Will competition get LEO's or Armed Civilians killed?

[Josh Runkle]

I've taken classes from Hackathorn and Vickers and I don't recall them objecting to the idea of competition per se. Rather their concerns were much like mine - too much emphasis on speed and not enough on accuracy. Vickers has been fairly vocal on the 1 second penalty per point in IDPA. I've heard about Hackathorn observing that there should be par times for stages and the winner is the person who shoots the most points in the designated time frame.

Me too. I'm not saying that they object to competition, just that they view it as unrealistic and "teaching" the wrong things.

[orionz06]

I think much of that is instructors projecting what some students do on to all students. I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread doesn't think a 5 stage vest match is training but it seems to be implied that folks think others think it is.

I am not the local guy who shoots idpa because they think it is real. I doubt anyone in this thread is.

[Josh Runkle]

I am not the local guy who shoots idpa because they think it is real. I doubt anyone in this thread is.

Agreed, but this thread is about all competition, including those people.

[John Hearne]

Another PF member and I know a top level area GM. He doesn't shoot a Sig, but grabbed my friend's 226 and holster, and cold, just smoked an IDPA stage with my friend's 226, despite having zero time with a Sig.

I think the key here is "GM." On the bell curve of shooters, how many standard deviation is he out? GM's are the top 5% of USPSA shooters. What percent of shooters shoot USPSA? That is a pretty elite data point from which to generalize from.

Paul Howe distinguished between too much caliber and not enough gun for acceptable shooting performance. For instance it might be possible for someone to shoot a Glock 22 acceptably but be unable to shoot a Glock 27 acceptably but be able to shoot a Glock 26 acceptably. The problem is that the shooter has outrun the grip size and sight radius to shoot the pistol acceptably. This is very personal and sufficient skill will mitigate the size/caliber issues.

[joshs]

I think you have an unrealistic perception of the kind of accuracy training high level shooters do. When training with Manny Bragg, he is shooting a lot of two inch dots.

But, for the average shooter in USPSA (mid-C to mid-B), there is definitely an incentive to shoot faster and less accurately than most would consider "good" (say 90%+ of the available points). The time tradeoff it takes shooters at that skill level to shoot better points usually isn't worth it in USPSA/IPSC scoring. This is especially true when shooting Major. Obviously, at higher levels, it becomes much more important to shoot nearly all of the available points.

As far as targets go, for pretty obvious reasons, I'm a fan of this one.

[Chuck Haggard]

Chuck, I think that reasonable people can differ in this regard. Ron Avery, for example, believes that once you learn pure technical shooting skills that it translates over to all your gear. And, that it is easier to learn high level technical skills shooting a "Porsche as opposed to a mini-van." Another PF member and I know a top level area GM. He doesn't shoot a Sig, but grabbed my friend's 226 and holster, and cold, just smoked an IDPA stage with my friend's 226, despite having zero time with a Sig.

As to the LCP in the pocket, that is just a bad on them. Really great skills and a J frame is likely to be trumped by C class skills and a proper firearm in many scenarios.

Your scenario of the competitor with the Glock 34 from a starched vest, but botching his G19 draw from a t shirt versus the guy competing with his carry gun isn't the only choice. How about the Robert Vogel or Ernest Langdon level competitor who also applies those skills to his carry gear. Competition skills in themselves are not a guarantee to translate to carry proficiency. But, high level competition skills, and effort applied to carry stuff, is likely to lead to a high level result.

I can't disagree with, or I agree with, everything you wrote.

[cclaxton]

But, for the average shooter in USPSA (mid-C to mid-B), there is definitely an incentive to shoot faster and less accurately than most would consider "good" (say 90%+ of the available points). The time tradeoff it takes shooters at that skill level to shoot better points usually isn't worth it in USPSA/IPSC scoring. This is especially true when shooting Major. Obviously, at higher levels, it becomes much more important to shoot nearly all of the available points.

As far as targets go, for pretty obvious reasons, I'm a fan of this one.

I like the Target. What do you think of the USCA target?
Cody

[GJM]

But, for the average shooter in USPSA (mid-C to mid-B), there is definitely an incentive to shoot faster and less accurately than most would consider "good" (say 90%+ of the available points). The time tradeoff it takes shooters at that skill level to shoot better points usually isn't worth it in USPSA/IPSC scoring. This is especially true when shooting Major. Obviously, at higher levels, it becomes much more important to shoot nearly all of the available points.

As far as targets go, for pretty obvious reasons, I'm a fan of this one.

If so, it is just a training deficiency. Easy fix -- shoot one inch squares at 7 yards, 3x5s at 25 yards, and 50 yard groups. No different than gaming with a race rig and never practicing with your carry gear.

Side note on carry gear. I carry appendix about 70 percent of the time, and OWB the balance. I have made a personal decision to minimize life fire training appendix as a personal risk management strategy. I practice appendix and do most live fire OWB. Just takes a few more reps. And, I believe my OWB draw practice also translates to a faster AIWB draw.

[rob_s]

I like the Target. What do you think of the USCA target?
Cody

IMO too forgiving in the vertical, especially for a carbine target. That's why I like the example I posted, or the one Josh posted.

Josh, are those actually available anywhere? I'd like to get some to possibly play with in our matches.

[Dagga Boy]

I'll make this super easy and then bow out.......because in the end it is like talking to the wall. Rule #2 & #3 violations are rampant. I don't want to be around habitual rule #2 and rule #3 violators, especially when they are distracted by trying to solve a real world, unplanned horrific crisis when folks are running those violations from their sub-conscious. Again, when people are spending a majority of their time with "don't let anyone figure out if that was a miss or ND, and contort yourself in anyway possible to not violate the 180" safety rules, and then think they will resort to something they have simply payed lip service to for the rest of their lives when the flag goes up is pure fantasy in my mind. Rob in his experience thinks otherwise. Do what you want and keep your fingers crossed that you picked right.

Sit at a match and watch how many fingers go on triggers before the muzzle is in any kind of orientation on the target to guarantee a hit on that target. I did it myself the first draw on the first stage of a match a few weeks ago. I was highly disappointed in myself for falling into the "match gun handling". I fixed it for the remainder of the match consciously. Based on what I saw I was the only one who cared. I also saw a ton of fingers not in index during the unload and show clear phase without a single correction. While I don't think it is the R/O's job or worth the confrontation over the "I did not", the fact is that a bunch of people are building a habit of getting a finger in a trigger guard or very close while simply operating and locking a slide to the rear. I already know that there will be ten "I've never ever seen that, must be an anomaly" posts, so I'll bow out..........look at all the pictures in my file with some of the top guys in the game doing exactly what I am talking about and again, hope for the best.