ihmsa forums

Not airing laundry here, but I think the reply I sent Jim (at the end of July) addresses the issue. Not sure how I can say it any better.

Jim,

Your letter closely mirrors one received from (name withheld). I intend to be consistent in the response.

It is regrettable that this has been allowed to go unaddressed until now. It may have started out as unknowing, or shrugged off from a match director, or a shooter who was willing to violate the rule until it got protested, or all of the above.

As an organization, we must have rules applied to all shooters, not allowing some shooters to ignore a rule they disagree with. I talked last week with shooters who said they have no problem with a flat fore end, they had not really read the rule book and were just doing what everyone else was doing, and I believe them.

This issue isn't about the flop, factory or aftermarket grips, thumb rests, Taco hold, etc. Those items are all well covered in the rule book.

This is about deliberately shaping a stock to fit your anatomy, and using that shaping to create an aid in a shooting position. The Rules Chairman has clearly stated that it is a violation of a rule that was on the books for decades.

The category is called Unlimited, but that doesn't mean "anything goes". This category could be called Super Duper, Modified, Enhanced, or any one of a dozen other names. There are rules that pertain to this category and they should be followed by the shooters and enforced by the match directors.

Gun check-in is no longer performed by knowledgeable IHMSA veterans of the sport. Instead, it is performed by a non-IHMSA person who is instructed to check for weight, barrel/sight length, and safe trigger.

At the 1987 Internationals in Oak Ridge, I had a flat bottom fore end on a TC (it was simply a pine 1x2), and Frank Scotto refused to allow my gun until I demonstrated I was shooting from dead frog. He only allowed it on the condition that I would not shoot it Creedmoor, and sent me out the door with a stern "I'll be watching" warning. I daresay that if Frank, Ron Able, or Blair Hamilton was doing check-in, these guns would've been DQ'd on the spot.

I don't know why this rule is being ignored. In the Dell Taylor vs. Dave Strydom exchange, it was apparent that Dave called Dell, Dell said no, and Dave did it anyway. I hope that isn't typical of the flop shooters.

Dell is the Rules Chairman. His job does not mean he is to go up & down the line, personally inspecting guns that already went thru check-in. His job is to provide insight or rule on protests, not to file them. It seems to me that Dell has been consistent and clear in his position on this issue.

When I got my XP 6.5br, it had a funky notch in the fore end from being used in Master's competition. I took pic's of the gun and also of me holding the gun in my shooting position. I sent the pic's to Blair Hamilton for approval before using the gun in competition. I probably still have that email somewhere.

Are we to understand that NOBODY CALLED DELL to ask his approval before shaping their stock? Seriously?

At championships at Tusco, when I first saw people shooting flop, I assumed it was with a flat bottom stock. And in those early days, it probably was. The gun I shoot has a flat bottom. Since I don't do check-in, and the underside is hidden from view when in a shooters box or while being fired, there was never a reason for me to question it. I assume this holds true for most other shooters as well.

The affected stocks aren't ruined, there is no butchering involved. The concave portion can be filled in with putty, or a thin 1/4 inch board can be glued to the underside. Paint or decorate to taste, it is on the underside and as stated above, it is almost never seen.

I have participated in many shooting sports over the years. Some were ruined by "innovation" thanks to people who constantly want to push the wording of the rules. NRA Rifle Silhouette started out as a basic hunting rifle. Then came alterations, enhanced "bellies", chin guns, offset buttstocks, etc. Did you know you are not allowed to wear any kind of a glove, even if it's cold outside? There was a guy DQ'd a couple years ago at a major match because he wore an archery glove to protect an injured finger, all it had was a leather pad over the fingertip!

It is possible to open a Pandora's box. If I show up with an 8 pound gun at local matches and nobody protests it, does it become legal? If I crank my scope up to 8x in Practical Hunter and it goes without protest, does it become legal? If I show up with a small sandbag fastened to the bottom of my fore end but still makes weight, can I claim legality under "IT'S UNLIMITED"? The answers are all NO.

Jim, I can't even imagine running 5368 straight targets! An unbelievable achievement, and to say congratulations doesn't do it justice.

But it also begs the question....so I gotta ask.....if you can run 5368 targets by balancing a round air cylinder on the back of your hand, why would anyone need to shape the underside of the fore end?

As always, your friend,

Rich

Indeed, I feel that we may be opening "Pandora's Box" !! This issue needs to be looked at from both sides - I shoot flop, but I use a modification of the "Fields Flop" position - instead of resting the forearm on the top of my arm, I set the forearm into the palm of my hand, and grip it like a rifle . I then rotate my grip position to either elevate or lower my muzzle. I am not using the shape of the fore end as a shooting aid, but someone that uses the true "Fields Flop" position could be accused of doing it. This, and several other issues (such as red dot optics in Production) should have been fully scrutinized from their inception, with specific rules documented. I think that this rule "enforcement", and the reasoning behind it is flawed. Our rules have always focused on the terms "shooting aid" and "form and function, to be used "as manufactured or intended". Using this logic, I think that no manufacturer ever intended their handgun to be fired using the "taco hold", especially using a long front globe sight as a "grip". Elgin Gates and our other founders were trying to expand the known boundaries of what a handgun could do by instituting the Unlimited class. True, It needed some basic limits, like weight , barrel length, etc. Unknown to many, the flop position harkens back to IHMSA's early days - most shooters at that very first match in Tucson 1975 fired from either the prone or sitting position. So, what do we look at next ??? By the applied logic, any TC shooter that is using a rubber Pachmayr fore end, and shoots Creedmoor position, is guilty of using a shooting aid ! And how is is not a shooting aid ? It will offer friction against your pants leg far better than a factory wood fore arm ever could. I only use these as examples. I think that some "traditionally-minded" shooters in IHMSA resent the fact that shooting from flop offers some distinct advantages over the more "traditional" shooting positions. Some would even like to outlaw flop altogether, along with using scopes in full-size UAS Big-Bore and smallbore. This is a big can of worms indeed, which fails to address the fact that we, as a organization, can ill afford to alienate even a SINGLE shooter - this is how fragile our position has become. When you start telling people that the equipment they have been using for YEARS is suddenly illegal, what result are you trying to achieve ? I can tell you what will happen - you are going to lose a lot of those shooters ! Do you think that with our membership at such a low level we can afford to do that. I am sorry, but in my opinion this " fore arm controversy is nothing more than "nitpicking" - trying to fix a problem that does not even exist ! As a member, I would ask the board to rethink their position on this - because in the long run, the implementation of this will do us more harm than good ! Philip Braud La. State Director IHMSA#13794

Please reread Doug's original post. The rule he listed has been around for 30+ years? Never an issue until recently. I suspect that some of those early founding fathers were shooters that recognized the Pandora's box that could be opened if they didn't put some limits on the guns of Unlimited class.

Shoot2Thrill wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 1:11 pm My wife, April, probably would not be shooting if it were not for flop. Her confidence and excitement increased dramatically when she switched from creedmore to flop because of the increase in X count. When she first started flop, I had her shooting a banana type forend that rolled (contoured) around her forearm very nice. We were very quickly told that forend was illegal because it contoured her body anatomy. The forend can be used in creedmore and be legal though.

And that is how our rules are supposed to work. This particular rule is obviously being observed by most (but not all) match directors and knowledgeable shooters. I have a new shooter here who asked about carving the stock underside to fit his wrist. I told him no, it was in the rulebook. He pulled up the rulebook, read the rule, and said "Well that's pretty clear, it says you can't do it. So how come some shooters are allowed to do that?"

As sport shooters, we don't get to pick & choose which rules we want to follow. Every shooter and every match director should be following the same rules.
The board discussed the problem of lax rule adherence, offered up a solution that hurt no one, and that solution passed. Nobody was DQ'd. Nobody has had their score protested. Nobody had their winning score reversed. Nobody had a trophy or title taken away. Everyone has 4-7 months to make sure their gun meets the rule that has been in place for decades.

.

Rich, with respect - I think that you need to reread MY post ! The point I was trying to make is that a concave fore end may be used illegally by one shooter, where another shooter could conceivably hold it in a way that is NOT illegal !

braud357 wrote: Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:25 pm Rich, with respect - I think that you need to reread MY post ! The point I was trying to make is that a concave fore end may be used illegally by one shooter, where another shooter could conceivably hold it in a way that is NOT illegal !

That wasn't my intent, sorry if it came out that way. I agree with you 100% in the above sentence. That was also the point that Doug made in his 2nd post, the stock April used was not legal for flop but ok for creedmoor. Doug also described in that post that it isn't totally about the shape of the stock, it is also about the position the shooter chooses and how he holds the stock from that position.

My once a year foray into flop shooting is now with my 6.5br. It has 2 flats on the for end, originally designed to be used in Masters competition. If I shoot with the flat on my wrist, it's legal. If I hold it with my thumb pressed in behind the notch, it's illegal.

The stocks and shooting position that we are discussing is this....a stock that has the underside specifically contoured to "nest" atop the shooters wrist, largely matching the contour of his bent wrist. And you are correct my friend, this isn't limited to just the stock configuration. It is how the stock is carved to be used in conjunction with your anatomy from your shooting position.

Thanks Rich - I do not shoot my flop guns from the "Fields" position - I grip the gun very much like a rifle stock. When I began exploring shooting from prone, there was little to no reference to fore end width or height. One of the first personal experiences that I had with flop the shooter was shooting this fore end This fore end is indeed concave on the bottom, but while shooting it it does not rest on my forearm, but is gripped like a rifle stock. Under the "compromise" proposed, this fore end is illegal because of its height, AND because it is concave. In my usage, the concave is more of a hindrance than a aid. Does anyone else use a "taller" fore end like this ??

Phillip,
I'm not the one to be making the decision, that's up to Dell Taylor. The stock is tall on the front end, but I'm not aware of a height limit yet. And you're not using the curve except as a means to hold the gun with your palm up? No front finger grooves, no attachments, no reverse taper front grip doodad that we see on some AR15 rifles? Again, that's not up to me but just picturing it in my mind, I'm not seeing a problem. Just my opinion...

My advice is to take some pics of the gun from different angles, and also some pics of the gun in your hands, posed in your shooting position, from different angles. Send the pics to Dell, he's the Rules Chairman. I did that when I got my 6.5 with the funky Masters stock, sent the pics to Blair Hamilton when he was Rules Chairman.

I saw one rimfire gun with a "belly". An Anschutz with a one piece stock with wood trigger guard that was part of the stock. Nice workmanship, as are most of these guns. Bottom of fore end was fairly flat, without much taper up to the muzzle. Shooter held the front in a pretty generic hold. I think he changed his hand position based on target height. AT OKC, chickens are downhill while rams are about level with firing line. I didn't speak with him about it, I assume the large stock was either for weight or was hollowed out to add weight. Again, not passing judgement on a gun I didn't hold, but looked ok enough that I didn't question it.

Thank Rich - I think that I will get in touch with Dell !

Rich and Phillip, I have seen where there is an issue with the stock configuration for some in the flop position have been using them as an aide. They have made there forearms to look like nuts that form to the hand as an aide, contoured to fit the hand as an aide as well. Rules need to be enforced to keep each and every shooter with the same behavior and not to give a shooter an advantage over another in the ways of cheating. Phil, if you were to take your contender with the forearm you have and turn it to the side then it would fit into the leg portion and become a shooting aide for it would be contoured in such that way. This is what the rules are saying and this is what Dell is telling is illegal to use in a match.