moverfive

First of all, based on how this was described, improper range commands were not given. The Range Commands begin with "Make Ready" and ends with "Range is Clear." Anything in between those commands is covered by the rulebook......anything said outside of all of that is fair game. To say otherwise, that would mean the RO cannot utter a single word except for the range commands. Now to have a lot of chatter and distractions going on while the shooter is listening for "Make Ready" can cause some confusion......but let's make sure that is characterized as such and not called improper range commands.

2012 application attached. Please note the new mailing address. 2012 MCC entry form.pdf

The folks that you are seeing as already squadded should be just match staff at this point. 2012's application about to be uploaded.

2036. ? I am also used to hearing and saying the word "dot" in there to separate whole seconds from the partial second. So in my case, I would either repeat back the time with the word "dot" seeking a verbal agreement and/or actually look at the timer for my confirmation.

Here is one potential..... http://www.crssa.com/

Actually you have filled in a blank in an idea I already had. I do database design for a living. In fact, I already have a database that connects to both the master and match databases in EzWinScore to do a bunch of things including printing the scoresheets. I can easily add a table for the registrations and create a procedure that will allow someone to just key in a competitors number (printed on the scoresheet) and a squad. That will update the record with the correct squad. Changes are just as easy. Once done, export and bada-bing. Thank you for telling me something that I already knew but was too stupid to see!! Hey - sometimes the answer to a difficult question is one that is too simple to initially consider.

What is the type of file transfer that Practiscore reads? txt? If 'txt,' then I may have a solution. We have the same issue using Peter's Palm scoring system but to add some complexity to the mix, we shoot our local matches 4 times (twice both Saturday and Sunday). So to handle squadding for 4 matches, I wrote an Excel spreadsheet that allows me to do all of the squadding on one tab. This way it is a lot easier to manage the squads as I can see ALL squads and WHO is on each squad - to ensure I have the proper experience (RO and Palm users) on each squad. Once verified, I simply export to a txt file format that is then uploaded into the Palms. To explain the process in a little more detail - (1) I create a match within EZWin for which I register everyone and for every division they might shoot. So for our regular members/shooters, I register them all divisions and the resulting shooter numbers by division will be their number for each and every following match. For example: Bob Jones shoots Open and Limited only at local matches. I register him in the generic EZWin match file for both divisions giving him a shooter number of 15 for Open and 16 Limited. Going forward in each and every monthly match, he will register using one of those numbers depending on which division he wants to shoot. (2) Once everyone is registered, I export the registration from EZWin and then import the data into my spreadsheet (all controlled by macros). I have a tab for squadding and I then enter the shooter number for each registered shooter. The spreadsheet through formulas will extract the name and division. Once all registered shooters are entered, I then export that data into the file format that the Palms scoring system reads. And ONLY the squadded shooters are exported - since it is possible to have hundreds of registered shooters but only have 50 at the match. This keeps data within the devices at a minimum. (3) I then hit 'sync' on my Master Palm and all of the shooter data, by squad, is imported. At that point, the data is replicated to all of the Palms being used that day. And of course when you reverse the gears of the 'sync' and send the data from the Palms to the computer, EZWin then imports that data. Understanding that this process may be slightly different than how Practiscore actually works, I would think the overall process is going to be very similar. If that sounds like it is the case, I can share what I have for someone to modify or we can work together and I will modify my file to fit Practiscore.....which may be something I need to do anyway.

The one thing that is and has always been an underlying (almost unwritten) rule in USPSA is "do what is fair and right for the competitor and to everyone at the match," even if that call may not be 100% supported by some rule. Not saying ignore the rule book with that statement. Just that I have seen many RO's do things like give reshoots for weird situations, tell someone their gun is missing a mag, and etc...things that that could be challenged by a strict interpretation of the rulebook. However in all of those cases, I honestly cannot remember where anyone made an issue when such calls were the right and fair thing to do. Part of that reasoning is that we hope and expect that the same call/actions would be made if that we 'us' on the line. I think this point goes back to the original poster's intent - customer service. Knowing everyone can have differing opinions as to the definition of "fair," but as long as you are consistent to everyone in your definition is what we all want from RO's.

I had the same problem when I originally started using AA7.......the problem was actually with the oil, too thin. The moment I switched to Castrol Synthetic 10W30, never had a problem since then.

You are correct when it comes to the cost of N105. One of the best burn charts out there is from VhitaVuori - instead of simply numbering the order, they show you the powders on a side-by-side perspective so that you can get a better comparison as to how two powders stack up. For example - Powders #33 and #34 on a numerical chart could be identical in burn rate or it could have a significant variance.....VV's chart shows that variance. On the VV chart, AA7 has the same burn rate as VV N105 and thus use both powders. Because of the cost, I only use N105 for real matches and use AA7 for practice/local matches. And to be honest - I cannot tell that big of a difference between the two for 99% of the shots. N105 gives me that one extra gear, as I like to describe it.....basically when you want to 'grip and rip' it just seems to hold a tad bit better. And yes, AA7 isn't exactly the cleanest powder out there. I am only concerned with dot movement and thus I don't mind spending a few extra minutes cleaning a gun if I get the performance I want. My AA7 load is 11.2gr with a 124gr bullet and again 10.2gr to 10.4gr of N105 with a 121gr bullet.

Just sent you a message.........

Let me piggy-back on Lynn's N105 recipe.....depending on the gun, I use 10.2gr to 10.4gr with a 121.

And let me repeat this plug along these lines - the Sunday following this match will be MSSA's local club match where we shoot the same stages. And whether you shoot open to production at the local match, the stages are still very fun and not so simple! Sam's stages are not the 6 shots here, 6 shots there, and then maybe another 6 shot somewhere else......oh no! You will have to come up with a plan. With that being said - at this match (MCC), everyone will be shooting revolver......therefore every stage is just as revolver neutral for the next guy.

Everyone trying to make an argument that just because you win your class you should therefore get bumped into the next class......is missing one very key element - the actual percentage/score of that shooter. It doesn't matter who you beat or how many of "them" you beat....it only matters what your actual score is. And that is why having enough GM's is critical - without enough GM's posting solid scores, the resulting percentages don't mean anything from a classification standpoint. For example: A match without GM's is won by a respectable Master.....on a good day, this Master will shoot 85% of good GM's. So in this particular match a C-class shooter wins his class with a 65% score - they DID NOT shoot a B-class score as some would like to believe. That 65% score is essentially a 55% score against GM's.....and 55% is a C-class score. (trust me.....do the math). In almost all cases where enough GM's shot, if you were to look at the winners of each class......they are probably within 5% of their classification range (really within a couple of percentage points). And in those rare cases where someone blows the doors of the scores - take a look at their shooting history, you will probably find a newer shooter that is advancing faster than the classification system can keep up. But we are probably talking about 1, maybe 2 shooters in the entire match, and they will get bumped immediately after that match. I know, I was in that category myself as every single classification I got through A-class came from match performance.

Generally speaking, I think this question about all divisions being classed similarly makes perfect sense. But when you really dig deeper, I think the current methodology of 'one class lower' is more appropriate given the real differences in the divisions. Granted no one makes M or GM by being slow and inaccurate and thus the base skill sets that allowed you to make M/GM will definitely transfer to any other division. But each division has their own unique skill sets that must be mastered in order to make M/GM, much less to even have a chance at being competitive. For example, if you cannot reload a revolver, forget it! As I joke, I am awesome with a revolver for the first six shots......after that, put the timer down, grab a drink, read War and Peace, because you now have a lot of time on your hands before I start shooting again. Granted I only shoot revolver once a year at Sam's Charity Match in Memphis.......but after a few years, I have only managed to shoot around 50% and have yet to beat one specific Production C-class shooter (and I am a GM in Limited in Open). And when the conversation keeps coming back to sandbagging or the classification not properly keeping up with a shooter......remember, after shooting one major match with sufficient competition, they will get bumped if they are truly shooting at a higher classification. So that shooter only gets one shot at using their lower classification for any gain.

Why don't you read what I wrote. A deliberate attempt to screw with the match yes. The amount of time you take to shoot a stage no. You're partial logic makes about as much sense as me saying I would DQ someone for having an AD while reloading and you saying I wanted to DQ them for reloading. What I wrote was that I would not DQ for what was shown in the video. If the shooter continued to do it after direction from the range official, absolutely. This conversation has gotten a bit ridiculous. I have been playing this game for several years, have seen people that are quick at 'make ready,' and then those that are beyond slow by comparison. Never once have I seen, heard, or suspected anyone intentionally doing something during the 'make ready' portion of a stage where a DQ should have entered ANYONE'S mind. Now does that mean in all of the sport somewhere that someone hasn't made a jackass out of themselves (intentionally or not) along this subject line? NO. But to also say that this type of action has even occurred enough to have this conversation about DQ'ing folks, a bit ridiculous in my opinion. Some people are quick, some people are slow, and most are in the middle. If in that RARE occurrence you have that ultra slow competitor, just ask that they please hurry up and let that be the end of it.

Knowing a couple of folks (and maybe even Randall now) will be wearing skirts (aka kilts), the rest of us would like to thank you for making keg stands a forbidden action.

THANK YOU FLEX! I so wish all proposed rule changes properly identified the problem being addressed - to ensure there was a real problem and that the problem was properly being addressed. That way we wouldn't have rule changes where a small group of folks implemented because they simply didn't like something.

And did you see where this RO treated other shooters differently? And especially treated them differently because of their classification? I have shot many a matches where the lower classed shooters took a lot of time themselves to make ready......and I have yet to see where a RO said a word to them......much less stop them, had them show clear, and then tell them to go away until they can make ready in less than 30 seconds. Have never seen it.

This is one of those scenarios where not enough information may be available to properly talk about this situation. The troubling part to me is that the first thing folks think of when they see something "out of the ordinary" is to DQ the shooter. In order for this shooter to have been DQ'ed, what safety infraction actually occurred? The folks believing a DQ may be appropriate are citing 8.3.1.1 and thus 10..3.1. However unless those folks were at that match, in that squad, and heard everything said between that RO and competitor, you cannot say that the shooter violated 8.3.1.1 because you don't know if he already had prior approval from that RO. I don't think anyone can legitimately say the shooter left an area that wasn't under the direct supervision of the RO (he was only a few feet from the start position). So the RO could have given prior approval and the shooter never left his direct supervision.....therefore what infraction occurred? Granted, allowing the shooter to go behind the start position is definitely not advisable and thus something an RO should typically not approve, but the shooter never violated a safety rule. People supporting and/or considering a DQ - this is why video is not allowed in arbitration. It doesn't always show the entire story. In fact the RO's reaction, or lack thereof, is more telling to me that the shooter did not do anything to the surprise of the RO. Would the folks supporting or considering a DQ have the exact same opinion if the shooter had gone a few feet IN FRONT OF THE SHOOTING POSITION? A little background story on this specific addition to 8.3.1.1 (Gary or the other long-time shooters may have a different recollection). Many rules come about because of something that happens that no one thought of previously. Well, this rule modification came about because there was nothing preventing a shooter from running around the stage with a drawn gun, even a loaded one, while "loading and making ready." And I am sure everyone can agree that having to chase a shooter around the stage unnecessarily is something you don't want allowed at your match. Therefore, when that previously unforeseen scenario actually occurred, the rule modification was added to 8.3.1.1. So the act of leaving the box after the start command is not in itself a safety infraction, it is simply a prohibited action. And for that reason, the rule gives the RO some flexibility to manage their stage/shooters as they see best.

Like last year, we are going to have squads that will shoot all-day Friday, all-day Saturday, Saturday AM/Sunday AM, and then Saturday PM/Sunday AM. So when you self-squad yourself, please pay close attention to the shooting schedule of the squad you are joining. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to send me an email: brad.griffin@gmail.com TN Section Squad Schedule - 2012.pdf

Once again, and this time I looked it up in the oldest rule book in my collection (1995) ... "slide forward" has not been an official range command since I joined USPSA, and I suspect not before then. This is a case of something which has crept into the lexicon over time but was NEVER part of the official commands. I'm all for passing out reminder cards with the commands printed on them ... Tape them to the timers ... Tatoo them on your forearm ... Heck, maybe I should get a shirt made with the proper commands listed on the back so the RO can read them to me! Yep, believe it or not......there are rule books that pre-date 1995. I could be off by a year or two, but I think that particular command was changed in 1994. The explanation for the rule change, as obvious as it is, how can you drop the hammer UNLESS the slide is forward? Thus "slide forward, hammer down" was redundant and thus shortened.

That is a good idea. Because as Randall said earlier - this isn't about the Alabama match itself, this is more about an incident or two that apparently happened at this match but also happens in just about every match.

True ... But in so doing it HAS happened that the shooter misunderstood what the RO said and THOUGHT he was told to Make Ready. This is especially problematic on noisy ranges and/or with shooters whose first language is not English. (BTW - That's NOT a crime!) And that is the reason why using the proper range commands are so important......for someone that doesn't speak English, all they are hearing is jibberish. But they understand which jibberish is "Make Ready" and etc. So if you butcher up the commands, it can cause an issue with that particular shooter. But in the case of the shooter being DQ'ed for thinking the RO said "Make Ready," that is a judgment call that can only be determined by the folks there.....in case there was a strong potential for the confusion. Generally speaking, unless the shooter clearly hears "Make Ready," he should simply confirm with the RO that that command was given. But because of what was said prior to "Make Ready" is not and should never be used as an excuse.....as the official range commands have not yet begun.

Again, something needs to be clear here....... The RO can say "Range is going hot," "Do you understand the course of fire," and/or "Did you have coffee this morning?" The RO can say anything he wants PRIOR TO and AFTER the official range commands have been given. So anything before "Make Read" and after "Range is Clear," is not a part of the range commands and thus isn't something to be confused as such.