ACTS (MI) Competition Dec09 Pics/Vids

[TFin04]

Is a competition training? Absolutely not.
Can a competition be a good place to practice your defensive firearm skills? Yes.

ACTS strives to keep the rules/skills/stages set up in a way to help the 'real world' shooter. You can never remove all of the 'game' from a competition, but we try to limit it as much as possible.

Why is this in this forum? Because last time the guys in the Competition forum who have never shot our events thought they knew everything about the organization and were in a position to criticize it from a few pics and short videos posted online. This is an event that is only about an hour and a half from the IN border and a good venue to test the skills you learn in class. MTC will attest to that.

Good match, simple yet challenging stages which brought out some of the lesser practiced skill sets for the shooters to test themselves with. Lots of fun.

American Confederation of Tactical Shooters

Pics:

I own all rights to all images. If you wish to use any images, please contact me at tfineis@gmail.com to work out details. Images uploaded are not of printable quality. Please email for arrangements if you wish to print anything you see here. Thanks!

Videos:

Stage 2:
YouTube - ACTS Dec 09 Tom Stage 2

Stage 3:

YouTube - ACTS Dec 09 Jake Stage 3 Pistol
YouTube - ACTS Dec 09 Jake Stage 3 Rifle (Beast)

YouTube - ACTS Dec 09 Tom Stage 3 Pistol
YouTube - ACTS Dec 09 Tom Stage 3 Rifle

YouTube - ACTS Dec 09 Nick Stage 3 Pistol
YouTube - ACTS Dec 09 Nick Stage 3 Rifle

Scores

Match Results December 2009

 

[Barry in IN]

We need to get that going here. The problem is, like I said at the YSINTG class, finding enough people to go in order to make it work. I can only think of a handful of people who would choose that over the more...um, familar...types of matches.

 

[TFin04]

New chapters are always a possibility. A group in Arizona have been running their own chapter for a few years now.

 

[Steve MI]

Wer are the boxes to run too

 

[MTC]

ACTS strives to keep the rules/skills/stages set up in a way to help the 'real world' shooter. You can never remove all of the 'game' from a competition, but we try to limit it as much as possible.

Definitely. The stage designs and requirements are what attracted me to the ACTS format in the first place. I had seen a few of your pics and vids before we met, but had to experience it for myself. Challenging, exhilarating, exciting and fun.

This is an event that is only about an hour and a half from the IN border and a good venue to test the skills you learn in class. MTC will attest to that.

I can. I will. Oh, and based on seven trips in four months, it's an hour and a half from Ft. Wayne, three and a half from Indy.

We need to get that going here. The problem is, like I said at the YSINTG class, finding enough people to go in order to make it work. I can only think of a handful of people who would choose that over the more...um, familar...types of matches.

Yeah. I had intended to broach the subject once I got to know more people here, and found a suitable range and location.

 

[slow1911s]

Why is this in this forum? Because last time the guys in the Competition forum who have never shot our events thought they knew everything about the organization and were in a position to criticize it from a few pics and short videos posted online.

Don't feel special, Tom. Competition shooters criticize everything - shooters, stages, clubs, associations, techniques everything. Hell, ACTS is one big criticism of 2/3-gun matches, isn't it? And besides, ACTS is also the new kid on the block - the new kid always gets picked on more (at least it seems that way to the new kid). IDPA got raked over the coals when it came on board and still does, but look where they are.

I'm trying to plan for a match this year, myself. Maybe I can round up a Trooper load and make the drive?

 

[TFin04]

My mom always said I was special....

ACTS is not a criticism per say, just different. Everybody shoots for different reasons, all of them being valid.

Your first match is on me.

 

[Barry in IN]

Yeah. I had intended to broach the subject once I got to know more people here, and found a suitable range and location.

Yeah, the range complication is always a factor. While my club wouldn't work (rapid fire restrictions) I know there are several clubs around here with ranges that would be suitable for ACTS or something slimlar...but I am not a member of any of them. And I doubt a non-member is in the best position to push for a new discipline to be held there.

Another problem is the match schedules at many of these ranges are pretty full, so finding a weekend clear for yet another discipline may not be easy. They may see an ACTS-type match as being too similar to another match (IPSC 3-gun for example) and be afraid it would hurt attendance at both. Similar matches would probably both do best if seperated by a couple of weeks, which further complicates scheduling.

While on the subject...
I doubt the matches I've turned over in my head would be very popular anyway. For one thing- I'd like to see a "tactical" match ran without timers (or at least parts of it would be untimed). Perhaps a time limit instead (You will be given 90 seconds to complete this task...starting...NOW!) I think it would encourage proper use of cover and other skills.
But no timers makes it hard to give a score, and without scoring, I doubt many would come.
Insead of a timed-based score, I'd rather see something like a peer critique, or an evaluation/rating given by other shooters after discussing the shooter's performance at each stage. Take the emphasis off score and put it on learning. Not everyone would agree on the methods used, but it would give an opportunity to discuss why another method might or might not work better. Then a simple change in the stage design or requirements could make it a different matter for the next shooter up. Not everyone can go to training regularly, but those who can't could hear from those who do in the discussion.
And I wouldn't hate it if there was a stage now and then whose correct solution was not to shoot at all (gasp!).
But, like I said, I would expect a small turnout after the first one. A few would like it, but probably not enough to keep it going. Without getting a copy of results with a finishing order, it wouldn't appeal to many.

 

[esrice]

Insead of a timed-based score, I'd rather see something like a peer critique, or an evaluation/rating given by other shooters after discussing the shooter's performance at each stage. Take the emphasis off score and put it on learning.

I find something like this to be very appealing. According to things I've read about ACTS, it is very similar.

 

[TFin04]

Sort of. You can't have a competition without timers, especially during our annual prize match.

Every competition will have other shooters who will give you advice. The problem is some of them are complete idiots.

 

[Barry in IN]

Every competition will have other shooters who will give you advice. The problem is some of them are complete idiots.

Yes, the idiots will speak up no matter what. It's usually the guys who know something helpful who keep quiet. From knowing some of them, I know they stand there biting their lip because they think nobody wants to hear what they have to say or they simply don't want to butt in.

Getting them to speak up is just what I'd hope a "critique match" would encourage. If everyone knew going into it that they would be expected to comment and be commented on, they should be more willing to speak up.

You would still get the bad advice, but you get that now. Might as well get a little more of it in order to hear some useful info. Just like any other part of a match: Take the helpful stuff and forget the rest.

 

[MTC]

Context within a context.

Several factors to consider and arrangements to be made before setting up a new chapter. Thanks for your thoughts. I'd like to address a few and pass along a few more, some fact and some opinion, based on limited experience.

They may see an ACTS-type match as being too similar to another match (IPSC 3-gun for example) and be afraid it would hurt attendance at both. Similar matches would probably both do best if seperated by a couple of weeks, which further complicates scheduling.

Yes, scheduling conflicts is something to be worked out. And yes, matches using the ACTS format are similar to, maybe the most similar to, multi-gun minus the shotgun (albeit with an altered rule structure, and not to be discriminatory against shotguns, that's just the way it is set up - a primary, and a secondary). Many shooters I met there have or still do compete in other shooting sports and disciplines.

Insead of a timed-based score, I'd rather see something like a peer critique, or an evaluation/rating given by other shooters after discussing the shooter's performance at each stage. Take the emphasis off score and put it on learning. Not everyone would agree on the methods used, but it would give an opportunity to discuss why another method might or might not work better. Then a simple change in the stage design or requirements could make it a different matter for the next shooter up. Not everyone can go to training regularly, but those who can't could hear from those who do in the discussion.
And I wouldn't hate it if there was a stage now and then whose correct solution was not to shoot at all (gasp!).
But, like I said, I would expect a small turnout after the first one. A few would like it, but probably not enough to keep it going. Without getting a copy of results with a finishing order, it wouldn't appeal to many.

What you are describing is IMO something to be done in a training course with an instructor, not used as a scoring method in an organized competition.
Not to be argumentative, but as has already been pointed out, you can't have a match - which is a competition - without a timer, in order to test the skills of speed and accuracy that we learned in various courses. Also, you cannot change the stage design between shooters or relays without changing the uniform standards and criteria that makes scoring possible. That's what makes a match - a match.
Within the context of the rules and framework set forth by the rules committee, the match director does have a certain amount of latitude to design stages that will essentially force the shooter to think, move and solve problems rapidly and tactically, without micromanaging his/her every move. ETA example: Sometimes blind stages and/or untimed stages are used, where the shooter starts with a perfect score [0] and can only incur penalties.
A review of the purpose, rules and scoring structure in the link that TFin provided will hopefully clarify this. As with anything else, though, the best thing is to go experience it personally.

 

[Barry in IN]

Not to be argumentative either, or defensive, but to clarify:

My use of the word "match" was a poor choice of words. I have been careful to not call it that when I've mentioned this before, but got lax this time.
Perhaps a better term would be to call it an "exercise".

I agree nothing like this can be a substitute for training, and that isn't what I had in mind. I was thinking of it more as a "gap filler" to fill the gap between one class and the next. Or, for that matter, to fill the gap between training and competition.

I just want to come up with a way to encourage discussion among the participants. There is some of that now, but it mostly consists of ways to shave tenths of a second from one's time rather than means of survival. But that's the nature of the event. I was trying to think of a way to stir up more constructive conversation and get people to share what they have learned in training.
As it is in most matches, there is little time for a discussion and shooters may not know the others well enough to ask. If such a discussion was made part of it, we should see more of it.

 

[pinshooter45]

What might work in that respect is a scoring system simalar to the "skins game" on Shooting USA a week or two ago. So much time and too many targets, there is a par score like golf, but basicly your score would be how many tagets hit. And perhaps the targets could have different values for level of threat, that sounds Tactical to me!

 

[MTC]

Thanks for clarifying, Barry. Interesting ideas, several possibilities. I can communicate with and understand people better in person. Might you be interested in attending one of the ACTS (MI) matches this winter?

 

[Barry in IN]

I do want to go to one, but it probably won't be this winter. I heard or read about them probably a year ago and it sounded interesting then...but I haven't made it yet. It wasn't my best year for getting to matches (it may not be any better this coming year).

 

[rhino]

Barry:

I understood you.

Anyway, I don't know if you ever participated in them, but Wildcat Valley used to have what they called "tactical matches." Bill DeZarn ran some of them, in fact. They used par times and were essentially pass/fail. You either neutralized all of the threats in the allotted time or not. You also failed ("go to jail") if you shot a non-threat. They were a lot of fun and the format was freindly to approaching the challenge with a variety of motives/intents/goals/philosophies.

I think you'd also be interested in Skip Gochenour's National Tactical Invitational. It is a competition, but it's not based on time per se. Placement is determined by the evaluations of the judges of your performance on each scenario.


Given that, the defense seminars that ACT is going to do will include some elements to which you've referred. On occasions when we do scenarios (i.e. stages), we won't keep time (or at the most we'll have a par time just for reference) and we won't keep score. What we will do is observe the participants as they negotiate the challenges and then offer our observations and opinions. The student can either accept or disregard our feedback (with the exception of safety issues). That process will repeat, depending on the complexity of the scenario, the number of participants, and the time available. In other words, the stages/scenarios will be treated like extended drills that just happen to incorporate a lot of skills at one time instead of focusing on just one skill.

Not to be argumentative either, or defensive, but to clarify:

My use of the word "match" was a poor choice of words. I have been careful to not call it that when I've mentioned this before, but got lax this time.
Perhaps a better term would be to call it an "exercise".

I agree nothing like this can be a substitute for training, and that isn't what I had in mind. I was thinking of it more as a "gap filler" to fill the gap between one class and the next. Or, for that matter, to fill the gap between training and competition.

I just want to come up with a way to encourage discussion among the participants. There is some of that now, but it mostly consists of ways to shave tenths of a second from one's time rather than means of survival. But that's the nature of the event. I was trying to think of a way to stir up more constructive conversation and get people to share what they have learned in training.
As it is in most matches, there is little time for a discussion and shooters may not know the others well enough to ask. If such a discussion was made part of it, we should see more of it.

 

[Barry in IN]

No, I never went to a tactical match at Wildcat nor remember hearing of them.
Sounds pretty good though.

The NTI always sounds like a great thing. It's another event I'd like to attend.

I have heard and read of another series being ran in, I think, some northeast states. I have been trying to think of the name since I hijacked this thread. I want to say it's named after a person.

The upcoming ACT seminar sounds good. Kind of a local NTI.

 

[turnandshoot4]

Holy cow that looks like fun!

 

[Dr Falken]

I just watched a bunch of U-Tubes of ACTS competitions and gotta say it looked like a blast. If I got up to speed and time allowed, I would definately do this. I glanced over the rules and equipment allowances and I like the emphasis. Really cool.