PDA

View Full Version : IDPA is really, really just a game now



jetfire
09-25-2013, 12:21 PM
So, at the 2013 IDPA Nationals, there was a stage that had humanoid vision barriers that represented bystanders at a rodeo. The best way to shoot the stage was to shoot through one or more of these vision barriers to hit threat targets.

On Gun Nuts, I posted that this pretty much puts the last nail of the coffin of IDPA being anything but a game (http://www.gunnuts.net/2013/09/25/2013-idpa-nationals-stage-10-rodeo-round-count/). For the record, I'm totally fine with that, because I like games.

Here's the stage video to give you an idea of what I'm talking about:


http://youtu.be/tkn5W8NWNh8

So what do you think? I don't really have a problem with it, but it is interesting to me that the "best" course of action simulated doing something that would get you arrested most rickey-tick.

Suvorov
09-25-2013, 12:50 PM
From a pure marketing perspective, as IDPA becomes more and more of a game, then what is to differentiate it from all the other gun games other than a "shoot me vest"?

jetfire
09-25-2013, 12:52 PM
From a pure marketing perspective, as IDPA becomes more and more of a game, then what is to differentiate it from all the other gun games other than a "shoot me vest"?

That it's the sport where for the most part you can actually use your carry gear and be competitive. For the most part, mind you. Because AIWB is awesome.

ToddG
09-25-2013, 12:52 PM
Why in the world wouldn't they have made them all no-shoots? Oh, there's a rule against having too many no-shoots in a stage, isn't there? So instead we just designate most innocent bystanders as "score neutral."

Awesome stage to get videotaped and used by MSNBC the next time they talk about gun control.

Seriously, if games just want "thing you can shoot for score" and "thing you're penalized for hitting" targets, please stop making them look humanoid. If your game is that happily divorced from self-defense, why hold on to the concept of shooting at people?

Having said all that, I've always thought the single biggest thing that IDPA could do to improve membership is to convince USPSA to start using the IPSC amoeba (called "classic") target instead of the classic (called "metric") humanoid target.

IDPA never penalized hits on non-threats enough to begin with. Now using them as non-scoring vision barriers just ups the silly.

Tamara
09-25-2013, 01:00 PM
So instead we just designate most innocent bystanders as "score neutral."

I... I just...

Insert a whole paragraph full of variations on the word "kitten" here:

John Ralston
09-25-2013, 01:10 PM
All I really noticed was that Caleb's reloads look a bit slower than Jerry's...:cool:

jetfire
09-25-2013, 01:19 PM
All I really noticed was that Caleb's reloads look a bit slower than Jerry's...:cool:

Jerry's using one of those cheater moonclip guns ;-)

And he has a bit more practice.

cclaxton
09-25-2013, 01:25 PM
There are plenty of IDPA COF that are not realistic. But to put IDPA shooting on the level of being "just a game" seems to infer that it has no value to those who carry...or is teaching people the wrong things.

While I agree that IDPA is not training, and certainly not "tactical training" like those that are professionals (LE, SecSvc, FBI, SWAT, etc.), it does help the average person practice gun-handling, learn how to run their gun reliably, learn where their weaknesses are, and what their strengths are. It forces you to use cover, draw from concealment, emphasizes accuracy and speed, lets you practice how to shoot while moving, and at moving targets. It forces you muzzle control, finger discipline, and safe operations.

The average IDPA Joe/Jane can go to a local club match for $3-25 1-2 times monthly in most areas and participate and compete in a match. The competition challenges people to improve. The match allows the average Joe/Jane to practice in a dynamic environment and forces basic use of cover/concealment/moving, etc.

Would we all like to go to professional training's that cost $150-$750/day plus ammo, travel, etc. to get professional training? You Betcha!!!

Can we afford to?....Most of us can't afford to do that very often, and for some, not at all.

So, I reject the idea that IDPA is "just a game." In order to make it competitive, it has to have rules that are practical to apply by the average Safety Officer, too. And, the COF has to be challenging to the average and the master shooter. This is hard to do.

Until you get to simmunitions training, we are all practicing with cardboard targets anyway. So, give us a break!!!

I encourage people to compete in any action shooting sport because it takes a person who can barely shoot safely at an indoor range to an adequate gun-handler thereby improving safety, marksmanship, shooting under pressure, while moving, using cover, drawing from concealment, etc.

IDPA is a game to make it competitive, but it is also a great way to learn and practice the fundamentals.

I also want to add that IDPA is fun and it gives me an opportunity to travel to many different cities and locations and meet a lot of different people, sometimes famous people. It gets me out of the house and outside and doing a fun and challenging activity that forces me to engage every part of my mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual self.

IDPA is not perfect, but for the average Joe/Jane, it is a great value and great practice and a good time.

CC

jetfire
09-25-2013, 01:35 PM
There are plenty of IDPA COF that are not realistic. But to put IDPA shooting on the level of being "just a game" seems to infer that it has no value to those who carry...or is teaching people the wrong things.

I did not say that it wasn't teaching people valuable gunhandling skills or that it had no benefit to CCW. In fact, if you'd read the linked post, you would have found this:


For the record, I love IDPA – I think it’s a great game, and will help build good gunhandling skills that could be useful in a defensive situation. However, I have long maintained that IDPA does not in any way teach tactics, and this stage is a perfect example.

USPSA, Steel Challenge, and Bianchi Cup will also teach you good shooting fundamentals. They are "just games" too. Or sports, as it were. MMA fighting is "just a game" but you don't see me running out to pick a fight with those guys because their skills don't apply in the street.

The point I'm trying to make is that within IDPA, there is a certain segment of shooters that insists that the game teaches you valuable defensive skills beyond the gunhandling/manipulation skills we've already discussed. My contention is that it doesn't, and it's silly to think that it does.

Tamara
09-25-2013, 01:39 PM
Jerry's using one of those cheater moonclip guns ;-)

And he has a bit more practice.

Excuses, excuses... :p

ToddG
09-25-2013, 02:01 PM
CC -- that's a lovely strawman you built, but no one in this thread has said "IDPA serves no benefit."

This discussion is about the use of humanoid targets -- ones that are even more realistic looking than normal IDPA targets -- as score-neutral "bystanders" that you were not just allowed to shoot indiscriminately but were actually encouraged to shoot by the stage design.

"IDPA teaches people to shoot better" is a complete non-sequitur.

jetfire
09-25-2013, 02:22 PM
This discussion is about the use of humanoid targets -- ones that are even more realistic looking than normal IDPA targets -- as score-neutral "bystanders" that you were not just allowed to shoot indiscriminately but were actually encouraged to shoot by the stage design.

For my part at least, my biggest issue is that it wasn't necessary. The stage could have just as easily been written as an empty rodeo, and the vision barriers made square pieces of cardboard to simulate empty seats.

Now, I don't know the stage designers, so I can't speak for their minds. However, I'd postulate that when this stage was written up, the vision barriers seemed like a good idea, because it would force people to think with the gun in their hand and that people would be shifting around in the seat (you shot from a chair) trying to find the best angle. The problem is that the second you tell people "it's a no penalty vision barrier" we're just going to shoot right through it, because there's no penalty for doing that and it's faster.

cclaxton
09-25-2013, 02:58 PM
The point I'm trying to make is that within IDPA, there is a certain segment of shooters that insists that the game teaches you valuable defensive skills beyond the gunhandling/manipulation skills we've already discussed. My contention is that it doesn't, and it's silly to think that it does.

So, use of cover and drawing from concealment, moving while shooting, entering through a door, and reloading quickly and behind cover are not defensive skills?

Those are all defensive to me. I think it's wrong to suggest that IDPA doesn't teach defensive fundamentals.

If this is about a stupid COF, I will agree with you, but to dismiss IDPA as useless for learning defensive pistol operations because of a badly designed COF is silly.

CC

NEPAKevin
09-25-2013, 03:04 PM
I do not know if this was part of the rationale, but in the past, objections have been made re using hard cover or non-threat targets for this type of set up in that it gives an advantage to taller shooters who just shoot over the obstacles.

jetfire
09-25-2013, 03:06 PM
but to dismiss IDPA as useless for learning defensive pistol operations because of a badly designed COF is silly.

CC

Literally no one but you is saying that. That's certainly not what I said. Or Todd. Or anyone.

nwhpfan
09-25-2013, 03:09 PM
If you keep score, it's a game. IDPA has alwasy been a game. The particiapnt can take away/assign value to whatever or wherever they want in regards to such events as preparation for self defense. Many IDPA/USPSA/etc. don't even carry guns outside of gaming. For some, it's just something fun to do.

ToddG
09-25-2013, 03:27 PM
So, use of cover

The way IDPA enforces use of cover allows folks to build up all sorts of habits that most "tactical" shooters would tell you are troublesome. In particular, crowding cover isn't just allowed but often encouraged or even required for some stages. (and prior to the new rulebook, some clubs required it because they mistakenly thought it was the right way to use cover... further evidence that learning your "defensive skills" from IDPA can be dangerous)


drawing from concealment,

This would be more meaningful if more competitors were practicing that "defensive skill" with the gun & garment they wear every day instead of a game-specific gun in a game-specific holster under a game-specific fishing vest.


moving while shooting,

The way most competitors "shoot on the move" in IDPA is so unrealistic that it's a common topic of derision.


entering through a door,

I've never seen anyone pie a doorway at an IDPA match the way that's taught by every single tactics/CQB instructor I've ever met.


and reloading quickly and behind cover

Like the concealed draw, I'm not sure how this is special to IDPA.


Those are all defensive to me. I think it's wrong to suggest that IDPA doesn't teach defensive fundamentals.

If you think the movement, cover, and clearing "skills" that are best for IDPA are teaching you good tactical fundamentals you're giving the games will get you killed crowd a perfect target.

jetfire
09-25-2013, 03:41 PM
I certainly don't carry a GP100 under a fishing vest every day.

NETim
09-25-2013, 03:46 PM
I certainly don't carry a GP100 under a fishing vest every day.

Why not? Everybody else in SoDak does. :)

jetfire
09-25-2013, 03:47 PM
Why not? Everybody else in SoDak does. :)

It'd get in the way of the Redhawk in .44 Magnum, which is a much more Dakota-acceptable choice.

NETim
09-25-2013, 03:49 PM
It'd get in the way of the Redhawk in .44 Magnum, which is a much more Dakota-acceptable choice.

Absolutely!

:)

Mr_White
09-25-2013, 03:55 PM
So, use of cover...are not defensive skills?

Other people already addressed the other ones.

I'd like to add that the articles of material I've seen treated as 'cover' in IDPA competition are normally concealment rather than cover since they will not normally stop even pistol bullets (plastic barrels, thin weak walls/barriers, etc.)

Doesn't it concern you that this will lead to failure to correctly recognize potential articles of cover in real life, and IDPA Dude will take 'cover' behind the Hostess endcap at the mini mart? Then he will get hisself shot in the streets. Not tactical, not tactical at all. 25ACP > Ding Dongs

LOKNLOD
09-25-2013, 03:59 PM
I do not know if this was part of the rationale, but in the past, objections have been made re using hard cover or non-threat targets for this type of set up in that it gives an advantage to taller shooters who just shoot over the obstacles.

So you're saying Caleb may have been the only one who noticed this problem?

ToddG
09-25-2013, 04:04 PM
I'd like to add that the articles of material I've seen treated as 'cover' in IDPA competition are normally concealment rather than cover since they will not normally stop even pistol bullets (plastic barrels, thin weak walls/barriers, etc.)

Apart from my general attitude toward bullet-stopping cover in the modern world (to whit: there isn't much), I have to sympathize with IDPA on this one. Frank Glover (of Carolina Cup fame) is the only guy I know who routinely has a rule that "hard cover is defined as things I can't stop your bullet from penetrating through."

Setting up a system for differentiating the shooter's point of cover between ballistic and non-ballistic would be incredibly complicated, especially if you wanted to achieve the goal of identifying cover properly instead of just saying "blue walls are cover, red walls are concealment."


25ACP > Ding Dongs

Referring back to Frank Glover, he's had stages before that were set up like a 7-11 with real shelves piled with real products like loaves of bread, etc. You'd be surprised just how well some of those things can deflect 9mm and .45 rounds. Heck, look at all the guys whose AK mags have stopped 5.56 bullets...

I'd be genuinely interested to see how many Ding Dongs it would take to stop a typical .25 ACP round. You wouldn't even have to wear a wig when you filmed it, Gabe. (though knowing you, you probably still would)

Josh Runkle
09-25-2013, 04:10 PM
So, use of cover and drawing from concealment, moving while shooting, entering through a door, and reloading quickly and behind cover are not defensive skills?

Those are all defensive to me. I think it's wrong to suggest that IDPA doesn't teach defensive fundamentals.

If this is about a stupid COF, I will agree with you, but to dismiss IDPA as useless for learning defensive pistol operations because of a badly designed COF is silly.

CC

Well, everything I've learned about one-man defensive scenarios includes leaving ASAP, and if a new area were to be explored to take down a bad guy, it's now offensive, not defensive. Regardless, let's say it's "justifiable" offensive behavior to protect the lives of others. Still, moving around corners includes things like "cutting the pie" as slowly as possible. Does IDPA reinforce any of these defensive skills? Or is it in fact a fun game that falsely inflates the confidence in false skill sets for the defensive-minded person?

jetfire
09-25-2013, 04:12 PM
So you're saying Caleb may have been the only one who noticed this problem?

Lol, but you shot the stage seated which for the most part negates a lot of height differences.

NEPAKevin
09-25-2013, 04:20 PM
So you're saying Caleb may have been the only one who noticed this problem?

... and Kitty. But seriously, part of running a match is trying to accommodate as many of your customers as you can.

jetfire
09-25-2013, 04:28 PM
Apart from my general attitude toward bullet-stopping cover in the modern world (to whit: there isn't much), I have to sympathize with IDPA on this one. Frank Glover (of Carolina Cup fame) is the only guy I know who routinely has a rule that "hard cover is defined as things I can't stop your bullet from penetrating through."

Setting up a system for differentiating the shooter's point of cover between ballistic and non-ballistic would be incredibly complicated, especially if you wanted to achieve the goal of identifying cover properly instead of just saying "blue walls are cover, red walls are concealment."



Referring back to Frank Glover, he's had stages before that were set up like a 7-11 with real shelves piled with real products like loaves of bread, etc. You'd be surprised just how well some of those things can deflect 9mm and .45 rounds. Heck, look at all the guys whose AK mags have stopped 5.56 bullets...

I'd be genuinely interested to see how many Ding Dongs it would take to stop a typical .25 ACP round. You wouldn't even have to wear a wig when you filmed it, Gabe. (though knowing you, you probably still would)

There was a stage at last year's nationals on Frank's range that had targets situated in natural cover among the trees. Those trees were freaking bullet eating machines, it was amazing how many FTNs and mikes got handed out on that stage.

ToddG
09-25-2013, 04:31 PM
Still, moving around corners includes things like "cutting the pie" as slowly as possible.

I'd disagree with that description. There are circumstances in which I wouldn't be pieing the corner. Even when I do pie a corner, I don't do it as slowly as possible... I do it as quickly as possible. That may be slow or fast depending on multiple factors but I'm still always doing it as fast as I can see what I need to see.


Lol, but you shot the stage seated which for the most part negates a lot of height differences.

You keep telling yourself that...

GJM
09-25-2013, 04:31 PM
I am surprised that nobody has yet mentioned what I believe is far and away the single best thing IDPA has going for it -- the 50% off Safariland card you get by joining.

Mr_White
09-25-2013, 04:36 PM
Apart from my general attitude toward bullet-stopping cover in the modern world (to whit: there isn't much), I have to sympathize with IDPA on this one. Frank Glover (of Carolina Cup fame) is the only guy I know who routinely has a rule that "hard cover is defined as things I can't stop your bullet from penetrating through."

Setting up a system for differentiating the shooter's point of cover between ballistic and non-ballistic would be incredibly complicated, especially if you wanted to achieve the goal of identifying cover properly instead of just saying "blue walls are cover, red walls are concealment."



Referring back to Frank Glover, he's had stages before that were set up like a 7-11 with real shelves piled with real products like loaves of bread, etc. You'd be surprised just how well some of those things can deflect 9mm and .45 rounds. Heck, look at all the guys whose AK mags have stopped 5.56 bullets...

I'd be genuinely interested to see how many Ding Dongs it would take to stop a typical .25 ACP round. You wouldn't even have to wear a wig when you filmed it, Gabe. (though knowing you, you probably still would)

I totally agree that there is no way competitions are going to be able to use only actual pieces of cover, as cover. I was saying that to illustrate that even a well-intentioned tactical prescription like 'must use cover', still incorporates fundamental elements of unreality and has to be taken with the requisite grain of salt. That Frank Glover guy sounds like an awesome match designer. I would like to shoot some loaves with my nine.

I bet it would be a real pain to see how many Ding Dongs it would really take - my money is on the bullet curving/veering out of the line of Ding Dongs before it had reached its full penetration potential. Obviously, I would wear a wig. You are correct. Or a hat. Or the shutter glasses. The possibilities are endless.

For now, my mini-mart cover calculus stands at:

Hostess endcap = concealment

Flats of 2-liter sodas = might be cover, depending, but with lots of gaps

Mr_White
09-25-2013, 04:40 PM
Or is it in fact a fun game that falsely inflates the confidence in false skill sets for the defensive-minded person?

This is an aspect I have come to appreciate, as a defensive-minded person, of fun shooting games that carry no tactical pretense. I can't even begin to kid myself about their overall tactical relevance. I can just have fun and jack up my shooting and gunhandling skills.

JAD
09-25-2013, 04:45 PM
I'm stunned that no one has pointed out that IDPA (and the other games mentioned, equally) don't teach anything. They provide a venue for practice of those things, but since no instruction occurs (or should) no learning occurs that couldn't have happened in any other practice venue.

Shooting games provide no unique value to a shooter other than entertainment, and I guess motivation.

Eta: not that there's anything wrong with that.

Mr_White
09-25-2013, 04:54 PM
I'm stunned that no one has pointed out that IDPA (and the other games mentioned, equally) don't teach anything. They provide a venue for practice of those things, but since no instruction occurs (or should) no learning occurs that couldn't have happened in any other practice venue.

Shooting games provide no unique value to a shooter other than entertainment, and I guess motivation.

Eta: not that there's anything wrong with that.

I'd mostly agree, but I know competitions induce stress in at least some of the participants (myself being one.) That's something more than is available in a lot of other practice venues.

GJM
09-25-2013, 04:55 PM
I'm stunned that no one has pointed out that IDPA (and the other games mentioned, equally) don't teach anything. They provide a venue for practice of those things, but since no instruction occurs (or should) no learning occurs that couldn't have happened in any other practice venue.

Shooting games provide no unique value to a shooter other than entertainment, and I guess motivation.

Eta: not that there's anything wrong with that.

Assuming you are being serious, and not just funny, I would take it you do not believe match stress exists and relates to your future ability to perform under stress?

Bill Rogers, in his Sunday evening lecture, goes into the physiology of how humans react during stress, from having to pee, poop, have tremors, different breathing, and so on. When they announce at Rogers that it is test time, a bunch of those physiological reactions are commonly observed. Bill reports that he feels them to this day, right down to his hands shaking.

ToddG
09-25-2013, 05:01 PM
I'm stunned that no one has pointed out that IDPA (and the other games mentioned, equally) don't teach anything.

I understand the sentiment but cannot agree with it. Just last night at the KSTG match the ROs were talking about the huge change we've seen in how folks are using cover because of our rules versus either (a) what they learned from shooting IDPA or (b) not having any instruction beyond TV & movies. That certainly doesn't mean that following the KSTG approach is tactical gold (warning: there might not be fault lines on the ground in real life; true story). But it shows, for example, that people can start making things like crowding cover (or not) a part of their subconscious process when positioned at cover.

Plenty of rules in IDPA teach people to practice certain things in a certain way. Take tac/retention reloads. When IDPA got started, they had faded from popular practice because most folks were favoring the IPSC-style speed reload. IDPA brought them back and turned them into a foundational part of the "tactical" world even though we're very, very hard pressed to find a single instance of a CONUS gunfight where a retained magazine was retrieved and used during the exchange (i.e., "needed").

Take Tactical Sequence, which creates an utterly unrealistic expectation and approach to dealing with multiple threats.

Take, as mentioned previously, shooting on the move, which as practiced & executed in most IDPA matches has almost no value and no correlation to how people actually move when they're actually being shot at.

Etc., etc.

Games do teach people things. Whether it teaches them by reward for practicing certain things (tac sequence) or by rewarding them from ignoring certain things (use of cover in USPSA) it's still influencing what & how people practice.

That doesn't mean that games are bad and, as I've said many times I think just about every truly exceptional shooter I know has been involved in competition shooting at a high level for at least a few years during his development. There are many great benefits that come from participating in USPSA, IDPA, etc. But those benefits need to be seen in context and the habits that are being formed (or the ones that aren't being formed because they're not useful to the game) also need to be considered.

jetfire
09-25-2013, 05:09 PM
Take Tactical Sequence, which creates an utterly unrealistic expectation and approach to dealing with multiple threats.


As an aside, there was not a single instance of Tactical Sequence at this year's Nationals.

ToddG
09-25-2013, 05:12 PM
As an aside, there was not a single instance of Tactical Sequence at this year's Nationals.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/Borat-VeryNice.jpg

ST911
09-25-2013, 05:15 PM
I'd mostly agree, but I know competitions induce stress in at least some of the participants (myself being one.) That's something more than is available in a lot of other practice venues.

I shoot our area IDPA matches and do pretty well. I've found the stress to be one of the biggest benefits, whether it's the stress of observation, competing with other shooters, or simply time/stage management. (See also: force-on-force.)

I don't do an entry the same way I run a stage, but there remains credible value in the match.

cclaxton
09-25-2013, 05:20 PM
I am surprised that nobody has yet mentioned what I believe is far and away the single best thing IDPA has going for it -- the 50% off Safariland card you get by joining.

Really?


CC

GJM
09-25-2013, 05:25 PM
Really?


CC

Really!

Other than the IDPA match was closer/more available, or your buddies want to do it, I can't imagine why anyone would shoot IDPA over USPSA.

JAD
09-25-2013, 05:38 PM
Please permit me to parse my earlier statement into two posits: that competitive shooting does not offer a unique benefit to individual shooters (I think it benefits us all in the 'cauldron' sense); and that participating in competitive shooting does not teach.

GJM, no troll. Match stress is not a unique benefit, there are lots of other ways to get it. Rogers is an extreme example, but even a simple training group that offers a critique has generated that same benefit for me in the past without a competitive aspect. I don't guess you're taking issue in your statement with my other posit, though you retain that opportunity.

TLG, meh. The rules don't teach, they provide motivation. Any learning that occurs is autodidactic. There is Pavlovian training as a result of that motivation, and in that strict sense of 'teach' I can agree with you.

Dagga Boy
09-25-2013, 05:38 PM
As I pointed out in Todd's blog, there is also the huge issue of covering all the "non-shoots" with the muzzle of a firearm AND with the finger on the trigger in violation of both the golden rules of firearms safety. As I stated there I wish all these venues would just quit using things that are supposed to make them look like people targets and just make them things to shoot and things not to shoot using simple shapes or colored shapes.

cclaxton
09-25-2013, 05:41 PM
If you think the movement, cover, and clearing "skills" that are best for IDPA are teaching you good tactical fundamentals you're giving the games will get you killed crowd a perfect target.

I guess I will just go back to practicing at the range in a single stall with targets straight down range, forget everything I learned shooting IDPA, and take an occasional tactics class when I can afford it and when the schedules work out. If IDPA can get me killed, then I better stop.

CC

jetfire
09-25-2013, 05:44 PM
I guess I will just go back to practicing at the range in a single stall with targets straight down range, forget everything I learned shooting IDPA, and take an occasional tactics class when I can afford it and when the schedules work out. If IDPA can get me killed, then I better stop.

CC

That whooshing noise you're hearing is the point going over your head.

jlw
09-25-2013, 06:04 PM
So, what's better: 9mm or .45ACP, and should it be shot out of a 1911 or a Glock...?

ToddG
09-25-2013, 07:21 PM
I guess I will just go back to practicing at the range in a single stall with targets straight down range, forget everything I learned shooting IDPA, and take an occasional tactics class when I can afford it and when the schedules work out. If IDPA can get me killed, then I better stop.

You know that's neither what I said nor what I meant, and it's beneath you to pretend otherwise just for the sake of rhetoric.

BLR
09-25-2013, 07:29 PM
So, what's better: 9mm or .45ACP, and should it be shot out of a 1911 or a Glock...?

Obviously, a 45 out of a 1911.

:D

GardoneVT
09-25-2013, 08:24 PM
Perhaps this us just an FNG thing to say,but maybe it's a GOOD thing IDPA is gamer-oriented.

Why? Well, think of it like this.We need as many souls as we can to vote pro-gun in the polls.To do that,we need to give the newbies motivation to join the club-and to do so,we need to dial back the seriousness.

If we set up each competition with the direct Idea of simulating a gunfight-and the baggage so implied-the newbies will at least be intimidated,if not freaked out of their wits.The distinction between shooting to improve "tactical" skills versus playing a game with live ammo might seem like a load of baloney to us,but it's worth it if it gets more people on the range.

The "Game" ethos also goes a good ways toward deflecting attention from the media and the Disarmement Lobby.Just imagine the amount of bricks the Fourth Estate would crap if they associated shooting sports with deadly force training.

I'm not trying to say anyones wrong about this,including the OP-I just think perhaps the gamesman theme serves us well enough that we should consider it an asset,not a liability .

ToddG
09-25-2013, 10:04 PM
We need as many souls as we can to vote pro-gun in the polls.

By day, he's a mild mannered college student. By night he's the logic-fighting superhero known only as... Captain Non Sequitur! :cool:

Seriously, things that raise positive awareness about gun ownership: good.
A COF at a major event that encourages competitors to scythe their way through rows of human shields: bad.

The fact that IDPA does good things for gun owners has absolutely nothing to do with whether some of the rules are goofy or how well it serves as a training ground for self-defense.

YVK
09-25-2013, 10:07 PM
Perhaps this us just an FNG thing to say,but maybe it's a GOOD thing IDPA is gamer-oriented.

Why? Well, think of it like this.We need as many souls as we can to vote pro-gun in the polls.To do that,we need to give the newbies motivation to join the club-and to do so,we need to dial back the seriousness.

If we set up each competition with the direct Idea of simulating a gunfight-and the baggage so implied-the newbies will at least be intimidated,if not freaked out of their wits.The distinction between shooting to improve "tactical" skills versus playing a game with live ammo might seem like a load of baloney to us,but it's worth it if it gets more people on the range.

The "Game" ethos also goes a good ways toward deflecting attention from the media and the Disarmement Lobby.Just imagine the amount of bricks the Fourth Estate would crap if they associated shooting sports with deadly force training.

I'm not trying to say anyones wrong about this,including the OP-I just think perhaps the gamesman theme serves us well enough that we should consider it an asset,not a liability .

Short answer, no. People who join shooting games usually are pro-gun already, and each IDPA scenario does simulate a gunfight using humanoid targets, so there is no way around it. Bowling pin matches would serve a purpose you're describing better.

IDPA is what it is. It is stuck in a middleman position between much less pretentious USPSA and tac training, and will stay there until "under the new management".

cclaxton
09-25-2013, 10:17 PM
I simply choose to look at what is good about IDPA and USPSA and KSTG and and 3-Gun and other shooting sports. I could choose to complain about them, but the net benefit still greatly outweighs the alternative. Rather than ridiculing IDPA (or any other action pistol sport), the focus should be on what they do right, and what needs to do to improve in a constructive manner. Sometimes I make suggestions. I wrote an email to IDPA HQ about the SO liability under the new rules. They issued an update and made changes in the areas I suggested. I am sure it wasn't just me who asked for those changes, but my point is that constructive comments can make a difference.

It is possible to support these action pistol sports and provide feedback that helps improve it. It is not easy or quick, but it does happen. But the main point here is there is a net benefit to ordinary shooters. I suggest we focus on the positive and work respectfully to improve them.

CC

Jay Cunningham
09-25-2013, 10:32 PM
It is stuck in a middleman position between much less pretentious USPSA and tac training, and will stay there until "under the new management".

That's a pretty descriptive assessment for a lot more than just IDPA.

BOOM

JAD
09-25-2013, 10:37 PM
. I could choose to complain about them, but the net benefit still greatly outweighs the alternative.

Not for me. My ability to survive a gunfight (in my opinion, because hard to measure) went up significantly when I stopped competing and used that time instead in group critiqued practice and solo practice. Same input, more output, no bulllsh1t. Someone with a commitment to shooting like OAK, who is capable and willing to do the group work and the practice and the training and still compete, can keep it all in balance, but not me.

jetfire
09-25-2013, 11:49 PM
I simply choose to look at what is good about IDPA and USPSA and KSTG and and 3-Gun and other shooting sports. I could choose to complain about them, but the net benefit still greatly outweighs the alternative. Rather than ridiculing IDPA (or any other action pistol sport), the focus should be on what they do right, and what needs to do to improve in a constructive manner. Sometimes I make suggestions. I wrote an email to IDPA HQ about the SO liability under the new rules. They issued an update and made changes in the areas I suggested. I am sure it wasn't just me who asked for those changes, but my point is that constructive comments can make a difference.

It is possible to support these action pistol sports and provide feedback that helps improve it. It is not easy or quick, but it does happen. But the main point here is there is a net benefit to ordinary shooters. I suggest we focus on the positive and work respectfully to improve them.

CC

What about my comments regarding the stage did you find disrespectful? Because everything in the post was something I'd personally talked to Joyce about already.

Joe in PNG
09-26-2013, 03:02 AM
Obviously, a 45 out of a 1911.

:D

I'm leaning more towards .38 Super...

Dagga Boy
09-26-2013, 07:06 AM
Not for me. My ability to survive a gunfight (in my opinion, because hard to measure) went up significantly when I stopped competing and used that time instead in group critiqued practice and solo practice. Same input, more output, no bulllsh1t. Someone with a commitment to shooting like OAK, who is capable and willing to do the group work and the practice and the training and still compete, can keep it all in balance, but not me.

When I stopped competing I replaced it with far more shooting than most would, just in a different direction. To just "give it up" because of the training scar and bad habit issues and then lose the training time is not helpful. For those who competition is there only real way to get out and train in a non-stagnet environment, then doing what tpd223 does and just shoot the match correct and take the penalties. I am finding that with many of the L/E guys who have been cut back so heavily on any kind of training at work NEED to be getting out and shooting competition to simply get some solid trigger and manipulation time. Right now, IDPA could REALLY remake itself into something pretty awesome and different and become a means for citizens, soldiers and LEO's could really have a venue to test the handling, safety, and marksmanship skills that are used daily and be very different from the other shooting sports.

Imagine the difference in how a match would be (and match strategy) if run where you couldn't even cover the non-shoots, huge penalties for hitting non-shoots, allow any kind of reload, punish reloads done in front of live threat targets and reward reloads from cover, and how about a reward for the amount of rounds you have left unfired at the end of a stage (rewards tac loads and surgical shooting). These are just some ideas that I think would differentiate IDPA from other venues and make it both difficult and beneficial to many who carry and use guns "practically in a defensive role".

jetfire
09-26-2013, 08:15 AM
Those ideas would also suck the fun out of the game while being almost impossible to enforce. As long as you're keeping score, people are going to play to win the game. If you're not keeping score, then it's just a tactical fantasy camp.

Sadmin
09-26-2013, 09:07 AM
I'm stunned that no one has pointed out that IDPA (and the other games mentioned, equally) don't teach anything. They provide a venue for practice of those things, but since no instruction occurs (or should) no learning occurs that couldn't have happened in any other practice venue.

Shooting games provide no unique value to a shooter other than entertainment, and I guess motivation.

Eta: not that there's anything wrong with that.

I would say "anything" is pretty strong...I mean, dry fire isnt teaching much for recoil control, but sight picture / draws from concealment / trigger press are all being accessed and the user is learning something if done correctly. I guess where you practice, what you practive, and how you practive are all variables. I cannot shoot on the move at my indoor range, so IDPA at the very minimum is honing the skill of presenting weapon from concealment while moving (no, I dont wear a vest.) If nobody ever showed me how to do a proper squat and I never had a resource to do my own research, but I picked up some dumbbells and did something resembling a squat, my legs will still get a workout. I guess I just think if we adhere too much to this assumption, than it pretty much negates the legitimancy of shooters of "yesteryear" who were great shooters. They didnt attend regular instruction, they just shot a lot.

NEPAKevin
09-26-2013, 09:34 AM
It occurred to me, and I might be way off, but the stage looks a a lot like what happens when the stage designer has to work with the home range's set up. Conversation might have been something like "one of the bays is used for Zombie Shoots and they don't want to break it down so you can either incorporate it in the stage or work around it. Oh, and we need more eighteen round stages to up the round count. Oh, and you can't use any movers that would make it more realistic because that would slow down the match flow and cause a bottle neck. Oh, and props budget is used up but they said they have extra zombie targets you can use. Oh, and you need to have this done yesterday so the match books can go to print and everyone else is busy writing a new rule book by committee. Thanks for volunteering. " I'm not disagreeing with any of the constructive criticism, just saying that sometimes this is how kittens are made.

Dr. No
09-26-2013, 10:22 AM
Not for me. My ability to survive a gunfight (in my opinion, because hard to measure) went up significantly when I stopped competing and used that time instead in group critiqued practice and solo practice. Same input, more output, no bulllsh1t. Someone with a commitment to shooting like OAK, who is capable and willing to do the group work and the practice and the training and still compete, can keep it all in balance, but not me.

I've never liked these arguments, but here's my .02$ since I am a competitor and gunslinger by profession.

Tactics are important when dealing with real life situations. Kitten tactics may get you killed. Often times a kitten plan executed violently with surprise is very successful.

Competition offers people the opportunity to execute actions at an extremely high speed and forces them to react to changes/mistakes and to make split second decisions. This is not easily replicated elsewhere aside from force on force.

Lots of Bad Kitten (tm) happens when you get into a situation where you are pointing a gun at someone. I believe that competition helps drive running the gun into your subconscious so that it frees your mind up to deal with the overwhelming amount of information your brain is getting when your world freaks out. I have bumped partners out of the way, had guns magically appear in my hand with the sights aligned, kicked dogs in the face, and transitioned to secondary weapons without conscious thought, all of which I attribute to a high level of gun training garnered through competition.

JAD
09-26-2013, 10:49 AM
If nobody ever showed me how to do a proper squat and I never had a resource to do my own research, but I picked up some dumbbells and did something resembling a squat, my legs will still get a workout.

-- That's an outstanding example. It would be far better if you never attempted to do a squat, than trying it without instruction.

Dagga Boy
09-26-2013, 10:53 AM
Those ideas would also suck the fun out of the game while being almost impossible to enforce. As long as you're keeping score, people are going to play to win the game. If you're not keeping score, then it's just a tactical fantasy camp.


When you tell people that are playing a game that "You're at the rodeo" or "you have walked into a robbery at 7-11....with 23 bad guys" and then have targets with hands on them that mean nothing and targets that are people you can shoot through without a penalty, then it is a tactical fantasy camp game.....vs. no score tactical fantasy camp. There is training to handle real life use of force scenarios and there playing games with guns that build on specific skills that can transfer over. I wish people would quit mixing them up. Quit doing "tactical training" that is essentially game playing without a trophy, and games that are "tactical" but reward using bad tactics.

In the scenario that started this thread, how about "you need to engage all the tan cardboard targets, don't hit any of the white cardboard targets, then hit a knock down metal popper to stop the clock....you will do this while seated in a chair". Now we are "shooting for time, not pretending that this is some real life event, and there is no confusion. My only issue is when we are telling competitors that things represent things (bad guys, innocent by-standers, cover, concealment, a door, a window, etc...), and then reward them for using or dealing with those things wrong. This is the biggest reason that my "favored" form of competitive shooting (and the one I am most likely to return to) is falling steel, particularly plates. They are simply targets that need to be hit and knocked down as fast as possible. No scenarios, no tow truck drivers explaining to me that I used poor tactics, no penalties for doing things correctly, and no violations of the basic safety rules.

Tamara
09-26-2013, 10:58 AM
Doesn't it concern you that this will lead to failure to correctly recognize potential articles of cover in real life, and IDPA Dude will take 'cover' behind the Hostess endcap at the mini mart? Then he will get hisself shot in the streets. Not tactical, not tactical at all. 25ACP > Ding Dongs

The cream filling will clog the bad guy's hollowpoints, causing failures to expand.

NEPAKevin
09-26-2013, 11:18 AM
Another shooter's POV video (http://youtu.be/mguUomLw4qY) is posted over at IDPAforum, stage 10 starts at about 2.52.

jetfire
09-26-2013, 11:28 AM
and no violations of the basic safety rules.

Yeah, that part I don't get. I was definitely treating my gun like it was loaded (since I was shooting it) I didn't cover anything with the muzzle that I wasn't willing to put a round in, I kept my finger off the trigger when I wasn't shooting, and I was quite certain of my target and what was beyond it.

But then, I'm just playing a game, I'm not pretending that IDPA is doing anything other than helping me become a better shooter.

Mr_White
09-26-2013, 11:38 AM
When you tell people that are playing a game that "You're at the rodeo" or "you have walked into a robbery at 7-11....with 23 bad guys" and then have targets with hands on them that mean nothing and targets that are people you can shoot through without a penalty, then it is a tactical fantasy camp game.....vs. no score tactical fantasy camp. There is training to handle real life use of force scenarios and there playing games with guns that build on specific skills that can transfer over. I wish people would quit mixing them up. Quit doing "tactical training" that is essentially game playing without a trophy, and games that are "tactical" but reward using bad tactics.

In the scenario that started this thread, how about "you need to engage all the tan cardboard targets, don't hit any of the white cardboard targets, then hit a knock down metal popper to stop the clock....you will do this while seated in a chair". Now we are "shooting for time, not pretending that this is some real life event, and there is no confusion. My only issue is when we are telling competitors that things represent things (bad guys, innocent by-standers, cover, concealment, a door, a window, etc...), and then reward them for using or dealing with those things wrong. This is the biggest reason that my "favored" form of competitive shooting (and the one I am most likely to return to) is falling steel, particularly plates. They are simply targets that need to be hit and knocked down as fast as possible. No scenarios, no tow truck drivers explaining to me that I used poor tactics, no penalties for doing things correctly, and no violations of the basic safety rules.

Hey nyeti, I just wanted to take the opportunity to say I agree with just about everything you wrote here. Whether to time and score is a key decision in creating shooting drills/exercises. Many activities intended to teach or reinforce tactics are best done without the timer, though not absolutely and in every case. I also appreciate your preference for steel competition - purity is an aspect of GSSF I enjoy for the same reason; it's just the shooting.


The cream filling will clog the bad guy's hollowpoints, causing failures to expand.

OMG THEN THEY WILL FAIL TO EXPAND AND PENETRATE EVEN MOAR

HOSTESS ENDCAP = EVENTUAL DEATH BY CARDIAC EVENT OR IMMEDIATE DEATH FROM PLUGGED .25ACP BOOLITZ

Dagga Boy
09-26-2013, 01:09 PM
Yeah, that part I don't get. I was definitely treating my gun like it was loaded (since I was shooting it) I didn't cover anything with the muzzle that I wasn't willing to put a round in, I kept my finger off the trigger when I wasn't shooting, and I was quite certain of my target and what was beyond it.

But then, I'm just playing a game, I'm not pretending that IDPA is doing anything other than helping me become a better shooter.

I guess its just the POV cameras, because I have watched a couple of these videos and I don't see any trigger fingers going to register while crossing over the non-shoot and targets with the hands up. It is one of the problems with calling these things "people" and "innocents" and not treating them that way. I found myself doing the exact same thing at a match a couple of weeks ago. That is why I would like to see a change in what we are calling these things so it can just be fun and treated like pieces of cardboard that are destroyable.

This is a issue that I am far more concerned with for the L/E folks and citizens we train to get people to stop being okay with pointing guns at people that we have no business pointing them at. I could be wrong on this, but I am okay with our training standard that pointing muzzles of firearms at things is something serious and needs to be justified. Others could give a crap. I guess it depends who is on what side of the muzzle.

jetfire
09-26-2013, 01:41 PM
I guess its just the POV cameras, because I have watched a couple of these videos and I don't see any trigger fingers going to register while crossing over the non-shoot and targets with the hands up. It is one of the problems with calling these things "people" and "innocents" and not treating them that way. I found myself doing the exact same thing at a match a couple of weeks ago. That is why I would like to see a change in what we are calling these things so it can just be fun and treated like pieces of cardboard that are destroyable.

This is a issue that I am far more concerned with for the L/E folks and citizens we train to get people to stop being okay with pointing guns at people that we have no business pointing them at. I could be wrong on this, but I am okay with our training standard that pointing muzzles of firearms at things is something serious and needs to be justified. Others could give a crap. I guess it depends who is on what side of the muzzle.

I think this is one of those mindset issues where, because we're coming at this from such different angles we actually can't find common ground. To elaborate, when I'm shooting a match, I take my finger off the trigger when I'm reloading or when I'm moving, because that's what the rules and good safety practices say to do.

I don't take my finger off the trigger when I'm transitioning the gun over a no-shoot, because a lot of the time I'm actually manipulating the trigger while I do that so I can get a faster shot at the target on the other side of the no-shoot.

Here's the mindset difference: I don't think of those no-shoot targets as simulating anything. They're just brown (or white) cardboard that I get penalized if I shoot, so I try to not shoot them. But I do shoot them sometimes and I'm okay with that, because it's just a piece of cardboard that's part of the game I'm playing. Shooting a no-shoot carries the same moral weight to me as striking out when I played baseball. I don't want to do it, but it happens.

JAD
09-26-2013, 03:21 PM
The cream filling will clog the bad guy's hollowpoints, causing failures to expand.
The cream filling does not fail to cause me to expand.

Dagga Boy
09-26-2013, 03:42 PM
Caleb, believe it or not, we are EXACTLY on the same page. After recently attending and covering a L/E multi-gun match as a "journalist", what I came away with is that there is a "Match Triad" with Match gun handling, Match Mindset, and Match marksmanship that are just as important in a match as the Combat Triad is in a two way shooting match. I get this. I think if we really stopped all this b.s. about "so you're sitting at the rodeo":confused:, and just tell people it is a shooting match-we shoot "things" and nothing here is trying to replicate humans would be great. It would be like golf that I can embrace (golf actually has a ton of parallels to shooting...and I really suck at Golf too). My SWAT guys used to play basketball for team building, communications and fitness. It was very helpful to their SWAT jobs. I would like competitive shooting to be very helpful for L/E and citizens and I think just making it about mechanics would really help that and everybody be up front about it.

jetfire
09-26-2013, 04:13 PM
Caleb, believe it or not, we are EXACTLY on the same page. After recently attending and covering a L/E multi-gun match as a "journalist", what I came away with is that there is a "Match Triad" with Match gun handling, Match Mindset, and Match marksmanship that are just as important in a match as the Combat Triad is in a two way shooting match. I get this. I think if we really stopped all this b.s. about "so you're sitting at the rodeo":confused:, and just tell people it is a shooting match-we shoot "things" and nothing here is trying to replicate humans would be great. It would be like golf that I can embrace (golf actually has a ton of parallels to shooting...and I really suck at Golf too). My SWAT guys used to play basketball for team building, communications and fitness. It was very helpful to their SWAT jobs. I would like competitive shooting to be very helpful for L/E and citizens and I think just making it about mechanics would really help that and everybody be up front about it.

I see what you're saying now. It's actually the same as what I'm saying, which is that we need to stop pretending that IDPA teaches any kind of tactics, and just accept that it's a game where you shoot stuff under certain rule conditions. But the problem is that corporately, IDPA has done an excellent job of marketing themselves as the "CCW sport", and so there are quite a few adherents who insist that it must be tactical and defensive. To my mind, IDPA should just go with "we're a sport, here are the rules, go shoot."

The thing that I've encountered are that there are (broadly) four types of people who shoot competitions:

People who are competing for the sake of competing, whether it's to win their division/category or the entire match - gamers
Defensive minded people who are there to sharpen their gunhandling skills
Defensive minded people who think they're learning life-saving tactics
Newbies


Groups one and two aren't really the problem, it's when group three gets their hands on the newbies and corrupts them into thinking that IDPA is some sort of great life-saving game.

Dagga Boy
09-26-2013, 04:32 PM
Yep, we are on the same page. Also, I don't know if you got the PM I sent you, but the other issue is "group 3" LOVES to find the cops and Mil guys along with the newbies to tell them how "real" it all is. From talking to the L/E guys who are very serious competitors I was told that their shooting team uniforms attracts the group 3 guys like honey. It is probably why guys like myself, Sean M., tpd223 all get the "its real" stuff, and you don't hear it as much. They know you are past corruptible ;), and are not joining them.

ToddG
09-26-2013, 05:39 PM
To my mind, IDPA should just go with "we're a sport, here are the rules, go shoot."

Throw away the driving force behind IDPA, though, and not only do you lose out on a marketable demographic (as you mentioned) but you open the sport up to the very same expansion of gaminess that -- in the eyes of the IDPA founders -- corrupted IPSC and made it less worthwhile.

Put another way, there's already a "just a game go shoot" game. If IDPA follows down that road it will end up looking just like USPSA within a decade and -- as much as the pro-USPSA/anti-IDPA folks don't want to admit it -- that's not what a lot of the IDPA competitors and new CCWers want. Think of how many basic CCW students feel they're not ready for a local IDPA match...

jetfire
09-26-2013, 08:04 PM
Throw away the driving force behind IDPA, though, and not only do you lose out on a marketable demographic (as you mentioned) but you open the sport up to the very same expansion of gaminess that -- in the eyes of the IDPA founders -- corrupted IPSC and made it less worthwhile.

Put another way, there's already a "just a game go shoot" game. If IDPA follows down that road it will end up looking just like USPSA within a decade and -- as much as the pro-USPSA/anti-IDPA folks don't want to admit it -- that's not what a lot of the IDPA competitors and new CCWers want. Think of how many basic CCW students feel they're not ready for a local IDPA match...

I feel like there's a balance point where IDPA can still be the CCW sport, but without the nonsense. I shall noodle on this.

ToddG
09-26-2013, 08:40 PM
I feel like there's a balance point where IDPA can still be the CCW sport, but without the nonsense. I shall noodle on this.

I don't disagree at all. But becoming IPSC-2 isn't the solution.

1911Nut
09-27-2013, 12:42 AM
GJM said: "Other than the IDPA match was closer/more available, or your buddies want to do it, I can't imagine why anyone would shoot IDPA over USPSA".

George: The following applies to the shoots within a 50 mile radius of where I live:
1. The shooters at IDPA matches are much more open and welcoming to new shooters
2. The shooters at IDPA matches are more receptive to taking time to "coach" and assist new shooters at matches
3. The contestant level at IDPA matches is significantly lower, hence less standing around between stages
4. While not perfect, the contestants at IDPA matches are more likely to pitch in in policing brass, taping targets, setting steel, helping break down stages, etc
5. IDPA match entry fees are typically 50%-65% less than USPSA match fees
6. Lower round count at IDPA matches, and that is important for many people given today's scarcity of ammo and loading components
7. Typically, IDPA stages are less physically demanding, and that is important to most older shooters and some new shooters
8. Any IDPA stage can be shot with a loaded pistol and two spare magazines, reducing equipment costs for shooters
9. Some people simply enjoy stages requiring 10-18 hits more than stages requiring 25, 30, or even 40+ hits
10. Scoring methodology seems to be more easily understood at IDPA matches

Disclaimer: I shoot a lot of IDPA matches and a lot of steel matches and just a few USPSA matches, but I am in no way implying that any one discipline is superior or inferior to another. I'm simply sharing some of the reasons I have heard discussed regarding why a particular group of people choose to shoot IDPA. I like them all (IDPA, USPSA, and steel) and have a demonstrated amazing ability to find creative ways to botch any of them. Agree or disagree, there are reasons that matter to some folks.

I can honestly say this: When I hear folks at a USPSA match bad-mouthing IDPA shooters or vice-versa, I tune them out. I'm there to shoot and support our sport. If you like to do your shooting with a shotgun, single shot pistol, muzzle loader, DA revolver, auto pistol, AR-15, 3-gun, or SA revolver, I support you. I don't expect my participation in IDPA, USPSA, or steel matches is going to make me a better tactical HSLD guru of pistolcraft during a gunfight anymore than I expect owning a .30-06 bolt action rifle and a Jeep make me a hunter. I just like to shoot!

Dagga Boy
09-27-2013, 06:55 AM
All of the reasons listed above are all the reasons that I wish IDPA would quit trying to be "tactical" and be a gun game done in daily wear with daily use gear.

Tamara
09-27-2013, 07:27 AM
All of the reasons listed above are all the reasons that I wish IDPA would quit trying to be "tactical" and be a gun game done in daily wear with daily use gear.

It's not even that anymore, necessarily. When you think about it, somebody who carries a G19 with a laser and MRDS AIWB would need a special gamer rig and gun to shoot the "practical street alternative to USPSA".

Maybe they could make people dress like Nash Bridges and call it "'90s Action Shooting"? :D

ST911
09-27-2013, 09:28 AM
GJM said: "Other than the IDPA match was closer/more available, or your buddies want to do it, I can't imagine why anyone would shoot IDPA over USPSA".

George: The following applies to the shoots within a 50 mile radius of where I live:
1. The shooters at IDPA matches are much more open and welcoming to new shooters
2. The shooters at IDPA matches are more receptive to taking time to "coach" and assist new shooters at matches
3. The contestant level at IDPA matches is significantly lower, hence less standing around between stages
4. While not perfect, the contestants at IDPA matches are more likely to pitch in in policing brass, taping targets, setting steel, helping break down stages, etc
5. IDPA match entry fees are typically 50%-65% less than USPSA match fees
6. Lower round count at IDPA matches, and that is important for many people given today's scarcity of ammo and loading components
7. Typically, IDPA stages are less physically demanding, and that is important to most older shooters and some new shooters
8. Any IDPA stage can be shot with a loaded pistol and two spare magazines, reducing equipment costs for shooters
9. Some people simply enjoy stages requiring 10-18 hits more than stages requiring 25, 30, or even 40+ hits
10. Scoring methodology seems to be more easily understood at IDPA matches

These are true for my local IDPA club as well. So much so, that when the idea of other types of competition were floated, there was very little interest.

jetfire
09-27-2013, 10:34 AM
It's not even that anymore, necessarily. When you think about it, somebody who carries a G19 with a laser and MRDS AIWB would need a special gamer rig and gun to shoot the "practical street alternative to USPSA".

Maybe they could make people dress like Nash Bridges and call it "'90s Action Shooting"? :D

Dude. I would TOTALLY play that game, especially if I got a sweet-kitten Hemi 'Cuda. And Jodi Lyn O'Keefe.

Back to the subject at hand, IDPA as an organization is moving towards the concept of "shooting sport with every-day gear/guns", with some exceptions as noted by Tam. That's why I found this stage so curious, because in light of the new rulebook that goes into effect soon, it seemed like a regression to the bad old days of tactical IDPA, where gamer-kitten-gamers like me are contravening the "spirit" of the stage by blasting through the vision barriers.

Hell, once a long time ago I intentionally shot through a no-shoot because it was obscuring a pepper popper activator. The penalty for hitting the no-shoot was 5 seconds, but if I'd not hit the popper and the subsequent target, I'd have been looking at a minimum 12.5 seconds in penalties.

Erik
09-27-2013, 10:49 AM
Maybe they could make people dress like Nash Bridges and call it "'90s Action Shooting"? :D

I'd sign up for that. But what I'd really like is a Magnum PI division.

jetfire
09-27-2013, 10:55 AM
I'd sign up for that. But what I'd really like is a Magnum PI division.

Yeah, but that'd get messy quick, because the purists would argue that the Magnum PI division would only be allowed to carry 1911s in .45 ACP, but the rules lawyers would point out that Magnum used a Star Model B as a stand-in gun so you should get to use 9mm 1911s too. Then it's just an equipment race to see who can conceal the most mags in a pair of cut-off jean shorts and how to get your Detroit Tigers hat to maximize your tactical vision.

Drang
09-27-2013, 01:30 PM
Yeah, but that'd get messy quick, because the purists would argue that the Magnum PI division would only be allowed to carry 1911s in .45 ACP, but the rules lawyers would point out that Magnum used a Star Model B as a stand-in gun so you should get to use 9mm 1911s too. Then it's just an equipment race to see who can conceal the most mags in a pair of cut-off jean shorts and how to get your Detroit Tigers hat to maximize your tactical vision.

What's the penalty for failing to wear a proper porn 'stache? And are fake porn 'staches allowed?

Tamara
09-27-2013, 01:35 PM
And are fake porn 'staches allowed?

Gamer.

Josh Runkle
09-27-2013, 01:46 PM
Yeah, but that'd get messy quick, because the purists would argue that the Magnum PI division would only be allowed to carry 1911s in .45 ACP, but the rules lawyers would point out that Magnum used a Star Model B as a stand-in gun so you should get to use 9mm 1911s too. Then it's just an equipment race to see who can conceal the most mags in a pair of cut-off jean shorts and how to get your Detroit Tigers hat to maximize your tactical vision.

Ok, ok, getting more and more interested...when's the first match?

Dagga Boy
09-27-2013, 02:12 PM
I will be showing up with a REAL porn stash, I will be dressed like Hunter, and now its just a toss up between the Dodge Power Wagon with the tow truck bumper from Simon and Simon, or the Ferrari Daytona from Miami Vice........choices:confused:.

Mr_White
09-27-2013, 02:57 PM
I am so low rent. All I have to choose between are a wig and a pimp hat. I did get a fighting cock feather* for the hat though....maybe I should bring it out to the USPSA match tomorrow.







*from a non-practicing fighting cock, so don't even start

Joe in PNG
09-27-2013, 04:08 PM
Do I get to tote a side folding Ruger AC-556 if I rock a safari jacket and cigar?

On second thought, bad idea- the A Team isn't exactly known for hitting their targets.

Mr_White
09-27-2013, 04:26 PM
Do I get to tote a side folding Ruger AC-556 if I rock a safari jacket and cigar?

On second thought, bad idea- the A Team isn't exactly known for hitting their targets.

If you hit the targets the dirt can't fly up all cool-like, doy. Then the corrupt sheriff and his cronies don't get scared away from harassing the hardworking miners and their hot daughters.

Joe in PNG
09-27-2013, 04:46 PM
If you hit the targets the dirt can't fly up all cool-like, doy. Then the corrupt sheriff and his cronies don't get scared away from harassing the hardworking miners and their hot daughters.

IDEA! For one of the stages in 80's action shooting- mag dump from the hip using a Ruger sidefolder inside a black van. -5 for ANY targets hit.
Points are scored for the most dirt flying up, and being able to say "I love it when a plan comes together" with a cigar clenched in your teeth.

Tamara
09-27-2013, 06:46 PM
IDEA! For one of the stages in 80's action shooting- mag dump from the hip using a Ruger sidefolder inside a black van. -5 for ANY targets hit.

When the bolt locks back, dump rifle in dump box and run downrange. Punch each target once in A/B zone or twice anywhere on target with fistful of gold rings while yelling "I pity the fool!"

tremiles
09-27-2013, 07:33 PM
If we're proposing gun games based on 80's TV, I'd like to throw a Hardcastle & McCormick in there. I want my Coyote X.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/09/28/ubena3u9.jpg

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

ToddG
09-27-2013, 08:51 PM
Safe to say this has run its course.