USPSA and New Gun Restrictions

In my January 19, 2013 post "Stop the Rage .... Mine" (and several earlier posts!) , I summarized my... disappointed .. in the recurring political movement to restrict private firearms ownership.

Actually, what I did was to say I was through talking about it.

[sigh]

Wrong.  I'm not through talking about it.

One of the comments was ... perhaps offered facetiously, but still the question offered was entirely germane to this blog: 

Instead of delving into the progressive mindset, we should be asking the important questions. How will restrictions on certain firearms, and magazine capacity affect USPSA/IPSC rules and stage development? The feds are talking 10 round magazines, but NY has already mandated 7 round capacity mags and other states are sure to follow. How will USPSA respond to these potential draconian restrictions and/or bans in magazine capacity and firearms? What affect will they have on 3gun?

Oh, yeah,  we've been there before.

Some folks suggest that since the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban didn't really have much effect on .. gun stuff ... maybe this one will be equally as ineffective (if still equally inconvenient).

Well .. maybe so, maybe not.

I know that I found ways during that time period to get around the 'banned' items.  For example, I found a way to move from Limited to OPEN Division, including the purchasing of "normal capacity" magazines of 18 rounds (limited) and 25 rounds (open).  The magazines were all marked something like "only military or Law Enforcement" .. but I still got them.  The magazines cost three times as much as their replacement tubes did after the 1994 law sunset in 2004, of course.   Which is, of course, economically selective; "poor people" couldn't afford them, just us "rich folks".  (Or those of us who really like Tuna Fish and Macaroni for dinner six nights a week.)

But that was then; this is now.

For the purpose of this discussion, I'll ignore the very STRONG possibility that Race Guns (they have "compensators", you know) may be outlawed.  Also, "Firearms which may accept magazines of greater than 'x-rounds' capacity" will not be totally banned ... I'm not sure if that can even pass a Democratic congress; any magazine-fed firearm doesn't have a way to restrict the LENGTH of the magazine.

So, delving into excruciating detail, here's what I see as possible ways that Congress and Our Beloved Leader may screw us most painfully:

10-round Magazines:
Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that ten-round magazines are the legally maximum capacity allowed under federal law.

Hmm .. the difference between LIMITED and LIMITED-10 Divisions have been been eliminated.

The Open Division can't use 25-round magazines; but they still have compensators and electronic dot-sights, so there is a clear advantage .. albeit LESS of an advantage .. over Limited/Limited-10 Divisions.  (Speaking as a 'vision-challenged' Super Senior: it's still an advantage when you can see the sights.)

I might point out, however, that current USPSA rules limit the number of shots which MUST be fired from a single location, port or position.  Any time you move, you have a small window of opportunity when you may reload.  Speaking for myself, I moved from "C-class" to "B-class" using a single-stack 1911 in 1998 when Limited-10 Division was still a "Talking Point" in USPSA.  If you gotta move, you gotta reload.  BFD.

Production and L-10 Divisions were predicated on limited magazine capacity.  Even Limited has a 144-mm magazine length restriction, which means you can probably stuff 18-20 9mm rounds in there, so ... who cares?

Single-Stack has limited capacity, under 10 rounds.
.
Revolver .. huh.  Who cares; they're only shooting 6-shot loads anyway.  And Jerry Miculek is possibly the only man in the world who doesn't care if he can get a 20-round Revolver or not.


 So, how about the possibility of a 7-round magazine capacity restriction?

Okay, so now we're talking about being really shitty for no discernible reason.

In the first place, the USPSA rule about limiting the number of rounds which must be fired from a single location/position/etc. have been completely undermined.  A 10-round magazine can handle a 9-round maximum; a 7-round magazine can not.

Since most stages include IPSC targets (cardboard, requiring 2 rounds to 'neutralize'), you could only have three targets in most array .. rather than the four (presuming a 9-round max per location) currently presented.  So ... many, even most, of the Classifiers would be either revamped or discarded.

That pretty much hoses the entire Classifier System which USPSA currently uses to decide who is Top Dog in any given Division/Class.


 On the other hand, when I started competing in USPSA/IPSC, the standard assumed that a Revolver was the 'standard/minimal firearm', so all stages were designed to be "six-round friendly".  So .. target arrays included 3 IPSC targets instead of 4, and .. have you noticed that plate-racks still have six plates?  Baby, we haven't got THAT far away from our technological roots.

We're just going back from 10-round-friendly target arrays to 6-round friendly target arrays.

The difference is, if the Federales have their way, we're just going back a decade (or two) to minimum rounds per shooting position, from 9 to 6.  (Citation needed here).

In other words, the current 9-round maximum rule presupposes a 10-round magazine capacity.  A 6-round maximum rule presupposes a 7-round magazine capacity.

It sucks to be a Limited or an Open Division Competitor, in that case.

Look for Open Division to remain strong (but magazines will be a lot cheaper).  The difference between Limited and L-10 will disappear.  Assume that L-10 will not be very popular .. there's no advantage to being able to reload quickly.   In fact, L-10 (or Limited .. whichever survives) and Singlestack will be much more competitive.

Production?  The discrimination between Production and Singlestack will also blur.  Who knows which will predominate.  Note that 1911-style handguns are specifically forbidden in Production, and the Single-Stack Division will disallow the double-stack magazines which are typical in Production Division.

My guess is that Production and Single-Stack will merge in Limited Division ... which was once "STOCK DIVISION" .. and which may be the best choice for the entire definition of "no compensators, no electronic sights".   The only discernible difference between Production and Single-Stack/Limited is that Production now specifically excludes 1911 frames (Prod vs SS) and Single-Stack precludes double-stack magazines (which Limited does not).

TO beat this dead horse a little further:  Limited will accept both Single-Stack and Production firearms, but the placement of holsters and magazine carriers is less restrictive.  Would we really need to cause the differences between the three divisions so picky as to center on holster placement?  (Well, okay .. Limited allows more modifications than does Production .....)

SUMMARY:


REVOLVER DIVISION: no changes
OPEN DIVISION:  Okay, no Big-Sticks, but still a viable Division.  Think of it as "Limited:, But Still Cooler!  And better for weak-eyed old guys.
LIMITED DIVISION: probably no change
LIMITED-10 DIVISION: probably not viable; no real difference between L10 and Limited
PRODUCTION DIVISION:  Probably the same as Limited except for equipment placement and maximum number of rounds allowed ... which wouldn't matter, legally.  That, and 1911's are specifically disallowed.
SINGLE-STACK DIVISION: Probably the same as Production, except that 1911s are specifically allowed and double-stack magazines still are NOT .. not that it matters.

IF I WERE USPSA PRESIDENT, HERE'S WHAT I WOULD CHANGE:

• I would combine Production and Single-Stack, except that maybe the modifications .. I don't know, it's still debatable
• Open and Limited differences remain based on electronic sights and compensators
• Revolvers .. who cares?  God knows THEY don't care!
• Limited and Limited-10 ... Limited-10 is definitively deleted.

________________________________________________________________________

This entire exposition is extemporaneous and not well organized.  It's an off-the-cuff attempt to respond to what turns out to be a very good question .. assuming that Obama's Gun-Killer Legislation ever becomes law.  (That is NOT beyond the realm of possibility in the current Politicized climate.)

You can be sure that these issues are being discussed around the water-cooler at Sedro Woolley, and I think it would be a service to all USPSA members if their thoughts could be shared with the rest of us .. RSN.

Jerry The Geek

Ho Hum - Bicycles: just another Excellence in Performance video

YouTube - Danny MacAskill - "Way Back Home"


I want you to watch this video, and think about just how much Excellence in Performance is demonstrated here.


Done watching?

Pretty damn impressive, wasn't it?


Now, go watch Athena Lea's performance at the latest major USPSA match ... 2011 Double-Tap Match. Go ahead; if you haven't seen it yet, go watch it. We'll wait.

No, even if you HAVE seen it before, go watch it again.

And while you're watching that video, keep in mind the differences between the two videos.

The Danny MacAskill - "Way Back Home video showed one person, in carefully chosen milieus, performing stunts which the common person could not even imagine himself doing. It's breath-taking. It's beautiful (not in the least because of the background music) ... in a controlled, stolid and consistent setting. When we watch this, we are in awe. We can only imagine the years of practice and dedication which allows and leads one person to accept and overwhelm such challenges of balance, speed, and power.

I'm impressed. Aren't you? If you aren't, you should be.


But consider the Athena Lee video. How are the challenges SHE faces any less intimidating? How many years has she practiced her skills .... and in the effort competed against a multitude of people no less skilled, no less dedicated, no less practiced over and over again.

Or, how are her challenges MORE intimidating? Other than, of course that she is competing, rather than making a feel-good video?

Danny has a 3 minute (more or less) video, which is obviously the result of hours of filming. It's like a Jackie Chan movie ... who knows how many takes each shot required, before he got it 'right'. Sure, he may have injured himself in the filming; we don't know. What we saw here were only the very best of an unknowable number of 'takes' before everything was just right.

Now look again at Athena Lee, or ANY USPSA/IPSC competitor. They only get one run, one chance to make the perfect run on any given stage ... On EVERY Stage! If it isn't perfect every time, they don't get another go at it .... their time and score is recorded and they stand on their single best/worst/good/mediocre performance. They have to be ALWAYS at the top of their game on every stage at every match .... or nobody cares about them.

I think that when people look at videos of USPSA/IPSC matches, they tend to say "ho hum, just another day at a match".

But when they look at a bicyclist riding a child's bicycle, they say "Hey, Wow! That's rather a dicey place he's put himself into, isn't it?"

Bicycle riding is ... I don't know if I can put it in to the proper framework. I'm impressed by the amazing stunts they can do, but I'm always aware that they probably didn't do it 'right' the first time, no matter what stunts they do.

USPSA/IPSC competition, however, is ALWAYS "do it right the first time, over and over, or you're merely an "Also Ran". (And we all know how many of us fit in THAT category, don't we? Show of hands? I thought so.)

I'm not saying that the antics of grown men on kiddy-cycles isn't impressive, because it is.

And yes, I've deliberately used the most demeaning buzz-words I could imagine in describing this phenomenon, because I am trying to demonstrate the wide gap between appreciation of one "non-spectator sport" and another.

When we see a grown man on a kiddy bike jumping walls and riding rails, it's justifiable impressive.

But when you see a truly champion-class Practical Pistol shooter (Athena Lee, for example) doing everything right, on every stage of a bit match, it's all to easy to say "Ho hum, just another IPSC match." You and I could probably do a fair approximation of Ms. Lee/s performance, couldn't we?

Well, maybe so, maybe no. But the point is ... you can't get your name in the winners' circle with a "maybe". You need to perform better than everyone else, first time and every time. Or you're still a "Ho Hum" performer.

I think that the kind of competition as typified in USPSA is the finest, most point-of-the-sword kind of competition available on this planet. This is roughly equivalent to Olympic quality athletes, but looked at in a different way.

(And do NOT get me started on the stupid failed efforts of IPSC to make Practical Shooting a "Demonstration Event" in the International Olympics a decade or so ago. I'm still frosted about that; this was the most inept political effort in recent history, in ANY venue, and a child could have told the IPSC President ["He Who must Not be Named"] that it was ill timed, poorly conceived, and ineptly executed.)

Yes, Practical Shooting could and perhaps should be elevated to an Olympic level, but that's a Political Decision, and IPSC/USPSA is not a politically-correct "sport" (Quotes used advisedly, well knowing that they are included in the sardonic sense.) In a single sentence: Kiddy-Bike rail-jumping will be elevated to an Olympic level before Practical Shooting is, because Kiddy-Bike rail-jumping is not politically incorrect ... even if it's EASIER TO DO.

Scroll back:
Biking looks good, because you get a lot of tries and it's not competitive AT ALL!

Shooting doesn't look good, politically, and it's easy to lose because you have only ONE TRY and the competition here is fierce, man. Truly fierce!

No, I'm not putting down biking, whatever the venue. Some of the stunts I see in the provided video ... oh hell, ALL of them! ... are just beyond the concept of the common man to perform.

But when I look at videos of USPSA/IPSC competition, I'm even more impressed. I KNOW I can't do that, because I've tried, for over 25 years, and I know that however well my performance may look on video, there's always some one else who can do the same thing better, smoother, faster. It's like the Bionic Man:

"We can do it. We have the technology. We can make him better .. stronger ... faster."

Yeah, but can you make him "better .. stronger ... faster" than everyone else? Or can you just make him look good on Video?

Here's the point:
You can look at a lot of video events, and you can look at a lot of competitive sports. But there are very few events which are both competitive sports, and which position each competitor against every other competitor .. in a field which may include 300 or 400 other competitors ... and elevate one single person above all of his or her opponents. This kind of competition selects the best, the fastest, the smartest and the most consistently excellent person in the field.


This kind of competition is found in very few venues; these venues include ..... well, The Olympics. And all subordinate versions of competition which qualify competitors for The Olympics.

No mistakes. No awkward moments. No minor slip-ups wit the penalty of only a second or two accumulative over multiple efforts ..... and the first try you get is the ONLY try you get.

Child bike-riding looks really good on video, but when you compare it to IPSC/USPSA competition (remember, these people are shooting real guns and a moment's slip-up could result in disaster!), it's just a kid sport.

Ho hum.

IPSC Stage Idea: Zombies!

Geek with a .45 has a great idea for a 'themed' match, or at least a stage or two.

Zombies!


I know that IPSC ... or at least USPSA, has gotten away from 'scenarios' in their stages.

My personal opinion is that this was a move toward the "Politically Correct" position which has never worked for IPSC and will never work for USPSA, either.

The original theory of "Scenarios" was that each stage of an IPSC match would represent a 'practical' exercise to justify the stage design.

This theory went astray, about the time stages described engaging a horde of marauding sharks through the screen door of a submarine. Well, perhaps that was a little unrealistic.

But the 800-pound Gorilla of Reality was that observers put the 'humanoid' looking targets together with the scenario, and decided that "IPSC IS TEACHING PEOPLE HOW TO KILL PEOPLE!"

Uh, well, IPSC ("The International Organization") rushed to the battlefront and declared that human-shaped targets don't REALLY depict humans, and anyone who thinks so is reading something into the competitive venue which just wasn't there.

That didn't work too well, because the IPSC "Metric" target is obviously designed to designate the shape and size of a human being, and the highest-scoring zones in a target depict the approximate "kill-zones" of the human body. (Don't forget, you heard it first here, folks.)

[IPSC and USPSA won't tell you this, but I will because I know and you know that IPSC was originally conceived as "Combat" Pistol and was intended to encourage the exercise of skills which will teach us how to defend ourselves against armed aggressors. That is, of course, not Politically Correct, but that is a theme for later ... and several earlier ... articles.]

But I digress.

The Link to GWA45 includes a friendly video of a match which pits well-armed mortal humans against a group of attacking Zombies ... The Undead. It allows scenarios where a single person (mortal) opposes aggressors (immortal Zombies) and hopefully prevails against The Bad Guys.

What can be badder than a Zombie? I don't know, but for people who don't believe in Zombies this should represent the epitome of Personal Protection scenarios without "teaching people to shoot people".

Are Zombies "people"? I don't think so Jose'.


As a bonus, there is also a link to a video which shows the Ultimate Zombie Killer": an electric chain-saw, mounted as a 'bayonet' on the lugs of an Evil Attack Rifle.

The video doesn't make a good case for the modification, nor does it demonstrate good Gun-Handling Techniques.

Still, it looks like fun.

2008 Area 1 Multi Gun Championship

2008 Area 1 Multi Gun Championship

... I missed it.

I was sick that weekend, didn't go to watch (and report on) the match even though it was only 20 minutes away from my sick bed.

Didn't talk to anybody. Didn't get any photographs or videos. .

I couldn't even find a link to the match results, year.
Watch this space. As soon as I learn anything, I'll pass it along.

(With luck, someone who was there will be able to provide a link to the match results in the COMMENTS section, and I can update this article with the link URL.)

Sorry, folks. Not saying I'll do better next time, but at least I recognize my own failings.

2008 R&R Racing Multigun Match at ARPC

Saturday and Sunday (July 12-13, 2oo8) Bobby Wright will be hosting the "R&R Racing" multigun match at Albany Rifle & Pistol Club.

The match is limited to 85 competitors, and will involve using 'any' combination of 3 guns (pistol, rifle, shotgun) on each of the ten stages.

Here's the line-up of stages:

Stage 1: "Knock Knock" (Rifle & Shotgun)
Stage 2: "Watch Your Breathing" (Shotgun & Rifle)
Stage 3: "Long Range" (Pistol & Rifle)
Stage 4: "Corridor" (Pistol & Shotgun)
Stage 5: "Ports" (Pistol & Shotgun)
Stage 6: "The Fair" (Shotgun & Pistol)
Stage 7: "Big Shot" (Rifle & Pistol)
Stage 8: "Cubicles" (Pistol & Rifle)
Stage 9: "Survivor II" (Pistol & Shotgun)
Stage 10: "Junction City" (Shotgun & Rifle)

The following documents are currently available at the R&R Racing Website:
Sign Up sheet. (Word Document)

Stages. (Excel spreadsheet)

Rules. (Word Document)

Sponsors (unknown Word Document)

The Match Fee (after May 24) is $275, it may betoo late to get a room in the Match Hotel, but contact Bobby (see the website for contact information), but if you show up at the match at 8am on Saturday, 12 July, 2008, you may still may be able to make some accommodation.

As usual, I'm posting this notice later than I should, but I'm assuming that interested competitors have already signed up for the match.

I'm not really trying to tempt more competitors here, although if the match is not yet fully subscribed that would be nice. Instead, I'm identifying a pending match.

I'll be there, taking pictures and interviewing participants.

Although this is not a USPSA match, , because the strict USPSA rules are not being followed (see the above rules description) and Wright is therefore not paying Match Fees to USPSA), I will be submitting an article to the USPSA Front Sight Magazine, which will probably be published in the November/December issue..

Are there rules of competition which are not best represented by the USPSA Multi-Gun rules?

I don't know.

Come, watch the match with me as we compare the two sets of rules to determine which are most reasonable.

I'll have pictuers.

TCGC Tactical 3-Gun: The Rest Of The Story

In case you still don't know what the Tactical 3-gun match (Oregon style) looks like, here's a video tucking 3 stages into one scene.

Mostly I developed the video so I could showcase Gloria Ganor's "I Will Survive" song.

Still, I think it's an interesting video.

Thanks to Alex and The Hobo Brasser for showing us how it works ... mostly with Pistol-Caliber Carbines.

The Agony and The Ecstasy: Part 2

The Ecstasy
When you've been in pain some discomfort for a while, the absence is as if an incredible burden has been lifted from your shoulders.

I feel so much better tonite than I have for the past four or five days, I have definitely decided to take The Hobo Brasser up on his invitation to join him at the "Tactical Three Gun Match" this Sunday.

This is a part of the regular "Tactical Rifle" presented at Tri-County Gun Club in Sherwood, Oregon. I think. Or, it's a special match; I never really understood where it fit in with the program.

As it was explained to me, it sounds something like the Pistol-Caliber Carbine match I shot there in May of last year.

But not quite. As The Hobo Brasser explained to me, it is very '3-gun' in that I will be using a rifle (the Mech Tech), a shotgun (the Mossberg 590 I bought last April in a "Buy-A-Gun Day" excess of testosterone, and haven't had a use for since), and a Pistol (the 10mm STI Edge, the front sight of which I haven't seen clearly since 2003.)

If all goes as as expected, there may be six stages:

• Rifle only
• Pistol only
• Shotgun only
• Rifle and Pistol
• Rifle and Shotgun
• Shotgun and Pistol

There may even be another stage: Rifle/Shotgun/Pistol. Who knows. I don't; I'm just making it up as I go along, based upon the description of previous matches I listened to with half an ear when The Hobo Brasser is talking.

This should be an interesting match. I've never done '3-gun', although I've done a grueling "All-Shotgun, All Day Long" match (and paid for it in Pain). Um, well, I'm use to that. (Note that the image shown on the left is much uglier in full-size, so don't click on the picture to see the bruising.)

Another point of interest is that The Hobo Brasser has offered to provide the shotgun shells if I attend. That's nice, but it's not fair. I bought two boxes of #6 Remington 2-3/4" and three 5-round boxes of slugs for the match, and I have various buckshot on the ammo rack in the garage. Surely it won't take more than that. Will it?

I also have 100 rounds of .45acp, and another hundred rounds of 10mm. And spare batteries for the archaic Pro-Point1 on the Mech Tech, and a semi-racegun holster for the STI Edge.

That holster doesn't always release right, though. It's hard finding a holster that will retain a pistol with a full-dust-cover. I hope I don't give myself a wedgie when I attempt to draw the pistol from the holster.

As for the problem with the blurry pistol sights, I will be wearing my bifocular reading glasses I had made up last year. They're specifically ground to allow me to focus on an object 4" from the end of my extended hands, and they incorporate "Phoenix" lenses, which is the improved Trivex (much like Polycarbonate, but better) as I mentioned in my boring series on Shooting Glasses.

Yeah, I think I've got it covered. Except that I need another chamber flag ... I only have one. Hopefully, I can buy one at the range.

I'm getting kind of excited about this. I'll definitely be re-reading my December, 2006 article on the Mech Tech to remind myself how it works. I don't expect to impress anyone, but I'll have a good time and take lots of pictures, and probably some video. If any of it turns out well, maybe I'll post some of it here so you can see what it Three-Gun looks like when performed by amateurs.

Or, as we say in the business:

Geeks & Geezers!

Practical Rifle: Segway

The Tri-County Gun Club (TCGC) at Sherwood,Oregon, has a very active Practical Rifle program.

They've been shooting this sport (earlier known as 'Tactical Rifle' until USPSA finally got on the ball with their own Multi-gun and 3-gun organized competition) forever. Okay, maybe it was only the last 15 years, but the dedication of the local adherents of this sport is impressive.


They shoot in the mud, usually. They make competitors crawl through the mud, roll in the mud and sometimes swim in the mud to get from one position to the next.

Did I say "Roll in the mud?" Sometimes they roll through the mud.

Last weekend (Saturday .. and repeated Sunday, March 8 & 9, 2008) the match included a stage where you were required to 'roll through the mud', shooting at targets as you go -- while mounted on a Segway.

The driving force of the program now is Randy S., a local LEO, who sometimes shoots USPSA Pistol. (I remember Randy winning some stages and his division at the 1994 USPSA Oregon Open, a state match before there was more than one Section in Oregon.) It's not that Randy can't shoot USPSA Pistol, it's just that he finds the Rifle competition so much more interesting, challenging, and fun.

Randy often has to design the courses of fire for each match himself, and stage designers are always on the lookout for a gimmick or an element of difficulty that is at least new, preferably unique.

I think he has probably outdone himself in the 'unique' department with the introduction of a Segway as a mobile shooting platform.

You remember the Segway? They were introduced in 2001 after a long period of pre-production marketing; we heard a lot about the word "Segway", but nobody knew what it was. It could have been a financial planning software package, a mobile-telephone plan, a personal airplane or a new brand of bubble-gum. All we knew was that it was going to revolutionize us in our personal life. Turns out that it was a "personal transporter", which was "more than a scooter".

(Note: when browsing the Segway website, note that some of the links will crash your browser. At least, that's what happened to me ... several times ... when using Firefox as my browser. You might have better luck using Internet Explorer to browse the Segway website.)

One of the proposed uses was as a mobility aid for LEO on patrol, suitable for street/sidewalk, beach, parking lot and mall. As such, they were sold to several police agencies that had a patrol responsibility. (They were also marketed for inner-city courier services to replace the bicycle, commuters and shoppers, but that's another story.)

Apparently, an Oregon Police Agency (we're not all deep-woods rain forests here, we actually have cities in Oregon) bought one and it has probably been languishing in a store room for the past several years.

I'm guessing here that 'someone' finally decided that as long as they already owned the Segway, they should explore its utility vis a vis actual high-profile police situations. Specifically: what should be included in the training manual for officers on a Segway who find themselves in a Lethal Threat situation?

Since Randy is a Training Officer in a police department, it seems reasonable that he would be charged with experimenting with the Segway in a contact situation. And what better way than to employ the Segway in a Practical Rifle situation where Time and Accuracy are an intrinsic part of evaluating performance ... and the only 'new' element is the introduction of the Segway as a firing platform?

As I say, I am guessing here. And I don't know if other competitors used the Segway to navigate this Course of Fire. (Randy is the shooter in the following video.)

All I'm saying for certain is: this is what it looks like.

(Everybody is having fun here: even the cameraman is laughing. Note that the Segway 'drifts' while the shooter is engaging targets ... that information would be 'good to know' when training patrolmen to shoot from a Segway.)
_________________________________
UPDATE: 07-JUL-2008

BROKEN LINK?
Sorry, the video has been removed from the user. I'll see if I can get a copy of it and post it directly here.

Thanks to Nick for reporting the 'broken link'.

What do you know about the AR15?

I got a letter today asking for information way beyond my experience. Maybe you can answer some of these questions:

I'm Lee ****** and I live in Spokane. I've been active in USPSA pistol shooting since March and am having great fun building guns, reloading ammo, and shooting a large quantity of rounds. We do a little 3 Gun activity at a couple of shooting clubs in the area and I am thinking of buying a used AR-15 (Rock River). I caught your blog in a Google search and thought I'd ask for some advice, if you have the time.

Do you reload for the AR? Is it any more difficult or hassling than standard pistol reloading? Is swaging of military primer pockets as easy as I have read it is? Finally, should I look for a .223 or 5.56 chamber?

I'm running a Dillon 650.

Thanks for the help.

If you can answer some of these questions, either post here or send me an email. I'll forward it to Lee and I'm sure he'll be grateful for your help.

Even if you do choose to contact Lee directly, the next reader who has these questions might appreciate the information here, so ... comments would be appreciated.

Cammenga Magazine for AR15

Cammenga :: Tactical Gear for Today's Enthusiasts =

H/T Say Uncle (click to see the very impressive video), via Traction Control (who intends to stock this item ASAP)


The Cammenga easy-load magazine for AR rifles seems like a dream come true for USPSA Multi-gun competitors.

The price is right (just $39.95 for a 30-round version of the magazine, if I understand correctly) and the ease of loading could be advantageous in a Multigun match where the competitor is required to do a lot of rifle shooting.

I don't shoot Multigun (or "3-gun", which is an alternative version of the rifle/shotgun/pistol competition), but I've seen a few Major Matches and as is true at all major matches, just reloading magazines can be a drain on your limited stores of energy by the end of a busy match day.

In fact, if Cammenga offered an STI Pistol version of this magazine in the 170mm size, I would be buying a couple of them. Especially at that price!

Letters, we get letters ....

I received an email today from one of the competitors at the R&R Racing NW Challenge 'Multigun Match (July, 2007) who was featured in previous posts and on Jerry the Geek's Video Shooting Gallery:

Jerry,

I can't tell you how happy I am to have found your site! Thank you for all your work photographing the stages and publishing them. I didn't know you were videoing me as I shot stage 7. I'm glad I didn't or I would have had stage fright!

I've never watched myself shoot on video before. Very interesting. I don't appear to be moving as fast as I feel like I'm moving at the time! Maybe that's why my times are usually about double that of the winners! Ha! I don't expect to get much quicker as I get older, either. I need to be thankful that I can even move!

Thanks again! Hope to see you at another match.

Joe Durnbaugh

PS: You even spelled my name right! Thanks!

PPS: You wouldn't have a complete list of the ROs would you? I knew several, but one of them I'll be damned if I can remember his name! I have CRS disease (can't remember shit) real bad!

Tell you the truth, Joe, I'm a charter member of the CRS Survivors' Club and I couldn't tell you all of the RO's names either. Maybe we can get some of the other readers to help out here.

Here are the names I remember for sure, although I'm not willing to guarantee that I have the right stage numbers/names assigned to the ROs:

1. Scott Hawkins
   
2. ?
3. ?
4. ?
5. Steve "The Shipster" Shippey - president-elect of ARPC
6. Gary Taylor
7. Bill Salberg
8. Craig Salman
   
9. Bob Higbie
10. Brent Reddaway

This doesn't include the Assistant RO's, and truthfully there were very few stages where more than one volunteer Range Officer was available.

Joe, I really appreciate your determination to recognize the fine folks who volunteer their time and their energy and their Melanin to work these matches. Your implication that they are the really important people at any major match is bang-on.

I haven't said this enough, and I never will, but THANK YOU to the Match Staff for your contribution to The Game.

(And if any of my readers would be kind enough to identify the other Range Officers at this match, I will post the names here. Lord knows they don't do it for money, 'cause they don't get paid. They deserve at least the recognition and our public gratitude.)

PS: Joe, I would never have figured out how to spell your name if not for the help of the Stats Team, Heidi and Dan.

UPDATE: July 29, 2007 (6:30pm PDT)
Brian Berkley informs us that the RO on Stage 1 is Retired Army Special Forces Command Sergeant Major Scott Hawkins.
Ed Dailey identifies Craig Salman as the RO on Stage 8 and also provides a correction in that "... no stages in this match were 'thrown out'." That last was my misunderstanding, and I apologize for the error.
Thank you, Ed and Brian. All corrections have been applied to the article.

Again, match scores are available here.

R&R Racing - Match Results

To those of you among the 62 competitors in this most excellent match ... congratulations! Chauncey Gardener gives you the greatest possible accolade.

You were fun to watch!

The results are available on the "NW Challenge Home" page (although by match day, it had been changed to the "R&R Racing Multigun" match.)

Here's a quick summary for those of you who hate to click on links:

OVERALL AGGREGATE: Top Ten

1. Taran Butler (TO)
2. Robert Johnson (O)
3. Chuck Anderson (TO)
4. Chuck Mahoney (TO)
5. Beven Grams (O)
6. Trevor Ott (TO)
7. Larry Lebeau (O)
8. Gary Purcell (TO)
9. Scott Hawkins (TO)
10. Gordon Baladad (TO)

Top Open (O):
Robert Johnson

Top Tactical Iron Sights (TI):
Kirk Jameson

Top Tactical Optical (TO):
Taran Butler

Top Heavy Metal (HM):
Phil Brodahl

STAGES:

1. Lined Up and Ready 2 Roll (Rifle, Shotgun)
   
2. 4X4X4 and More (Rifle, Shotgun)
3. Mr. Beal's Best (Pistol, Shotgun)
4. Rock Around the Croc (Pistol, Shotgun)
5. The Corridor (Shotgun, Rifle)
6. 4's A Crowd (Shotgun, Pistol)
7. Breaching Doors (Shotgun, Rifle)
8. Crazy Zebras (Pistol, Rifle)
   
9. Stalled in Stalingrad (Pistol, Rifle)
10. Survivor II: The Maze (Rifle, Pistol)

Note that (a) the weapons are entered in the sequence in which they were used; (b) two guns ... no more, no less ... were used on every stage; (c) Stage 1 (the long-range rifle) had a 180-second time limit, perhaps as a response to the 10+ minute runs on the Area 1 Multigun long-range rifle stage; (d) Scoring was 'tactical', in that the time is the raw score and penalty seconds are added for errors; (e) I have some excellent videos and still photos taken during this match; (f) I have NO photos or stills of Stage 8 -- Crazy Zebras -- for the reason that I never found a squad on the stage when I walked past it; (g) these pictures and videos are being loaded to Jerry the Geek's Video Shooting Gallery and eventually ALMOST all of them will appear.

FeedBack:
If you shot the match, I strongly encourage you to join competitor Joe Durnbaugh in contribution to the Feed-Back Page for this match. (This is a feature you won't see at most IPSC/USPSA matches.)

Impressions:

The most visually interesting stage (from the viewpoint of the spectator) was Stage 7: "Breaching Doors". Hands down, no contest, this was a blast to watch. I've already posted videos of Taran Butler, Chuck Anderson and Beven Grams in the article "Super-Size It", and the Klein boys (Grandfather Jeff, son Jason and grandson Jacob) in "The Klein Family". I'm always pleased to see evidence that this is indeed a Family Sport, but when you get three generations in one squad it's something between A Real Treat To Watch and an affirmation of my personal bias.

There's more than one reason why I didn't get film of Stage 8: "Crazy Zebras". I hated that stage when I first shot it as a pistol-only stage in the 2005 Crazy Croc Match, and I admit I didn't make any special effort to find a squad on the stage during the R&R Racing match. It's an excellent, very challenging stage but one can only take so many targets with the C/D zones almost entirely masked out. In this stage, there were 30 of them.

ARRGGGGHHHHHH!

Stage 1 and Stage 2 were rifle/shotgun stages, which combined the agonizing combination of slow long-range rifle shooting and slow shotgun reloading.


I know, I know, the challenge to high-round-count shotgun stages is not quite so much the actual shooting as it is the ability to reload quickly and the 'don't-miss-because-it-will-cost-you-reload-time' factor. There were a LOT of stages with shotguns -- seven out of ten. I spent a lot of time watching people reload their shotgun, and I often caught myself sub-vocalizing "come on, come on, hurry up, hurry up!" during the reload part. Some of the reload were amazingly well timed and executed, and I was impressed. But I also saw a lot of people passing up targets because the miss penalty just wasn't worth the time it took to reload ... or at least they seemed to think so.

For comparison, there were 5 stages requiring use of a pistol, and 8 stages requiring use of a rifle.

SCORING:
I talked to Bob Higbie, RO of Stage 9. He explained to me that the scores were based on target 'neutralization', and time. Paper targets which had at least one hit in the A-zone were considered neutralized, but if they had two hits anywhere in a scoring zone they were considered neutralized. Misses, targets not neutralized and penalties added time to your score. The lowest time won the stage.


Match Staff:

No description of a match would be complete without mention of the people who actually worked the match. I know I won't be able to mention all of the workers, and for those many who I seem to slight, I apologize. I just want to mention a few people I actually watched and spoke to.

Brent Reddeway worked the Area 1 three-gun two weeks ago, last week he took his wife to visit family in The Dakotas, and the next Monday morning he showed up at the range to help set up the stages ... at least one day, he was the only one available to assist MD Bobby Wright. Then he worked Stage 10 with only one helper. He has a great tan, and he has lost at least 20 pounds since the last time I saw him.

Steve Shippey, an Albany Rifle and Pistol Club -- ARPC -- member (and President-Elect of the club) worked Stage 5 with NO assistance. He was always cheerful and helpful, but assume this of ALL the RO staff, and especially assume this of "The Shipster" because this is his usual mien. Note also that his website "2alphas" is the host of the match and the site where the stage procedures and match results are located.

Gary Taylor worked Stage 6 all by himself. When Jason Klein had completed Stage 7 with a huge number of feeding problems with both shotgun and rifle, he asked me where he could function test his guns. I dropped back downhill to Gary's stage and asked him if Jason could use his stage (there was nobody on it at the time) for that purpose. Gary replied "Sure, as long as he doesn't shoot any of the targets and as long as you spell my name right".

"T - O - O - L - M - A - N". Hope I got it right, Gary, and thanks for making us all look good to our visitors.

Bill Salberg worked the most complicated and difficult short-range stage (Stage 7) with one helper, whose name I unfortunately didn't catch. Sorry. He dealt with difficult, hot, tired competitors in his usual cheery manner and fixed an over-taxed 'breach-door' with the loan of a Leatherman between shooters with no delay in the stage. He handled busted targets, competitor controversy (see Bevin Grams in "Super Size It") and probably gave at least one too many re-shoots when he thought it was justified. Between squads, he offered to loan me his guns and ammunition and gear to shoot the stage "just for fun", and I was too chicken to take him up on his generous offer. I was afraid I would like it too much, and right now I just can't afford to start 3-gun competition with an STI pistol, a Mossberg 590 and a WWII Garand. I know I would be out buying guns, dies, bullets and cases within the week. But thanks anyway, Bill.

Bill lost his father last week to an extended bout with Cancer, but he never let it show.

Mike "Mac" McCarter, past president of ARPC, current Executive Director, Director of the IPSC discipline, and candidate for USPSA President (and if there is a God in heaven, he will win the race for the good of USPSA) spent a lot of days in the sun for this match. A tireless worker, a strong leader, and the best John Deere Tractor driver in the county, this former nurseryman not only keeps the club facilities in top shape 3 days a week but even brought in a small grove of potted trees to decorate the North Range road. He hauled water to the shooting bays, and performed whatever dirty little job was needed to make the match run smoothly.

Heidi Salman and Ed Dailey worked the stats shack. Heidi (I didn't recognize her without a gun in her holster) was Stats Mistress, and Ed willingly and cheerfully performed any other chores needed ... if you ate lunch at the match, credit Ed. He sorted the lunch orders, made sure they got where they needed to be when you were hungry.

When I showed up at the match at 9am my first stop was the Stats Shack. My slightest request for assistance was cheerfully and willingly obliged. Heidi printed out a competitor list and stage & squad schedules while Ed printed out the stage descriptions (all of which I have used to write this article). They did ALL of this while I was eating my breakfast at a table in the Stats Shack and writing the stage numbers, bays and names in my notebook. Without their help I couldn't have kept track of who shot which stage when, their names (including correct spelling) and which photo/video related to which competitor.

Robert Johnson is "The Other R" in "R&R Racing". He spent most of his time during the match on his four-wheel ATV running stage score-sheets between the bays and the Stats Shack for Heidi and Ed, and the rest of the time responding to the RO radio net and making sure that the match ran smoothly. During the staff match (Thursday and Friday), he also won Open Division and Second Overall.


Match Director Bobby Wright spend the last couple of months planning, coordinating, designing stages, building stages, finding sponsors for a $30,000 prize table (doubtless with the assistance of CCS Section Competition Director Chuck Anderson) and improvising new props. If you liked the "Breaching" door, you can thank Bobby. As far as I know, this was entirely his original design. I looked for it on the R&R Website and couldn't find it. Bobby, you have got to get this on the market. I predict that it will be a popular prop for future Multi-Gun and 3-gun matches.

Bobby ("Robert?") spent his match driving the Dragon-Mo-Bile back and forth at great speed, usually with either daughter Kaitlyn or son Jesse hanging on and trying not to laugh with glee. his wife, Lili, was all over the range helping get score-sheets to Heidi and Ed and handling such other administrative chores as they came up.

He even found time to shoot the RO Match. Well, maybe a LITTLE time. According to the Aggregat Scores, this Master-Class competitor came in next to last; he didn't have time to shoot 6 of the 10 stages.

Dead last shooter? Heidi ... she only found time to shoot ONE of the 10 stages.

That's what I call dedication.

For what it's worth: if only because of the stage designs I consider this match to be not only better than the Area 1 Multigun match last week, but even better than the USPSA Multigun Match last year at ARPC.

R&R Racing Stage 7: Super-Size it!

Those of you who have watched the videos in the previous post may be under the impression that it illustrates the ability of lesser competitors to fail the challenges of new props and targets.

Not at all! Even the very best competitors can screw up a stage, especially when the targets (including those which offer no point-value for hits, such as the door locks on this stage) are entirely new to us.

In the included video, Taran Butler manages a new-definitive example of how to shoot this stage ... if cautiously (which may be the best approach).

Chuck Anderson follows his example, taking his time on the new stuff (and, like Butler, may eschew the extra point-value of the Clay Pidgeon launched by the 'flipper' US Popper) to the advantage of loading one less round in his shotgun.

The whole point of shotgun stages seems to be minimizing reload time. I find this a depressing commentary on shotgun shooting in Multigun, but I guess it's a sad fact of life and the clever competitor recognizes his limitations.

Beven Grams, on the other hand, takes the bit firmly between his teeth and attempts a 'non-standard' approach to breaching the door. While all other competitors backed off so as to give the shot pattern distance to expand, he bravely advances and puts his shotgun muzzle within inches of the breaching bar -- and misses. Three times.

He learns from this sad experience, and used sufficient distance from the second door to breach it with fewer rounds.


Moving from Shotgun to Rifle, Grams moves aggressively to the middle-distance Rifle-target array and shoots the stuffing out of it ... breaking the sticks supporting the cardboard target and blasting all of the tapes off it. (Although, when watching the video, Grams doesn't seem to engage the targets at a much closer distance than did Butler and Anderson.)

When Range Officer Bill Sahlberg is called upon to score the target, he announces:


Is it neutralized? Hell yes!



However, after the stage scoring is completed and it becomes obvious that the IPSC targets must be replaced, he does take Mr. Grams to task to task and shakes a finger at him. (The ever-indomitable Grams doesn't seem very contrite, which seems reasonable to me. And Sahlberg is clearly admonishing Grams in an entirely joking manner.)

Still, Sahlberg is witnessed to counsel a later competitor thus:

"What Beven did? Don't do it!"

The thing to do is to not restrict close-access to targets by fault lines and careful positioning, of course. Sahlberg knows that, Grams knows, that, and we assume that the stage designer knows it. If we're going to allow shooters to move close enough to a target to blast the tapes off and break the supporting sticks, we must be prepared to live with the consequences when it happens.

Watch all three runs at "Breaching Doors" here, and decide for yourself.

R&R Racing Stage 7: The Klein Family

Stage 7 of the 2007 R&R Racing Multigun Match is called "Breaching Doors".


For this stage, Bobby Wright has created a new stage prop. It's a door frame which must be opened by blasting the lock with a shotgun charge. The competitor must completely sever the locking mechanism (a 1" diameter wooden 'lock') before he is able to continue to the first shooting position.

This stage actually features two doors, so both 'locks' must be 'blasted' open. Sometimes, this works fine. Sometimes, this doesn't work as well as might reasonably be expected.

I watched the match this weekend, and took a lot of pictures and filmed a lot of videos. My attention was focused most often on this entirely new stage design, because it was eminently viewable (the few vision barriers were composed of 'snow fencing', so spectators could see what the competitors were doing at almost every position of the stage).


Also, this new stage prop was cleverly designed to present an unique challenge to the competitor, while making it easy for the stage crew to set up for the next competitor. In fact, it took less time to set up the two 'doors' than it would ordinarily take a stage crew to reset most target activators.

There were ZERO delays on the stage because of the need to reset this prop (twice featured on Stage 7) because of the simple and robust design of the door mechanism. The only delay ... and it lasted no more than a minute ... was when one competitor muscled his way through the door and slightly damaged the opening mechanism. Repairs by Chief Range Officer Bill Sahlberg were simple, intuitive and easy.



While filming this stage, I noticed that three of the competitors were surnamed "Klein". Grandfather Jeff, son Jason and grandson Jacob demonstrated three different approaches to the stage. Unfortunately, Jason experienced many firearm malfunctions ... both with the initiating Shotgun and the follow-up Rifle ... which dramatically extended his stage time.

In the video, you can hear Jacob exclaiming excitedly as his father determinately fights the malfunctions.

And you can see the way the door works.

Multi-Gun in Oregon

UPDATE July 10: Weather for the weekend - mid 80's, partly cloudy. Dress in light-weight, light colored, loose clothes. Drink lots of water and keep that sunblock handy!

R&R Racing NW Multigun Challenge July 14 - 15 at Albany Rifle & Gun Club. (Directions to range)

See the details at:

Cogito Ergo Geek: Albany Oregon Multi-Gun Matches


(Note: this will stay at the top of the Blog until the matches complete.)

A1MG Stage 5 - "Burn Down The House"

This "rifle only" stage might very well be more properly referenced as "The Malf Stage", as I saw as many firearms malfunctions on this single stage as I saw on any three of the other stages in this match.

Why, I wonder, should this be true?

In my limited experience, and only as a spectator at this match, I can only conclude that the competitors were "pushing the envelope" in terms of firearms reliability. This 30-round Rifle stage presents challenges not really represented by any other stage in the match. (Indeed, it may be one of the paramount strengths of this match that the stages provide such a variety of shooting problems.)

The round-count is most important, in that it appears to offer a premium for a competitor who can engage all of the targets without reloading. This may or may not be true, but the suggestion is there. The lure to stuff as many rounds as possible into your fattest magazine (or pair of magazines) is there. And the irresistable temptation to challenge the capacity of your firearm ... is there.

Add to this temptation the fact that all of the targets are close, easy, and an open invitation to turn this otherwise indistinguised stage design into -- A Hoser Stage!

The result was far too often a dismal disappointment to competitors who had, they felt, reasonable expectations of Smoking The Stage.

This did not often happen, except in the case of those competitors who went into it with the intention of surviving the Siren's Song.

Those who did well on this stage seemed to be those who poured a libation to the gods of Functional Reliability, planned to reload at least once during the stage, and played it fast and not-very-loose.

In evidence of that theory, I offer the Video of The Malf Stage.

A1MG - Stage 9: "Get 'Er Done" (Gordon Baladad)

The point of "Multigun" competition (MG), rather than "3-gun" competition, is that the competitors may be required to demonstrate their profeciency with two or three firearms in a single stage.

In the USPSA 2007 Area 1 Multigun Match, all three firearms types (Pistol, Shotgun, Rifle) were used in only two stages:

Stage 4: Draining the Swamp

Stage 9: Get 'Er Done

It's difficult to choose 'the most excellent stage' between the two.

Essentially, Stage 4 pre-positioned the three guns 20 yards away from each other, and featured relatively close targets for each gun. The competitor had no choice in determining the order in which he would use each firearm to engage the appropriate target arrays, but there was a lot of movement involved. Essentially, that 'lot of movement' was running as fast as you could from position "A", where you had just used your pistol, to position "B", where you used your shotgun, and thence to position "C", where you used your rifle to finish the stage.

The distance between competitor and target was about 10 yards for pistol (large, cardboard Metric targets), 15 yards for shotgun (Steel plates), and 15 to 25 yards for rifle (more large, cardboard Metric targets).



In a dramatic comparison, Stage 9 put the competitor in a 'structure' (designed to look like an 'airplane', if you had a good imagination' and put all three firearms in boxes within easy reach. The competitor never moved out of the 'airplane'. In fact, it was theoretically possible to shoot all three arrays without moving your feet.

You use your pistol to engage 4 IPSC 'Metric' targets at 20-25 yard range. Some of the targets were partially obscured with white 'penalty' targets.


You use your shotgun to engage 8 steel plates (Pepper Poppers, US Poppers, heavy 'tombstone' plates and a single 8" round plate) at about 15 yards.

And you use your rifle to engage 6 'flasher' steel plates at varying ranges. At about 75 yards there are four targets ... an 8" steel plate, two 12" steel plates, and a US Popper. At about 120 yards there are two 12" steel plates. (I'm guessing at the actual target dimensions, but that's what they looked like from the shooting position.)

The difference between the two stages is that Stage 4 featured relatively close, relatively easy targets with movement between each array and the choice of sequence of target array engagement was fixed; while Stage 9 featured much more distant targets, no movement (other than whether to shoot sitting down or standing up) and the competitor was allowed to choose the order in which he engaged each array.

In the actual event, the target selection and distance on Stage 4 did not seem particularly challenging, speaking as a casual observer. The stage clearly provided an advantage to the competitor who could most quickly move (run!) from one position to the next.

On Stage 9, however, the ability of the competitor to run fast was never tested. The only skills involved were the ability to change from one gun to the next, and the ability to actually hit the targets accurately in the shortest possible amount of time. The fact that this stage design required the competitor to engage all targets from a single 3' square structure tested most rigorously the ability to actually SHOOT.

More, it also required the competitor to choose the tactics which most closely suited his individual skills set. The competitors had to actually THINK about what they were going to do, when they were going to do it, and the way in which they 'abandoned' one gun and picked up another may have an influence on the amount of time needed to complete the stage.

For example, if the competitor chose to shoot the rifle first, it may be awkward to 'abandon' a rifle with a fixed bipon in the same box in which the shotgun rested. Would the shotgun be tangled in the rifle bipods? In that case, it may be better to shoot the Shotgun first, and pick up the Rifle later.

On the other hand, as long as you are already sitting down, it might be better to shoot the Rifle first. If no bipod is involved, it may be a smooth and efficient thing to change guns while standing up, going directly to the Shotgun and finishing off with the pistol.

On Stage 9, I saw competitors using all tactical variations in the order in which they used each firearms, and not all of them were as advantageous as the shooter had obviously hoped they would be. I saw one "heavy-metal" shooter using an iron-sighted .308 finish with the rifle targets, use nearly 4 minutes to NOT get all the rifle targets, to the point where he had sweated into his eyes and quit without hitting all the far targets. He threw up his hands, tossed his earmuffs and hat, and buried his face in a towel to get rid of the perspiration stinging his eyes.

Here is a video of one Tactical shooter, Gordon Baladad, who chose to shoot Rifle/Shotgun/Pistol. it worked well for him, and I was able to film from a position right behind the 'airplane'. The video will serve to show what it's like to shoot this stage.


Note that these videos are also available here in the original WMV version on Jerry the Geek's Video Shooting Gallery. This video is a 10mb download

A1MG - Range Master Clarification

After I posted my video on Stage 3: "Don't Rock The Boat" I received an email from that match's Range Master (and NASSAONLINE.COM partner) Tom Chambers. He provided some information which I didn't have before. I thought you might be interested, so when I asked him if I could post his email here, he graciously gave his permission:

A few points of 'clarification' on your blog.

The seat on the dinghy runs lengthwise-there was no board sitting on seats. Shooter sat on the seat, straddling it or with both feet on one side and the shotgun was on the seat in front of the shooter. BTW, I built that dinghy almost 20 years ago to use on my sailboat where it did yeoman's service all over the northwest, including 2 trips to the San Juans and a trip up the west side of Vancouver Island. It's been sitting and rotting on my back patio for the last 7 years and I thought it was time to give it at least one more chance at being useful.

Stage 8, "Field of Dreams" , the long range rifle stage that got tossed had 5 targets that you engaged 3 times for a total of 15 targets. The 3 at 300 yards were worth 10 points each(a miss would be -20 pts) and the 2 at 350 yards were worth 20 pts each and a miss there was -40 pts.

We had just 2 squads get through this stage in 4-1/2 hours. This was the only stage where I had assigned stage RO's. They tried very hard to move it along but their efforts were in vain. I gave one of them a break and ran the last 4-5 shooters. One of them took 750 seconds and hit 4 of the 15 targets, expending 170 rounds in the attempt. There was no way we could get the other 60 shooters through during the match so Mike and I made the decision to toss the stage out.

A1MG Stage 3 - Don't Rock The Boat

As mentioned earlier, Stage 3 was probably the funnest stage in the 2007 Area 1 Multigun Tournament. It balanced (and I use the word advisedly) fast shotgun with not-so-fast mid-range rifle shooting.


It may not have been quite so fun during the shooting of the stage. We watched as each competitor stepped into the boat for the first time, and every one looked just like a cat trying to coax himself into the water. That first cautious paw -- er, foot -- withdrawn when the flat-bottom boat began rocking on the hard plywood platform, was an almost universal response. Everyone used both hands to brace on the gunwales of the boat and kept most of the body weight there until both feet were inside the boat. Then the experimentation with where to put the feet, where to sit.
Then the shotgun, loaded and placed so it is sitting on a board placed longitudinally on the boat seats. Most found that they could straddle that board, put the butt of the shotgun on the board between their legs, and rest the barrel of the shotgun on the bow of the boat.

A few decided to put both feet on the right side of the board, since they were going to shoot the first eight steel plates on that side. (See the stage setup here at NASSONLINE in PDF format.)

SHOTGUN TARGETS:
Of course, I didn't watch every competitor who shot this stage, but those I did watch all opted to shoot the first 8 targets from the boat, reloading in the boat if necessary to complete the array. Then they exited the boat (under the emphasis of adrenaline, MUCH less cautiously than they had entered) and stood on the dock to reload. One Open shooter, Craig Outzen, opted to reload before and during his exit. Hard to tell if there was any advantage.

Outzen's performance is depicted in the video included below.

Still, the stage procedures allowed engagement of all targets from the dock, and I didn't witness that. In the actual event, it seemed to matter little whether you shot the first eight shotgun targets sitting down or standing up, the boat didn't actually rock much once you became familiar with the balance point. The boat with move with every shot, but it looked easy enough to compensate.

Perhaps that's why this stage was more fun for the spectators than for the competitors.

RIFLE TARGETS:
After placing the shotgun in the box, the competitors retrieved their rifles from the other box on the dock. There were eight cardboard "Metric" targets downrange, and white 'penalty' targets covered most of the shooting area of each target. Although the range to the targets was short of 25 yards, it left only a very small scoreable target area for each shot. I was impressed that (a) there were fewer miss/noshoot penalties recorded, (b) the winner of the Open division won even though he had a ten-point procedural penalty, and (c) the winner of the Tactical division completed the stage in only 0.52 seconds more time (with a higher raw hit factor) than the winner of the Open division.

Division winners for this 160-point stage:

LIMITED: Kyle Nice (58.15 seconds, 156 points)
OPEN: Robert Johnson (45.10 seconds, 150 points - 10 penalty points)
TACTICAL: Carl Carbon (45.62 seconds, 149 points)

The Video:
Featured competitors, in order of appearance -

• David Heyden
• Darrell Humphrey
• Chris Schiatano
• Craig Outzen
• Gordan Balladad
• Carl Schmidt

Area 1 2007 Multigun Match Results - McCarter Interview

The match results for The A2 MG match can be seen at the USPSA Website - click on "Match Schedule and Results" on the left-hand sidebar, and the resulting webpage has the "Area 1 Multigun Championship" as (currently) the fourth item. Click on that and you can see the match results except that the last names of the competitors are indicated only with an initial. This is done to protect the privacy of the competitors.

However, if you're a member of USPSA you can see the full-names in the match results by clicking on the "Member Page" icon at the top of the USPSA home page and entering your userid and password. Again, click on the "Match Schedule and Results" sidebar button and follow the above directions.

Here's what you get:

2007 Area 1 Multi-Gun Championship
Albany Rifle and Pistol Club
6/29/2007
Division Name USPSA Competitors
Limited Patrick Kelley -- 21
Open Robert Johnson -- 20
Tactical Carl Carbon -- 42
Total: 83

(I've deleted USPSA Member Numbers from this display) .

"Field Of Dreams" Stage Thrown Out:
Note that only nine (9) stages are listed. The long-range rifle stage ("Field of Dreams") was thrown out of the match due to the excessive stage times. This WAS the biggest choke-point of the match, with some competitors actually registering times of 700 seconds on this stage.

There were only five targets, but they were presented at 300 to 350 yards distance. There were three positions -- two standing, one prone -- and competitors were required to engage all five targets from each position.

As many as two squads were backed up on this stage, and according to Match Director Mike McCarter they had to drop the stage to allow all competitors to complete the match. The first day, each squad was expected to complete seven stages. Some squads were on the range until after 7pm the first day. Some squads still had 5 stages to shoot on the second day.

McCarter notes that "this is a young sport" and match administrators are still learning from experience. Chances are that long-range rifle stages will be much simpler in future Multigun matches. In the 2006 Multigun Nationals (held July 7, 2006 on this same range) similar problems were encountered with this kind of stage.

USPSA On Top Of The Problem:
In a telephone interview tonite, McCarter stated that Area 1 Director Bruce Gary had already begun the process of bringing these and other Multigun problems to the attention of the USPSA Board of Directors with the intention of establishing a change in the competitor rules allowing the match to set a time limit on stages.

Moving Targets
One of the successes noted by Mr. McCarter was that the eight moving targets experienced ZERO Range Equipment Malfunctions. This was due, according to McCarter, with the "hinged sticks" designed by USPSA RM Jay Worden.

These are 1" square wooden sticks which have been sawn apart in the middle, then rejoined with a simple metal hinge. An eye-screw is affixed to the stick near the hinge, and the cable to the activating device attached to this eye-screw. Further, the joint between the two halves have been sanded so that there is a slight bend in the assembly, so that the stick looks like a leg with the knee joint where the hinge is. It's intuitively obvious how to set the stick correctly ("Eye-screw toward the activator") in the target array, and it breaks reliably every time.

Cost of construction: under a dollar, and you can make one in your garage in a few minutes. No, the eye-screws don't pull out of the wood because the stick 'breaks' so easily.

"Snipe hunt" 28-round Shotgun Slug stage:
McCarter also discussed the problems with shooting a large number of slug rounds through a shotgun on a single stage. This stage included a number of IPSC targets to be engaged at relatively close ranges, but also some steel targets at ranges of about 50 feet. Shooting 12-guage Shotgun Slugs is a grueling exercise in pain management, as soon as the adrenaline wears off. He suggested that the wave of the future for Multigun shotguns may be moving to 20 guage. These are still classified as Major Power, and using a sabot round further aleviates the punishment, according to McCarter.

I'm not sure if Benelli makes a 20 guage auto shotgun comparable to the 12-guage guns which are currently so popular with Open Division competitors, but this sounds as if it might be worth looking into for Multigun matches next year.