beltjones
-
Posts
1,277 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by beltjones
-
-
With a Max trap, the target is available at some point, as required by rule. In this particular set up, you have to shoot targets out of the way of subsequent targets to be able to see them. If you don't do it "fast" enough, you will never see the back target(s), which makes it an illegal stage. A target can not "disappear" if it was never visible.
That is provided that the back three poppers (50% of the calibration zone) are not visible from the sides of the shooting area. If they are, then the stage is fine, and legal.
That is interesting reasoning, but it makes one wonder if you think that it's legal or not to simply have poppers stacked one behind the other (which is pretty common). If for some reason, you don't shoot the first one, the ones behind it will never be available, but no one has a problem with that. I don't see any real difference between activating a maxtrap vs activating a swinging hard-cover and also shooting down poppers in the way. Either way you have to do stuff to make the targets available, and they are only available for a limited time.
I think the max-trap analogy is a good one, and shows that the actual scoring target doesn't have to be 'moving' in order to be scored as a disappearing target.
Again, I'm waiting curiously to find out on monday what the real story is, but I'll bet 5 of Nik's deutschmarks that the lurking poppers will be scored as disappearing targets (NPM), and I also suspect they will be arranged so that a decent shooter can actually hit them quickly, or else no one will bother shooting them after activiation.
It's amazing that the actual rule has been posted many times throughout this thread and very few people have taken the time to read it.
There isn't some "interpretation" in the rule that is used for max traps that could also apply to stage 22. There is strict, specific verbiage that addresses max traps and makes them allowable as disappearing targets.
-
Have any of the people that have been saying these aren't disappearing targets since they don't move ever shot a Max Trap? I have and I have shot more than a few that have the No-shoot cover the entire shoot target when at rest..............always, always, always was deemed as a disappearing target. Why is it now different?
Bro, actually read the rules sometime.
9.9.3 Moving scoring targets will always incur failure to shoot at and miss penalties if a competitor fails to activate the mechanism which initiatesthe target movement. This includes no-shoot targets that must be activated when in front of scoring targets to expose them, penalties are based on number of shots required for the scoring target(s) behind the no-shoot. -
Ugh. This is another reason why I would never arb anything in a million years. I suppose "All Poppers shall follow the guidelines below:" could be slightly more clear, but I have a feeling there will always be a person who says, "it's just a guideline! I can do whatever I want if I ignore the word 'shall' and the word 'all.'"
That same person, if the rule said, "principle," they would say, "it's just a principle! It's not a provision!" And if the rule said, "provision," they would say, "it's just a provision! It's not a stipulation!" And if the rule said, "stipulation," they would say, "it's just a stipulation! It's not a condition!" And if the rule said, "condition," they would say, "it's just a condition! It's not a requirement!" And if the rule said, "requirement," they would say, "it's just a requirement! It's not a mandate!"
-
Actually, I think someone intentionally found a little glitch and has exploited it in the stage design.
From the definition section of the 2014 Handgun Rulebook:
Disappearing target .......... A target which when activated and after completing its movement is no longer available for engagement.
So by definition, those poppers at issue, while they will disappear from being able to be shot, are not considered to be disappearing targets by the rulebook. Since they are not paper targets, the 25% A-zone requirement is not applicable. But there is more...
If a lot of people call for calibration, it might get it tossed. How could the RM shoot poppers 2-4 if the window is closed? Just open the window? Then that is not as presented to the competitor.
However, I might argue that it is not a legal course of fire per this rule:
4.3.1.5 Scoring metal targets must be shot and fall or overturn to score. Scoring poppers which fail to fall when hit are subject to the provisions of Appendix C1, 6 & 7. Scoring metal targets which a Range Officer deems to have fallen or overturned due to a shot on the supporting apparatus or prematurely fallen or moved for any reason will be treated as range equipment failure. (See Rule 4.6.1). All Poppers shall follow the guidelines below:1. That a minimum of 50% of the calibration zone be available at some point in the COF.Unless the back 3 poppers have 50% visible from the edges of the shooting area, they would not meet this criteria, therefore they would not be legal."All Poppers shall follow the guidelines below:"
"shall follow" = a requirement
"guidelines" = suggestion (not a requirement, something to give consideration)
Someone could counter argue that if HQ wanted it to be applied as you assert, then HQ would have written it "All poppers shall follow the requirements below". That's pretty clear. Or, they could have used "... rules below". That's pretty clear too. But HQ didn't write it that way - they chose to write it differently. The current rulebook text uses the word "guidelines" and therefor means that 'regarding using poppers, you're required to consider the suggestions below'. Therefor, it's only a suggestion that "a minimum...", and the stage isn't illegal for the reason you assert.
Yeah, no. Guidelines doesn't necessarily mean suggestions. From Websters:
"a rule or instruction that shows or tells how something should be done"
You're playing the semantics game if you think the word "guidelines" means you can do whatever you want within the context of the rule.
-
answered the question did'n cite rule got it,
Honestly I don't think you answered the question. The only way to answer the question is to admit that there isn't a rule that covers it (like Motosapiens said), and then apply other rules that are written for different situations. Posting bizarre course construction instructions for MDs isn't going in the right direction.
-
I was asked a single question on scoring and answered it.
what was the executing question? and I answered you first question
You posted rules from section 1 (course design) and section 2 (course construction and modification).
Section 9 deals with scoring. You didn't post anything from section 9.
-
Beltjones,
I have given a rule for everything I have said. What do you need me to elaborate on?
None of your rules apply to this thread though. You have just posted guidelines for designing stages, not for executing or scoring them.
-
I think instead of arguing about it on the internet, I'm going to ask how they're scoring it at the stage, and plan accordingly.
I have never heard of a 'disappearing target' that is not a moving one, but I don't see any compelling reason the same rules couldn't be used.
What on earth do you constitute as "arguing?" I'm asking a question about the rules in a rules sub-forum.
But I did like how you posted this caustic response while at the same time saying you're not going to argue about it on the internet. That's A+ trolling.
wow, take things personal much? lol. Are you my ex-wife? She thought I was caustic too.
I didn't mean to be caustic with my choice of words. I think your questions about this stage are interesting and I've been wondering the same thing. I think ultimately tho it's going to depend on how the stage is set up and how the rules are interpeted. We already have some fairly smart people that can't really agree whether a stationary target that is not visible at rest is scored as a disappearing target.
Enough both of you. This is the kind of stuff -- posting at each other, rather than debating the merits of the question that will get threads locked.
Go re-read the forum rules.....
That was the end of it several hours ago.
-
Mark, Show me where the stage is illegal. Don't just say it is show me.
Dude, no offense, but you haven't exactly been compelling with your quotations of the rules. Demanding that others show you something in the rule book at this point is pretty ironic.
-
Belt, ( I don't know how to use the quote function) You are shooting to check the target calibration, nothing else shots would be fired through the port.
Right, and the steel hardcover would be at rest, obstructing the targets. Good luck calibrating those.
-
Rule 1.1.5 shoot targets "as and when visible".
Again that's part of the instructions for MDs, not for shooters. "must be permitted," not "are required."
What else ya got? Want to post something else incorrectly and out of context?
Do you need me to post the whole rule?
1.1.5. Freestyle – USPSA matches are freestyle. Competitors must be permitted to solve the challenge presented in a freestyle manner, and to shoot
targets on an “as and when visible” basis. Courses of fire must not require mandatory reloads nor dictate a shooting position, location or stance, except as specified below. However, conditions may be created,and barriers or other physical limitations may be constructed, to compel a competitor into shooting positions, locations or stances. -
4.3.1.5.3: Visible evidence of a hit must be present to calibrate the popper. If no evidence is present, the request for calibration shall be denied.
Ok, but what happens if/ when there is a legitimate call for calibration?
-
SuperDub
The problem as I see it is that the targets are not actually moving, so they really don't fit into the scoring of disappearing target rules ( 9.9). What the designers need to do is have an auxiliary method of restarting the HC, if your scenario occurs .
That would make it interesting.
-
Good god there are no disappearing targets. There are no moving targets. 2.1.8.5. again!!
2.1.8.5 Appearing scoring targets must be designed and constructed to be obscured to the competitor (during the course of fire) prior to activation.
This is a rule for stage designers. It doesn't say anything about what competitors are required to do.
-
of course it does it's about course design and getting shooters to shoot in different arrays and positions.It's not all about gaming stages, people spend a great deal of time designing and setting up stages as soon as someone comes up with a novel idea people try to game it.
This is USPSA. I don't know how it works in IPSC, but the target doesn't have to disappear before the end of the timed stage in order to be a disappearing target.
-
UH where does it say disappearing The rule says revealed. But thanks for playing.
and no one has shown me a moving target yet.
This is why I will never pay for an arbitration. Nothing you have written has been relevant. The rule you cited is about the requirement for level 2 matches and above to conceal moving targets until they are activated. It has nothing to do with shooters being required to activate anything.
-
I'd say you answered your own question. The targets don't move, and the no-shoot doesn't cover the targets when set, so none of 9.9 applies. And since they don't move, they don't fall under the definition of a disappearing target:
Disappearing target ..........A target which when activated and after completing its movement is no longer available for engagement.
So that means that they are static targets subject to miss penalties just like a wide-open popper would be.
That would make sense for the first popper, but the stage description says all of them are disappearing.
No the stage description says "PP1- PP5 will not be visible at rest" it doesn't say anything about disappearing targets, what will have happened is the targets will be visible as the HC swings across but when the HC stops the PP if left standing will not be visible.
If the designer has done his work properly the HC will swing for a long time so that the competitor will have plenty of time or He will be standing there for a long time waiting to get the "disappearing "no miss, and his stage time will be very long
Yeah, that's not how the sport works.
-
The stage description says "PP 1-PP5 will not be visible at rest. PP1 activates swinging hard cover." There are only 4 of them, and they do not move. Poorly worded for sure, but it does NOT say they are disappearing.
Well that's a good point. What else can "not be visible at rest" mean other than disappearing, though? Every time I've seen that phrase in a stage description it has meant the targets are disappearing.
-
Uh what show me the moving targets
Exactly. The stage description says they are disappearing, but they're not moving targets.
The rule you posted about appearing targets doesn't say a single word about being required to activate them, but thanks for jumping in.
-
First thing There are no moving targets on this stage!!! Targets stay in the same spot!!! The targets do not move they do not disappear!!
the targets can not be seen by RULE look it up rather than argue. Nothing in rule 9.9 applies.
you ask for the rule and then chose to ignore it.
.
Uh, what?
-
I think the only requirement would be in engaging and taking down the popper that activates the swinging hard cover. If the remaining poppers can't be seen once the swinging hard cover comes to rest, then they should be considered disappearing.
If they leave the stage in this configuration there would be no reason to even shoot at the remaining poppers after hitting the first one to start the movement of the swinging hard cover. There are simply not enough points in targets to justify wasting the time to engage more poppers. That is if the poppers are set one in front of the other and you can only see one at a time.
Like others have said, we really don't know what the best strategy is going to be for this until we can actually see how they set it up.
If they set it up so the steel is in front of one another and they are considered DT's, then its a pointless shooting challenge. Why they would try to do something like that at the nationals is beyond me as these stages should have been fully reviewed and approved by NROI, USPSA President, RM, MD, etc.
That's exactly what I was thinking. But then I read the rules to make sure I wasn't missing something, and it occurred to me that moving hardcover that obscures a fixed target isn't exactly covered in the book.
-
I think instead of arguing about it on the internet, I'm going to ask how they're scoring it at the stage, and plan accordingly.
I have never heard of a 'disappearing target' that is not a moving one, but I don't see any compelling reason the same rules couldn't be used.
What on earth do you constitute as "arguing?" I'm asking a question about the rules in a rules sub-forum.
But I did like how you posted this caustic response while at the same time saying you're not going to argue about it on the internet. That's A+ trolling.
-
The targets are "appearing" , Appendix A3
Must be activated Rule 2.1.8,5 ,
Yeah, I don't see how that applies at all.
-
No doubt there will be alterations once the stage is built. The text of the WSB could be wrong, too. Possibly the words "hard cover" were left out.
"PP1-5 will not be visible when hard cover is at rest" or something to that effect.
How will that change anything? They are still disappearing targets that don't correspond to 9.9.3.
Nationals Stage 22 - Do you have to activate the moving hardcover?
in USPSA/IPSC Rules
Posted
This is the exact rule that covers max traps. It says they are scored the same way as other moving targets. Thus, max traps can be disappearing, but other types of disappearing targets are not included in the rule. I think that's the justification they are using for saying the steel in this stage isn't disappearing.
I'm basing my judgement that they are disappearing on this thing called reality, which is to say, the stage description says they are disappearing, and the depiction shows hard cover that is placed in such a way as to completely conceal the targets at the end of its movement.