Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

IDPA - The New Rule Book is Here

Discussion in 'Competitive Shooting' started by RicInOR, Jun 26, 2013.

  1. RicInOR

    RicInOR Washington County Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,920
    Likes Received:
    4,751
  2. iGun

    iGun Pacific NW Active Member

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    49
    I am wondering how these rules will be implemented:

    3.9.1. If the shooter runs the firearm empty behind cover, the shooter may not advance in the stage, (move toward the next shooting position) until the weapon is deemed loaded.

    3.9.2. When performing a Loaded Cylinder/Loaded Chamber reload, the shooter may not advance in the stage (move toward the next shooting position) until the weapon is deemed loaded.


    Does this mean the shooter can't reload while moving if still behind cover--unless the direction of motion is not toward the next shooting position?
     
  3. Jammer Six

    Jammer Six North Greenlake, Seattle New Member

    Messages:
    949
    Likes Received:
    312
    Man, I thought IDPA used to be beyond the pale...
     
  4. RicInOR

    RicInOR Washington County Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,920
    Likes Received:
    4,751
    @iGUN -- you might check into the official IDPA forums - that rule, and many others are being discussed by Match Directors, Safety Officers and regular shooters. Since all SO & above are to be re-trained between now and 1 October, now is the time to ensure the way you see it is the way they see it.

    Do note that since the proposed rules and now, a rule requiring the SO to physically grab a shooter in a dangerous situation, has been removed. It was discussed at length.
     
  5. RicInOR

    RicInOR Washington County Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,920
    Likes Received:
    4,751
  6. RicInOR

    RicInOR Washington County Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,920
    Likes Received:
    4,751
  7. RickB

    RickB Greater Seattle area Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    6
    This is being debated on the IDPA forum, as we speak (as I type). I thought the purpose of the rule was to prevent people from moving from, say, the edge of one wall to the edge of another wall, across open ground, reloading as they go, and claiming that they had not "left cover" since they were not exposed to any unengaged threats as they did so.
    Not being able to reload while moving to the opposite end of the same, continuous piece of cover was the unfortunate casualty. You cannot "advance" with an empty gun, and you can't even "move" with an empty gun.
    Well, those who want to move while they reload are reasoning that you are not "advancing" or "moving" if you remain at the same "shooting position", and since cover now extends to infinity, you could argue that a single shooting position is whatever size it must be to allow engaging all the available threats; stand fifteen feet from cover, and your "shooting position" might be fifteen feet in diameter, so you are presumably allowed to move within that area and not be "moving", and since you are "at" a shooting position, you are not advancing to the next shooting position (though, on a course of fire with limited dimensions, you could imagine multiple, overlapping "positions", so you could move pretty-much wherever you want and not violate "moving"!). Voila, the rules haven't really changed at all!
     
  8. Jammer Six

    Jammer Six North Greenlake, Seattle New Member

    Messages:
    949
    Likes Received:
    312
    This demonstrates exactly why I don't participate in IDPA. When you wonder why people leave the sport, this is one of the main reasons.

    I can afford the weapons, the ammo, the travel and the time. But I don't want to spend the money for the lawyer.

    In a gunfight, the first thing I'd do is start breaking "rules".
     
  9. RickB

    RickB Greater Seattle area Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    6
    IDPA clearly isn't gunfighting, but even a game has to have rules that are universally understood and interpreted. I thought the new rules might tighten things up, to remove some of the ambiguity, but people see what they want to see, and those who, in my estimation, were misintepreting the rules all along, are now changing the definitions of words and agreeing among themselves what "must be", so they can continue along their way.
    That said, there's no evidence that people are leaving the sport. We were averaging over 100 shooters a month a few years ago, a new club opened down I5, the numbers dropped to 70-80, and now they're back up to 90 at our club and topping 60 at the other; IDPA is more popular than ever.
    Not to put too fine a point on it, but two clubs in the NW Section of USPSA are teetering, right now. Come the Spring, there may be only four clubs in the Section if participation doesn't pick up.
    How clubs treat their staff and their "customers" makes a lot more difference than how some guy in California disagrees on a rules interpretation with a guy in Seattle.
     
  10. Jammer Six

    Jammer Six North Greenlake, Seattle New Member

    Messages:
    949
    Likes Received:
    312
    If you say so. I just gave you some-- I left.

    Discounting people who left as well as the reasons they give is a great way to keep your numbers up, though.
     
  11. RickB

    RickB Greater Seattle area Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    6
    If the sport were hurting for membership, I'd agree that discounting the reasons why people leave could really be dangerous. We get eight or ten new shooters every month at our club. If we were struggling with participation and declining numbers, I'd be really concerned that we weren't retaining more of them. But when the sport is flourishing it's easy to ignore. I have never been contacted by a new shooter, in over ten years, with a complaint about how they were treated, the value they received for the time and money they put into a match, etc., so I'm left to think that some people just don't enjoy it enough to stick with it.
    I used to be involved with an intro-to-IPSC class that was supposed to help grow USPSA competition in the Seattle area. We'd do three classes, for ten students, three times a year. Over the three- or four-year period, that would be 100 shooters who were introduced to the sport, encouraged and nurtured, and how many stayed with it? Ten? Fifteen? It's not for everyone. I concern myself with the people involved with my club, and let Bill Wilson worry about the bigger issues of IDPA.
     
  12. Jammer Six

    Jammer Six North Greenlake, Seattle New Member

    Messages:
    949
    Likes Received:
    312
    That's a good strategy, if what you want is new people.
     
  13. Sstrand

    Sstrand La Grande OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    2,699
    I am another one who left IDPA.

    Sheldon
     
  14. Jammer Six

    Jammer Six North Greenlake, Seattle New Member

    Messages:
    949
    Likes Received:
    312
    Ramp up the classes and the advertising, make sure that the number of new people is higher than the number of people leaving.

    Don't measure anything but the number of current members. If you're careful to restrict yourself to this metric, and this metric only, you can always show success, as long as that income of new people is higher than that other, nasty number, the number of people leaving.

    Be very careful, because if you measure anything else, problems will surface.

    And you don't want to deal with problems.

    Instead, do whatever you have to do to increase the number of new people, because then it won't matter if people leave, your metric will show success.
     
  15. Sstrand

    Sstrand La Grande OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    2,699
    Actually I still shoot club matches, which I may be against IDPA rules. The last issue I got of their magazine complained about local clubs so I dumped my membership.

    Our club discipline director strives to teach people how to use the weapon they have by using some scenarios that the national organization would not approve.

    I think there are only two or three of our shooters that belong to national IDPA. These people have been certified as range officers.

    I send out the scores.

    Sheldon
     
  16. RickB

    RickB Greater Seattle area Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    6
    We've now had four matches since the new rule book was issued. No change in numbers (~80 competitors, 6-8 new shooters each month). There's still some confusion about how some of the new rules should be applied, but it's mostly the rules that don't see much use. Area clubs are screaming for SO classes, so the sky doesn't appear to be falling. We've expanded the capacity of the WA state match from 150 to 165, and will just keep muddling along.
     
  17. quiet one

    quiet one woodland Member

    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    5
    Is there a shortage of SO's for the tournaments?
     
  18. Jammer Six

    Jammer Six North Greenlake, Seattle New Member

    Messages:
    949
    Likes Received:
    312
    Significant Others?

    Significant Others almost never attend IDPA. It's not that much fun to watch.
     
  19. quiet one

    quiet one woodland Member

    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    5
    Nice, guess I will pass this organization up
     
  20. Sstrand

    Sstrand La Grande OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    2,699
    Our "Discipline Director" and one other took the SO class. I passed on it because I get the feeling the national
    IDPA organization is more interested in control than encouraging shooting.

    Sheldon