Yup. I love this game. It has so much going for it. Let the haters take their fun elsewhere. IPSC is here to stay.
IPSC trying to drop the hammer on USPSA?
- Thread starter red magnum
- Start date
Slavex thanks for this I was not aware of this. Don't get me wrong I love to shoot IPSC. Truthfully one of my favourites. I love the online scoring and ranking system. I shoot in Canada so was not aware of some of these restrictions that other countries face. I was merely trying to say I find it confusing why one organisation should be able to tell the others where they can hold matches. I get the IPSC matches are run by IPSC people but I assumed as the clubs are owned by the clubs it would ultimately be their decision as to what types of matches the want to allow to be run on their facility. Obviously there is more going on here than I am aware of.
Another factor is that USPSA as a whole is a member region of IPSC as part of their agreement with IPSC no different than say Canada. The USPSA foreign member club thing was setup and allowed for circumstances like a lot of Canadians who go to the USA to shoot matches and want to be classified when they get there. Vince is saying that USPSA can do whatever it wants globally and no one needs IPSC permission, they just won't be doing it as a member of IPSC since it violates the agreement in place.
I think it's unfortunate that USPSA allowed themselves to get put into the middle of a power play between two factions in the Philippines and the end result could have ripple effects for the rest of us that respect the current setup.
I think it's unfortunate that USPSA allowed themselves to get put into the middle of a power play between two factions in the Philippines and the end result could have ripple effects for the rest of us that respect the current setup.
There was an agreement in place that USPSA chose not to honor by allowing sanctioned matches to happen in countries where the RD didn't approve them, quite simple. As much as I dislike certain things regarding our IPSC Exec, they have this one right in my opinion. Although I don't like the "passive" part of the new rule. USPSA can't stop clubs from running unsanctioned matches.
That is the same thing IPSC did 8 years ago with IPSC US. Push comes to shove ,IPSC pushed first. Thinking you need some one or some organizations permission to shoot any sport is insane. Any organization that thinks that you need to ask their permission to shoot another sport shows how out of touch with reality they are.
I don't believe that to be accurate. I can see where one would get it though, as it has been commonly reported.
From my understanding of things, the club in the Philippines was an approved USPSA club. That club became an approved club with the consent of the Philippine IPSC RD. Much has been made of the fact that the foreign club agreement says that a club affiliation with USPSA runs from Jan 1 thru Dec 31. That is the exact same boilerplate language that is used for clubs that affiliate in the states. It defines the terms of when monies are due each year. However, here in the states, it does NOT require another set of signatures for a club to re-up their affiliation each year. (When in my past role as Section Coordinator for Ohio, I only signed off on the club in their initial affiliation packet. After that, the club would simply pay their re-affiliation fee to USPSA. Same same.)
In USPSA's eyes, the club in the Philippines was a legit club, running a legit match. They hadn't broken any rules, and USPSA had their fees, which were paid through the entire year.
The USPSA President (thru emails) told Vince Pinto that he didn't see where there was a specific and actionable breach of organization rules (both IPSC and USPSA rules from what I understand).
This was in January. Pinto thought that the IPSC Executive Council (EC) would take the matter up in their February meeting and he would then get back with the USPSA President.
Pinto never got back with the USPSA President. One might wonder... did the EC take the matter up further? Apparently so. What followed was a communication black out period with USPSA, escalation, then a change of the rules at the IPSC General Assembly...6 months later.
One might ask if IPSC should have better process for dealing with issues between regions (especially two of the largest regions within IPSC)? What happened here was a complaint was filed with the IPSC President. No word EVER got to USPSA from the IPSC President, nor the Executive Council. The only dealings were from Vince Pinto, who initially stepped in because the "President was traveling". According to Vince, he wanted to settle this with "back channel communications".
So, an issue was brought forth, handled unofficially, an initial response was given that called into question the facts of the issue...then nothing, until a rule change.
That is an interesting way to do business.
So, an issue was brought forth, handled unofficially, an initial response was given that called into question the facts of the issue...then nothing, until a rule change.
That is an interesting way to do business.
Last edited:
Why does it matter? Because the rule change puts USPSA in an impossible position.
USPSA bought and owns Steel Challenge. The wording of the new rule (on purpose) says that USPSA can't run steel Challenge matches outside of the States, without getting approval from that IPSC region's RD. Steel Challenge isn't IPSC, it isn't USPSA. If they do run matches, they are subject to being kicked out of IPSC.
So, USPSA either cedes control of Steel Challenge to IPSC (about as likely as IDPA becoming an Olympic sport), or they violate the new resolutions.
USPSA bought and owns Steel Challenge. The wording of the new rule (on purpose) says that USPSA can't run steel Challenge matches outside of the States, without getting approval from that IPSC region's RD. Steel Challenge isn't IPSC, it isn't USPSA. If they do run matches, they are subject to being kicked out of IPSC.
So, USPSA either cedes control of Steel Challenge to IPSC (about as likely as IDPA becoming an Olympic sport), or they violate the new resolutions.
IPSC turned me off competitive handgun shooting. Too many rules, too many regulations, too much infighting. It drowns the enthusiasm of new shooters looking to join them.
I wouldn't mind joining a different discipline in the future, but IPSC likely won't be seeing me return to their events.
I wouldn't mind joining a different discipline in the future, but IPSC likely won't be seeing me return to their events.
One's exposure to the politics of any organized sport can be as much or as little as they choose.
Does any of what is discussed in this thread actually matter or make any difference to the vast majority of people who enjoy the sport?
No. Not one bit.
I'd bet 95%+ of the IPSC membership in Canada will never shoot IPSC (or USPSA) outside of Canada.
Everyone can still compete and enjoy the company of like minded people.
Some of my closest friends I've met through IPSC.
Too many rules?
Please explain.
Safety is safety and there is no limit on those rules.
As far as the actual game is concerned, I don't like certain rules in golf and hockey, but I still play those sports.
I accept the challenge as set out by the rules and develop the skills required.
Does any of what is discussed in this thread actually matter or make any difference to the vast majority of people who enjoy the sport?
No. Not one bit.
I'd bet 95%+ of the IPSC membership in Canada will never shoot IPSC (or USPSA) outside of Canada.
Everyone can still compete and enjoy the company of like minded people.
Some of my closest friends I've met through IPSC.
Too many rules?
Please explain.
Safety is safety and there is no limit on those rules.
As far as the actual game is concerned, I don't like certain rules in golf and hockey, but I still play those sports.
I accept the challenge as set out by the rules and develop the skills required.
I did enjoy IPSC but my feelings have soured for the sport for a number of reasons. I have within the last year moved on to the 'other' target shooting sport. Much calmer, no drama, everyone helps with setup and tear down, less running about, match fees are less, no match pre-registation, pay on match day, emphasize on fun & safety, monthly matches, no race gear, not anal on the rules except for safety, etc, etc. I have met lots of IPSC refugees at my local range. All have moved on for pretty much the same reasons.
Flex, I'm not sure which regions but there were apparently other regions with issues too. But knowing the people involved I wouldn't be surprised if that was just inflated bull#### too. This is much less about USPSA than people realize.
Level 3's and 4's can bring a bit more drama but what your describing above sounds like every IPSC level 2 I have ever attended. If there are that many drama queens in your area maybe the MD could squad them together, or maybe just ask to be squaded with the more personable competitors.
The drama is just one facet. Squads list get carved in stone so not easy to get moved and even if you do, you still have to deal with them as a RO.
A number of Canadians from Ontario shoot monthly matches in Area 7 (NY) & Area 5 (MI). I'm sure there are also shooters from BC that travel to WA as well as the snowbirds in AZ and FL every winter. There are also shooters that go to the USA specifically for big Area/Sectional Matches and US Nationals. There are several USPSA clubs in Canada. It may not affect YOU one bit, but could affect others.
I frequently travel to the US and elsewhere for matches.
I still stand by my statement.
IPSC Ontario has what, 1400 members?
Can you honestly tell me that more than 70 of them routinely participate in USPSA in the US?
Besides, I'm a USPSA member in good standing.
Regardless of how this all plays out, I'll still be able to compete in the US, as will all others who attend Area matches etc.
And if this whole situation implodes and IPSC/USPSA go their separate ways, what do you think the outcome will be for the affiliate clubs in Canada?
Do you think they will cease to host matches?
No.
In fact I'd bet more USPSA clubs and matches will pop up.
With no requirement for approval from the IPSC RD, what's to stop any club from offering USPSA to its members?
pauls I don;t think I have ever heard of any club that has been prevented from starting a USPSA club by the resident RD? I doubt it has ever happened.
Your points are valid. Based upon what has been posted here and on the IPSC Village forum my bet would be the two organizations are about to part company. I doubt many,if any, USPSA shooters give a rats a$$ about IPSC and most would consider this to be an "up yours" by IPSC. At some point National pride enters the picture and the Americans have an ample supply of that.
Just a guess, stay tuned.
Take Care
Bob
Your points are valid. Based upon what has been posted here and on the IPSC Village forum my bet would be the two organizations are about to part company. I doubt many,if any, USPSA shooters give a rats a$$ about IPSC and most would consider this to be an "up yours" by IPSC. At some point National pride enters the picture and the Americans have an ample supply of that.
Just a guess, stay tuned.
Take Care
Bob
Last edited:
