The AD rules are very interesting because they can't use subjective language so they have to describe intent without using the word intent. I don't envy the rule writers!
Thanks for sharing your videos, to include the good, the bad and the ugly. I think it's important that fellow competitive shooters also see that not everything always goes to plan and sh*t just happens.
What are your thoughts now having shot a match with the 2011 frame versus your checkmate? I'm currently using a TSO in limited and would like to start open next year. I cannot decide if I want to go the 2011 route or the checkmate.
After the match I shot it side by side with one of my Czechmates and another buddy's more traditional design 2011 without popples and I do think the Nevermiss is the best of the three. Overall dot movement was noticeably less with it, though it was the most concussive. I would choose my Czechmates over the other 2011 though they were very close. My sample size of 2011s that I've shot is small, but I suspect other traditional "budget" 2011s like the Honcho or Bul guns would fall in a similar boat of "definitely not better"
Hmmm i feel like that DQ could have gone either way. The gun was not even up in sight line, so making an argument that you were “aiming” is very hard to do, especially when you didn’t hit the target at all. Remember the CRO class arb DQ was overturned because the shooter actually hit the targets which is why it wasn’t a DQ. Also, “AD”, not ND
I said ND because it was an ND. The rulebook uses the term AD but it's not an accident, it's negligence. W.r.t. the DQ, the shot didn't go over backstop, didn't strike ground within 10 feet of me, not while loading or unloading, not during remedial action, not while transferring hands, not retrieving staged firearm (what our CRO seminar arb was about), so only 10.4.6 can apply. "A shot which occurs during movement, except while actually shooting at targets". No mention of aiming (aiming isn't even defined in the rules), shot just has to be "at" a target.
There is no rule that says you have to be looking through the sights when firing a shot. No rule that says you have to be accurate. Didn't fit any 10.4, so game on!
Well what do you think compared to your checkmate? Every gun has its own particular idiosyncrasies. Recoil impulse, timing etc. And who is the maker of that gun?
The gun is made by Nevermiss Industries, a small shop based out of WA. I would say that when I have my gripped nailed down the dot movement was noticeably less than with my Czechmates, so it's probably a bit more forgiving in that regard. The balance on it superb, as are the fit and finish, as they should be since it's twice as expensive!
Definitely an accident, but does not fit any definition of AD. Looked like the round hit at the toe of the berm. Did not strike the ground within 10 feet of where you were standing.
One of my favorite sayings in USPSA is "not all ADs are DQs."
The AD rules are very interesting because they can't use subjective language so they have to describe intent without using the word intent. I don't envy the rule writers!
Thanks for sharing your videos, to include the good, the bad and the ugly. I think it's important that fellow competitive shooters also see that not everything always goes to plan and sh*t just happens.
Awesome work!
What are your thoughts now having shot a match with the 2011 frame versus your checkmate? I'm currently using a TSO in limited and would like to start open next year. I cannot decide if I want to go the 2011 route or the checkmate.
After the match I shot it side by side with one of my Czechmates and another buddy's more traditional design 2011 without popples and I do think the Nevermiss is the best of the three. Overall dot movement was noticeably less with it, though it was the most concussive. I would choose my Czechmates over the other 2011 though they were very close. My sample size of 2011s that I've shot is small, but I suspect other traditional "budget" 2011s like the Honcho or Bul guns would fall in a similar boat of "definitely not better"
@@jordan-rogers-uspsa thanks! 👍🏻
Hmmm i feel like that DQ could have gone either way. The gun was not even up in sight line, so making an argument that you were “aiming” is very hard to do, especially when you didn’t hit the target at all. Remember the CRO class arb DQ was overturned because the shooter actually hit the targets which is why it wasn’t a DQ.
Also, “AD”, not ND
I said ND because it was an ND. The rulebook uses the term AD but it's not an accident, it's negligence. W.r.t. the DQ, the shot didn't go over backstop, didn't strike ground within 10 feet of me, not while loading or unloading, not during remedial action, not while transferring hands, not retrieving staged firearm (what our CRO seminar arb was about), so only 10.4.6 can apply. "A shot which occurs during movement, except while actually shooting at targets". No mention of aiming (aiming isn't even defined in the rules), shot just has to be "at" a target.
There is no rule that says you have to be looking through the sights when firing a shot. No rule that says you have to be accurate. Didn't fit any 10.4, so game on!
@@L3001USPSA that’s cuz the rule is 10.5.10 & 8.5
Well what do you think compared to your checkmate? Every gun has its own particular idiosyncrasies. Recoil impulse, timing etc. And who is the maker of that gun?
The gun is made by Nevermiss Industries, a small shop based out of WA. I would say that when I have my gripped nailed down the dot movement was noticeably less than with my Czechmates, so it's probably a bit more forgiving in that regard. The balance on it superb, as are the fit and finish, as they should be since it's twice as expensive!
is it a 6MOA?
This one was 6MOA. The ones I run on my Czechmates are 3. I do think I prefer the 3.
Definitely an accident, but does not fit any definition of AD. Looked like the round hit at the toe of the berm. Did not strike the ground within 10 feet of where you were standing.