Is USPCA a joke?

[Agencyman]

I am hereby starting the newest shooting organization. It is to be called the ICCS-BS, or the "International Couch Commando Shooting" & "Bragging Society".

Major caliber is anything with the momentum of Mini-Mag or better, don't want any recoil slowing down those race guns' rpm.

SERIOUSLY folks, those two older organizations are both fun, and both offer good skills to acquire. The day you need your experience on the street you will of course want to draw like a flash from under your garmet, then zap the BG with triple-taps that sound like a burst sear at work.

But the real skills come into play after the match, on the keyboard. Our guys will be constantly striving to out-"B.S." the other guys' sport, and we shall surely prevail.

Bruce

[ryucasta]

I agree with the point of view thats expressed in the following link

http://www.craigcentral.com/idpaipsc.asp

[Navy joe]

bulm5, I think it was a D class shooter!

Original poster:
Please refer to my all purpose shooting motto. "Just Shut up and Shoot!"

[bulm5]

I'll tell you what, when tactical Ninjas shoot a USPSA match thinking that their skills are better than most USPSA shooter, they are proven wrong after they see the score. Usually they are at the near bottom.

[Navy joe]

Ahh, but brasshopper, score matters not! The ninja may have been slow and clumsy to the eye, but he lived by employing tactical skills to thwart threats that you gaijin gamers could not even see!

Or, we all had a good laugh as he gave himself a wedgie by not taking the retention strap off of his tactical nylon thigh holster...

You know what, I just can't stand it when people make up crap about what they don't know. Get off your lazy computer game butts and go shoot a match any match before you tell us how much it sucks. You know, I am 90% that a GSSF match will make my head hurt with simplistic courses of fire and newbie shooters. But!, I refrain from trashing it because:
a) I've never tried it yet...
b) It might be fun
c) It's still shooting

I shot IDPA the other night, had fun. Drew two procedurals, that hasn't happened in many matches, I usually remember the rules. One for tac order where it really didn't matter "tactically" and one for charging the last target in a house clearing stage instead of plinking in from cover. I was pretty flat out when I nailed the little fwella thrice, no cover anywhere close. Who knows, maybe my IPSC "training" would have gotten me shot, but by all accounts I think a real fellow would have just pooped his drawers and died. Who knows? We don't until we try it for real. Same stage had us shooting at a retreating mover. Heck, moving aggressively towards targets and shooting retreaters in one stage?! Tactical posers unite! That isn't "REAL LIFE" Oh BS. It was a game, a fun stage, and that's it.

[Scooter2]

Of all the discussions on various forums on this topic of which is more "practical", the best reply I've seen is from TGO (The Great One), Rob Leatham. He posted this on the Brian Enos forum.

I recently ran a class of military shooters, and among other things, ran them through the IDPA classifier, Participated in a local steel match and shot The Arizona State IDPA Championships! Let me share with you some interesting observations. They get more wound up and nervous in a match than they do in combat! Why? Because they have time to think about it and get tense! I respect these guys opinion more than ANY so called tactician out there who is sure he knows the tricks to surviving an armed confrontation. These guys have been doing that a bunch lately and think IDPA and IPSC shooting both offer much to the testing phase of ones ability. On the other hand, they to a man do not agree with the philosophies that either is inherently more practical. All the little things like which way do you turn or where you do the load is all something that we can discuss all day on the range, but on the battlefield, men do things that may not be considered practical or tactical and live because they did it fast, accurately and decisively. On the other hand, there are those who did it "right" by some folks judgement and still lost. We all have our ideas of how it should be done, and the rules of the existing games are just that, some ones ideas. To say going to any kind of shooting event will teach you technique that will get you killed is idiotic and irresponsible. Guys, it is cool to have your own plan but do not try to pass it off as gospel to the rest of us. A discussion of technique and philosophy seldom ends with agreement, but that does not make the other guy wrong or stupid. These are just games designed to test your abilities in a very controlled and pre-planned arena. Who wins is your best shot, not your most likely survivor. That can not be tested under the clock. However, those that master executing under the timer are probably more likely to do well in a pressure situation, than someone who chokes, misses or gets procedural penalties. This is a point the boys all agree on, thus they train hard and test themselves in the arena of competition to see what they know and whether they can do it.
Rob

[fyrestarter]

I just shot my first IDPA match last weekend. Coming from IPSC, I envisioned it to be similar with only a slight change in equipment or scoring. In addition to some truly asinine rules, I didn't much care for the attitude of the fellow shooters, either.

For one thing, they kept referring to the targets as BG's or "criminals". Instead of "engaging" their targets, like we do in IPSC, IDPA shooter "neutralize" theirs. I understand that it's a "defense" pistol match, but something about a lot of guys getting excited about "head shots" makes me nervous. Ditto the fact that a lot of these guys had their guns in behind-the-hip holsters and kept jerking them out at the buzzer. A presentation should be fluid and graceful -- it should not look like someone got stung in the behind.

Secondly, I decided to use a stripped down Glock 17 for the match. I was told by the RO that I could only load 10 rounds in my mags. Fine, no problem, I'll just pretend I'm shooting Lim 10 IPSC. After clearing the first course of fire, I was told by the same RO that I was getting a penalty. When I asked why, he told me that I dropped a mag that still had rounds in it. Obviously I could do nothing about the penalty, but I asked for a logical reason behind it. I was told, "You're penalized for not maintaining ammunition on your person. If this were a real firefight, you might run out of ammo."
I responded, "If this were a real firefight, I wouldn't be restricted to 10 rounds in my mag, nor would I be forced to make tactical reloads at specific points. In a real firefight, people shoot their guns until all BG's are stopped and / or they've run out of ammo." He just sort of grumbled at me and walked away. Then I watched as people, instead of simply dropping their mags, would attempt to stick them in their pockets, taking upwards of three seconds to do this. I wonder what the RO would have said if I mentioned to him that three seconds, standing there in the open trying to stick in a mag in your pocket isn't the kind of tactical procedure taught at Gunsite.

On the second course, there was to be a total of twelve rounds fired, two in one set of three targets, reload, two in the second. I figured that to avoid the mag-drop penalty, I'd just load my first mag with six rounds, drop the empty mag, and pop in a fresh mag. Nothing doing. I was told this is a "failure to do right", as it was considered "gaming". Hmm....isn't it a game?

Finally, on the last course, during a tac reload, I grabbed the mag and stuck it in my mouth, reloaded and finished the course. One of my squad mates (and IPSC shooting buddy) laughed that this was an inventive way to get around the mag drop penalty, as it was quicker than stuffing it in one's pants. Well, you know what, placing a mag in one's mouth or down the front of a shirt receives the same penalty as if I dropped it on the floor.

At the end of the match, I discovered that those mag drop penalties amount to ten seconds! If I missed the target completely, I wouldn't receive a ten second penalty. So what IDPA has taught me is that in a "real" firefight, one can only carry 10 rounds, must not let any still loaded mags drop, and if they do, that's worse than if you missed the bad guy entirely and hit some innocent on the other side.

IPSC is NOT training for defense, not in the slightest. But neither is IDPA. There's nothing realistic about either. They are games, pure and simple, both with rules invented seemingly to frustrate the player. If you want to shoot, shoot, but pick the sport that has less asinine rules. For me, I'll use the IDPA matches to "train" for the "reality" of IPSC.

[Jim Watson]

Without making a defense of IDPA itself, I'll just say that if you want to play a different game than what you are used to, it is your responsibility to learn the rules.

[fyrestarter]

it is your responsibility to learn the rules

Oh, don't get me wrong, Jim, I fully appreciate the fact that "ignorance is not innocence." I'm just questioning the "practical" nature of some specific rules in a game that purports itself to be "defensive" in nature.

For instance, the IDPA rule book says "Basically, if you wouldn't carry it to defend yourself, you can't shoot it in Defensive Pistol competition". It then goes on to say that a tungsten guide rod is not allowed in Stock Service class. Why? The Glock 17 I have carried every day for a year has one. So therefore, I should be allowed to use it. And if it gives me an advantage, then so be it -- isn't the point in defending yourself to have as many advantages as you can? The factory Glock sights are terrible -- and now I shoot with a Dawson Optical front and a custom designed rear. For some reason, that's allowed in IDPA. Am I to believe that a tungsten guide rod give a shooter more of an advantage than superior sights?

Seems to me that their rules are sometimes contradictory to their mission statement.

[Jim Watson]

I see what you are getting at, nothing new to any IDPA shooter. But don't get all het up about it. When I shoot USPSA these days I get a good deal of ribbing for pieing a corner instead of jumping out in the shooting area and blasting away. But I don't let it bother me, I have made my choice and I stick with it.

I think the disparity between IDPA principles and rules is partly due to a wish to minimize the equipment race. Most things are frozen at what was available at IDPA's inception in 1996. A lot of what was then unavailable or expensive custom work is now factory standard or option, and IDPA sees no reason to modernize. Another reason for due to a wish to keep IDPA competition at about the 1980 level of IPSC. Another reason seems to be that the rule book was apparently written by someone for whom Engish is a second language. One day we will need to hire the lawyer who did the current USPSA.

It is probably why IPSC no longer lists any principles other than safety and DVC. And why a CoF is now designed "primarily to test a competitor's IPSC shooting skills" where it used to be something like "to present a problem that might reasonably be solved with a handgun." The "P" in that acronym used to stand for something, too.

The 10 round magazine limit is based on the law. The IDPA idea was to allow shooters to compete evenly with what is available new and legal.

You worry about not being allowed to burn through a 17 shot Glock magazine at an IDPA shoot. I have worried about the BATmen setting up a sting to catch USPSA members buying "repair parts" for 28 shot Supers. I doubt that will happen in the month of AWB now remaining, but it has been a risk for nearly ten years.

[mdavid01]

Before I ever shot a USPSA event my perception was that it was gamey and the folks shooting it were kidding themselves. I'd only shot IDPA events prior and most shooters badmouthed IPSC for not being tactical.

I've served four years at 2nd Ranger Bn. and got more tactical training that I figure I'll ever use as a civilian. I really didn't find that IDPA comps dictated correct tactics but heck they were fun.

I moved to Colorado and found that all the local clubs shot USPSA. Now that my girl and I have shot a couple events we are very happy with the change. My perceptions of the USPSA folks are ....

1. shooters are very friendly and unassuming, no one is telling me "how it would be in the real world". One rated GM talked to me about the rules and equipment between stages, let me shoot his open gun and was totally friendly and approachable.....and humbled me with his times and smoothness.
2. events are so damn organized and consistant I am just stunned by the professional manner in which they are run.
3. everone realizes it is a gun game and are having fun playing the stages.

In the end I found that USPSA comps are a hell of a lot of fun, give me way more shooting time than before and are so well run I am content to stay. If you want to show everyone how tactical you can be then for the love of god join the marines and go to iraq and serve our nation....if you're too old or broken then accept the fact you won't be in delta or seals anytime soon and just have fun shooting. my 2c

[Jeeper]

IPSC is NOT training for defense, not in the slightest

I understand your post but disagree with this line. I understand that the rules may not be related to defense but I fail to see how learning how to shoot fast and accurately is NOT training for self defense. You might have just been talking about the rules though.

[WESHOOT2]

Random musings.........

The US Armed Forces decided to 'do the MMU', and they chose IPSC.
I occasionally wear all of my guns (no, not all at once), so I compete with them all so I'll know how they work if I ever really need them.
I've found that those who slam one (or the other) shooting sport don't know much about it, OR they got their patootie kicked so badly they can't get the stink outta their nostrils, so they crap on it (or the other) in 'public'.

NEVER think certain 'gamey' tactics WON'T work in real life, because that's just making things up.

I have tried IDPA a couple times, and got a great laugh from it, AND enjoyed it (mostly), but the 'rules' about what to wear (guns n holsters n clothes n stuff) galled me. Okay, frankly, it's NOT the rules so much as hurting my brain trying to remember them.
I've shot IPSC matches in a tie and wingtips, and wearing my London Fog, and without my prescription glasses, and even with my 45 Colt Redhawk (speedloader issue, though).

I would invite all IPSC dissenters to come shoot some matches with me, because I believe I can teach you how much fun it can be while adding 'social' value to the experience.
Or at least fun.

Any match can be shot all tactically, but one will NOT win. So, is that why?
Not every person has sufficient skills, ay?

[bulm5]

Did they ( IDPA) require you to wear tactical underwear.

[FirstFreedom]

Guys, I've been thoroughly flamed....ok. I tried not to post, to let the thread die, but that didn't work - lol. I just hate that stupid, stupid holster setup, because nothing could be less PRACTICAL for everyday carry (remind me again, what's the P in USPSA stand for?)



Attention, Luke Skywalker wannabes: USPSA=Joke ......

[WESHOOT2]

If I had one I'd wear the Gilmore I bought some (many) years ago; now if I use my Open gun (yes, with iron sights) I draw it from a Galco Yaqui Slide (my other Open gun has NO sights, but not enough mags -- yet).

Redhawks all fit my Sparks HSR (a beauty); my 1911 and Witnesses fit their respective Sparks 1AT's, and I have an occassional foray into Galco Royal Guard (1911) or J-Clip (Witnesses).

See? I CAN compete in USPCSAXYZ AND use my 'tactickle' gear. Except the Redwing steel-toed boots.........

[Scooter2]

Where in the USPSA rulebook does it specify what holster to use, besides no race holsters in production division? It's your choice. You can use your carry holster in open division if you wanted to. Now if you live in the free states that allow open carry, you can carry with your race holster if you wanted to so that makes it practical right?.

Do anyone actually read these posts? I thought my post of Rob Leatham's comments pretty much sums it up. Neither is more practical or tactical.

Another way to think of this is to compare it with auto racing. IDPA is like SCCA Autocross. You can take you everyday commuter like a Camry or whatever you drive and race it on a closed course. SCCA Autocross was set up to allow people to enhance their driving skills with their own cars. They also want to make it affordable for people to get into auto racing. You can say Autocross is "Practical".

I want to say IPSC is like Formula 1, but really it's more like the Touring Car Series. You do race with a highly modified production car. The fundamental skills are the same as Autocross except the Touring car drivers have refined their skills to another level. You can say that racing on closed road course with highly modified cars isn't too practical. However the skills that you learn from racing do carry over to everyday driving. Just look at how many people spin their cars on the road at the first sign of rain.

Taking a shooting class from any competition shooter or Gunsite, Frontsight, etc. is like attending a driving class from Skip Barber or Bondurant.

[lochaber]

You are really hung up on the holster thing. Not only are "normal" kydex rigs very popular with Production shooters they are also making their way into Limited. That aside, from this moment forward whenever you bring this issue up, I'll just bring up the the "special" vests with weights. Nevermind that almost no one uses tactical vests in day to day life, but then you go ahead and modify them with iron bars? So in IDPA I have lots of rules about what gun and rig I can use to avoid an arms race, but then we have clothing race. Great.

They are both games. Go shoot a good USPSA match and watch what a high rank Production shooter can do. One really has to wonder why he/she would want to use cover while moving faster then the BG could even think never mind aim and hit.

Loch.

[bulm5]

P stands for practice , practice, practice in USPSA. What does ID in IDPA stand for, I don't P anymore???

[Don Gwinn]

Yeah, I think that's enough.