CMP Games Match Officials

[Maury Krupp]

You can throw away your NRA Rulebooks.

Effective 1 Mar 12 under Rule 5.1.2:
"...CMP Games Events and Special EIC Matches described in Rule 9.0 shall be governed solely by this edition of the CMP Competition Rules."

There's a fair amount of new material (underlined in the rulebook text). Much of it is almost the same as the NRA versions but different enough that it bears reviewing.

If nothing else it eliminates all the back-and-forth between rulebooks that could get so aggravating.

A few more points of interest:

-Under Rule 6.3.1 7th dot, changing the size of the rear aperture on an "As Issued" rifle is now allowed. A literal reading of the rule says you can't use an undrilled but "NM" marked aperture but you can fill and re-drill a standard one

-Rule 6.3.2 3rd dot Type 1 NM (no bedding & no NM sights) are now considered "As Issued." Given that this is pretty much what most commercial and private rebuilds and CMP Specials are, this change is pretty much just an acknowledgement of reality

-Rule 6.11.1 prohibits "non-flexible" shooting jackets. Pretty sure this is aimed at the rigid ISSF-type coats or those with slide-in rigid inserts not the standard modern coats (eg, Creedmoor Hardback)

-Rule 6.11.2 Shooting pants and those funny shoes smallbore shooters use are now disallowed

-Rule 9.1.12 In a Games match a disabled rifle gets a max of three extra minutes to fix and finish any slowfire stage or the competitor may be resquadded to another existing relay. In rapids, if any shots are fired even if the rifle is disabled (rather than a simple stoppage) you're SOL :eusa_boohoo: This is one of those CMP/NRA differences: under NRA Rules a Disabled Rifle is treated differently from an Alibi

Go get your own copy http://www.odcmp.com/Competitions/Rulebook.pdf

Maury

[Bob S]

Maury ...

6.11.1 I have been wearing International coats for everything since I retired (1993). This new rule cannot be directed at "rigid ISSF type coats" because there's no such animal. International coats have to pass a flexibility test that measures deflection of the material in a fixture with a controlled weight on it, and they're pretty hardass about it. I don't know of any "NRA" coat that could pass this test. 'Cept the cotton poplin "USMC" and similar coats.

Are you aware of any coat(s) that have "slide in rigid inserts"? First I have heard of this ...

It would be interesting to find out what prompted this new language.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Maury Krupp]

Bob,

Both Champion's Choice and Champion Shooter's describe their ISSF/ISU Coats as "stiff" or "rigid." Maybe that's not the same as "non-flexible" as used in the CMP Rule, but the smallbore suits I've seen were pretty Tin Woodsman-y. I wonder if that's why they outlawed the pants?

I also seem to recall several years ago one of the Champions (I get them mixed up) did offer an NRA coat with an optional channel sewn into the back that would accept a stiffener (sort of a collar stay on steroids). Maybe I'm dis-remembering :icon_scratch:

Even when new and now after a decade or so of use my Hardback isn't very rigid or at least non-flexible. It came to me folded into a box.

Thinking about it a little more, I can't see CMP prohibiting the type of coat used by close to 99% of Service Rifle competitors (including Games competitors).

I think it's very likely the new rule was just written to fill in a "no more NRA rulebook" gap. That it isn't directed at any of the current commonly used coats (NRA, ISU, ISSF) and the "non-flexible" part is a pre-emptive strike on anyone with any bright ideas.

Maury

[Bob S]

I just thought it interesting that after 50+ years of "Coat Wars"; a US rule was written that specifies that coats must be "flexible", not "hard" or "inflexible". It approaches the ISSF rule, but now the question is what is the CMP definition of "flexible"? ISSF has a definition, a test method and accept/reject criteria. And there is no "type approval" ... if 50 shooters show up at a big event and all of them have the identical Anschutz (or other brand) coat, all must be tested and passed. Then they get a chit for that match only. I don't think most US NRA coats could pass the ISSF flexibility test, and even if they coulod, they would not pass the fit tests (button/zipper closure only with 70mm overlap). If the Creedmore Hardback coat is "flexible", and not hard, why is it called "Hardback"?

I used to be able to hold up a Farrow Ballard rifle, about 11 lbs, for 100 shot offhand matches, and "shooting coats" as we know them were not allowed. Heck, I didn't even know they existed until 1965. I have been having severe back pain in recent years, an artifact of severe injuries in 1972 ... when you're young, you can heal quick, but after 60 it all comes back to bight you in the butt. I'm losing height and just standing up (with no rifle) for extended periods is painful. If I live a few more years, my head will probably fall through my stern tube and break my neck. I'm searching for some artificial support that y'all have been using, but that won't give me heat stroke in July at Quantico. If a "Hardback" is legal, I don't see why I should not be able to wear a back brace that has been banned for ~20 years now. There is no functional difference, the difference is only political.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[JOEZ]

I"m onboard with Bob S. JOEZ.

[PhillipM]

In Oklahoma at the games I saw plenty of hardbacks, so no issue there.

What was interesting is there were no alibis allowed, they just said to have good functioning rifles and ammo. I had a backup rifle right behind me, ready to go.