"Gaming" vs "True Intent" of a stage

[bigbrowndog]

There seems to be much talk this year about shooting a stage to its true intent,..........what is that???????? Since competitors are not inside the stage designers head, we do not know what intent was intended?? The only things we have to go by is the written stage description and the RO's stage brief. As a competitor in a game, we should be looking for every possible advantage, heck Sun Tzu even covers that in his book, the Art of War, "do not look for perfection, look for advantage". So as a competitor we will take the stage parameters given to us, and look for an advantage.

It is the stage designers privilege to write up the requirements of the stage, personally a good stage designer will "allow" freestyle thought or movement to be utilized in a stage. Never, have I ever heard shooters talk about how much they enjoy stages that can only be shot one way, those type stages are boring!!!! If a stage designer wants the competitors to make an honest attempt at targets, then the targets NEED to be able to be worth the challenge, either by being relatively easy to hit, thereby making it worthless to bypass, or by assigning penalties to them that will make the percieved advantage of passing them by worthless. If you go the penalty route, then you still need to make the target hitable, or it still becomes an advantage to pass it by. It takes a good rifle shooter aprox. 3-5seconds to make a good shot, once in position on a distant target, 3 shots with no hits gets to be 15ish seconds, so if your penalty is 15-20 seconds and very few people are hitting the target, guess what???????? It can be to a shooters advantage to engage the target halfheartedly and move on.

Also in play is having penalties for not making an honest attempt at a target?????????what the heck is that!!!!! one good shot can be one good honest attempt. The point is now an opinionated call has been made against a competitor. All of these so-called problems can be eliminated by BETTER stage design, BETTER course descriptions, BETTER target presentation, and BETTER thought processes by stage designers and MD's. All of these issues are the property of the match staff, not the competitor and yet the competitor is the one who winds up being called out for "gaming" or "unsportsmanlike conduct".

If a competitor comes up with a "better" or simply "another" way to complete a COF than what was thought of by the course designer it should be allowed if it meets the criteria of the written course description and the RO's stage brief, the lesson learned should be on the MD and the stage designer to do a better job, NEXT TIME!!! We are not mind readers, we cannot know what original intent or state of mind the course designer was in when they dreamed up the stage, all we know is that we are looking for an advantage to be gained on this particular course of fire.

Trapr

[abn-rgr]

I couldnt have said it better myself. I hate it when people use the term "gamer" as derogatory. The guys who win the matches are all good "gamers". I agree if a match leaves a loophole that gets exploited, too bad. Remember it for next years match, but dont penalize the guys who were smart enough to figure it out.

[Jesse Tischauser]

Well said Trapr. "Gaming" the stages are half the fun. I hate it when a stage gets thrown out or penalties are handed out because a competitor was trying to win.

[kellyn]

+1 Trapr

If you want to make shooters engage long range rifle targets, use Horner scoring or modify your own scoring system to make the penalties such that the shooters have to hit them.

If you want a stage that is all about the shooting, there is an easy way to do that. Have some standards! But if you have field courses, expect some clever attacks on your precious stage design.

[M ammo]

+1 Trapr.

As I'm reading ,,,, it sounds like someone, at a pretty big match,,,, didn't think the stage through,,, or show the stages to some 3 Gun friends, before the match,, , and ask,,, how would you do this?

IF you want folks to shoot the long range targets,,, put it in the stage description,

Shooter must hit long range targets from this position,, before moving on to the rest of the stage.

I do like to see the full rifle skill set tested in a 3 Gun match. Not just a bunch of pistol stages shot with a rifle,,

I have shot matches, that had those kind of stage standards. And yes I have seen people, time out or shoot all of their ammo, at that one position. Time to do some home work. Zero your rifle. Know your holds. Or just shoot pistol matches.

[Jesse Tischauser]

And yes I have seen people, time out or shoot all of their ammo, at that one position. Time to do some home work. Zero your rifle. Know your holds. Or just shoot pistol matches.

Have we shot together before?

Edited May 24, 2010 by jtischauser

[abn-rgr]

And yes I have seen people, time out or shoot all of their ammo, at that one position. Time to do some home work. Zero your rifle. Know your holds. Or just shoot pistol matches.

Have we shot together before?

[MarkCO]

Trapr, I agree with your discussion wholeheartedly. Once the first shooter starts a stage, which includes the match rules, the stage description and the stage breifing, there should be no changes. If a shooter finds and exploits some portion of the stage within that "box" created by those elements, then it MUST be allowed. Changing or modifying the course, the rules or the breifing does not present a fair and consistent challenge to ALL of the shooters. ROs who "ad lib" and start adding in recomendations and extra bits of information as the match progresses are altering the playing field, which an official should not do.

Well Done!

[M ammo]

probably have shot together,,,

I joke Sarcastically,, with folks,,, “ that has never happened to me!”

If whatever it is ((Disaster)) has not happened to you,,,

You have not been playing this game long enough..

[Fullauto_Shooter]

+1 Trapr. Very well said - and it certainly needed saying. I always do my absolute best to "game" every stage I shoot. In a game of high-speed precision, If you're not "gaming" stages you're not giving it your all.

I also don't like last-minute changes to COFs right before you're getting ready to shoot. Example - you show up at a match 30 minutes early to walk the stages and develop your plan. Then the MD comes along, right before you shoot, and changes the physical layout of the COF because he sees you planning to shoot the stage in a way he didn't think of.

[DocMcG]

Multiple Solutions to a Problem Promotes Creativity & Flexibility!

Creativity & Flexibility = Fun!

Fun = Lots of Shooters Doing Great Things That Surprise Us All!

Disagree? - Ever been to Disney? They get it! - Parking lots are always full!

"Don't fence me in..." - It gets boring if you take away creativity!

Cheers,

Kyle

[JThompson]

Screw intent! I have recently seen the forbidden action used to control movement too. Bugged me enough not to shoot the match. Don't tell me I have to stay within fault lines, make me stay within them.

my two pence

JT

[Stefan]

Nicely said Trapr. Or maybe not so nicely said but needing to be said none the less.

Now, if you would name names we can all show our distaste with our wallets.

[AlamoShooter]

Trapr is just a Gamer Wannabee = He does not even have an Open Gun

SOB #1

Play Hard My Friends

Edited May 24, 2010 by AlamoShooter

[outerlimits]

One thing USPSA has going for them-rules. I have been to some outlaw matches where some of the above occurred. Rare at a MG nationals, but they aren't perfect either.

[bigbrowndog]

Bad stage design or intent is not inherent to any one kind of association, I have seen it at all types of matches. Which is why i did not mention any ones initials, also because naming names and directly pointing fingers gets threads closed, and this needs to be said and read.

Jamie I don't need an Open gun to game you!!!

Trapr

[GrumpyOne]

I see no problem with "Gaming" a stage. We mod our guns, push the limits on what we can do to them, like in production, if it's inside and can't be seen, it pretty much fair. So, why not a stage? The object is to follow the "set" rules and shoot as fast and as accurately as you can. If the rules don't say that you can't do "XYZ", then why not? Just because it's unconventional or thinking out of the box, doesn't make it illegal....

What about this? What if you see a way to save 11 seconds, but it costs you a 10 second penalty? Do you take it? The end outcome gains you a second....But you do get the penalty and know when you do it, that you will get the penalty. But, is it wrong?

Edited May 24, 2010 by GrumpyOne

[Space Cowboy]

Well said Trapr.

To repeat what one of my LE compadres says, "gaming" a stage is just good tactics.

[outerlimits]

Bad stage design or intent is not inherent to any one kind of association, I have seen it at all types of matches. Which is why i did not mention any ones initials, also because naming names and directly pointing fingers gets threads closed, and this needs to be said and read.

Jamie I don't need an Open gun to game you!!!

Trapr

Trapr- you talkin about my post? So be it, but it needs to be said.

[bigbrowndog]

yeah, OL I was refering to your post, but the said and read thing was about my OP not your post or my reference to it.

I just think its better for the topics survival to leave out initials of associations, or mention any one in a better or worse light to another, you say one is better and then someone disagrees and then the topic gets closed, that was all I meant.

No harm or disrespect intended

Trapr

[Merlin Orr]

I'll bet those Redcoats were really pissed when the Colonials hid behind trees to shoot at them rather than marching in box formation to meet them and die by volley...

Perhaps the "intent" that one party feels should be observed in a situation is not shared by the other participant in the battle game.

[EkuJustice]

I have always followed the never ask permission or open your mouth till the stage has been shot once. I saw one where there were shotgun targets intended to be shot prone through a low port and rifle and pistol targets shot through other ports which were specified which port. The shotgun did not have the port listed on accident. Shot all the shotgun targets from the wide open door way.

[LChico]

Good post Trapr

My major match checklist has a line that reads: "It is better to hurt the feelings of one stage designer than to frustrate or seriously inconvenience 250 shooters."

Stage designers who find their stages are frequently "gamed" beyond their liking, need to practice designing better stages & get feedback from the biggest gamers they know. Stages designers who are so thin skinned that they cannot handle honest, well intentioned criticism, need to figure out who they are doing this for. As many have said, fix it next time. The gamers keep us all on our toes and have driven much of the fun & innovation in our sport.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

Columbia SC

[JThompson]

What Linda said.........

[Jack T]

I believe I probably owe apologies and perhaps need to change my view of the sport. Shot my first match in Sanford, NC in 1978 or 79, so I have been in the game for a while now. Have had the discussion about intent/gaming with Amidon and David Hayden on several occasions because I respect their views and have asked for their guidance when I thought I had carried my views/actions with regards to gaming/gamers too far.

It had been hammered into me all my life that you obey the rules in sports or it is considered cheating. Kinda funny because I have always lived my life outside the lines but I have never strayed from the letter of the law/rules with regards to sports. Our mantra in SF was if you ain't cheating then you ain't trying, but that was a different world and lives were on the line. Being creative and thinking outside the box keeps you alive.

This sport/game has definitely evolved through the years and has become very dynamic and one hell of a lot of fun, but it is still only a sport/game.

I probably won't change my ethics, but it is wrong of me to impose my views on others. I always looked at it like running a 220 yard race around the outside of a football field. We know you are supposed to run around the field, but if someone decides they are going to cut across the middle of the field and get to the finish line first, because no one said they couldn't, I just don't understand where one would get satisfaction from that. It would be a hollow victory for me.

I can not find it in myself to manipulate the rules/stage design to win. Old school values? don't know. Apparently that may be my shortcoming, but I will deal with that. I feel I am cheating if I try and do this.

It will never be perfect and we don't need one inch thick rule books, because someone will always figure a way around a stage/course of fire other than the supposed "Intent". It is the responsibility of the MD to insure the integrity of the match is not compromised. Or does integrity even matter anymore.

Again, if I have offended anyone, I apologize. If I haven't offended you, then I am sure I will eventually.

Best to all of ya,

JT

Edited May 25, 2010 by Jack T