Rats, now I am tangled in your twisted web. You've a devious mind, BT. 8)bigtaco said:finally a response. and the exact response i have expected. this is exactly what i was told about idpa after having shot ipsc.
Because IPSC saw IDPA had the right approach? Seriously, I have shooting experience only in local club IDPA & Steel Challenge, and I've only watched IPSC.bigtaco said:here's my .02 on it. keep in mind that in my area, we have a long rich ipsc tradition and many of the top shooters shoot this competition. as such, i may not have experienced the best idpa stages.
with the production class in ipsc, which was created in reponse to idpa, a tricked out expensive race gun that's totally impractical for carry isn't the only choice. lots of us shoot totally stock pistols and i've seen more than one guy shoot a revolver at ipsc, even with 26 rounds in a stage.
Typical situation at our club matches is "shoot as visible", and if something doesn't fit the proposed scenario, we usually drag a barricade over to make it more plausible. It is incorrect to break cover to engage a target if it exposes you to another's fire. I'm OK with that.bigtaco said:as far as "gamey", and this is where i kinda wonder how we define gamey...
in ipsc, the most common command is, "engage targets as visible". which seems exactly what i will do when those targets are real combatants. when the shtf, i'm going to engage targets as visible.
in idpa, you MUST engage targets "tactically" meaning "split the pie". this may or may not be "as visible". and you get penalized for not doing this. so now, when approaching multiple targets, you're forced to think about which target to engage first... to avoid a penalty. the presumption is that by training in this way, you will always be shooting behind cover and never expose yourself. but in real life the targets are probably going to move. you aren't going to think, you're going to see a target and take it out. period. so honestly, idpa seems a little"gamey" to me.
Yes, that does sound goofy. We've done similar things, but it was a heavy bucket meant to represent a person who was down; never a briefcase, remote control, or fresh latte.bigtaco said:in my few personal idpa experiences, here are the beefs i had with it.
one stage we had to carry a briefcase while we engaged three targets during which time we "must be walking towards the targets and shooting". then we continued walking to a barricade where we had to set the briefcase down on a dot, do a tactical reload, engage some targets from one side of the barricade, other targets from the other side of the barricade. but you had to shoot the blue popper first, then the three papers then the red steel to end the stage. what? sounds like a fricking game to me!!!
never in my life, EVER, when confronted with three armed attackers will i attempt to maintain control of the briefcase, while i WALK TOWARDS them, engaging in one handed shooting. i don't care what's in the briefcase. screw it. and what exactly is so tactical about this scenario. three armed guys, and you're WALKING TOWARDS THEM ENGAGING THEM ONE HANDED WITH NO COVER!!!
you can be penalized for putting the briefcase down in the wrong spot. what does that have to do with surviving a gunfight? you're penalized for engaging the wrong targets from behind the barricade. in real life, if i've been lucky enough to find cover, i'll engage whatever target i can, whenever i can see them. period.
I know, but they can't have a target on a track rushing you, would be cool if it was workable. I just look at the rules as a mental flexibility task, since there will be obstacles to overcome and problems to solve in any plausible "multiple armed attackers and it's just you and your trusty pistol" scenario.bigtaco said:the idea with the blue popper is that he's advancing towards you first. hey man, in real life, you'll know who's advancing towards you first. and obviously engage him first. but i don't need a penalty because after remembering to put the briefcase down just right, and after remembering to engage t4-7 from the correct side of the barricade i forgot and shot the paper first.
In general, IDPA emphasizes cover and tries to place value on "not getting shot by BGs". Real, hard cover seems to be scarce when I look for it on the street or in a building.bigtaco said:too many rules!!! too much game in idpa in my opinion. they're looking for you to break "tactical rules" in order to penalize you for not following the rules. some of these "tactical rules" seem of dubious value to me.
that stage in ipsc would have read, "x number of paper, x number of steel. engage as visible." and if this exact scenario transpired in real life, this is exactly how any of us would handle it. there's no one to tell us which attacker will do what when. there's no one to tell us in a real life gunfight, "hit these targets from this side of the barricade and those from the other". in real life, if you're lucky enough to find cover you'll engage targets as visible... i promise.
in other words, both idpa and ipsc are trying to simulate gunfights. ipsc lets you fight your way. idpa forces you to fight they're way, or else.
Yes, I agree. I've been burned before because I carefully shot all required targets with my weak hand, when it would have been better to simply take the misses and finish much faster. I take a bit of pride in typically being in the top 3 for "accuracy"/fewest points down. About the walking, that is a drill that does get gamy, because at our club it often takes place in front of a row of steel at about 15 yards, and it is hard to move and hit those small steel sillhouettes. Guys often do "drag-step-pauses" while shooting, but we don't have real hard cases about penalties, they just tell you to keep moving. Our club seems to be fairly reasonable about shooting order. I do like being reminded to keep my legs/head behind cover, when I goof.bigtaco said:also, it stinks to me that someone shooting idpa could have all a zone hits and the lowest time (probably winning this real life gun fight) but lose the stage because: he was not actively walking while one shot was fired, put the briefcase down on the wrong spot, engaged one target from the wrong side of the barricade despite the fact it was clearly visible and a combatant, and shot the red steel before the blue steel. that to me seems VERY gamey.