Double failure drill in tactical sequence

[Forrest Halley]

So a question came up at a match from a guy that is not fast enough to be a gamer, but sure does like to discuss the rules and multiple ways of doing things. The COF started pizza box in hand with two threats each needing 2+1 at the buzzer drop the box and blaze away.

As I understand it it's 1-2-1-head-head for six magical shots and four transitions. The theory being that the reason for the head shots is the failure of the two body shots to stop the threat. This individual asked why not 1-2-head-head-1? Or 1-1-head-head-1-1? The only rule based answer I could give to stop this was because the COF description says 2 to the body and then one to the head. I made the executive decision to have the shooter fill up the body before proceding to the heads, made it clear to each competitor before the buzzer, and passed this on to my relief when it was my time to shoot.

Bring forth all the fastest ways to do it please whether legal or not and a definite answer based in logic.

Thanks,

Forrest

[Duane Thomas]

I'm assuming the two targets are an equal distance from the shooter?

[Steve J]

You nailed it. Things like that need to be spelled out in the COF. "Failure drill" / "Mozambique" are only addressed here:

In certain course designs, the course description may specify that a

certain number of shots may be required on specific areas of the

target, i.e. two (2) shots to the body and one (1) shot to the head.

Shots that are specified for the body, but where the shooter actually

shoots the head are to be counted as -0. However, shots that are

specified for the head that are shot below the neck line are to be

counted as misses (-5 for each miss). The rationale is that the head

box is a smaller target than the body and therefore is a more

difficult target. Shooting all shots to the head to circumvent sight

alignment transition may be considered a procedural and incur the

penalty. CoF designers and MDs should be aware of this

possibility and decide beforehand how to handle it. Some course

designers will specify head shots in order to simulate the threat

target as wearing body armor.

Combining that with tactical sequence engagement requires careful wording to ensure the coure designers intent is clear and followed by each shooter.

[2MoreChains]

Without knowing exactly what the CoF says or how the targets were arranged in front of the shooter, I think there are a couple of possibilities within the rules.

CoF 10 says we have to engage targets in tactical priority unless tactical sequence is specified. So to my way of thinking, unless the targets are within 2 yds apart, the closest one needs to be engaged first before transitioning to the second. But based on the way you made everyone shoot it, it sounds like they were both equal distance, in which case tactical sequence applies. 1-2-1-head-head.

But wouldn't that have been five transitions?

[Jane]

But based on the way you made everyone shoot it, it sounds like they were both equal distance, in which case tactical sequence applies. 1-2-1-head-head.

But wouldn't that have been five transitions?

While there is the "equal distance = equal threat" language, the rule book also says "targets must be engaged in tactical priority unless tactical sequence IS SPECIFIED" (my emphasis).

So to my mind, if tactical sequence is not specified in the CoF description and cover doesn't dictate how to engage the targets, two equal threat targets can be engaged as the shooter chooses.

The 2001 rulebook (page 38) said: "targets within 2 yards of each other are considered equal threat and no tactical priority should be required."

The same language occurs in the previous "Little Red Book" (March, 2000) on page 24.

I realize that many IDPA people have come to assume that if it's not a "priority" situation that tac sequence must apply. But that's not how I read the rules.

And in both the more recent rule books is the following:

"Well-designed courses of fire should have the following

attributes:

...

The sequence of target engagement should be obvious to the

shooter without extensive briefing or instruction. "

Edited May 21, 2010 by Jane

[Forrest Halley]

So sorry in my post match excitement I forgot to include distance and orientation. The targets were five yards distant shoulder to shoulder on the same backer and tac sequence was specified.

Thanks to everyone for their contribution. Steve J...you have definitely given me the necessary ammo for next time. I guess wannabe gamers are worse than the real thing because they take up so much match time with questions on the line.

[Duane Thomas]

I really wish that IDPA has chosen different terms than "tactical sequence" and "tactical priority". Having the terms be so similar to each other causes confusion, and makes it difficult for many people to remember which is which.

Having said that, back to the OP's question, there's really no super-advanced "fast" way to shoot this one, you're pretty much stuck with four transitions. I'd start on the leftmost target and then move in a counterclockwise circle, just because in our culture we're using to starting on the left. One body shot on T1, two body shots to T2, then up to the head and one more shot on T2, over to the head on T1 and one more shot, then down to the body on T1 and finish up with one last body shot. Six shots, four transitions. There are other ways to do it, but nothing really any simpler or faster.

[Jane]

I really wish that IDPA has chosen different terms than "tactical sequence" and "tactical priority". Having the terms be so similar to each other causes confusion, and makes it difficult for many people to remember which is which.

Duane,

the mnemonic trick somebody once posted (assuming two on paper)

Priority gets a Pair of shots

Sequence gets a Single shot

[Duane Thomas]

The way I remember it that Priority and "pieing" both start with a "p", and Sequence and "single" both start with an "s". Still doesn't change the fact that the terminology could have been better chosen.

[Forrest Halley]

The way I remember it that Priority and "pieing" both start with a "p", and Sequence and "single" both start with an "s". Still doesn't change the fact that the terminology could have been better chosen.

Had another match tonight. Spelled it out in the stage walk throughs and still had two people(shameless gamers) blow it and try to play rulebook on us. Twin failure drills separated by a non threat 5 yds away from start point. Specified two hits to the body THEN one hit to each head in Tac Seq and got 1-2-opposite head-head-body and then 1-2-head-head-1. Thanks again to Steve J for a leg to stand on. They each conceded the point, but only after they saw that whining wasn't going to work. The big problem I have with this is that its so gray and some SO's think it is and some think it isn't a multilegal approach exercise. It's not the the same for everybody, as we are all different, but everyone should be held to the same standard on the rule enforcement from the first shooter to the last.

[Boats]

I think the way for a confident shooter to run the pizza box stage would be 1st tgt Head, 2nd tgt Head, come down to Body on the 2nd target for 2 then back to the first body for 2 more. 4 sight pictures and all body shots doubles. Way I understand the tactical sequence rule is targets equal distance have to be neutralized before engaging the next one. Head hit neutralized . Question is did you think you could draw and hit the first head.

Way I shot it was 1st target body one shot 2nd body two shots slow my pace and sharpen my focus up to the 2nd targets head for 1 over to the 1st targets head for one more then down at speed with the last required body shot to finish the 1st target, 5 sight pictures.

Did Forrest mention we then had to back up reload behind cover 3 to the body on a 3rd target move lateral to 2nd cover position then 3 to the body 4th target. It was a 12 shot one reload stage.

If I was sure of draw and hit the first head it would have been the thing to do. I get pressed buzzer goes of and often my first shot is loose.

Edited May 22, 2010 by Boats

[Duane Thomas]

That is pretty trick. Only three transitions. The question is, can you hit the head shot from the draw in any sort of timely manner? Also when you go down for the first body shots you're going to be transitioning "blind", you won't be able to see the next target area (8" circle) before you get there because your arms and gun are covering it. Of course, that's a problem with the way I discussed, as well. It occurs to me the best way to shoot this might me one to the body on T!, two to the body on T2, then back to T1 for one more to the body, then up for a head shot on T1, cross over for a head shot on T2. Still four transitions, but at no time do your arms and gun block your view of the next target area. This should make for better transitions.

[Boats]

First Stage in this match was draw shoot 6 body shots one target re-load then 6 body shots on a 2nd target. 5 sec penalty if all shots were not complete in 10 seconds. It was our clubs once a month Revolver Match. For that one we have simpler array's and heavy on basic skills. Sort of Bill Drill double. You have to nail he re-load to make it.

Boats

[Duane Thomas]

Sounds like fun. What was the distance, seven yards? My club also has a revolver match, but people are allowed to shoot autos if they prefer. Was that the case here? If so, did auto pistol shooters start with the gun downloaded to six and did a slidelock reload, or did they start at division capacity and had to do a RWR?

[Forrest Halley]

Autos are allowed, but downloaded to six with all shooting to slide lock as the COF is wonderfully 6 friendly. This makes for a neat match as pocket nines come out, etc.

I like the three transitions also, but if I do it I know somebody will cry about it. Duane makes a good point about the blind transition, but figuring the short range of this all shots can basically be fired on index alone and as I am taking up trigger through the transition my shot should be as quick as the alignment.

I believe the distance was five yards at the revo match and the hispeed IDPA match.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Forrest Halley

[Pittbug]

It occurs to me the best way to shoot this might me one to the body on T1, two to the body on T2, then back to T1 for one more to the body, then up for a head shot on T1, cross over for a head shot on T2. Still four transitions, but at no time do your arms and gun block your view of the next target area. This should make for better transitions.

This is the way I would have done it.

[Boats]

Little History on this match

Our club runs two full IDPA matches per month with strict adherence to IDPA rules. We used to run one additional "IDPA Lite" bit simpler, basic skills focused and intended for beginners. It morphed into a Revolver only match (and now allows Auto's classed all in one group, fulfilling the beginner basic function). It's run under IDPA procedure rules, not under IDPA equipment rules, 6 inch revolvers are OK and Power factor is not a requirement. Auto's are all 6 shot loaded and reloaded from slide lock.

COF is selected for quick set up, basic skills, and 6 shot strings, all limited vickers. It's a good way to give casual shooter club members a match, introduce new shooters to IDPA rules match shooting, and give Revolvers a "home" It's been very successful. I don't know what the general feeling is about running matches that are "outlaw" but this one works for us.

Boats

Edited May 23, 2010 by Boats

[MemphisMechanic]

chest, two chest, back to T1 chest, T1 head, T2 head.

How else would you do it? It's never even occurred to me to try something else, as that's both fast and consistent.

Pure speed, if there's no sequence, is no contest. 2+1 on T1, then 2+1 on T2. Let the recoil bring you up to the heads, and there's really only one transition that requires driving the gun hard.

[Jim Watson]

Around here, the stage described in the OP must be shot with all body hits in before the head shots are fired, no "circular transitions" with a body shot last. It is a Failure Drill or Mozambique, the threats being discovered to be armored or drugged to insensibility of injury.

[Ahab]

I would have gone 1-T1 Chest, 2-T2 Chest, 1 T2 head, 1 T1 Chest, and 1 T1 Head. I do like the idea of drawing to the head on T1 and going to T2 head - at 5 yards you should be able to draw to an open head shot pretty quickly, I'll have to try that.