Nik Habicht

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Nik Habicht

  • Rank
    Chopped Liver
  • Birthday 05/04/1966

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Levittown, PA
  • Interests
    Shooting, Photography, Reading, Old Police Cars, changing cases in post titles
  • Real Name

Recent Profile Visitors

2,600 profile views
  1. Same way I do? LOL
  2. The only penalty would be the potential miss -- if round zipped fully through hardcover -- or the ammunition lost in incurring the potential reshoot -- if the round went on to strike down a popper or plate....
  3. You actually don't need a rule. Start position questions should be hashed out with the RM prior to the start of the match -- and the RM has final say on the wording in the WSB. I don't care what you decide (We'll allow that; we won't allow that) but some of my concerns with allowing it include: Do we set any limits? What if the object presents a possible hazard on the course, i.e. something that could snag the feet/legs of not just the competitor but the RO? Could the object damage the stomp pad, rendering it unusable, and forcing us to toss the stage?
  4. The delayed reload is legit. The other one gets overturned -- see -- you can't assess a procedural for the extra shot at T1 under 10.2.2. Now assessing it under stacking -- that would now be legit.....
  5. Read
  6. I gotta say -- not a huge fan of the rewritten The double jeopardy rule only applies to 10.2.2 however, so Yep, if you're assessing one under, you gotta assess one more under 10.2.4 for firing an extra round prior to the reload. Pretty much, once you double-tap that first target, you're hosed one way or another.....
  7. Neither or apply -- since all twelve rounds are fired in the same string. The correct call is simply: one procedural under 10.2.4 for the extra round fired before the reload.
  8. The only class that's not true in is D class -- but that's only because there is no E......
  9. Regarding balanced squads -- add squads in multiples of 8. Have 23 shooters? Two squads. Have 24 -- three squads. Why? RO, Scorekeeper, Shooter, On Deck competitor, leaves 4 people to work the reset. That usually works pretty well toward making stages flow..... Also helping: Got complicated movers/devices/props/tons of steel? Use them on short to medium courses. Have a need for a 32 round stage? Make it all paper. Rationale -- stages will/should take about the same time to shoot and reset, generating near identical turnover times....
  10. +1......
  11. If you live in a black and white world, missing all the shades of grey -- then yes, the rules contradict each other. If on the other hand, you realize that things are frequently non-binary, then the dichotomy of 8.6.1 and 8.6.4 exists effortlessly in your brain.....
  12. So -- does "You break it, you own it" only apply to competitors? Or does it apply to match staff as well? Odds are they set out to put on a match that complied with the rules -- but "they broke that stage" by adding one too many targets. I could argue that by your own standards, "they [now] own it" and the attendant consequences. Reputable match officials will yank a stage once they determine they made a mistake in set-up and violated a stage building rule. It sucks, but that's owning it, on the part of RM and MD....
  13. Congratulations!
  14. I'm with George and Chuck.....
  15. On the East Coast where land is at a premium -- there's a berm directly in front of the Safe Area/Table that can contain a bullet. Turn 45 degrees left or right, depending on which side of the bay the safety area is on though, and you're probably looking at competitors moving from bay to bay..... The fact that we use the entire 180 to engage targets isn't germane to the discussion at hand -- which is the deliberate inspection of and possible unloading of a firearm. There's no reason we can't wait a minute for the shooter on the bay to finish, and then arrange to do that in the location deemed safest......