Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

A plug for allowing the gunfighter shooting style in age-based categories


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 said:

 

Bet a lot of folks wish y'all learned that lesson before putting out the Shooter's Book for EOT this year, too!

That, or just used the other 2 placement instructions. Like make shotgun safe on box, or shoot pistols from box. Either of those would have "leveled the playing field" better than calling out a category or shooting style. Especially those duelist style shooters that everybody knows has an upper hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the byplay has been entertaining... I think it's time to quit.  The discussion remains "gunfighter style in age based categories"... let's not interject gunfighter in other propellant/clothing/style categories.  Or past transgressions against other single-handed shooters.  Personally, I think Joe went above & beyond to get an answer to that question... and certainly doesn't deserve the vitriol displayed here. 

 

This might be a novel enough idea, but why don't we just leave it alone... I've been in this game long enough to know that every change has had unintended consequences... In some cases, detrimental to original intent of the change.

 

I have a couple of questions.  And are directed at persons that made the request... not someone guessing that intent.

 

1.  Does your club allow variations to the rules for monthly club matches... I.e.:  By allowing you to shoot gunfighter in your age category?  

 

2.  What will be your suggested call when a shooter clearly starts a stage say two-handed, then changes and finishes the stage gunfighter?   I.e. changes style mid-stage.  Or will the prohibition to have two loaded revolvers in hand at one time simply cease to exist for age-based categories?  What about in Duelist style required categories...?

 

3.  What about the unknown number of shooters that don't want to even try gunfighter, yet now they're going to REQUIRED to compete against a few individuals that just want to opportunity to shoot gunfighter on a stage that really just begs for it, and gives a distinct advantage to the gunfighter?   Ever since the beginning of the gunfighter category those adherents have always asked for MORE gunfighter friendly stages.   How many stages a month at your monthly are gunfighter friendly?  3 of 5, 3 of 6, or 4 of 6?  Is there at least one stage every month that requires split pistols? 

 

4.  How will the proponents of this change react if/when there's a push for age based categories that ban both gunfighter and duelist?  Backlash always seems to over-achieve... LOL!

 

5.  Is this some covert operation to eliminate cross-draw holsters...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Griff said:

1.  Does your club allow variations to the rules for monthly club matches... I.e.:  By allowing you to shoot gunfighter in your age category?  

I know your questions were directed at others but I wanted to share my "opinions".

 

As always; local clubs can and are encouraged to try out new ideas - but GF in age based categories is (imo) a red herring.

Statistically - no one shoots Duelist in age based categories where is has always been legal.

Statistically - unless they shoot GF fulltime - no primarily supported shooters shoot GF or Duelist in BWestern where this behavior is already legal.

1 hour ago, Griff said:

2.  What will be your suggested call when a shooter clearly starts a stage say two-handed, then changes and finishes the stage gunfighter?   I.e. changes style mid-stage.  Or will the prohibition to have two loaded revolvers in hand at one time simply cease to exist for age-based categories?  What about in Duelist style required categories...?

Again; its statistically so unlikely to ever happen - the average shooter or match will never encounter the question.

1 hour ago, Griff said:

3.  What about the unknown number of shooters that don't want to even try gunfighter, yet now they're going to REQUIRED to compete against a few individuals that just want to opportunity to shoot gunfighter on a stage that really just begs for it, and gives a distinct advantage to the gunfighter?   Ever since the beginning of the gunfighter category those adherents have always asked for MORE gunfighter friendly stages.   How many stages a month at your monthly are gunfighter friendly?  3 of 5, 3 of 6, or 4 of 6?  Is there at least one stage every month that requires split pistols? 

Distinct advantages? 

A GF has NEVER won End of Trail. 

A GF has NEVER won Winter Range.

I am a fairly skilled stage writer and have been a fairly skilled GF and it would take some significantly convoluted stage writing to even come close to ADVANTAGING the GF.

Do not conflate the terms GF friendly with GF advantage - friendly simply means that the GF may shoot the stage/ match within the rules of GF and not be FORCED via poor stage writing/ prop manipulation or bay setup to shoot out of category (1 out of 6 stages is 16% - I think supported shooters heads would explode if we remotely suggested a similar percentage of time they be forced to shoot out of category - make them shoot Duelist 1 stage out a 1000 and listen to the uproar)

And don't give me the old saw that Double Duelist is a legal subset of GF and we should expect it and be profecient in it - because I will reply that if so (as discussed in this very thread) then Duelist style is a legal subset of supported and you should expect it and be profecient in it.

1 hour ago, Griff said:

4.  How will the proponents of this change react if/when there's a push for age based categories that ban both gunfighter and duelist?  Backlash always seems to over-achieve... LOL!

And thats why instead of diluting categories - we should be differing/ protecting and codifying them.

Example:

Duelist is a single loaded pistol out of holster one hand unsupported category.

GF is two loaded pistols out of holster at the same time, both shot unsupported - with an expectation of alternating shots (verbiage could be explored regarding lead changes)

Supported (formerly age based) is a single loaded pistol out of holster fired with two hands in contact with gun.

1 hour ago, Griff said:

5.  Is this some covert operation to eliminate cross-draw holsters...?

More a covert operation to allow adjustable sights in all categories. 

Which is high time to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Griff said:

While the byplay has been entertaining... I think it's time to quit.  The discussion remains "gunfighter style in age based categories"... let's not interject gunfighter in other propellant/clothing/style categories.  Or past transgressions against other single-handed shooters.  Personally, I think Joe went above & beyond to get an answer to that question... and certainly doesn't deserve the vitriol displayed here. 

 

This might be a novel enough idea, but why don't we just leave it alone... I've been in this game long enough to know that every change has had unintended consequences... In some cases, detrimental to original intent of the change.

 

I have a couple of questions.  And are directed at persons that made the request... not someone guessing that intent.

 

1.  Does your club allow variations to the rules for monthly club matches... I.e.:  By allowing you to shoot gunfighter in your age category?  

 

2.  What will be your suggested call when a shooter clearly starts a stage say two-handed, then changes and finishes the stage gunfighter?   I.e. changes style mid-stage.  Or will the prohibition to have two loaded revolvers in hand at one time simply cease to exist for age-based categories?  What about in Duelist style required categories...?

 

3.  What about the unknown number of shooters that don't want to even try gunfighter, yet now they're going to REQUIRED to compete against a few individuals that just want to opportunity to shoot gunfighter on a stage that really just begs for it, and gives a distinct advantage to the gunfighter?   Ever since the beginning of the gunfighter category those adherents have always asked for MORE gunfighter friendly stages.   How many stages a month at your monthly are gunfighter friendly?  3 of 5, 3 of 6, or 4 of 6?  Is there at least one stage every month that requires split pistols? 

 

4.  How will the proponents of this change react if/when there's a push for age based categories that ban both gunfighter and duelist?  Backlash always seems to over-achieve... LOL!

 

5.  Is this some covert operation to eliminate cross-draw holsters...?

1. Two local clubs have a shootist category which allows any shooting style at any time.

2. Under the current rules I would give them a P. Under hypothetical new rules, it depends on what the ‘new rule’ says about switching styles mid stage.

3. Suck it up buttercup. Extend your skills or get beat.

4. Fine by me. We have way to many categories already.

5. You might see fewer top shooters wearing cross-draw if the proposed change went through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 6:48 PM, Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 said:

I do not want it to be said that there would not be unintended consequences of making a rule change like this.

 

We all know that some people did not think all the way through to the end result when we made the changes to the cocked rifle moving from the loading table to the line rule, and how other rules would still apply even with the rule change.

 

By allowing people in age-based categories to shoot in any style at their discretion, a couple penalties would go away for people shooting in age base categories.

 

For instance, this what's the call situation would go away.

 

 

If that happened, then people shooting in duelist style categories would be the only ones penalized for having two loaded revolvers in hand at the same time.

 

This situation is caused by the definition of "in hand" needing correction.  Think about it: if the shooter had returned to leather here, the penalty would have still applied.  On what planet is a gun that is in your holster "in hand"? 

 

The solution to this is simply fixing the definition.  A gun is "in hand" when it is 1) unholstered and 2) any part of the hand is touching the gun.  A gun that has the hammer down on a spent cartridge that has been safely put down on a table is not "in hand."  The definition discussed in that video proves that there's a situation where a penalty applies even though no safety infraction has occurred and no competitive advantage has been gained.  The penalty applies simply because the rules say so for no gain in competitive equity or safety.

 

As a gunfighter, I'd enjoy being able to shoot gf in an age based category.  That way if I felt like shooting another style for a stage or two, I'd have the option, instead of having to choose whether to get to shoot gunfighter that day at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, El Chapo said:

 

This situation is caused by the definition of "in hand" needing correction.  Think about it: if the shooter had returned to leather here, the penalty would have still applied.  On what planet is a gun that is in your holster "in hand"? 

 

The solution to this is simply fixing the definition.  A gun is "in hand" when it is 1) unholstered and 2) any part of the hand is touching the gun.  A gun that has the hammer down on a spent cartridge that has been safely put down on a table is not "in hand."  The definition discussed in that video proves that there's a situation where a penalty applies even though no safety infraction has occurred and no competitive advantage has been gained.  The penalty applies simply because the rules say so for no gain in competitive equity or safety.

 

As a gunfighter, I'd enjoy being able to shoot gf in an age based category.  That way if I felt like shooting another style for a stage or two, I'd have the option, instead of having to choose whether to get to shoot gunfighter that day at all.

I've been preaching about that defined term as going against all common sense for a few years. 

Same stage for all shooters:

*One traditional or duelist style shooter gets a P for setting a pistol on the table with a round still in the chamber because it's still "in hand".

*One shooter gets an sdq for setting a revolver down on the table with the hammer halfway back because it "left the shooters hand".

Those are 2 different penalties for setting the gun down on the table but our clarifications tell us we ignore the in hand definition on the last one because it physically left their hand. Makes a bunch of sense.

 

Also, I still say the SHB was misprinted at some point reversing the definitions of stage and firing line and it just never was fixed. I don't see how it could be anything else common sense wise. Where else do you see a MDQ for firing a gun on the firing line(unless done by a qualified gunsmith)?

Screenshot_20220327-164302_Drive.thumb.jpg.7c2059f0be3feb7b2828db07b9ab6569.jpg

 

783902469_Screenshot_20220327-164151_Drive2.thumb.jpg.97f455e1ada3cc5408ef7608b1067da4.jpg

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Tennessee williams said:

I've been preaching about that defined term as going against all common sense for a few years. 

Same stage for all shooters:

*One traditional or duelist style shooter gets a P for setting a pistol on the table with a round still in the chamber because it's still "in hand".

*One shooter gets an sdq for setting a revolver down on the table with the hammer halfway back because it "left the shooters hand".

Those are 2 different penalties for setting the gun down on the table but our clarifications tell us we ignore the in hand definition on the last one because it physically left their hand. Makes a bunch of sense.

 

Also, I still say the SHB was misprinted at some point reversing the definitions of stage and firing line and it just never was fixed. I don't see how it could be anything else common sense wise. Where else do you see a MDQ for firing a gun on the firing line(unless done by a qualified gunsmith)?

Screenshot_20220327-164302_Drive.thumb.jpg.7c2059f0be3feb7b2828db07b9ab6569.jpg

 

783902469_Screenshot_20220327-164151_Drive2.thumb.jpg.97f455e1ada3cc5408ef7608b1067da4.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

I appreciate you bringing this to our attention because I'm a new cowboy but I've been shooting USPSA for 18 years and I've been a range officer for 12.  USPSA, for all its faults, has an excellent set of rules and interpretive body in the National Range Officer's Institute that really should be the envy of all shooting sports to follow.  Irrational rules like the one we're discussing make people mad and not come back, and so having a reviewing body to eliminate situations like this really is better for the sport overall rather than just hoping someone doesn't ensare themselves in a situation like this where they suffer a useless penalty.

 

USPSA used to have such strict rules about holster and magazine position that if a person in the restrictive divisions used their front pocket to store a magazine "during the course of fire," they would get an extreme penalty (bump to the Open division, which would ruin anyone's match).  The thing was that some people would rack a round into the chamber and then insert another magazine before the start signal, but since the course of fire begins with "make ready" command (where the RO allows the person to handle their firearm to prepare for the stage, kinda like our loading tables), the storage of a magazine in the pocket was "during the course of fire" even though the person gained absolutely no competitive advantage from using the front pocket as anything put a place to store the magazine off the clock.  If the same person had thrown the magazine on the ground and began the stage at the start signal, the penalty wouldn't have applied.  A rule change was needed, which subsequently happened, after I don't know how many matches were ruined by this BS.  The example you brought up is the same thing, a penalty caused by a silly rule that can be easily corrected.

 

Then last year they repealed these equipment location rules in those divisions anyway, so even if it hadn't been fixed years ago, it's moot now.  But at the time, this is an example in another shooting sport where they had the same sort of pointless way to penalize yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of an "Open Category"... in fact, open it up to sponsored shooters.   Any style, any stage, two divisions... if you must, Men's & Ladies... Heck, I'll donate $5 to top prize money just to watch pros in their non-western garb and sponsor-covered clothing battle it out with ol' west guns.  (That's $1.50 for men & $1.50 for ladies... don't go to thinking I'm biased, and $2 for the overall  Consider me rootin' for Holy Terror)!   And if you, even as an "amateur", want to enter that category, feel free...  Well, as long as you're willing to pay the entry fee determined by the match organizers for said "Open Category!"

 

But, leave the existing amateur categories as they are. 

 

(Don't expect me to send you $5 for each of your monthly shoots... I'm talking National & World Championships here).

 

I'll try to remove my tongue from my cheek... but... allowing gunfighter in age based categories seems destined to have the same effect...  a general loosening of the spirit of the game.

 

I do however, see a problem with the "out of holster" clarification business... If the 1st pistol were either shot clear, or the definitions of "safe to leave the shooter's hand" were applied in the instance of the 1st pistol being tabled instead of returned to leather, no penalty would apply to either the 2-handed or duelist shooter.  Similar to a Duelist shooting from pistols staged on a table... as long as one pistol stays in contact with the table while the other is shot, no penalty.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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