IDPA vs IPSC

[Guest DaG]

First, let me say this is not an IDPA bashing thread. I shoot IPSC regularly at ORSA and when I have time IDPA, Steel Challenge and 3 Gun. IPSC seems to be slowly dieing away while IDPA is getting bigger every month. What makes IDPA so much more attractive to shooters in the E. Tn. area?

Is it the low rd. ct. stages? The fact that you are told how to shoot a stage vs freestyle? Guns,gear? Is IPSC intimidating? The way I see it, both sports are games...they have a scoresheet. Both involve manipulating a gun at high speeds and pulling the trigger. Both reward speed and accuracy. IPSC has higher rd. ct. stages and this can only be a good thing as it equals to more shooting. Yes, there are different rules and personally I don't agree with some IDPA rules but they are what they are and I will abide by them. I will try to game the hell out of them as much as I can. Divisions are set up just like IDPA. Raceguns do not compete against production guns. SSP division is the same as Production division. CDP is the same as Singlestack and/or Limited 10 division. ESP single stacks can compete in Singlestack division. The equipment for these and their belt positions are the same as IDPA. So, why is IDPA so much more appealing?

DaG

[et45]

DAG,Ya'll used to have huge turnouts for the IPSC matches in Oak Ridge.I have my opinions of why attendence died but since I'm not an ORSA member I'll just keep them to myself.Suffice it to say though if Dwight had stayed on as Match Director I believe you all would still be going strong.

[Guest DaG]

if Dwight had stayed on as Match Director

I've wondered that myself.........

DaG

[rstandley]

I perfer to make the trip to Owensboro on the 3rd saturday from Nashville. I used to go to Oak Ridge on the 1st or 3rd Sunday. I also noticed that most of the unclassified shooters at the IDPA match are IPSC shooters as well as a good number of the IDPA classified shooters. Range sharing made the match more Lobor intensvive, requiring more clean up after the match and loosing the ability to leave stages set up to be resued later. Shooting one day a month also caused problems.

[MemphisMechanic]

It's much easier to get new people into IDPA, because there is a lot less equipment to invest in. Even if they want to get involved in Production, most will have 2-3 mags and *maybe* one mag carrier for their gun of choice, and they need the gear to mount 4 or 5 more on their belt.

Also, and this is something I prefer about IPSC, there is much less flexibility in IDPA. I personally think everyone that's looking at USPSA should shoot IDPA for at least 1-2 months beforehand.

New shooter's brains are going in a thousand different directions at the beep. At least in IDPA, they're pretty much repeating what the previous 12 shooters just did. Watching a guy shoot his first production stage, when the previous two were a wheelgunner and an Open shooter, can be like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

[deerslayer]

Not sure about E. TN, but IPSC is certainly not dying out anywhere else. On the other hand, IDPA is growing every day. IMO, this is due to several things:

The rise in the number of people with carry permits--IDPA is marketed toward them, and at least some IDPA stages are arguably geared toward defensive scenarios.

The ease of being able to go compete with what you already have--Yeah, yeah, I know, you can go shoot IPSC with a DAO Beretta 92 or a Sigma, because you're not really shooting against that guy with the open gun. However, some get irritated or embarrased when that guy with the $4000 race gun shoots a match in one third the time. On paper, the different classes don't shoot against each other in IPSC or IDPA. In reality, two shooters often compare scores even though they are in different divisions. Excluding revolvers, the three remaining IDPA divisions offer no insurmountable advantages. IDPA newcomers are less likely to be intimitated when they see everyone else's equipment.

Becoming active in IDPA is a much simpler process; for example, it takes 20 minutes and 90 rounds to get a classification in IDPA. In IPSC, getting classified is a process that usually involves several matches.

Lower round count is not a negative for some cost-sensitive shooters. Ammo prices are becoming a bigger concern for many, whether they shoot handloads or store-bought ammo.

Regarding IDPA requiring everyone to do the same thing, it's up to the guy setting up the stage to be creative and make stages that offer several options. Some match directors are more creative than others.

I'm not bashing IPSC--I'm an IDPA shooter, but I like IPSC too.

Edited December 25, 2008 by deerslayer

[nb forrest]

I shoot USPSA and IDPA, I enjoy both and I suck at both equally. I prefer USPSA over IDPA because of the higher round count and the fact that it is not dictated how to shoot the stage. I'm usually the guy with the most procedurals at any IDPA match I go to. I will not travel any distance to an IDPA match because I don't want to spend all day and a bunch of money on gas to only shoot 50 rounds. Every USPSA match I've been to has had a round count of 100 or more, which is a good thing if you ask me.

I think the attendence to most matches is down this year, USPSA or IDPA. I think its because of the price of ammo and the crappy economy in general.

[deerslayer]

I don't recall ever going to a match where I shot only 50 rounds.

[Guest canynracer]

NB...I havent shot IDPA, and I know they shoot more than 50 rds where I watch, most are getting 250 boxes....not sure where you went or how many of you there were...but seems like an oddity.

[nb forrest]

I don't recall ever going to a match where I shot only 50 rounds.

I have been and I won't be back.

I guess I should have made myself clearer, I like USPSA because of the higher round count. I have never shot more than 100 rounds at a regular club level IDPA match except in Manchester, they sometimes have a high round count.

My point was if I'm going to travel any distance, it's going to be to a USPSA match because of the higher round count and the freestyle stages. I like both USPSA and IDPA, I just prefer USPSA.

[deerslayer]

Can't blame ya there. We shoot IDPA twice a month at MSSA, and the round count is almost always over 100. Some people stay and shoot the whole match over again, so it's not impossible to go through 200-250 rounds on a Saturday with us.

[DMark]

.... I prefer USPSA over IDPA because of the higher round count and the fact that it is not dictated how to shoot the stage.....

Tactics dictate how a stage should be shot in IDPA. Yea, I have seen poor IDPA stages where you are told how to shoot it. That is somebody being lazy. A good stage design will give the shooter a problem to fix while using TTPs of a gunfight.

If a stage can be fired with a low round count...., shoot it again strong or weak hand to give the shooter another run and a different condition to overcome. If anything, I wish we could come up with a way in IDPA to slow everybody down. I'm one of those who think a stage should be as near to "would you do that for real" as it can.

Myself - - - I can't shoot USPSA. Trying to "gun & run" without regard to sound TTPs goes against all of my training and combat experience.

But most important of all, both are just games. Its not training, but it can support your training.

[Guest DaG]

Tactics dictate how a stage should be shot in IDPA. Yea, I have seen poor IDPA stages where you are told how to shoot it. That is somebody being lazy. A good stage design will give the shooter a problem to fix while using TTPs of a gunfight.

If a stage can be fired with a low round count...., shoot it again strong or weak hand to give the shooter another run and a different condition to overcome. If anything, I wish we could come up with a way in IDPA to slow everybody down. I'm one of those who think a stage should be as near to "would you do that for real" as it can.

Myself - - - I can't shoot USPSA. Trying to "gun & run" without regard to sound TTPs goes against all of my training and combat experience.

But most important of all, both are just games. Its not training, but it can support your training.

I don't think I have ever shot an IDPA stage without being told how to shoot it. Just the nature of the beast.

What are sound TTP's?

DaG

[deerslayer]

Our CoF sometimes goes something like this: "start with your gun holstered, loaded to division capacity. Engage targets T1-T8 with two rounds each as you see fit." We then proceed to shoot the stage two or three different ways. It all depends on the creativity of the guy setting up the stage.

[Guest abailey362]

I've shot a few idpa matches in the past year, but never an ispc. it's really more about what I started with and what the group of guys that i know are shooting. I know that the same group of guys will be shooting idpa or 3 gun somewhere in the area, and that adds to the fellowship aspect of the sport.

[Guest DaG]

Our CoF sometimes goes something like this: Engage targets T1-T8 with two rounds each as you see fit."

Almost sounds like USPSA freestyle.

DaG

[et45]

Our CoF sometimes goes something like this: "start with your gun holstered, loaded to division capacity. Engage targets T1-T8 with two rounds each as you see fit." We then proceed to shoot the stage two or three different ways. It all depends on the creativity of the guy setting up the stage.

I thought you had to shoot the targets in tactical sequence (as you see them emerging from cover) or tactical priority ( all in the open 1-1-2-1-1 for example) unless it was a standards stage.Matter of fact according to the IDPA rule book Course of Fire rule no.10 states "Targets must be engaged in tactical priority unless tactical sequence is specified.

[deerslayer]

I thought you had to shoot the targets in tactical sequence (as you see them emerging from cover) or tactical priority ( all in the open 1-1-2-1-1 for example) unless it was a standards stage.Matter of fact according to the IDPA rule book Course of Fire rule no.10 states "Targets must be engaged in tactical priority unless tactical sequence is specified.

Sometimes it is a standards stage, but other times, it's not. We still use tac sequence, pieing from cover, and all the other rules, but there are often several not-so-obvious options on what order to complete the stage. For example, you may choose to start at the left side and deal with those targets first, then tac-load on the way to the right side of the stage. Or go right first, run dry, and slide lock, then deal with the middle on the way to the left side. One way could be advantageous to SSP guys, while the opposite benefits CDP shooters. Or one way may benefit someone who's fast on his feet, while slower shooters would be wise to do the opposite. Lefties may shoot the stage comletely opposite form what right-handers do. Another example may be a target which may be engaged at 12 or 15 yards at the beginning of the stage, or saved for later because the shooter chose a different path and that target was not visible until the end of the stage. Many stages are shot almost the same by all shooters, but sometimes a little creativity results in different perspectives on the quickest way to solve the problem while following the rules exactly.

[robbiev]

I thought you had to shoot the targets in tactical sequence (as you see them emerging from cover) or tactical priority ( all in the open 1-1-2-1-1 for example) unless it was a standards stage.Matter of fact according to the IDPA rule book Course of Fire rule no.10 states "Targets must be engaged in tactical priority unless tactical sequence is specified.

You have the terms reversed (at least by IDPA definition). Tactical sequence is 1-1-2-1-1. Tactical priority is as you see them when emerging from cover. Tactical priority can also mean near to far, if you aren't behind cover.

Edited December 29, 2008 by robbiev

[DMark]

..... at least by IDPA definition.... Tactical sequence is 1-1-2-1-1.....

And this is why I am no longer one of the IDPA regional match guys.

The 1-1-2-1-1 deal was written into the rule book over the objection of several of us reviewing the rules update. It was (and still is) one of the then board members latest & greatest "tac-cool" training method and this helped his school.

A training method that has NO factual base in any known real-world gunfight.

Those of us with real-life experience and/or the data could find NO single fight (cop, civilian, military) where this "everybody gets served once" method has been used. In a fight, people tend to shoot until the threat goes away. To think that you will be able to shoot once and pull yourself off that target to the next target without knowing if the threat is gone from the first target is folly.

Shooting single shots at single plates at the Steel Challenge for speed is one thing, shooting BGs who can return fire is a different matter. Hangout with an SF team during contact - - - talk about firing until the threat is gone, no wonder their M4A1s have a heavier barrel.

When we argued againist this tactical sequence in favor of the tried & trued "Cooper's Hammer" the reply was that us old-school guys just didn't understand the new and improved way of training. Maybe so but when I attended the American Pistol Institute, the Modern Technique was taught by guys who had seen the elephant. I trust the training they gave me over somebody's theory.

Sorry for the flame....., I'm still pissed about this!

[Guest BigJ45]

IDPA is like a pistol match only STUPIDER. It should be called screw the shooter. What ever makes the least amount of sense is the way they want you to shoot the stage. That being said I shoot IDPA about every month just for the trigger time. USPSA is leaps and bounds ahead of IDPA as far as clarity of rules (not as open to judgement calls), classification system (I know several IDPA master-USPSA C class shooters), Listening to the general membership (USPSA shooters get to vote). Instead of making a gun to be competitive in IPSC BIll Wilson made a game for his guns to be competitive in. It is not real life, it is not training, it is not a place to practice your training. It is a game, score is kept, there is a winner. If you are not playing to win, why play?

[et45]

(I know several IDPA master-USPSA C class shooters)

The last time I shot the IDPA Classifier I came within 2 seconds of making SSP Master.I am/was a low (48%) C class Production shooter.

Edited December 29, 2008 by et45

[Guest DaG]

I appreciate everyone's replies, but really, what makes IDPA so much more enjoyable/attractive/whatever than USPSA?

DaG

[robbiev]

IDPA is like a pistol match only STUPIDER. ..What ever makes the least amount of sense is the way they want you to shoot the stage.

I can agree with that, at least in regards to some matches I've been too. I've been to matches where the stages made no sense, however, in regards to what I'm referring to, the problem was stage design, not IDPA rules.

classification system (I know several IDPA master-USPSA C class shooters),

I know three USPSA master class shooters that only made sharpshooter in IDPA and all of them shoot within the scores of other sharpshooters in matches. I also know of one USPSA GM that barely made expert in IDPA, and he shoots within the scores of other experts. (ETA: I haven't had time to go to too many matches this last year, so I have no idea how those guys shoot now).

The first time I went to an IPSC match, I was ranked expert in IDPA yet I beat two GMs. (ETA: I was shooting a stock Sig, and one of the GMs that I beat got so pissed off, he told me I wasn't welcome to come back)

I suspect that it isn't so much a classification system problem as much as it is just simply they are two different games. Neither one is (necessarily) better, they are just different. Some people are going to be good at one and not the other, and some people are going to be good at both.

Edited December 30, 2008 by robbiev

[deerslayer]

If you are not playing to win, why play?

Maybe to get some better trigger time with your carry gun?

Edited December 30, 2008 by deerslayer