IDPA officially endorses multi gun

[Steve]

We have been doing this for 5 years now......

www.Actshooters.com

[Jay Cunningham]

You can get the provisional rules here: http://idpaforum.yuku.com/topic/6218...nal-Rules.html

Though it's good to see IDPA endorse multi-gun, I'm not so sure about the way they have it set up. It's more "home defense"-like than tactical-ish, as in no transitions from long gun to pistol, no box magazine shotguns, etc.

From my perspective, I think it's great.

It's nice to see something realistic that is available to normal human beings. Jocking up in a plate carrier and drop leg holster doesn't make a helluva lot of sense for the average armed citizen who might confront an intruder in their home.

[Steve]

From my perspective, I think it's great.

It's nice to see something realistic that is available to normal human beings. Jocking up in a plate carrier and drop leg holster doesn't make a helluva lot of sense for the average armed citizen who might confront an intruder in their home.

While i agree, some like to play dress up(not me)
but some of IDPA rules are pretty freaking stupid...... and not very realistic like 10 rounds in gun that holds 18 or no weapons lights? no grip stippling come on..... or the crowd that shoots there g-34 from a 5-11 vest OWB yet carries a IWB or pocket carry......

games are games and they are fun and good.....
yest they can often give false sense as well and again its up to the end user i used to tell te Ro as i made my way to the line start dinging me now

[orionz06]

While i agree, some like to play dress up(not me)
but some of IDPA rules are pretty freaking stupid...... and not very realistic like 10 rounds in gun that holds 18 or no weapons lights? no grip stippling come on..... or the crowd that shoots there g-34 from a 5-11 vest OWB yet carries a IWB or pocket carry......

I originally took issue with the light, but there is a good explanation somewhere about that. Basically, if you allowed lights, they would then become a requirement as they function as a weight which can help people shoot better. The idea is to not make it a gear race, but rather a skill race.

For capacity limits, I can see it somewhat, as those who carry compact pistols with lower capacities might feel the need to buy a competition only gun, thus making it a gear race still. I take more issue on the capacity, but if I can stuff 17+1, would they then change the stage requirement to ensure the same number of magazine changes? That capacity advantage could easily be taken away.


ETA: I imagine capacity limits reflect laws in some states more so than trying to limit gaming with large "game guns".

[bulbvivid]

From my perspective, I think it's great.

It's nice to see something realistic that is available to normal human beings. Jocking up in a plate carrier and drop leg holster doesn't make a helluva lot of sense for the average armed citizen who might confront an intruder in their home.

Though I agree, I look at most of these gun games—including IDPA—as a fun way to get out and play with my toys, not as a training aid beyond becoming comfortable/more familiar with my chosen tools. Therefore, I look for what's most fun to do, not what's best from a realistic standpoint. That being said, I still like IDPA more than USPSA because it strives for more realism, but I still don't see it as anything more than a game with ancillary benefits. I do hope that DMG gets more folks out and working with their long guns though.

Also, having the benefit of running my own carbine matches for over 5 years, I appreciate many of the things that they included, not the least of which is the prohibition against having transition-to-pistol stages.

Out of curiosity, is there something about these transitions that you dislike beyond the safety aspects?

[rob_s]

I used to object to the capacity limits in IDPA, but I don't anymore. It's a game, and games have rules. Among other things, I like that the capacity limits force reloads, which is a good thing to practice IMHO.

Before we go too far down the road of condemning all things IDPA, I think that anyone that wants to comment in this thread needs to actually go and read the provisional rules. I think some things will surprise you if you approach it with an open mind.

Out of curiosity, is there something about these transitions that you dislike beyond the safety aspects?

The safety aspect is exactly it. It is the primary reason that we do not take walk-ons at our matches, and why I wouldn't want to shoot in an open match that performed transitions and DID allow walk-ons. Without a way to vet people prior to the event, transitions become horribly dangerous in my experience. I've spent 3 hour blocks of training teaching people to do them and allowing them to practice them over and over again and STILL wound up with dangerous people.

Something happens when you put two guns in a persons' control that seems to cause an instant brain disconnect or a vapor lock in some people and they just turn into drooling, mouth-breathing, idiots. Transitions can be learned in one evening of live fire, and perfected in a few hours a week of dryfire practice in less than a month, but people don't do it and persist in being a danger to themselves and others.

To do it right in a competitive setting you have to start with downloaded rifle magazines and/or very intelligent stage design. You need them to run dry in exactly the right moment, give or take a target or two, and not before or after depending on the types of targets you use. Many of the transition stages we do are simple drills stages for exactly this reason where we do a head-to-head with 3 paper and three steel. Start with 6 rounds in the carbine, each paper gets two (the minimum number to neutralize a target in my scoring system), transition to handgun, drop the poppers. Last poppers are set to overlap, popper on the bottom is winner provided that all paper is neutralized. This is a big crowd pleaser, but once you get into setting up actual dynamic stages it can get much more complicated to force the transition where you want it.

[LHS]

ETA: I imagine capacity limits reflect laws in some states more so than trying to limit gaming with large "game guns".

IDPA was started in the mid-90s, when the AWB was in force. The sport was designed so that anyone could walk into a gun shop, buy a service-grade pistol, and compete with it out of the box. Since Joe Civilian couldn't buy new hi-cap mags anymore, they decided to limit mag capacity to 10 rounds. Otherwise it becomes a money/gear race, where the wealthier people who could afford to drop $100 on a 17-round Glock mag would have a clear advantage.

I think IDPA would do well to allow hi-cap mags where allowed by law, and perhaps even institute a compact gun division with a smaller magazine limit to cater to the G26 crowd.

The problem with IDPA is that it was designed from the start to be fairly static in terms of equipment, because the founders saw what happened to IPSC/USPSA over the years, where what was meant to be a realistic means of testing applicable skills became as relevant to self-defense as NASCAR is to daily driving. This means IDPA has trouble adapting to changing realities and times. It's still a fun sport, though, and better (IMHO) than running around with a 25-shot 9x21mm STI with a massive compensator and Aimpoint Comp on it in a holster that barely earns the name.

[Cwood]

Wonder why they excluded 5.45 and made 5.56 the minimum caliber?

[orionz06]

IDPA was started in the mid-90s, when the AWB was in force. The sport was designed so that anyone could walk into a gun shop, buy a service-grade pistol, and compete with it out of the box. Since Joe Civilian couldn't buy new hi-cap mags anymore, they decided to limit mag capacity to 10 rounds. Otherwise it becomes a money/gear race, where the wealthier people who could afford to drop $100 on a 17-round Glock mag would have a clear advantage.

I think IDPA would do well to allow hi-cap mags where allowed by law, and perhaps even institute a compact gun division with a smaller magazine limit to cater to the G26 crowd.

I am on the fence the more I think about it. Mag changes are very important, so there are two ways to do it, allow full capacity and require reloads, or limit to 10 and control where they reload in the same manner. It is really tough to say, and the more I consider it, the less I am concerned with it.

[Steve]

how about no head shots outside x yardage wow talk about a nice happyland space.....


as for the weapon light issue thats BS on there part really please who many folks do you really think its going to help