private1313
Member
- Location
- SW Ontario
IDPA New 1-second point down penalty scoring
- Thread starter private1313
- Start date
private1313
Member
- Location
- SW Ontario
It did not help to wait ... the 1 sec per point down rule is NOW in the proposed 2017 rule book, effective Jan 1.
In my opinion it will detract severely from the game. <sigh>
In my opinion it will detract severely from the game. <sigh>
Well if what you say is true then do you know what changes they made in the Classifier. Without changes to the Classifier you are going to have some upset members. That said, I believe those in charge were contemplating changes to the Classifier as well.
Using the one second penalty seems to be geared to slow the sport down which is OK but those in charge might have looked at the changes that were made in 2015 that took the sport into a run and gun mode. eg The cover call description, and defining vision barriers are two, there are more. The inability to monitor clubs that consistently run matches with little regard to the shooting and stage rules would be also an area to address. Ensuring stages at the US Nationals were all legal would be a major step in this direction as well. There are matches I see on youtube that appear to be USPSA matches with stages limited to 18 rounds.
I like the one second down change. Action Shooting International aka ASI uses that scoring system to promote accuracy and to make scoring easier. It works on both accounts.
Take Care
Bob
heavenIsAlie
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Abbotsford
I didn't think they needed to make IDPA any slower
Me too and yes. Why I'm I sending cash to Arkansas again?
Same here. Its a game.
Classifier has been changed from 90 rounds in 3 Stages with a total of 14 strings to 72 rounds in 3 Stages with a total of 8 strings. The target layout is unchanged but the shooting positions (in Stage 3 only) have.
http://www.idpa.com/misc/Rulebook 2017.pdf (see rule 9.9)
The classification breakdowns have also changed (see Rule 9.8)
The preliminary RB is out and wil be revised once before becoming official. There are a number of minor changes that have to be corrected. The 1 point down was announced at the US Nationals ans will be effective Jan 1/17. The Classifer has been changed for the better. The one point down will slow things down but other rule changes will certainly offset the scoring change, I think IDPA is now pretty much IPSC Lite with less differentiation than there once was. I am have not gone through all the changes yet but it is about what one would expect given the history if the sport.
Members have until early December to voice their comments, point out obvious and less than obvious errors in the RB. In short proof read what the rules garues were unable to do by themselves. It isn;t perfect yet burt they are moving towards improving the sport. We now even have fault lines as an option!
You might notice Cdn members will be able to play in CCP division now and we have apistil carbine division which will make life interesting.
Take Care
Bob
Members have until early December to voice their comments, point out obvious and less than obvious errors in the RB. In short proof read what the rules garues were unable to do by themselves. It isn;t perfect yet burt they are moving towards improving the sport. We now even have fault lines as an option!
You might notice Cdn members will be able to play in CCP division now and we have apistil carbine division which will make life interesting.
Take Care
Bob
Comments and suggestions from members are being requested by HQ before the RB becomes finalized. Go to IDPA Canada's website for links to HQ RB Comment section. Your opinion might induce a change of thought. Incidently we can now play in CCP Division if what is proposed goes through. Max. barrel length is now 111MM. Just make sure your blaster is thin enough or is it the overall length. In any event your Commander size blaster should be good to go in CCP aka ESP Light Division. You are welcome.
Take Care
Bob
Take Care
Bob
The original intent of IDPA was for it to be a vessel for people who CCW to get out and practice in a fun, safe and practical manor (as 'practical' as reasonably relevant training can be obtained within a structured competitive environment would allow).
It isn't the end-all, be-all of training and was never intended as such as Larry and Ken pointed out, but it was something worthwhile.
The whole DVC concept was designed as an equation with equal parts, and the 1sec. Penalty I think more closely reflects that than the current equation.
It is completely skewed in IPSC (a concept they make no bones about since it's slide into a full-on 'sport'), and was watered down early on in IDPA and I believe, the primary reason Ken and Larry pulled pin.
I shot it for a couple of years and the one thing that really bugged me about IDPA were the 'subjective' rules designed to separate it from feeling like 'IPSC light' to what the originators intended, and the different individual competitors stance on the ideals. You could go from one bay where the ideals were upheld and see competitors take procedural infractions for 'gaming' the stage to ones where they cleaned everyone else's clock with poor marksmanship, poor gun handling skills and utter lack of regard for the scenario if the SOs felt as they did - it is just a game. You'll get all sorts of excuses like 'oh, we don't have CCW in Canada, so why pretend to think it has any training value' to 'it isn't like you win prizes for your standing, so why does the score matter?'
It's all bullsh!t of course. If it is worth organizing, it is worth doing properly.
If it is worth keeping score, it is worth doing properly.
If it is worth getting together, practicing, getting proficient with firearms, it is worth doing properly.
By letting competitors go as fast as they want and play fast and loose with the rules, then you have people pushing limits to circumvent those rules, and you maintain a competition that has divisions within by competitors with differing views on where the competition should go. It then remains watered down and ultimately irrelevant to its intent.
While it was fun still, those aspects of it made for frustrating matches and one of the reasons I ultimately threw in the towel.
It isn't the end-all, be-all of training and was never intended as such as Larry and Ken pointed out, but it was something worthwhile.
The whole DVC concept was designed as an equation with equal parts, and the 1sec. Penalty I think more closely reflects that than the current equation.
It is completely skewed in IPSC (a concept they make no bones about since it's slide into a full-on 'sport'), and was watered down early on in IDPA and I believe, the primary reason Ken and Larry pulled pin.
I shot it for a couple of years and the one thing that really bugged me about IDPA were the 'subjective' rules designed to separate it from feeling like 'IPSC light' to what the originators intended, and the different individual competitors stance on the ideals. You could go from one bay where the ideals were upheld and see competitors take procedural infractions for 'gaming' the stage to ones where they cleaned everyone else's clock with poor marksmanship, poor gun handling skills and utter lack of regard for the scenario if the SOs felt as they did - it is just a game. You'll get all sorts of excuses like 'oh, we don't have CCW in Canada, so why pretend to think it has any training value' to 'it isn't like you win prizes for your standing, so why does the score matter?'
It's all bullsh!t of course. If it is worth organizing, it is worth doing properly.
If it is worth keeping score, it is worth doing properly.
If it is worth getting together, practicing, getting proficient with firearms, it is worth doing properly.
By letting competitors go as fast as they want and play fast and loose with the rules, then you have people pushing limits to circumvent those rules, and you maintain a competition that has divisions within by competitors with differing views on where the competition should go. It then remains watered down and ultimately irrelevant to its intent.
While it was fun still, those aspects of it made for frustrating matches and one of the reasons I ultimately threw in the towel.
Your issue was with MD's not the sport. Not sure what the answer is. Despite a major effort to improve SOing and Match Directing the variations of IDPA shot in the US is remarkable in their divergence. I wish I could say with certainty HQ didn't condone indirectly exactly what Beltfed describes. Watch US National videos of some of the stages that get through is evidence enough. Since 2015 though some of the subjectivity has been removed though and now we have optional fault lines which should improve the use of cover, something the 2015 RB almost eliminated.
To paraphrase a famous US football coach, " If we seek perfection we may ultimately reach excellence". I do hope we are in the process now.
I just wanted to add the M&P FS 4.25" is not legal in CCP Division with the change in barrel length. I think IDPA is trying to have one division that actually attracts guns that folks actually carry in the US. CCP Division does represent that aspect now. Some might ask why we retain ESP Division and perhaps that will be one division that eventually fades into memory. Time will tell.
Take Care
Bob
To paraphrase a famous US football coach, " If we seek perfection we may ultimately reach excellence". I do hope we are in the process now.
I just wanted to add the M&P FS 4.25" is not legal in CCP Division with the change in barrel length. I think IDPA is trying to have one division that actually attracts guns that folks actually carry in the US. CCP Division does represent that aspect now. Some might ask why we retain ESP Division and perhaps that will be one division that eventually fades into memory. Time will tell.
Take Care
Bob
Last edited:
- Location
- Prince George B.C.
If we lose ESP where will the 9mm 1911's play?
John
John
We aren't going to lose ESP Division nor are we going to lose CCP Division either.
If it were up to me though they would stick the 1911 9MM's in with SSP and leave it at that. The top shooters don't use them to win the US Nationals ESP Division and for the rest of us does it really matter what gun we use? The scores between SSP and ESP at any large match are virtually identical despite the fact you can add magwells, carve your frame anyway you choose and change internal and external parts in one division and the other is held to changing sights and internal mods for the most part. Says something about the magic of modifications doesn't it.
HQ and the rules team will do what they will. The present RB has some minor and major changes, again. Let's see how it all plays out. BTW, after further measurements the M&P FS 4.25" gun is not legal for CCP Division. While the 2017 increases the barrel length to 111MM the 2017 RB reduces the overall height allowed to 5.375" from 6 inches. Don't ask me why but that is the change. We can now play CCP, just not with the M&P FS. A Glock 19 with and extended barrel might be the ticket for us.
Take Care
Bob
You're a humourless old fart, aren't you.....
Ah the irony, you obviously have not read the new rule book. :>)
Take Care
Bob
