[jhe888]

I just looked at the results. Looked like a lot of DQs. Anyone know what happened?

[doncannon]

jhe888, on Feb 23 2009, 09:49 PM, said:

I just looked at the results. Looked like a lot of DQs. Anyone know what happened?

All but a few were equipment related. Mostly not making power factor. A few overweight.

Don

[GmanCdp]

doncannon, on Feb 23 2009, 10:22 PM, said:

jhe888, on Feb 23 2009, 09:49 PM, said:

I just looked at the results. Looked like a lot of DQs. Anyone know what happened?

All but a few were equipment related. Mostly not making power factor. A few overweight.

Don

A few overweight.

did you go ???

[sirveyr]

doncannon, on Feb 23 2009, 10:22 PM, said:

jhe888, on Feb 23 2009, 09:49 PM, said:

I just looked at the results. Looked like a lot of DQs. Anyone know what happened?

All but a few were equipment related. Mostly not making power factor. A few overweight.

Don

Great, now they have weight-classes! I hope I can still compete in the light-heavyweight class.

[GmanCdp]

more interesting info here : http://idpaforum.yuk...ips.html?page=1

[JFlowers]

Are they going to have a Super Heavyweight class as well?

[jm9x23]

Most were for equiptment and ammo, a couple was for people leaving the range they were on with a hot gun. I was DQ'd because my grip safety didn't work, no I didn't disable it or pin it, When I built the gun it worked fine and I guess that the last time it was checked.

Ironically a shooter with a "safe gun" was reholstering and put one through his leg and that stopped the match for a few hours on Saturday. My 1911 with a bad grip safety still has a thumb safety that works perfectly, but I was DQ'd for having an "unsafe gun". They allowed me to finish the match for fun, which is the reason I was there in the first place.

[lugnut]

jm9x23, on Feb 24 2009, 09:28 AM, said:

Most were for equiptment and ammo, a couple was for people leaving the range they were on with a hot gun. I was DQ'd because my grip safety didn't work, no I didn't disable it or pin it, When I built the gun it worked fine and I guess that the last time it was checked.

Ironically a shooter with a "safe gun" was reholstering and put one through his leg and that stopped the match for a few hours on Saturday. My 1911 with a bad grip safety still has a thumb safety that works perfectly, but I was DQ'd for having an "unsafe gun". They allowed me to finish the match for fun, which is the reason I was there in the first place.

Here is the modifications not allowed in any division:
"E. Disconnection or disabling of any safety device on any gun."

I guess it's difficult for the SO to determine if something like this was intentional or unintentional. I am however, very surprised they let you shoot the match....

The comment on the other shooter was uncalled for.

[UltraTen]

The rules are there to level the playing field and keep the shooter (and the people around them) safe.
Doug Koeing was DQ'd for the same reason as jm9x23, I'm just as surprised they allowed you to finish.
At times accidents happen but the staff at S&W did all they could to prevent them......Julie went as far as closing stage 2 because of splashback.
I'd rather be DQ'd for safety or rule reasons, than shooting myself or somebody else.

My best wishes go out to Jose, I hope he's doing well!!

[nwb01]

This was the first sanctioned IDPA match out of 10 that I have participated in where all the equipment checks were performed.... weight, box, PF, safety. Personally, I was very happy to see it. I wish this was the norm not the exception.

[bbbean]

jm9x23, on Feb 24 2009, 08:28 AM, said:

My 1911 with a bad grip safety still has a thumb safety that works perfectly, but I was DQ'd for having an "unsafe gun". They allowed me to finish the match for fun, which is the reason I was there in the first place.

It seems to me that if a gun is deemed "unsafe", you wouldn't want someone shooting it at the range. If its OK to shoot at the range, then it must be safe, right?

[Glock3422]

I believe the guns with non-functioning grip safeties were DQed because they did not function, not because they were unsafe. The rule book requires that safeties be functional.

There are a lot of pinned safeties out there and many believe that the thumb safety makes the grip safety superfluous. That belief can be argued either way.

That a major match stood up and required conformance with the rules should be commended. It doesn't happen often enough. Allowing a competitor to finish for no score is a reasonable compromise given the cost associated with attending a major match.

Craig and crew did a great job.

I agree that comments regarding the other shooter are not appropriate.

This post has been edited by Duane Thomas: 25 February 2009 - 08:38 PM

[rr4406pak]

I like how they selected your ammo for testing.
Before the start of the standards stage they had you put 6 loaded mags in a box.
The chrono officer came over and selected randomly one of the 6 to test.
The resultant testing procedure was the most complete testing I've ever seen.
No wonder why they caught so many people.
I feel bad for the people who were not trying to cheat (like Doug Koenig) but I bet you he sure as hell tests his grip safety next time.


PS: The guy that shot himself was not holstering an unloaded gun to my understanding. He was on a stage that had two strings. After the first string he had to top off and reholster which is when it happened. I heard he's going to be OK though.

[Jane]

sirveyr, on Feb 24 2009, 05:54 AM, said:

doncannon, on Feb 23 2009, 10:22 PM, said:

jhe888, on Feb 23 2009, 09:49 PM, said:

I just looked at the results. Looked like a lot of DQs. Anyone know what happened?

All but a few were equipment related. Mostly not making power factor. A few overweight.

Don

Great, now they have weight-classes! I hope I can still compete in the light-heavyweight class.

Yo, Dude! Not much new here.
The oldest rule book I have is from 2000 (the Little Red Book), and its weight limits for ESP and CDP are the same as today's.
The next rule book (Little Green Book) didn't change them.
The 2005 rule book added a weight limit for SSP guns (which bumped my P226ST/.357 out of SSP).

None of this should be a surprise to anybody who shoots IDPA.

[Glock3422]

Jane, on Feb 24 2009, 09:28 AM, said:

Yo, Dude! Not much new here.
The oldest rule book I have is from 2000 (the Little Red Book), and its weight limits for ESP and CDP are the same as today's.
The next rule book (Little Green Book) didn't change them.
The 2005 rule book added a weight limit for SSP guns (which bumped my P226ST/.357 out of SSP).

None of this should be a surprise to anybody who shoots IDPA.

It was to the shooter with the stainless Sig.

[BerKim]

Jane, on Feb 24 2009, 08:28 AM, said:

None of this should be a surprise to anybody who shoots IDPA.

I think they're talkng about the competitors weight

[Jane]

BerKim, on Feb 24 2009, 09:07 AM, said:

Jane, on Feb 24 2009, 08:28 AM, said:

None of this should be a surprise to anybody who shoots IDPA.

I think they're talkng about the competitors weight

LOL... that's the trouble with us computer programmers. So literal minded

[Sac Law Man]

Right on Jane, if you're going to play the game. know the rules.

[robertbank]

Sac Law Man, on Feb 24 2009, 11:23 AM, said:

Right on Jane, if you're going to play the game. know the rules.

As a matter of interest did they weigh down to a tenth of an ounce or did they round to the nearest ounce?

Take Care

Bob

[Aristotle]

Are the rules regarding the guns "safety" based primarily to address mechanical advantage, or safety concerns?

If it is to address safety concerns, seems to me they put some people at risk allowing an "unsafe" gun to shoot. I can understand allowing someone that went "sub minor" or even a gun that didn't make weight, to finish a match. But if the gun was deemed "unsafe" I would not have allowed it to continue shooting the match.

This is not to say that I believe a pinned GS is unsafe. But if they view it as an unsafe gun, per the rule book. It should not have been allowed to finish the match.

This post has been edited by Aristotle: 24 February 2009 - 10:54 AM

[wooddog]

Aristotle, on Feb 24 2009, 12:50 PM, said:

This is not to say that I believe a pinned GS is unsafe. But if they view it as an unsafe gun, per the rule book. It should not have been allowed to finish the match.

I agree, if it's not safe its not safe otherwise, drop the rule.

Sounds like a great match though!

Lots of hard work by the crew obviously paid off. Well done!

[Glock3422]

robertbank, on Feb 24 2009, 10:38 AM, said:

Sac Law Man, on Feb 24 2009, 11:23 AM, said:

Right on Jane, if you're going to play the game. know the rules.

As a matter of interest did they weigh down to a tenth of an ounce or did they round to the nearest ounce?

Take Care

Bob

It is my understanding that the weights were taken in whole ounces. That is, tenths were ignored giving up to 9/10s leeway. I heard the Sig was 5 ounces over SSP.

[rr4406pak]

When they posted the results at the match there were a lot of INCs too.
These do not appear in the final results now posted on the match site.
http://www.matchreg..../2009-02-19.htm
I know what the DNFs are but how are the INCs different?

[nwb01]

I believe INC are from people that didn't show up.

[lugnut]

rr4406pak, on Feb 24 2009, 01:53 PM, said:

When they posted the results at the match there were a lot of INCs too.
These do not appear in the final results now posted on the match site.
http://www.matchreg..../2009-02-19.htm
I know what the DNFs are but how are the INCs different?

I know that at least a few are from people that had to leave before completing the match. Nothing to do with the match itself... just personal reasons.