MN3GUNGROUP Rules: Red dot = Iron Sights? What the...?

[Snowgun]

From http://www.mn3gungroup.org/

03-23-11 --EQUIPMENT / RULES CHANGE

MN 3 Gun Group is going to experiment with a change that has national attention. We will allow RDS, (Aimpoint, Eotech) zero magnification optics to compete in Tactical Iron(Limited) and Heavy Metal on a trial basis. One sighting system will be allowed. Questions on this to be referred to jay@mn3gungroup.org

I may have misinterpreted this update...but if not I just want to say....EFFIN BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

This is super lame, especially for Heavy Metal. It kills the entire spirit of competing with a weapons system THAT DOESN"T HAVE TO USE **** BATTERIES. There is a reason why a red dot will put you in a different classification in USPSA, because it's COMPLETELY DIFFERENT EQUIPMENT.

Open iron sights will not be able to compete on a level field with red dot. NEVER. That's why the made they damn things in the first place! They have better parallax and target acquisition than a standard iron sight setup.

Are we gonna put them on the shotguns and pistols too for Heavy metal and Iron Limited? Can we even call it **** IRON or METAL anymore?

Man this bums me out.

[goalie]

While I don't shoot 3-gun, I would really question it if I was shooting iron sights. What could possibly be the rationale of allowing battery operated sights in the iron-sight class?

Can you use a red-dot on your stock service pistol? Would people complain in practical handgun shooting competition if they had to shoot against a red-dot with their irons? Why would anyone think it would be different with rifles?

[mnmike59]

Rifles have Iron sights?

[J.Schmitt]

I, along with others from mn 3 gun group changed this. It has been a national topic for quite some time. It has been covered in depth on other forums. I shoot irons, by the way. But the fact is that the divisions are dying. This is a trial. Other ranges are trying this too. USPSA changed their rulebook to this,and while we don't toe that line they also are not uninformed as The need to save divisions. We have almost no iron shooters left. I shot tac ops last week at holmen because their were no iron shooters. I still shot my irons though. I would love to see the resurgence of irons.

Some data, of 3 major matches, irons have won over RDS.

Again this is a trial, I would be happy to answer any questions.

[Snowgun]

I, along with others from mn 3 gun group changed this. It has been a national topic for quite some time. It has been covered in depth on other forums. I shoot irons, by the way. But the fact is that the divisions are dying. This is a trial. Other ranges are trying this too. USPSA changed their rulebook to this,and while we don't toe that line they also are not uninformed as The need to save divisions. We have almost no iron shooters left. I shot tac ops last week at holmen because their were no iron shooters. I still shot my irons though. I would love to see the resurgence of irons.

Some data, of 3 major matches, irons have won over RDS.

Again this is a trial, I would be happy to answer any questions.

If these are the current USPSA rules:

http://www.uspsa.org/rules/2011_Multigu ... 5_2010.pdf

Then they just split the HM division into tactical and limited. I don't see a problem with that, since you can still shoot in an iron sight division, however the flip side is it decreases the number of people in each division further...These are the rules on the 3 gun group web site...They seem to split the division as well.

http://www.mn3gungroup.org/pdf/MN_3_GUN ... 5B1%5D.pdf

So what is the deal? Are they killing heavy metal pump and lumping it in with heavy optics?

I just don't understand why these divisions are dying. I am starting 3 gun this year and am trying to shoot HM with irons. I met another guy at the SCAPSA shoot who is starting HM with irons this year as well. I think saying multigun is growing around the nation is a valid statement. Therefore, why are divisions "dying"?

As the number of people shooting 3 gun grows, people will navigate to divisions that are less populated. This is seen in the USPSA and IDPA leagues around here, and the number of people involved in those sports are growing as well. The answer doesn't seem to homogenize the divisions until everyone is shooting against one another with different equipment.

And while it is possible for a skilled iron sight shooter to beat a red dot shooter on a given day, there is no doubt that optics have an advantage, and that combining these equipment setups into a class WILL really kill iron sights. Who wants to play with a handicap?

I hope that this gets changed for multigun. I hope that this year a bunch of new people like myself come out and fill up the ranks to make multigun in this area a success. However I'm pretty upset that my first year of three gun, getting excited to set up my HM rig, is hosed since I have to play with a bunch of optic gamers.

It will be interesting to see how IDPA's DMG matches work out, since they have plenty of iron sight divisions built in. First one is this Sunday.

[goalie]

In light of your answer, I guess I will rephrase the question: Would anyone expect it to go smoothly if, during practical handgun competition, it was deemed that the stock/stock service pistol/iron sight divisions were "dying" and they made people shooting stock Glocks shoot and compete against people shooting with red-dot optics on their handgun?

This would appear to be no different other than the length of the firearm in question.

Or, to look at it another way, do you think that by making people shooting irons compete against people using optics you will lose or gain shooters using irons? If the answer is lose, then isn't the solution worse than the alleged problem (dying iron sight division) it is trying to solve?

[rugersol]

In USPSA, we have "major" and "minor", in the same divisions. Anything but an "A" hit is 1pt less, for "minor".

Off the top of my head, I'd suggest, if someone were to use iron sights, they could be awarded 1pt more, for any hit ... regardless of caliber or anything else. So, if they shot "minor", with irons, they'd be flush with someone else shooting "major" with an optic.

This would not further split any division. It would be shooter's choice. If 1pt more for any hit proves to be too much, they could then back it off to only "A" hits ... or whatever.

Justa thought.

BTW, anyone know if a "tactical" comp is ok for a Heavy Metal rifle? Can't seem to find that one, nowhere.

[Keith]

BTW, anyone know if a "tactical" comp is ok for a Heavy Metal rifle? Can't seem to find that one, nowhere.

Most matches seem to follow the 1" diameter x 3.00 long rule for comps. Anything bigger than that and it is considered open. But then again, some matches allow the JP tank brakes in all divisions.

[westberg]

You know guy's, equipment plays only a small role in a competitors finish in a given match. The competitors skill on any given match day is more important to a win then equipment. In local matches there are open shooters who are soundly beaten by production equipment every match. Don't get your undies in a bundle about this and just shoot the match and have fun.

I will add the exception to this is when you reach the higher levels of the game.

[rugersol]

You know guy's, equipment plays only a small role in a competitors finish in a given match. The competitors skill on any given match day is more important to a win then equipment. In local matches there are open shooters who are soundly beaten by production equipment every match. Don't get your undies in a bundle about this and just shoot the match and have fun.

I will add the exception to this is when you reach the higher levels of the game.

Talk all ya want, Ron ... we're NOT lettin' ya shoot Ltd-10 with a dot 'n comp!

[westberg]

You know guy's, equipment plays only a small role in a competitors finish in a given match. The competitors skill on any given match day is more important to a win then equipment. In local matches there are open shooters who are soundly beaten by production equipment every match. Don't get your undies in a bundle about this and just shoot the match and have fun.

I will add the exception to this is when you reach the higher levels of the game.

Talk all ya want, Ron ... we're NOT lettin' ya shoot Ltd-10 with a dot 'n comp!

Damn......I tried!!

[goalie]

You know guy's, equipment plays only a small role in a competitors finish in a given match. The competitors skill on any given match day is more important to a win then equipment. In local matches there are open shooters who are soundly beaten by production equipment every match. Don't get your undies in a bundle about this and just shoot the match and have fun.

I will add the exception to this is when you reach the higher levels of the game.

Now, as someone on the outside looking in, I see some serious flaws in the logic.

While I agree that the arrow<indian for the most part until the higher skill levels make the arrow relevant, telling "noobs" not to get their undies in a bunch and shoot against optics with irons is not going to result in a huge influx of new shooters.

Someone posted that they were part of this decision. They said that the decision was based upon too few iron shooters. Making the iron shooters compete directly with optics users seems like it would be a way to end up with even less iron shooters than before, not more.

In my case, I just picked up an AR that is appropriate for shooting 3-gun. Now I actually have a G17, a Mossberg 590A1, and a rifle that doesn't weigh a ton.....that has irons. I have no intentions of putting optics on it for quite some time.

If I want to shoot for fun, I can do that any time at my cabin or range. If I come out to shoot a match, I would like to pay my money to compete on a level field. Why would I pay money to compete directly against red dots and optics? If I am going to just have fun and completely not GAS, then why compete?


In the end, if it isn't a big deal, why not just make optics/red dots illegal? That would increase the number of iron shooters, right?




Analogy: this weekend I will be in Rochester playing in a tournament. I am now playing in one of the old guy's divisions. If we show up tonight and the team we are playing has a bunch of 20-somethings, should we just play and have fun, despite being in a tournament? No, we would get our panties in a bunch. You pay to play, and while our days of winning the younger divisions is past, we did do it, and we did it several times while we were MUCH older than the competition in average age. If the tournament allowed 20-somethings to play against us this weekend, we would not be back next year despite playing the Return of the Robin for over a decade.

Justa say'n

[Snowgun]

I totally agree with goalie.

And to Ron's point, I don't' care if people have little infractions like over sized mag wells or their gun is to heavy by ounces or they have a holster that is dimensionally inaccurate. I agree, just focus on your shooting and have fun.

But when optics are added verses irons, or someone has twice as many rounds in their magazine, I call foul. I want to gauge my performance against a (rougly) level playing field, and I want to use that to focus my practice and become better.

Ahrens idea of a points adjustment a la major/minor is an interesting one...

[westberg]

I guess your right then, every one who puts on dot will kick your ass, might as well stay home.

I guess at the last match you didn't see anyone missing using optics. If your worrying that much about your gear then your counting too much on it and not your skill.

[goalie]

I guess your right then, every one who puts on dot will kick your ass, might as well stay home.

I guess at the last match you didn't see anyone missing using optics. If your worrying that much about your gear then your counting too much on it and not your skill.

You are missing the point.

Back to the analogy. If I wanted to play hockey against 20 year olds this weekend, I could. I am choosing to play against other old guys like myself. I will NOT be happy if the tournament allows a bunch of 20-somethings to play in the fossil division. If they did, my team would not go back. We can play for FREE against young kids without driving to Rochester.

So, again, you can talk all the smack you want, you can try to belittle people's opinion on it, but I have a strong feeling that you are not going to get new 3-gun shooters to pay to play when they are paying to play on an uneven playing field.

If it's a good idea, let USPSA have the stock service pistol guys shoot against the open guys. By the logic being used, it shouldn't hurt attendance at all........

Oh, and just for the record, are YOU going to shoot irons against the optics? I think you should do it with all three guns and see how fun it is.

Justa say'n