Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Course of Fire Design and the One True Faith!

It is no secret among the ingenue (those in the know) that I am a not a big fan of those NASCAR gamers who show up at our road courses and make noise about our game (IDPA). I can only attribute this to them not having anything else to do as the other matches take so long, no one wants to run them! Just kidding...but they have already driven me out of IPSC once! Now don't get me wrong, they are fast, accurate and very athletic but that rooney equipment and assault courses have already left me behind.

But, we are indeed fortunate in the area to have three (3) well established IDPA type matches monthly at RRPC, CAVP and at BC. Makes me wonder why there is not another one but both ammo and ranges appear to be in short supply. For instance, there is an IPSC match in Fburg, a CSA match at West Point and something down in the Tidewater area but no IDPA! It would be nice to have one IDPA event each weekend.

Now having said that, not all IDPA matches are equal and some are, in fact, more equal than others. They reflect the experience, personality and interest of each of the dissimilar match directors and it is reflected in both the course of fire and the RSOs involved. Again it is no secret that I prefer some matches to others but as long as the MDs are willing to do the grunt work, I am just going to shoot them and not complain about them. But, I think we should examine in some detail what IDPA COF should be.

At the recent match at the ITI training center, the COF was entirely devoted to law enforcement and/or police scenarios other than the steel plate stage. That only makes sense as it was a function of the Police Memorial Foundation. But it was not quite IDPA in that you ran quite a bit and took many more long shots than close ones. No WHO, No SHO, some movement, no disadvantaged shooting positions and the LEOs seldom employed cover. It was not advertised as an IDPA match but a sort of modification to suit the clientele. In my not inconsiderable experience with IDPA, LEOs are not generally thick on the ground at IDPA or for that matter IPSC matches. This was a special case.

The principles behind IDPA are directed at guns and equipment for self-defense that test the skill and ability of the shooter and not the stuff or the game itself. It calls for practical, realistic scenarios that simulate potential encounters or test the requisite skills for self-defense with a handgun. The theory behind COF design is stated to present problems that shooters are asked to solve while reflecting some reality with an emphasis on self-defense tactics and skills.

Listed in the philosophy section of the rule book things like the use of cover, reloading behind cover and limited rounds per string are included specifically. "Could this really happen?" like being attacked by steel circles or stars! The scripture tells us to make this up with SHO, WHO, retention and movement.

Safety considerations must be taken for granted and the physical demands of the square range somewhat limit us. Generally we do not have access to a shoot house or AC fuselage much. Sometimes we do not do much with props at all, the distances grow long and a few other things like head shots get over used.

The complaint that people won't attend if they don't get to shoot X number of rounds is not valid. They can shoot it twice or better yet, take up IPSC. They shoot lots. Or, better they can join a club!

How about a few new scenarios? I got dinged recently for retreating before two targets at less than 4 yards from me. Tueller would have been proud as I shot them on the move backwards! The RO said I was supposed to have shot them kneeling! Not in accordance with the challenge to have the shooter solve the problem is it?

I am hoping to stir up some thought on this. Undoubtedly it will become a beauty contest.

6 comments:

Glock26idpa said...

Devils Advocate here......

With down loaded ammo and 5 inch barrels? Plastic holsters. I've shot 2 of the IDPA Nationals and had a lot of fun..... but realism I did not see..... not that I have ever been or hope to be in an actual gun fight.

""The principles behind IDPA are directed at guns and equipment for self-defense that test the skill and ability of the shooter and not the stuff or the game itself. It calls for practical, realistic scenarios that simulate potential encounters or test the requisite skills for self-defense with a handgun. The theory behind COF design is stated to present problems that shooters are asked to solve while reflecting some reality with an emphasis on self-defense tactics and skills.""

Glock26idpa said...

A comment on my thoughts while creating the COF's for Cavalier IDPA.

I typically despise skills testing courses of fire ( not that I don't use them often)

I have recently increased the round count of my COFs.... I guess to try to keep up with BLack Creek.

I really don't write a scenario that is presented to the shooter, I have one in mind when I created COFs but I don't feel the need to tell the shooter he is walking his dog and three bad guys jump him from the bushes.... maybe I'm wrong and you shooters want more of that?

I am a big fan of the low round count stage (6ish) BUT it slows down a match as well! I also hate doing the same COF stong , weak and free! My favorite Cavalier State match was when we had a large amount of 6-9 round stages

I feel most if not all of my COFs may suffer from being over scripted and not allow the shooter much room for "solving the problem" as they see fit.....BUT this would lead to safety issues with new shooters as well.... plus a reduction in realism as the safety goes up.

What steel, the rulebook did away with that!

The Non-threat rule kinda makes me upset, I would like to use more and give them a higher penalty.

I have to think about how many Safety Officers are gonna show up and work after working other matches..... in rain, heat.......

The pain in the buttocks of props, the ability to put up a good wall would be nice (something easy that one person could do and not be blown down by a gust)

I'll post somemore when I think of it!

Andy

Oberstlt said...

Andy,

I am with you on the equipment thing 100% and I recommend for our interloping NASCAR competitors that we establish a classification called NSE (non standard equipment) to include rooney guns and whisper loads. Now, having said that we appear to have some form of issue with our box and chronograph. I wish we had a better way.

When you were MD over to the Creek, I recall short, sharp matches. I remember DUSM once remarking on that. I also liked it particularly because I was not tied to a squad and could observed all the shooters.

I am also not sure that you need to write an elaborate scenario for each stage. But, my last experience at PUT was the friend RO who proceduraled (? new word) me for not following instructions I heard differently the day before! My point here is no one will give you an stage briefing in real life either. You should be presented with a problem, asked to solve it and get on with life.

I know that prop targets can be a PIA but I really enjoy them unless the MD goes berzerk! I love the moving target from the CSA, the drop turner, the pop up things, the black hole of Rivanna. I would love to see tactical teds, charging targets and swingers. Maybe we could substitute those for the platoon in the assault?

Let us restrict the draw from holster a bit more, incorporate more movement away from the targets, more NonThreats getting in the way, one handed shooting, fewer headers and covered targets.

You will all note that I do not volunteer to be an MD, AMD or RSO!

Jim Taylor said...

A few comments from the Dark Side:

As soon as we put a clock on it, it became a game. And since it is a game, many have biased opinions about courses of fire. Steel is hated by those who have difficulty shooting steel. Movement and difficult shooting positions are hated by those who don't move well and those with bad backs.

As far as design goes, the cover call is one of the most subjective calls in sport, almost on a par with the strike zone in Major League Baseball. Most major matches are rife with controversy over cover.

You never hear many positive comments about the Classifier, but it does indeed test most of the fundamentals of IDPA shooting. Movement, strong hand shooting, reloads of all types, cover, and distance.

What we do at Black Creek is attempt to cover the full spectrum of what one might expect to find in a stage at state or regional level match. We have some range limitations, such as not being able to shoot at the side berms that restrict us for certain course designs.

Since we run 12 stages or so each month, you will see a variety of stages. Most of the time, there are 4 speed shoots, 4-6 medium courses, and a few standards. The rule book encourages COFs out to 35 yds and we like to have plenty of 15-20 yd shots.

As far as props go, they are pretty much a pain to set up and keep operating efficiently. But we use them, since you will run into them at a major match.

This month's match at Black Creek will have a ton of no-shoots, movement, and difficult shooting positions with hardly any steel (just one stage).

I personally do not like the typical highly choreographed stage, but prefer to give the competitor multiple options.

If you do well at Black Creek, then you will do well at any IDPA match. 12 stages takes luck out the game, distance and movement put a premium on accuracy and speed. Consistency and skill make the difference.

One last thing, we have great matches because of great safety officers who know and enforce the rules fairly. We design courses that are challenging to all levels of shooters and strive not to have procedure traps and cover traps that only hurt the game. Most of all, we always give the benefit of the doubt to the shooter except in the area of safety rule enforcement.

Oberstlt said...

As I said, some are gamier than others. The COF at Black Creek is very "competition" oriented and is always challenging. I particularly remember the "theme" matches. But, the IPSC and Steel Challenge flavor is present and visible. Not that I plan to quit coming when I can, I am simply expressing my desire for more than the plate rack and the texas star (both of which I can shoot ok). No offense is intended as all know I am seldom shy in expressing myself!

Sandy said...

Wouldn't it be wonderful to help other people who are in need? It is good to know that there is a course such as fire warden training. The course provide participants with the knowledge, training and practical skills to effectively perform the role and responsibilities of Building Fire Warden.