Too many IPSC matches I've seen are based on what I call the "Thirty Round Burst" syndrome. Every stage requires multiple hits on multiple targets. That's fine for the IPSC game mindset, but what about those who seek to work on actual shooting skills?
What about stages requiring 'neutralizing' no more than three targets?
So you want to test actual shooting skills, but not shoot more than three targets? One good thing about USPSA/IPSC matches is that, besides the qualifiers, you generally get to shoot a bunch -- like 2x the number of rounds at an IDPA match with the same number of stages.
What's the complaint about 30 round stages anyway? You'd hate 3Gun, since we often have 60+ round stages. Anything you can fit into a "2 target" stage, you can fit into a longer stage, and the shooter will need more versatile skills and problem solving ability to shoot it well.
By the logic that most defensive encounters are less than 8 rounds (or whatever), one could extend it to say that the average person never has a defensive encounter with a handgun, so why bother in the first place?
And by the way, in IPSC, every paper "shoot" target requires two hits, however, it is not true that every target requires multiple hits; steel targets do not.
Some one mentioned not all shooting situations start with a holstered gun. How about starting gun in hand from time to time; or gun in box or under pillow or in glove compartment? Maybe even unloaded in a closed box?
Set up stages to duplicate an actual event. The Miami shootout comes to mind as a team event, and it could be edited for a single shooter. After all, there were only two 'targets' in that whole scenario. The California Northridge Bank robbery could be interesting. Again, only two 'targets' (armed with fully automatic rifles, but only two.)
Again, these get away from a test of "actual shooting skills", which you bemoaned the lack of, and into scripted events more apt in a training event vs. a scored match. And if I want training, it will be from a BTDT with creds, not an ID*A range nazi. This is exactly the dilemma Monster detailed in his excellent post.
This concept is what makes IPSC and IDPA both lacking. Not the rules, but the stage design. By designing stages to test the shooter, the director has removed the advantage of the double stack pistol, or the laser sighting system, muzzle breaks and even metal seeking bullets.
There's nothing preventing a IPSC course of fire with a single target at 60 yards. If you think you've got some really killer, challenging stages, why not bring them to an established shooting organization instead of inventing yet another ID*A with poorly thought out rules?
The examples you gave directly prior to that paragraph (standards, school drills, and the 60 yard stage) intended to show that they test the shooting and not the equipment ironically
would all be shot faster with a comp'd, double-stack pistol with a DoctorSight (optic) on it!