Powderman, that is all fair enough, and I certainly see your points. But let me make a few counter-points and maybe we can help bridge the perceived gap between fun and games, so to speak.
However, I must be a stick in the mud--because I fail to see anything FUN and RELAXING about having to shoot unrealistic scenarios, under unrealistic conditions, with unrealistic rules (as far as I can see) ...
If I go to the range for a fun shoot, me and a couple of friends bring out some steel targets, set them up in various configurations, and go about hosing them with our handguns of choice.
Several things here. If you don't enjoy the scenarios and you find rules in general to be stifling, then organized competition is never going to appeal to you. And that's perfectly fine. If you prefer setting out an array of targets and just plain shooting them -- that's great!
If, however, you like to work through more complex shooting problems, and test out more complicated skills, then a formal match setting can offer you a chance to compare "apples-to-apples" how well you do a task vs. how someone else might do it. By somewhat strictly defining what the shooter is supposed to do, you get everyone to try to accomplish the same task in relatively the same way, so making time and accuracy comparisons between shooters is relevant.
IDPA tends to test a very specific set of motions on any given stage as the positions and order are pre-determined (
"how fast and accurately can you shoot this stage THIS way?)." USPSA tends to test a bit more of pre-shoot strategizing as the shooter may choose to approach the stage in a different way than others did and so save time by his approach, rather than his speed. (I.e., "
How fast a way can you find to shoot this stage?")
Either way, a competition also gives you a chance to benefit from a larger group's efforts in setting up a series of complex shooting problems and providing a set competition and safety format which means you get to do more shooting and more involved shooting without having to do quite so much setting up and breaking down, and dealing with the "logistics" of range day. That can be of great benefit, even if you don't care at all about competition results.
Toss in someone with a Napoleon complex yelling at you, and in my way of thinking that's a perfectly good way to ruin your day.
And that's a great way to ruin
any day. No one should act like that on the range (unless there is a safety issue), competition or no.
If I go to the range for practice, it's different. I put on my duty gear and practice, along with anyone else who is with me. We practice holster presentations, two and three shot drills, position shooting, and a bunch of other stuff.
So you split your range days between "practice" and "fun shoots?" That's fine, and a good ol' fashioned blasting day can be a hoot. If that's what you're looking for, avoiding a competition setting makes a lot of sense.
On the other hand, from a "practice" setting, competition can be whatever you're willing to make out of it. Want to race? That's fine, and you might win a plaque or some bragging rights. Want to practice sound self-defense techniques? That's o.k. too (maybe mention that to the SO) take your time, use cover correctly, use your duty or carry equipment, and make the most of some varied and interesting shooting problem-solving opportunities.
I shoot with a few law-enforcement types who do exactly that. I've SO'd officers who will take 5 minutes (instead of the usual 1-1/2 minute par time) to work through our shoot house (as an example) because they are being exceedingly careful not to expose themselves to threats, making sure they identify the non-threats correctly, avoiding potentially lethal blind corners and other pitfalls. They're very happy for the opportunity to shoot a more complex scene, rather than the stand-and-deliver qualification stuff they normally can do, or whatever scenario stages they might have the time and energy to set up on their own.
unrealistic scenarios, ... with unrealistic rules (as far as I can see)
This is, IMHO, a frequently misunderstood issue. If you read through the rule book, there are hints about this written right in there. The "unrealistic" scenarios are not supposed to be taken at face value -- as though you'll get out on the street and someone will be telling you, "now stand on one foot and hide behind this paper tree..." In the real world, you may have to shoot under a car, but over the curb it's parked next to. Or you may have very scant cover and have to shield yourself behind something oddly-shaped, like a fire plug. Or, you might have to move a certain odd direction, while shooting at the threat as you can. Or, might have to move forward because of something changing or unpleasant behind you, when you'd rather move back, etc. We can't duplicate every REAL threat or condition on the range, but we can write stages that make the shooter perform a specific, unusual shooting task. The point is not to suffer through the stages complaining about how unrealistically they might be written, but to practice the widest possible variety of shooting tasks so that, no matter what you end up having to do in real life, you've gotten to practice something like that before.
Now, some folks can't get past the idea of shooting scenarios featuring many (up to nine in IDPA) attackers or that require a lot of movement (only 15 total yards in IDPA). My view is this: No, if there are nine armed guys out to get me, I'm probably not going to prevail. Accepted. However, if I set up one target, or two, or three, I can script out my motions and sort of choreograph how I will shoot. Strategize, plan, and completely unrealistically predetermine how I'll shoot the scene. The more targets I add, and the more movement I have to do, the less capably I can control all that, and the more I am forced to shoot in reaction to the targets as I see them. It isn't completely realistically random, but the longer and more involved the stage may be, the closer we're getting to pure reactive skills.
In other words, not choreographing, "
now, my foot will go here, tap-tap, then three steps, half-turn, tap-tap, reload, step, step, break the next shot..." That is
predictive. Instead, working
reactively, so that your motions and shots are defined by the cover as you find it and the targets as you happen to see them. Personally, I'd much MUCH favor "blind" stages, but there are competition reasons why we don't usually run those. A long stage with lots of "threats" is about the next best thing.
under unrealistic conditions
Competition often wins here, too. In the action shooting sports, we've got many (sometimes hundreds) of competitors traveling to shoot, lots of time and effort expended, and
the show will go on. I've shot in torrential rain (MANY times), blizzard conditions, hungover, sick, COLLLLLD, so hot the sweat ran off my hands and stung my eyes, wearing shorts, t-shirt, and tennis shoes, wearing three pairs of pants, five shirts, and coveralls, snow boots and gaiters -- you name it.
Last year I shot a match where the temps didn't break the mid 20s, 8" of snow fell
during the match, and I had been violently ill all week, still couldn't eat, and was weak as a kitten.
If I was just plinking or even seriously practicing on my own time, I'd have been home in bed with some chicken soup, where it was warm, where it was dry, reclining in the A/C, or otherwise avoiding those "unrealistic conditions" present at probably 30% of the matches I shoot. I'd only shoot my guns when they were clean and comfortable to the touch. I'd never engage any targets after taking a swan dive onto a piece of carpet under an inch of 40 deg. rainwater. I'd have never run my gun after picking my mags up out of a foot of heavily trampled mud. I'd have never had to use two hands to change mags 'cause my thumbs were too cold to work the mag catch. ETC.
But, thanks to the unrealistic nature of competition, I have done all those things and know what to expect if I ever have to "for real."
IF you accept that there is any validity to competition, then you have to accept that there are some rules to define what everyone's doing. If there are no rules, we could all "WIN" in the best possible way by reacting to the timer "BEEP" by immediately running to our cars and GOING HOME! Hey, no shots fired and I made it home alive -- I WON!
If there are rules, then there exists the chance for someone to try and break them -- not in order to save their own life as in a gun fight -- but to simply walk away with a trophy or award that they didn't actually earn as the other shooters did. That's demonstrably unethical, and the sort of thing a "Failure To Do Right" penalty is supposed to deal with. If you want a trophy and you can't out-shoot your fellow competitors -- go BUY one. Don't cheat them and yourself.
But--if you're in a situation that requires you to "run and gun", doing multiple reloads, you'd better have a rifle.
Really? Most of us don't carry rifles around all day. What are we supposed to do? Quit? Ask for a gun-fight rain-check 'cause we didn't bring the right equipment? Maybe being able to move and shoot is an important skill to have -- with the equipment you actually DO carry.
I'm guessing you really haven't read through the rules if you're complaining about PEs. 1st off they are MINOR score hits. 2nd, a lot of them make some sense.
Like, don't lean out from behind cover and expose yourself to bad guy A in order to shoot bad guy B who is more hidden. Take care of the bad guys in the order you see them and they would see you. Common sense, right? Yeah, pretty much. So, if you stand out from behind cover and shoot like you're bulletproof, you're going to get three seconds added to your time. Hey, it's probably not a good idea anyway. Why complain about the three second penalty?
Or, don't leave a position of cover and then do a reload. Get your gun loaded before you head out into danger. Makes sense, right?
Or, don't drop your ammo and leave it behind. Yeah, if pressed you might have to do a speed reload and might leave a round or two in a spent mag, but most folks don't carry a whole lot of ammo every day -- might be a good idea to remember to keep it with you. Who knows, you might want it later.
If getting 3 seconds tacked onto your score for such things is really killing you, I guess it's YOU that's taking things too seriously.
