Possible cure to round dumping?

[Flexmoney]

I had opened this thread with a split off from another thread that was closed. This was to be a side topic.

It looks like it is back to the same old re-hash. So, I will close it down.

[On second thought...as long as the conversation doesn't get too uptight...lets continue.]

-------------------------------------------------------

As I was alluding in the opening post...

- I don't believe that we have a problem with the shooters nor with the SO's. The rule fails to meet it's objective.

- It is a systematic failure. The evidence of that is empirical and overwhelming.

- Even if it could/was completely enforced, the objective itself could be called into question.

(Hmmm... typing that out...it occurred to me that it sounds like the prohibition of alcohol...or caffeine.)

[Steve Koski]

I would like to see the round dumping rule removed. If it's fastest to shoot an extra round then each individual should have to decide if that's part of their plan or not. If you want a RWR or tack-load then design a course of fire where that's the best plan.

Question: Is it within the IDPA rules to have a COF where only certain targets are limited? Target T3 is scored limited vickers, 2 shots only. If this is kosher then that's another tool course designers could use.

I've never seen anyone formally mix Vickers and Limited Vickers in the same string. It is frequently done informally by requiring only 6 rounds in the first mag, availability of cover, course layout, etc.

I wouldn't want to see "you can shoot as many rounds as you like on this stage, except for targets 2, 3, and 7. You can't shoot any extra there." That could get very confusing and hard to remember.

[freeidaho]

I believe Duane is on to something here. If every club everywhere called round dumping when they see it in local matches it might make a significant change. Recall that when the SO travels with the squad, any SO with one whit of observational powers knows who in his squad is dumping by the third or fourth stage of the day. At least at our club, the SO travels with a squad for local matches.

Squashing it at the local level would probably stop most round dumpers. Maybe it really is an enforcement problem. Thanks Duane for the fresh look at this issue.

Just a thought,

kr

[Jake Di Vita]

I believe Duane is on to something here. If every club everywhere called round dumping when they see it in local matches it might make a significant change. Recall that when the SO travels with the squad, any SO with one whit of observational powers knows who in his squad is dumping by the third or fourth stage of the day. At least at our club, the SO travels with a squad for local matches.

Squashing it at the local level would probably stop most round dumpers. Maybe it really is an enforcement problem. Thanks Duane for the fresh look at this issue.

Just a thought,

kr

And what about the people that get called for round dumping when they legitimately weren't? Are they just SOL?

What happens when people wise up and stop dumping on the last target and do it on the first target (or any other)? It's still illegal but much much harder to catch.

Doesn't sound very fair to me. Especially considering how drastic the punishment is.

[clown]

+1 to what Jake said.

[freeidaho]

Jake,

You missed the part where the pattern is absolutely clear to anyone with a positive IQ, and the part that I have never seen a person that never dumps be called for it.

But here is another idea.

Replace the Round Dumping rule with a 1/2 second penalty for every shot over the required minimum per target. This would reward fast and accurate even more, and remove the incentive to dump. If adopted I guarantee you will stop seeing an extra round right before a reload because it is no longer the fastest solution.

kr

[Jake Di Vita]

You missed the part where the pattern is absolutely clear to anyone with a positive IQ,

So you're telling me that you know that Johnny Shooter dumped a round because of some pre-conceived notion of what the pattern sounds like?

and the part that I have never seen a person that never dumps be called for it.

Well that sure doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And if you started calling every shooter who "conveniently" triple taps a target on it - it would sure start happening more frequently.

I do think that is a reasonable solution though.

[Nik Habicht]

Jake,

You missed the part where the pattern is absolutely clear to anyone with a positive IQ, and the part that I have never seen a person that never dumps be called for it.

Given IDPA's version of hit factor --- a point should be made up if it can be accomplished in less than 0.5 seconds, all -3 zone hits need to be made up --- I fire at least one makeup shot per stage, sometimes 2-3. They're frequently out of the first mag --- but not always. Unless you're plugged into my brain, I think you'd have a tough time calling that for certain.....

Of course, if you're comfortable with assessing 20 second penalties on a hunch, more power to you.....

Up until now, that wasn't the impression I had of you....

[Glock3422]

Jake,

You missed the part where the pattern is absolutely clear to anyone with a positive IQ, and the part that I have never seen a person that never dumps be called for it.

But here is another idea.

Replace the Round Dumping rule with a 1/2 second penalty for every shot over the required minimum per target. This would reward fast and accurate even more, and remove the incentive to dump. If adopted I guarantee you will stop seeing an extra round right before a reload because it is no longer the fastest solution.

kr

Really? A get out of jail card for 1/2 second.

Can I have two?

I don't know about where you shoot, but 1/2 second on top of 25 - 35 yard shots, tight target placement, non-threats, moving targets, and the potential for any target to turn into a failure to neutralize is a bargain.

[Flexmoney]

But here is another idea.

Replace the Round Dumping rule with a 1/2 second penalty for every shot over the required minimum per target. This would reward fast and accurate even more, and remove the incentive to dump. If adopted I guarantee you will stop seeing an extra round right before a reload because it is no longer the fastest solution.

kr

Ken, that is an interesting idea...and I am glad you shared it.

While it would reward accurate shooting, I don't know that it addresses the (apparent?) goals of the game. For instance, it would discourage taking make-up shots to some degree.

I'm not sure that is the path to address the retention issue (retention seems to be the point of it all)?

[Jake Di Vita]

While it would reward accurate shooting, I don't know that it addresses the (apparent?) goals of the game. For instance, it would discourage taking make-up shots to some degree.

It could in the sense that you're held accountable for every shot you take.

[freeidaho]

Jake,

You missed the part where the pattern is absolutely clear to anyone with a positive IQ, and the part that I have never seen a person that never dumps be called for it.

Given IDPA's version of hit factor --- a point should be made up if it can be accomplished in less than 0.5 seconds, all -3 zone hits need to be made up --- I fire at least one makeup shot per stage, sometimes 2-3. They're frequently out of the first mag --- but not always. Unless you're plugged into my brain, I think you'd have a tough time calling that for certain.....

Of course, if you're comfortable with assessing 20 second penalties on a hunch, more power to you.....

Up until now, that wasn't the impression I had of you....

Nik,

My point is that when one travels around with a squad, after a hand full of stages, the dumpers mark themselves clearly and surely. I know this isn't good news for them to hear. But if in most or many stages there is a makeup shot "needed" right before a reload, even when it is not the most difficult shot in the stage, it leaves an impression. This pattern is not clear to an SO that is stationary and has squads shift through. (They see other patterns.) Most of the shooters on the squad can tell you which shooters on the squad are round dumpers too if they are paying any attention. I have had shooters in my squad come up to me and comment on dumpers. This isn't rocket surgery.

I'm not sure what your impression of me was or is. Nothing I have typed is aimed at anyone on this forum and is talk about dumping in general. I do not believe the answer to any cheating problem is to remove the rule. If we as a society did that we wouldn't laws against murder because they are not all caught.....

kr

PS: I'm beginning to like the 1/2 second penalty for any shot over the minimum per target, just so this 10 year round dumping issue would die.

Edited March 10, 2010 by freeidaho

[rvb]

But here is another idea.

Replace the Round Dumping rule with a 1/2 second penalty for every shot over the required minimum per target.

We already have a scoring system in the book that penalizes extra shots... and the book describes it as "not suitable for Scenario stages" (pg 46), and I agree w/ that. Otherwise every stage becomes a standard exercise.

-rvb

[freeidaho]

Ryan,

With due respect, the proposal is a serious attempt to put an end to the round dumping issue forever. You have been wanting that... Yes? Isn't that what this thread is about?

Yes we have a limited scoring system, and that is not the proposal. This is something different. The proposal eliminates many of the problems with round dumping, it does not penalize the honest shooter, and allows people to shoot at will at any target without being cheaters, and make up shots at will. It eliminates the subjectivity, which we have heard over and over a hundred times in this thread. It is behavior based, not mind reading based. Isn't that what this thread is all about?

There is just a small incremental cost, that is all. So people will shoot stages as they do now, but will possibly consider a makeup shot a bit more than they do now. Misses will/can still be made up, and -3 shots will/can be made up. But it will effectively remove round dumping from our vocabulary and the incessant whining about round dumping. The advantage to round dumping.... if there is one, is surely less than 0.5 second.

Of course your mileage may vary, objects in the mirror are nearer than they appear, other disclaimers may apply.....

kr

[Jake Di Vita]

I do not believe the answer to any cheating problem is to remove the rule.

No it isn't. But rules get changed all the time in other sports when they are flawed. It's blatantly obvious that this rule cannot be enforced 100% of the time. As such it quite simply is unfair to other competitors. How do you disagree with this?!?!?

The advantage to round dumping.... if there is one, is surely less than 0.5 second.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Why don't you put yourself on the clock doing a load with retention and a speed load and see the difference. If you're good it will be under a second...most people will be well over. That compared to an extra .2 for a split...seems worth it to me.

Maybe we should just come up with a database of all assumed "round dumpers" and give them all a 20 second penalty before they show up. Afterall, they have the intent to do it don't they? Just calling people for it when SOs think it happens isn't far from this.

How do you think this would be handled if it were a mainstream sport?

[DWFAN]

No it isn't. But rules get changed all the time in other sports when they are flawed. It's blatantly obvious that this rule cannot be enforced 100% of the time. As such it quite simply is unfair to other competitors. How do you disagree with this?!?!?

I agree with this. Am I correct to assume that you would just rather do away with the dumping penalty ? (I tried to read back in your pother posts but couldnt find a definitive answer.)

What about doing away with the dumping penalty, doing away with the mandatory retention if you are not at slide lock. Then if the COF designer wants to mandate a RWR, then the COF rules need to say so and where.

ex. Competitor is to engage t1-t3 and popper 1, Then RWR, engage T4-T7.

How about that ?

[freeidaho]

The advantage to round dumping.... if there is one, is surely less than 0.5 second.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Why don't you put yourself on the clock doing a load with retention and a speed load and see the difference. If you're good it will be under a second...most people will be well over. That compared to an extra .2 for a split...seems worth it to me.

Jake,

You misunderstand. The difference is between dumping a round to a slide lock reload before engaging a target, and doing a slide lock reload after engaging the target, then re-engaging. That difference is likely less than 0.5 seconds.

kr

Edited March 10, 2010 by freeidaho

[Glock3422]

Jake,

You missed the part where the pattern is absolutely clear to anyone with a positive IQ, and the part that I have never seen a person that never dumps be called for it.

Given IDPA's version of hit factor --- a point should be made up if it can be accomplished in less than 0.5 seconds, all -3 zone hits need to be made up --- I fire at least one makeup shot per stage, sometimes 2-3. They're frequently out of the first mag --- but not always. Unless you're plugged into my brain, I think you'd have a tough time calling that for certain.....

Of course, if you're comfortable with assessing 20 second penalties on a hunch, more power to you.....

Up until now, that wasn't the impression I had of you....

Nik,

My point is that when one travels around with a squad, after a hand full of stages, the dumpers mark themselves clearly and surely. I know this isn't good news for them to hear. But if in most or many stages there is a makeup shot "needed" right before a reload, even when it is not the most difficult shot in the stage, it leaves an impression.

kr

PS: I'm beginning to like the 1/2 second penalty for any shot over the minimum per target, just so this 10 year round dumping issue would die.

So to be clear, your definition of round dumping is firing an extra shot right before the reload?

New thought-

Wouldn't your proposal penalize Novices and Marksman to a greater degree? The person with the 1 second plus splits is already at a pretty heavy disadvantage for feeling the need for an extra shot. If someone feels the need to fire seven extra shots, they would have been better off being called for round dumping. Would you give them 1/2 second for the first six and just a flat 3 seconds if they went to seven or over?

As an SO, I wouldn't want the additional duty of having to count rounds for every shooter in case they fire an extra one. I know, most timers will tell you how many rounds. The problem is that I can't read with my shooting glasses and most of the newer displays are just too small for anything except time.

The problem with the rule is that it is the most subjective rule in the book by a long shot. Those who dump rounds well are not called on it and those who dump rounds badly are called on it, sometimes. We have had examples cited of squads being warned and the seventh shooter gets penalized. How is that fair? Even a cover call has a fairly objective definition.

There is simply no good purpose to the rule for all the reasons discussed. The only thing to support the rule is that it exists. You can offset any perceived benefit of round dumping with stage design.

We ran two stages last night that had about 8 feet of lateral movement behind cover. Targets were shot from both ends of the wall. Some Tac(RWR) loaded and some fired extra rounds. Generally, the Tac load was faster and improved acuracy. Practice can improve the Tac load to the clear winner.

Probably the best argument against the round dumping rule is the infrequency of its use. If the SOs don't want to use it, why leave it in the book? It is time that HQ listen to the clear vote against this one by the people who have to enforce it. You can't fire them for not calling it and it would be a very rare match director who wouldn't overturn it. Shooter-"I thought I pulled a shot."

[John Z Sr]

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.

Finally someone making sense

[Strick]

I think if I could get an idea what some of you consider round dumping then maybe I could better understand where you are coming from. I just get a feeling that some think that any extra round fired that did not improve your score is round dumping.

[RobMoore]

I disagree with the 1/2 second "vickers but not" penalty. -1s would never be made up. -3s would only be made up if you could do it in less than 1 second, and then only if you can be sure of a -0 the second time around. You may as well make all stages limited.

In the military, one of the good rules of leadership was "Never give an order than you can't enforce".

Erase the round-dumping rule, and the problem is solved. Of all the ways our sport does not mirror real life, this one area to cling to is doing us more harm than good.

[Jake Di Vita]

I agree with this. Am I correct to assume that you would just rather do away with the dumping penalty ? (I tried to read back in your pother posts but couldnt find a definitive answer.)

What about doing away with the dumping penalty, doing away with the mandatory retention if you are not at slide lock. Then if the COF designer wants to mandate a RWR, then the COF rules need to say so and where.

ex. Competitor is to engage t1-t3 and popper 1, Then RWR, engage T4-T7.

How about that ?

I think that is a reasonable solution for all parties.

[Gregg K]

I agree with this. Am I correct to assume that you would just rather do away with the dumping penalty ? (I tried to read back in your pother posts but couldnt find a definitive answer.)

What about doing away with the dumping penalty, doing away with the mandatory retention if you are not at slide lock. Then if the COF designer wants to mandate a RWR, then the COF rules need to say so and where.

ex. Competitor is to engage t1-t3 and popper 1, Then RWR, engage T4-T7.

How about that ?

I think that is a reasonable solution for all parties.

It doesn't work well for all parties but not many people care about revolver shooters. The above would have you shoot 6 reload shoot one and then RWR. This is part of the problem with designing stages that prevent round dumping, you have 6,8,9,10 and 11 round guns to design around, there is always going to be some that it won't work for.

Ken made a good point about when the SO moves with the squad, it becomes real apparent you the dumpers are after watching a few stages. I recently viewed a video of master shooter at a sanctioned match and after watching it I thought about the SO's that may have had concerns about calling round dumping on a single stage because of trying to give the benefit of the doubt to the shooter but if you viewed the whole match, there was no doubt about what was going on. I have no idea as to what the fix is and don't intend to argue about it. It does happen and I'm not sure that there is a good solution.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Gregg K

[freeidaho]

I disagree with the 1/2 second "vickers but not" penalty. -1s would never be made up. -3s would only be made up if you could do it in less than 1 second, and then only if you can be sure of a -0 the second time around. You may as well make all stages limited.

In the military, one of the good rules of leadership was "Never give an order than you can't enforce".

Erase the round-dumping rule, and the problem is solved. Of all the ways our sport does not mirror real life, this one area to cling to is doing us more harm than good.

Rob,

Thanks for the reply. But this clearly does not make all stages limited, your own example of novices shows that. In fact most matches would go unchanged almost completely, except for there would be little or no dumping. And it penalizes novices no more than the current -1, -3, -5 scoring system we have today. By your logic, we should abolish points down altogether, since lesser skilled shooters get more points down than masters and of course that is inequatable.

In the military I was in, round dumping was also not taught. Anyone that has been shot at, knows the reason for the rule. One does not just blast away their ammo, which is typically in short supply, so they can reload sooner. In fact you can't count rounds in the first place.

That said, I know in my heart that this proposal falls on the deaf ears of most here. Which will never be satisfied with IDPA until it is morfed into another shooting sport entirely. We should just use the rules of another shooting sport, but with vests. But then vests would be made optional in short order.

Serously though, I am so thankful that the members do not get to vote on the rules. The founders were very wise in that regard, or we would have already morfed into another shooting sport.

Thanks to the minority that listened, but I'm not sure my part in this discussion is helping anyone. See ya at the range!

kr

[DWFAN]

I agree with this. Am I correct to assume that you would just rather do away with the dumping penalty ? (I tried to read back in your pother posts but couldnt find a definitive answer.)

What about doing away with the dumping penalty, doing away with the mandatory retention if you are not at slide lock. Then if the COF designer wants to mandate a RWR, then the COF rules need to say so and where.

ex. Competitor is to engage t1-t3 and popper 1, Then RWR, engage T4-T7.

How about that ?

I think that is a reasonable solution for all parties.

It doesn't work well for all parties but not many people care about revolver shooters. The above would have you shoot 6 reload shoot one and then RWR. This is part of the problem with designing stages that prevent round dumping, you have 6,8,9,10 and 11 round guns to design around, there is always going to be some that it won't work for.

Ken made a good point about when the SO moves with the squad, it becomes real apparent you the dumpers are after watching a few stages. I recently viewed a video of master shooter at a sanctioned match and after watching it I thought about the SO's that may have had concerns about calling round dumping on a single stage because of trying to give the benefit of the doubt to the shooter but if you viewed the whole match, there was no doubt about what was going on. I have no idea as to what the fix is and don't intend to argue about it. It does happen and I'm not sure that there is a good solution.

You're right there, I didnt really think about the Revo shooter. My example scenario was just a top of my head kind of deal. Im sure someone could really look out for you guys if that fix was used. Maybe not say where to do the reload, but in the COF then mandate, "all reloads in this stage must be RWR wether you have ammo or not in the mag. Then you can shoot to slide lock or not, but still have to retain the mag."

How do SSR revo shooters currently do a RWR ? Just pocket the empties and live rounds ?