Jump to content


Photo

One club's reaction to rules 2017


  • Please log in to reply
103 replies to this topic

#1 redrider

redrider

    lolcow

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 06:37 AM

I shot a match with this club once years ago and am still on their mailing list. Seems they wanna jump ship. Here is part of the email they sent out to, oh I guess a few hundred people. Portion of the email follows:

 

So here is the question…. If we decide that IDPA 2017 rules (which are currently unsettled) are not the standard by which we choose to run this match….will you still support us?    We recognize that this would therefore NOT be an “IDPA match” with our Club’s withdrawal.  And I am sure we will face consequences for our actions, but it is a fight for principles at this point.  
 
But the championship match would be IDPA-ish.   At this point we will consider running the match under the 2015 old rules – but no option to appeal to IDPA HQ.  We will work more on the details but want to get this out as we hope to open registration this coming Saturday after our monthly match.

We have great concerns about where IDPA is heading.  We are in total disagreement with the visual fault lines proposed and are exasperated with how requiring those can allow for IDPA to be described as “”simulated-real-world-self-

defense scenarios”.

We know we have many shooters who were excited about the CCP division and invested substantially in new guns and holsters only to find substantial changes proposed now.   We would welcome all CCP shooters to the championship, operating with 2015 rules as a guideline.

IDPA has prospered for 15 years on volunteers as Match Directors and Safety Officer.  But to us, this is a step to far,  we are placing an unreasonable burden on Safety Officers to digest new rules and have greater focus on being an umpire or referee, which is simply unappealing. 

We are disheartened that the newly proposed changes, as we understand them, do not appear to truly make shooting more fun,  nor make it easier for Safety Officers to administer, and make it much more similar to a different action pistol sport than we IDPA purists like.


#2 Doc

Doc

    Google ( o Y o ) SME

  • Moderators
  • 4,264 posts
  • Location: safety wired in the pissed off position

Posted 10 January 2017 - 07:43 AM

If that was verbatim, the author failed English.
Unload and Show Clear...
tsarbombaexplos2.jpg
"Licorne" French Polynesia 1970

It pins my irony meter when people post things like "your to stupid..."

You brought a rifle to a handgun competition?

#3 Peally

Peally

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,855 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:19 AM

So instead of following their ruleset, they'd rather have a wildcard made up ruleset no one else follows or recognizes. How about just following either IDPA or USPSA rules and not being stupid?

 

Or just pulling the head out of their ass and realizing that an "IDPA purist" is someone that doesn't know what the hell they're doing?



#4 Fishyjoe

Fishyjoe

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 639 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:26 AM

This is why people bust on IDPA. Grown men getting butt hurt so bad they rage quit the organization. I actually think the changes are a good thing as they addressed the problems most people had with the game.

1. Subjective Cover calls are gone. One less thing for the SO to worry about. Good riddance.

2. Flat footed reload behind cover gone. Retention still there but this is a fair compromise imo.

3. 1pt = 1 second. This one confuses me the most, why people are bitching about a greater focus on accuracy? Being inaccurate will get you killed in the streets.

4. New classifier, target, and system. This is a good thing. Now you have to shoot 1 classifier a year instead of one for every division. New classifier much simpler and the hokey stuff is gone.

5. Equipment rules. Now, if one has and axe to grind this is the place to do it. Yes I had a pistol bumped out of ccp. No im not butt hurt about it. Contrary to popular belief, I don't think they stacked the deck for Wilson to sell more guns. I think this low lying fruit for the haters.

In general, the changes streamlined an overbearing rule book and removed the subjective aspect or the game. The way they rolled it out left a bit to be desired, but at least they took our feedback seriously and made amendments where they were needed. I'll shoot my 1st match next week under the new rules. Can't wait.

To answer the email. No I won't be supporting you in your half-assed boycott. I think you are misguided in your crusade.
  • aceinyerface, Buck Turgidson and MilkMyDuds like this

#5 Larry Costa

Larry Costa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 797 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:28 AM

It's a wonder IDPA made it this far.
  • Buck Turgidson likes this

Because of who I am dawg = EABOD


#6 Peally

Peally

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,855 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:31 AM

It's a wonder IDPA made it this far.

 

They have done one thing right in their history, and that's excellent marketing towards people that don't know any better.



#7 redrider

redrider

    lolcow

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:32 AM

Yep, that's a cut and paste direct from the email. They use some interesting word choices that remind me of Soviet era propaganda in a way.

 

I disagree with most of the points put forth from them as to why they want to leave and answered as much in the survey they asked respondents to complete.

 

This is really starting to lay bare the identity crisis that happens when you mix a game and keep talking about real life. Maybe 5% of what one does in an idpa match is analogous to a self defense shooting.



#8 redrider

redrider

    lolcow

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:35 AM

And why can't you be an "IDPA purist" and also enjoy other shooting sports?



#9 Peally

Peally

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,855 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:48 AM

Kinda goes against what a purist is? An IDPA shooter is just someone that shoots it, by definition a purist would be someone that thinks it's the best and only way, AKA a dumbass.


  • NickBlasta and redrider like this

#10 GuanoLoco

GuanoLoco

    Minister of Culture

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,245 posts
  • LocationMy Safe Space

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:57 AM

 

 

we are placing an unreasonable burden on Safety Officers to digest new rules and have greater focus on being an umpire or referee, which is simply unappealing. 

 

Classic.  

 

SO's should be able to focus on eating cookies or smaller shooters and then making capricious cover calls when not otherwise nodding off.


  • Stubb, Doc, phil datpus and 1 other like this
Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Doodie Project?

You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

In Doodie, Veritas.

"You might be a little thin-skinned for this forum". -Scott.

#11 redrider

redrider

    lolcow

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 08:59 AM

Reminds me of the schisms in martial arts schools. "No, my school is better because my teacher came from Mr XYZ and his kung pao chicken comes from the purest fountain of knowledge. Your kung pao chicken is horrible and an abomination because your teacher is Mr PDQ and he uses chickens with two feathers of the wrong color. You pollute the world with your filthy kung pao chicken."

 

We follow the pure idpa, the one true idpa. All others are takfiri! They wanna be the Wahab of IDPA hahaha.



#12 redrider

redrider

    lolcow

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 09:00 AM

Classic.  

 

O's should be able to focus on eating cookies or smaller shooters and then making capricious cover calls when not otherwise nodding off.

Yep, shows the weakness of their logic and argument. It's funny they think the SO's job is now tooooooo hard, when it was just fine before. Ugh.



#13 Peally

Peally

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,855 posts
  • LocationWisconsin, USA

Posted 10 January 2017 - 09:01 AM

Classic.  

 

O's should be able to focus on eating cookies or smaller shooters and then making capricious cover calls when not otherwise nodding off.

 

What I get out of that is the SO should be there for very specific things: watching for 180s and if someone shoots themselves they can help out by saying "hey he dun got shot!". Holding a timer, procedurals, cover calls, none of that should fall under the responsibilities of an SO because that's being a referee.

 

The more I read into this email the more I realize this is just a classic case of a tarded ol IDPA.



#14 aceinyerface

aceinyerface

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,166 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 09:19 AM

Gun Guy p 188- "We started at with one-third second added for each penalty point, and we quickly realized that wasn't enough penalty to provide the balance we sought. So, we went to a half-second. It should have been one second from the beginning, but we compromised." Bill Wilson

 

Gun Guy p 189- "... there are too many damn rules and still too many courses of fire that require the safety officer to make judgement calls, though major improvements have been made." Bill Wilson

 

It sounds to me like IDPA went more toward what Bill Wilson talked about in his book. I shot a match last weekend and have no complaints.

 

I shot an outlaw match once and I will never do it again. 



#15 redrider

redrider

    lolcow

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 09:56 AM

i saw a picture on another forum or fb where b wilson is quoted as saying the idea of cover was impossible to call in one of his early books.



#16 Lowlife

Lowlife

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 280 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 11:00 AM

It isn't really a surprise for me when stuff like this happens. After all, getting butthurt, quitting and making your own rules is a founding principle of IDPA.
  • snark, GuanoLoco, CH3NO2 and 2 others like this

#17 GForceLizard

GForceLizard

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 11:03 AM

I'm of 2 minds with the change in BUG and CCP equipment rules.  On the con side if you bought a gun to shoot BUG or CCP you may be one of the unlucky that are not legal anymore.  If you don't practice and don't care about your score you can just shoot ESP.  These people feel F'ed.  On the other hand the rule change to smaller lighter guns makes sense in the long run.  A larger difference between ESP to CCP and shorter lighter BUG guns is probably a good thing.  I wonder if some of the hurt comes from it only being 2 years between major rule changes.  I have not shot an IDPA match using their new fault line rule which seems to be the main problem.



#18 GuanoLoco

GuanoLoco

    Minister of Culture

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,245 posts
  • LocationMy Safe Space

Posted 10 January 2017 - 11:29 AM

No one seriously competes in BUG, do they?  And how does making BUG smaller/lighter help anything?

 

CCP - last I saw you could shoot a Glock 19...with 8 rounds max...

 

Not that I care, but shouldn't ESP be for tricked out gamer guns, STI, etc., externally stock full size guns like 17/34 for SSP, Compact Glock 19 size for CCP, then M&P Shield/Glock 43 & maybe Glock 26 for BUG?

 

Anythings smaller is just not fun to compete with outside of a side match.


Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Doodie Project?

You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

In Doodie, Veritas.

"You might be a little thin-skinned for this forum". -Scott.

#19 Flexmoney

Flexmoney

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,764 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 11:38 AM

This is why people bust on IDPA. Grown men getting butt hurt so bad they rage quit the organization. 

 

How do doodies miss this stuff??  


Unless otherwise noted, expect that all my posting here is in true Doodie fashion.  If my post somehow upsets your sensibilities, well...there ya go.  


#20 snark

snark

    Aberrant Freak

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts
  • LocationNull Island

Posted 10 January 2017 - 01:48 PM

They should call themselves "USDPA" and remain members of IDPA but with a different rulebook.  How could that possibly go wrong?


Use the rules. Don't DQ someone who doesn't do anything DQable. -- Da Beard.

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users