USPSA President Fired

[Bosshoss]

The fact is, every rule and division change is a reactive decision.

It should be but not always and many rule changes that this administration did (whether you agree with then or not) were in violation of the bylaws of the organization. I'm not a lawyer but I have read the bylaws and don't see how they did it correctly.

Regardless, you either suck or you don’t as a shooter.

What does this have to do with anything?

 

[Trapper Jim]

What does this have to do with anything?

Just saying that divisions in all sports were designed to group like categories together so that we felt better about our placement. The division did not make us shoot better…..just look better.

 

[2-Alpha]

Divisions exist to account for equipment advantages, so that you can compare your performance to others on a “level playing field”. If the divisions are too broad, they fail at this purpose. And if shooters can’t find a division that they feel is fair to them and they’re unable or unwilling to buy new gear, then they’ll turn away from the sport.

 

[Twangbanger]

Just saying that divisions in all sports were designed to group like categories together so that we felt better about our placement. The division did not make us shoot better…..just look better.

Yep...all this would mean, is that the top Revolver shooter and the top Single Stack shooter would each have maybe 1 or 2 more Production shooters above them in the Practiscore at the end of the day.

 

[Twangbanger]

Divisions exist to account for equipment advantages, so that you can compare your performance to others on a “level playing field”. If the divisions are too broad, they fail at this purpose. And if shooters can’t find a division that they feel is fair to them and they’re unable or unwilling to buy new gear, then they’ll turn away from the sport.

Who is going to sell their guns and quit because Production goes to 15? I can see needing a new gun when Revolver went to 8, but not in a gun with magazines which can accept baseplates. It would not be "failing" at any presumed purpose of leveling the playing field. Squeeze in a few more rounds and go play ball. Problem solved.

I don't care one way or the other, but if you have an opinion, I think you should be able to show your work. The Glock people are not hosed because something holds 2 more rounds. They are hosed because with the advent of the Shadow 2, Production is now a division ruled by 46 ounce guns with two-pound triggers, and rounds in the magazine will not change that a bit. If PROD was supposed to be a plastic division, that was when the line should have been drawn. The horse is already out of the barn.

In the current environment, there is no reason for a practical shooting sport to limit any gun to less than its prevailing design capacity. Unless, of course you're a Revo or SS shooter measuring your worth in the world by looking outside of your little 3-man contest, and counting the number people above you and the number of non-Amish-gun beginners you were able to beat, and comparing the two. And if that's the case, and you're really going to be run-off from the sport by having two less Production beginners below you at the end of the day, I am guessing the introduction of PCC and CO have already long since blown your fuses.

 

[Bosshoss]

Unless, of course you're a Revo or SS shooter measuring your worth in the world by looking outside of your little 3-man contest, and counting the number people above you and the number of non-Amish-gun beginners you were able to beat, and comparing the two. And if that's the case, and you're really going to be run-off from the sport by having two less Production beginners below you at the end of the day, I am guessing the introduction of PCC and CO have already long since blown your fuses.

Thanks for mansplaining why I shoot Revolver.
Here I just thought it was fun and I liked the challenge.
Oh no fuses blown here in fact I shoot CO when I want a change up.

 

[Twangbanger]

Thanks for mansplaining why I shoot Revolver.
Here I just thought it was fun and I liked the challenge.
Oh no fuses blown here in fact I shoot CO when I want a change up.

It's only about you, if you say it is.

 

[Grelber]

In the current environment, there is no reason for a practical shooting sport to limit any gun to less than its prevailing design capacity. Unless, of course you're a Revo or SS shooter measuring your worth in the world by looking outside of your little 3-man contest, and counting the number people above you and the number of non-Amish-gun beginners you were able to beat, and comparing the two. And if that's the case, and you're really going to be run-off from the sport by having two less Production beginners below you at the end of the day, I am guessing the introduction of PCC and CO have already long since blown your fuses.

Are you related to Mr. Foley by any chance?

 

[Bosshoss]

They are hosed because with the advent of the Shadow 2, Production is now a division ruled by 46 ounce guns with two-pound triggers,

Except for the national champion shooting a plastic Canik That cost less than $600 and then the Beretta in second place and the Glock in 6th place.
You can't buy talent unless you spend the money on ammo.

and rounds in the magazine will not change that a bit.

Then why change it if it doesn't make a difference?

 

[Bosshoss]

It's only about you, if you say it is.

 

[jakemartens]

IIRC the salary for President was around 55K when he was elected first time. I believe he eliminated a couple of people and took over they duties and salaries and he received 10K profit sharing last year.
While I do think Mike did some good things for our sport I had issues with him and some of his thinking. I won't go into it on a public forum but I will say that KARMA is a bitch.

A couple of people that I have heard are they plan on running for the job so far.
One is a hell NO and other is a maybe and hopefully others run(you listening Jake)

The President was PT role at $55k per year (his wife was the sponsor coordinator at $25k)
The Executive Director was a FT role at $90k year

In 2016 the board hired the newly elected president as FT at $110k
There have been raises over the years in the position
There is no profit sharing, a quick review of the minutes shows goals that are approved by the board each year and there is a bonus potential based on achieving those goals (also part of the minutes, and presentations that are on the website) There is a compensation committee (also part of the minutes on the website) that review and determine the bonus and performance increase for the position.

I am not interested in the position and will not run for it, doesn't matter how much it pays, that isn't what is important.

As for Production it has been seeing less and less activity for the past 5 years with the industry going to Optics Ready Guns.
The largest division is Carry Optics, it has replaced Limited. Limited has been artificially propped up by new shooters being pigeoned holed into "load your mags up" and shoot.

The last 2 years of equipment changes have been focused on making it less restrictive for guns to fit into certain divisions. For example every model of every P320 would have to have 2k guns built to be approved, so you couldn't take a Pro-Cut Slide and stick it on a TXG grip model, that gun has never been made. Or you couldn't buy an aftermarket slide for your Glock with front serrations, because that gun had never been made. Holster position was the same reason, if you wanted to take your carry gun and run it from appendix you were automatically bumped to Limited or Open if it had an Optic or Flashlight.
There are approx 4800-5000 level 1 club matches a year, and only 65-80 Level 2/3 matches. The whole idea of IPSC/USPSA was to test gear and skills in practical settings. Trying to enforce what hammer, take down lever, what slide or serrations are on a gun is asinine (so was 59oz by that wasn't me) The divisions have an identity that guns fit in, and the small details shouldn't matter as long as it meets that identity.

As for 15 rounds, I don't shoot production very much, I like Limited and CO, so if you are asking me, a guy that doesn't shoot it, then my opinion shouldn't matter much. I would make it easy, CO is 140mm mags and the guns are the same except optic, make it 140mm.

BUT...
I would recommend
Open Major -Open Now
Open Minor - CO now with single action slide mounted added (but I do not like the idea of 2011's in here to be honest)
Limited Major - same
Limited Minor - Production now with 140mm mags
Carry Irons - new division 4 inch slide and under, 35oz and under (reduced size box)
PCC - too late to kill it
Classic - 10 rd minor, 8 round major da/sa, safe action, single action 45oz less
Revolver - same

 

[Fuzz]

The one thing that cracks me up in this whole scenario is there were lots of people complaining about all the equipment changes every year. A lot of people. Now he is gone and first thing everyone is looking at is changing more things.

 

[Bosshoss]

As for 15 rounds, I don't shoot production very much, I like Limited and CO, so if you are asking me, a guy that doesn't shoot it, then my opinion shouldn't matter much.

Thanks for the info Jake.
I don't shoot production at all so I don't really care either but when the Revolver rules were being discussed most of the opinions I saw online or heard people discussing were people who didn't shoot Revolver so here I am. My opinion doesn't matter at all.

 

[Bosshoss]

The one thing that cracks me up in this whole scenario is there were lots of people complaining about all the equipment changes every year. A lot of people. Now he is gone and first thing everyone is looking at is changing more things.

I don't have a problem with the equipment changes myself in fact most of them I thought were a good idea.
BUT the Bylaws said 2 years between changes and the changes happening every month or two are a violation of those bylaws.
Change the bylaws and then change the equipment/rules.
Personally I thing equipment changes should be voted on by the members as they are the ones that have to live with them.

https://uspsa.org/documents/bylaws/Current.pdf

16.2 for those you don't want to read the whole thing.

 

[jakemartens]

I don't have a problem with the equipment changes myself in fact most of them I thought were a good idea.
BUT the Bylaws said 2 years between changes and the changes happening every month or two are a violation of those bylaws.
Change the bylaws and then change the equipment/rules.
Personally I thing equipment changes should be voted on by the members as they are the ones that have to live with them.

There have been two major equipment changes one in 2019, and the other in 2020. 1 year a part.
The bylaw is 2 years for restrictive equipment changes
ie eliminating open holsters in Limited for example.

That being said the board did screw up and not follow the time line for announcement of the 2019 and 2020 changes making them effective immediately instead of 30 days. There was a lot of discussion after the fact, and it was pointed out to them before the announcement that if couldn’t be “immediate” however some board members don’t pay attention and others are/were the louder voice.

I do agree that doing more surveying of the membership would be prudent before making any more changes.
I have also engaged the industry pretty heavily and have a few meetings coming up about where the industry is heading.

The whole idea is that your Area Director is your voice on the board and is who you discuss things with.

 

[Bosshoss]

The bylaw is 2 years for restrictive equipment changes
ie eliminating open holsters in Limited for example.

16.2 Competition Equipment Rules Modifications:
Changes to USPSA Division rules affecting personal competition equipment shall be adopted for a specific nonprovisional division no more frequently than every two years except as outlined below:
i.) Changes as required to comply with federal laws
USPSA BYLAWS – LAST REVISION 2/13/2017 USPSA Bylaws – Last Revision 3/25/2021 ii.)
Changes or clarifications which, approved by the BOD with consultation of DNROI and the instructor corps, would loosen restrictions or otherwise expand allowed personal competition equipment for a specific Division Notice of all such changes must be published in the board minutes three months prior to effective date.

All I know is what I read here I don't see restrictive equipment changes explained and I don't really know what that means.
I do see they updated the bylaws a few months ago(after most of the changes). I hadn't looked at them for several months.
The wording is still kind of vague(at least for my feeble mind) as to what can be changed and what cannot be changed.

 

[Bosshoss]

Wow this has to be one of the best thread jacks ever.

 

[IsThatLegal?]

Change in this sport is inevitable. Improvements in technology, fabrication, materials and polymers, designs, etc. bring about new possibilities. The advances provide shooters with new options - some work out, some do not. Some directly improve shooting times (ie. RDS).

We do live in Indiana. And Hoosiers are typically slower to embrace change than others in our country. (That can be seen as an asset or a liability - and I am not taking a position on it.) I have only shot pistols competitively for 4 or 5 years, but one thing that I thought might be helpful for USPSA would be to take some surveys of membership regarding proposed rule changes - which I believe is in the works. Surveys must be prepared wisely, because the results can be "shifted" depending on the wording of the survey. But if a paragraph or page were submitted explaining a potential rule change, followed by one or more questions, I think the membership could help inform the organization of wants/desires to help make informed decisions.

In the short time i have shot pistols competitively, I have learned that the results are driven by the shooter and not the gun. Of course there are minor exceptions, but hand a master or grand master any stock pistol and they will still shoot better overall than B class open shooters IMO. It is fun to buy new equipment, etc. but you can't buy your way into shooting/scoring better. Education and lots of practice make you better regardless of whether you are counting to 8, 10, 24 or 30 between reloads. My point, in part, is to enjoy whatever gun/division you are shooting, but still be honest with yourself in critiquing your performance (if you are results/improvement oriented). I dont care if u are a D class single stack shooter or whatever. Do you know where your weaknesses lie (trigger press, movement, sight picture, target focus, reloads, stage planning, shooting while moving, stance, grip)? Are you working to improve them? Are you shooting "better" than you were 12 months ago? These are all relevant regardless of class or division.

In general, my thought is that we make Rule changes as needed that get more people shooting competitive sports, but don't get too caught up in the small things. I do not like telling Newbies that their equipment doesnt meet our rules because of . . . . so he cant shoot our sport unless he spends more money on equipment. It is a marketing "kick in the stones" to those that are interested in our sport. Rule changes to lower the threshold to get into the sport (but still maintain safety) seem wise to me.

We are all blessed to have the opportunity to be able to go shoot some type of event most every weekend. Think about that. It is a gift. (If you could only go shoot a match once every 2 months, would you care or complain about division rules?) The more people we get involved in the sport, the more we ensure that the sport and 2A rights endure. I would like for my kids to be able to have as much fun as I do in the shooting sports. I have met some really great people while shooting competitively.

Another thought about 10 round limitation - shooting production makes me work on my reloading skills more. It emphasizes weaknesses with that task. I would shoot it more if my old eyes saw irons better. I also understand that most modern "Production" guns have a higher capacity, so I really do not have a problem allowing higher capacity for Production.

I see the horizon in USPSA, and we may be headed for problems if competitors do not help with the labor and time commitments of hosting matches. Time is limited for everyone, but match directors for local matches work their butts off putting matches on the ground. They depend on labor help to put the stages on the ground. They spend their valuable time designing stages. The come early. They stay late. They do not get paid! I see a trend in younger generation shooters toward just showing up and shooting. They do not want to set up or tear down or design or set up kindles or give new shooter briefings. They do not want to RO. They do not want to paste targets. There is a movement to make that a reality by a few influential younger shooters that do not shoot local matches. If that happens, the sport will suffer IMO. Match fees will increase, match directors and ROs will quit. Clubs will stop hosting USPSA. The opportunity to shoot matches will decrease significantly. Remember, nothing is free. If you want a "caddy" to come paste for you, bring someone. Do not try to make it an obligation of the organization.

 

[Grelber]

We do live in Indiana. And Hoosiers are typically slower to embrace change than others in our country.

We aren't typically one of the nuttiest states in the union, beyond that I haven't seen any evidence that we embrace well thought out positive changes at a different speed than anyone else. If there is data that would be interesting.

 

[jakemartens]

16.2 Competition Equipment Rules Modifications:
Changes to USPSA Division rules affecting personal competition equipment shall be adopted for a specific nonprovisional division no more frequently than every two years except as outlined below:
i.) Changes as required to comply with federal laws
USPSA BYLAWS – LAST REVISION 2/13/2017 USPSA Bylaws – Last Revision 3/25/2021 ii.)
Changes or clarifications which, approved by the BOD with consultation of DNROI and the instructor corps, would loosen restrictions or otherwise expand allowed personal competition equipment for a specific Division Notice of all such changes must be published in the board minutes three months prior to effective date.

All I know is what I read here I don't see restrictive equipment changes explained and I don't really know what that means.
I do see they updated the bylaws a few months ago(after most of the changes). I hadn't looked at them for several months.
The wording is still kind of vague(at least for my feeble mind) as to what can be changed and what cannot be changed.

It is this part
Changes or clarifications which, approved by the BOD with consultation of DNROI and the instructor corps, would loosen restrictions or otherwise expand allowed personal competition equipment for a specific Division Notice of all such changes must be published in the board minutes three months prior to effective date.

A rule change that loosens restrictions doesn't follow the 2 years.
This was a change actually in 2018. (3/25/21 revision was some other update, which anytime they do an update like in the rulebook the most recent date is shown)

The reasoning behind is that it doesn't take away anything, the example here would be
-Production used to be 2000 guns made for each model
-change was 500 guns and allowed variants

That change loosened restrictions because now you didn't have a new gun come out with 3 models
ie SIG 320X5 Legion, SIG 320RX, SIG M17 and have to have 2000 of each gun made, paperwork submitted on each on etc
Also that QTY change from 2000 to 500 reflected what Carry Optics QTY was at the time, 500. In this case a CO gun was getting approved at 500, then the manufacturer had to submit the exact same paperwork when the gun was at 2000 made to get approved for Production. Which was the case with the Walther Q5 Steel Frame, the CZ Shadow 2 OR and the EAA Stock 2 OR models.
Not to mention Gen 5 Glock 34, or the Gen 5 Glock 34 MOS. Two different guns, four sets of paperwork for the manufacturers, which they never submitted and people would be shooting with guns that were not approved. Side note, CO 2018 Champion shot a SIG 320 in that match that was never made by SIG based on the configuration of the gun, however every part of the gun was approved on other guns, it was just never built by SIG and therefore was never approved.

The 2 years part is based on a restrictive rule change that would eliminate gear that members are currently using, like the example of eliminating a type of holster, or say all of sudden 40sw major was no longer allowed, that type of sweeping change.
The part of the bylaw they messed up was the 3 months prior to going into effect. Messed it up in 2019 and again 2020. But that was because some voices in meeting are/were louder than others when the discussion came up.