Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Need to p/u some boots on a budget. Are these ok. Miss my ole Red Wings, but don't have the funds to spare for them right now. Thanks for y'all's input. GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack N. Water Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Looks good to me, are they comfy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 They would pass at any match I've ever been too. Good luck, GJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 Thanks guys... Haven't tried em on yet just shopping around. Price was good - $89 GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles B. Gatewood SASS #48517 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Should be fine Gunner! They are similar to the Ariat Roper sole. CBG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purly SASS # 57438 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 If these are Ga boots I wear them for work and play. There is no break in period. Very easy on the feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 Thank you for the quick replies. I just picked up a pair... they feel comfortable enough and they are the basic ranch and work Justin boot... For and they were on sale at the Tractor Supply..$79 GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Need to p/u some boots on a budget. Are these ok. Miss my ole Red Wings, but don't have the funds to spare for them right now. Thanks for y'all's input. GG YES...LEGAL for ALL CATEGORIES...including Classic & BW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 YES...LEGAL for ALL CATEGORIES...including Classic & BW. Thank you sir GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Partner Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 YES...LEGAL for ALL CATEGORIES...including Classic & BW. Shooters Handbook page 16 "no lug soles". What constitutes a lug sole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Shooters Handbook page 16 "no lug soles". What constitutes a lug sole. One like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original Lumpy Gritz Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 SOOoooo, GG had to 'buy' his own soul-------- LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 SOOoooo, GG had to 'buy' his own soul-------- LG That's good GG ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anvil Al #59168 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Shooters Handbook page 16 "no lug soles". What constitutes a lug sole. Never mind. If Palewolfs picture don't explain it. Then we are in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Floyd Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Is the Ariat Roper legal in Classic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warden Callaway Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 I wear work boots with a similar grid - not for SASS but for work work - and the big problem is getting mud packed in the cracks, then come in and it dries and falls out on the kitchen floor. Guess who's not happy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Floyd Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 The floor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Is the Ariat Roper legal in Classic? If you mean the style that is similar to a Wellington boot...then, yes...it would be...as long as it has a NON-LUG sole. http://www.ariat.com/western-men-footwear-ropers_lacers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michigan Slim Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Just shatter yer legs like me an ya can wear tennies! I don't recommend it though............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone Dog, SASS #20401 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Love me some Justins; Gunner are those made in USA? All Justins used to be but who knows these days. That a good price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackey Cole Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 PWB , as I understand it the soles are legal in all categories but the boots themselves are questionable for bw, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Yes...the soles are legal (NOT a "LUG" sole); but the particular model/style boot in the OP photo appears to be pretty plain...can't see anything about it that would qualify it for BW otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 Love me some Justins; Gunner are those made in USA? All Justins used to be but who knows these days. That a good price No they are not but they feel comfortable enough to use until I can afford my favorite boot.... Red Wing Pecos. As far as style they do have the typical stitching of most boots but it blends in. I have no interest in B Western myself, but sure admire those that do. GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumblin Tom Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 But I thought we were not allow to wear rubber sole boots either. And those are rubber not leather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 But I thought we were not allow to wear rubber sole boots either. And those are rubber not leather. Where in the rules does it state THAT?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 never mind...you'd have to actually READ the rulebooks to find the answer to that question... wouldn't want to RUDELY suggest that anyone do THAT! FWIW: CLARIFICATION: Boot soles for CC/BW (edit language to read ―NO LUG SOLES) The way it reads now is too restrictive & has already been ruled as non-applicable. Boots are required and must be of traditional design with leather or smooth rubber non-grip enhancing (i.e NO “lugs”) soles). Mocassins are not allowed. SHB (Classic Cowboy/Cowgirl) p.15/RO2 p10 Boots are required and must be of traditional design with fancy stitching or multi-color fancy design with smooth, non-grip enhancing (i.e. NO “lugs”) soles. Lace up boots and moccasins are not allowed. SHB (“B” Western) p.16/RO2 p.11 ROC Clarifications "post Summit" 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Apologies (NOT!) to anyone else who might be offended by postings related to the history/background of the RULES (like WHEN/HOW certain issues were amended)...just to clarify that SOME folks are still apparently operating under OLD/OBSOLETE versions of the rulebooks... Current versions can be found HERE. maybe time for a refresher?? ...or ask your Territorial Governor to keep your club updated on the published Summit changes/clarifications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 just think, summer tread, vs winter tread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 Apologies (NOT!) to anyone else who might be offended by postings related to the history/background of the RULES (like WHEN/HOW certain issues were amended)...just to clarify that SOME folks are still apparently operating under OLD/OBSOLETE versions of the rulebooks... Current versions can be found HERE. maybe time for a refresher?? ...or ask your Territorial Governor to keep your club updated on the published Summit changes/clarifications. Thanks PWB. My question was answered sorry that this thread became something not intended. Hopefully though folks received some clarification and world can be a better place GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Henry Quick Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 But I thought we were not allow to wear rubber sole boots either. And those are rubber not leather. Where in the rules does it state THAT?? never mind...you'd have to actually READ the rulebooks to find the answer to that question... wouldn't want to RUDELY suggest that anyone do THAT! Apologies (NOT!) to anyone else who might be offended by postings related to the history/background of the RULES (like WHEN/HOW certain issues were amended)...just to clarify that SOME folks are still apparently operating under OLD/OBSOLETE versions of the rulebooks... Current versions can be found HERE. maybe time for a refresher?? ...or ask your Territorial Governor to keep your club updated on the published Summit changes/clarifications. Sir, everyone here, myself included, have great respect for all you've done for the hobby and for your unsurpassed knowledge of the rules. However, I must ask if correcting someone who made an incorrect assumption without verifying it in the rule books requires such a churlish response? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 ... Sir, everyone here, myself included, have great respect for all you've done for the hobby and for your unsurpassed knowledge of the rules. However, I must ask if correcting someone who made an incorrect assumption without verifying it in the rule books requires such a churlish response? A more "churlish" response would have been "RTM"...which, apparently, is NOT an acceptable suggestion. In this particular instance, I felt that restraint accompanied by explanation and more detailed options were in order. (based on previous experience here on the Wire) The comment regarding the background and timeline of the rule change was directed at another individual with whom I've had some PM conversations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Henry Quick Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 A more "churlish" response would have been "RTM"...which, apparently, is NOT an acceptable suggestion. In this particular instance, I felt that restraint accompanied by explanation and more detailed options were in order. (based on previous experience here on the Wire) The comment regarding the background and timeline of the rule change was directed at another individual with whom I've had some PM conversations. I know it must be tiresome to answer the same questions over and over and to repeatedly correct misconceptions, but that came across as a very public shaming. The again, maybe I've misunderstood what is meant by The Cowboy Way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 When someone posts an "opinion" based on a rule that hasn't been on the books for almost FOUR years, they've pretty much "shamed" themselves when they publicize their own ignorance. Correcting that error and attempting to guide them to the current regulations IS "The Cowboy Way" in my book...especially for someone who purports to have READ the rules (but apparently either has NOT, or they are referring to a out-of-date version of same). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anvil Al #59168 Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 I know it must be tiresome to answer the same questions over and over and to repeatedly correct misconceptions, but that came across as a very public shaming. The again, maybe I've misunderstood what is meant by The Cowboy Way. When someone posts an "opinion" based on a rule that hasn't been on the books for almost FOUR years, they've pretty much "shamed" themselves when they publicize their own ignorance. Correcting that error and attempting to guide them to the current regulations IS "The Cowboy Way" in my book...especially for someone who purports to have READ the rules (but apparently either has NOT, or they are referring to a out-of-date version of same). +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217 Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 " Contains good and valuable information but is heading in a non-productive direction." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.