Possible cure to round dumping?

[kct45acp]

I agree with Memphis Mechanic, required should be off the clock(except in the classifier) but give me a chance to do it on time in a stage and I will without any trouble. I have even done it with moonclip revolvers. The Cherokee Wheelgun Championship even had to written in standard course of fire.

As far as stowing the partial I always put it in my Left front pants pocket since this pocket doesn't move like a vest pocket or have the small opening of a magpouch(pouches are for full mags only) Stow the mag com e up and grab fresh mag which is right above and behind this pocket

[MemphisMechanic]

I used the front pocket on my pants until recently, when I switched to the tuck-into-waistband load. Unlike the pocket, this works with every pair of pants I own. And it's easier to hit on the run.

[Dan Burwell]

Solution for round dumping: white out. Just take the round dumping rule out of the book, there will be places where it is still better to do a RWR or Tac Load on the clock. Like last year at nationals where there was 6 or 8 shots, a wall to move along, then an activating steel, and 4 more shots on moving targets.

I hate having SOs trying to use their foggy a$$ crystal ball to decide what my intentions just were. It is for darn certain I hate trying figure out if someone was dumping when I am an SO.

[Glock3422]

The round dumping rule is an area of subjectivity that really needs to be eliminated from the book.

A guy shooting .45 semi wad cutters has a much better idea of where his hits are than a guy shooting a 9mm.

Eye sight, distance, caliber, and ability are all factors in guessing if someone is round dumping.

If competitors could always call their shots, there would never be a failure to neutralize. The change to requiring a down 1 or better on a target changed the way competitors addressed the issue of distant, moving or obscured targets.

[John Z Sr]

This might not go well with some hard core IDPA shooters, but while we still have First Amendment Rights, here goes, I shoot the stage as I see best, not always what the rule book agrees with, hence my collection of procedurals, but I'm sorry, give me 3 BS seconds over dropping a partial moonclip on the deck and getting my gun back in action quickly, and I'm happy with that. I shoot all the pistol sports and when it comes to IDPA and some of the round dump/reload rules, I do what I think is best and take the procedurals, which don't really matter to me.

[Duane Thomas]

Let's go easy on referring to the rules, and the SOs' enforcement of them, as "BS".

[Duane Thomas]

With all this "I'm not a mindreader" talk, still no SO has answered my question: have you ever tried just ASKING the competitor whether or not they were round dumping?

[Shibby]

With all this "I'm not a mindreader" talk, still no SO has answered my question: have you ever tried just ASKING the competitor whether or not they were round dumping?

But if you ask one competitor, I think you would need to ask them all. I wouldn't want to ask Dave Sevigny or Bob Vogel if they just dumped rounds after a stage at Nationals.

I still think its a gray area though. There have been many times where I have put 3 on a target BECAUSE it was a tough shot. Being at slide lock afterwards just makes the decision easier . But being at slide lock afterwards is not the reason why I put three on the target. If I was being 100% honest with the SO I would answer your question by saying, "It was a tough shot so I decided to shoot 3 at the target to ensure I was 0 down. And I would be at slide lock afterwards so it made sense to shoot 3 at that target to make sure I was 0 down".

My biggest beef with it is Vickers Count is well defined in the rule book. While dumping rounds is not, only examples are given. So it is left up to personal judgement whether a competitor dumped rounds. SO's are still human and flawed just like the rest of us. Bias and emotion can and will play into judgement calls.

A lot of time we like to brag about how short the IDPA rule book is, but in cases like this I don't think that's something to brag about.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Shibby

[John Z Sr]

Let's go easy on referring to the rules, and the SOs' enforcement of them, as "BS".

Not meant to be an insult Duane, and apologies to any that may have been offended by my personal comments, the big thing here is what other's have stated, the SO interpretation of "round dumping" can be very subjective. With much of the objective of IDPA matches and stages to be "real life" scenarios, why would we carry a pistol that can hold 15-19 rounds in it with only 10? Just my opinion, not that of this forum or it's sponsers! Off to an IDPA match now, NO PROCEDURALS today, at least that's my plan !!

[Chills1994]

Duane wrote:

With all this "I'm not a mindreader" talk, still no SO has answered my question: have you ever tried just ASKING the competitor whether or not they were round dumping?

Hmmn...okay, I will try to explain it this way. And I only bring this up to give you some background as to where I am coming from, NOT to brag or toot my own horn. I graduated from the Air Force Academy in 1994. During my "sentence" there, we lived under an Honor Code of "We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate....blah...blah yada yada..."

You get the picture, I think.

The way the Honor System was set up was that if you asked another cadet, usually a lower ranking cadet some question, let's say for example "Were you out drinking tonight?", but you already knew he had been drinking that night, you saw him at some bar, let's say. By you asking that question, it implies that you don't already know the correct or truthful answer to that question. In effect, you are deceiving the cadet into thinking that you do NOT know the answer. It also sets that cadet up for something like an "Honor trap".

Consequently, those kind of questions are labeled as "improper" and are strictly verboten to be asked in the first place. Said another way, the cadets who make up the Honor staff from a very early start teach the new incoming cadets how the System is set up, so they teach that a question like that is an improper one and is NOT to be asked.

So, in my mind, to ask a shooter, "Hey, man, did you just round dump in that stage?" would be an improper question and should never be asked.

The pragmatist in me says that if somebody is going to be gamer-ish enough to round dump, and you ask them that question, then their pre-planned reply is just going to be, "Nah, man, I just made up a shot." Or you might get something smart @$$-ey like, "It's known as shot calling. You should give it a try some time. Your scores might just improve."

If people are trying to round dump so that they are at slide lock all in order to avoid an RWR, then...well...maybe we should get rid of RWR'ing entirely.

Retaining an empty mag while there is still one in the pipe is...well...just plain dumb, in my opinion.

[Strick]

I think the only way to "solve" the problem in rule book and keep the Vickers scoring so it makes sense is that all the targets have to be engaged with listed number of rounds from each shooting position before any make up shots can be made. That is about the only way to really limit the "dreaded" round dumping. Barring that I set leave things the way they are and I still think it fits into the spirit of IDPA. It is all about choices and just because you dump a round doesn't mean it was faster.

[Chills1994]

Strick wrote:

....into the spirit of IDPA....

If I hear spirit of anything one more time, I think I might just scream. "Spirit" is subjective from person to person, and as such is ambiguous.

I would much rather stick to the black and white and letter of the law that is the IDPA rulebook.

Strick also wrote:

...just because you dump a round doesn't mean it was faster.

Then, why do it?

[Strick]

The "spirit" is pretty clearly defind in the rule and all that really matters is how the writer of the rule book see the "spirit". Like or not that is what IDPA is and to shoot IDPA all you need to do is accept it to play their game.

It is not always faster to dump a round. If you want to know why they did, again just ask the shooter.

[Chills1994]

Just an FYI...I shot in and SO'ed the 2007 IDPA Nat's. I won my class and division. So don't take my comments as some guy who is strictly a USPSA'er out to poo-poo all things IDPA.

The ambiguity of "spirit" is what grates on me.

[Glock3422]

With all this "I'm not a mindreader" talk, still no SO has answered my question: have you ever tried just ASKING the competitor whether or not they were round dumping?

I have asked the question. Although, when I have asked it, it was in good fun.

I saw quite a few rounds dumped today, but I wasn't the SO today.

I saw more than a few opportune insurance rounds at S&W.

I think it is a completely unenforceable rule when taken in conjunction with the "benefit of the doubt" premise of IDPA. To me, benefit of the doubt is the overriding consideration and makes round dumping moot. Don't ask, don't tell.

When I look at a COF, I will often consider the best location for an insurance round. I don't always follow the plan, if I feel it isn't necessary.

Today, I didn't fire an extra round (partially due to this thread). I had a down five on a distant target and have learned my lesson. Follow the plan.

The rule puts the "honest" competitor at a disadvantage. The presumption is that round dumping creates an advantage. It doesn't matter if it really does or not. Those who would say that there is no advantage should not be opposed to removing the rule. Those who believe there is an advantage, would probably favor leveling the playing field. It is an awful rule.

[Duane Thomas]

I graduated from the Air Force Academy in 1994. During my "sentence" there, we lived under an Honor Code of "We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate....blah...blah yada yada..."

You get the picture, I think.

The way the Honor System was set up was that if you asked another cadet, usually a lower ranking cadet some question, let's say for example "Were you out drinking tonight?", but you already knew he had been drinking that night, you saw him at some bar, let's say. By you asking that question, it implies that you don't already know the correct or truthful answer to that question. In effect, you are deceiving the cadet into thinking that you do NOT know the answer. It also sets that cadet up for something like an "Honor trap".

But this is not the Air Force Academy. It's an IDPA match.

[Duane Thomas]

The pragmatist in me says that if somebody is going to be gamer-ish enough to round dump, and you ask them that question, then their pre-planned reply is just going to be, "Nah, man, I just made up a shot."

How do you know? Have you ever tried it?

[Duane Thomas]

But if you ask one competitor, I think you would need to ask them all. I wouldn't want to ask Dave Sevigny or Bob Vogel if they just dumped rounds after a stage at Nationals.

Why not?

[Chills1994]

Duane you missed the point. Honor is honor whether you're at some school in C-springs, or if you're at a match.

If you have to ask, it implies, deceptively, that you don't know. If you are asking, then realistically or pragmatically, you already know the answer to the question...or at least you had a gut feeling of what the truthful/honest answer to the question should be, so why not just go ahead and issue the 20 second FTDR?

And again, realistically, if you ask a shooter that, and he/she just replies back with, "Oh, I made up a shot," or "It's known as shot calling. You should try it sometime...." or just a simple "No!" and you are not happy with that answer, then what are going to do? Eh? Call him a liar right there in front of all his squadmates and then give him an FTDR?

I think if you do that, there are going to be about 8 to 10 people who won't be returning to your major match the following year.

Either the guy who received the FTDR or one of his squadmates is going to come in here on this sub-forum and gripe about it. That equates to bad publicity for that match, and I think long term you will NOT be asked to SO the following year, or even more people won't show up to your match.

I have known of shooters who have complained about an SO being a jerk, so they emailed the MD to complain. Then the following year those shooters have followed up with the MD, and via email the MD replied that, that jerk would NOT be back to SO. Then the match applications and entry fee checks poured in.

Edited March 8, 2010 by Chills1994

[freeidaho]

From the hundreds of matches I have attended here are a few observations:

Way more people are getting away with dumping rounds, than are being called for it. The ratio may be hundreds to one. It sure isn't 10 to one or less.

I don't know of any shooter that never dumps getting called for it.

The people getting called for it don't proclaim that they never dump. They effectively proclaim they weren't currently dumping when called.

So maybe the system isn't as bad as one would believe from this discussion.

Or we need to polygraph each shooter before the match to find out if he/she is a cheater, and exclude them.

kr

[Ahab]

Hey, there's a simple cure for round dumping, I don't get what all this debate is about! You want to prevent round dumping? Shoot a revolver.

[rvb]

Way more people are getting away with dumping rounds, than are being called for it. The ratio may be hundreds to one.

...

So maybe the system isn't as bad as one would believe from this discussion.

kr

kr,

I don't understand? We have a system where possibly 99 out of every 100 people who are effectively cheating are not penalized appropriately, and the system isn't bad? Is that even a system?

-rvb

[Steve Koski]

I'm all in favor of behavior based rules, not intent based rules.

Intent based rules have the nicety of being printable on a T-shirt. In theory, you could just print the intent in a half dozen sentences and the rules to any sport would be complete. But reality rears its ugly head, and it doesn't work for big groups.

[freeidaho]

Way more people are getting away with dumping rounds, than are being called for it. The ratio may be hundreds to one.

...

So maybe the system isn't as bad as one would believe from this discussion.

kr

kr,

I don't understand? We have a system where possibly 99 out of every 100 people who are effectively cheating are not penalized appropriately, and the system isn't bad? Is that even a system?

-rvb

Ryan,

You make a good point. But my point was most of the pain this rule causes is not landing on the honest non-dumper so I don't mind.

A myopic view point indeed, but it works for me.

kr

[rvb]

Way more people are getting away with dumping rounds, than are being called for it. The ratio may be hundreds to one.

...

So maybe the system isn't as bad as one would believe from this discussion.

kr

kr,

I don't understand? We have a system where possibly 99 out of every 100 people who are effectively cheating are not penalized appropriately, and the system isn't bad? Is that even a system?

-rvb

Ryan,

You make a good point. But my point was most of the pain this rule causes is not landing on the honest non-dumper so I don't mind.

A myopic view point indeed, but it works for me.

kr

I tend to think the pain this rules causes IS landing on the honest non-dumper... those who get their scores bested by shooters who do dump. It also lands on those non-dumpers who (in my experience) get accused of dumping when honestly making up a shot.

Would you say the same thing if we replaced round dumping with, oh, 100 pf ammunition? If we catch 1 out of 100 that's good enough? They get penalized "sometimes" so by the rules of karma it's ok? That is not hurting people who shoot minimum pf ammo?

-rvb

Edited March 9, 2010 by rvb