driver8M3

The example of stacked shots in the glossary purposefully doesn't mention procedurals under 10.2.4? That's surprising to me. How many would you give in the example in this thread?

Have you read the example of stacked shots yet? It very clearly includes a mandatory reload that was done early (just like in the situation described in this thread). In the example, they assessed two procedurals for stacking...and zero for mistiming the mandatory reload. There are many, many ways to write an example of stacking. The one the rules writers chose to use includes a mistimed mandatory reload. And because they are already penalizing under stacking (because it's the most appropriate penalty), they do not also penalize under 10.2.4.

Once you assign the two procedurals for stacking, you can't add additional penalties for the same action under a different rule. The violation committed was stacking (which included doing the mandatory reload after one target instead of two). Are you also saying they forgot to mention the mandatory reload violations in the example?

Do you think they forgot to mention the mandatory reload procedurals when they said what the penalties would be in the glossary? I'll ask you the same question. How would you score the example that's in the glossary? (hint...the correct answer is in red) Stacked shots - Shooting more than the specified shots at a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in the stage briefing. Example: A VC scored stage requires two shots only at T1 and T2, a mandatory reload, and two shots only at T1 and T2. Firing 4 shots at T1, making the mandatory reload, and firing 4 shots at T2 is considered stacking and the competitor will be assessed two procedural penalties, one for incorrectly shooting at T1 and one for incorrectly shooting at T2. Also, if you're going to penalize for stacking, you shouldn't also penalize the same actions under another rule.

I would assign four procedurals...one each for stacking on T1, T2, T4, T5. I don't think you penalize the same action twice, so I would only assess stacking procedurals. You didn't say how you would score the example in the glossary. I'm surprised...it should be easy because the answer is right there with the example.

You can if the rulebook directs you to. And it does.

You keep ignoring the part of the rulebook that was written for this exact situation. This exact scenario is in the rulebook glossary under stacked shots and it only assesses stacking procedurals. The reload in the glossary example was also done incorrectly, but still only stacking procedurals were assessed. How would you score the example in the glossary? Stacked shots - Shooting more than the specified shots at a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in the stage briefing. Example: A VC scored stage requires two shots only at T1 and T2, a mandatory reload, and two shots only at T1 and T2. Firing 4 shots at T1, making the mandatory reload, and firing 4 shots at T2 is considered stacking and the competitor will be assessed two procedural penalties, one for incorrectly shooting at T1 and one for incorrectly shooting at T2.

The stacking example in the rulebook glossary says nothing about procedurals for an ill-timed mandatory reload. The situation in the example is nearly a perfect match of what happened here and only stacking procedurals were assessed.

Lol. But shouldn't you just score it the way the rulebook says to score it?

If you get ignore the first reload he engaged all five targets wrong because he engaged them all twice without a reload (because that second reload attempt is not a reload). how would you score the example of stacking in the glossary of the rulebook? Stacked shots - Shooting more than the specified shots at a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in the stage briefing. Example: A VC scored stage requires two shots only at T1 and T2, a mandatory reload, and two shots only at T1 and T2. Firing 4 shots at T1, making the mandatory reload, and firing 4 shots at T2 is considered stacking and the competitor will be assessed two procedural penalties, one for incorrectly shooting at T1 and one for incorrectly shooting at T2.

I understand your point. But the rulebook provides an example of stacking. In that example the reload was done after engaging one target instead of two, so according to your analysis, the penalty should be under 10.2.4. But it wasn't. The resulting penalty in the rulebook example was stacking, not 10.2.4.

My opinion about the reload is irrelevant. What matters is the rulebook. And the rulebook gives an example of stacking that is basically identical to this situation, and it says stacking, not 10.2.4. The rulebook is perhaps not as clear as it could be. But I would give four procedurals for stacking. I wouldn't call you crazy or anything for doing it differently, but I think stacking is more appropriate.

I understand exactly what you're saying. And it's not an outlandish interpretation. but the example in the rulebook matches this situation very closely. how do you account for the fact that the rulebook example of stacked shots does not penalize for the incorrect mandatory reload? Stacked shots - Shooting more than the specified shots at a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in the stage briefing. Example: A VC scored stage requires two shots only at T1 and T2, a mandatory reload, and two shots only at T1 and T2. Firing 4 shots at T1, making the mandatory reload, and firing 4 shots at T2 is considered stacking and the competitor will be assessed two procedural penalties, one for incorrectly shooting at T1 and one for incorrectly shooting at T2.

Check the example of stacked shots in the glossary. In that example the mandatory reload was done incorrectly...and not mentioned. The very nature of stacked shots means you're not doing a mandatory reload correctly. That's the "benefit" of stacking shots. And the situation described here is a perfect example of stacked shots.

A total of 4 procedurals for stacking (9.4.5.3): 1 each for T1 and T2 - this is clearly stacking as they were engaged incorrectly prior to the reload, and not at all after the reload. 1 each for T4 and T5 - these targets were not engaged prior to the reload and were engaged incorrectly with two rounds each after the first reload (that second attempt at a reload doesn't count because a new magazine was not inserted). T3 was engaged correctly with one round before and after the reload.

I don't think you've thought this through completely. What do you want ROs to do when they recognize a squib but the shooter doesn't? The current squib rules are fine. I seriously doubt NROI would ever consider allowing squibs to be cleared on the clock.

I think you spelled relic incorrectly. I assume it retains the gun safely since they were widely used in ancient times.

Chapter 10 is pretty clear. Extending the stock of a PCC would seem to be covered under 10.5.19's "All other gun handling..." provision even though it's not specifically listed as an example. Why do you think extending the stock is exempt from these rules? Would you allow me to draw my pistol under your direct supervision as I approach the start position before you issue a command? 10.5 Match Disqualification – Unsafe Gun Handling Examples of unsafe gun handling include, but are not limited to: 10.5.1 Handling a firearm at any time except when in a designated safety area or when under the supervision of, and in response to a direct command issued by, a Range Officer. This includes deliberately removing a flag from a PCC except under the conditions listed here. 10.5.19 Failing to point the muzzle of a PCC at a side berm or back stop during casing/uncasing or removing/replacing on a conveyance or sweeping any person with the muzzle of a PCC, whether loaded or not, even if a chamber flag is inserted. Side berms/backstops may be used for casing and uncasing or removing from/placing on conveyances only. All other gun handling with the PCC, e.g., sight pictures, turning dots on/off, etc., must be accomplished in a safety area or under the direct supervision of a Range Officer. The berm/backstop is not required while removing/returning a properly flagged PCC from/to a vehicle providing all other safety rules are followed.

10.5.1 provides a clue to what Troy might say.

5.2.1.5 - Un-cased pistol caliber carbines must be carried reasonably vertical, whether slung or held in the hands, with a chamber flag in place. Match Directors may require this to be "vertically upwards" or "vertically downwards" providing this is made clear to all competitors in a reasonable manner.

Do you interpret 10.5.19 as allowing a PCC shooter to turn the dot on/off wherever he/she wants?

So want a competitor to be able to stop himself if he suspects he has a squib...but if he's wrong he gets a reshoot?

According to the current rules you don't get a reshoot when there is a squib.

What hypothetical change are you talking about.

It's not required (see "if available" below), but I think they add the open division as a courtesy to the shooters so they can see their scores (and maybe so everyone can laugh at them for getting bumped). And since open division isn't announced prior to the match, there is no open division to win. 6.2.5.1 - However, if a competitor fails to satisfy the equipment or other requirements of a declared handgun Division during a course of fire, the competitor will be placed in Open Division, if available, otherwise the competitor will shoot the match for no score. If a competitor fails to satisfy the equipment or other requirements for PCC or Open Division during the course of fire, he will shoot for no score. APPENDIX A2 - USPSA Recognition Prior to the commencement of a match, the organizers must specify which Division(s) will be recognized.