Difference Between IPSC and IDPA?

I shoot a lot of IDPA, and enjoy it greatly, but I won't BS myself that it's "tactical" or training in any form other than improving gun handling skills, because it flatly isn't.

In fact, IDPA's insistence on finding cover, may very well get you killed in a real gunfight. Look around you - see any hard cover? In real life, hard cover is pretty rare, and seldom available in the sorts of places where you might need to use deadly force. So turning around and looking for cover may very well get you killed, when you should be shooting instead. Sheetrock and plywood are not cover. Throw in goofy tac-loads, and some of idpa's other quirks, and "tactical" becomes a non-sequitor to the sport.

On the other hand, as a shooting game, IDPA is a bunch of fun. Highly recommended. I shoot USPSA too, and while the style is a little different, the two games are basically the same, with minor differences. Shoot both, have twice the fun, and resist the temptation to become a pompous tacticalberry.

If you want to be truly "tactical", then consider that the real skill that wins gunfights is raw, naked, aggression and fury. As important as gun handling skills are, they take a distant second place to the simple agressive willingness to actually *use* the gun.

I've been unlucky enough to be there a couple of times. I lost two, and won one. The one I won, I did with a piece of heavy chain. I won, because I was mad clear through, and wouldn't back down. The ones I lost, I lost because I couldn't make myself gamble on dying, and stood like a sheep.

The one thing training can't do for you, is to make you commit. Anger, on the other hand, makes you *do*. Trust me on one thing - you won't be icily in control of your feelings. You'll be scared spitless, and probably frozen in place - unless you get mad.
 
When I shoot IDPA, it's a game. Like a video-game, but more exciting, 'cause I get to shoot a real gun (which is the point of how many electronic games?) and even put myself in exciting imaginary scenarios (so it's not just a gallery-game, it's a 1PS game). When I first tried to explain to my wife what we did at the club matches, she took about 3 seconds to say, "So you're playing Charlie's Angels?" And hence it has been known thus; on Tuesday nights, i go play Charlie's Angels.

The fact that this game makes me better at skills (like shooting and, probably more important, hiding) that could conceivably save my life is a bonus, sure; but with the miniscule odds that I'd ever have to do the kind of shooting I'm practicing there, the 'training' component is surely no more than a tertiary benefit, after fun and socialization. I know that some of the guys I shoot with think differently about the relative value of this game as 'training'; I just think they're thinking unrealistically about the probability of getting caught in a tac-load, hard-cover, pie-the-corner, two-to-the-head, one-to-the-body, weak-hand-only scenario.

cw
 
Tapper

Great post.

Welcome to TFL.

Intrinsic value of both IDPA and IPSC: confidence (hopefully) in one's gunhandling, ability to make (first) shots count, finding out what's 100% RELIABLE.

First rule = Have a gun. If it doesn't go bang it's just an intetresting paperweight.

In games first rule is "Bring a reliable gun (or make one)".

Never wear cammo to a pistol match.................
 
Ok here is my $.02....you knew it was coming didn't you?

If you are looking to have fun shooting your gun in a competitive enviroment it doesn't matter which disipline you choose. Both are full of very nice, helpful people that will encourage you to join and have fun.

If you are looking to improve your defensive tactical skills...it doesn't matter again. If you use competitive shooting to improve you tactical skills (which is good because it adds a level of stress not available at a range by yourself) then shoot which ever competition you want but don't let winning get in the way of practicing your tactics. If you are competeing to win and move outside cover to engage targets you are palying a game. If you use good tactics and take extra time to engage all your targets you still win by training for the day you need to engage a live target.

I use competitive shooting (mostly IDPA because of local) but usually do not win because I refuse to sacrifice the tactics I have trained for years to develop...and I don't care. I am a good enough shooter that I occasionally bring home a trophy to stack in the reloading room with all my other crap.

Shoot competitively for fun. If its tactical traingin your looking for go to a good school, get your tactical training there then go shoot competitively but don't let competition get in the way off your training.

Ok, I'm off my soapbox now.

Thank you.
 
I like them both, and I consider both of them games.

I mostly shoot IDPA, because that is what I shot first, and that is where many of my shooting buddies are.

As far as which one is more "tactical" I don't ever see myself in a million years doing a tac reload. Nor am I going to go to one knee when I can squat. As for IDPA being a more realistic test of CCW gear, then you would see a lot more folks shooting with P32s and .38 snubs drawn from bellybands and fanny packs than anything else. But at my local matches, all of us are using full size guns drawn from strong side belt holsters. :) Go figure.

I've been accused of being "gamey". Well then if I ever get in a gunfight hopefully I can game the badguy to death. :)
 
It's primarily a matter of approach. If you wanted to, you could use good tactics and shoot your carry gun in IPSC and get in some good practice.

you could also have a gun solely for IDPA shooting and use equipment you wouldn't use for CCW and not learn anything of merit.

Whenever I shoot in any sort of competetion, I Think of the situation the stage is presenting and then use the equipment i'd have in that situation.

for example, If the stage was primarily a rifle stage with some pistol shooting, then i'd have on my rifle gear with a full flap field holster. inclusing the clothes and shoes i wear when I'm rifleshooting.

if the stage was a pistol only stage and was such that it was intended as a CCW stage, then i'd wear my CCW holster and equipment.

I given my mindset, I think i could compete in any sort of shooting and learn from it, since i consider any kind of shooting i do to be training.
 
Andrew, just a point of clarification. Since you won't be 21 until Dec of 2003, you must be speaking figuratively about your CCW... and handgun ownership here in CA.
 
Tapper - welcome! Excellent first post.

I'm sitting here sort-of bemused but rather turned off, watching the various camps piss on each other.

Ug.
 
sven,

I know what you mean.
We haven't heard back from SteveW13. I suspect all the "My match is better than your match." mudslinging and nonsense ran him off and we have lost a shooter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top