I wanted to do a poll of sorts and see what people think about a different type of competitive pistol shooting sport. I have enjoyed USPSA, IDPA and Steel challenge but I'm thinking about something that may combine aspects of all of those and some tactical shooting as well. Some of my thoughts are no power factor, time plus scoring and less restrictions on gear. Ont he scoring of paper targets my current thought is to use a USPSA target and not score the D zone, there for 2 hits anywhere works and is realistic for acceptable accuracy an dlends itself to accurate yet aggressive shooting. On ths gear thing I'm thinking whatever you want to do to your pistol minus compensators and dot sights. This combined with no power factor will put the guy shooting a glock on par with a guy(of equal shooting skills) shooting a 2011 with iron sights. I'm also thinking about some standards type stages that can be shot on steel and shot multiple times similar to steel challenge. These standards stages would be practical shooting scenarios set up similar to classifiers and ranked nationally. They would require shooting and moving and would represent realistic combat shooting situations. My thought process on these standards or CTEs(critical task evaluations) is that it would give a shooter a skill set to train on and be tested on that would apply to combat or self defense shooting. Well there are some of my thoughts, I look forward to hearing what y'all have to say. Frank
- Thread starter fpgb1
- Start date
Re: Thoughts on new competitve pistol shooting sport
If there's no power factor can we run the course with a 22LR target pistol?
The idea has some positive merits but I think that if it takes off you're going to see guys with guns setup to absolutely minimize recoil and lock time.
No compensators and it turns into a "race to the 22's"
If there's no power factor can we run the course with a 22LR target pistol?
The idea has some positive merits but I think that if it takes off you're going to see guys with guns setup to absolutely minimize recoil and lock time.
No compensators and it turns into a "race to the 22's"
Re: Thoughts on new competitve pistol shooting sport
power factor would be needed but you could run it sorta like ihmsa small bore,field pistol,and open you could even spilt it again when i shot it they had scoped and unscoped
power factor would be needed but you could run it sorta like ihmsa small bore,field pistol,and open you could even spilt it again when i shot it they had scoped and unscoped
Re: Thoughts on new competitve pistol shooting sport
My first thoughts are questions .... Why have it? What does this sport do to attract shooters that USPSA and IDPA are lacking?
I can't see it working and growing to any sort of a national level. It might be a popular localized game, but that's probably about it.
My first thoughts are questions .... Why have it? What does this sport do to attract shooters that USPSA and IDPA are lacking?
I can't see it working and growing to any sort of a national level. It might be a popular localized game, but that's probably about it.
Re: Thoughts on new competitve pistol shooting sport
Here's a little more of what I'm thinking about starting up. I'm thinking maybe 2 different divisions one would be Combat Carry type set up(Duty rig for LE or MIL guys or similar to limited) and another division for concealed carry. The guns would have to be minimum caliber 9mm. 3 standard magazines would be sufficient, magazines would be loaded to complete capacity, do what you want you want to the gun, sights, triggers, stippling, undercut, etc(must be safe) no dots and no comps would be about the only limit on gun set up. No power factor, time plus scoring is fast and easy. Using a USPSA target with 2 hits any where(D zone doesn't score) Yes, similar to outlaw 3 gun but adding some flavor of combat shooting Mil / LE and self defense flavors. The courses of fire would include plenty of movement and freedom to decide how you want to best execute the course of fire. There would be high round count field courses as well as some stand and shoot or sit and shoot stages. What I'm thinking of with the classifier system or I called it standards would be courses of fire that train and evaluate skills that somebody who carries a gun for a living or for self defense should be able to accomplish. The thing I was taking from steel challenge was shooting a stage multiple times, from the training aspect it takes repititon to learn anything and who hasn't shot a stage and wished they could get another run at it? The classifier type stages I mentioned would include movement and not all be stand and shoot or sit and shoot. I'll add more to this later, I've got this posted in a couple different places and I'm absorbing everyone's input thanks and keep it coming.
Here's a little more of what I'm thinking about starting up. I'm thinking maybe 2 different divisions one would be Combat Carry type set up(Duty rig for LE or MIL guys or similar to limited) and another division for concealed carry. The guns would have to be minimum caliber 9mm. 3 standard magazines would be sufficient, magazines would be loaded to complete capacity, do what you want you want to the gun, sights, triggers, stippling, undercut, etc(must be safe) no dots and no comps would be about the only limit on gun set up. No power factor, time plus scoring is fast and easy. Using a USPSA target with 2 hits any where(D zone doesn't score) Yes, similar to outlaw 3 gun but adding some flavor of combat shooting Mil / LE and self defense flavors. The courses of fire would include plenty of movement and freedom to decide how you want to best execute the course of fire. There would be high round count field courses as well as some stand and shoot or sit and shoot stages. What I'm thinking of with the classifier system or I called it standards would be courses of fire that train and evaluate skills that somebody who carries a gun for a living or for self defense should be able to accomplish. The thing I was taking from steel challenge was shooting a stage multiple times, from the training aspect it takes repititon to learn anything and who hasn't shot a stage and wished they could get another run at it? The classifier type stages I mentioned would include movement and not all be stand and shoot or sit and shoot. I'll add more to this later, I've got this posted in a couple different places and I'm absorbing everyone's input thanks and keep it coming.
Re: Thoughts on new competitve pistol shooting sport
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mscott</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My first thoughts are questions .... Why have it? What does this sport do to attract shooters that USPSA and IDPA are lacking?</div></div>
Because a lot of the fun is lost when there are so many rules, so many ways to "game" a stage. I have a pretty solid background with USPSA, am NROI certified, but I get tired of shooting with people who are constantly whining about this or that. "That hole is a double! Get the overlay!", "I want a re-shoot because that prop fell over", "You can't brace on that barricade because it's outside the shooting area and you gain an unfair advantage" blah blah blah. "Your power factor is 164.7, hope you shot a lot of As!" Being told I should have taken a miss instead of fixing/reloading my weapon and neutralizing a target because I would have scored better. That's not the way I would want to be thinking if God forbid I find myself in a real-world scenario. It's a proven fact: under stress, we react the way we're trained. I want to train with a <span style="font-style: italic">weapon</span>, not some implement of a game. Furthermore, USPSA stages are supposed to be designed as "freestyle", where shooters can solve the stage any way they choose, but in reality, few end up being that way at all.
I think this is a great idea. And I think I'm going to be wishing I lived closer to Blakely
I've also thought of ways of running a match where it would enhance real-world skills and simply be more fun. This sounds much like what I've tried to think up.
I like the idea of being able to run some stages more than once, no comps/dots (race guns), keep it truly practical.
If I may, you might consider treating a target as neutralized with two hits in the A/C zone or one hit in the upper A/B zone (head). Also, maybe just do it once a quarter, but I'd love to see a match or some type of setup where I could use my carbine as well, where targets aren't necessarily designated as a pistol or carbine target, and where transitioning could be done at will as a strategy or if one weapon malfunctions or is empty. The stage could force a transition by requiring you at some point to pick up an ammo can or something, leaving you with few options besides strong hand only pistol.
I hope you can get something like this off the ground. I'd love to shoot it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mscott</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My first thoughts are questions .... Why have it? What does this sport do to attract shooters that USPSA and IDPA are lacking?</div></div>
Because a lot of the fun is lost when there are so many rules, so many ways to "game" a stage. I have a pretty solid background with USPSA, am NROI certified, but I get tired of shooting with people who are constantly whining about this or that. "That hole is a double! Get the overlay!", "I want a re-shoot because that prop fell over", "You can't brace on that barricade because it's outside the shooting area and you gain an unfair advantage" blah blah blah. "Your power factor is 164.7, hope you shot a lot of As!" Being told I should have taken a miss instead of fixing/reloading my weapon and neutralizing a target because I would have scored better. That's not the way I would want to be thinking if God forbid I find myself in a real-world scenario. It's a proven fact: under stress, we react the way we're trained. I want to train with a <span style="font-style: italic">weapon</span>, not some implement of a game. Furthermore, USPSA stages are supposed to be designed as "freestyle", where shooters can solve the stage any way they choose, but in reality, few end up being that way at all.
I think this is a great idea. And I think I'm going to be wishing I lived closer to Blakely
I like the idea of being able to run some stages more than once, no comps/dots (race guns), keep it truly practical.
If I may, you might consider treating a target as neutralized with two hits in the A/C zone or one hit in the upper A/B zone (head). Also, maybe just do it once a quarter, but I'd love to see a match or some type of setup where I could use my carbine as well, where targets aren't necessarily designated as a pistol or carbine target, and where transitioning could be done at will as a strategy or if one weapon malfunctions or is empty. The stage could force a transition by requiring you at some point to pick up an ammo can or something, leaving you with few options besides strong hand only pistol.
I hope you can get something like this off the ground. I'd love to shoot it.
Re: Thoughts on new competitve pistol shooting sport
Thanks for the input guys, I'm soaking it all in. I've got this thread running on ARFCOM also, here is the latest thing I posted there in response to some different questions, I hope not to offend, just thoughts on where I'm coming from and going with this.
I am pretty new to competitive shooting, I shot my first match in May of 2007. I enjoyed it and learned alot, I continued to compete and train and learn from the guys I shot with. All of this made me a better combat shooter and gave me tools to bring back to my job in the military and to train the guys I worked with. After alot of training I was able to acheive the rank of grandmaster in limited division in December 2009. I started shooting some IDPA in 2010 and shot the classifier and was able to shoot master in SSP. I shot the Berretta 92f and trained with it after I attended the Special Forces Advanced Urban Combat Course. When I started competing I shot a Glock 17 then a Glock 35. I moved into an STI Eagle 2011 that did cost me $1900, I shot it for awhile and had a 2011 custom built for me. The 2011 was an awesome gun and I enjoyed shooting it, but I ended up moving back to a Glock 35 due to the pure simplicity of the gun. I have also run the Smith and Wesson M&P and realy like that gun as well. I am currently shooting a Glock 17 for training and shoot a Glock 35 in Competition. I am back to the Glock because most of the people I train with show up with Glocks and it is currently with I get issued in my military job. When I was training pretty hard a few years ago I had a drill that I would do as soon as I got to the range to see where I would be for the first stage of a match. The drill was 3 uspsa targets spaced a targets width apart 10 yards away. I would draw from hands at sides and shoot 2 rounds per target this was a good static drill that involved transition through multiple targets and tracking sights, it was an evaluation tool for me. About a month ago, I took a Glock 19, M&P Pro and an STI 2011 Limited Gun (all 9mm) to the range. I shot the M&P then the 2011 for a couple mags each then sharted shooting the Glock 19. I had not shot the 19 very much before, but I started liking it. I put the other 2 up and started shooting my old 3 target drill with the Glock 19, I was consistantly getting the same times and good hits that I got with the 2011 back when I was training hard with it. I was pretty pleased with that. I will say that it is easier for me to run the trigger on a 2011 than it is with the Glock, but with a little range time with the Glock it works pretty good. I will say that it is my opinion that you can buy an expensive gun but you can't buy skill. I may go on a bit of a rant here and hope I don't offend anyone too much. I've heard people in IDPA say they that USPSA is all about expensive guns and equipment and so forth. There is production division, where any SSP gun can compete, the SSP guns can compete in limited and so can the ESP guns. CDP guys can shoot single stack ( you would need 5 or 6 mags) I think that USPSA develops better and faster shooters than IDPA regardless of division. I also think USPSA allows more free thinking. I don't think USPA is a perfect sport either, I would like to see production guns allowed to load to magazine capacity and so what if you want to undercut your glock to make the grip more comfortable, if you have a really high grip and get slide bite from the glock and want to put a beaver tail on it of some sort I think you should be able to. It would still be a polymer gun with iron sights shooting minor power factor,, those things won't make the gun shoot any faster, but would make it more comfortable for some people. Back to some guns being faster than others, no human can out run how fast a glock can actually fire, the same can be said for the 1911/ 2011 platform. I'm not sure what the cyclic rate of a Glock 18 is but I'm willing to bet that it is faster than even Rob Leatham can pull the trigger on a 1911. OK I'm ready to wind down this rant. I'm going to continue taking in alll you guy's input and develop this thing I'm working on. I'll make this happen as a local match and see how it goes. When I get it done come out and shoot it, then let me know what you think. I'm putting this out in several places that I have it posted so I'm answering multiple question on here also. In regards to CCW and round count. I'm not looking to download magazine round count. Each match will have stages that have some higher round cound field course stages with alot of movement involved, I may cap these off at 30 rounds. If you have a gun capable of holding 10 rounds you will only need 3 mags total. If your gun holds 17 rounds you will only need to do one reload. I may limit the magazines to factory configuration. Stages can be designed to create challenges for everyone. I'm still thinking 2 divisions open carry which would include basically a uspsa limited style rig ,combat rig, LE duty belt or even IDPA style gear with no cover garment. The other division would be concealed carry, cover garment or IWB, no appendix, pocket carry, or shoulder holsters, those are not condusive to safe range/match operation. More to follow.
Thanks for the input guys, I'm soaking it all in. I've got this thread running on ARFCOM also, here is the latest thing I posted there in response to some different questions, I hope not to offend, just thoughts on where I'm coming from and going with this.
I am pretty new to competitive shooting, I shot my first match in May of 2007. I enjoyed it and learned alot, I continued to compete and train and learn from the guys I shot with. All of this made me a better combat shooter and gave me tools to bring back to my job in the military and to train the guys I worked with. After alot of training I was able to acheive the rank of grandmaster in limited division in December 2009. I started shooting some IDPA in 2010 and shot the classifier and was able to shoot master in SSP. I shot the Berretta 92f and trained with it after I attended the Special Forces Advanced Urban Combat Course. When I started competing I shot a Glock 17 then a Glock 35. I moved into an STI Eagle 2011 that did cost me $1900, I shot it for awhile and had a 2011 custom built for me. The 2011 was an awesome gun and I enjoyed shooting it, but I ended up moving back to a Glock 35 due to the pure simplicity of the gun. I have also run the Smith and Wesson M&P and realy like that gun as well. I am currently shooting a Glock 17 for training and shoot a Glock 35 in Competition. I am back to the Glock because most of the people I train with show up with Glocks and it is currently with I get issued in my military job. When I was training pretty hard a few years ago I had a drill that I would do as soon as I got to the range to see where I would be for the first stage of a match. The drill was 3 uspsa targets spaced a targets width apart 10 yards away. I would draw from hands at sides and shoot 2 rounds per target this was a good static drill that involved transition through multiple targets and tracking sights, it was an evaluation tool for me. About a month ago, I took a Glock 19, M&P Pro and an STI 2011 Limited Gun (all 9mm) to the range. I shot the M&P then the 2011 for a couple mags each then sharted shooting the Glock 19. I had not shot the 19 very much before, but I started liking it. I put the other 2 up and started shooting my old 3 target drill with the Glock 19, I was consistantly getting the same times and good hits that I got with the 2011 back when I was training hard with it. I was pretty pleased with that. I will say that it is easier for me to run the trigger on a 2011 than it is with the Glock, but with a little range time with the Glock it works pretty good. I will say that it is my opinion that you can buy an expensive gun but you can't buy skill. I may go on a bit of a rant here and hope I don't offend anyone too much. I've heard people in IDPA say they that USPSA is all about expensive guns and equipment and so forth. There is production division, where any SSP gun can compete, the SSP guns can compete in limited and so can the ESP guns. CDP guys can shoot single stack ( you would need 5 or 6 mags) I think that USPSA develops better and faster shooters than IDPA regardless of division. I also think USPSA allows more free thinking. I don't think USPA is a perfect sport either, I would like to see production guns allowed to load to magazine capacity and so what if you want to undercut your glock to make the grip more comfortable, if you have a really high grip and get slide bite from the glock and want to put a beaver tail on it of some sort I think you should be able to. It would still be a polymer gun with iron sights shooting minor power factor,, those things won't make the gun shoot any faster, but would make it more comfortable for some people. Back to some guns being faster than others, no human can out run how fast a glock can actually fire, the same can be said for the 1911/ 2011 platform. I'm not sure what the cyclic rate of a Glock 18 is but I'm willing to bet that it is faster than even Rob Leatham can pull the trigger on a 1911. OK I'm ready to wind down this rant. I'm going to continue taking in alll you guy's input and develop this thing I'm working on. I'll make this happen as a local match and see how it goes. When I get it done come out and shoot it, then let me know what you think. I'm putting this out in several places that I have it posted so I'm answering multiple question on here also. In regards to CCW and round count. I'm not looking to download magazine round count. Each match will have stages that have some higher round cound field course stages with alot of movement involved, I may cap these off at 30 rounds. If you have a gun capable of holding 10 rounds you will only need 3 mags total. If your gun holds 17 rounds you will only need to do one reload. I may limit the magazines to factory configuration. Stages can be designed to create challenges for everyone. I'm still thinking 2 divisions open carry which would include basically a uspsa limited style rig ,combat rig, LE duty belt or even IDPA style gear with no cover garment. The other division would be concealed carry, cover garment or IWB, no appendix, pocket carry, or shoulder holsters, those are not condusive to safe range/match operation. More to follow.
Re: Thoughts on new competitve pistol shooting sport
I like your philosophy. I get tired of all the different rules, divisions and so forth.
A guy that runs some local combat match's has a interesting way of scoring. He doesn't use power factors and is a run what yu brung type guy. He requires a total of 7 points on a standard USPSA target. Any head shot is 7 points, A zone is 5 points, C zone is 2 points and D zone is 1 point. If there is any target that does not have at least 7 points on it the entire stage is a DNF. Guess what happens? Every one is much more concerned about accuracy over speed,LOL.
It's interesting you mentioned the 2011 and Glock scenario. I'm the opposite. I've gone back and forth on those. Over the years I bought 3 and sold 2 STI 2011's, one was a custom limited gun in 38S set up for steel and the other a stock Edge in 40. Same with the Glocks, I've probably owned a half dozen of them in different calibers and sizes. I tried various other semi's out there too. In the end I couldn't get exited about anything other than the STI Edge. Another pistol I really like though is a Steyr M9. The bore axis is very low to the hand so the muzzle flip is minimal. For some reason I can shoot the trapezoidal sites really well.
Good luck starting your new match! I'm sure there are others that appreciate your way of thinking.
I like your philosophy. I get tired of all the different rules, divisions and so forth.
A guy that runs some local combat match's has a interesting way of scoring. He doesn't use power factors and is a run what yu brung type guy. He requires a total of 7 points on a standard USPSA target. Any head shot is 7 points, A zone is 5 points, C zone is 2 points and D zone is 1 point. If there is any target that does not have at least 7 points on it the entire stage is a DNF. Guess what happens? Every one is much more concerned about accuracy over speed,LOL.
It's interesting you mentioned the 2011 and Glock scenario. I'm the opposite. I've gone back and forth on those. Over the years I bought 3 and sold 2 STI 2011's, one was a custom limited gun in 38S set up for steel and the other a stock Edge in 40. Same with the Glocks, I've probably owned a half dozen of them in different calibers and sizes. I tried various other semi's out there too. In the end I couldn't get exited about anything other than the STI Edge. Another pistol I really like though is a Steyr M9. The bore axis is very low to the hand so the muzzle flip is minimal. For some reason I can shoot the trapezoidal sites really well.
Good luck starting your new match! I'm sure there are others that appreciate your way of thinking.
Similar threads
