Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Rules part 2


Onepocket

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, konkapot said:

The visceral, profanity filled rage I heard from some shooters (not the poster) was more consistent with people who were in the "Why didn't I think of that?" camp.

 

@Mike it was your first scenario described in your post.

I'm sorry - what, specifically, was the "visceral, profanity filled rage", and specifically what post(s) was it in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am the MD for that particular match. The walls have a bit of play to them due to the wall stands that we use. While we didn't intend for the shooters to be able to engage the targets from a certain position, leaning on the wall (that was part of the shooting area) allowed those targets to be visible. The wall had enough play in it to allow this to happen. That's our fault for not either bracing them or otherwise creating a complete vision barrier for those targets. When I shot, I was able to hit those targets without moving the wall any more out of the way than it was naturally wanting to lean. To answer the question posed earlier in this thread --- yes, the wall sprung back. There was no actual permanent movement of the wall.

 

It was determine that this was just bad stage setup and we let it go. Several shooters did the lean. I didn't witness anyone on the squad that I was running actually move the wall in such a way that I thought a procedural was warranted. If someone REALLY forced the wall over (like --- put their weight into it such that the entire wall and stand started to move) --- I'd have either assessed a procedural via 4.5.1.   I didn't witness this --- and neither did any of the ROs or CROs that I spoke to.

 

There is no grey area here --- there is just a weak wall that had just the right amount of play to it.  The fact that I am even having to type this statement AGAIN is making me seriously rethink continuing our matches at this range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, uod said:

I am the MD for that particular match. The walls have a bit of play to them due to the wall stands that we use. While we didn't intend for the shooters to be able to engage the targets from a certain position, leaning on the wall (that was part of the shooting area) allowed those targets to be visible. The wall had enough play in it to allow this to happen. That's our fault for not either bracing them or otherwise creating a complete vision barrier for those targets. When I shot, I was able to hit those targets without moving the wall any more out of the way than it was naturally wanting to lean. To answer the question posed earlier in this thread --- yes, the wall sprung back. There was no actual permanent movement of the wall.

 

It was determine that this was just bad stage setup and we let it go. Several shooters did the lean. I didn't witness anyone on the squad that I was running actually move the wall in such a way that I thought a procedural was warranted. If someone REALLY forced the wall over (like --- put their weight into it such that the entire wall and stand started to move) --- I'd have either assessed a procedural via 4.5.1.   I didn't witness this --- and neither did any of the ROs or CROs that I spoke to.

 

There is no grey area here --- there is just a weak wall that had just the right amount of play to it.  The fact that I am even having to type this statement AGAIN is making me seriously rethink continuing our matches at this range.

 I never once mentioned this match or anyones name simply wanted thoughts on a ruling. I ask lots of questions about rules and rulings called, the more you know the more you can get away with. I asked several CROs that I respect and to be honest they all gave a different answer. You chose to adress this question blankly asked on a forum. Forums are for input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, uod said:

I am the MD for that particular match. The walls have a bit of play to them due to the wall stands that we use. While we didn't intend for the shooters to be able to engage the targets from a certain position, leaning on the wall (that was part of the shooting area) allowed those targets to be visible. The wall had enough play in it to allow this to happen. That's our fault for not either bracing them or otherwise creating a complete vision barrier for those targets. When I shot, I was able to hit those targets without moving the wall any more out of the way than it was naturally wanting to lean. To answer the question posed earlier in this thread --- yes, the wall sprung back. There was no actual permanent movement of the wall.

 

It was determine that this was just bad stage setup and we let it go. Several shooters did the lean. I didn't witness anyone on the squad that I was running actually move the wall in such a way that I thought a procedural was warranted. If someone REALLY forced the wall over (like --- put their weight into it such that the entire wall and stand started to move) --- I'd have either assessed a procedural via 4.5.1.   I didn't witness this --- and neither did any of the ROs or CROs that I spoke to.

 

There is no grey area here --- there is just a weak wall that had just the right amount of play to it.  The fact that I am even having to type this statement AGAIN is making me seriously rethink continuing our matches at this range.

Better toughen up mr MD. You are either loved or ridiculed in the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not going to argue on a forum about a rule question. I will ask who ever I want, politely. No names were given, not the club, nothing. I simply asked the ruling. I talked with several CROs that I know and respect and they all had different answers. So I posted the question to the forum.  I did not get madd about at the match, didn't know if it was legal or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, not4you2know said:

dnroi@uspsa.org is the proper place to ask questions about rules. The answer you get from Troy IS the final answer. He is pretty responsive. You should give it a try some time.

With all due respect, you might recognize that DNROI doesn't make rules, and his emails aren't official rule interpretations. Only the interpretations published on USPSA.org and in Front Sight magazine are.  

 

Also, Onepocket is right.  We discuss rules and calls here on BE all the time.  It's why we're here.  It's good for the sport.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, teros135 said:

With all due respect, you might recognize that DNROI doesn't make rules, and his emails aren't official rule interpretations. Only the interpretations published on USPSA.org and in Front Sight magazine are.  

 

Also, Onepocket is right.  We discuss rules and calls here on BE all the time.  It's why we're here.  It's good for the sport.  

Untrue, I went through an e-mail correspondence/investigation with Troy and another individual after the 2015 SC State that was only given in e-mail and only to the individuals involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2.2.3 Barriers – Must be constructed in the following manner:
2.2.3.1 They must be high enough and strong enough to serve the intended purpose. 

 

This is the reason the call was made since the wall was part of the shooting area and had not been moved from its position. The wall structure was not constructed to not allow it bend when it was leaned on. Had this been thought of during setup an debugging, a stronger wall would have been put into place. It is the fault of the stage setup and not the shooter. Unlike level 2 and up, we do not get days to debug all the stages, we get a couple hours. Also, you could have achieved the same effect by leaning forward and around the wall. The stage got gamed. This is much like a nationals stage where I hung off a piece of wood that was intended to brace 2 walls together so that I could shoot around a wall without doing a incredibly hard lean. It was not intended, but it was legal and I ask for a ruling from the RM before I did it. In this case the ruling was given after a few people leaned on the wall. I also watched a lot of people lose time trying to do this as well. I shot it straight up and my SS time was better than most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, konkapot said:

The visceral, profanity filled rage I heard from some shooters (not the poster) was more consistent with people who were in the "Why didn't I think of that?" camp.

 

@Mike it was your first scenario described in your post.

First scenario -- did the shooter continue to engsge through the port in the wall, or did the shooter engage through a new opening he had created by leaning on the wall?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, not4you2know said:

Untrue, I went through an e-mail correspondence/investigation with Troy and another individual after the 2015 SC State that was only given in e-mail and only to the individuals involved.

That's nice, and I would guess that most CROs and RMs would at least consider what Troy had to say in an email -- but the email opinion of DNROI isn't binding on any range official....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Gary Stevens said:

I don't think props should be required to be steel re enforced to keep shooter from deliberately pushing a wall out for the purpose of shooting a hidden target. 

 

Few have agreed with with anything I have said lately, but I would strongly consider a 10.6 call.

I'd think about it too......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Nik Habicht said:

First scenario -- did the shooter continue to engsge through the port in the wall, or did the shooter engage through a new opening he had created by leaning on the wall?

It was a large gap between 2 walls that was intended to be shoot through. 2 targets were to the right somewhat behind a secondary wall to block visibility from the far left. 1 of the 2 was visible by just standing in the port. The other could be seen by leaning on or around the right side wall. No new opening was made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started the match on this stage telling it the way I saw it. I dont think those guys would have been angry and got the MD if someone was leaning around a corner to shoot. Maybe it was out by the time you shot?  The construction of this was is a flat piece of steel on the ground with 3 metal pipes welded to the steel. The wall just drops down into the pipe. This the last thing I have to say about this, I asked the question without involving names.  Some one asking questions about your stages is just that a question. Good luck with your future matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Onepocket said:

 I never once mentioned this match or anyones name simply wanted thoughts on a ruling. I ask lots of questions about rules and rulings called, the more you know the more you can get away with. I asked several CROs that I respect and to be honest they all gave a different answer. You chose to adress this question blankly asked on a forum. Forums are for input.

 

the problem tho is that imho you gave pretty incomplete information, so I really had no idea what *actually* happened until uod posted. Based on his description, I think he probably handled it the right way.

 

Based on your description, I couldn't really say. We spike our walls directly to the ground, so it never occurred to me that the walls might be stuck into stands that might have a bit of play in them. taking advantage of that play is very different from moving something that is spiked down and then has to be repaired afterwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

the problem tho is that imho you gave pretty incomplete information,

I read it the same way.  I go to matches where the walls are not all that solid.  If the wall is in the shooting area and there is a hard lean and I lean on the wall and it moves a little, no big deal. 

 

If I go to a match and a wall is pretty solid and I push it a foot or two out of the way so I can make a shot..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the shooters physically moved the base of the wall, we have a problem.  If they pushed the top to lean a bit more then it is stage construction.  Either brace the wall so it cannot be pushed out of position, or place a fault line in front of it so that the wall is off limits.  It is a case of learning from our mistakes and trying to not repeat them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...