MCTS IDPA match

[rstandley]

Hey shooters, come out to our reg. IDPA match in Adairville KY Red River range on 12/1/07. We will also be having a blind stage for a $25 prize.

[RWF]

Sorry we could not make it. we have not shot alot since oct. i did look at your new 08 calender. a trophy match hmmm and i got got a new pistol for SSP. we hope to be there as you know my wife is not afriad to shoot without me.

[rstandley]

Robert;

You missed a good weekend to whip up on me, I brought out my Kimber, forgot my ammo, shooting glasses, hat and could not do a 1-1-2-1-1 engagement to save my life. Too much USPSA.

[DMark]

.... could not do a 1-1-2-1-1 engagement to save my life.....

Many of us are telling IDPA HQ that Recent Combat is showing the 1-1-2-1-1 doesn't work. Too much indexing of the gun, better to two-tap quick and move to the next target. Of course "somebody" at IDPA isn't going along with that since it doesn't support "his" training method. BTW - That somebody has never been shot at either.

Jeff Cooper had it right with the "Double-Hammer" all along.

[molonlabetn]

if 1-1-2-1-1 is what I think it is... it's a bad idea. If I'm under fire, I don't want to have to re-engage several targets multiple times each, sequentially, and I would never train myself to do so.

2-2-2 is faster, and much more accurate than aquiring 2 of the targets twice.

[DMark]

if 1-1-2-1-1 is what I think it is... it's a bad idea.

Yup, its a bad idea.

The "Serve Everybody Once" training method came about a few years back. It was somebody's latest & greatest Ninja idea and it got writen into the rules book.

Those of us who had been in real fights said - WHAT?????

We're trying to get IDPA to at least allow LEO & Military the option NOT to do the 1-1-2-1-1 since its something that our training doesn't support.

BTW, Shooting the BGs to slide lock still appears to be a worthy method. We also think that limited vickers on any stage isn't good. If somebody wants to shoot half a mag at each target - let them. Only good hits count in IDPA and let them add the time for as many shots as they want so long as the shooter is using good tactics and not doing any "Failure To Do Right."

Maybe we can get Bill Wilson into the ammo business and he'll support that idea.

[RWF]

Well i am sorry that i was not there, i do not know when the last time you had really bad day so i could beat you. that alone would have been well worth the drive.

[deerslayer]

We're trying to get IDPA to at least allow LEO & Military the option NOT to do the 1-1-2-1-1 since its something that our training doesn't support.

Good luck with that--optional for some shooters, not optional for others. LEO and Military gets an advantage--don't think that will fly. You'd have better luck convincing the guy who set up the stage to allow you to shoot them on the move, instead of requiring tac sequence.

We also think that limited vickers on any stage isn't good. If somebody wants to shoot half a mag at each target - let them. Only good hits count in IDPA and let them add the time for as many shots as they want so long as the shooter is using good tactics and not doing any "Failure To Do Right"

I'm not crazy about limited stages either, but they do serve a purpose. IDPA is a game, and limited stages are an excellent test of basic skills. If you can't slow down a little and avoid time-consuming extra shots, you need to practice a little patience (this is especially true for me). Just be glad that IDPA is dominated by scenario-based stages instead of standards-type stages.

[ZZRguy]

if 1-1-2-1-1 is what I think it is... it's a bad idea. If I'm under fire, I don't want to have to re-engage several targets multiple times each, sequentially, and I would never train myself to do so.

2-2-2 is faster, and much more accurate than aquiring 2 of the targets twice.

On Personal defense tv wed. night the host proved shooting 2-2 is much faster than shooting 1-2-1.

[deerslayer]

The overall time was faster for sure, but did the second target get a bullet in less time doing 2-2?

[DMark]

Good luck with that--optional for some shooters, not optional for others. LEO and Military gets an advantage.....

No advantage since there is already a LEO/Military category and we just wanted the option for professionals to fire a COA as they are trained.

[deerslayer]

There are sometimes awards for High LEO/Military, but the CoF is the same for everybody.

[DMark]

There are sometimes awards for High LEO/Military, but the CoF is the same for everybody.

I am not saying to have a different CoF. What we wanted was no points down for LEO/Military shooting as we are trained. Their score would be listed as LEO/Military and not counted against the other shooters.

BTW - At the time of this discussion (debate) with HQ I was one of the IDPA Regional Directors. So I had a vested interest as both a shooter and a military trainer.

IDPA loss a chance to get in offically with the Army. We very nearly adopted the IDPA classifier. Would had been good for everybody.

But its all a Moot point now.

[deerslayer]

I am not saying to have a different CoF. What we wanted was no points down for LEO/Military shooting as we are trained. Their score would be listed as LEO/Military and not counted against the other shooters.

But this amounts to a different CoF; all sanctioned matches have one CoF and everybody shoots it the same way. They are classified differently and compete against similarly skilled shooters w/ similar weapons, but the match is EXACTLY the same for everybody. I'm not arguing w/ ya; I'm not crazy about 1-1-2-1-1 myself. I'm just trying to explain what I bet HQ's rationale probably was when they decided against this.

BTW, where do you shoot/SO?

[DMark]

..... just trying to explain what I bet HQ's rationale probably was when they decided against this.....

All good points.

Only allowing 1-1-2-1-1 was not in the rules when IDPA began. It was added later.

I still feel that their main reason against also using 2-2-2 was to protect one of the board members latest teaching trick. I recall one saying that it HAD to be done that way (1-1-2-1-1) because its being taught that way and a Bud of mine looked at me and said, "Has this want-a-be SOB ever seen the elephant?" But, its old news now and that window won't open up again during my watch. I haven't talked to anybody at the HQ in over 3 years now.

When I now shoot, its mostly in Southern KY/Middle TN/ Northern AL. At the time all of this was going on I was found in the AL/GA/FL area - - - Not to include some quick side trips to SWA. I will SO every now and then, but I no longer do any MD duties.

And I still shoot 2-2-2.

[deerslayer]

And I still shoot 2-2-2.

LOL. You didn't happen to shoot or SO in Manchester this past October, did you?

[DMark]

LOL. You didn't happen to shoot or SO in Manchester this past October, did you?

Not this year if you are talking about the State Championship on 20 Oct. I was out of the state that weekend.

[DMark]

On Personal defense tv wed. night the host proved shooting 2-2 is much faster than shooting 1-2-1.

It wasn't the host.

It was Cory Trapp of Gunsite doing the shooting..., quite the gentleman and a Master of the 1911.