1911Forum banner
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have been shooting IDPA for 4 years and have been seeing somthing more than when I started out in this game. All of the different clubs in my area as well as the regional matches I have shot, about 13, all seem to feel it is ok to put thier slant on the IDPA rules. When one points the rules out, they are told, "its our gig", and this is the way it is. I do not agree with this type of operation, but I go along. Does anyone else see this in thier area clubs?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,312 Posts
Clubs are allowed to have leeway in that thier ranges may require more strict safety rules than IDPA. Also, it is my personal feeling that clubs should try to follow the rules as closely as possible. I have seen on more than one occasion a shooter who has shot a lot of club matches, but their first sanctioned match, get several procedurals, because their club was either lax, or just did it differently. All the clubs in my area follow the book fairly well.

How about giving us an example?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
769 Posts
They are really doing their shooters a disservice. Like John said when they go to a major sanctioned match they will be susceptible taking procedurals. Nothing is perfect for sure but clubs and matches are only as good as the MD's and SO's make them. Best bet is to get involved become an SO or MD and exert your influence that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
301 Posts
Consistency is good

Samray,

You bring up some good points. At our matches I see some deviation from the "letter of the law" in order to accomodate the range layout, and available equipment. I don't have any problem with that, what I find curious is the differences between SO's.

For example, some SO's are trying to do things by the book, but using their commons sense when necessary to accomdate the COF or other issues that may create a conflict with safe practices. I OK with this, in fact I am glad we have SO's that can think on their feet.

Most of the SO's at our club are great and do a fantastic job. But I am a little disappointed when some SO's seem to just make calls by the seat of the pants, like; not accessing a failure to neutralize penalty, or giving you credit for a "double" when in fact you missed the target. I appreciate the jesture, but this is not how things will be when you shoot a sanctioned regional match.

Personally, I prefer to have everything scored and judged consistently, then your score means something. If your score is skewed due to "gifts", then what have you really found out about your skills? Personally, I do not care how my score compares to the rest of the participants, except my buddy I shoot with. I use my scores to monitor if I am making any progress, and to identify the areas needing improvement. Trust me, there is plenty of room for improvement.

When I helping a SO and am asked how a target is to be scored, I try to honestly determine the score accurately, and explain how I come up with the number. Some guys don't like to be 'reminded' of some of the applicable penalties, but I point out that I am harder on myself.

Most may not agree with me, but this is how I personally feel. I really enjoy IDPA competition and if others choose to 'squeeze' the scoring, fine. I'd prefer mine straight up and by the book.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
In Reply

Firt to John Forsyth
I agree all the way about clubs having very strict rules concerning safety. One example I have was most recent concering turning in a Bill Drill. It should in fact be the shooters choice on what way they would like to turn, as described in the course of fire book, as I read it. When we were given the course of fire at a local club mini match, we were told we had to turn to the gun, as they felt it was more tacticly correct. Another example is demanding what particular type of relaod a shooter perform. It should be simply stated any legal IDPA reload. The bigger part of IDPA in the east coast, at least the Regional matches I have shot, have moved away from telling to do a tactical reload vs a reload with retention. I have more examples but I do not want to over stay my welcome.

In reply to Mayonaise, I took the IDPA approved SO class as soon it was available at Smith & Wesson and have volunteered as an SO there for 2 Winter Championships. I try to interject as much as possible, while at the same time not wanting to spend to much time going back and fourth with uninfomed, one sided people.

I am very serious about the rule book in IDPA, and the mission of this sport when it was formed. I was curious to se if it was just this area that had this type of thing occuring in thier local area.
 

·
Super Moderator
EDC: SIG P938.
Joined
·
22,429 Posts
The SO is given a bit of latitude, so you'll see some nuances (that's a good, inoffensive term, eh?) in the way individuals interpret things. At our club, we have come up with our own interpretation of some rules, to ensure that they are enforced consistently by all the SO's, but I have no idea if it is the way they are interpreted at Nationals.
An example: Reloads are to be performed behind cover, if cover is available. How do you define "available"? There is no agreed-upon definition. For consistency's sake, we don't let anyone begin a reload unless they are behind cover, if the CoF has a position of cover. I don't know if that's how it's done at nat's, but our interpretation is certainly within a broad definition of "available".
We also don't interpret lack of visible threats to equate with "behind cover". If you are at a position of cover, and are going to move to a position of cover, we don't allow you to reload on the way - even though there are no threats visible as you cross the open ground, you are not "behind" anything.
If Bill Wilson wants to give me a call, to say we're doing it wrong, then I'll listen to him.
"Giving" points to people is an entirely different matter; if you were to take "benefit of the doubt" to the extreme, you could argue that every called mike is actually a double; and there is something of a catch-22 to any disputed call. The SO is not supposed to closely inspect the target, so that shots very close to the line are not overly scrutinized, but if a mike is called, and it's disputed, what do you do? Stick your nose right up to the target, looking as closely as possible for elongation, grease marks, etc. I think SOs should be thinking "fair" as much as "rules" when they use their discretion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,312 Posts
samray, you have hit one of the major problems with IDPA. Not going to directly quote you, but to paraphrase, "turn into the gun because it is more tactically correct", MD's and SO's in general are not tactical trainers. It is the MD's job to put on a good match and the SO's job is to insure a safe and fair run of the stage. That's it. At our club, if a reload is required to complete the CoF, we just say perform any IDPA legal reload as you see fit. Not perform a Tac Load, or a slide lock reload, just perform a legal reload and get on with it.

If someone wants to see you perform a particular reload, just make it a standard, and clock it. By doing that, it takes the mall ninja tactician out of it, and gives you a realistic time to perform that skill.

I applaud you that you have become a certified SO. We need more like you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
That would be me. I'm a certified SO, and a real rules horse.

I've picked up some of samray's brass over the years.

The list of house rules around here is pretty extensive, and, fortunately, somewhat humorous. There's the "you have to do a reload before leaving cover" rule. And the "you must draw before you kneel, not kneel before you draw" rule. I had to argue against that for a half an hour in front of a class full of people, and I was only able to get the guy to back down to allowing a draw after a kneel on the weak side knee, only.

Then you get into house rules at the sanctioned matches.

I can't for the life of me understand while people feel that they must deviate from clearly defined rules. I know that not all of the IDPA rules are clearly defined (although HG can assist with an explanation/interpretation there) - but a lot of them are. So follow them. You signed a piece of paper saying that you would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,692 Posts
2cats said:
That would be me. I'm a certified SO, and a real rules horse.

I've picked up some of samray's brass over the years.

The list of house rules around here is pretty extensive, and, fortunately, somewhat humorous. There's the "you have to do a reload before leaving cover" rule.

Then you get into house rules at the sanctioned matches.

Don't you have to do a reload before leaving cover? I am assuming the gun is empty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
No, the gun is not empty. This house rule did not state that you cannot leave cover with an empty gun, it held that you may only leave cover with a full gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,692 Posts
2cats said:
No, the gun is not empty. This house rule did not state that you cannot leave cover with an empty gun, it held that you may only leave cover with a full gun.
That sucks. The rules are hard enough to understand but when Joe Schmo makes up their own rules, it is just too much.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
226 Posts
2cats said:
... And the "you must draw before you kneel, not kneel before you draw" rule. ...
We have this rule for range safety reasons. In fact, we've gotten to the point that when designing COFs that you only include one scenario where you drop to a sitting/kneeling/squatting/prone position and the COF is concluded from that position. This is to accomodate the many individuals that we have participating that may have knee/hip/leg problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
IDPA has become a game of "shoot it exactly as the SO instructs". In spite of that its still fun!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,692 Posts
Not at our range. We demand safety but if you want to do a tac load somewhere, we don't care as long as it is done behind cover. We try to set the COF's up so they are shot somewhat the same. It is a tactical game. I think the best ones (and we have run a couple of these) are the blind stages. They take a long time though and are tough to run.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
To bigsappers point - I feel there are already rules that address the potential for sweeping yourself (which is the potential hazard I imagine we are talking about here). Shooters are required to learn good gun handling in other applications, and I think that it's better to allow people to do what comes naturally, as long as it's safe. If someone can kneel on their strong knee, draw without endangering anyone, and shoot, I don't want to tell them that they can't, when the rule book does not prohibit it. Even the wording of the classifier is something to the effect of "kneel, draw, and fire . . ."

I'm not saying you're doing this, bigsapper (I've seen it happen plenty elsewhere), but in general, "safety concerns" can be twisted to justify anything. I'd prefer to let shooters do what they want. I would also suggest that a potential safety issue, like kneeling and drawing, should be mentioned during the walk through, and that the shooters be told that they will be scrutinized for safe gun handling - as described in the rule book.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
226 Posts
2cats said:
To bigsappers point - I feel there are already rules that address the potential for sweeping yourself (which is the potential hazard I imagine we are talking about here). Shooters are required to learn good gun handling in other applications, and I think that it's better to allow people to do what comes naturally, as long as it's safe. If someone can kneel on their strong knee, draw without endangering anyone, and shoot, I don't want to tell them that they can't, when the rule book does not prohibit it. Even the wording of the classifier is something to the effect of "kneel, draw, and fire . . ."

I'm not saying you're doing this, bigsapper (I've seen it happen plenty elsewhere), but in general, "safety concerns" can be twisted to justify anything. I'd prefer to let shooters do what they want. I would also suggest that a potential safety issue, like kneeling and drawing, should be mentioned during the walk through, and that the shooters be told that they will be scrutinized for safe gun handling - as described in the rule book.
I agree whole-heartedly.........in a perfect world. Unfortunately, if we were to have an ND where someone was hurt, the entire range would probably be shut down permenantly. The range has been in a long standing feud with the city which wants to annex the land to expand the municipal airport. So yes, we lean very heavy on the safety issue, espeicially when we typically have new shooters at every match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,692 Posts
This is a very easy fix. Set up the COF so the gun is drawn and targets engaged before kneeling. Put the kneeling part after the first target has been engaged. Allakazam!! Gun already out of holster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,686 Posts
I started in IPSC, so I'm used to being able to solve the course more or less however.

We get very precise instructions here, on the sequence of engaging targets, such as from behind cover. It like "on this stage shoot 1-1-2-1-1" and the next stage "shoot like this 2-2-2". It doesn't seem consistent, or maybe I'm missing something that differentiates them.

As long as it's tactically reasonable from behind cover, etc, they're just cardboard. In a real scenario you'd have to be more continually doing a threat assessment. For example, if the closest target to you is an enraged Taliban on drugs running right at you, one shot might not stop him, so why train to automatically shoot once then move to the next target, etc, and then come back to shoot him again after you've shot all the other targets twice? Doesn't make sense to me. If he dropped from the first shot, I'm going to come back to him and shoot him on the ground?

A double-tap seems more like a reasonably sure, efficient, neutralization, than a shot now, and another one later, whether you need it or not.

There needs to be Poppers that can be set to fall on the first hit OR the second hit (or even third hit!) Then mix them up on the COF, and they all have to fall to be considered neutralized.

That would be much more realistic that the non-reacting cardboard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
560 Posts
ranger

there ya go again confusing the "real world" with IDPA ;) OOPS did i say that ??? LOL.. bad me..

sorry just kidding.

IDPA is a lot of fun but to be honest I don't think it's going to train you adequately to handle drug enraged Taliban.. or for that matter Multiple bad guys.. all shooting at you..

my best advice.. pop him once and run like hell.. :eek:

have fun with it.. if you want tactical training there are many many acredited schools that can do that for you..

Jeff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
The start of IDPA was originally intended to at least partially get away from the extensive rules of another shooting sport.

As a certified SO, the main rule I follow after safety rules is the description from the rule book on the duties of a SO
Safety Officers:

Defensive Pistol rules have as their fundamental purpose the safe conduct and enjoyment of Defensive Pistol matches. Unlike some other shooting sports, Defensive Pistol rules are few in number and simple to administer. The purpose of an IDPA Safety Officer is to assist the competitor so he/she can complete the course of fire safely and with as much enjoyment as possible. The purpose is NOT to hover over the shooter and treat him/her like a child and look for every possible opportunity to assess the shooter a procedural penalty. The goal of an IDPA match director should be for the competitors to have a safe and enjoyable event and to promote fellowship between participants. Club presidents should use as safety officers experienced shooters who have a clear understanding of this purpose and the rules. Because the rules are so few in number, clubs should be able to qualify safety officers fairly quickly and easily.
I find that many SOs look too hard at the course to see where they can bone the competitor with a procedural penalty.

IDPA is my hobby. I try to enjoy the game and the people as much as possible. If I miss a penalty who cares. As long as you were safe and had a good time, I am happy. If the penalty I missed allows you to finish higher than me, you get my congratulations again, I really don't care. Am I competitive? Very much so but not to the point where I do not have fun.

My idea of a great IDPA match is to tell everyone these are the basic rules, here is the scenario, solve the problem within the rules.
Shooter ready, stand by, BEEEEP :D
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top