IPSC RULES question 'Gear Distance'

This has been hashed, talked about and threaded to death!
Go to Global Village, find the thread that the "man that knows all" has explained away this whole debacle, print it off and carry it in your range bag.
Produce it when you need to.
Problem solved.
 
baird said:
This topic has been beat to death on Global Village, and even Vince is stating the measurement has leway. If RO's have nothing better to do we have problems.
Click to expand...

What section is the leeway rule in?

tomo333 said:
This has been hashed, talked about and threaded to death!
Go to Global Village, find the thread that the "man that knows all" has explained away this whole debacle, print it off and carry it in your range bag.
Produce it when you need to.
Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Does a GV printed thread supersede the IPSC rule book?
 
Hmm. Interesting. I am blessed with muffin top..
You...on the other hand...may need a few sandwiches to catch up.
 
Typically, a Range Official will "swipe" the (50mm wide) narrow side of his scoring overlay between the grip and the competitor's torso. The "grip" is the part of the gun which is "gripped" by the strong hand, so from just below the beavertail to the end of the frame seems reasonable to me.

However the 50mm rule was never, and is not, intended to be a precise scientific measurement. The rule originally alluded to concealability, and it was written to prevent blatant violations whereby the handgun grip would stick out like an unmentionable part of a dog's anatomy!

This is why Rule 5.2.5.2 gives the RM leeway to allow for "anatomical considerations", and I'll usually allow up to 10mm extra.

In my experience, skinnier competitors have more trouble complying with the 50mm rule than Fat Bastards® like me, who intentionally develop and maintain "love handles" purely to assist with rule compliance.

This how Mr Pinto applies the rule re: distance. It's at the RO's discretion.
 
Well, since this topic has been beaten like a red headed step child..

Could you imagine if there were weight classes in IPSC. omfg, the hilarity that would ensue.
 
The distance was 25mm at one time for standard if i remember right.
That is before prod open came along.
 
I got stopped at a match last time I shot and was told I'd be unable to shoot the match, if I didn't change my holster immediately...even though I've had the same setup for five years and worn it to Nationals several times.

I'm a lady and wear my belt lower than the guy's to start with. I've got curvy hips and use a half inch spacer under my holster already to bring my holster closer to spec. I don't want to gain any more weight, I look ridiculous drawing my gun from my armpit...I just hate it that way and it's clearly not correct because I'm also rather short in the spine. I'm very frustrated and Nationals is coming up soon!! I was told that the "some shooters may not comply" ...is only for super skinny shooters..not for curvy ladies :(

I also wear a wider belt than is worn by most shooters so I guess it's off to the shop to try and design something more "compliant" out of aluminum....still pissed off :(
 
baird said:
It's at the RO's discretion.
Click to expand...
Therein lies the rub. A rule should not be a judgment call/opinion of the RO because it cannot be applied equally to all. Bias also comes into play here. If a rule cannot be applied fairly and equally to all competitors, regardless of body shape and gender, the rule should be tossed.
 
Many of our youth competitors and mentors got called on this over the weekend due to their slight builds. We put an inch block under the barrel section of the pistols and it got us by but were told we would have to likely change holsters for Nationals - a lot of the Team use the offset BladeTech. :( To be honest I saw this putting a lot of sreess on people (not just our team) and taking away from their concentration, but a rule is a rule even if it seems a bit arbitraty (we had a problem with the 'to the skin' part as how one stands can even dramticly change the measurement. In any case we will make sure everyone is in compliance by the next match if we can, as noted above it may be physically impossible for one or two of the girls to make it due to their build.
 
1riot1ranger said:
This is one rule where USPSA has it over IPSC... Measuring to the belt removes the variability that measuring to the torso induces.
Click to expand...

I disagree, if you measure from the belt then a small competitor could have a 100mm gap and a large competitor could have the grip of the gun embedded in their love handles.

One way to work around it would be to add a clause that if the gap is more than 50mm to the body then it must be less than "lets say 25mm" to the belt which would give everyone a fair size opening between the gun and body yet keep it within reason and leave no room for different interpretations.
 
xldbldbl said:
I disagree, if you measure from the belt then a small competitor could have a 100mm gap and a large competitor could have the grip of the gun embedded in their love handles.

One way to work around it would be to add a clause that if the gap is more than 50mm to the body then it must be less than "lets say 25mm" to the belt which would give everyone a fair size opening between the gun and body yet keep it within reason and leave no room for different interpretations.
Click to expand...


Or even better.. 50mm to body or belt, whichever is closer..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom