Who is going to the SWAT sponsered match in Laughlin?
- Thread starter gl
- Start date
- Status
Andrew Wyatt
Member
I'll be there. I 've heard it's a great match, and is one of the first national 3-gun matches.
I'll be practicing setting up plates to ready myself for it.
I'll be practicing setting up plates to ready myself for it.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
I don't know who here will be there, but Denny Hansen, correia, George Hill, and several others have shot the match, and they all seem to dig it.
Zak Smith
Member
I can't make it mainly because it starts on a Tuesday and ends on a Saturday. I just can't afford an entire week off from work, to merely shoot a match.
-z
-z
BerettaNut92
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2002
- Messages
- 9,723
No paid vacays for me either
Andrew Wyatt
Member
Denny Hansen
Member
See you there, Andrew.
Denny
Denny
Rich Lucibella
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 21
Rob, Denny, Ashley Emerson and I are shooting for the S.W.A.T. Team this year. All who drop by, please drop by!
Rich
Rich
Archie
Member
Hmmmmmm
$300 is a little steep for an entry fee. At least for me.
$300 is a little steep for an entry fee. At least for me.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
Cost covers the match, banquet, t shirt and hat. Other matches don't have banquets and expect you to buy a t-shirt and hat separately.
Rich Lucibella
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 21
The organizers have had enough...at least that's what I was told 15 minutes prior to the banquet on the last night.
It seems the match attendance has been falling since SOF discontinued sponsorship....little wonder as the SOF Convention drew scores of shooters that now have to be attracted separately. It requires a whole new approach.
Lyle, Mike and Mike are good organizers. They're just not marketing people.
Our efforts to assist with suggestions like Industry Teams, an Industry Class and free shoots for sponsors were pretty much rejected. Shooters come for the prizes. Sponsors provide prizes for exposure. Other than the web site and in our Magazine, I think the sponsors really got short changed on this one.
I can't say I'm happy about the timing.....we might not have provided the first ever free reception on Friday night, had we known their hearts weren't in it. But I'm not unhappy about the outcome....fresh blood never hurts an event.
Wes Doss, who saved the match at Denny's request by providing the outstanding range, will be organizing a successor match....Lyle promised to provide the shooter and sponsor contacts to him.
As for S.W.A.T., there'll never be another "S.W.A.T. Magazine Match", unless we decide to plan, organize and run one ourselves. We'll sponsor and promote truly tactical matches, but our name will never again be seen in that particular manner without a whole bunch more control over the event, the activities, the courses of fire and the Sponsor perks.
Rich
It seems the match attendance has been falling since SOF discontinued sponsorship....little wonder as the SOF Convention drew scores of shooters that now have to be attracted separately. It requires a whole new approach.
Lyle, Mike and Mike are good organizers. They're just not marketing people.
Our efforts to assist with suggestions like Industry Teams, an Industry Class and free shoots for sponsors were pretty much rejected. Shooters come for the prizes. Sponsors provide prizes for exposure. Other than the web site and in our Magazine, I think the sponsors really got short changed on this one.
I can't say I'm happy about the timing.....we might not have provided the first ever free reception on Friday night, had we known their hearts weren't in it. But I'm not unhappy about the outcome....fresh blood never hurts an event.
Wes Doss, who saved the match at Denny's request by providing the outstanding range, will be organizing a successor match....Lyle promised to provide the shooter and sponsor contacts to him.
As for S.W.A.T., there'll never be another "S.W.A.T. Magazine Match", unless we decide to plan, organize and run one ourselves. We'll sponsor and promote truly tactical matches, but our name will never again be seen in that particular manner without a whole bunch more control over the event, the activities, the courses of fire and the Sponsor perks.
Rich
Zak Smith
Member
Anyone have pictures?
Rich Lucibella
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 21
Anyone can be a critic. The trick is to offer something constructive.
8 Stages of Fire. Enough for anyone.
Were they appropriate? Were they realistic? I'm not willing to nit-pick those points. You'll just have to speak to attendees or wait for the article in S.W.A.T.
What I will say is this: I don't think that a "tactical" match should lend itself to $3K rifles and handguns with mag wells that render them non-concealable. I don't think that a "tactical" match should lend itself to plastic bags over holstered weapons or Airsoft Guns to protect holsters from dust because the actual weapons are too finicky or too expensive to be exposed to the weather.
I don't believe that the winners would have changed with real world equipment....those with talent; those who PRACTICE were obvious. But I would have liked to see lots more carry weapons than "acceptified" IPSC guns.
The contestants were exceptional. FirePower FP's team was there...and won. Pueblo PD was there....and won. JP Enterprises team was there...and won. I have enormous respect for all those who braved the 104 degree temps, the hikes, the runs and the shoots.
Rich
8 Stages of Fire. Enough for anyone.
Were they appropriate? Were they realistic? I'm not willing to nit-pick those points. You'll just have to speak to attendees or wait for the article in S.W.A.T.
What I will say is this: I don't think that a "tactical" match should lend itself to $3K rifles and handguns with mag wells that render them non-concealable. I don't think that a "tactical" match should lend itself to plastic bags over holstered weapons or Airsoft Guns to protect holsters from dust because the actual weapons are too finicky or too expensive to be exposed to the weather.
I don't believe that the winners would have changed with real world equipment....those with talent; those who PRACTICE were obvious. But I would have liked to see lots more carry weapons than "acceptified" IPSC guns.
The contestants were exceptional. FirePower FP's team was there...and won. Pueblo PD was there....and won. JP Enterprises team was there...and won. I have enormous respect for all those who braved the 104 degree temps, the hikes, the runs and the shoots.
Rich
Rich, I told the same thing to Rob and Denny already, but if any of you guys do decide to put on a truely practical/tactical match, let me know. I would love to help out. I'm a match director myself, so I might even be halfway useful. Seriously give me a heads up if you need help in the future.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
The airsoft guns thing was the result of a new RO not recognizing that that's a DQ.
As to the magazine well and 3,000 dollar rifle issue, kurt miller explaines it pretty darn well.
On this post in response to some stuff about last year's match.
It's the indian, not the arrow.
and another thing, why is it untactical to keep your gun clean? are you saying that soldiers shoudn't bag up their guns when given the chance to when they're in sandy and dusty environments like the fort mojave range?
The whole purpose of matches like ours is research and development. If SWPL and IPSC never existed, you's likely be carrying around a 1911 without a beveled magawine well, with thumbnail sights, and a small safety, that would only feed ball.
I apologise in advance for sounding like jerk, but it makes me angry to hear people complain about the match when my whole family worked our arses off to bring it off.
Zak Smith
Member
I'm a newbie to big matches, but I have the following observations of human nature:
0. If it's scored, timed, and prizes are given, it's a competition. People want to win.
1. If it's a competition, some people are going to spend a lot of money on their equipment to give them whatever edge they can. For example, you can shoot Limited class in IPSC with a Glock 22 and beat just about everyone if you're good enough -- but people still spend $2500 on a STI/SVI. A $3k rifle? Heck, you buy a DSA FAL or "Match" M1A and some good optics, and you're already to about $2500.
2. Corollary: If it's a competition, some people will limit their equipment and performance behavior by mainly what the rules define. (A good example of this might be the 50% (?) cover rule in IDPA.) Or it might mean having "untactical" mag holders that only leave exposed 2" of your mags.
The following might be a naive suggestion, but instead of setting more rules to attempt to make equipment "tactical, really", why not just design the match and stages to weed out those weapons that are not "battleworthy" ? That's the test of practicability - if it works, use it; it is breaks or doesn't work, lose it.
For example, if we're already in a 3Gun match, shooting a multi-gun stage, there's not much point in having a truly concealable pistol. In other words, if I'm supposed to be pretending I'm in a scenario with 40+ rounds required and I just happened to have my rifle and/or shotgun handy, I don't think it's much of a stretch to think I'd want to have my high-capacity 9x19, 40, 10mm, or .45 on me instead of my Glock 27. Certainly if I knew I was going to be entering some sort of SHTF scenario with 20+ zombies, I'd take the highest capacity pistol I could shoot fast & accurately with, but only if I knew it was totally reliable. For example, if an objection is that "race guns" are too sensitive to dirt, have us crawl around in the dirt on a stage. At Raton, everything including the insides of my clothes, shoes, holsters, car, and, yes, guns was coated in fine red dust by the end of the weekend
The rifles from JP which were legal for WC3Gun or RM3G (or basically any other "Tactical" rifle division) are not fundamentally different than your standard AR. In their top-of-the-line "CTR-02" model ($2100), there are a few design tweaks, e.g. to allow for mounting an ACOG directly to the upper receiver, but it is essentially an AR-15. Same stock, bolt design, gas system, free float tube, etc.
Sorry this turned out kind of ranty - I guess I'm not really sure what the objection was.
best,
Zak
[edit] And just for the record, I shoot an off the shelf single-stack .45, a stock Benelli, and a Rock River AR-15.
0. If it's scored, timed, and prizes are given, it's a competition. People want to win.
1. If it's a competition, some people are going to spend a lot of money on their equipment to give them whatever edge they can. For example, you can shoot Limited class in IPSC with a Glock 22 and beat just about everyone if you're good enough -- but people still spend $2500 on a STI/SVI. A $3k rifle? Heck, you buy a DSA FAL or "Match" M1A and some good optics, and you're already to about $2500.
2. Corollary: If it's a competition, some people will limit their equipment and performance behavior by mainly what the rules define. (A good example of this might be the 50% (?) cover rule in IDPA.) Or it might mean having "untactical" mag holders that only leave exposed 2" of your mags.
The following might be a naive suggestion, but instead of setting more rules to attempt to make equipment "tactical, really", why not just design the match and stages to weed out those weapons that are not "battleworthy" ? That's the test of practicability - if it works, use it; it is breaks or doesn't work, lose it.
For example, if we're already in a 3Gun match, shooting a multi-gun stage, there's not much point in having a truly concealable pistol. In other words, if I'm supposed to be pretending I'm in a scenario with 40+ rounds required and I just happened to have my rifle and/or shotgun handy, I don't think it's much of a stretch to think I'd want to have my high-capacity 9x19, 40, 10mm, or .45 on me instead of my Glock 27. Certainly if I knew I was going to be entering some sort of SHTF scenario with 20+ zombies, I'd take the highest capacity pistol I could shoot fast & accurately with, but only if I knew it was totally reliable. For example, if an objection is that "race guns" are too sensitive to dirt, have us crawl around in the dirt on a stage. At Raton, everything including the insides of my clothes, shoes, holsters, car, and, yes, guns was coated in fine red dust by the end of the weekend
The rifles from JP which were legal for WC3Gun or RM3G (or basically any other "Tactical" rifle division) are not fundamentally different than your standard AR. In their top-of-the-line "CTR-02" model ($2100), there are a few design tweaks, e.g. to allow for mounting an ACOG directly to the upper receiver, but it is essentially an AR-15. Same stock, bolt design, gas system, free float tube, etc.
Sorry this turned out kind of ranty - I guess I'm not really sure what the objection was.
best,
Zak
[edit] And just for the record, I shoot an off the shelf single-stack .45, a stock Benelli, and a Rock River AR-15.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
That's the SOF/WC-3gun/swat3-gun philosophy in a nutshell.
Rich Lucibella
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 21
Andrew-
I don't think you sound like a "jerk" at all. I recognize (and attempted to give recognition to) all the hard work your family put in. I haven't criticized the courses of fire....quite the opposite.
What I did lament was the fact that equipment was used that would never be seen on the street...examples:
- STI Pistols that I've never seen in a duty or concealment rig...or, for that matter, at ANY fighting school.
- Shotgun shell speed holders that are guaranteed to loose their load as soon as you go inverted....also never seen at a fighting school.
- Rifles that are so accurate due to the tight tolerances that one of your RO's told me they were the most problematic there.
I also object to a "tactical" match not requiring tactical shooting (ie: shooting around rather than over cover; guns extended thru windows rather than behind them, etc.)
Plastic bags over guns simply offend my sensibility. YMMV. Guns are tools. They are to be cleaned after the action, not bagged on the field of battle. I used pretty Plain Jane weapons: Gunsite LW Commander (my carry gun); Remington 870 (my bedside gun); DPMS AR-15. None of the three were bagged; none of the three were cleaned; none of the three malfed.
I'm not saying that should be the norm....just that I think an individual cheats himself of a real learning experience when he lays aside daily carry weapons for special competition guns only for these matches. Competition attracts gamers. Gamers are attracted to anything which gives them the edge in competition. So be it. But this very fact is what turned IPSC into sport, what's turning IDPA into sport and what could easily turn 3 Gun into sport.
If that's the case, simply remove the word "tactical" from the Match title and call it what it is...a shooting competition.
Rich
I don't think you sound like a "jerk" at all. I recognize (and attempted to give recognition to) all the hard work your family put in. I haven't criticized the courses of fire....quite the opposite.
What I did lament was the fact that equipment was used that would never be seen on the street...examples:
- STI Pistols that I've never seen in a duty or concealment rig...or, for that matter, at ANY fighting school.
- Shotgun shell speed holders that are guaranteed to loose their load as soon as you go inverted....also never seen at a fighting school.
- Rifles that are so accurate due to the tight tolerances that one of your RO's told me they were the most problematic there.
I also object to a "tactical" match not requiring tactical shooting (ie: shooting around rather than over cover; guns extended thru windows rather than behind them, etc.)
Plastic bags over guns simply offend my sensibility. YMMV. Guns are tools. They are to be cleaned after the action, not bagged on the field of battle. I used pretty Plain Jane weapons: Gunsite LW Commander (my carry gun); Remington 870 (my bedside gun); DPMS AR-15. None of the three were bagged; none of the three were cleaned; none of the three malfed.
I'm not saying that should be the norm....just that I think an individual cheats himself of a real learning experience when he lays aside daily carry weapons for special competition guns only for these matches. Competition attracts gamers. Gamers are attracted to anything which gives them the edge in competition. So be it. But this very fact is what turned IPSC into sport, what's turning IDPA into sport and what could easily turn 3 Gun into sport.
If that's the case, simply remove the word "tactical" from the Match title and call it what it is...a shooting competition.
Rich
Zak Smith
Member
Agreed.
But presumably you'd want your "daily carry weapons" to have features which would give you "the edge" in real life? Some of those "edges" will be the same, and some won't. It sounds like those "too tight" AR-15's were a liability at this match, thus teaching those shooters an important lesson.
Is it "tactical" to mount a Doctor Sight or JPoint/Tasco on top of your Leupold M1 or TA01/31 ACOG? This looks gamey as hell, but over on AR15.com, you have guys coming back from Iraq who ran that setup over there.
Others have made the argument more eloquently than I can, but we're not going to learn anything new and develop better gear if we have to stick with the current status quo.
best,
-z
Andrew Wyatt
Member
*shrug* I know people who used STI/svi's as carry guns. one is from your home state of florida. like i said earlier, this match and other events and leagues like it are Research and development tools, they give the shooters a base of information and a forum to improve their ability and equipment. Look at the quantum leap in fighting weapons that has occurred since the beginning of the match. in the first couple matches, people shot everything from mini-14s to ak's to ar-15s , and various flavors of 870s and mossbergs and whathave you, all in basically stock configuration.
now, we have benellis with Ghost ring sights (which are an arguable equipment improvement over a bead sighted 870) , ar-15's with acogs (which the military seems to be fond of) And a bewildering array of decent fighting pistols (sti/svi, glocks, czs, 1911s of every size and description, all of them with decent sights, bevelled magazine wells, and other honest improvements) and the other gear has improved as well. I can't help but think that this match and others like it have helped improve the state of weaponcraft.
This match was as tactical as we could make it and still be efficient, and one school's version of what is tactical is not the same as another's. we tried (and succeeded) in making a match that both the BTDT people and the IPSC people liked and enjoyed shooting, and eas efficiently run, and wasn't a cattle drive, and was as tactical and applicable to the real world as having 175 shooters would allow. I wish you good luck in what ever 3 gun matches you put on, and you're welcome to come shoot any of our local matches, but any further argument about the tacticality of this match is basically pointless, since it doesn't exist anymore.
now, we have benellis with Ghost ring sights (which are an arguable equipment improvement over a bead sighted 870) , ar-15's with acogs (which the military seems to be fond of) And a bewildering array of decent fighting pistols (sti/svi, glocks, czs, 1911s of every size and description, all of them with decent sights, bevelled magazine wells, and other honest improvements) and the other gear has improved as well. I can't help but think that this match and others like it have helped improve the state of weaponcraft.
This match was as tactical as we could make it and still be efficient, and one school's version of what is tactical is not the same as another's. we tried (and succeeded) in making a match that both the BTDT people and the IPSC people liked and enjoyed shooting, and eas efficiently run, and wasn't a cattle drive, and was as tactical and applicable to the real world as having 175 shooters would allow. I wish you good luck in what ever 3 gun matches you put on, and you're welcome to come shoot any of our local matches, but any further argument about the tacticality of this match is basically pointless, since it doesn't exist anymore.
Zak Smith
Member
Anyway, I wish I could have made it to this match. Couldn't get the time off from work.
best,
Zak
best,
Zak
- Status
