argh,.bad ideas at GLobal Village
- Thread starter maurice
- Start date
They are going to put 1kg pull for SA. 3lb is ~ 1.3kg...
To play Devil's Advocate....
It's all well and good to declare that we should become Area 9, but last time I checked, USPSA had very little interest in absorbing Canada under the USPSA umbrella.
Yes, they do have their own rulebook and IPSC turns a blind eye to it, but if they were to endorse a Candian "Area", I'm sure IPSC and USPSA would butt heads over the issue, and I can guarantee you that USPSA has no interest in clashing with IPSC over Canada.
What does USPSA get out of Canada becoming "Area 9"? Money, maybe. Clubs would have to become USPSA affiliated. Affiliation costs for US based clubs are different from foreign affiliates.
Your yearly fees will increase. We would pay an annual fee to USPSA, but our Provincial sections would not be getting any funding unless they charged a separate fee for "section membership". Match fee prices would differ as well. In USPSA, clubs pay a sanction fee per competitor for ALL matches (Foreign affiliates are different). Your sections would not be collecting match sanction fees unless they tacked on an additional amount over and above USPSA mission count fees.
Joining USPSA as "Area 9" sounds like a great idea, but is really not necessary. What stops a club from "changing the rules" for their IPSC match. They lose sanctioning. Boo hoo! What does sanctioning get you for a level 2 or level 1 match? Not really very much. Hypothetically speaking, Province "X" could agree to civil disobedience and adopt their own rulebook (maybe the current one instead of the new one). They could run their own matches (level II or level I which do not go to level III approval) with business as usual. Sure, they lose IPSC sanctioning, but maybe the Provincial organization chooses to still recognize the match for classification, fee payments and team selection purposes.
This is really essentially all USPSA does.
It's all well and good to declare that we should become Area 9, but last time I checked, USPSA had very little interest in absorbing Canada under the USPSA umbrella.
Yes, they do have their own rulebook and IPSC turns a blind eye to it, but if they were to endorse a Candian "Area", I'm sure IPSC and USPSA would butt heads over the issue, and I can guarantee you that USPSA has no interest in clashing with IPSC over Canada.
What does USPSA get out of Canada becoming "Area 9"? Money, maybe. Clubs would have to become USPSA affiliated. Affiliation costs for US based clubs are different from foreign affiliates.
Your yearly fees will increase. We would pay an annual fee to USPSA, but our Provincial sections would not be getting any funding unless they charged a separate fee for "section membership". Match fee prices would differ as well. In USPSA, clubs pay a sanction fee per competitor for ALL matches (Foreign affiliates are different). Your sections would not be collecting match sanction fees unless they tacked on an additional amount over and above USPSA mission count fees.
Joining USPSA as "Area 9" sounds like a great idea, but is really not necessary. What stops a club from "changing the rules" for their IPSC match. They lose sanctioning. Boo hoo! What does sanctioning get you for a level 2 or level 1 match? Not really very much. Hypothetically speaking, Province "X" could agree to civil disobedience and adopt their own rulebook (maybe the current one instead of the new one). They could run their own matches (level II or level I which do not go to level III approval) with business as usual. Sure, they lose IPSC sanctioning, but maybe the Provincial organization chooses to still recognize the match for classification, fee payments and team selection purposes.
This is really essentially all USPSA does.
I am getting warnings now that I have voiced my opinion. I disagreed with the absurd trigger pull proposal. I am happy to say that I can live with the alternative 1kg and 2kg in respect of Striker fired guns and the SA being lowered.
I barely even shoot in Open division, but the no sight picture at target proposal it is being proposed to "save time" I believe. It will save no time IMHO, as the competitor can still aim a the ground to check the brightness of their dot, etc. I don't see the harm in allowing the competitor to AIM at a target (the light to dot contrast being checked..etc) does no harm IMHO. The holster proposal to eliminate the firearm from pointing at the leg, toes, etc. is another example of wasting bandwith. My bladetech DOH points down the side of my leg, as did my duty holster. Depending on my stance so does my race holster. What is being proposed greatly increases your chances of being DQ''d for doing something that is part of the game; loading holstering or drawing a loaded handgun.
I barely even shoot in Open division, but the no sight picture at target proposal it is being proposed to "save time" I believe. It will save no time IMHO, as the competitor can still aim a the ground to check the brightness of their dot, etc. I don't see the harm in allowing the competitor to AIM at a target (the light to dot contrast being checked..etc) does no harm IMHO. The holster proposal to eliminate the firearm from pointing at the leg, toes, etc. is another example of wasting bandwith. My bladetech DOH points down the side of my leg, as did my duty holster. Depending on my stance so does my race holster. What is being proposed greatly increases your chances of being DQ''d for doing something that is part of the game; loading holstering or drawing a loaded handgun.
This uncertainty about the rules makes it difficult to recruit new competitors, as we can not honestly describe to prospects what the equipment requirements will (soon) be.
A new shooter who chooses a Prod. HG from the currently approved list might be po'ed come the 2012 rule change. He might also have to purchase a new holster. A few years ago, in Open, folk had to buy shorter mags.
With the cost of components going up, and gas and accommodation too, IPSC should be careful not to introduce further cost irritants into the mix.
I personally don't like to mislead friends. It is bad enough that we don't make it obvious to newcomers that a match yields maybe 2 minute's worth of shooting against hours of set-up and tear-down.
--
Finally, if our Level IIs become unsanctioned, how are ROs to accumulate the match points they need to maintain their standing? With fewer ROs the sport ends up where?
A new shooter who chooses a Prod. HG from the currently approved list might be po'ed come the 2012 rule change. He might also have to purchase a new holster. A few years ago, in Open, folk had to buy shorter mags.
With the cost of components going up, and gas and accommodation too, IPSC should be careful not to introduce further cost irritants into the mix.
I personally don't like to mislead friends. It is bad enough that we don't make it obvious to newcomers that a match yields maybe 2 minute's worth of shooting against hours of set-up and tear-down.
--
Finally, if our Level IIs become unsanctioned, how are ROs to accumulate the match points they need to maintain their standing? With fewer ROs the sport ends up where?
I agree. What I would like to stress is that for the most part, we agree on a lot of things,...and most IPSC participants that stick with it, are generally people who don't give up easily...regardless of topic or discussion.
All in all, IPSC is fun, and should be seen that way by new IPSC competitors. Don't let our rants and venting on this site deter anyone from participating. I get bored easily, and IPSC is never boring for me. I started with my Black badge back in may of 2004. I have no desire to stop having fun in action pistol shooting. Just over 7 years. I hope to be still shooting in the next 7 years..or until I can no longer see the sights.
All in all, IPSC is fun, and should be seen that way by new IPSC competitors. Don't let our rants and venting on this site deter anyone from participating. I get bored easily, and IPSC is never boring for me. I started with my Black badge back in may of 2004. I have no desire to stop having fun in action pistol shooting. Just over 7 years. I hope to be still shooting in the next 7 years..or until I can no longer see the sights.
What benefits do RO points come with that makes them so desirable? I RO at matches to help out, that's it.
Apparently we are plotting to get banned over at GV, but I haven't really seen that, just a lot of frustrated members.
Apparently we are plotting to get banned over at GV, but I haven't really seen that, just a lot of frustrated members.
the way I see it is this....if there is doubt,....there is no doubt. Many members are not happy with the proposed rule changes. He (Vince) should note that. He also has a tendency to minimize the opposed positions,...and basically saying if you are not with me....you are anti -safety; you are careless and support unsafe activities on the range. FRUSTRATED IS RIGHT.
stormbringer
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S.W. Ontario
I get no gratification in trying to disagree with him,....I just disagree because he forces it. This "MY -way,..or the HIghway" BS is just another way for my blood pressure to spike.
I grow tired of it...maybe I am getting old. I also grow tired of the USPSA bashing.
I grow tired of it...maybe I am getting old. I also grow tired of the USPSA bashing.
PFFFTTTTT........Lightweight!.......I got banned for essentially doing nothing....LOL...Permanently!
I RO matches for the same reason - to give back. However, to stay current and to maintain proficiency, are we not supposed to gather up a minimum of 6 match points by ROing sanctioned matches?
Let me know if I am mistaken on this.
Btw, I agree that the 'other place' that you guys have been talking about is moderated as if it was a medieval fiefdom. Furthermore, the portrayals made of women are not what I would call an astute way of growing the sport in a world half populated by women. The ###ual innuendos are tiresome after awhile, esp. if one has matured beyond frat house humour. What a fine way to represent IPSC before a big wide world intolerant of firearms sports.
