Saturday, January 08, 2005

The "New" IDPA Rules...SSDD

I was going to do a long analysis of the new International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) rulebook, but quite honestly, it just makes me tired.

After reading through the new rulebook a couple of times, one major question comes to mind — stupidity or malicious intent?

IDPA, which was once one of the fastest growing and most respected practical shooting sport, has been showing the need for a mid-course correction for a couple of years now. Membership has been flat, and the existing membership base has been clamoring for an overhaul of the rules to clear up inconsistancies, define terms that were used and not defined, bring the rulebook into line with the real-world way matches were run and — in short — fixing the glitches that are inevitable with Version 1.0 of anything.

Amazingly, IDPA World Command took this opportunity — and it was an opportunity — to instead whip out their blaster and shoot themselves in not just one, but both feet...and probably other some parts as well.

Many of the rule changes are clearly designed to eliminate specific weapons from IDPA competition, or to slant the playing field in the direction of a different gun. Here's a couple of example:

• The stainless steel SIG-220 .45 and Sig-226 in .40 S&W and 9mm have been eliminated because of weight. Under the new rules, the stainless steel SIGs are too heavy by a couple of ounces. The apparent rationale for eliminating guns that have been approved for years is that the guns were originally designated "S," for "Sport" in Germany, which last time I checked my atlas, wasn't even a state. Now why IDPA World Command overlooked this fact when the guns were approved in the first place is a question for another day, but the guns were approved and many, many people bought them to use in IDPA competition. Tough noogies, maggots! Interestingly enough, SIG, which had never really been in the competition arena, became a major sponsor for IDPA. If I were the folks at World Command, I probably wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for the 2005 check!

Parenthetically, a stainless SIG-220 was used by Ernest Langdon in 2003 to defeat Rob Leatham, Bill Wilson, John Sayles and the other Bishops of the Holy Church of the 1911 in the IDPA Nationals, a little trick that was widely considered to be impossible, since the 1911 is the be-all and end-all of handguns, forever-and-ever amen! Langdon predicted to me after his victory that IDPA would find a way to ban the gun he used. Surprise, surprise!!!

• Oh yeah, the new all-steel Beretta 92/96 doesn't make the weight restriction either. Once again, the argument is that slimy scumbag cheating weasel non-tactical "gamers" — who, to hear World Command tell it, apparently make up the majority of IDPA shooters — are buying those all-steel guns in the thousands to gain competitive advantage! I pointed out to the person telling me this, a gun writer, that he and I and a lot of people had at various times and in print eschewed aluminum-framed guns as insufficiently durable, especially for competition use where thousands upon thousands of rounds were fired. Tough noogies, maggots! Ya spends yer money and you takes your chances, maggots!

• Which brings us to the revolver category, or rather, categories, where after much agonizing (I'm giving World Command the benefit of the doubt here; these rules show no apparent application of a thought process of any kind), they set a weight limit that bans the two best all-around "fighting" revolvers in the world — the S&W 625 .45 ACP and the S&W 610 10mm/.40 — because they're too easy to reload using moon clips! Well hell, why not just specify that all revolver shooters duct tape their left hand to the back of their head and hop on one foot if you want to make things harder?

In one of those amazing coincidences, the only large frame S&W revolver that meets the new improved IDPA rules in the drastically overpriced Thunder Ranch Special .44 Special. Suprise, surpise! And if you bought a 5-inch 625 or 610; then bought a 4-inch 625 or 610 when IDPA banned 5-inch guns as "non-tactical," well, tough noogies, maggots!!! You want to play our games, you play it wtih our guns, maggots!

I won't even get into the holster rule changes, which were apparently designed to:
1) Elminate any inexpensive holster that might make it easier for a new shooter

2) Try to keep Dave Sevigny from winning all the time

My favorite part of the new rulebook is the part where it reads, repeatedly, that IDPA wants to ban anything that"makes a travesty of the sport." Well guys, I'm pretty sure that nothing a shooter does in a match can make as much of a travesty of the sport has you already have.

By the way, my IDPA membership number (at least until World Command revokes it!) is A-00009. I though this was one heck of a sport! Travesty, indeed!




38 comments:

JR said...

Amen, brother.
There's been considerable discussion on the whole holster/mag pouch topic, with both sides represented. While there may be a certain pretzel logic to the BoD's rules, there's a disregard for at least 2 things:

1) The burden this places on the MD/SO. The interpretation of these "rules" is subjective. Unless clarifications are issued, then silliness like the "daylight" rule and the "hourglass figure" rule will run rampant. This is just begging for dissent, disagreement, and general shenannigans.

2) The financial burden this places on the shooter. Look at the stats from the last Nationals. Let's look at the 73 Comp-Tac holsters, for example. I'm not sure what other manufacturer's holsters may be suspect, but do the math. Let's assume that those who bought the holsters also bought the mags. $72.50 + $45.00 (2 single mag pouches) = $117.50. Now look at the measly 73 Comp-Tac shooters at Nats = $8577.50. I'm pretty sure there are many more times that number of shooters in the same boat. You get the picture. Again, just using Comp-Tac as an example. Uncle Mike's apparently got problems, too. As you said: tough noogies, maggots!While I'm not too keen on having thrown a hundred bucks out the window, that problem can be fixed with more money, which will in all likelihood go to Comp-Tac. Again.

What can't be fixed is a subjective interpretation of the rules. We can't even get a straight answer on WHEN the rules take effect. And if we (as local MD/SOs) DON'T enforce the rules, then we're doing shooters a disservice. How'd YOU like to be responsible for someone getting DQ'd at a major match because YOU told them their holster was just fine?

As odious as an official list may have been, at least it was authoritative, and removed subjectivity. Yeah, I know that the original design might have been modified. However, at least that can be inspected. If you think I'm gonna decide who's got an hourglass figure - well, I'm allergic to gunshot wounds.

Here's what bugs me: the whole thing stinks. I'm not even really sure what the smell is, other than it's got a whole lot of people smelling it and crying foul. I learned a long time ago that when a lot of people say something is wrong, there's usually some truth to it.

I say publish a list, even if it's a "banned" list. That way, people don't waste their money, and MDs don't waste their time.

Anonymous said...

The general lack of regard, and its seems to me, outright contempt these "world headquarters" people have just displayed for the rank and file shooters out there is amazing to me.

What sort of people would for years endorse a list of holsters and gear as legal for the sport, leading thousands of shooters to buy them. Then in one week without notice declare all those purchases null and void? I think the answer is a bunch of very unethical self centered people.

I know a lot of blue collar shooters in our local club who don't consider $100 for a new set of gear to be chump change. It may discourage some of them from coming back if this idiotic pointless ruling is enforced.

I am an SO in this sport and I don't plan to comply. The first time some "range Nazi" SO from another club thinks I should be penalized for using the expensive Bladetech gear I purchased under IDPA's previous endorsement, will be the last IDPA match I ever attend.

I guess I am just lucky not to have invested in one of their banned guns like so many of my friends.

F.D.
Birmingham, AL

Anonymous said...

Travesty? How about a 9x19 power factor of 165,000 in ESR? I guess IDPA thinks me having a right hand is a "competitive edge."

Anonymous said...

Many of the rule changes are clearly designed to eliminate specific weapons from IDPA competition, or to slant the playing field in the direction of a different gun. Here's a couple of example:

• The stainless steel SIG-220 .45 and Sig-226 … all-steel Beretta 92/96 … Once again, the argument is that slimy scumbag cheating weasel non-tactical "gamers" — who, to hear World Command tell it, apparently make up the majority of IDPA shooters — are buying those all-steel guns in the thousands to gain competitive advantage!

No, in fact, only a very small minority of IDPA shooters are buying, or being given by the manufacturers, the heavy steel frame autoloaders. Many of those seem to be on the payroll of said gun manufacturers. What an interesting correlation; gun manufacturers who for years haven’t been able to get into IDPA to any significant degree in IDPA come out with guns that give a significant competitive advantage and hire people to shoot them. Ernie is a smart guy in predicting the future. Bill Wilson isn’t any stupe about predicting the future either, especially since he has already seen where that road leads.

As far as aluminum guns being insufficiently durable for competition use; well, the old rulebook specifically says that things designed solely for competition have no place in IDPA. Sorry, get a Glock 9mm, they last forever.

• Which brings us to the revolver category, … they set a weight limit that bans the two best all-around "fighting" revolvers in the world — the S&W 625 .45 ACP and the S&W 610 10mm/.40 — because they're too easy to reload using moon clips!

In one of those amazing coincidences, the only large frame S&W revolver that meets the new improved IDPA rules in the drastically overpriced Thunder Ranch Special .44 Special.

The small minority of us who really carry revolvers for self-defense have been talking about this for years. In fact, I personally lobbied the BOD to ban the moonclip guns because they are the wheelgun equivalent of 170mm magazines. While an argument might be made for the “best…fighting revolvers” status, we ALL know they’re simply not concealed carry revolvers, especially when equipped with five inch barrels. Personally I don’t have a problem with eliminating any handgun from IDPA that weighs 50 ounces (over 3 pounds). It’s a nice hunting piece when carried in a good shoulder holster, but a CCW piece it’s not. And while I have heard folks claim that they actually carry these horse pistols, I have never been able to catch them at it. I wonder why that is?

As for the overpriced (I agree with you completely) Thunder Ranch Special making the weight limit, I’m not sure what you’re implying: Are you saying that S&W is giving Wilson a cut of the profits of the TR Special?

I won't even get into the holster rule changes, which were apparently designed to:
1) Elminate any inexpensive holster that might make it easier for a new shooter

I am willing to bet money that Blade-Tech, Uncle Mike’s and all the other Kydex holster makers will get their holsters into compliance shortly. Since the principal problem is the backplate, some smart aftermarket guy will probably come up with a replacement that fixes the issue. And it won’t cost much, either.

2) Try to keep Dave Sevigny from winning all the time

Michael, David would win if he had to use a Level IV security holster and a Glock 37 equipped with a NY2 connector. You and I and Bill Wilson all know it, so that comment is completely non sequitur.

A lot of us who don’t spend most of our free time on Internet boards browbeating Wilson et al have noticed certain shifts in the sport over the last three years. Much of it is driven by those who are motivated, either egotistically or financially, toward winning rather than shooting, having a good time, and developing our SELF-DEFENSE skills. When I went to the 2004 Nationals and had a guy on my squad walking around with one of those red foam condoms on his gun (I have pictures), I figured Bill better do something quick or else we’re headed down the same road as in 1981.

All this squawking largely comes from people who got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They’ve been pushing the rules for several years now and Wilson finally said, “THAT’S ENOUGH.” That includes at least one well-known holstermaker. I’m glad HQ did what they did. Not all growth is good; some of it is a cancer. If the new rulebook runs off at least some of the whiners, gamers, malcontents, and range lawyers, then I say “Thank God and good riddance.” The average shooter with a Glock, Kimber, or S&W Model 10 doesn’t want to hear their prima donna crap anyway.

- Claude Werner aka HeadHunter

Anonymous said...

To the few that agree with the new rule book my question is this: What will they ban next time? There will always be competitors (gamers) in any sport that will push the limits of the rules. I think that is the nature of competion. FWIW I shoot IDPA (or did) with my daily carry gear. A 1911 in a Sparks VMII holster with a combination of Mitch Rosen and Sparks single mag pouches. Guess what, by the letter of the rules all of that equipment is now banned! The breechface of my 1911 is below the center of the belt! None of the mag pouches I have meet the 50% rule.

Anonymous said...

I don't have a problem with the new rule book. As an SOI and regular shooter for the last 5 years I agree with Headhunter.

For years the keyboard commandos have b*tched and moaned about removing any grey areas in the rulebook and clarifying the the rules. HQ gave them what they asked for. Don't like them? Simple solution is to vote w/ your wallet. Deal with it or start something else. If you make a better product people will come. If this all means there will be 40 shooters each month instead of 60 it won't break my heart. Less yakkin' and more cakkin' for the rest of us "like minded individuals".

Mike, I enjoy your show. Good luck and thanks for promoting the gun sports. I just don't happen to agree with your assessment of the situation.

Mark M.
Atlanta

Anonymous said...

If IDPA were a membership driven sport instead of being lead by single minded purists, I would probably stay a member.

I shot IDPA because I liked the sport. I especially liked the people who attend. Yes, It would bother me if we had 20 fewer people attending. I don't mind the whiners and gamers. They make it interesting and it makes me feel morally superior to someone.

To me the heart of IDPA is the local club. We encourage people to come out and keep coming out. As an SO, I have seen people's targets go from shotgun patterns to mostly 0's. It makes me proud to be a part of that. Our club has 80 to 100 shooters at a monthly match. 40 to 60 at weekly practice. Last Saturday, we had 50 shooting in 20 degree weather. It was fun. I don't care what holsters they use. Any stock gun is fine with me. Trigger time is happy time. There seems to be a paranoid fear that if you can see a speck of daylight through a holster, then the next thing will be compensators and red dots. Someone mentioned a cancer? Geez, lighten up.

I think most of this gamer stuff comes from people who go to the big national type matches. Hey, everyone who goes to one is a "gamer." You don't travel half way across the country to sharpen your carry skills.

As a revolver shooter, I'm particularly steamed about the changes. Some people crow that now the Model 10 shooters will have a chance to win a fabulous $.30 ribbon. Yeah right, they carry powerful 4" .38 special revolvers. I carry an N-frame snubbie with moon clips. I'm not going to pound the hell out of a Performance Center gun just to make purists happy. My current 646 is starting to loosen up after a year shooting 142,000 PF loads. What will 165,000 do?

And, I would like some comment on the 165,000 PF for ESR. If SSP and ESP have the same caliber range and 125,000 PF, why does ESR have 165,000? I think that Mr. Bane is right about "malicious intent." I have a Ruger Police Six in 9mm. Would you like to SO me while I use 165,000 PF loads?


Joe S.
Michigan

Anonymous said...

My holster was on the approved list. Supposedly, sometime after I got it, the manufacturer changed the design. I can't prove that, but that's what I'm told. OK, if it's true, pull the holster off the list, and send an email to the membership. They sent me an email this week, so I know they know how! But keep the list. Save everybody that doesn't have an offending holster the time and aggravation. Save the SO's and MD's the time and aggravation. Let the affected people take it up with the manufacturer's that (allegedly) caused the problem.

Anyway, so I'm thinking that my holster will probably pass muster, because it was made before the 'alleged' changes to the design. Theory is, the criteria we have now is the same as what was used in compiling the holster list all along. Sorry, my rig doesn't make it. Even though it fits flush against my side, I have a gap between the belt and the holster. Now, I ask you, if the criteria is the same now as before, how did my holster make the list in the first place?

One word sums up the magazine carrier 50% rule, and that word is STUPID. If loose magazine are a concern, DQ the dingbat who doesn't understand how to tighten the tension screw. I will admit to understanding some of the rationale that went into the holster changes.... but the mag carrier thing is beyond me.

The more I look at this, the only beneficiary of the holster/mag pouch changes are the leather holster makers. And, I'm beginning to wonder if that wasn't the point!

JR said...

If you're okay with the rule changes, then we might as well go all the way: eliminate Master and even Expert classifications. If IDPA is designed for the average shooter, that should pretty much take care of it. If you classify or place out of SS, see ya! You belong in USPSA, where all the above-average shooters apparently must go.

The new COF guidelines should not be ignored. Low round-count, short distance - you know, real-life scenarios. Pretty exciting, huh? You want to travel for four hours and spend money on a hotel to shoot at THAT match?

The rules are designed to level the playing field. I could have SWORN that's what the classifications were for - so you competed with shooters of equal ability. If Master class isn't fast enough, create a Grand Master or Professional class. That should assuage the enormous egos that are driving some of these rules. I guess it's not enough to win your classification anymore - you must be the winner of the whole match to really rate.

The net result of these rules is to cater to the average shooter. The problem is that it makes for a boring match, fraught with headaches for MDs and SOs. The rules really don't do anything to discourage the real gamers - they'll figure a way around (most likely scenario), or leave the sport (some entire clubs already have). Neither scenario is good for the sport - it breeds discontent either way. Meantime, the next generation of gamers will simply be groomed, and the next set of rules changes will become more draconian.

Why not figure out a way to cater to the supporters of the sport, rather than penalize them? Examine the classification system, maybe. Look at new classifications, maybe. Change the scoring system, maybe.

I'm sure if World HQ were to actually consult with the constituency, reasonable rules would be hammered out, and have the support of the majority. But that sounds too democratic, doesn't it?

catfish said...

For those drinkin' the IDPA cool-aid, all I can say is that I hope you enjoy your now mediocre level of competition. Rules that encourage short stages, few reloads (and those off the clock where possible), reduced emphasis on moving more than 2-3 steps and holsters that might be suitable for deep cover clandestine ops but don't really have a place on a range where you have spectors and fellow shooters all around you.

I have been a 5 year shooter with IDPA, a two gun master, and finished in the top five in my division the last two times I participated at nats. I am a certified SO instructer and have SO'd several state and regional matches.

I am voting with my wallet and I'm not going to participate in a sport that encourages mediocrity. I will continue to shoot locally with the great friends that I have made, but as of Saturday night I've rejoined uspsa and will spend my travel money and time participating in a sport that encourages excellence.

Call me stupid, but I figure that I will become a better shooter by shooting more rounds, not less. By moving more, not less. By having more hard shots, not less.

But then maybe I'm just a scummy gamer trying to be the best shooter I can be.

Anonymous said...

Dave Sevigny will win regardless of what they will do!!

Anonymous said...

Great comments

Dont forget the kneepads. I am way too old to be shooting any competitive sports, but I do. Now, I find that I cannot simply strap on my kneepads to shoot a stage that requires kneeling

Right up there with my 625, my holster offset and my speedloader carriers is another new rule about my kneepads.

I think I have had enough

Anonymous said...

I was happy shooting idpa because I could save on equipment and use the extra money for practice ammo and trips to state matches. I find no logic in some of the rule changes that outlaw the holsters and mag pouches I own. I have carried them on the street (concealed) without problem. My Uncle Mike holsters are about the same as my expensive holsters. I am glad that my weapons are not outlawed, and that I will probably be able to shoot local matches with no hassle but I will never get to shoot a state or national again. I was looking forward to another four-gun award in the next step up the ladder but now I would have to chase five divisions! Maybe in my next life! In order to compete at bigger matches, I will have to find a different discipline to spend time and money on. How can people build something good and screw it up so badly? Hello, up there--anyone home?!!! Since I just sent in my dues, can I get them back? Others will be glad to get my money.

This little guy has left the building.

Dick L said...

Can I get my dues back as well. To bad IDPA is going to drop from about 11,000 members to 500. Guess you guys will have to start over. Damn those adjustable Kydex holster, damn ye 625's and 610's, damn ye all to IPSC. Can't believe the BoD (Big old Dumb) people making decisions thinks that 35 yards is a defensive range for engagement of a BG. I wouldn't want to be your lawyer on that one. Sincerely, Dick L (shooterready), IPSCs newest member.

Anonymous said...

I'm going to call idpa tomorrow, and instead of renewing my membership I plan on informing them that my dues money and the money I'd planned on using to go to my State's match will be spent on a new holster.

bill wilson (lower case intentional) needs to realize that idpa (again, lower case intentional) exists because the SHOOTERS keep it alive. If we all bow out, he doesn't have anyone to play his little game with him...but maybe that's what he wants so he and his 1911's can be the winner.

Jeremy V.
Michigan City, IN
idpa A21354

Anonymous said...

I predicted years ago, that I feared IDPA would shoot themselves in the foot with micro-management. Now, with the new rulebook, they've not only shot themselves in the foot, they're reloading !!

It's not quite so much the new rules as it is the total consuming need bill has to CONTROL things to the smallest degree.

All the dictators of the past refused to allow elections or votes. They feared a loss of control.

IF bill had come out w/ this book and stated, "These rules will take effect January 1st, 2007" there wouldn't be near this much griping.

IF bill was concerned about holsters being changed, all he had to do was say, "From henceforth, all matches will be shot from concealment." This would've eliminated anything w/ a severe offset, as it would not conceal well, or allow the garment to clear easily.

One word on the holsters and/or alleged design changes. The problem w/ "one size fits all" is, one size doen't fit all. What works for the 160# guy ain't gonna work for the 300# guy. By stipulating a certain design, one of those guys is screwed.

It's not so much that bill wanted to specify WHAT the holster must do, he's specified HOW the holster must do it!

This is not unlike getting directions to Berryville from him. "Follow my directions exactly, or I won't acknowledge you. First, you have to go to Dallas, then you must go to Tampa.....THEN you are required to come to Berryville."

By dropping the "effective immediately" bomb, he has told the members, "Screw you and the money you spent on guns and gear. Spend more!!" He's telling the retailers that stock merhandise specifically for their IDPA customers, "Screw you and the 1000's of dollars you've invested in inventory! Firesale it (ie, take a profit loss!) and spend 1000's more! (and hope I don't change my mind again!)" He's telling the gun and holster makers, "Screw you and the 1000's of dollars you have in tooling, and the 1000's of hours you have in research! Comply w/ my whims, NOW, dammit!!"

That's what bill is telling us.

I have one response: "No, bill. screw YOU"

Anonymous said...

_______________________________
- Claude Werner aka HeadHunter

Much of it is driven by those who
are motivated, either egotistically or financially, toward winning rather than shooting, having a
good time, and developing our SELF-DEFENSE skills.
_______________________________

Yeah I totally hate it when someone tries to win a COMPETITION [/sarcasm]. Its a game, a sport, a competition not an ice cream social. If you want to develop SD skills go to a class or go practice. Its a sport not a training ground.

- Tactical Tyrant.

Anonymous said...

The Book of Bill 1:05

Woe be unto ye faithless defensive pistol shooters.

Thou hast not kept to the true and only path.

The True Prophet hath set forth upon ye, new commandments.

Quake and quail ye moon-clipping heathens.

Fire and brimstone on ye kydexing cheats.

Only the holy will survive, as long as they pay their just dues.

Speak not protest or petition, thou whilst not be heard.

Joe S.
Michigan

Anonymous said...

The problem w/ elitists is, they think that if THEY do or don't do something, then NO ONE does.

For example, if the elitist doesn't carry a 5" 625 concealed, NO ONE does. Nevermind the guys that do, or that keeps one on the nightstand.

If THEY don't conceal a 4" N frame, then NO ONE does. Therefore, anyone that uses one in competition, is a CHEAT---, uh, I mean, "gamer."

If THEY don't carry an all steel Sig, then NO ONE does. Never mind the cop that uses one daily, or the shooter sensitive to recoil....THOSE people are cheat--uh, I mean, are gamers.

Why not ban Glock 34's ? I mean, it was DESIGNED specifically for "gaming," and it's too big to conceal. (THEY don't conceal one, therefore NO ONE does...)

Why not ban the Glock 20, 21, 29 and 30? Everyone "knows" they are too big to conceal effectively....

Why not ban the Para Ordnance P-14 in single and LDA configuration? NO ONE carries one concealed, it's too fat and heavy....

Why not make it simple:

1) You can only use Wilson leathergear.

2)Courses of fire are limited to a "realistic" 5 round maximum.

3) You can only shoot a 2" five shot snubby, or a Glock 26. (downloaded, naturally!)

4) Distance will be no greater than 10 feet.

5) Number of targets no greater than 3, but only w/ special permission from "world command" to grant such an advanced course of fire...

6) No score is kept. This will help the losers from feeling too badly about how poorly they did. And, they can claim they really didn't get beat by some lousy cheat--uh, gamer......

7) If you admit to ever practicing on your own, you're placed in a special cheat--, uh, gamer division....

Sounds like fun!! Where do I sign up?

Anonymous said...

One interesting aspect of IDPA is that it has "members", but those "members" are not permitted to vote for their officers, run for office, or exercise any sort of control over the "membership" based organization. When IDPA spun off from USPSA they decided they did not want to have to worry about that pesky "voting" as it would give the membership too much influence over the leadership.

Rob Boudrie

Anonymous said...

Jeez, guys, read the rule book!

One guy says the new course design guidelines suck. What? Did you ever read the OLD GUIDELINES? Obviously not, or you'd stop whining. They are almost word-for-word identical to the 2002 course design guidelines!

Another guys says he's pissed that his kneepads have been banned. WHAT??? Did you ever read the OLD RULE ABOUT KNEEPADS? Obviously not, or you'd stop whining! The rule hasn't changed since the 2002 rulebook!

Another guy complains that the revolver weight rule bans one of the greatest fighting handguns ever, to wit, the M625 revolver. Horse pucky. The M25 and M625 were never issued to the military, unlike the M1917, and the handful of LE agencies that ever issued or approved them for duty carry is miniscule. Fighting handgun? Come on. The M625 in .45 ACP was and is a big, fat, heavy, underpowered revolver suitable for nothing but games. And yes, I own a 5" 625, and yes, I tried it as a concealed carry revolver for several weeks straight (I'm not talking a few hours here and there, I mean I put it on at 0600 and took it off at 2200) and found it big, fat, heavy, and really hard to conceal comfortably. If I'm going to for-real carry a .45, I'd rather carry a 1911 at 2/3 the weight of a 625 and with a flat profile that can be concealed easily. If I'm going to for-real carry a revolver, I'm going to carry a K-frame 357 Magnum like the M19, or the L-frame M57/58 41 Magnum, both of which have PROVEN themselves as FIGHTING HANDGUNS in the hands of law enforcement in America.

Anybody who wants to quit IDPA because he can't shoot his hogleg 625 with powderpuff 600 fps loads anymore is welcome to leave, as far as I'm concerned. And anyone who wants to leave IDPA because he's too lazy to compare the new rulebook to the old one on his own is welcome to jump on the bandwagon with his buddies, too.

JR said...

Nice post, anonymous. What about the valid points, then? I note you only addressed the gaffes made by those who didn't realize the old and new rules were the same. How about the mag rule? What about the "daylight" rule for holsters? Better yet, why don't YOU tell a woman she doesn't have an "hourglass figure," and her holster is illegal?

Once again, IDPA has put the burden of enforcment on the SO/MD, where it rightly belongs. However, they've given them subjective guidelines that WILL vary wildly from match to match, club to club.

I have a new philosophy to help me as an SO. I just ask, "What Would Bill Do?" WWBD will be my new guiding principle for IDPA.

Anonymous said...

Just being a curious sort, I dug out my Blade-Tech magazine pouch and holster. The mag pouch is one of the good ones (I won it at the Nats a few years ago) and the holster is one of the injection molded ones I bought recently for a loaner.

The pouch covers exactly half of my Glock 17 mags, so 17 and 19 mags should be legal.

Next I removed the lower screws that attach the backplate of both so the backplate opens up at the bottom. Then I stuck the backplate in my pants like a paddle. And voila, it looks like I have an IDPA legal holster and mag pouch; no visible daylight and it fits close enough to my body. BTW, I was wearing my favorite el cheapo belt from Wal-Mart.

Then I did my Master Level Dry Fire Practice Regimen to see how well they work. The answer is just fine. But, just to be sure, I will use it for Deliverance IDPA this coming Sunday and report back to the Forum.

Didn't cost me anything except about three minutes work. I did need a Philips screwdriver, so if you don't have one of those, you might need to buy one.

I've done this in the past with an Uncle Mike's rig and it works on it, too.

I am always happy to help relieve my fellow shooters of financial hardship.

HeadHunter

Anonymous said...

To the cluck that thinks the new rules banning the 625 and 610 are "just fine," you are totally missing the point.

bill, et al, in every article about idpa said the 5" 625 was the gun to buy for SSR. Then he banned that gamey 5" barrel. (nevermind it was slower on the first shot..) This forced more money to be spent, brought on SOLELY by the whim of bill.

This caused the previously unpopular 4" 610 to become "the" gun for SSR. At least, until S&W tooled up to make a 4" 625.

As of now, both are illegal. Oh, and so is the all steel Sig and Beretta. (maybe you've heard of those, they're being used by the military right now in their original configuration.)

Again, by the mere whim of bill.

IF it made sense, that would be one thing......but it doesn't. I guess that's what Ernie gets for beating everyone w/ an all stainless Sig.

But, I suppose you idpa apologists will simply smirk and say, "serves you right, you slimy gamer! How dare you beat me w/ an all stainless gun, or a heavy revolver."

I got news for you. The good shooters can kick your butt with a Kel-tec 9mm...THEN what you whine about?

Anonymous said...

I purchased a 4" S&W 625 to compete in IDPA SSR right before they changed the allowable barrel length from 5" to 4". I Really would have preferred to get a 5" to use in USPSA and ICORE, but I figured that with a 4" I could use one gun for all three sports, even if I was at a slight disadvantage in USPSA and ICORE. Now the powers-that-be at IDPA have decided, with almost no notice, that they don't want me to participate in SSR anymore, since they banned not only my gun, but the nifty litte 2 moon-clip carrier I purchased from Blade-Tech to go with it.

Just like the anti-gunners, the BoD is outlawing things incrementally...why don't they just come out and admit that their goal is to allow only products designed, sold or endorsed by members of the BoD.

When our local club got started I was the biggest advocate for IDPA, but now it just SUCKS!

LK
Jacksonville, FL

M.B. said...

After shooting IDPA a couple of times, I have convinced myself that it does not really help my gaming or self-defense skills, IPSC does on the other hand has elevated my gunhandling skills. IDPA's rules has really gone south, they always insisted that the sport emphasizes self-defense gear, but, if you become too fast we will change the rules. A lot of people are sold that it is a sport where one learn how to defend oneself, the reloads are slow, one hardly moves to engage mutiple targets. The rounds are low and not worth a long drive. If IDPA has to survive, they should promote shooters towards the top, and if they happen to win without the 1911, so be it, I want to see the top shooters shoot, whatever gear or sponsorship they have, they will inspire other shooters for the top.

Thunder said...

I'm probably the newest (and most confused) IDPA member. Don't even have my card back yet. I started shooting IPSC back in the mid 80's and really enjoyed it but had to discontinue due to job/family requirements and a move to Maryland (gun unfriendly). I have sincwe retire and moved tooAlabama (gun and CCW friendly) and decided to renew my love afair with the sport. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find an IPSC club close enough to go to all the time but I did find the local IDPA club and will join their range next month.

It seems that I have comew into IDPA at an interesting time. I started looking at my current guns and find I really didn't have what I consider a good all around gun to shoot IDPA and also use in IPSC limited/limited 10. I have an S&W 625 5" barrel I shot in IPSC but that not allowed. I have my first Colt Delta Elite but it was modified with comp and sights. I love my 10mm STI race gun (accurate and fun) but of course not for IDPA. Of course my .22 and .380 CZ83 won't work. That leave my Glock 27 and Mod 60 S&W. While these make good carry guns, they are not guns I would care to shoot a lot of rounds through. I do have a new Colt Carry Commander that I bought years ago. It is light , .45 cal and will make a good CDP gun but once agaain I don't think it will hold up to a lot of shooting 165 + PF loads. I know, some may argue that the idea of IDPA is not to shoot a lot but concealment and comfortable carry. Now I admit I'm not a cop and my main concern is not carrying an off duty weapon. My thoughts are that my practical defense will be either getting my Glock 27 out of my bedside gunsafe, or my Smith out of my truck gunsafe. In fact at my old IPSC club, once a month we would have a purely defensive coures of fire (gun in a box, few targets, close targets, use of cover, and small guns(BUGS)). Almost everyone enjoyed them, even the Masters).

What I have done for the last 5 days is try and decide how I want to compete in IDPA. I decided on a Glock 35 in .40 S&W. It meets requirements for SSP and ESP, should hold up to 165 PF with the right springs, is fairly accurate and with a replacement barrel, I can use reloads. I know that a little shorter barrel is "more concealable" but the M35 should be more preasant to shoot (fun) and safer in PF 165 +.

My main problem is holsters. Four of the last five days have been spent researhing the new rules and comments from various site. I'm still not sure what holsters are leagal or not. I really wanted a synthetic holster but I can't make heads or tails of the "3/4 inch" rule or the light between the belt and holster. WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF IT IS CONCEALED BY THE CONCEALED GARMET????? If it's so important than there should be no exception for women or police/military service holsters.

The rule "must be comfortable for all day wear" is interesting. I peronally don't think any holster that I have to stick inside my pants is comfortaqble. Maybe my pants are too tight. Even the pancake styles cause guns to poke you in the side. It seems the newly outlawed models are the most comfortable and probably allow for the "smoothest" draw. Shouldn't the holster issue be somewhat mute if it is concealed??? If you can't see my gun when I raise my arms parallel to the ground shouldn't I be good to go?

Sorry for being so long winded.

Anonymous said...

The stupid rules will not be enforced, with the exception of the usual suspects.

DD said...

IDPA can be and is a fun sport that is usually ruined by a bunch of pinheads who think they're now special forces and have the mistaken notion that IDPA is "tactical training" No, it's not. If there are 2 or more people competing for anything, whether a prize, fastest time, better score or whatever, it's just another GAME. There are about a half dozen jerks in the local club that think just because their fat desk bound tails have gone to Thunder Ranch, Gunsite or other shooting place, they are now experts in the field of "tactics". They continue their rants in the face of a group of us that hits the bricks everyday and have to do it for real for a living which does more to chase off prospective participants than welcome them. When people find out they're a teacher, or computer hacker for a living, they lose some stature with their "tactical" opinions. I was at the first IDPA invitiational in Columbia, Mo. and the first nationals in Jeff City, Mo. There was a chance for a good time except for the fact that that phony Ken Hackathorn would allow his chosen children to violate the rules but call the common folks down and punish them. At the Invitational we caught a FBI dork changing holsters between stages but Ken the Hack refused to do anything. The same weasel showed up at the nationals and did the same thing but his "duty" rig had all the safety features cut off and he word a huge open top bag on the front of his belt so he could do tac mag changes and then throw the the used mag in the bag and not have to fiddle with getting it in a pocket. I personally cornered Ken the Hack on this one and he refused to do anything about it since "the guy is FBI and they can do whatever they think necessary" (his words). Of course his lick boy got to win his division.
What these people have never taken the time to figure out is the same people win despite their requirement to follow the rules. They can't get the picture that it isn't the equipment as much as the shooter pounding tens of thousands of rounds downrange every year. Ken and Bill were a bit out of control in the beginning but I think they've allowed some folks to inflitrate their circle who're worse.

Anonymous said...

Let me give you a purely recreational shooter's perspective:

I plink once or twice a week out on the farm, carry (with a CCW), and compete in 2 or 3 matches (USPSA, Steel Plates, or IDPA) a year. I shoot in the middle of the pack at most matches. I shoot for a chance to sharpen my skills, to get some tips from guys better than me, and for a little friendly competition. Leatham, Jarret, Miculek et al don't have to worry about me taking their prize money away.

But I've noticed that while I can pick up any one of my two or three favorite guns, stick it in any holster I choose and have a good time competing in USPSA or Steel Plates without having to worry about anything but basic safety rules, IDPA requires a whole different mindset. Suddenly Ihave to worry about whether my holster and mag carriers are approved, whether my gun is too heavy, whether I loaded too many rounds, etc etc etc. And rules that prohibit taking a sight picture or dropping mags on the ground are simply asinine.

The IDPA says other disciplines are gamers? Sheesh!

I'll still shoot IDPA if that's whats available when I have a chance to shoot at a decent range, but if I'm driving to a match, it'll be to USPSA or Steel Plates. THAT'S where the comraderie, fun, and laid back competition is!

Anonymous said...

I been shooting IDPA for nearly 5 years now. The (new) rules show up and everyone ie... the gamers bale. I shot with cops and semi pros using 2,000$ guns, and they were in the marksman division, but winning the state match. Talk about doggin it. Guys like Mas Ayoob and Andy Kemp are beaten by the guys and no one says a thing, cause the range director and them are friends. All that just so they can have another $16.00 trophy for their den. They may win every time but the have lost the respect of their fellow shooters. And now their leaving in droves because they have to requalify every year. It's a two edged sword, now the local guys only hold qualifiers once a year and if you don't make it, sorry , no state. I still shoot locally, but I miss the people and experience the the state matches. Poor old Bill just yepped himself to a hole in the head.

Anonymous said...

My family was watching a nature film last week where the lioness jumped down from a tree and broke a leg. it was not long before the hyennas dragged her cub off and ate it while she was helpless. she roarred for help and two male lions showed up not to help but to kill the lioness and eat her. In the shooting sport I don't find much difference. In cowboy action shooting a gunsmith develops a replica winchester 1893 pump shotgun that is safer and the prototypes receive acceptance from the swhooting group but after 3200 of the guns are made and are in route the gun is banned by their board of directors.Sorry coyote cap.It will not be permitted at state level and above sorry compeditors who purchased. Sorry idpa equipment manufactures, distributers, dealers, compeditors. I see we are not much better than the lions and I my thought of shooting idpa would improve my defense skills and be fun is wrong. I will just keep my sig 225,220 for carry and practice at the range on paper because IDPA rules are too dettached from the real world to be of value. I will spend the money i would of spent on equipment and match fees and buy a second dillon 650 and load and shoot more ammo

Anonymous said...

Michael,
Hola amigo....I sent you a note a few months ago to say hello and haven't heard back.
SOOOOO, it looks like I need to dust off my pistol and start competing to try and catch up with you. But after reading the article, I'm not sure what I can afford or want to buy!!!!!
Hope all is well....
Gary Ramey

Anonymous said...

Mr Bane,

Thanks for ripping bill wilson a new one. One does get tired of the back pedaling or double talk from the BOD. The conflicts of interest from the Holy Church of the 1911 are obvious for all to see.

What is being done with the $500,000+ in members dues that is received by Berryville? Is there an accounting somewhere?

Why have IDPA "Major Match" entry fees have gone so high--clocking in close to $100; in many cases ripping you off with 'late' entry fees (HEY DO YOU WANT ME TO COME OR NOT!). Where is Bill W on these issues for the common man? Perhaps he doling out "sanctioned" matches to his friends so they can get cash rolling in. Because $100 for 100 shooters is 10,000. I dont know of any clubs that use up 10k on their IDPA budget in a year--let alone have 10k of total equipment on the IDPA range.

In the end there arent to many "working class" folk who are able to afford to do this kind of thing regularly. A rimfire division could trim the costs for many by quite a bit. There is a pretty large void of young people (under 40) at many matches.

Anonymous said...

I was thinking of joining the local IDPA, but a little research indicates to me that this break-off group has some serious foundational issues that need addressing before I even consider it.

For example, and if it's actually true ( as indicated by some who are already members ), the fact that 'the membership', who pay fees to BE members, can not vote on who populates the officer levels. This makes absolutely NO sense to me whatsoever. The idea that the people running this group will run it until they decide to leave is problematic for many reasons I could go in to, but any reasonable contemplation for a small period of time could deduce on their own. Just think about the conflict of interest factors among officers who solicit sponsorship. They become friendly, too friendly, with Sponsor X and the rules start changing, conveniently enough, to leverage towards Sponsor X's interests ( financially speaking, of course ).

Anyone working in an officiating capacity should have limited terms of service OR, better, be voted in or to stay on BY THE MEMBERSHIP. NOT the 'founding fathers'. Those too entrenched in the upper tiers just tend to have very, very different interests than those who make the organization exist, over Time, to begin with ( that would be you guys and gals who pay membership fees ).

Also, I'm sorry, but there's very, very little that's 'real world' about the IDPA comps. It should not be promoted as any kind of thing like that, but rather another shooting sport.

The IDPA has to compete against so many other SS's, in fact, that how it is currently run is almost surely going to be its death knell. Sure, you might have a few spits of local clubs here and there, but it will lose the respect of the shooting community if it continues as it is.

With this many unhappy members already, with the absurd rules in place already, and the, as others call them, 'BoD''S at the top being so rigid and inflexible to member interests, there is no way in the world I would or will pursue any further interest in this org.

There's just too many other really fun shooting sports out there, all of them generally requiring enough time and investment as it is, to consider adding the IDPA to my list of hobbies. I'll check back in a couple of years from now and see if things have changed. Till then, good luck to all of you and your shooting pursuits. Please know there are many shooters out there, in a variety of disciplines, who wish you and the welfare of your organization well.

puertas metalicas en valencia said...

Really worthwhile info, lots of thanks for this article.

www.muebles-en-guipuzcoa.com said...

Really effective info, thanks so much for the post.

Women leather jacket said...

nice post love it
Womens Leather Pants