Do you draw your DA/SA pistol with hammer down or cocked and locked?

[Canuck44]

Posted by: Canuck44
"The effect the draw has on scoring I believe is overstated in any event and plays a smaller part in the shooters overall score than most realize."   This simply not true.  If you take a B class shooter that draws and fires their first in 1.75sec. and work with them to improve their draw to 1.00 to the first shot, this is a huge gain.  in the coarse of most matches it will = 3-4sec. and that will move you ahead of a lot of competitors.

That would be true if you were firing your gun immediately after the gun was drawn.  In IPSC/USPSA and to a lessor extent IDPA you are moving towards a position while you are drawing and the movement time is longer than the draw.  Put in simple terms if you and I have to travel 10 steps before engaging a target if you have your gun ready in two steps and I in four  and we move at the same speed our first shot will take place at exactly the same time even though you drew your gun two steps faster. 

The only time a fast draw can separate the men from the boys is when the first shot will take place immediately or almost immediately after the draw.  There are stages where this happens but not as often as some would think.  There is a lot that can go wrong along the way to negate all the advantages of a fast draw.  I didn;t say it has no affect on rersults but it isn't as great as some would think

The IDPA Classifier certainly favours a fast draw.

Take care

Bob

[Bossgobbler]

 the USPSA Classifier are 90% stand and draw, they favor a fast draw.  I shoot 4-5 USPSA matches a month, 65% of the stages can be shot with a fast draw. A fast draw is important, If someone doesn't have a fast draw= they are slow and at the bottom of the match results.  For an old fat guy I manage to be in the top 15%-20% at each match.
 
 "if you and I have to travel 10 steps before engaging a target if you have your gun ready in two steps and I in four  and we move at the same speed our first shot will take place at exactly the same time even though you drew your gun two steps faster."

If the stage permits I will draw and fire in my first step, by shooting on the move not stopping to engage targets saving more time.

[Canuck44]

If the stage permits I will draw and fire in my first step, by shooting on the move not stopping to engage targets saving more time.

It is when you can't do that where you gain no advantage.  I am not familiar with USPSA rules.  IPSC has Qualifier matches and it is scores from the Qualifier Matches that determines your Classification.    I would not use the word rare butcertainly the majority of the stage starts involve movement before shots are available to be taken.  If you were 25/100 faster than I on a draw you would over 10 stages gain 2.5 seconds which using IPSC scoring would be lost on you with a few more Alphas or a blown reload.

Personally I spend more time practicing my transitions and reloads for IDPA than I do working on my draw.  Using a cover garment a good draw for me is 1.45 seconds, a bad one, 1.60 seconds.   I am about 22/100 faster without a cover garment.   It is what it is and I am in it for the fun because the days of running over the youngsters are over.

Take Care

Bob

[himurax13]

One item I would like to be changed in IDPA is the requirement that DA/SA pistols like the CZ be started hammer down.  The guns can safely be carried cocked and locked.  This would place the guns in the same condition of carry as the Striker fired guns.  Both designs would start with a light SA trigger pull.  I would argue this would see an end to the Striker fired dominance of SSP division.  It might also generate some interest in reviewing the decision to base divisions on the type of action the pistil has or how many modifications one can do on their toys.  Ah but that is for another discussion and another time.

Take Care

Bob

 

I totally agree. I would even be bold enough to say that it would be much safer since the possibility of an AD while decocking would be eliminated.  Heck,  all Striker fired guns can play in SSP now.

[Bossgobbler]

  [/quot] It is what it is and I am in it for the fun because the days of running over the youngsters are over.

Take Care

Bob
[/quote]
     Ain't that the truth. This is how it is with me also, Although I try the youngsters just seam to be getting faster each year.
Take care
Dave

[Canuck44]

If you want to shoot cocked and locked, shoot ESP or Limited.  The End.

And +1 to what bossgobbler said.

And if you want to shoot the gun the way it was meant to be carried, work to get the IDPA rule changed.  The rule made some sense as it is until the striker fired pistols came on the scene (DA/SA, DAO and Decocker models all started from the same basic condition of readiness).  The striker fired guns now dominate all three IDPA pistol divisions.  In part weight gives them an advantage, along with very light SA triggers.  (Forget the nonsense about them being double action, they aren't).  They are utterly reliable which also helps.  The End

Take Care

Bob

[himurax13]

If you want to shoot cocked and locked, shoot ESP or Limited.  The End.

And +1 to what bossgobbler said.

And if you want to shoot the gun the way it was meant to be carried, work to get the IDPA rule changed.  The rule made some sense as it is until the striker fired pistols came on the scene (DA/SA, DAO and Decocker models all started from the same basic condition of readiness).  The striker fired guns now dominate all three IDPA pistol divisions.  In part weight gives them an advantage, along with very light SA triggers.  (Forget the nonsense about them being double action, they aren't).  They are utterly reliable which also helps.  The End

Take Care

Bob

I totally agree.

That ridiculous reloading rule was changed after enough complaints.

[Canuck44]

[/quote]
I totally agree.

That ridiculous reloading rule was changed after enough complaints.
[/quote]

Sorry it hasn't been changed and remains in effect and I suspect will be going forward.  Certainly IPSC/USPSA have given no indication they will change their Production rule and despite efforts to the contrary IDPA is not likely going to change the rule either.  We all have our wish fulls and the the hammer down rule happens to be mine.

Take Care

Bob

[1SOW]

I think a lot of people forget these 'sports' are ALL GAMES.  IDPA is not a self defense teaching tool.  USPSA is not a Tactical, Carry or HD teaching tool.

These are designed for FUN and competition to measure and rate shooting progress within the rules of the games. 
Some shooters are said to be "Gaming" the rules when they use firearms and tactics just within the boundaries of the rules (intended or not) to optimize their "Game Scores".  This would be called being smart in other venues.

Ultimately,  any intense trigger time practicing good shooting basics is beneficial to the shooter.   Some procedures used form habits that may NOT be good outside the games.  Requesting changes to the rules not appreciated is good. 

Since all of these "games" are said to be for the members,  it would be cool the members at large were given the chance to vote pro or con on changes suggested annually by the membership.

Games I don't enjoy,  I don't play.

Just saying.


 

[Canuck44]

I think a lot of people forget these 'sports' are ALL GAMES.  IDPA is not a self defense teaching tool.  USPSA is not a Tactical, Carry or HD teaching tool.

These are designed for FUN and competition to measure and rate shooting progress within the rules of the games. 
Some shooters are said to be "Gaming" the rules when they use firearms and tactics just within the boundaries of the rules (intended or not) to optimize their "Game Scores".  This would be called being smart in other venues.

Ultimately,  any intense trigger time practicing good shooting basics is beneficial to the shooter.   Some procedures used form habits that may NOT be good outside the games.  Requesting changes to the rules not appreciated is good. 

Since all of these "games" are said to be for the members,  it would be cool the members at large were given the chance to vote pro or con on changes suggested annually by the membership.

Games I don't enjoy,  I don't play.

Just saying.

I agree to a point but lately we have seen way to much "member" involvement in the rules of IDPA.  The present rule book is an improvement in format to the 2005 version but is now going under the knife within a year of issuing the new version to hopefully clean up some of the poorly written aspects that came with the re-write.  The phrase "to many cooks in the kitchen" comes to mind.

Take care

Bob

[himurax13]

Sorry it hasn't been changed and remains in effect and I suspect will be going forward.  Certainly IPSC/USPSA have given no indication they will change their Production rule and despite efforts to the contrary IDPA is not likely going to change the rule either.  We all have our wish fulls and the the hammer down rule happens to be mine.

Take Care

Bob

Hmm, I reread the Eblast.

The first, and one of the biggest announcements, is on the flatfooted reload. While we thought we were headed the right direction with this, it became obvious that the membership at large did not like this new rule and that we missed the mark by implementing it. The members have spoken using the suggestion tool and we listened. When this version of the rule book becomes effective, the flat footed reload will not be gone. Big cheers all around we are sure.

Wow, I wonder if this is to keep those of us who are getting older and slower a fighting chance? It seems the RO's at my club were misinformed.

[Canuck44]

Sorry it hasn't been changed and remains in effect and I suspect will be going forward.  Certainly IPSC/USPSA have given no indication they will change their Production rule and despite efforts to the contrary IDPA is not likely going to change the rule either.  We all have our wish fulls and the the hammer down rule happens to be mine.

Take Care

Bob

Hmm, I reread the Eblast.

The first, and one of the biggest announcements, is on the flatfooted reload. While we thought we were headed the right direction with this, it became obvious that the membership at large did not like this new rule and that we missed the mark by implementing it. The members have spoken using the suggestion tool and we listened. When this version of the rule book becomes effective, the flat footed reload will not be gone. Big cheers all around we are sure.

Wow, I wonder if this is to keep those of us who are getting older and slower a fighting chance? It seems the RO's at my club were misinformed.

The Flat footed Reload will be gone with the new rule book and HQ has already announced it.  Not sure of your quote.  What we don;t know is what will come in to replace the FFR.

Here is the copy of the amended eblast correcting their typo:

"The first, and one of the biggest announcements, is on the flatfooted reload. While we thought we were headed the right direction with this, it became obvious that the membership at large did not like this new rule and that we missed the mark by implementing it. The members have spoken using the suggestion tool and we listened. When this version of the rule book becomes effective, the flat footed reload will now be gone. Big cheers all around we are sure."


 

Take Care

Bob

[andrewtac]

One item I would like to be changed in IDPA is the requirement that DA/SA pistols like the CZ be started hammer down.  The guns can safely be carried cocked and locked.  This would place the guns in the same condition of carry as the Striker fired guns.  Both designs would start with a light SA trigger pull.  I would argue this would see an end to the Striker fired dominance of SSP division.   

Beating the striker fired pistol shooters in IDPA hardly depends on needing that first shot to be SA.  If you want to use that as your excuse, have at it.

Concur, recent convert and I am where I was if not a little quicker.  I thought in the other sport there has been a shift towards hammer fired da/sa pistols.

[Canuck44]

One item I would like to be changed in IDPA is the requirement that DA/SA pistols like the CZ be started hammer down.  The guns can safely be carried cocked and locked.  This would place the guns in the same condition of carry as the Striker fired guns.  Both designs would start with a light SA trigger pull.  I would argue this would see an end to the Striker fired dominance of SSP division.   

Beating the striker fired pistol shooters in IDPA hardly depends on needing that first shot to be SA.  If you want to use that as your excuse, have at it.

You obviously have not spent much time in the sport.  Aside from the hammer/striker issue there are others that tend to favour the polymer guns.  Weight is one.  Lighter guns can, for most, be drawn faster than heavier guns.  Transitions from one target to another also, for most, can be done faster by lighter guns.  Becaus e IDPA for the most part has fewer shooting positions than say IPSC/USPSA transition times between targets play a larger role in IDPA.  Why?  IDPA limits the amount of movement between shooting positions and total movement on a stage and the stages are shorter.

At any given IPSC Qualifier you might see one or two Glock/M&P's in evidence.  Contrast that with any large USPSA match.  The two significant differences in Production Division are 1) the 5# First shot rule and the fact Glock 34/35's are not allowed in IPSC Production Division.  The latter is the lessor of the two influences.  IPSC Production Division is dominated by CZ DA/SA guns - the Shadow in the main, and Tanfoglio DA/SA guns.  At the IDPA US NAtionals last year there were exactly 12 SP-01 Shadows reported in the hands of competitors out of a total of 355 gun models reported.  There were 133 Glock 34/17 and M&P PRO/FS 9MM models reported.  Because I shoot CZ and M&P's in the main when I am not shooting revolver I tend to watch these stats.  Over the past three years the nuber of CZ's has increased three fold.  It wasn't that long ago when only 4 CZ's were logged in at the Nationals.

Alpha the rules of any sport often dictate the type of equipment used.  What wins as well plays a major part in the selection of equipment by competitors.  You can agree or not it is what it is.

I would not be surprised to see the rules address some of this.  Some have suggested the present SSP/ESP Divisions be re-aligned into DA/SA, DAO, SA guns in one division and Striker Fired into another all shooting 125PF.  Radical I know but doable.  There is so little difference between SSP and ESP now some feel it maybe time for a reflection.  We shall see. 

Take Care

Bob
Ps It has nothing to do with excuses.  I am way beyond worrying about the reasons why I don't finish higher than mid Sharpshooter in any Division I enter.  I found peace with my shooting performances years ago.  It is more about the fun factor and enjoying the moment.

[motosapiens]

You obviously have not spent much time in the sport.  Aside from the hammer/striker issue there are others that tend to favour the polymer guns.  Weight is one.  Lighter guns can, for most, be drawn faster than heavier guns.  Transitions from one target to another also, for most, can be done faster by lighter guns.  Becaus e IDPA for the most part has fewer shooting positions than say IPSC/USPSA transition times between targets play a larger role in IDPA.  Why?  IDPA limits the amount of movement between shooting positions and total movement on a stage and the stages are shorter.

I think you're completely wrong. If striker-fired pistols dominate ssp, it's because very few good shooters bother shooting IDPA. The same guys that are at the top of USPSA would be at the top of IDPA using the same guns if they thought it was worth competing in that venue.