IDPA Rule Changes - Suggestions

[TEX]

Not as a b***h and complain session, but for serious input, what would you change or modify about IDPA rules to make the sport simpler and more realistic? I do not have the power to change any such rules and certainly do not have the ear of any one at IDPA headquarters!

TEX

 

[Helmut]

you can drop your mags!

 

[John Forsyth]

1) Put 10mm and .400Corbon back into CDP.

2) Make power factors similiar to factory ammo.

3) Allow more steel in stages at sanctioned matches.

4) Add another classification above master.

 

[OF]

I'm new to IDPA, but here are a couple thoughts I've had:

A. Remove the tacload/RWR requirement or stipulate that it cannot be mandated 'on the clock'. If a shooter chooses to do it, fine. If you want to force someone to do it, break the stage up into strings with the tac/RWR between the strings off the clock to better simulate a 'lull in the action'.

B. Stop comparing IDPA to IPSC. Just take all of that crap out of the rulebook and make IDPA proud of itself as something other than the anti-IPSC sport.

C. Holster approval should be based on type and characteristics, not a list of holsters. The list will never keep up with the market.

D. More professionalism. The rulebook is not very well written. The website could stand a major upgrade. Better polish means a better image means more shooters.

- Gabe

 

[Steve Smith]

Hope I don't drag this thread off course.

After GRD posted his issues, I went and read the rules. Wow...sounds like the author had some sour grapes about IPSC. Pretty unprofessional if you ask me. Now I remember why I stopped shooting IDPA about 4 years ago. First things that could be changed are rulebook and rediculous holster list. Changing everything else could come later.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

change the rules to allow people to shoot their carry gun, add in an open carry class with field rigs.

 

[another okie]

I sent my suggestion to them a little while back. Here it is:

IDPA
2232 CR 719
Berryville, AR 72616

re: rules on Vickers count

I would like to suggest some clarification of the terminology used in Vickers scoring. In the current rules it is a little unclear when the term “Vickers†is used whether this means both limited and unlimited Vickers, or just unlimited.

For example, on page 32, # 14, the term “Vickers†is used. This rule requires the pistol be loaded to full capacity in any Vickers stage. In the context of this rule it only makes sense if this means unlimited, since in fact many limited stages require downloading to six and reloading from slide lock. However, on page 24, the paragraph titled “Penalties for Vickers Count†only makes sense if Vickers is used to mean both. And on page 26, # 3, the term “standard Vickers Count†is used to mean unlimited.

This is not a theoretical issue. At one local club match I shot, there was a limited stage in which it would have been an advantage to have a slide lock reload after ten rounds rather than eleven. I was very unclear after reading the rules mentioned in the previous paragraph whether this was allowed.

I suggest using the terms “limited Vickers†and “unlimited Vickers†consistently, and using “Vickers count†as a generic term for both. “Standard Vickers†is a little unclear and does not describe what it means. Saying “unlimited†instead of “standard†makes explanation much easier for the SO.

A sentence in the rules could say something like this:

“In these rules when the term ‘Vickers count’ is used it means bot limited and unlimited Vickers count.â€

 

[Correia]

Add a BUG class. Instead of just having the occasional BUG stage, have a class for the Kel Tec P32s and snubbies that most folks actually carry.

Allow squating instead of requiring kneeling, both put you behind cover about equally. One is easier on old guy's knees, and in real life kneeling on some broken glass in a parking lot would really suck.

I like the idea of a class above Master. Not that I'm in any danger of breaking into it anytime soon. But it would seperate the super-duper professional shooters from the rest of us slugs.

Death to the reload with retention!

Clarify the rulebook. Good idea. Get somebody who is a professional writer to give it a good go over.

I also like the holster description vs. the approved holster list. I've seen plenty of odd ball holsters that work just fine for concealment.

 

[Steve Smith]

Part of my job is technical writing. I could do it, but I doubt IDPA would want to pay me for it.

 

[Dr.Rob]

BUG class would be a good idea, minimum power=centerfire, minimum rounds per mag=6, max 10. This way a shooter would still be competeitive (as are revolvers) but they might not knock down much steel.

I have a buddy that wants to do IDPA, but he wants to use his Makarov, everyone says OK, but they won't score him. I think that's a little silly.

 

[OF]

I thought there was a BUG class?

The IDPA rulebook sounds like it was written by 9th graders with an attitude. It needs to be dealt with. It's embarrasing.

I agree that there has to be some sort of accomodation for people shooting their carry gun when it doesn't fit with the IDPA idea of an 'approved' carry gun. Same with the holsters.

- Gabe

 

[GeneS]

Clarify the Rule Book.
Allow 10mm in CDP.
Change penalty for Hit on Non-threat to 10 seconds.

 

[ChristopherG]

Allow moonclips as a modification, so I don't have to buy a whole 'nuther revolver (610/625) to make the grade.

 

[Dr.Who]

It would be nice to allow 7 and 8 shot revolvers to shoot to full capacity. As it is now, they can only shoot 6 and then must reload if they are used in a match. Maybe it should be different class like unlimited or included in the CDP category.

The LGB does need to be simplified and a better indexing system to find it after you have read it the first, second, third.... time.

 

[faustulus]

Get rid of the "get shot in the head while I fumble with this mag" reload. Let them drop.

Holsters should be like guns not on an individual basis.

As everyone has said, take out the "I'm more tactical than IPSC" in the rule book.

Allow 7&8 shot revolvers to load all the rounds but only shoot six.

hicap class.

Outlaw the phrase "in real life" any shooter can be dq just for saying it.

Have someone who speaks english as a first language rewrite the rulebook.

Bump up the round count. No one wants to drive 30 minutes to shoot 50-75 rounds.

More steel.

have one stage of every match a classifer. or at least have a way people have to take the classifier more than once.

Long dustcovers and bull barrels should be allowed.

Did I mention the 'tactical reload'?

 

[Jim Watson]

I agree the LGB needs rewriting for clarity. Supposedly a new edition is in the works but I am not optimistic about real improvements. About three years ago a professional tech manual writer between projects offered to redo the rulebook gratis. He was ignored.

Nobody likes the Tac Load, it is a demanding little exercise in sleight of hand and the "experts" who can't do it well say it isn't really tactically wise. OK, if the Tac Load is abolished and you are allowed to drop half loaded mags on the ground occasionally, are you going to WIN with all the time you save?

Lot of other good points made here. Some of them would help, some of them would turn IDPA into IPSC even faster than it is moving anyway.

 

[PDshooter]

That's easy..."Less rules"

 

[Steve Smith]

Its easier to be something you are, than not something else.

As long as IDPA shooters continue to verbally and mentally seperate themselves from IPSC, IDPA will continue to be in a struggle with itself.


For instance (I'll grab Larry for this). Larry Correia, prove you are Larry Correia.

Easy enough. Right?

Larry Corriea, prove you are NOT Daffy Duck.

How does he prove THAT?


IDPA is (and has been since inception) trying to prove they aren't IPSC, when all along they should have focused on who THEY were.

 

[OF]

In thinking about this, it would seem that the way to keep IDPA 'reliastic' is through stage design restrictions and restrictions on equipment, not through mandating that shooters do things that IDPA thinks are 'tactical' (the tacload is a prime example. 'Tactical Sequence' is another). The state-of-the-art in defensive training is constantly in flux and you can hardly find two trainers who agree on anything. IDPA needs to realize that it's strength is in presenting shooters with a forum that allows them to practice skills they have developed outside of IDPA that have practical validity, not in mandating that people shoot using the IDPA skillset or trying to dictate or teach people engagement scenarios. Stage design and equipment restrictions would seem to be the key.

Ultimately, though, it's up to the shooter to determine how they want to shoot the game. Shoot your carry rig and use the skills you have been taught or push the limit of the rules and compete. It's one or the other. You're never going to get rid of the split, so stop trying so hard that you piss people off. Emphasis needs to placed on attitude: IDPA can be venue for you to get trigger time under stress to practice your gunhandling and tactics you learned in class (but you will likely not place well), or you can compete on the scoreboard. These two attitudes are going to have to learn to get along or IDPA is always going to be arguing with itself.

- Gabe

 

[Correia]

Steve, I'm afraid I can't do that.


DUCK DODGERS IN THE TWENTY FOURTH AND A HALF CENTURY!!!!!!!


Dropping the tac load doesn't mean that new people are going to win. In fact the same people who win now will continue to do so. However many of us don't think the tac reload is a viable technique for whatever reason, and so we find it silly that it is presented as such.

I will agree that IDPA as an organization should not talk bad about its competitors. It makes the organization look bad. Now as an individual IDPA shooter I will make fun of IPSC until the cows come home. (I've never seen so many guys shooting in spandex bike shorts! Downright scary if you ask me)

 

[Navy joe]

I think if any rules need to be maintained it should be tac order and sequence, while not perfect they simulate the idea of dealing with the greater threat first.

Photog vests should be outlawed, what a joke! Everybody gripes about gamers and then shows up in a slicked up Royal Robbins vest. how many folks wear this daily?

Power factors need work, leave SSP as the minor class and penalize minor in the other classes. Differential target scoring is the way to go. Oh wait, that sound like IPSC. Anyone shoooting a .40 in ESP and making 130 Pf is not dealing with recoil. This is supposed to be defensive, how about 180 major, 135 minor?

As someone pointed out to me a RWR requires less hand travel and thus clock time than a tac load. Do we throw it out for being gamish or keep it because it's fast? How is it that I can't count to 10 and drop an empty mag on the deck while leaving one in the pipe?

The holster list seems like a punitive "who's IDPA mad at so we won't let their gear run list".

In the end big changes are not likely. As an IPSC guy I view the rules as a mental exercise to confuse my shooting. I memorize what I have to do and see how my mental focus works once that buzzing sound starts. It helps. I see a lot of the same folks I see at IPSC. I have a good time. I make fun of their silly rules only because I know they are going to SO for me and pay me back for all the rotten calls of "MEDIC" I made when Ro'ing for them. So in the end I come back to my mantra. Just shut up and shoot.

 

[ChristopherG]

If you set the power floor at 135, you've just ruled out virtually all 38 specials, including +Ps. You really wanna do that?

 

[Dr.Rob]

IDPA is supposed to be set up for stock or nearly so guns. I think thats a good thing. (as opposed to needing a tricked out 16 shot race gun with hand loaded bullets barely popping out of the barrel... not that everyone in IPSC does this)

I've only had ONE "tactical order" discussion with an SO in three years. And I was right.

IDPA should allow holsters to be evaluated by an SO who says yay or nay. Give a guideline on what a holster should do, ie, completely cover the trigger guard, positively retain the weapon, etc.

From concealment should mean just that, though many of us have shot IDPA in a t-shirt with our holsters exposed. (is that gaming or being practical on a HOT day?)

The tac reload has gotten so much flak and frankly I don't understand it (the flak) why on earth would you leave a partially loaded mag on the ground (unless it malfunctioned?)

IDPA is a game, IPSC is a game. Hopefully at its best IDPA is supposed to be about learning something useful as opposed to 'winning.

Both can be fun.

 

[Navy joe]

Yeah, 135 is still well within the realm of 9mm +p. I carry some that well exceeds that. The point being that most people defensively carry the hottest thing they can and then come to play with wimp loads.

A grand poohbah class would be nice.

One classifier, get real. Oh wait, maybe IDPA finally figured out a way to make sure folks will practice.

 

[444]

"The tac reload has gotten so much flak and frankly I don't understand it (the flak) why on earth would you leave a partially loaded mag on the ground (unless it malfunctioned?)"

From what I understand, the argument against the tac load is this: It is an administrative proceedure. It isn't something that you do in the middle of a gun fight. If there is a lull in the gunfight, then OK, top off the gun and keep the mag, but when you have known targets and you are behind cover, this isn't the place for a tac load. If you do a speed load and have the opportunity, you can squat down and retrieve the mag. while keeping the gun and eyes on the danger area. Another side issue is that IDPA is supposed to be training for real life gun fights. Most real life gunfights don't involve huge round counts and multiple mag changes. However, IDPA wouldn't be fun if we neutrilized a single threat with a single shot or a hammer and the match was over. So, we have a higher round count to make it a match. Now in a real gunfight, I don't really think you would be making tac loads, I may be wrong, but I doubt that I would. I would be shooting until all known threats were down. This would almost certainly involve primarily reloading from slide lock.
I personally can see both sides of the argument. If it came down to me making a choice, I would forget the tac load. However, I am neither a gun fighter or a serious IDPA shooter.