPSA/IPSC isn't what guns or holsters are allowed. It's the scoring system. Hit factor scoring is what makes USPSA/IPSC a much more attractive sport to me. I really don't care if my carry gun isn't competitive in Production, or if I can't shoot from AIWB.

Shooting a Time+ match with my carry gear just isn't interesting to me. +1 sec per shot outside -0 encourages checking targets for holes and making up misses. That's just not my kind of match.

I could see designing a new sport around defensive shooting at the highest level. That would be really interesting. I'm sure we could brainstorm some good rules. I'll start:

-Hit factor scoring
-Very heavy penalties for misses off target and non-threat hits
-Limited ammunition

[rob_s]

Appendix is a big deal for the gun hipsters, and their ranks are growing, but frankly I think IDPA sees things pretty clearly on this:
1) appendix-carry is still a very niche thing, however vocal the proponents may be
2) of that niche, some are mature enough to to shoot the game with the allowable equipment
3) of what’s left, they mostly complain on the internet and then go shoot somewhere else, so it really doesn’t matter.

I don’t think that allowing appendix would do a damn thing to their attendance, and I don’t think banning it is hurting their attendance.

What is it about IDPA that makes people want to shoot it from appendix, that you can’t currently accomplish by shooting from appendix in USPSA?

[GyroF-16]

I’d love it if people could really use their “daily carry” gear to shoot IDPA, and, since AIWB is becoming more common with “aware” shooters, that would be cool.

Having said that, I SO for two different clubs at 2-3 matches a month (pre-COVID-19). New shooters are a regular threat for flagging themselves, especially when using strong-side IWB holsters (tend to use the support hand to “stabilize” the holster, and predictably sweep the muzzle across the hand when reholstering, and occasionally when drawing). This issue would be that much worse with AIWB.

I’d imagine that the consequences (for the club) of a shooter injuring themselves with an ND could be catastrophic, and an ND with AIWB will cause a serious injury.

I think that the real challenge would be how to determine who is an experienced, safe gun-handler. And given the limitations in the current IDPA rulebook (it could use a lot of editing and clarification as it is), I shutter to think how lengthy and involved the process would be to incorporate new things. That said, I’d be game to participate in the re-write conference. Then there’s the issue of how long it would take for the old farts (who I guess are 10 years older than me) to read and understand the new rules.

[BigT]

Didn't wilson recently add an appendix holster to their catalogue ...

[45dotACP]

The key difference between IDPA and USPSA/IPSC isn't what guns or holsters are allowed. It's the scoring system. Hit factor scoring is what makes USPSA/IPSC a much more attractive sport to me. I really don't care if my carry gun isn't competitive in Production, or if I can't shoot from AIWB.

Shooting a Time+ match with my carry gear just isn't interesting to me. +1 sec per shot outside -0 encourages checking targets for holes and making up misses. That's just not my kind of match.

I could see designing a new sport around defensive shooting at the highest level. That would be really interesting. I'm sure we could brainstorm some good rules. I'll start:

-Hit factor scoring
-Very heavy penalties for misses off target and non-threat hits
-Limited ammunitionThat's the real draw of USPSA to me.

Shooting CDP makes WAY more sense if you're a 1911 guy, but the holster position isn't what kills it for me.

In USPSA, I would argue that you must be considerably faster at calling your shots and making them up, but really when you're shooting competitively in USPSA, even at the club level, it's best to get appropriate hits the first time around, because you don't have one second to make it up and make up shots take time. Really if you throw a lot of C and D zone shots you've already screwed the pooch.

I still shoot IDPA just because some weekends I work, and some I don't. I'm not always free for a nearby USPSA match and some days I don't want to drive an hour or two each way for USPSA when IDPA is 30 minutes away. I do enjoy it. I may even try playing around some in SSR because IDPA remains one of the only places where you're not an idiot for shooting a wheelgun.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[miller_man]

My body doesn't accommodate Appendix carry. So, I'm not concerned for myself..

I would bet that might have something to do with leadership not giving it any thought as well.

[miller_man]

Correct on no magwells in CO.

I think for most people that want to compete from AIWB limited minor is probably the best fit. It rules out an optic and light but you can do anything else you might want to do. Gabe and Les (probably others) have proven you can be competitive there.

I didn’t realize you could shoot from appendix in open. Being competitive there is probably not going to happen. Isn’t open major only?

Having a dot and shooting from aiwb puts you into open. Open is just about anything goes. AIWB in limited is fun and useful - I'm just hooked on the dot.

[miller_man]

The key difference between IDPA and USPSA/IPSC isn't what guns or holsters are allowed. It's the scoring system. Hit factor scoring is what makes USPSA/IPSC a much more attractive sport to me. I really don't care if my carry gun isn't competitive in Production, or if I can't shoot from AIWB.

Shooting a Time+ match with my carry gear just isn't interesting to me. +1 sec per shot outside -0 encourages checking targets for holes and making up misses. That's just not my kind of match.



I disagree - biggest difference to me - USPSA - here are the targets, here is shooting area - you figure out best way or your best way. IDPA - you do it like this, maybe you have 1-2 options.

I don't love but don't hate the 1 sec penalty of IDPA, don't think its all bad. I think it makes you strive to hit the zero the first two times. I don't check the target for holes, but do make up shots by calling shots - but I do that in both. In USPSA, the area where I think make up shots are needed is just farther out toward the edge.

[miller_man]

Appendix is a big deal for the gun hipsters, and their ranks are growing, but frankly I think IDPA sees things pretty clearly on this:
1) appendix-carry is still a very niche thing, however vocal the proponents may be
2) of that niche, some are mature enough to to shoot the game with the allowable equipment
3) of what’s left, they mostly complain on the internet and then go shoot somewhere else, so it really doesn’t matter.

I don’t think that allowing appendix would do a damn thing to their attendance, and I don’t think banning it is hurting their attendance.

What is it about IDPA that makes people want to shoot it from appendix, that you can’t currently accomplish by shooting from appendix in USPSA?

1)Maybe a lot less niche than previous. I perceive more people that do not shoot gun games that carry AIWB, at least I have seen the last few years.
2)True - but adapting the sport to things people like/want is a good way to get more attendance and members (look at USPSA - carry optics and PCC)
3)Or maybe some like myself, who just joined IDPA for the first time would want to push for change. If a certain number of their members starting making noise about something maybe change is possible.

I am on a facebook group - modern samurai project alumni, and this topic came up - most people bashing IDPA, but when asked I think quite a few said they would go shoot IDPA if aiwb were allowed.

Go see my first post for why I'd want to shoot IDPA from aiwb.

I am well aware this is all highly unlikely - just thinking out loud really.

[Medusa]

I shoot uspsa, idpa, and speed steel; I carry appendix, and have in fact just two sets of gear. One for games, one for carry. It’s doable once one decides one wants to and trains it, has been my experience.

I like idpa scoring, shoot a lot of idpa matches and don’t see the people higher in the results checking for holes especially in the difficult targets (far targets, swingers and falling targets, etc) , and don’t think my decision to use the same gear in uspsa is holding me back in the latter. My two cents only.

I would love to see appendix in idpa but don’t expect it to happen soon.

[JSGlock34]

What is PF thoughts on if IDPA were to allow appendix carry?

This is how KSTG started. (Among other elements of dissatisfaction with IDPA and USPSA.)

Those were good matches.

[ST911]

I AIWB all day every day, and prefer to shoot classes and matches with my carry gear. When I can't, I adapt. I'm at the class or the match for more than just the holster work. The world's full of clownshoes and range rules, holster type isn't high on my list of grievances.

[miller_man]

I shoot uspsa, idpa, and speed steel; I carry appendix, and have in fact just two sets of gear. One for games, one for carry. It’s doable once one decides one wants to and trains it, has been my experience.

I like idpa scoring, shoot a lot of idpa matches and don’t see the people higher in the results checking for holes especially in the difficult targets (far targets, swingers and falling targets, etc) , and don’t think my decision to use the same gear in uspsa is holding me back in the latter. My two cents only.

I would love to see appendix in idpa but don’t expect it to happen soon.

Yep, done the two sets - no issues. It's when I look at putting on and practicing with 3 different set ups that it gets tiresome.


I know - it is what it is. Obviously I am fine to play with the gear and rules of the game I am playing - been doing so for few months now. Just wanted to have a discussion about it.

My day has improved by beating this dead horse a little bit :p

[Zincwarrior]

I can safely say I will not SO someone with appendix carry. I can TQ a leg. Gut shot is a different animal.

[LittleLebowski]

Appendix is a big deal for the gun hipsters, and their ranks are growing, but frankly I think IDPA sees things pretty clearly on this:
1) appendix-carry is still a very niche thing, however vocal the proponents may be
2) of that niche, some are mature enough to to shoot the game with the allowable equipment
3) of what’s left, they mostly complain on the internet and then go shoot somewhere else, so it really doesn’t matter.

I don’t think that allowing appendix would do a damn thing to their attendance, and I don’t think banning it is hurting their attendance.

What is it about IDPA that makes people want to shoot it from appendix, that you can’t currently accomplish by shooting from appendix in USPSA?

In answer to your last sentence, I’d say match availability.

[Medusa]

In answer to your last sentence, I’d say match availability.
The matches are just plain different.

locally, IDPA serves up stuff you don’t see much in local uspsa - or I haven’t seen it much in the year and change I’ve been shooting matches locally. Shooting from inside vehicles, prone shooting, awkward position shooting, shooting from a seated position, shooting with props like a briefcase or parcel in hand, strong and weak hand only. You see some of the latter in uspsa classifiers, but not a lot.

Attendance at idpa locally is quite good in decent weather.

[Clusterfrack]

The matches are just plain different.

locally, IDPA serves up stuff you don’t see much in local uspsa - or I haven’t seen it much in the year and change I’ve been shooting matches locally. Shooting from inside vehicles, prone shooting, awkward position shooting, shooting from a seated position, shooting with props like a briefcase or parcel in hand, strong and weak hand only. You see some of the latter in uspsa classifiers, but not a lot.

I agree. I miss that aspect. Our club's IDPA matches are especially creative, in large part due to the match director.

On the other hand, USPSA has lots of stuff you don't see in IDPA.

[Medusa]

I agree. I miss that aspect. Our club's IDPA matches are especially creative, in large part due to the match director.

On the other hand, USPSA has lots of stuff you don't see in IDPA.

agree. Which is why I do both, and steel. eta I’m just answering a question posed upthread about why people might like to add idpa to their attendance list, or idpa with appendix, as opposed to just doing uspsa appendix from concealment.

[LittleLebowski]

The matches are just plain different.

locally, IDPA serves up stuff you don’t see much in local uspsa - or I haven’t seen it much in the year and change I’ve been shooting matches locally. Shooting from inside vehicles, prone shooting, awkward position shooting, shooting from a seated position, shooting with props like a briefcase or parcel in hand, strong and weak hand only. You see some of the latter in uspsa classifiers, but not a lot.

Attendance at idpa locally is quite good in decent weather.

Sounds good to me.

What I was getting at just having any match nearby.

[snow white]

When I shoot games where I can not AIWB (idpa, steel challenge) I use my clutch belt and get reps in with that.

[Zincwarrior]

agree. Which is why I do both, and steel. eta I’m just answering a question posed upthread about why people might like to add idpa to their attendance list, or idpa with appendix, as opposed to just doing uspsa appendix from concealment.

Yes indeedy. There is room for all of those. In the mecca of action shooting that is Central Texas three clubs multiple different events monthly.

[JSGlock34]

Sounds good to me.

What I was getting at just having any match nearby.

I started with IDPA because there just weren't many USPSA matches convenient to me. I still have to drive over an hour to the nearest outdoor USPSA match.

I get the desire to shoot a match with carry gear, but there are so many benefits to match shooting beyond the meager number of draws that comprise a match that I think focusing on this limitation is throwing the baby out with the bath water. My two cents; I've shot IDPA, USPSA, and KSTG - each has their merits, and drawbacks.

[Wendell]

Thoughts?

I've corresponded directly with Mrs. Wilson. In my personal experience, she was helpful, open to suggestion, and very diplomatic in her responses.

In response to your essential question - i.e.: "What would it take?" - I think that all it would take (for IDPA to change it's policy) is enough letters from IDPA members to Mrs. Wilson.

https://www.idpa.com/about-idpa/contact-idpa/

[LittleLebowski]

I started with IDPA because there just weren't many USPSA matches convenient to me. I still have to drive over an hour to the nearest outdoor USPSA match.

I get the desire to shoot a match with carry gear, but there are so many benefits to match shooting beyond the meager number of draws that comprise a match that I think focusing on this limitation is throwing the baby out with the bath water. My two cents; I've shot IDPA, USPSA, and KSTG - each has their merits, and drawbacks.

I agree. I’m just tired of driving so far for a match.

[miller_man]

I've corresponded directly with Mrs. Wilson. In my personal experience, she was helpful, open to suggestion, and very diplomatic in her responses.

In response to your essential question - i.e.: "What would it take?" - I think that all it would take (for IDPA to change it's policy) is enough letters from IDPA members to Mrs. Wilson.

https://www.idpa.com/about-idpa/contact-idpa/

Very insightful.

A quote from Dumb and Dumber "So your sayin there's a chance" ;)

[BN]

I think that all it would take (for IDPA to change it's policy) is enough letters from IDPA members to Mrs. Wilson.

My initial reaction to this was HA HA HA HA. No offense meant, but I guess you're new at this.

Bill, disgruntled former IDPA member # A-000282.

[miller_man]

I started with IDPA because there just weren't many USPSA matches convenient to me. I still have to drive over an hour to the nearest outdoor USPSA match.

I get the desire to shoot a match with carry gear, but there are so many benefits to match shooting beyond the meager number of draws that comprise a match that I think focusing on this limitation is throwing the baby out with the bath water. My two cents; I've shot IDPA, USPSA, and KSTG - each has their merits, and drawbacks.

I fully understand that the draw is a fairly insignificant element to shooting a match. What isn't insignificant is the number of reps in dry practice higher level shooters put in for their sport. I prefer putting on USPSA gear and doing practice, I make myself dry practice from my carry gear and I strongly dislike putting on IDPA legal gear and a vest to practice with IDPA gear. 1st world problems for sure.

Again, in my perfect world - I could put on gamer uspsa gear for my preferred pistol sport and then only have to practice/work with 1 other set up (carry gear).

But in the grand scheme of things - I'm still eager and thrilled to go shoot any action pistol match with whatever gear rules/limits needed.

[jetfire]

A while back when I made my "3 Ways to Improve IDPA video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jotti0zvgr8)" allowing AIWB was the number one thing on my list. I think that it makes sense for the concealed carry focused sport to allow a method of concealment that's growing in popularity, especially among savvy shooters.

The problem is the roadmap. Full disclosure, I know Joyce and was actually on the Tiger Teams when IDPA was doing their big re-org, and the path to getting AIWB in the sport is...difficult. There's surprisingly less institutional resistance in IDPA leadership than you'd think, although there is some. The big problem comes from Area Directors and Match Directors who think it's fundamentally unsafe, and there are a lot more of them than there are serious minded shooters who'd shoot from AIWB concealment.

However, for funzies I did write a draft of how the rules would work for AIWB.

"Appendix Carry: Appendix carry is legal for all divisions. The holster must be an inside the waistband appendix model. Magazine pouches can be placed anywhere on the shooter's belt line, but must be inside the waistband. The concealment garment must be a closed front shirt such a t-shirt or polo shirt. Open front concealment is not allowed for shooters using appendix carry."

[RevolverRob]

"The concealment garment must be a closed front shirt such a t-shirt or polo shirt. Open front concealment is not allowed for shooters using appendix carry."

Why? Because I appendix carry under a shoot me vest about 50% of the time.

___

In response to Clusterfrack's thoughts on a defensive-oriented shooting sport that had really good scoring. It's simple to me:

I'd basically draw my hit zones from the VTAC A-Zones (not the +0) show here: https://www.vikingtactics.com/v/vspfiles/photos/VTAC-DSTT-100-2.jpg?v-cache=1522759615

Each stage has a prescribed number of hits and a par time. Fastest time with lowest number of misses, wins the stage. I'd penalize each miss outside those A-Zones with negative points and of course if you exceed par time you'll likely be out of the competitive running.

And there would be no Bs, Cs, or Ds. You either are shooting As or your going backwards. Take your fucking time and make the shots.

You could shoot at them with whatever gun and holster you want as long as it comes from concealment.

Classes would be: Carry Guns, Backup Guns, plus a couple of others*.

Carry guns - Size, optics, compensators unrestricted, however, maximum weight of 50 ounces, 9x19 is minimum caliber. No Major/Minor scoring, minimum Power-Factor ammunition equivalent to Minor will be required.

In Backup Guns, only sub-compact guns that can fit in a pocket (pre-determined size) can be used. Capacity cannot exceed 12-rounds. Caliber can be .32 and larger. For .32 and .380 guns - we'll establish the minimum power factors.

Make-Up Shots would be allowed, because to pass a stage you must make the prescribed number of hits, period.

No make-up stage shoots, unless a calibration error of a popper or plate can be demonstrated. I can't emphasize this enough - no make up stage shoots - you don't get do-overs in real life during a shooting event.

___

*I propose that quarterly matches be held for carbines and shotguns, centered around realistic defensive scenarios around vehicles and homes. Shotguns must run buckshot and slugs (at least one stage should require a slug select). Rifles can be any centerfire rifle and targets will all be within 100-yards. No magazines can be loaded with capacities exceeding 30-rounds.

[jetfire]

Why? Because I appendix carry under a shoot me vest about 50% of the time.

I did a bunch of testing on this, actually. Drawing from a closed front shirt AIWB vs drawing from an OWB IDPA style holster under a vest was a wash for speed, over the course of the reps there wasn't a big difference.

Drawing AIWB from under a shoot me first vest was on average 0.20 faster than closed front or OWB strong side holster (concealed). The draw stroke is super fast since the gun is already on the centerline and the vest barely moves.

[RevolverRob]

Drawing AIWB from under a shoot me first vest was on average 0.20 faster than closed front or OWB strong side holster (concealed). The draw stroke is super fast since the gun is already on the centerline and the vest barely moves.

Yea man...that's why I carry under a vest. :eek:

I'm not that fast, so I need all the help I can get.

[jetfire]

Yea man...that's why I carry under a vest. :eek:

I'm not that fast, so I need all the help I can get.

Oh I agree. When I tossed the proposed rules out, I was trying to write them in a way that IDPA would accept, and I thought insisting on a closed front shirt would do that.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Not to divert a bit but I said my FOG body isn't really up for appendix carry. Another concern is that I really don't like having to use two hands to free the gun. I see folks lifting their shirts with a hand and going for the gun with the other. I'm currently battling my 'lifting' hand being totally screwed up. The joint is terribly painful and weak. Going to the doc tomorrow. I wouldn't trust it to fail on me. OWB and sweeping a garment is my style. YMMV, I certainly agree. Will 200 milliseconds kill me on the street? Will not clearing the shirt, kill me. Who knows?

Just a thought.

[GyroF-16]

In response to Clusterfrack's thoughts on a defensive-oriented shooting sport that had really good scoring. It's simple to me:

I'd basically draw my hit zones from the VTAC A-Zones (not the +0) show here: https://www.vikingtactics.com/v/vspfiles/photos/VTAC-DSTT-100-2.jpg?v-cache=1522759615

Each stage has a prescribed number of hits and a par time. Fastest time with lowest number of misses, wins the stage. I'd penalize each miss outside those A-Zones with negative points and of course if you exceed par time you'll likely be out of the competitive running.

And there would be no Bs, Cs, or Ds. You either are shooting As or your going backwards. Take your fucking time and make the shots.

You could shoot at them with whatever gun and holster you want as long as it comes from concealment.

Classes would be: Carry Guns, Backup Guns, plus a couple of others*.

Carry guns - Size, optics, compensators unrestricted, however, maximum weight of 50 ounces, 9x19 is minimum caliber. No Major/Minor scoring, minimum Power-Factor ammunition equivalent to Minor will be required.

In Backup Guns, only sub-compact guns that can fit in a pocket (pre-determined size) can be used. Capacity cannot exceed 12-rounds. Caliber can be .32 and larger. For .32 and .380 guns - we'll establish the minimum power factors.

Make-Up Shots would be allowed, because to pass a stage you must make the prescribed number of hits, period.

No make-up stage shoots, unless a calibration error of a popper or plate can be demonstrated. I can't emphasize this enough - no make up stage shoots - you don't get do-overs in real life during a shooting event.

___

*I propose that quarterly matches be held for carbines and shotguns, centered around realistic defensive scenarios around vehicles and homes. Shotguns must run buckshot and slugs (at least one stage should require a slug select). Rifles can be any centerfire rifle and targets will all be within 100-yards. No magazines can be loaded with capacities exceeding 30-rounds.

Sounds great to me!
I would make significant efforts to attend such a match in my area.

[miller_man]

A while back when I made my "[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jotti0zvgr8"]

However, for funzies I did write a draft of how the rules would work for AIWB.

"Appendix Carry: Appendix carry is legal for all divisions. The holster must be an inside the waistband appendix model. Magazine pouches can be placed anywhere on the shooter's belt line, but must be inside the waistband. The concealment garment must be a closed front shirt such a t-shirt or polo shirt. Open front concealment is not allowed for shooters using appendix carry."


That was awesome! Totally agree with all that - I'd love to shoot IDPA-CV (Caleb version).


With that said, lets say it all gets implemented tomorrow - So you would not require a certain classification or any safe gun handling proficiency verification for those showing up to shoot from aiwb?

I would still think some kind of verification would at least be a good move.

[Clusterfrack]

I think there should be formal training for USPSA and IDPA.

[Yung]

I think there should be formal training for USPSA and IDPA.

I know the most common advice given to interested shooters is to just show up to a regular match because the seasoned players are very open toward newbies and will show them how to do things, and I believe this to be generally true, but if it were not for the Practical Shooting Starter Course and Leatham's Intro to Steel at Rio Salado, I'd have never felt confident enough to jump in. Less than fifty bucks in fees and about eight hours of relaxed but structured time in the classroom/range over two days made a world of difference in requesting and following guidance months later when I went to my first IDPA classifier at a different range (South Mountain), after I was comfortable enough to try something beyond Tuesday Night Steels.

[Clusterfrack]

There are so many things new shooters need to know before their first match. Eg. If a shooter doesn’t know how to fall safely with a loaded gun that may or may not be drop safe, I don’t think they have any business participating in an action shooting sport.

[Sal Picante]

The matches are just plain different.

locally, IDPA serves up stuff you don’t see much in local uspsa - or I haven’t seen it much in the year and change I’ve been shooting matches locally. Shooting from inside vehicles, prone shooting, awkward position shooting, shooting from a seated position, shooting with props like a briefcase or parcel in hand, strong and weak hand only. You see some of the latter in uspsa classifiers, but not a lot.


This is a nice distinction. I think the trouble with both is lazy match management ... You know you see all 32 round USPSA "field courses" where there are just 4, 4 target arrays barfed up with 8'-10' of movement between shooting positions. Compare that to IDPA clubs that run stupid El Pres variations without any imagination... The trouble it that clubs just burn match directors and ROs out... Big time commitments and then dealing with a bunch of "difficult people". If I ever run a club again, it'll be "for profit"...

What I did always appreciate about IDPA was that the scoring did reward "clean shooting", which, if you think about it is the medicine that most people carrying a gun kinda need. The problem is that IDPA coupled all that with a bunch of "tactical considerations" which are all questionable, IMHO: Remember the pivot-step rules? Pepperidge Farms remembers... I really think the new rules have helped.

Both sports are trying to grow and provide the crack to their core audiences... Let's face it USPSA is going to be slowly dominated by PCC, CO and open (I think Limited is going to be the only real game for folks running irons...), while IDPA is sorta going in the opposite direction catering to folks with irons and low cap designs.

At the end of the day, unless you really want to be a national champ of the worlds smallest sports with a infinitesimally smaller audience (and no $$), it all doesn't really matter. See your sights/dot/WTFever and put holes in the middle of whatever headed/headless target is in front of you without shooting anything that doesn't need shooting. Enjoy the fresh air and camaraderie with a bunch of other like-minded folks.

[Sal Picante]

I think there should be formal training for USPSA and IDPA.

We used to have a rule that only classified people could come and shoot.

No classifier? Sign up for a class with some trainers and show us proof of class completion.
I think that kinda of vetting helped a bit.

I think the bigger issue is that USPSA and IDPA probably won't approve a membership/participation being contingent on passing a class...

[olstyn]

I think the bigger issue is that USPSA and IDPA probably won't approve a membership/participation being contingent on passing a class...

I'm not sure I'd approve of that. It really sounds like you and Clusterfrack want to make these sports less accessible. Maybe things are different where you are, but clubs in my local area are really good about shepherding new shooters through their first match or two, making sure they understand safety rules, etc.

[Clusterfrack]

Not less accessible, just safer. I don’t think a match is the right place for a 9yr old kid to learn how to draw and holster safely, let alone run with a gun.

[1911Nut]

Les Pepperoni said:

"At the end of the day, unless you really want to be a national champ of the worlds smallest sports with a infinitesimally smaller audience (and no $$), it all doesn't really matter. See your sights/dot/WTFever and put holes in the middle of whatever headed/headless target is in front of you without shooting anything that doesn't need shooting. Enjoy the fresh air and camaraderie with a bunch of other like-minded folks."

This summarizes it as eloquently as any statement I have seen. Bravo, sir!

[GyroF-16]

Not less accessible, just safer. I don’t think a match is the right place for a 9yr old kid to learn how to draw and holster safely, let alone run with a gun.

I’d certainly agree with you on that example.

After a few uncomfortable moments with new shooters, one of the IDPA clubs I SO for introduced a “holster and safety certification” for shooters new to the club. I haven’t participated in teaching it, but it seems to be a short new-shooters class conducted immediately before the match. It’s mostly an opportunity to convey safety expectations to the new folks, and give them a chance to demonstrate that they understand them before “going hot” in their first match. The MD then ensures that the SO running their squad is aware who is new. They then get a little extra instruction and vigilance throughout the match. It seems to work pretty well.

[CalAlumnus]

I’d certainly agree with you on that example.

After a few uncomfortable moments with new shooters, one of the IDPA clubs I SO for introduced a “holster and safety certification” for shooters new to the club. I haven’t participated in teaching it, but it seems to be a short new-shooters class conducted immediately before the match. It’s mostly an opportunity to convey safety expectations to the new folks, and give them a chance to demonstrate that they understand them before “going hot” in their first match. The MD then ensures that the SO running their squad is aware who is new. They then get a little extra instruction and vigilance throughout the match. It seems to work pretty well.

My local club required new shooters show up to a ~4 hour class before their first match

Match day rolls along with a new shooter (who, of course, completed the training). Stage One called for the gun to start in an IDPA box. As the squad is downrange taping and brassing, new guy walks up to box, draws, and sets his gun inside. Ugh. DQ'd before his first stage.

Guy seemed smart enough, but it's a lot to remember. "It's not loaded! I was just trying to keep things moving!" Brain farts happen; tough to completely eliminate them in training.

[olstyn]

Not less accessible, just safer. I don’t think a match is the right place for a 9yr old kid to learn how to draw and holster safely, let alone run with a gun.

I think we may have been talking past each other - I wasn't even thinking in terms of 9-year olds, and If I had to guess, I'd say the youngest I've seen at a match was at least 11 or 12 years old, and those kids had been extensively coached by parents who were already into the sport before they ever showed up to compete. I 100% agree that it's not the right place for young kids to learn holster skills, but I have seen plenty of first time adults show up, take instruction well, go slowly until they achieve competence/confidence, and then go on to become good. I'd be fine with a "no AIWB until you show that you're safe" plan, along with a minimum age limit, but excluding people altogether until they take a class seems a bit extreme to me.

[Clusterfrack]

@plstyn, I see where you’re coming from. I don’t think we are talking past each other though. I would support a mandatory safety class for all action shooting sports. The stakes are too high to assume that everyone can be safe with ad hoc coaching. I’ve seen personally that this is not the case.

[Wendell]

Not less accessible, just safer.

Whether or not that was the intention, or the objective, isn't really the point, creating any extra barriers - even a barrier intended to make things 'safer' - actually makes the sport less accessible.

In his books, economist John Lott has warned us about the economic effects of state-required carry permits and any state-required training for to obtain a state-required carry permit. In short, he found that, contrary to the notion that increased training would offer society some kind of benefit, any added requirement actually acted as a disincentive to participate (in carrying a firearm, lawfully), and that - because of the measurable economic benefits associated with lawfully-carried firearms - any added requirement (that reduced the number of people carrying) did not return any economic benefit at all, but instead actually came with it's own economic cost.

[45dotACP]

@plstyn, I see where you’re coming from. I don’t think we are talking past each other though. I would support a mandatory safety class for all action shooting sports. The stakes are too high to assume that everyone can be safe with ad hoc coaching. I’ve seen personally that this is not the case.Heh...yeah.

I watched a dude nearly blow his index finger off a few months back. His grip was shitty, he was shooting a short pistol...m&p shield or something....and with each shot the index finger that he swore he kept on the trigger guard crept that much closer to the muzzle.

If he'd been using anything with more than a 7 round capacity, he'd be shy a left index fingerprint.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Clusterfrack]

Wendell, I think this question is good to keep discussing. You make some valid points, and I understand why you feel this way. However, how many lethal accidents involving a 9 year old kid shooting IDPA or USPSA do you think it would take for us to lose our sport?

[jeep45238]

Wendell, I think this question is good to keep discussing. You make some valid points, and I understand why you feel this way. However, how many lethal accidents involving a 9 year old kid shooting IDPA or USPSA do you think it would take for us to lose our sport?

Oh......about negative one.

[Sal Picante]

I'm not sure I'd approve of that. It really sounds like you and Clusterfrack want to make these sports less accessible. Maybe things are different where you are, but clubs in my local area are really good about shepherding new shooters through their first match or two, making sure they understand safety rules, etc.

It isn't like that... The trouble was with volume of shooters and limited match space, honestly...
We've had varying degrees of success getting newbies up to speed.

[Clusterfrack]

Here’s a thought: what activities require formal training? Flying airplanes seems like a good example. Would anyone argue that ad hoc coaching should be enough for a person to fly a plane, and carry passengers? How about racing cars?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Getting newbies up to speed depends in part of the maturity of the beginner. I see a lot of one timers who shoot and then never come back. On the other hand, we had a USAF neuro-ophthalmologist who wanted some practice beyond his brief service intro. He learned quickly and became part of our group. Same with a TSA agent.

It's attitudinal and willing to learn. We were very gentle with new shooters and shepherded them through the stages. Blatant disregard got them DQ'ed.

One thing that is a big negative, is a guy who is new and wants to 'win'. Won't tape and yaks with his buddies instead. A newbie who tapes is a good sign.

One newbie, I still recall that particularly annoyed me was a guy who bitched when some of us older shooters did not kneel. We have serious and documented screwed up knees. Want my MRIs? Even with us taking the penalty - bitch, bitch.

[JAD]

Wendell, I think this question is good to keep discussing. You make some valid points, and I understand why you feel this way. However, how many lethal accidents involving a 9 year old kid shooting IDPA or USPSA do you think it would take for us to lose our sport?

That at least is what the training is good for — a degree of indemnity. I don’t think 4 hours of training is going to be dipshit proof. I’m not even sure it would be measurably effective. But it would help if you got sued.

[Sal Picante]

Here’s a thought: what activities require formal training? Flying airplanes seems like a good example. Would anyone argue that ad hoc coaching should be enough for a person to fly a plane, and carry passengers? How about racing cars?

Would you say that IDPA and USPSA are reasonably safe at this point?

[Zincwarrior]

Would you say that IDPA and USPSA are reasonably safe at this point?

I was racing motorcycles at 8, with just Dad's advice...

[Clusterfrack]

Would you say that IDPA and USPSA are reasonably safe at this point?

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I can see the point. I think having a group of newbie, young stud friends can be dangerous. Single one or two older folks, not so much as a good squad (like ours was) would be more of learning experience. Maybe we were special.


-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter

I dislike that running is part of some games as I don't see it as integral to defensive shooting, if that is the goal (yeah, I know, it's a game, if you can't be athletic, blah, blah). At one match, a new gun starts to run so fast, he falls on his face, gets up and tries to make up time and speed ups and falls again. I would have DQ'ed him but that SO was a wuss.

I would tell someone who fell, not to move and we will get him up slowly and make sure the gun is safe. In a club match, I would let him reshoot. In a 'real' match - tough. Out you go.

[That Guy]

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?

In my country, some action shooting sports (not IDPA but some of the other ones) have fairly strict mandatory safety training classes one has to complete before being allowed to take part in any match, or most organized training, for that sport. Typical class is two days, with day 1 being classroom instruction with a test afterwards, and day 2 being a standardized test match where one has to achieve a defined minimum hit factor to pass the course.

When I'm around these "safety certified" competition shooters I still see shitty reholstering, dangerous holsters, iffy firearms modifications, disregard for safety during less formal events, lack of understanding why the safety rules exist in the first place, etc. I've also run into instructors with shitty attitudes where half their students fail to pass the safety course and the instructors attitude is "learn to shoot you fucking noobs" and have seen newcomers have difficulty passing the test match with ratty loaner guns, due to physical limitations etc. There's also quite a lot of Dunning-Kruger syndrome going on with people who've passed the safety class but do not understand how safe firearms handling in another context may differ from a match environment, but think that since they've been "trained" they know all there is to know about firearms safety.

I'm less than 100% sure the safety classes help much when it comes to safety. I haven't visited matches in the US though, so I can't make a direct comparison.

[BigT]

I can see the point. I think having a group of newbie, young stud friends can be dangerous. Single one or two older folks, not so much as a good squad (like ours was) would be more of learning experience. Maybe we were special.



I dislike that running is part of some games as I don't see it as integral to defensive shooting, if that is the goal (yeah, I know, it's a game, if you can't be athletic, blah, blah). At one match, a new gun starts to run so fast, he falls on his face, gets up and tries to make up time and speed ups and falls again. I would have DQ'ed him but that SO was a wuss.

I would tell someone who fell, not to move and we will get him up slowly and make sure the gun is safe. In a club match, I would let him reshoot. In a 'real' match - tough. Out you go.


DQ'd for what exactly?

Falling is not DQ'able

Was there an AD? Was his finger on the trigger? Did he break the 90?Did he drop the gun?

If no then he gets to get right back and keep running.

New or experienced the rules remain the same.

[miller_man]

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?


I am not against new people taking training to play our sports but don't know if I'd be for seeing it be mandated. I haven't made up my mind on that, good for discussion though.

Pherhaps playing devils advocate, Clusterfrack did you take a class or instruction before participating in IDPA/USPSA?

I did not, but I sure looked into it and practiced safe gun handling for about two weeks in dry fire before attending my first match.

[Zincwarrior]

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?

Are you talking about a class over and above the new shooter brief most groups have for new shooters before a match?

[olstyn]

I am not against new people taking training to play our sports but don't know if I'd be for seeing it be mandated. I haven't made up my mind on that, good for discussion though.

This is basically where I'm at. I think that a training requirement would push some people away from ever trying these sports. Looking back at when I started, it probably would not have kept me away, but I was nearly 100% certain that I wanted to get into competitive shooting before I started; I see a training requirement as something that might push away those who are less sure and just thinking "that would be fun to try."


I did not, but I sure looked into it and practiced safe gun handling for about two weeks in dry fire before attending my first match.

I didn't take a class beforehand either, but I was also fairly safety-conscious beforehand, and I watched a bunch of video and read a decent portion of the procedural rules before attending my first match, showed up in time to help with setup, introduced myself as a newbie, and got coached by experienced shooters. It all worked out well, but I've also seen some newbies who are less prepared do some scary stuff, so I do understand Clusterfrack's concern; it's easy to believe that not every club has as good of a coaching environment as the one where I started. I just have a competing concern about pushing people away.

I'm willing to be convinced, but the repeated talk about 9-year olds feels a bit over the top to me; I've never seen a 9-year old at a USPSA match. Of course my experience is not everyone's experience, so it may be that Clusterfrack has seen a large quantity of scary 9-year olds, and if so, then I can definitely understand where he's coming from.

[miller_man]

This is basically where I'm at. I think that a training requirement would push some people away from ever trying these sports. Looking back at when I started, it probably would not have kept me away, but I was nearly 100% certain that I wanted to get into competitive shooting before I started; I see a training requirement as something that might push away those who are less sure and just thinking "that would be fun to try."



I didn't take a class beforehand either, but I was also fairly safety-conscious beforehand, and I watched a bunch of video and read a decent portion of the procedural rules before attending my first match, showed up in time to help with setup, introduced myself as a newbie, and got coached by experienced shooters. It all worked out well, but I've also seen some newbies who are less prepared do some scary stuff, so I do understand Clusterfrack's concern; it's easy to believe that not every club has as good of a coaching environment as the one where I started. I just have a competing concern about pushing people away.

I'm willing to be convinced, but the repeated talk about 9-year olds feels a bit over the top to me; I've never seen a 9-year old at a USPSA match. Of course my experience is not everyone's experience, so it may be that Clusterfrack has seen a large quantity of scary 9-year olds, and if so, then I can definitely understand where he's coming from.

Yep completely agree that a required training might just hold some new folks back or make it seem more daunting than just “going to try it out”.

I do think the new shooters meeting/briefing and the quality of the person doing it plays a large roll.

I have seen ~9-10 yr olds shoot but never without a parent who is pretty well versed and committed to the sport (and super attentive to their child and how they are doing the whole time).

But we all have seen some scary stuff - but lately I would really have to think if more came from new shooters or some older guys who “been doin dis fer years”.

Actually last weeks match, walking out of retail range area, veteran IDPA shooter pulls gun out of holster as I pass him, sticks mag in and racks slide and quickly reholsters. I have no problem with any of that except I was immediately down range of him while he unholstered. ( I noticed and stepped back until he finished - I just walked away but was a little concerned).

[ST911]

My clubs screen for new shooters (to the club, sport, facility). They are pointed out to the RM and SOs and get extra attention. Safety rules are rigid but stage stuff gets more flexibility. People feel welcome and come back. I've seen similar practices other places. The many kids that have come through get extra attention. Almost all are kids of pretty competent parents. Mine started at ~12 or so.

For a time, one offered an occasional "clinic" to help learn the game and process. It was okay, but eventually died. Training and orientation sessions are great in concept but few will go, even if the club was willing or capable to take on the burden. One possible solution... In clubs with the facilities and personnel to accommodate, set up a bay or safe area for an orientation or check-off process. Everyone rotates through for accountability once a season, new shooters first match. There may be other ways to do it using the epic amounts of down time between stages and shooters. Several hours of standing around for a few minutes of shooting gets pretty old.

When I think about the last several times someone put a round near my feet, swept me with a muzzle, or were dangerous to those around them, all had more than enough know-better through either formal training or experience. A training session wouldn't do a thing for them. Hard truth: almost all of them wore a uniform of some sort.

[Clusterfrack]

I am not against new people taking training to play our sports but don't know if I'd be for seeing it be mandated. I haven't made up my mind on that, good for discussion though.

Pherhaps playing devils advocate, Clusterfrack did you take a class or instruction before participating in IDPA/USPSA?

I did not, but I sure looked into it and practiced safe gun handling for about two weeks in dry fire before attending my first match.

Yes, actually I did take a class and it was quite good. Unfortunately that is no longer offered or required.

[Clusterfrack]

Are you talking about a class over and above the new shooter brief most groups have for new shooters before a match?

Yes. I’m talking about a one or two day class.

I’ll admit that my 9yr old example, while based on experience, was an extreme example. We have had maybe 3 new kids in the last year In the 9-14 range. But does it really matter who is unsafe and unclear on why we practice safety procedures?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

DQ'd for what exactly?

Falling is not DQ'able

Was there an AD? Was his finger on the trigger? Did he break the 90?Did he drop the gun?

If no then he gets to get right back and keep running.

New or experienced the rules remain the same.

The way he fell, he had little control of the gun and might have broken our 180 rule. Also, his state of excitement was such that I would be wary of his safe continuation of the stage. Rules are rules and safety is more important. He can come to another match when he has his shit together.

I've had a round put next to my foot on a holstering when I was score keeping. Then the idiot started to wave the gun, WHA Happin? SO grabbed him. Saw an SO grab a guy who couldn't get his gun out of his Serpa and was panicking.

Give a safety class as mandatory. Good idea - bad for business? We had a long newbie briefing before each match. Newbies were marked so on their score sheet.

[Zincwarrior]

Yes. I’m talking about a one or two day class.

I’ll admit that my 9yr old example, while based on experience, was an extreme example. We have had maybe 3 new kids in the last year In the 9-14 range. But does it really matter who is unsafe and unclear on why we practice safety procedures?

Just as a reference, the IDPA Safety Officer Course is a one day course.

I can understand the arguments on all sides here. As an SO, much less a normal shooter, its been an interesting ride on occasion. Slightly OT but I like to run new shooters, and give them tips after each stage. That usually only works for one or two matches, because after that, they inevitably shoot better than I do (its because I'm such an awesome helper...right...RIGHT??? :) )

[MGW]

I don’t think a new shooter class has to be complicated or time consuming. It could be completed an hour before a regular club match. We’re basically talking about making sure someone is not a danger to themselves or others.

My local indoor range requires a qualification before you are allowed to work from the holster or shoot at splits less than one second. They do one the first Wednesday of every month. It takes less than 10 minutes per person.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

My old local fancy range had you go through a computer lesson on safety. If you wanted to draw they would watch you first to determine safety. Then, one instructor shot another in 'practice'. Oops.

They also had a bullet impact on the glass (whatever it is) partition between two lanes. Let's not count the swiss cheese ceiling right above each station.

[Clusterfrack]

I don’t think a new shooter class has to be complicated or time consuming. It could be completed an hour before a regular club match. We’re basically talking about making sure someone is not a danger to themselves or others.

My local indoor range requires a qualification before you are allowed to work from the holster or shoot at splits less than one second. They do one the first Wednesday of every month. It takes less than 10 minutes per person.

Here's what I've been talking about with some people for a possible USPSA Indoc course: New shooters shoot their first match for no score. First stage is shot by dryfire, with a laser boresight inserted so the shooter and coach can see where the muzzle is pointed. Common safety issues are demonstrated, and everyone will learn how to fall safely with a loaded gun. Demonstrations and live fire exercises on stages can focus on choke points like reloads during support-side movement, and retreating safely. The class would be fun, and would build confidence--especially in shooters new to firearms.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

interesting, I can't shoot pistols until I free them from FFL detention due to having to get a permit here. All that is frozen.

Anyway, I asked the local USPSA club that shoots indoors if I could run some stages with a SIRT just to get in some familiarity with their set up and some pseudo trigger time. Despite explaining that and have a long training and competition record, that was not acceptable. I think they didn't get it, sorry to say. It might have offended the more extreme partisans?

[Yung]

Yes, actually I did take a class and it was quite good. Unfortunately that is no longer offered or required.

For me, the class I took was also very good. It was not required back then, but it is now, I believe, at least for unranked shooters.

I am not one of those folks who would ever just jump into a match, and therefore would never have entered competition without a formal class. It took me a long time going through defensive classes at my local range before I even had the guts to go with Citizens Defense Research as my first 'big name' training.

Tom Givens pointed out the generational and cultural differences in his most recent CCR appearance. It was in regards to police training and the firearms familiarity of the average recruit prior to what is taught in academy or OJT, but I think the same gist applies.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Training and getting folks to train is always an issue. When I live in Oregon to get a permit, you just need a short law babble class. However, I decide to take a two day NRA basic pistol class with actual firing experience which also counted. It might be because (I'm great!) trained as a scientist, I believe in researching and education. When I moved to TX, I found Karl Rehn's through the UT adult ed classes. Took his basic stuff and then went on. Then I got into competition and took more classes. I tried USPSA, IDPA, Steel. Found I like the last two the best.

I have friends with safes of guns and can't get them to train or compete. They will shoot a rock at the ranch or a box at the square range to 'train'. Many analyses of males indicate that some can't face training and losing their warrior opinion of themselves. I came it at not being from a gun culture as a kid and thus a blank slate for learning. I knew I wasn't an intuitive advanced Calculus student to just take that course. I wasn't an intuitive shooter. BTW, I think I became a better shooter than advanced mathematician.

[Lost River]

In my country, some action shooting sports (not IDPA but some of the other ones) have fairly strict mandatory safety training classes one has to complete before being allowed to take part in any match, or most organized training, for that sport. Typical class is two days, with day 1 being classroom instruction with a test afterwards, and day 2 being a standardized test match where one has to achieve a defined minimum hit factor to pass the course.

When I'm around these "safety certified" competition shooters I still see shitty reholstering, dangerous holsters, iffy firearms modifications, disregard for safety during less formal events, lack of understanding why the safety rules exist in the first place, etc. I've also run into instructors with shitty attitudes where half their students fail to pass the safety course and the instructors attitude is "learn to shoot you fucking noobs" and have seen newcomers have difficulty passing the test match with ratty loaner guns, due to physical limitations etc. There's also quite a lot of Dunning-Kruger syndrome going on with people who've passed the safety class but do not understand how safe firearms handling in another context may differ from a match environment, but think that since they've been "trained" they know all there is to know about firearms safety.

I'm less than 100% sure the safety classes help much when it comes to safety. I haven't visited matches in the US though, so I can't make a direct comparison.



Sounds like 95% of the POST academies across the United States.

[BigT]

The way he fell, he had little control of the gun and might have broken our 180 rule. Also, his state of excitement was such that I would be wary of his safe continuation of the stage. Rules are rules and safety is more important. He can come to another match when he has his shit together.

I've had a round put next to my foot on a holstering when I was score keeping. Then the idiot started to wave the gun, WHA Happin? SO grabbed him. Saw an SO grab a guy who couldn't get his gun out of his Serpa and was panicking.

Give a safety class as mandatory. Good idea - bad for business? We had a long newbie briefing before each match. Newbies were marked so on their score sheet.


Lots of subjectives there. We don't DQ people for may have or could have. I've DQ people. I've also not DQ'd people because I wasnt sure if they had done the thing.

I've seen world class shooters trip. They had their shit together. They tripped. They didn't break a safety rule so they didnt get a DQ. DQing people without reason is not going to have them coming back.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

We will differ on this. Of course, it's subjective to judge whether someone has their shit together. However, a bullet hole is not subjective.

[JRV]

Think of the average IDPA participant.

Think of the average IDPA SO/RO.

Imagine, after all this time, IDPA approves AIWB for those people.

Now imagine the club or the organization being sued after an injury/death.

“What’s the average age and experience of IDPA competitors? Do you allow those competitors to use modified guns with lightened triggers? How long was appendix carry prohibited by IDPA/your club? Does your club conduct personalized inspections of equipment or reholstering techniques? Did you foresee the potential for injury with inexperienced shooters placing modified competition guns down the front of their pants? Was that foreseeable injury the reason for the historical prohibition on appendix carry? Do you understand the risk of fatal or serious injury to be higher or lower as compared to carrying a pistol at or behind the hip? No further questions.”

You might think, but isn’t shooting an inherently risky activity? Don’t people sign waivers? Sure, those are standard practices for any risky behavior. But a club or organization for dangerous activity can expect litigation if they suddenly permit the participants to engage in a behavior that was deemed “too dangerous to allow” for several decades. It would be like a theme park allowing people to forgo using restraints on a rollercoaster, or a private racetrack allowing competitors to stop using safety equipment, race on worn tires, or decorate the track surface with debris or oil.

When a club or organization can no longer afford its insurance, it stops holding matches.

[cheby]

delete

[olstyn]

“What’s the average age and experience of IDPA competitors? Do you allow those competitors to use modified guns with lightened triggers? How long was appendix carry prohibited by IDPA/your club? Does your club conduct personalized inspections of equipment or reholstering techniques? Did you foresee the potential for injury with inexperienced shooters placing modified competition guns down the front of their pants? Was that foreseeable injury the reason for the historical prohibition on appendix carry? Do you understand the risk of fatal or serious injury to be higher or lower as compared to carrying a pistol at or behind the hip? No further questions.”

The problem with this line of reasoning, from my not a lawyer viewpoint at least, is that several divisions in USPSA allow appendix carry, and as far as I'm aware, USPSA's safety record with appendix carry allowed is virtually identical to IDPA's safety record with it prohibited. I don't think you can really draw a logical conclusion that the organization as a whole (or an individual club) would be held liable or shut down on the basis of someone being injured or killed purely because of the detail of appendix carry being present in the situation.

[Clusterfrack]

delete

LOL!

[jeep45238]

Think of the average IDPA participant.

Think of the average IDPA SO/RO.

Imagine, after all this time, IDPA approves AIWB for those people.

Now imagine the club or the organization being sued after an injury/death.

“What’s the average age and experience of IDPA competitors? Do you allow those competitors to use modified guns with lightened triggers? How long was appendix carry prohibited by IDPA/your club? Does your club conduct personalized inspections of equipment or reholstering techniques? Did you foresee the potential for injury with inexperienced shooters placing modified competition guns down the front of their pants? Was that foreseeable injury the reason for the historical prohibition on appendix carry? Do you understand the risk of fatal or serious injury to be higher or lower as compared to carrying a pistol at or behind the hip? No further questions.”

You might think, but isn’t shooting an inherently risky activity? Don’t people sign waivers? Sure, those are standard practices for any risky behavior. But a club or organization for dangerous activity can expect litigation if they suddenly permit the participants to engage in a behavior that was deemed “too dangerous to allow” for several decades. It would be like a theme park allowing people to forgo using restraints on a rollercoaster, or a private racetrack allowing competitors to stop using safety equipment, race on worn tires, or decorate the track surface with debris or oil.

When a club or organization can no longer afford its insurance, it stops holding matches.

The thing I don't get is when a club hosts BOTH IDPA and USPSA (seems to be common) - and USPSA allows appendix.

[JRV]

The problem with this line of reasoning, from my not a lawyer viewpoint at least, is that several divisions in USPSA allow appendix carry, and as far as I'm aware, USPSA's safety record with appendix carry allowed is virtually identical to IDPA's safety record with it prohibited.

USPSA has always allowed carry forward of the hip for certain divisions. The AIWB-in-Limited trend is a newish development, but it is more of a “it was not prohibited by the rules” development, and not a deliberate rule change to permit that kind of carry. So, if someone shoots their junk, it can’t be blamed on a recent rule change made by an organization or club. I don’t think anyone can convincingly blame USPSA for someone going junk carry in a decades-old division with a permissive rule-set built around OWB race holsters.


I don't think you can really draw a logical conclusion that the organization as a whole (or an individual club) would be held liable or shut down on the basis of someone being injured or killed purely because of the detail of appendix carry being present in the situation.

Think about why the rule has been historically justified. Imagine IDPA (the organization or an individual club) makes an explicit rule changes to permit a style of carry where 90% of the people are going to flag their femoral while holstering into concealment, courses of fire that break the 180, people to run around with their finger in the trigger guard, allow ammo in designated safe area, or have people do one-handed reloads by shoving their guns in their belt-line and then racking off the belt. Those acts are prohibited expressly for a reason. Some are cartoonish examples, but it’s to illustrate the liability problem presented.

If someone gets hurt by an action after a permissive rule change allowing the formerly-prohibited action, and the action was prohibited for years as a safety rule... that’s going to be a problem.

Edit: I’m not against AIWB in IDPA or any competition. I’m just arguing that IDPA is coaxed into a bit of a snafu by its long-standing ruleset on hip-carry only. No shoulder holsters, no pocket carry, no cross draw. If they made a change to allow any of those given their historical justifications for decades of prohibition, they’d be double-secret screwed by an aggressive plaintiff’s attorney.

[TheRoland]

I'm generally skeptical of the liability argument. IDPA, as an organization, especially after the Pandemic, is likely not in possession of enough assets to be worth suing.

[olstyn]

The AIWB-in-Limited trend is a newish development, but it is more of a “it was not prohibited by the rules” development, and not a deliberate rule change to permit that kind of carry.

Not prohibited = allowed, meaning it has *always* been allowed in USPSA. Has anyone carrying AIWB in a USPSA match actually shot themselves? I feel like we'd have heard about it on this forum if anyone had.

[Clusterfrack]

...a style of carry where 90% of the people are going to flag their femoral while holstering into concealment.

No one I know who carries AIWB flags their femoral, or any other body part while holstering.

[cheby]

LOL!

I think I am getting smarter. Slowly.

[Clusterfrack]

I think I am getting smarter. Slowly.

I laughed out loud when I read your post. Then again when you deleted it. :D

Maybe we should start shooting IDPA again. I dare you.

[JRV]

No one I know who carries AIWB flags their femoral, or any other body part while holstering.

I have yet to see someone at a local club match — in five years in this area — holster any handgun IWB at a match without angling their muzzle inboard trying to find the holster mouth.

I know how to holster AIWB (hips forward, strong side leg back, cover garment held high and clear)... but think about the IDPA club match crowd. Half couldn’t roll a wheel down a hill without failing somehow.

[Zincwarrior]

I'm generally skeptical of the liability argument. IDPA, as an organization, especially after the Pandemic, is likely not in possession of enough assets to be worth suing.
It's not IDPA that's at risk. It's the club, range, and SO.

[Medusa]

I laughed out loud when I read your post. Then again when you deleted it. :D

Maybe we should start shooting IDPA again. I dare you.
I’m sure it would be salutary for some egos, but honestly I find most local idpa shooters, and for sure the ones I regularly squad with, some of whom I’d consider now to be friends, are just there to have fun and try to improve and enjoy such successes and improvements as we may find without any grandiose concepts of what it means in general, other than that likely we're better than we would be if we didn’t compete.

There’s room for all the disciplines and all the folks who can compete safely for their own reasons and at their own level.

[miller_man]

Think of the average IDPA participant.

Think of the average IDPA SO/RO.

Imagine, after all this time, IDPA approves AIWB for those people.

Now imagine the club or the organization being sued after an injury/death.

“What’s the average age and experience of IDPA competitors? Do you allow those competitors to use modified guns with lightened triggers? How long was appendix carry prohibited by IDPA/your club? Does your club conduct personalized inspections of equipment or reholstering techniques? Did you foresee the potential for injury with inexperienced shooters placing modified competition guns down the front of their pants? Was that foreseeable injury the reason for the historical prohibition on appendix carry? Do you understand the risk of fatal or serious injury to be higher or lower as compared to carrying a pistol at or behind the hip? No further questions.”

You might think, but isn’t shooting an inherently risky activity? Don’t people sign waivers? Sure, those are standard practices for any risky behavior. But a club or organization for dangerous activity can expect litigation if they suddenly permit the participants to engage in a behavior that was deemed “too dangerous to allow” for several decades. It would be like a theme park allowing people to forgo using restraints on a rollercoaster, or a private racetrack allowing competitors to stop using safety equipment, race on worn tires, or decorate the track surface with debris or oil.

When a club or organization can no longer afford its insurance, it stops holding matches.

I see possible merit to this argument - but at the same time, if we are going to run matches based on possible litigation - better just keep the guns unloaded and in the holster. Also, these matches are sometimes held at ranges that already allow shooting from aiwb, either in USPSA or just the range itself.

[Wendell]

@Wendell (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=1223), I think this question is good to keep discussing. You make some valid points, and I understand why you feel this way. However, how many lethal accidents involving a 9 year old kid shooting IDPA or USPSA do you think it would take for us to lose our sport?

We must live in different worlds. You keep talking about accidents involving 9 year-old USPSA (or IPSC, or IDPA) competitors being a basis for requiring all competitors - including adults - to take some kind of safety course, and while I do read the papers, and I do read the internet forums, and I do participate in practical shooting, I must have missed all the accounts about actual cases that might support your position. Offhand, I do recall hearing about one adult IPSC competitor in British Columbia who shot himself fatally during an IPSC match, one adult IPSC competitor in New Brunswick who shot himself in the thumb during an IPSC match, and one adult IPSC competitor in Nova Scotia who suffered a minor blast injury after he unintentionally caused a primer to contact an extractor during an IPSC match. All three of those adults - being located in Canada - had, before competing in IPSC - successfully completed IPSC Canada's mandatory two-day safety course known as the 'Black Badge'.

[BigT]

We will differ on this. Of course, it's subjective to judge whether someone has their shit together. However, a bullet hole is not subjective.


Having dealt with enough SO's trying too tell me "you almost" when I did something safe, but outside his or her frame or reference, I am a fan of objective, and applying the rule books as written not interpenetrated.

[Clusterfrack]

I regret using the 9yr old as an example because it weakened rather than strengthened my argument. The younger shooters were the first ones I thought of because as a parent, I'd really hate for something bad to happen to a kid--especially when I'm right there to see it. We are setting the standard for how they will treat firearms for the rest of their lives, and how they will teach their own kids as well. Will it be to view guns as basketballs or footballs? Or as lethal weapons requiring the highest level of respect? Will safety rules be annoyances that get in the way of winning? Or important principles that make good sense outside of a match?

Fortunately, USPSA and IDPA have remained relatively free of serious accidents. That doesn't mean we can't do things better. My level of participation in USPSA is very high, and I don't view it as a casual activity. It's a serious sport involving guns that shoot real bullets, and it's disturbing when people (of all ages) show up without any clue about the how and why of our safety procedures.

I'm not ok with casual ad hoc coaching by whoever happens to be there, and it wouldn't take much to solve the problem. See my idea below for a solution. I don't hold much hope of that happening, so when the new shooters are up, you'll find me:

-Not ROing unless there's no one else with experience
-Standing well away from the edges of the safe angle
-Leaving the bay when certain shooters are on deck
-Not shooting IDPA


Here's what I've been talking about with some people for a possible USPSA Indoc course: New shooters shoot their first match for no score. First stage is shot by dryfire, with a laser boresight inserted so the shooter and coach can see where the muzzle is pointed. Common safety issues are demonstrated, and everyone will learn how to fall safely with a loaded gun. Demonstrations and live fire exercises on stages can focus on choke points like reloads during support-side movement, and retreating safely. The class would be fun, and would build confidence--especially in shooters new to firearms.


We must live in different worlds. You keep talking about accidents involving 9 year-old USPSA (or IPSC, or IDPA) competitors being a basis for requiring all competitors - including adults - to take some kind of safety course, and while I do read the papers, and I do read the internet forums, and I do participate in practical shooting, I must have missed all the accounts about actual cases that might support your position. Offhand, I do recall hearing about one adult IPSC competitor in British Columbia who shot himself fatally during an IPSC match, one adult IPSC competitor in New Brunswick who shot himself in the thumb during an IPSC match, and one adult IPSC competitor in Nova Scotia who suffered a minor blast injury after he unintentionally caused a primer to contact an extractor during an IPSC match. All three of those adults - being located in Canada - had, before competing in IPSC - successfully completed IPSC Canada's mandatory two-day safety course known as the 'Black Badge'.

[orionz06]

Think of the average IDPA participant.

Think of the average IDPA SO/RO.

Imagine, after all this time, IDPA approves AIWB for those people.

Now imagine the club or the organization being sued after an injury/death.

“What’s the average age and experience of IDPA competitors? Do you allow those competitors to use modified guns with lightened triggers? How long was appendix carry prohibited by IDPA/your club? Does your club conduct personalized inspections of equipment or reholstering techniques? Did you foresee the potential for injury with inexperienced shooters placing modified competition guns down the front of their pants? Was that foreseeable injury the reason for the historical prohibition on appendix carry? Do you understand the risk of fatal or serious injury to be higher or lower as compared to carrying a pistol at or behind the hip? No further questions.”

You might think, but isn’t shooting an inherently risky activity? Don’t people sign waivers? Sure, those are standard practices for any risky behavior. But a club or organization for dangerous activity can expect litigation if they suddenly permit the participants to engage in a behavior that was deemed “too dangerous to allow” for several decades. It would be like a theme park allowing people to forgo using restraints on a rollercoaster, or a private racetrack allowing competitors to stop using safety equipment, race on worn tires, or decorate the track surface with debris or oil.

When a club or organization can no longer afford its insurance, it stops holding matches.

This line of thinking could easily be used to not allow anyone to shoot.

[Clusterfrack]

Having dealt with enough SO's trying too tell me "you almost" when I did something safe, but outside his or her frame or reference, I am a fan of objective, and applying the rule books as written not interpenetrated.

Mostly agree. At least in USPSA, a match isn't the time or place for coaching, unless the shooter asks for help. E.g. the "helpful" RO telling me how close my right-to-left reload was to the safe angle. Like I didn't know how close it was, and didn't rehearse the reload 20 times during the walkthrough and visualization. Some ROs love to make it seem like they could have DQed you, but were doing you a BIG favor somehow by letting it slide. Either DQ or be quiet.

On the other hand, if it's a major safety issue, I think it's good for the RO or anyone else to do what they think is best. The worse thing is that the shooter will get a reshoot. I've grabbed shooters a few times as an RO because they were doing something dangerous even though they didn't DQ. Just offer them a reshoot, no harm done.

[JRV]

This line of thinking could easily be used to not allow anyone to shoot.

I was using a hypothetical argument to make a point about why IDPA or IDPA clubs may have institutional inertia preventing AIWB carry in a sport that’s generally suited for (and marketed at) newer shooters and concealed carriers. No need to make a straw man out of an exaggerated position.

Shooting is a dangerous activity, and all sanctioned sporting bodies have a set of rules aimed at maximizing safety for participants and minimizing potential legal liability. The same goes for football clubs, soccer clubs, rugby clubs, and any other sport. There are long-standing norms for conduct and equipment, codified into safety rules, that allow the organizing bodies and participating clubs to maintain affordable insurance for those activities.

Equipment and techniques can evolve over time around gaps in rules that never intended to address a certain type of conduct (e.g. AIWB carry rigs in USPSA Limited). Again, that’s a totally different concern for an organization than actively permitting a once-prohibited behavior that almost certainly increases the risk of serious injury to the participant in the event of a foul-up.

[Zincwarrior]

Mostly agree. At least in USPSA, a match isn't the time or place for coaching, unless the shooter asks for help. E.g. the "helpful" RO telling me how close my right-to-left reload was to the safe angle. Like I didn't know how close it was, and didn't rehearse the reload 20 times during the walkthrough and visualization. Some ROs love to make it seem like they could have DQed you, but were doing you a BIG favor somehow by letting it slide. Either DQ or be quiet.

On the other hand, if it's a major safety issue, I think it's good for the RO or anyone else to do what they think is best. The worse thing is that the shooter will get a reshoot. I've grabbed shooters a few times as an RO because they were doing something dangerous even though they didn't DQ. Just offer them a reshoot, no harm done.

I think we have a similar position, you may just be further on the bell curve than I on the amount of class time needed before hand.

A question should be asked maybe, how much of this is an actual issue? I've never seen anyone actually shooting appendix in a USPSA match. In IDPA the crowd tends to be more normal, with bigger waistlines that make appendix carry less desired. Is this a big thing?

[Jim Watson]

I've never seen anyone actually shooting appendix in a USPSA match.

I have seen it once.
At least it was what the practitioner called "appendix." It was anatomically more nearly a navel carry, just to the right of center.
There was a stage with a start at 45 deg left of the bay meridian, call it 135 deg around on the plane. So he was past the 180 the moment he grabbed the gun. His buddy the RO/MD did not find this a problem. So I was careful where I stood.

This was a common sight in CAS when I dressed for that. It is very common to wear the second gun in a cross draw holster. You are supposed to shift your stance to draw it so the gun comes out in front of a 170 (not 180) deg line. What is seen is a slight waggle of the butt and the gun whipped right out.


Is it time to revive KTSG and quit telling IDPA what it is doing wrong?

[Wendell]

In the United States, many states do not require completion of a safety course; some do, but many do not. Some sports do not require completion of a safety course; some do, but many do not.

In Canada, per the Firearms Act, to obtain a handgun, the government has decided that an individual must take two safety courses (CFSC & CRFSC) before being eligible for a (restricted-endorsed PAL) license to possess a handgun. In Canada, per the Firearms Act, most shooting clubs require that applicants, before joining, first complete another club-level safety course. The CFSC, CRFSC, and the club-level course are all required by law. In Canada, IPSC Canada has decided that the completion of a Black Badge course is necessary for participation in level 2 or higher matches; the Black Badge, I think, is regarded as necessary to prevent unsafe gun-handling and to protect the sport. For the record, I do like the Black Badge course, and I do find it valuable for most participants, but there's no doubt that the requirement for a Black Badge (a two-day course that costs money, fills up quickly, and is offered only infrequently) also acts as a real barrier to participation.

I shoot at matches where competitors were not required to first complete a safety course, and I shoot at matches where competitors were required to first complete several safety courses, and the truth is this: comparing the two, while the 'safety briefs' tend to be a lot longer at American matches, I really don't see much difference in the gun-handling.

[olstyn]

I have seen it once.
At least it was what the practitioner called "appendix." It was anatomically more nearly a navel carry, just to the right of center.
There was a stage with a start at 45 deg left of the bay meridian, call it 135 deg around on the plane. So he was past the 180 the moment he grabbed the gun. His buddy the RO/MD did not find this a problem. So I was careful where I stood.

As I understand it, this should only be an issue if the draw is being done incorrectly. I'm not sure I have the right words to describe it, but I believe that someone drawing from AIWB, if they're doing it correctly, should be able to draw right up to the 180 (well, 89.5 to one side or the other, however you want to describe it) without breaking the 180. Muzzle control is obviously super important, and I'm sure Mr. White or Clusterfrack or any of several others who have actual AIWB experience could give a good explanation of how to do it correctly, but I'm not going to venture to do that, as I do not myself carry or compete from AIWB at this time, so I've only visualized it vs actually doing it.

[Clusterfrack]

The Black Badge course is a good example of what I'm proposing. I don't know the details, but what I've heard is very good.

Safety briefs in my experience are mostly useless. And, as you point out, the longer ones aren't better. That's not too surprising. USPSA is fairly complicated, and people learn complicated things best by example and in action.


In the United States, many states do not require completion of a safety course; some do, but many do not. Some sports do not require completion of a safety course; some do, but many do not.

In Canada, per the Firearms Act, to obtain a handgun, the government has decided that an individual must take two safety courses (CFSC & CRFSC) before being eligible for a (restricted-endorsed PAL) license to possess a handgun. In Canada, per the Firearms Act, most shooting clubs require that applicants, before joining, first complete another club-level safety course. The CFSC, CRFSC, and the club-level course are all required by law. In Canada, IPSC Canada has decided that the completion of a Black Badge course is necessary for participation in level 2 or higher matches; the Black Badge, I think, is regarded as necessary to prevent unsafe gun-handling and to protect the sport. For the record, I do like the Black Badge course, and I do find it valuable for most participants, but there's no doubt that the requirement for a Black Badge (a two-day course that costs money, fills up quickly, and is offered only infrequently) also acts as a real barrier to participation.

I shoot at matches where competitors were not required to first complete a safety course, and I shoot at matches where competitors were required to first complete several safety courses, and the truth is this: comparing the two, while the 'safety briefs' tend to be a lot longer at American matches, I really don't see much difference in the gun-handling.

[Artemas2]

In IDPA the crowd tends to be more normal, with bigger waistlines that make appendix carry less desired. Is this a big thing?

and are wearing a 10 degree reverse cant IWB holster while also favoring a no look reholster. With their first attempt to reholster, they point the muzzle directly into their own lower abdomen and subsequent attempts they then over rotate and muzzle the entire squad. I don't think I have seen an RO call them on it either:confused:

[Clusterfrack]

and are wearing a 10 degree reverse cant IWB holster while also favoring a no look reholster. With their first attempt to reholster, they point the muzzle directly into their own lower abdomen and subsequent attempts they then over rotate and muzzle the entire squad. I don't think I have seen an RO call them on it either:confused:

OMG I fucking HATE that!!!

[miller_man]

You guys shoot with different IDPA shooters than I do. We do have a little bit of that but most the guys and gals i shoot with also shoot USPSA as well and are pretty decent, competent shooters.

This was started in IDPA so don’t let it turn into full IDPA bashing. Stop making me take up for IDPA!! :p

[Artemas2]

You guys shoot with different IDPA shooters than I do. We do have a little bit of that but most the guys and gals i shoot with also shoot USPSA as well and are pretty decent, competent shooters.

This was started in IDPA so don’t let it turn into full IDPA bashing. Stop making me take up for IDPA!! :p

I enjoy both sports, for different reasons, no bashing here. I will clarify that my example is to a couple specific shooters, most of the people I know a who shoot IDPA are pretty squared away.
I believe the safety argument is moot in terms of holster location. At it's core it is a people problem. People who are unsafe will be unsafe (hopefully they can be corrected) no matter where the holster is positioned.

I think eventually we could see IDPA allowing AIWB, even the last few tactical journals have had articles with the virtues of AIWB.
I can understand that there might be some reluctance on needing to design an entire rule set around a holster position. I don't think the allowance of AIWB will bring in a ton more people. Of the pure USPSA people I know, holsters are the least of their complaints with the sport.

[Bergeron]

I get their concerns but would like them to allow it. The last time it was brought up, the leadership seemed to double down on not just prohibiting AIWB, but making sure that charitably-minded match directors knew it wasn't allowed even at the club level for no score.

There appears to be an AIWB-brouhaha that's recently occured at something like the club level. I lack details, and I don't want to assume.

I've seen what looks like note from IDPA leadership that seems to confirm what we've been discussing. The primary issues identified are that 1) attempts to holster quickly/negligently raise the risk for a fatal ND, which would cause 2) liability insurance to become unavailable.

I recently moved, and I've shot some local USPSA matches. There is an IDPA match about an hour away that I'd like hit up in either a month or two. I'm glad both sports exist, and I'm always happy to abide by whatever rules are in place. I'd like to see IDPA allow appendix, but I don't know how to overcome the objections noted above.

I think that USPSA-appendix really is different from IDPA-appendix. There's not really any identifiable advantage, score-wise, (that I've seen) to shooting USPSA from appendix, particularly considering the allowable divisions. No one is shoving a .38 Super 2011 with a huge comp and 170mm magazine into an appendix rig, and while I can be convinced that there might be a person or two trying it with a .40 2011 and their 140s, I think the number people trying their best to compete while carrying appendix is far smaller than the number people looking for pressure-tested practical skill. There's a couple of people at the local club level who will shoot appendix, but their focus is developing carry-gun skill more than competing.

I think it would be different with IDPA-appendix. While jetfire has shown vest-OWB is equivalent to closed front-AIWB, I can see a perception that AIWB would be faster, and that a greater number of people, proportion-wise, would want to compete AIWB, and that the risk profile is different if it's one or two people not trying to win carrying AIWB, compared to half the competitors, all trying to win, carrying AIWB. I understand how it's possible to holster safely, without flagging, and while having positive lockout of a pistol's fire control, and that no one is holstering on the clock.

[JCN]

I can totally see why IDPA doesn’t want to do it. Just like most indoor ranges don’t allow drawing from a holster.

I personally feel comfortable drawing from AIWB, but I could see how it would be a no-win situation for an organization.

That being said, the local winter IDPA club is allowing AIWB (even though purists are having a stroke) which is where I’m going to play. Shooting just left handed (I’m a righty) because I want to train the other side.

[orionz06]

They remain free do to as they wish, but they're just getting further and further from reality, as far as defensive shooting goes. This is of course if they care about that. If they're cool with folks using competition specific gear, rock on.

[Zincwarrior]

It's a competition, not defensive training. As an SO, I would not be comfortable running a squad with an appendix shooter. By it's nature it's almost a guaranteed DQ, and I have no way of seeing the draw or safe holstering without being within the 180.

Note shoulder holsters and ankle holsters are not permitted either.

It's argued USPSA permits it, but I have never seen it at an actual match.

I have no issue if someone wants to carry like that. But that's their liability. At a match it's the club and SO's potential liability, and I am not getting sued because Tactical Timmy shit for brains blows his own balls off.

[uechibear]

There appears to be an AIWB-brouhaha that's recently occured at something like the club level. I lack details, and I don't want to assume.

You could say that:

66656

[olstyn]

Of the pure USPSA people I know, holsters are the least of their complaints with the sport.

In my view, it's just one of several silly/illogical rules:

1. No AIWB
2. Must shoot targets in the order of a prescribed algorithm, doing otherwise = penalty
3. Must use cover (c'mon, IDPA rules committee, admit that IDPA is a game)
4. Dropping partial mags on the ground = penalty

Honorable mention for USPSA/hit factor scoring being (IMO) a better overall system.

I'm sure others could come up with more extensive lists, but regardless of how long the list of complaints about IDPA is, I think you're engaging in "perfect is the enemy of good" here - just because other things might be bigger problems doesn't mean that any given one couldn't/shouldn't get fixed.

[olstyn]

Note shoulder holsters and ankle holsters are not permitted either.

Shoulder holsters are not permitted on the grounds that they cause loaded guns to be pointed uprange. This is not an issue with AIWB. (I'm not clear on why ankle holsters are not permitted, but I really can't see anyone having any real desire to do that outside of (maybe) a BUG match, given the very real time penalty involved.)


It's argued USPSA permits it, but I have never seen it at an actual match.

I've seen multiple competitors on the same squad as me in a USPSA match shooting Limited Minor from AIWB before. Your area != everywhere.

[Artemas2]

You could say that:


Looks like my guess of one day maybe aged like sour milk. Has anyone seen the video in question?


..."travesty":rolleyes: actually I'm not even going to go there, whole new topic

[CleverNickname]

Honorable mention for USPSA/hit factor scoring being (IMO) a better overall system.
The only advantage time-plus scoring has is that it's easy to calculate by hand on a piece of paper. But since everyone's been using tablets for scoring for the past five or ten years, time-plus really needs to be dropped.

[Elwin]

It's argued USPSA permits it, but I have never seen it at an actual match.

Didn’t Gabe White somewhat famously make GM by shooting limited minor from AIWB? If I recall correctly he’s also placed well at national/regional matches doing so, but I’m not in the know when it comes to USPSA so I could be wrong about that. I also seem to recall he’s not the only one known for running AIWB in serious USPSA competition but again I could be misremembering.

[Artemas2]

Didn’t Gabe White somewhat famously make GM by shooting limited minor from AIWB? If I recall correctly he’s also placed well at national/regional matches doing so, but I’m not in the know when it comes to USPSA so I could be wrong about that. I also seem to recall he’s not the only one known for running AIWB in serious USPSA competition but again I could be misremembering.

Gabe White, lespepperoni, Scott Jedlinski, and Jay Beal are some of the more accomplished AIWB shooters who have done well in big matches. Jay and I think Scott shot Open pretty competitively too.

Oddly enough 3/4 of them are PF members...

[miller_man]

It's a competition, not defensive training. As an SO, I would not be comfortable running a squad with an appendix shooter. By it's nature it's almost a guaranteed DQ, and I have no way of seeing the draw or safe holstering without being within the 180.

Note shoulder holsters and ankle holsters are not permitted either.

It's argued USPSA permits it, but I have never seen it at an actual match.

I have no issue if someone wants to carry like that. But that's their liability. At a match it's the club and SO's potential liability, and I am not getting sued because Tactical Timmy shit for brains blows his own balls off.

This comes off as pretty hostile + negative to AIWB on a forum where a WHOLE LOT of great shooters rock AIWB. I've felt uncomfortable running LOTS of people and it didn't have anything to do with where their holster was.

You've never seen it in USPSA so it probably doesn't really happen?

As I stated in OP -I think there should/would need to be an achieved level of classification before just anyone could shoot AIWB.


Pretty sure Mr. White made M class in limited minor from AIWB, but also won a few or more level 2 or 3 matches too - which is super impressive as well.

[gtmtnbiker98]

You could say that:

66656

Where was this gem, found?

[JCN]

It's argued USPSA permits it, but I have never seen it at an actual match.

I have no issue if someone wants to carry like that. But that's their liability. At a match it's the club and SO's potential liability, and I am not getting sued because Tactical Timmy shit for brains blows his own balls off.

I agree with the liability thing.

That being said, I ran AIWB at a USPSA match today with my CO gun using my left hand (my right hand is in a brace).

Nobody batted an eye. I rocked my hips and pushed the bottom of the holster down range to keep things kosher reholstering. Drawing, I always flip muzzle out while withdrawing to also avoid the junk shot.

[JCN]

You could say that:

66656

See Clusterfrack ... we should make those Kevlar junk pouch holster attachments and sell them to IDPA clubs!

[Sal Picante]

I agree with the liability thing.

That being said, I ran AIWB at a USPSA match today with my CO gun using my left hand (my right hand is in a brace).

Nobody batted an eye. I rocked my hips and pushed the bottom of the holster down range to keep things kosher reholstering. Drawing, I always flip muzzle out while withdrawing to also avoid the junk shot.

p/CKMgCSpj3QW

Was I very unsafe? :p

[uechibear]

Where was this gem, found?

I got it off another gun forum, so I'm sorry, but I can't say who/what the original source is.

[uechibear]

p/CKMgCSpj3QW

Was I very unsafe? :p

VERY unsafe from the targets' perspective!

[JCS]

Didn’t Gabe White somewhat famously make GM by shooting limited minor from AIWB? If I recall correctly he’s also placed well at national/regional matches doing so, but I’m not in the know when it comes to USPSA so I could be wrong about that. I also seem to recall he’s not the only one known for running AIWB in serious USPSA competition but again I could be misremembering.

Jay Beal made open class Master using a Roland special aiwb. It was gamed out but that’s just insane. I don’t believe anyone has ever made GM aiwb but that’s not because of skill. Most of em run it and use minor scoring. They have GM skills. Les is a GM in production and Jay finished top 5 at nationals in CO.

[RJ]

Was I very unsafe? :p

Les Pepperoni is that at Ruskin? I need to get down there sometime.

[Elwin]

Jay Beal made open class Master using a Roland special aiwb. It was gamed out but that’s just insane. I don’t believe anyone has ever made GM aiwb but that’s not because of skill. Most of em run it and use minor scoring. They have GM skills. Les is a GM in production and Jay finished top 5 at nationals in CO.

That makes sense, thanks for the correction. I do recall listening to or reading Gabe describing what a severe limiting factor it is to use minor in those divisions which, again, makes sense.

Also count me in as one of the guys described in a previous comment who just shows up to run carry gear on the clock. I’ve only occasionally shot a small local USPSA match. I’m not registered and personally don’t have the time and funds to seriously compete and/or chase a classification, as much as I’d like to if I had unlimited resources. So I’m not too interested in IDPA. I’d need different gear and since I’m not in it for the game itself, I’m not investing in that gear. Which is fine for me, it means I just shoot USPSA or maybe find an IDPA where someone will let me just shoot the stage for no score.

[Zincwarrior]

I agree with the liability thing.

That being said, I ran AIWB at a USPSA match today with my CO gun using my left hand (my right hand is in a brace).

Nobody batted an eye. I rocked my hips and pushed the bottom of the holster down range to keep things kosher reholstering. Drawing, I always flip muzzle out while withdrawing to also avoid the junk shot.

As a competitor, I have no problem with it. It's an interesting style, not permitted by my TexMex gifted body. As an SO, I have problems. I cannot see or manage the holster or draw and I have already seen glock leg. It makes me liable and my TQ is not going to help an abdominal wound.

[olstyn]

It makes me liable

Can you elaborate on this point please?

I do not understand how you could be held liable for someone else shooting themselves when doing something they decided to do of their own volition, and which activity they had to sign a liability waiver in order to participate in, thus acknowledging that they were taking risks in doing so. At no point did you instruct them to point the gun at their own body and press the trigger, right?

[Sal Picante]

Les Pepperoni is that at Ruskin? I need to get down there sometime.

That was at Frostproof. But, yes, you do need to come down to Ruskin sometime.

[jetfire]

I've been on the front lines of trying to get AIWB into IDPA for years, back to when they were doing rulebook re-writes in 2012. Joyce is a industry friend as well, and I like most of the people in IDPA's senior leadership. For better or for worse, we simply won't get AIWB in IDPA while the current ownership is in place.

It's a bummer.

[RJ]

That was at Frostproof. But, yes, you do need to come down to Ruskin sometime.

Yep, that too. Thanks Les.

On topic:

I think any shooting sport that gets people out with their carry gear (more or less) on the clock, against other competitors, is good for the industry. I suspect that anyone interested in IDPA is much, much more likely to be carrying behind the hip. In so far as I've been exposed to the "gun culture" online in other places (than p-f), carrying AIWB is regarded more like a red-headed step child, with the added negative of youwillshootcherballsoff. But hey, IDPA gets to set their own rules, like any other organization. If I shot an IDPA match, I'd just use one of my JM CK IWB3's.

Question, actually, save me looking it up, can I carry my reload AIWB in IDPA?

Also, (again, save me looking it up) I watched some "2019 Championship" IDPA videos, and seems like most of the folks were just dropping their mags on the ground through the reload on the clock. I seem to recall previous discussion on IDPA you could not do that, it was a rule you had to retain the partially full or empty mag ejected somewhere on you. Has that all changed recently?

[Zincwarrior]

Yep, that too. Thanks Les.

On topic:

I think any shooting sport that gets people out with their carry gear (more or less) on the clock, against other competitors, is good for the industry. I suspect that anyone interested in IDPA is much, much more likely to be carrying behind the hip. In so far as I've been exposed to the "gun culture" online in other places (than p-f), carrying AIWB is regarded more like a red-headed step child, with the added negative of youwillshootcherballsoff. But hey, IDPA gets to set their own rules, like any other organization. If I shot an IDPA match, I'd just use one of my JM CK IWB3's.

Question, actually, save me looking it up, can I carry my reload AIWB in IDPA?

Also, (again, save me looking it up) I watched some "2019 Championship" IDPA videos, and seems like most of the folks were just dropping their mags on the ground through the reload on the clock. I seem to recall previous discussion on IDPA you could not do that, it was a rule you had to retain the partially full or empty mag ejected somewhere on you. Has that all changed recently?

1. No appendix carry in IDPA. You can use an IWB holster in IDPA if that was your question.

2. You can drop a mag with a round in the mag if you pick it up before the course of fire is over, but thats usually only done on accident. Dropping empty mags is not an issue.

[jetfire]

Dropping empty mags is not an issue.

Incorrect. If I drop an empty mag but the slide is forward and I have a round in the chamber, it's a procedural.

[Jim Watson]

Question, actually, save me looking it up, can I carry my reload AIWB in IDPA?

No.
8.6.2 H. Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the front edge of the carrier or magazine is
behind the shooter’s hipbone.


Also, (again, save me looking it up) I watched some "2019 Championship" IDPA videos, and seems like most of the folks were just dropping their mags on the ground through the reload on the clock. I seem to recall previous discussion on IDPA you could not do that, it was a rule you had to retain the partially full or empty mag ejected somewhere on you. Has that all changed recently?


Dropping empty mags is not an issue.

You may drop an empty magazine from under an empty chamber. This normally at slide lock, but if your gun does not go to slide lock when empty, you may still drop the magazine. But you must retain even an empty magazine if there is a round in the chamber, and certainly retain a partly loaded magazine.

Caution, if you "stow" a partial magazine back in its carrier on the Tac Load, be sure to take it out and reload it for the next stage, likewise your Unload and Show Clear magazine. Reloading with three when you expected ten is not a good feeling.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Reloading with three when you expected ten is not a good feeling.

Nope, I would never do that - well, maybe not. Haha. Both games have their own silliness. I just like trigger behind the square range boredom. So I comply and let the games argue over millisecond technique differences. AWIB doesn't work for me, so have or ball or not.

My gun is an EDC, that's my focus. Skills with that. Is revolver shooting dead in USPSA? I did like shooting my J's in club IDPA matches. I doubt that would go over here. Have to see what the IDPA matches, a distance away, are like when the weather breaks.

[Zincwarrior]

Incorrect. If I drop an empty mag but the slide is forward and I have a round in the chamber, it's a procedural.

Fair point. I was thinking of a slide lock reload.

[RJ]

Incorrect. If I drop an empty mag but the slide is forward and I have a round in the chamber, it's a procedural.


No.
8.6.2 H. Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the front edge of the carrier or magazine is
behind the shooter’s hipbone.

You may drop an empty magazine from under an empty chamber. This normally at slide lock, but if your gun does not go to slide lock when empty, you may still drop the magazine. But you must retain even an empty magazine if there is a round in the chamber, and certainly retain a partly loaded magazine.

Caution, if you "stow" a partial magazine back in its carrier on the Tac Load, be sure to take it out and reload it for the next stage, likewise your Unload and Show Clear magazine. Reloading with three when you expected ten is not a good feeling.

Thanks Caleb and Jim. Appreciate the clarification and you correcting my impression.

[olstyn]

Incorrect. If I drop an empty mag but the slide is forward and I have a round in the chamber, it's a procedural.

Being required to retain an empty mag is extra dumb. I was not previously aware of that particular nuance. I suppose the justification is to make it easier for the RO to know whether dropped mags are empty or not?

[CleverNickname]

Being required to retain an empty mag is extra dumb. I was not previously aware of that particular nuance. I suppose the justification is to make it easier for the RO to know whether dropped mags are empty or not?
No, it's to discourage round-counting. You're not supposed to know that you've shot exactly enough shots to have an empty magazine but not be at slide lock, because in a Tactical Situation you wouldn't be counting rounds. Yes, it's a dumb rule.

[1911Nut]

Great thing about "dumb" IDPA rules: Participation in the sport is not mandatory.

[Jim Watson]

No, it's to discourage round-counting. You're not supposed to know that you've shot exactly enough shots to have an empty magazine but not be at slide lock, because in a Tactical Situation you wouldn't be counting rounds. Yes, it's a dumb rule.

Jeff Cooper thought you ought to be able to count rounds under match or combat stress and reload with the last round in the chamber. But he was thinking in terms of GI 1911s with 7 in the magazine.

One IDPAish outlaw match I know lets you load where, when, and how you like, but... you only get 30 rounds, 3x10 or 2x15 and stages run longer than regulation IDPA's 18. Better not throw away ammo you will need later just to schedule a reload e.g. between shooting positions.

[jetfire]

No, it's to discourage round-counting. You're not supposed to know that you've shot exactly enough shots to have an empty magazine but not be at slide lock, because in a Tactical Situation you wouldn't be counting rounds. Yes, it's a dumb rule.

And yet I know several people who in gunfights counted every round they fired. Weird, right?

[olstyn]

Great thing about "dumb" IDPA rules: Participation in the sport is not mandatory.

Attitudes like that are how you shrink participation in a sport, especially when there's an alternative available which does not have the "dumb" rules in question.

There are multiple USPSA clubs within a little over an hour drive of me (several of them within a half hour drive) hosting weeknight matches every week from spring through autumn with bigger matches on some weekends, but only one IDPA club in the entire metro area, and the lonely IDPA club hosts matches significantly less frequently. Certainly there are other factors as well, but I can't help but think that the contrast is at least somewhat related to the "dumb" IDPA rules.

[Zincwarrior]

Attitudes like that are how you shrink participation in a sport, especially when there's an alternative available which does not have the "dumb" rules in question.

There are multiple USPSA clubs within a little over an hour drive of me (several of them within a half hour drive) hosting weeknight matches every week from spring through autumn with bigger matches on some weekends, but only one IDPA club in the entire metro area, and the lonely IDPA club hosts matches significantly less frequently. Certainly there are other factors as well, but I can't help but think that the contrast is at least somewhat related to the "dumb" IDPA rules.

On the flip side you don't need a $3,000 race gun for IDPA. Every sport is different and that's a good thing.

[JCN]

Nope, I would never do that - well, maybe not. Haha. Both games have their own silliness. I just like trigger behind the square range boredom. So I comply and let the games argue over millisecond technique differences. AWIB doesn't work for me, so have or ball or not.

My gun is an EDC, that's my focus. Skills with that. Is revolver shooting dead in USPSA? I did like shooting my J's in club IDPA matches. I doubt that would go over here. Have to see what the IDPA matches, a distance away, are like when the weather breaks.

I kind of thought that way and didn't start shooting USPSA until 2019. But what I found was that playing the game and figuring out the game helped me improve my pistol shooting tremendously... with every single other gun I owned, including my EDC. Even from draw positions I didn't practice regularly. I improved more with my carry gun (P365) shooting a CZ gamer gun in that 12 months than I had in years prior.


No, it's to discourage round-counting. You're not supposed to know that you've shot exactly enough shots to have an empty magazine but not be at slide lock, because in a Tactical Situation you wouldn't be counting rounds. Yes, it's a dumb rule.

I have a hard time believing that's the reason for the rule. The round counts are so low in the game that you'd have a hard time NOT remembering your shots. Basically you're counting your make up shots from a stage plan, right? I heard it was a "don't waste ammo because you don't know when you might need it" rule.

All that being said, isn't it time for a new IDPA type game to come onto the scene? Surely Mr_White could come up with something that was a modern version of IDPA. Maybe a modern version of a Postal Match that people could compete remotely and post video?

Would anyone here be interested? I could post a different thread on it. I envision something that could be shot at a square range.....

[olstyn]

On the flip side you don't need a $3,000 race gun for IDPA. Every sport is different and that's a good thing.

This is the argument of someone who has a very skewed view of what USPSA is. If you want to be competitive in Open, sure, you need a multi-kilobuck race gun. Not so much in basically any other division. People regularly win Production division with stock (or nearly stock) Glocks or similar, and the same is true of Carry Optics, with the exception that they've usually spent a bit of money on 140mm mag extensions.

[Zincwarrior]

This is the argument of someone who has a very skewed view of what USPSA is. If you want to be competitive in Open, sure, you need a multi-kilobuck race gun. Not so much in basically any other division. People regularly win Production division with stock (or nearly stock) Glocks or similar, and the same is true of Carry Optics, with the exception that they've usually spent a bit of money on 140mm mag extensions.

Production is dying. Poor Man's Open has stomped it.

If you are playing in Production, Glocks are second level. Competitors run CZs and Tanfoglios now.

[CleverNickname]

I have a hard time believing that's the reason for the rule. The round counts are so low in the game that you'd have a hard time NOT remembering your shots. Basically you're counting your make up shots from a stage plan, right? I heard it was a "don't waste ammo because you don't know when you might need it" rule.
There's no difference in ammo being "wasted." The rule penalizes dropping an empty magazine on the ground if the chamber still has a round in it. There's no ammo being dropped, and the round in the chamber will be shot too.

[olstyn]

Production is dying. Poor Man's Open has stomped it.

If you are playing in Production, Glocks are second level. Competitors run CZs and Tanfoglios now.

Ah, so now we've entered the "move the goalposts" phase of the conversation. I never claimed a bunch of people were winning nationals with stock plastic guns, but even when you start talking about Shadow2s, they may be the "race guns" of Production, but they're still not $3K. MSRP is something like $1400 IIRC. Expensive, sure, but ~1/2 of what you mentioned. On the flip side, how many $5K custom 1911s do you see in IDPA? I'm pretty sure it's not zero. You can compete in either sport with a wide range of guns at a wide range of prices, so claiming that USPSA is some sort of "rich guy only" territory is pure BS.

[1911Nut]

Attitudes like that are how you shrink participation in a sport, especially when there's an alternative available which does not have the "dumb" rules in question.

There are multiple USPSA clubs within a little over an hour drive of me (several of them within a half hour drive) hosting weeknight matches every week from spring through autumn with bigger matches on some weekends, but only one IDPA club in the entire metro area, and the lonely IDPA club hosts matches significantly less frequently. Certainly there are other factors as well, but I can't help but think that the contrast is at least somewhat related to the "dumb" IDPA rules.

Not certain which "attitude" you are referencing. It's simply a statement. If one doesn't like the rules of any sport and think they are "dumb", then the perfect solution is to not participate.

I'm very fortunate. I can participate in 6 to 7 IDPA matches per month (year round) within a 35 minute drive from my home. There are a couple more I can participate in within 2 hours of my home. I participate in as many of them as I can.

There are even more USPSA matches within the same driving distances of my home, but I seldom, if ever participate in them, as I don't enjoy that sport as much as IDPA. That doesn't mean USPSA has stupid rules . . . . it's just what I want to do with my free time.

I'm convinced that is is highly counter-productive to the shooting world to continuously criticize ANY shooting sport today. I'm all for encouraging improvement in the rules and allowing anyone to share their opinions. But pointing out how your chosen sport is "dumb", or criticizing the sport because the rules don't match the rules of your favorite sport is hardly the conduit to achieve change.

There are plenty of enemies of the shooting sports out there. I prefer to not be among them.

It may not apply to all areas of the country or the world, but "shrinking participation" is absolutely, positively not happening in my part of the country.

[JCN]

Production is dying. Poor Man's Open has stomped it.

If you are playing in Production, Glocks are second level. Competitors run CZs and Tanfoglios now.

A Glock will not prevent you from getting to M level in USPSA. It’s probably about 2-4% off a classifier to shoot a stock Glock versus a fully prepped CZ.

If someone is shooting at the 40-50% level on classifiers, a full prep gun isn’t going to get them to B. A little bit of dry fire will.

The gun doesn’t hold most people back from their potential up to a fairly high level of performance.


There's no difference in ammo being "wasted." The rule penalizes dropping an empty magazine on the ground if the chamber still has a round in it. There's no ammo being dropped, and the round in the chamber will be shot too.

I didn’t say that the rule still wasn’t stupid. :D I’m just arguing that people can count to 6 or 8 by just counting make up shots if they have a stage plan so I’m not buying “can’t count” as a reason. Otherwise you’d have random ammo counts in magazines, arranged by the SO.


Ah, so now we've entered the "move the goalposts" phase of the conversation. I never claimed a bunch of people were winning nationals with stock plastic guns, but even when you start talking about Shadow2s, they may be the "race guns" of Production, but they're still not $3K. MSRP is something like $1400 IIRC. Expensive, sure, but ~1/2 of what you mentioned. On the flip side, how many $5K custom 1911s do you see in IDPA? I'm pretty sure it's not zero. You can compete in either sport with a wide range of guns at a wide range of prices, so claiming that USPSA is some sort of "rich guy only" territory is pure BS.

Also note that I can run a Shadow2 in IDPA CO with a milled and lightened slide.

[olstyn]

Not certain which "attitude" you are referencing. It's simply a statement. If one doesn't like the rules of any sport and think they are "dumb", then the perfect solution is to not participate.

It's possible that I read some tone which you didn't intend. If so, my apologies.

[1911Nut]

No apology necessary. Thanks for your reply.

[Zincwarrior]

A Glock will not prevent you from getting to M level in USPSA. It’s probably about 2-4% off a classifier to shoot a stock Glock versus a fully prepped CZ.

If someone is shooting at the 40-50% level on classifiers, a full prep gun isn’t going to get them to B. A little bit of dry fire will.

The gun doesn’t hold most people back from their potential up to a fairly high level of performance.



I didn’t say that the rule still wasn’t stupid. :D I’m just arguing that people can count to 6 or 8 by just counting make up shots if they have a stage plan so I’m not buying “can’t count” as a reason. Otherwise you’d have random ammo counts in magazines, arranged by the SO.



Also note that I can run a Shadow2 in IDPA CO with a milled and lightened slide.

Fair points there.
I've seen the biggest growth in both being poor man's Open: Carry Optics. I think that's the future of the sports and the industry overall.

[JCN]

Fair points there.
I've seen the biggest growth in both being poor man's Open: Carry Optics. I think that's the future of the sports and the industry overall.

I agree too. In objective testing, I’m just so much better with a dot that I quit fighting my desire for iron sighted carry guns.

To be fair, I’ve had irons knocked out of zero and having a dot plus BUIS actually is a more reliable sighting system for carry IMO.

I also don’t see why people disparage CO as “Poor man’s open.”

It’s not about cost for most people, it’s about hassle. It’s the same as racing less modified vehicles rather than prototype cars. It still takes a lot of skill to race well and expensive cars don’t replace basic driving ability.

But to have factory based cars that have parts that are available in stock from mass distributors and were built to reliability and durability specs for widespread use?... THAT’s a lot of the draw for carry optics.

It’s less hassle. When people have a lot of money, their time costs money. Sometimes people with money just want shit that works. Carry Optics comes on a basis of factory engineering and testing.

For the same reason that I’d rather daily drive a GT3 than a McLaren, I’d rather compete in CO than Open. And financial cost of entry isn’t a consideration at all. Hassle of breakage and repair is.

[JAD]

Oh my fucking gourd IDPA versus IPSC.

I sincerely hope all of you get herpes.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Well said!!!

[ST911]

I like some stuff about USPSA. I like some stuff about IDPA. I test, learn, have fun, and don't take either too seriously. Is that still okay?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Yes.

[Zincwarrior]

I agree too. In objective testing, I’m just so much better with a dot that I quit fighting my desire for iron sighted carry guns.

To be fair, I’ve had irons knocked out of zero and having a dot plus BUIS actually is a more reliable sighting system for carry IMO.

I also don’t see why people disparage CO as “Poor man’s open.”

It’s not about cost for most people, it’s about hassle. It’s the same as racing less modified vehicles rather than prototype cars. It still takes a lot of skill to race well and expensive cars don’t replace basic driving ability.

But to have factory based cars that have parts that are available in stock from mass distributors and were built to reliability and durability specs for widespread use?... THAT’s a lot of the draw for carry optics.

It’s less hassle. When people have a lot of money, their time costs money. Sometimes people with money just want shit that works. Carry Optics comes on a basis of factory engineering and testing.

For the same reason that I’d rather daily drive a GT3 than a McLaren, I’d rather compete in CO than Open. And financial cost of entry isn’t a consideration at all. Hassle of breakage and repair is.
When I say poor man's Open I say it with fondness myself. Several comrades have gone there and I bought my X5 with that in mind in the future.

[Zincwarrior]

Oh my fucking gourd IDPA versus IPSC.

I sincerely hope all of you get herpes.

Herpes? Old fart!:D

[JCN]

Oh my fucking gourd IDPA versus IPSC.

I sincerely hope all of you get herpes.

I did already, but your mother was worth it. :D

[olstyn]

I did already, but your mother was worth it. :D

You both belong on doodie project. :P

[JCN]

You both belong on doodie project. :P

Nah, it’s just good old fashioned STD and mom jokes.
We aren’t actually talking about open sores on genitalia and having sex with people’s mothers.

:D

[Jim Watson]

Oh my fucking gourd IDPA versus IPSC.


Please update complaints.
IPSC has not been shot to any extent in the USA for a good many years. Not zero, but not much.


No, it's to discourage round-counting.


I have a hard time believing that's the reason for the rule.

Why? IDPA BoD SAID it was the reason when they put it in.

[JCN]

Why? IDPA BoD SAID it was the reason when they put it in.

Well, if that’s what they said was the intent then that’s the intent.

I had a hard time believing it because it didn’t seem like that rule would make counting to 10 difficult.

But I’ll chalk it up to rules because rules and accept it.

[Joe]

AIWB doesn't matter.
IDPA pisses people off because it's a game that wraps itself in faux tactics with Dunning-Kruger Effect to the max. It has a drastically different scoring metric, crowd, and equipment rules from USPSA. The holster rules are at the bottom of the list of issues. Issues which will always exist because you can't make everyone happy and nothing is perfect.

In an average match let's say there are 4-6 stages. The majority of matches are local, level 1 matches. So over 90% of the time when one goes and plays IDPA they shoot approximately 5 stages. Say one of those stages has the gun start in a box, on a barrel, whatever.
So you're telling me, 4 draws is going to ruin your real world application, build training scars, and keep you from "train like you fight" ninja-operator-master level? 4 draws is what's keeping you from competing? Go dry fire for 10min after the match with your AIWB holster and you'll log in 500% the quantity of draws you just got in the match.

Bruce Lee was pretty accurate when he said "Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick." In direct comparison a draw is a draw and it really doesn't matter whether its from AIWB, a skeleton race holster, or a Safariland. If you're a soup sandwich going from AIWB to OWB, its because you're a soup sandwich, not because you had to change gear.

[1911Nut]

AIWB doesn't matter.
IDPA pisses people off because it's a game that wraps itself in faux tactics with Dunning-Kruger Effect to the max. It has a drastically different scoring metric, crowd, and equipment rules from USPSA. The holster rules are at the bottom of the list of issues. Issues which will always exist because you can't make everyone happy and nothing is perfect.

In an average match let's say there are 4-6 stages. The majority of matches are local, level 1 matches. So over 90% of the time when one goes and plays IDPA they shoot approximately 5 stages. Say one of those stages has the gun start in a box, on a barrel, whatever.
So you're telling me, 4 draws is going to ruin your real world application, build training scars, and keep you from "train like you fight" ninja-operator-master level? 4 draws is what's keeping you from competing? Go dry fire for 10min after the match with your AIWB holster and you'll log in 500% the quantity of draws you just got in the match.

Bruce Lee was pretty accurate when he said "Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick." In direct comparison a draw is a draw and it really doesn't matter whether its from AIWB, a skeleton race holster, or a Safariland. If you're a soup sandwich going from AIWB to OWB, its because you're a soup sandwich, not because you had to change gear.

I tried to like this post ten times, but could only log in one.

[YVK]

So you're telling me, 4 draws is going to ruin your real world application, build training scars, and keep you from "train like you fight" ninja-operator-master level? 4 draws is what's keeping you from competing? Go dry fire for 10min after the match with your AIWB holster and you'll log in 500% the quantity of draws you just got in the match.



Not necessarily disagreeing (personally use side rig in games while carry AIWB) but...

Those four draws will be their weekly assessment of how they are doing with their carry gear under condition of competitive stress, under observation, more or less cold, no redos, for score on that given day. 500 dry draws at home or live fire at the range don't give you that. As an example, there are less than two dozen FAST coin holders but hundreds of people who say they can run it on their own under 5.

[olstyn]

So you're telling me, 4 draws is going to ruin your real world application, build training scars, and keep you from "train like you fight" ninja-operator-master level? 4 draws is what's keeping you from competing?

Nope. For me personally, it's much more about the other rules than about AIWB not being allowed - AIWB just happens to be the subject of this thread, that's all. (I vastly prefer USPSA's rules, and as I stated earlier in the thread, I've got plenty of options of USPSA matches, so I don't bother with trying to get into IDPA.)

[JCN]

As an example, there are less than two dozen FAST coin holders but hundreds of people who say they can run it on their own under 5.

Maybe not a great example because many people don't have access or motivation to do the class where they give out FAST coins.
I have an extremely strong suspicion that every single semiauto handgun USPSA M and GM could run 2x successful FASTs on demand.

A better example would be the number of people who went to class and tried to get FAST coins and failed despite being able to run it consistently on their own under 5 at home.

[Zincwarrior]

Nope. For me personally, it's much more about the other rules than about AIWB not being allowed - AIWB just happens to be the subject of this thread, that's all. (I vastly prefer USPSA's rules, and as I stated earlier in the thread, I've got plenty of options of USPSA matches, so I don't bother with trying to get into IDPA.)

What are the other rules that bug you? This is not a criticism, but a question. I suck at both, and steel challenge, and falling steel, and they all seem pretty similar. Hence my question.

[YVK]

Maybe not a great example because many people don't have access or motivation to do the class where they give out FAST coins.
I have an extremely strong suspicion that every single semiauto handgun USPSA M and GM could run 2x successful FASTs on demand.

A better example would be the number of people who went to class and tried to get FAST coins and failed despite being able to run it consistently on their own under 5 at home.

Your example is better.

The other part, about every single M/GM being able to get a coin, color me skeptical. GJM once shared that at a post match lunch 2 or 3 out of 14 or something like that were carrying at all. I don't think that M/GM are particularly an exception from that. Kinda hard to be good with carry gear if you don't use it at all. I am a better USPSA shooter, with my Shadows etc, than I was in previous years but I dunno if I could run mid-5 on demand with my carry stuff now, like I did a few years back in a class with Ernest. There's only that much time for live and dry fire.
But we digress.

[JCN]

Your example is better.

The other part, about every single M/GM being able to get a coin, color me skeptical. GJM once shared that at a post match lunch 2 or 3 out of 14 or something like that were carrying at all. I don't think that M/GM are particularly an exception from that. Kinda hard to be good with carry gear if you don't use it at all. I am a better USPSA shooter, with my Shadows etc, than I was in previous years but I dunno if I could run mid-5 on demand with my carry stuff now, like I did a few years back in a class with Ernest. There's only that much time for live and dry fire.
But we digress.

Oh, I never said they were going to do it with their carry gear.
They only need to do it from concealment by the definition of the FAST challenge.

A number of people take pistol classes with Glocks but carry J frames.

With very little modification of holsters and mag pouches, most competition gear could be run at a pistol class.
Especially Production, Single Stack, Limited and CO.

[jetfire]

I have an extremely strong suspicion that every single semiauto handgun USPSA M and GM could run 2x successful FASTs on demand.

lol okay dude

Like on demand on their own range on demand in a class with Ernest staring at them and knowing that if they don't get the whole internet is going to think they suck?

[JCN]

lol okay dude

Like on demand on their own range on demand in a class with Ernest staring at them and knowing that if they don't get the whole internet is going to think they suck?

Like on demand if someone came to them at the end of a match and said, here’s an XL stiff vest. Put it on and do this drill twice and I’ll post it on the internet and if you blow it, everyone is going to think you suck.

My opinion though. Yours may differ.

C’mon. For chrissakes. You and I could probably do it with a revolver if we practiced it.

;)


https://youtu.be/MuDryrD3iuA

[Zincwarrior]

Like on demand if someone came to them at the end of a match and said, here’s an XL stiff vest. Put it on and do this drill twice and I’ll post it on the internet and if you blow it, everyone is going to think you suck.

My opinion though. Yours may differ.

C’mon. For chrissakes. You and I could probably do it with a revolver if we practiced it.

;)


https://youtu.be/MuDryrD3iuA

What is that setup? Is he shooting out of a tent to keep the white powder off him? As a Texan, is that what they call...snow? :eek:

[JCN]

What is that setup? Is he shooting out of a tent to keep the white powder off him? As a Texan, is that what they call...snow? :eek:

Haha. Yes, that’s me shooting.
I don’t shoot revolvers much at all but I like all guns.

I have a tarp shed with a little propane heater but it still sucks to try and do fast gun handling drills (no pun intended).

I normally shoot with gloves in the winter but for really precision stuff at high speed I can’t.

A FAST with a semi auto is a 1.5s draw, 0.5s second shot, 1.5 second reload and 0.25 splits for 4.25s total.

Heck, you could do a 1.75s draw and 1.75s reload and still make it under time.
That’s in comparison to normal 1 second draws and 1.2 s reloads for people at that level. Adding concealment doesn’t seem like that it would add more time than was available.

I do recant my opinion. I forgot about how many Legacy M there are. I’ll change my statement to every pistol based GM could do it without breaking a sweat.

[jetfire]

Like on demand if someone came to them at the end of a match and said, here’s an XL stiff vest. Put it on and do this drill twice and I’ll post it on the internet and if you blow it, everyone is going to think you suck.

My opinion though. Yours may differ.

In those circumstances, yes.

For an actual coin? No.

Although that revolver run was pretty sick, I ain't mad at that. Before I broke my arm last year I was pushing low fives pretty regularly with my Match Champion.

[JCN]

In those circumstances, yes.

For an actual coin? No.

Okay. At least we agree on the first part.
We can agree to disagree on the second point.

[JCN]

Although that revolver run was pretty sick, I ain't mad at that. Before I broke my arm last year I was pushing low fives pretty regularly with my Match Champion.

That’s cool. I had seen your revolver FAST and I wholeheartedly admit to everyone that you are by far a better revolver shooter than me. I enjoy your Revolver love! Heck, in 15 years that’s the only type of gun we might be able to carry, lol.

[olstyn]

What are the other rules that bug you? This is not a criticism, but a question. I suck at both, and steel challenge, and falling steel, and they all seem pretty similar. Hence my question.

Mainly it's the rules which encompass the sport's seeming attitude of "you will shoot this stage in a prescribed manner rather than as you see fit." The requirement to pie corners, shoot targets near to far, and to retain partial (and as noted by jetfire, sometimes even empty) mags are the big ones. I very much prefer the freedom USPSA allows where you're just presented with a problem and how you solve it is up to you as long as you stay within the fault lines while shooting and don't break the 180.

ETA: I also don't love the 18-round maximum for stage length, just from a fun perspective. I like shooting, and at least some of the time, more shooting = more fun. Short/medium stages like that can certainly be fun and challenging, but so can 32-round stages. Basically, as long as it doesn't take more than the 51 rounds I have on me at the start of a stage when shooting Production, I'm probably not unhappy about it. :)

[jetfire]

Okay. At least we agree on the first part.
We can agree to disagree on the second point.

I think the addition of "doing it for real" creates a level of stress equivalent to a major match that you care about. But of course for that to be true, the person has to care about winning a coin, but if someone's in an Ernest class they probably care about winning a coin.

So I definitely think that most GMs possess the technical skill to pull off two clean FASTs back to back, but what I question is whether or not they posses the match mentality to make it happen. There's still a lot of paper GMs on the planet who can only win Area matches if no one good shows up, and can't crack the top 16 at Nationals. Sure they can shoot a standard great, but when they're under pressure they get junked by a B-class shooter with a good mind.

[YVK]

I’ll change my statement to every pistol based GM could do it without breaking a sweat.

Most likely.

The test was designed to be shot with guns that could be reasonably carried daily. Todd had people raise their arms to assess concealment. I remember the heartburn around here when people got coins with G34 and Roland. If someone decided to run it with a Shadow 2 or Atlas out of DAA hanger under SMF vest, their choice but I doubt many here would be impressed by that. I also doubt Ernest will give them a coin for that but I don't mean to speak for him.

[JCN]

Most likely.

The test was designed to be shot with guns that could be reasonably carried daily. Todd had people raise their arms to assess concealment. I remember the heartburn around here when people got coins with G34 and Roland. If someone decided to run it with a Shadow 2 or Atlas out of DAA hanger under SMF vest, their choice but I doubt many here would be impressed by that. I also doubt Earnest will give them a coin for that but I don't mean to speak for him.

Dunno. Life imitates art though. Lately been seeing a lot of trainers for self defense using guns that look straight out of a competition with large dots and big magwells. Have to define the parameters or else there’s creep.

I don’t know if this is his teaching gun or carry gun, but it looks like a race gun.

66739

I would have no problem bringing a Shadow 2 to a class. It’s really no different than the “carry” CZ75B I bought tricked out from CZC.

And as to “carryable” would you be insane for carrying a 1911?

No, then why not a Shadow 2?

66740

[Zincwarrior]

Mainly it's the rules which encompass the sport's seeming attitude of "you will shoot this stage in a prescribed manner rather than as you see fit." The requirement to pie corners, shoot targets near to far, and to retain partial (and as noted by jetfire, sometimes even empty) mags are the big ones. I very much prefer the freedom USPSA allows where you're just presented with a problem and how you solve it is up to you as long as you stay within the fault lines while shooting and don't break the 180.

ETA: I also don't love the 18-round maximum for stage length, just from a fun perspective. I like shooting, and at least some of the time, more shooting = more fun. Short/medium stages like that can certainly be fun and challenging, but so can 32-round stages. Basically, as long as it doesn't take more than the 51 rounds I have on me at the start of a stage when shooting Production, I'm probably not unhappy about it. :)

That's fair. I like the course of fire as a pallet cleanser, but understand. I would add I don't like the limits on steel and the mag reload is annoying. Also I don't like the belt rules. I like the ability to pull your equipment belt right off like in USPSA.

I do like the focus on more creative crap like one handed shooting, and get really annoyed with the extended walk throughs of USPSA. I also like IDPA scoring because I don't like hit factor calcs. It may be a thing but it feels like less USPSA shooters pitch in to reset, but thats me.

[NoTacTravis]

This thread has me all fired up about the FAST drill now. I'm going to start dry firing it today from both open and concealment and see how many months it takes to get to sub 5 back to back runs in live fire with a bone stock G19.

From there I'll see how much it longer it takes to get two back to back sub 5 runs on video. Video typically ads more stress and fumbles to me than full competition in most other sports. Obviously it's no $500 class with a famous instructor level of pressure but it should be an interesting study of sample size one.

I'm from the camp where I think Joe Average can just put the reps in. I'm posting that opinion in this context so I'll have to eat those words later if I'm wrong.

[Clusterfrack]

I don’t know if this is his teaching gun or carry gun, but it looks like a race gun.


Yeah, I get the need for sponsors. But I liked it better when Pannone ran 100k through 2 Cajunized P-07s at his classes.

[olstyn]

It may be a thing but it feels like less USPSA shooters pitch in to reset, but thats me.

It is my guess that this is regional, and maybe even specific squad based rather than sport-based. I may simply be lucky, but most of the time at USPSA matches here in the Twin Cities area of MN, people are generally very good about helping reset, often to the point where there are more people trying to help reset than are needed, and on the rare occasion where that hasn't been the case, calling it out has usually resulted in near-instant changes of behavior.

[YVK]

I would have no problem bringing a Shadow 2 to a class. It’s really no different than the “carry” CZ75B I bought tricked out from CZC.

And as to “carryable” would you be insane for carrying a 1911?

No, then why not a Shadow 2?



Funny you asked. I carried my 1911, appendix of course, this Saturday. Full sized, all steel, although masterfully lightened by Ned Christiansen. Only 'cause I wanted to go practice with it just that one day. Got done with that, back to regular 43X that same night.

I didn't think I was more insane than usual, people who carry full sized all steel 1911s get my respek*, 99% of other ccw carriers carry stuff that's closer to Shield. So the question, Noner's Staccato aside, is who we relate in regards to carry gear and drills to be shot with it, the outliers or everybody else.

With respek* to Shadow 2, both carry and use in defensive classes:

- I wouldn't do either with a gun that has a 2.5 lbs trigger.
- I wouldn't do either with a gun that has to be thumb-decocked.
- I wouldn't carry a gun without a firing pin block.
- I wouldn't carry a 9 mm gun that weighs 47 oz unloaded.
- I wouldn't carry any gun that weights 47 oz unloaded.

YMMV, of course.

*Respek

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBKk1McBLxM
-

[JCN]

Funny you asked. I carried my 1911, appendix of course, this Saturday. Full sized, all steel, although masterfully lightened by Ned Christiansen. Only 'cause I wanted to go practice with it just that one day. Got done with that, back to regular 43X that same night.

I didn't think I was more insane than usual, people who carry full sized all steel 1911s get my respek*, 99% of other ccw carriers carry stuff that's closer to Shield. So the question, Noner's Staccato aside, is who we relate in regards to carry gear and drills to be shot with it, the outliers or everybody else.

With respek* to Shadow 2, both carry and use in defensive classes:

- I wouldn't do either with a gun that has a 2.5 lbs trigger.
- I wouldn't do either with a gun that has to be thumb-decocked.
- I wouldn't carry a gun without a firing pin block.
- I wouldn't carry a 9 mm gun that weighs 47 oz unloaded.
- I wouldn't carry any gun that weights 47 oz unloaded.

YMMV, of course.

*Respek

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBKk1McBLxM
-

I like you and respect you. Hopefully you don’t mind a discussion on it and a different viewpoint.

I carry a P365 with XL grip. So I dry fired and shot the FAST x2 (I know it’s not the same as being in class).


https://youtu.be/fKUlXzcw0RY

Because I wanted to prove to myself that I could do it on demand.

I can also pass and almost clean the old Federal Air Marshal course of fire with that gun as well.

I do it with the manual safety engaged, just like I carry it.

But it’s not the best shooting gun I own.

If I were at home when there was a break in and I were sitting next to my gamer Shadow 2 and my P365...

I would absolutely grab my gamer gun.

In normal life, I don’t carry a spare magazine and I use a holster that rides lower. It’s a little slower to get to the gun, but more comfortable and conceals better.

If I were to do a pistol class, it would be gaming in my mind. It’s a challenge to master. I’m not LEO or military and am really not concerned about defensive pistol as a necessary safety skill versus just another challenge to master that might come in handy, but really is more for my education and enjoyment.

So to that end, I would game in the spirit of the game.

I would pick loose fitting concealment clothing, a holster that wasn’t crazy tight retention and magazine pouches that weren’t buried deep in a pocket.

If the requirements were stock gun with duty powered ammunition, that’s different. But hate the game, not the player.

[YVK]

Hopefully you don’t mind a discussion on it and a different viewpoint.


If I were at home when there was a break in and I were sitting next to my gamer Shadow 2 and my P365...

I would absolutely grab my gamer gun.

In normal life, I don’t carry a spare magazine and I use a holster that rides lower. It’s a little slower to get to the gun, but more comfortable and conceals better.

If I were to do a pistol class, it would be gaming in my mind. It’s a challenge to master. I’m not LEO or military and am really not concerned about defensive pistol as a necessary safety skill versus just another challenge to master that might come in handy, but really is more for my education and enjoyment.

So to that end, I would game in the spirit of the game.

I would pick loose fitting concealment clothing, a holster that wasn’t crazy tight retention and magazine pouches that weren’t buried deep in a pocket.



Nah, I enjoy the conversation. Feel guilty a little that the thread is hijacked but it was already dead.

I'd do many of the same things you would. Certainly if I had to shoot for real and had an option of my Shadow 2 vs 43X, no question. My S2s are unloaded unless at the range tho.

The classes, that's the matter of attitude and reasons. Yeah, if you're going for enjoyment, challenge etc, and class employs some metric that's hard and somehow desirable, gaming it within the rules of this game is what we all do. If not for the speed, I'd use a high ride holster so I don't beat my fingers against the belt. The FAST shot with G34 out of IDPA gear projects IDPA, no necessarily real conceal carry.

To me, and I emphasize that this is just a personal attitude without passing any judgments on others, those things are no longer relatable. I may still go and take a defensive class for reasons not necessarily related to technical aspects, but if a dude pushes some sort of standards while shooting a 9 mm 2011 with a huge magwell, that basically becomes IDPA to me. Oh, I didn't say that, did I..

[Clusterfrack]

I would absolutely grab my gamer gun.


I wouldn't grab my practice S2 because it has 50k rounds through it, and probably 10x that in dryfire. And it probably hasn't been cleaned in 3000 rounds.

I also wouldn't grab my match gun for similar reasons. My guns aren't life safety equipment unless I keep them specifically for that purpose.

If I had a S2 for home defense... yes sure. But I have 2 P-07s for carry/home defense instead. (And a practice P-07 for practice).

[JCN]

I wouldn't grab my practice S2 because it has 50k rounds through it, and probably 10x that in dryfire. And it probably hasn't been cleaned in 3000 rounds.

I also wouldn't grab my match gun for similar reasons. My guns aren't life safety equipment unless I keep them specifically for that purpose.

If I had a S2 for home defense... yes sure. But I have 2 P-07s for carry/home defense instead. (And a practice P-07 for practice).

My actual home defense gun is a Glock. :D

I’ve been trying to warm up to the Maxim 9 as a home defense gun... but that trigger... bleh.

[Clusterfrack]

I recently shot an outlaw match with mostly IDPA rules, that allowed AIWB carry. At least on my squad, everyone was safe, and the AIWB carriers did not cause any issues. It was cold and rainy so we all wore a lot of clothing. I observed a few strongside IWB carriers speed/slam holster or poke around to find their holster under their jacket. The AIWB shooters had none of these issues, and could look their gun into the holster. From what I saw, even newer shooters were not endangered by carrying AIWB.

I will add that this was the first time-plus IDPA scoring match I've shot in at least 5 years. If was fun, but not something I will do very often. Several high-scoring shooters inspected targets after each array and cleaned up any points down, and that's not something I want to do.

The best part of the match was squadding with a retired LEO SWAT guy I hadn't seen in years. It was good to catch up, and I like his "default aggressive" approach to defensive scenarios.

[olstyn]

Several high-scoring shooters inspected targets after each array and cleaned up any points down, and that's not something I want to do.

Can you explain this? I'm not clear on what "cleaned up any points down" means.

[Clusterfrack]

Can you explain this? I'm not clear on what "cleaned up any points down" means.

After shooting a group of targets, they visually inspected their hits and if there were any outside of the Down-0 circle, they would shoot makeups. At 1s per point down, there's plenty of time to do that.

[joshs]

After shooting a group of targets, they visually inspected their hits and if there were any outside of the Down-0 circle, they would shoot makeups. At 1s per point down, there's plenty of time to do that.

It's still faster (especially over a whole match) to just shoot at a speed where you can shoot 90-95ish percent of the available points. This makes it a slightly slower pace than USPSA minor (around 90% usually fastest), and a bit slower than major(80-85% usually fastest). Unless you're shooting lots of mikes, I have a hard time wrapping my head around the time needed to assess, reacquire, and shoot being faster. I'll make up a shot that I call out of the -0 while I'm in the process of shooting (assuming it won't have a reload consequence) because that's almost always faster (only takes .25-.5 depending on target difficulty), but actually reassessing uncalled bad shots seems slower.

[Zincwarrior]

I was going to ask same as guys with vacuums immediately popped in my head.

How does the SO watch the holstering? This is not a criticism but a question.

[Clusterfrack]

It's still faster (especially over a whole match) to just shoot at a speed where you can shoot 90-95ish percent of the available points. This makes it a slightly slower pace than USPSA minor (around 90% usually fastest), and a bit slower than major(80-85% usually fastest). Unless you're shooting lots of mikes, I have a hard time wrapping my head around the time needed to assess, reacquire, and shoot being faster. I'll make up a shot that I call out of the -0 while I'm in the process of shooting (assuming it won't have a reload consequence) because that's almost always faster (only takes .25-.5 depending on target difficulty), but actually reassessing uncalled bad shots seems slower.

That's what I did, and it was a winning strategy. But there were numerous opportunities to scan and make up, and it would have been a major scoring advantage.

[NoTacTravis]

*edit* Nevermind. I'm too stupid to understand a word play joke. Figured it out in my own slow way. *edit*

[GyroF-16]

It's still faster (especially over a whole match) to just shoot at a speed where you can shoot 90-95ish percent of the available points. This makes it a slightly slower pace than USPSA minor (around 90% usually fastest), and a bit slower than major(80-85% usually fastest). Unless you're shooting lots of mikes, I have a hard time wrapping my head around the time needed to assess, reacquire, and shoot being faster. I'll make up a shot that I call out of the -0 while I'm in the process of shooting (assuming it won't have a reload consequence) because that's almost always faster (only takes .25-.5 depending on target difficulty), but actually reassessing uncalled bad shots seems slower.

This is exactly my conclusion / adopted practice.
Visually assessing holes and re-engaging would usually only be helpful for a miss (-5), although potentially slightly advantageous for “cleaning up” a -3, as long as it was detected quickly.

[olstyn]

After shooting a group of targets, they visually inspected their hits and if there were any outside of the Down-0 circle, they would shoot makeups. At 1s per point down, there's plenty of time to do that.

Ah, I see. That sort of thing would never even occur to me to do - as others have said, if I'm sure I have a miss due to reading the sights/calling the shot, or I just happen to catch a flash view of a target and notice it for some reason, then sure, I'd throw another shot at that target, but specifically pausing to assess arrays of targets for mikes/bad hits a standard part of the shooting process? Ugh. So much wasted time...

[Clusterfrack]

Ah, I see. That sort of thing would never even occur to me to do - as others have said, if I'm sure I have a miss due to reading the sights/calling the shot, or I just happen to catch a flash view of a target and notice it for some reason, then sure, I'd throw another shot at that target, but specifically pausing to assess arrays of targets for mikes/bad hits a standard part of the shooting process? Ugh. So much wasted time...

Exactly, and IMO it shouldn't. Consider: the cost of 1 point down is 1 sec, and there is a visible target array of 6 targets. That's 12 shots. It takes maybe 1sec to scan for hits, or maybe you remember where you were down points. Even down 2 could make it advantageous to go back and clean up hits--let alone down more.

And, this approach encourages a hero-or-zero shooting style (exactly the opposite of what the newer IDPA rule set was supposed to do). My estimate is that this works below a certain level of shooting. Above that, switching to shot-calling might be required for a win.

[Clusterfrack]

How does the SO watch the holstering? This is not a criticism but a question.

It varies, but in my experience SO/ROs aren't very concerned about holstering. On make ready, as long as the gun is in the proper condition, all's good with most ROs. After the stage, they instruct the shooter to unload, show clear, hammer down, holster. One the gun is in the holster, the job is done.

I have only very rarely seen any RO comment on a speed/slam holster or a fishing expedition around the holster mouth. I've commented far more times than all the other ROs I've seen do it put together. The dangerously holstering shooter is usually resentful, despite me trying to be as helpful and gentle as I know how. Honestly, I'm getting tired of mentioning it. I have seen zero AIWB shooters holster dangerously.

[Artemas2]

How does the SO watch the holstering? This is not a criticism but a question.

With my eyes:rolleyes:

If the need to babysit a shooter is required I step up to their strong side just behind their 180 and can see everything I need to. Adding to what Cluster observed, all the AIWB guys I have run are aware of the "risks" and their holster game is on point.

[Artemas2]

EDIT: oops completely wrong IDPA AIWB thread:o

https://www.facebook.com/ShootIDPA/photos/a.199456060131409/4732163920193911/


Thank you to the members that completed our AIWB survey. We have collected the responses and want to share the results. At this time we are going over this data with our rules committee and no decisions have been made as of yet. We will be publishing more surveys soon, as we want to learn more about our membership. Any future surveys will be announced on all our social media channels, in the weekly email the Tactical Brief, and on the IDPA website. https://bit.ly/AIWBIDPA


82610

[Glenn E. Meyer]

It varies, but in my experience SO/ROs aren't very concerned about holstering. On make ready, as long as the gun is in the proper condition, all's good with most ROs. After the stage, they instruct the shooter to unload, show clear, hammer down, holster. One the gun is in the holster, the job is done.

I have only very rarely seen any RO comment on a speed/slam holster or a fishing expedition around the holster mouth. I've commented far more times than all the other ROs I've seen do it put together. The dangerously holstering shooter is usually resentful, despite me trying to be as helpful and gentle as I know how. Honestly, I'm getting tired of mentioning it. I have seen zero AIWB shooters holster dangerously.

Shot at the club where there was a fatal holstering incident (note it was in USPSA and I was shooting IDPA there). They were very concerned with telling folks to look at their holster. Since I have a pretty automatic reholster nowadays, they told me to look at it.

[Jim Watson]

New rules coming out, effective June 1.
AIWB is IN
15 SHOTS in SSP, 10 (from 8) in CCP.

It appears the Cooper Reload will be allowable. You still may not drop a magazine with ammo in it, but there is now nothing said about the chamber.

[Artemas2]

New rules coming out, effective June 1.
AIWB is IN
15 SHOTS in SSP, 10 (from 8) in CCP.

It appears the Cooper Reload will be allowable. You still may not drop a magazine with ammo in it, but there is now nothing said about the chamber.




holy crap these are some huge changes

https://www.idpa.com/new-rulebook-mar-equipment-appendices/

[CleverNickname]

Now just change over to hit factor scoring and it might be worth shooting IDPA again.

[MVS]

Now just change over to hit factor scoring and it might be worth shooting IDPA again.

Why bother having a separate sport if you are going to do that?

[CleverNickname]

Why bother having a separate sport if you are going to do that?
Exactly.

[JCN]

Exactly.

I just read the rules and said fuck it, I’ll just shoot PCC.

[1911Nut]

holy crap these are some huge changes

https://www.idpa.com/new-rulebook-mar-equipment-appendices/

The increase in capacity for SSP Division will be welcomed by most shooters, I think.

However . . . . the last two bullets in the summarization of changes below, are going to NOT be welcomed, and I think will ultimately do more to chase folks away from SSP than attract them to it

Equipment Changes - SSP
• Division capacity increased to 15 rounds
• No visible external modifications are allowed
• Grip Modules are not considered removable grips
• Exterior parts may be refinished
• Stippling/texturing may be applied to replaceable parts
• Aftermarket magazine releases, slide stops, safety levers,
de-cocking levers, hammers, and triggers are not allowed
• Custom shop parts are not allowed

"Aftermarket magazine releases, slide stops, safety levers, de-cocking levers, HAMMERS, AND TRIGGERS are not allowed"
Almost every single SSP shooter I am aware of that shoots SSP Division has some changes in their hammers and triggers, especially CZ shooters who have pistols from CZ Custom or Cajun Gun Works. And I know there are several Glock and S&W M&P shooters currently shooting SSP Division with aftermarket triggers.

I have long ago decided to just try to shoot and enjoy myself at IDPA matches and tune out the incessant discussion and debate over "IDPA rules". Almost every time IDPA "improves or clarifies" rules, they create more displeasure and controversy.

The last true "rule" change the organization implemented that was truly an improvement and seemed to be almost universally welcomed and embraced was when they established fault lines and removed the subjectivity of "cover" calls (back in 2017, I think).

So how did they improve that rule this time? By limiting the length of a fault line! I'm not going to go into a lot of detail about how this rule can and will change the way a match stage is planned and executed, but it WILL. I don't think many shooters are going to like it. IDPA had finally almost completely solved the fault line/"cover" debate in their courses of fire, so they have changed the rule.

Oh well, it's just a game, and I am mediocre at it, at best. I'll keep shooting it and just stand a little farther away from the rule debates to prevent my mellow from being harshed!

Oh, and I will get my two DA/SA CZ Shadows converted to SAO and shoot in ESP Division when I am not shooting in CO Division.

Next up: The fire and brimstone from ESP and CO shooters who want to know why THEY can't load 15 rounds in their magazines!

[miller_man]

Boom! Never say never.

Just renewed my membership and will be likely shooting aiwb in a match on Thurs. Good on IDPA, took em a while - honestly, actually still surprised they actually did it!

[JCN]

When an iron pistol is made artificially more competitive with higher mag capacity than CO, it feels… political / industry driven.

PCC, yeah you know me.

[underhook]

The stippling on replacable parts. That favors the SIG FCU as the entire lower is replaceable.


When an iron pistol is made artificially more competitive with higher mag capacity than CO, it feels… political / industry driven.


That is intersting. I would assume the indsutry would be pushing to CO as it sells new guns and optics?

[Artemas2]

I bet leaving ESP mostly alone is because of those pesky 9mm 1911s that generally dominate the division, same for CO.

Not sure I like how they changed the rules on fault lines though, might as well just use shooting boxes at every position

[JCN]

The stippling on replacable parts. That favors the SIG FCU as the entire lower is replaceable.

That is intersting. I would assume the indsutry would be pushing to CO as it sells new guns and optics?

“The industry” meaning Wilson Combat…

They’ll sell you something with a red dot but “the Gun Guys” love their irons.

EDIT: I read rules more carefully and SSP doesn’t allow single action?

Such a weird mish mash of different eras.

I wonder if they know that agencies are moving to optics on service pistols….

Maybe we can expect IDPA to come up with rules for 2022… in 2027.

[Mirolynmonbro]

The increase in capacity for SSP Division will be welcomed by most shooters, I think.

However . . . . the last two bullets in the summarization of changes below, are going to NOT be welcomed, and I think will ultimately do more to chase folks away from SSP than attract them to it

Equipment Changes - SSP
• Division capacity increased to 15 rounds
• No visible external modifications are allowed
• Grip Modules are not considered removable grips
• Exterior parts may be refinished
• Stippling/texturing may be applied to replaceable parts
• Aftermarket magazine releases, slide stops, safety levers,
de-cocking levers, hammers, and triggers are not allowed
• Custom shop parts are not allowed

"Aftermarket magazine releases, slide stops, safety levers, de-cocking levers, HAMMERS, AND TRIGGERS are not allowed"
Almost every single SSP shooter I am aware of that shoots SSP Division has some changes in their hammers and triggers, especially CZ shooters who have pistols from CZ Custom or Cajun Gun Works. And I know there are several Glock and S&W M&P shooters currently shooting SSP Division with aftermarket triggers.

I have long ago decided to just try to shoot and enjoy myself at IDPA matches and tune out the incessant discussion and debate over "IDPA rules". Almost every time IDPA "improves or clarifies" rules, they create more displeasure and controversy.

The last true "rule" change the organization implemented that was truly an improvement and seemed to be almost universally welcomed and embraced was when they established fault lines and removed the subjectivity of "cover" calls (back in 2017, I think).

So how did they improve that rule this time? By limiting the length of a fault line! I'm not going to go into a lot of detail about how this rule can and will change the way a match stage is planned and executed, but it WILL. I don't think many shooters are going to like it. IDPA had finally almost completely solved the fault line/"cover" debate in their courses of fire, so they have changed the rule.

Oh well, it's just a game, and I am mediocre at it, at best. I'll keep shooting it and just stand a little farther away from the rule debates to prevent my mellow from being harshed!

Oh, and I will get my two DA/SA CZ Shadows converted to SAO and shoot in ESP Division when I am not shooting in CO Division.

Next up: The fire and brimstone from ESP and CO shooters who want to know why THEY can't load 15 rounds in their magazines!

If your gun was SSP legal before the rulebook, it is still legal with the new rulebook

[underhook]

“The industry” meaning Wilson Combat…


Irony that such a specific corner of the industry has that much influance on IDPA. I would like to see Phil Strader have an equal industry voice in IDPA. Maybe I'm crossing the beams there politically.....

The Hackerthon/Wilson future of the industry chat has me thinking they are looking in the rear view.

[1911Nut]

If your gun was SSP legal before the rulebook, it is still legal with the new rulebook

You certainly may be correct, and I certainly hope you are.

A continuing problem I (and several other IDPA shooters I know) have encountered with the IDPA rules is their interpretation.

Can you point me to a place in the new rules and/or updates that support your statement, or is it another one that must be individually interpreted?

I don't recall anyplace in previous rules that specifically prohibit "aftermarket hammers, triggers, or custom shop parts".

Were these parts prohibited before this change? If they were, I know of multiple dozens of SSP shooters who have been in violation of IDPA rules for several years, yet who gave passed "equipment inspection" at IDPA sanctioned matches.

Believe me, I am not attempting to be argumentative nor do I enjoy debates about IDPA rules. Just trying to understand the latest changes.

[Artemas2]

You certainly may be correct, and I certainly hope you are.

A continuing problem I (and several other IDPA shooters I know) have encountered with the IDPA rules is their interpretation.

Can you point me to a place in the new rules and/or updates that support your statement, or is it another one that must be individually interpreted?

I don't recall anyplace in previous rules that specifically prohibit "aftermarket hammers, triggers, or custom shop parts".

Were these parts prohibited before this change? If they were, I know of multiple dozens of SSP shooters who have been in violation of IDPA rules for several years, yet who gave passed "equipment inspection" at IDPA sanctioned matches.

Believe me, I am not attempting to be argumentative nor do I enjoy debates about IDPA rules. Just trying to understand the latest changes.

From the 2017 rule book:


8.2.1.2 SSP Permitted Modifications (Inclusive list):
A. Sights may be changed to another notch and post type. Slides may not be machined to accept different style
sights.
B. Grips may be changed to another style or material that is similar to factory configuration and do not weigh more
than 2.00 oz. more than the factory standard weight for that model.
C. Magazine releases, slide stops, safety levers, de-cocking levers, hammers, and triggers, that are stock on one SSP
legal firearm may be used on another SSP legal firearm from the same manufacturer provided they are drop in
replacements. Parts in this list must come factory installed on standard production firearms. Special parts that
are available installed only from a factory custom shop are not eligible in SSP.

8.2.1.3 SSP Excluded Modifications (Non-Inclusive list):
A. Externally visible modifications other than those listed in the Permitted Modifications section.
B. Aftermarket or visibly modified magazine releases, slide stops, safety levers, de-cocking levers, and hammers.


Unless they happen to be a fellow CZ nerd, many equipment check guys don't know what the are looking at which is why a slightly different shaped hammer often gets a pass, but it has always been illegal. I run all my DA/SA under ESP for this reason.

[JCN]

Irony that such a specific corner of the industry has that much influance on IDPA. I would like to see Phil Strader have an equal industry voice in IDPA. Maybe I'm crossing the beams there politically.....

The Hackerthon/Wilson future of the industry chat has me thinking they are looking in the rear view.

I’m out of the loop, but isn’t “Joyce” Bill Wilson’s wife?

It’s such a schizophrenic rule set.

Our local IDPA is all PCC and CO.

Their PCC allowance made it seem like a desperation member grab that wasn’t well thought out.

[1911Nut]

From the 2017 rule book:



Unless they happen to be a fellow CZ nerd, many equipment check guys don't know what the are looking at which is why a slightly different shaped hammer often gets a pass, but it has always been illegal. I run all my DA/SA under ESP for this reason.

Thanks for this information. I guess most of the CZ's from CZC and CGW have always been illegal in IDPA SSP Division. It will be interesting to see if anything changes regarding enforcement.

[vcdgrips]

Minor ramble follows.

A someone who has " competed" locally off and on in IDPA since its inception, I often found its rules byzantine and confusing in rationale i.e. a Glock 17 with stippling at one point was ESP. With stick on removable grip tape it was SSP-yet they are functionally equiv. in every way, no AIWB despite the literal explosion of the carry mode since the mid 2000's etc.

Moreover, if you shot any "competition course" with an eye toward life preserving tactical considerations, you would NEVER win anything.

At some point I realized, that the true value of the "sport" (for me at least) was the camaraderie and honing automaticity re running the gun to free the mind to solve the accuracy and "tactical" challenges.

Once, I made that switch, I did reasonably well in my local club playing the game.


Having said all of that, when you as the Wilsons ( and others) literally invent a sport, you get to literally make the rules. If you do not like it, one can endeavor to effect change from within or invent their own sport.

In the end, it is simply a game. I could lie and say that I stopped/started/stopped shooting IDPA because they would not let me shoot with a light on my gun at one point when I carried that way (G34/35 with a TLR-1 in a Raven OWB) and/or shoot carrying AIWB (98% of the time since 08 or 09) or I could tell the the truth and say I had other priorities for my time and COVID keep me away from folks even when the club started shooting outside in the Summer of 2020.

I am cautiously optimistic as my time is freeing up with the kids getting older, I will endeavor to shoot IDPA AIWB SSP with a Gen 1 G17 (skateboard tape on the grip) and drive on.

[1911Nut]

I’m out of the loop, but isn’t “Joyce” Bill Wilson’s wife?

It’s such a schizophrenic rule set.

Our local IDPA is all PCC and CO.

Their PCC allowance made it seem like a desperation member grab that wasn’t well thought out.

Yes, Joyce is Joyce Wilson.

I shoot very few USPSA matches and a lot of IDPA matches, so I can't fairly draw a comparative analysis of how much the rules of USPA are discussed at their matches vs. how much the rules of IDPA are discussed at those matches.

But "schizophrenic" is an apt description of the IDPA rules, in my opinion.

[Zincwarrior]

Yes, Joyce is Joyce Wilson.

I shoot very few USPSA matches and a lot of IDPA matches, so I can't fairly draw a comparative analysis of how much the rules of USPA are discussed at their matches vs. how much the rules of IDPA are discussed at those matches.

But "schizophrenic" is an apt description of the IDPA rules, in my opinion.

I like the nonweapon related rules changes noted so far. They help with those discussions and clarify them the way people here have been running.