Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Creeker, SASS #43022

Members
  • Posts

    3,487
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Creeker, SASS #43022 last won the day on January 29 2020

Creeker, SASS #43022 had the most liked content!

3 Followers

About Creeker, SASS #43022

  • Birthday 04/21/1966

Previous Fields

  • SASS #
    43022
  • SASS Affiliated Club
    Life Member Eldorado Cowboys

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  • Yahoo
    ecowboyscreeker@yahoo.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Las Vegas NV
  • Interests
    Doing the best I can do. Guns, Can Am Spyder, Cars and Life.

Recent Profile Visitors

Creeker, SASS #43022's Achievements

SASS Wire Vet

SASS Wire Vet (1/1)

4.2k

Reputation

  1. In my opinion 1.5 is about perfect. I agree at 1.44; you are likely having rounds feed into the lifter block and then "have" to be pushed back into the magazine tube. This adds effort to the lever stroke and can make it feel "hitchy".
  2. The engraver was out of Michigan. Al Wygant (spelling?) Built by my Dad and I; we machined the barrel to the octagon, added the triggerguard spur and polished - engraved 40 years ago. Elephant ivory grips - fitted to the frame at that time.
  3. Rules require review on a regular basis. The rules need to exist for a VALID reason. And within our game that reason should fall under either safety, consistency of competition or atmosphere. And be explained/ terms defined in that manner: Term: Holstered (in holster, etc) Prior to beep - Meaning a pistol properly and completely inserted to the maximum depth of the retaining holster. After beep - meaning any pistol with at least 1/3 of barrel length remaining within leather. Rule exists for: Safety - Competition Term: Footwear Meaning foot coverings or lack thereof. All footwear must appear representative of the actual era/ or from movies - television. No modern footwear i.e. athletic shoes, tactical wear etc. is allowed. Representative appearing footwear MAY (excepting specifically excluded categories) have modern materials/ traction enhancing soles. Barefeet are always allowed at shooters discretion. Rules exists for: Atmosphere - Competition Yes, this means all terms and rules would require examination, review and definition. And probably end up with a larger rulebook and addendums than we have now. But the rules would have accurate wording and would be in a single unit. And seemingly conflicting rules and guidance could be fixed. And rules that have outlived their need could be culled (adjustable sight restrictions, for example).
  4. Thats why terms need to reference the actual issue - not a component of the issue. A firearm is "dropped" the moment it leaves the shooters hand and control. We drop them on tables - drop them in our holsters - drop them and (sometimes) catch them before they hit the ground. So the penalty is not actually for the drop - the current penalty is for the firearm being out of control AND coming to a rest in a place other than intended. THEN we determine the severity of the penalty by how the firearm was positioned (both while out of control and in its final resting place) and the loaded/ unloaded condition of the firearm. Writing rules is easy - writing rules using the proper terms needed to explain the rules intent (and scope) is hard.
  5. Tennessee is correct in his assessment. A GAME is (primarily) played for the enjoyment of the participants. A SPORT is a game played for the (primary) reasons of challenge, recognition, ranking and reward. (Including self recognition) A game can include reward. A sport can include enjoyment. It is determined by attitude of the participants AND the presence of reward. This is why the definition is so nebulous as participants at the same event will have differing (primary) reasons for being there. Some are playing a game Some are participating in a sport Speed, skill, ability have zero bearing on the definition either. I have seen shooters running times in the low teens who were PLAYING a game and I have seen shooters shooting 40's who were approaching this as dead serious SPORT.
  6. Hmmm besides everything? Ok, maybe not everything, but... There needs to be a concentrated effort to properly rewrite and codify the rulebook. Including referencing within the rulebook any required clarifications that may be too lengthy for a handbook. These clarifications need to be provided as a companion booklet to EVERY member in printed form (or at minimum electronically) once yearly. The category matrix needs attention and steps taken to rein in the never ending shooter segregation category expansion. The communication channels that used to flow SASS - TG - clubs/ shooters need to be re-examined to better reflect the age we live in and access to immediate information. Issues and changes should be created thru open communication (and feedback) with the shooters instead of being announced unilaterally. Equipment rules should be adapted to a standard that is accepting of "if a reasonable person would have done this in the era - it is acceptable" barring, of course illegal or unsafe modifications (pistol grip 87's or Bridgeport devices come to mind) I have others... But that will do for now.
  7. One - I have played this game as long as most in this forum and whether it is accurate or not - I feel like I have paid my dues in sweat, blood and effort to be able to freely post my opinion. Two - I don't mind playing by the rules; but the goalposts need to be properly defined and remain in place. We have been led to believe we have input in the rules and operations of the game - the current ROC method of combining creation AND interpretive duties is a mistake in my view. If our input is no longer valid or valued - then that is the new reality that we have to choose to (or choose not to) participate within. Three - Shrinking, imploding or aging is immaterial to doing what is in the best interests of the game and the participants. I have given over too many years of my life running clubs, writing stages, setting steel to throw my hands in the air and give up on efforts to better CAS and SASS. Four - I don't believe I was sniveling. But, I would rather be one to complain and press for improvement (no matter how futile that effort may be) than be one who says; the patient will be dead soon - so there is no good reason to keep feeding them.
  8. I have long thought the TG system needed overhaul - and I think the "flaws" within the TG system have led to the ROC being in the position of authority that it is now.
  9. I am a relatively intelligent man - and sometimes even reasonable. Can you elaborate on what I am missing? I provided my reasoning above - but it mostly comes down to the following points: Lack of documentation of rulings conveyed to the end users via or referenced within printed materials. unaccountable to the end users (and I understand - we don't own SASS, so we don't deserve accountability) but... non input soliciting from the end users (and I understand - we don't own SASS, so no requirement to solicit input) but... I often view their rulings as (not always) as over reaching and creating new rules by fiat - not attempting clarification of existing rules. And lastly - I view their rulings as methods to allow/ disallow personal agendas (fixing items they think were established incorrectly) rather than just to clarify rules. My opinion and no more valid than any other.
  10. The ROC is a group that were perhaps created with good intentions - but whose operations and input need to be re-organized, redirected or possibly dissolved. There is no sense in a rules sanctioning body whose input is never codified into the rules. Saying to shooters that, "Yes; we have a rule book - but to arrive at the CORRECT ruling - you must combine the rule book with an addon volume that is not printed nor referenced within the printed rules." And furthermore is created by a group that asks for zero feedback from the end users and has zero accountability to the end users of this information. This is ridiculous. If the rules require clarification - then at minimum the existence of a clarification MUST be referenced in the issued rulebook. And if the rule is so egregiously written that extensive clarification is required - the rule needs to be re-written (by the RULE creation TG system - not by the ROC) As my understanding is that rule implementations and changes were intended to flow from the TG system - The ROC should be extremely limited in their ability to change rules by their interpretations. Their input should be limited to clarification solely - not creation (i.e. they should not have carte blanche to look at a rule and ADD components/ restrictions to said rule based on their desires) their sole input should be clarification of what does this word/ phrase mean? AND when they make a ruling there should always be a WHY component. WHY was a ruling requested or required and WHY was the decision reached that was presented. We are not children and most of us bristle at the idea of being told what to do without any supporting reasons - but if a valid explanation exists most of us understand logic (and even if we disagree with a ruling - we will likely abide by it) Civil disobedience arises when we disagree with a ruling and no support for that ruling is offered beyond, "We say so". Additionally there should be a mechanism that requires upon an issued ROC clarification/ ruling; a TG vote to EITHER agree with/ retain the ruling or begin a reworking of the rule or elimination of the rule in question. And if the ruling/ clarification has no bearing on safety or competition - it should be outside the purview of the ROC. Case in point - the current thread regarding the "Terminator" style 1887 shotgun being illegal for our game. The firearm is a completely legal firearm for our game per the shooter handbook - it is not NFA or tax stamp reliant. It conveys no safety issues or competitive advantage - but has been declared illegal because... Hmm? No idea why it is illegal other than somebody doesn't like the way it looks.
  11. Ok. Let's start over... If we establish some baselines - maybe there are points we can agree on. First - SASS/ CAS is a shooting competition that romanticizes the legends, the ideas and the fantasy (movies and television) of the old west. It was never intended as historical reenactment nor should it have ever been assumed everything seen or done at a SASS event is representative of the old west or actual occurrences. Whether or not it should be; is grounds for another debate - but as it stands - the above is true. Second - Modern two handed supported shooting (ie Weaver/ Isosceles stance with off hand cocking) is not referenced in any text that I have ever read on the time period - I do not believe folks of the era were stupid and if a superior style existed - it would have been taken up quickly. The one handed shooting style was dominant for a number of reasons; including riding on horseback with reins and the sideways profile presented (evident in the military training films) displayed a smaller target to your opponent. Whether or not SOMEBODY ever did it in the old west prior to the two handed style in the 1950's is immaterial - the preponderance of pistol shooting in the old west time period was one handed. Third - The founders of SASS were IPSC shooters in the 80's and came into the game with a COMPETITION mindset - the technical gamesmanship they were decrying was the equipment race that was exploding (and continues today) where money (or lack thereof) could significantly affect your finish. They were not adverse to the shooters improving themselves thru technique or practice. The game BEGAN with two handed IPSC style shooting being the norm. Whether or not this should have been "corrected" as the game grew is grounds for another debate - but it is the origin. Fourth - the game currently has categories/ category protections and has since well before 2000 or so when you joined. These ensure that shooters have the ability to compete within their chosen shooting style with their chosen propellant against their age based peers. Duelists are NOT competing against Gunfighters or Modern supported style shooters and since the elimination of rank points - the differing shooting styles are in no way affected by the performance of ANYONE not shooting in their category. Yes, the fastest OVERALL shooter often (but not always) comes from the ranks of two handed shooters - this would not change with the elimination of recognition. But, human nature always wants to know and celebrate the pinnacle of accomplishment; there will always be an interest in whose car was fastest to the end of the quarter mile. (and it doesn't matter that there are six other guys who competed just as hard and individually won their class {and should be just as celebrated as any other} - we will still want to know the FASTEST time of the event.) Now the premise that recognition of the overall winner equates to ELEVATION above category winners? (whom ARE often relegated to also ran status due to the comparative speeds of styles). That is a legitimate fodder for debate. Fifth - unlike the static existence of a set time period - our game is ever evolving to encompass the changes in participation. This includes equipment, attire, stage design, target sizes, distances and attitudes - this is not a bad thing other than for the folks that only have a single thing that anchors them within the game and the loss (real or perceived) of that attachment is devastating to them. Sadly, there are those whose sole contribution is "It was better before and I want it back" (even when what they long for may have never really existed). And there is NOTHING wrong with wanting something to be the way we imagine it should be - but the current reality does not support that wish. Everyone has an idea of what is perfect for them; but very little will be perfect - so they must determine what is acceptable - and if/ when that falls below their desired threshold - they need to either WORK at the local level to enact change or walk away. Standing on the sidelines and throwing rocks doesn't accomplish anything other than to harden divisions and make it less likely that anyone will want to sit down and have a reasoned debate. Lastly - this is directed at Bisley Joe. You say you have been unable to participate in our game for some time due to life - I fully understand that. I almost died from Covid complications in 2021 and then shortly after that suffered a fall and broke both arms and wrists. So to demonstrate that people can behave reasonably - I will make this offer to you Your signature says White Mountain AZ. Over the dates of June 10th, 11th and 12th - there is a two day shoot occurring in your area (Saint Johns). The White Mountain Old West Shootists & Posse of the Purple Sage. My family and I will be attending this shoot - if you would like to come play; I am willing to cover your entry fee. Perhaps a return to the range might remind you that there is still more fun to be had in this game by playing than staying at home mourning the demise of what you believe it used to be. Please let me know.
  12. I know, I know - I was supposed to be done... But is all this heartburn because of simple recognition at awards that "Hooptie" was our fastest shooter of the day? It cannot be about separately scored categories because that already exists. It cannot be about two-handed shooting creeping in and ruining the game as the game was begun with two handed shooting. It cannot be about two-handed shooters adopting the technique of slip hammering as has been pointed out - slip hammering using tied back triggers is 100% Old West historically accurate. (and "modern" slip hammering is only a replacement of the tiedown with a finger to hold the trigger rearward). It cannot be about concealing the fastest shooters result - because it is not a challenge to look for the lowest score on the sheet. It cannot be about how the two-handed slip hammering shooter ruins the game for the historically accurate shooter - because even without an overall recognition - they will still be at the event. (and posters have claimed they don't wish to eliminate the two-handed practice {not that I believe that}) And just for fun - lets say Bisley Joe gets everything he wants. Elimination of slip hammering. Elimination of supported shooting. No overall shooter recognition. Then what? When Gunfighter becomes the dominant shooting style - we harp on the ruination of the game because their leather is not historically accurate? They are not using Black Powder? They're using the wrong caliber? How far down the rabbit hole do we need to go before we acknowledge we are a shooting event with a myriad of different players that are all looking for something different out of their experience. If your event is ruined by how another plays our game - then I would suggest the issue is with you. Please feel free to stay home; read and study the SASS online marketing materials - watch the westerns channel, YouTube videos and take your yellow highlighter to your Time Life cowboys series of books. Comfort yourself with the moral superiority of knowing you are right and the rest of us troglodytes are ill informed barbarians unsuited to claim we are "cowboy" shooters. But while you do that - the rest of us will actually be out shooting matches - cheering for our friends, our category winners and yes, our overall top shooters.
  13. My last post on this thread. Our GAME/ SPORT is not historical reenactment - it is a timed shooting competition utilizing old west era firearms. The old west attire or adoption of alias is window dressing and mood enhancement for the timed shooting competition. And no matter how many terms and phrases are cherry picked from website or handbook - there are no points or bonuses for historical accuracy or style points - we are FIRST and foremost a timed shooting competition. The approved handgun shooting styles for use in this timed shooting competition are: Duelist - single loaded handgun out of holster at any time - supported and manipulated by a SINGLE hand in contact with said handgun. Supported - single loaded handgun out of holster at any time - supported and manipulated by TWO hands in contact with said handgun. Gunfighter - two loaded handguns out of holster at any time - each individually supported and manipulated by a SINGLE hand in contact with a single handgun. As it is a timed shooting competition - and since anyone with a modicum of sense could realize that there are discrepancies between the pistol handling allowances - categories (age based, propellant, pistol style, etc.) were established that ensured that shooters would only be required to compete against their peers in gear, shooting style, propellant and age. I agree the two handed supported shooting style (likely) did not exist in the old west era - but so what? It does exist within the context of our timed shooting competition AND since the "style" of shooting is a modern invention than it is no surprise the hammer manipulation would be a modern invention as well. But it matters not; because of the category protections - NO ONE shooting in a "historically accurate" shooting style is competing with that two handed shooter. So it is immaterial who shoots what and in what manner as you are only competing against your peers. There is no such thing as overall category - solely an announcement of who the fastest shooter to complete the timed shooting competition was. Lastly - if a shooter might actually shoot versus whining and worrying about what others are doing; they would likely find their enjoyment does not hinge on the actions of others.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.