"Gaming" vs "True Intent" of a stage

[1chota]

What about the "Game" the Mayans played = trying to put the ball in the small stone ring. The winner's killed the the 2nd place team.

I wonder what happened to the RO in that game

I wonder what a procedural penalty was

emasculation using dull flint knife prior to stoning at the end of the game!

[el pres]

What about the "Game" the Mayans played = trying to put the ball in the small stone ring. The winner's killed the the 2nd place team.

I wonder what happened to the RO in that game

I wonder what a procedural penalty was

If we did that, Daniel Horner would get awfully lonely awfully quickly after he killed us all.

I belive that in the original Mayan game it was the winner who recieved the privledge to be killed, or sacrificed. So I dont think Daniel would want to play this one ..

[Dan Sierpina]

I belive that in the original Mayan game it was the winner who recieved the privledge to be killed, or sacrificed. So I dont think Daniel would want to play this one ..

I thought the "ball" was the head of a defeated enemy...

[jasmap]

P.Press is correct. The winner was killed. It was considered an honor and they believed it somehow either made them a deity or sent them closer to their deities.

[bigbrowndog]

enough off topic drivel,............ Jim has brought up some good points that i failed to mention, first, jim my thoughts were only about major matches, dealing with the intricacies of local matches is a headache unto itself. What is a WSB?? I think its a shooters brief but I'm not sure??

Secondly, penalties do not force anyone into attempting a difficult shot, the risk/reward benefit does, and the fact that others in your competitive circle have made the shot in a reasonable amount of time. forcing the competitor to take 3 shots does nothing either if the shot presented is too difficult or not worth the time needed to score a hit, 3 rounds in 1.5 seconds with no hit is much better than 3 shots in 15seconds and no hit. It still all comes back to reasonable target presentation, and current atmospheric conditions. As for the conditions, we and match staff have no direct affect on, the target presentation is completely on match staff. also you say that apparently an honest attempt must be made from some position other than offhand????? why??? who are we to say that the shooter can't make an honest attempt at a target from the standing position, just because we can't or wouldn't.

Most all of the opinionated calls for penalties on these type things go away with reasonable target presentation, as does the need for increased penalties on distant targets.

[Jim Norman]

BBD,

Your answers to my questions point up the level of difficulty in solving the match management side of this question.

I think we are all interested in having a match where the targets make sense to shoot vs targets that make sense to leave behind. To that end, we need to decide what type of match we are running. Do we throw in a 600 yard target because we can? Even though we are advertising a (I don't know any other way to say it) Tactical Match as opposed to a Sniper Match? What is the common distance that the M16/M4 is employed at? The AK-47? I am certain that an M1A/M14 with a scope will hit at 800 plus, but do we toss that in the mix? Targets should be achievable hits for the majority of your customers. Make the match with 2 MOA targets out at 400 yards and you will not get as many returns next year. Likewise, make the match a hoser with 10MOA targets at 100 and you might not win friends either. (Interesting point on this, we have only a 100 yard range locally so we have to be really inventive. But the number of people that come out that can't hit an 8" plate with a rifle at this short a distance is scary!)

My point is that through the WSB (Yes, that is the Written Stage Briefing), penalties and target values, the match should be made where running past a target is not viable. As for the shooter that runs up, tosses of one shoot at a 400 yard target, offhand and says he legitimately engaged it, I would want to question, If he stands there and takes three aimed shots, maybe 5-7 seconds, offhand, then I am OK. I was talking about, Skid to a stop, should the rifle, pull the trigger, round hasn't hit the backstop yet and our shooter is off and running. Not sure, but I think I know that that was not a 'real' effort to hit that target.

Like I said, I don't like it when I am told, I can't move on till all the targets are down as there are people that might just not be able to hit a particular target, they did however pay their money to come out and play. Some where there has to be a relatively simple answer to make people engage a target for real.

[bigbrowndog]

I agree with the concept of having targets that you should not be able to afford to pass up, however, I feel all that is solved with reasonable target presentation, personally I understand the feeling you have with people not being able to hit an 8" target at 100yds, it is mind boggling, but realistically myself and a lot of other very experienced shooters see a 4moa target as a very doable shot and that fits easily into any range available, and with any sighting system, irons or optics. Provided they can be seen as well.

The idea of gaming a stage does not necessarily mean passing up targets or not "honestly" engaging them. there are many other things that go into maximizing your advantage, so lets not get locked up on the passing a target thing. "And Honestly i thought I had engaged those targets, RO!!!"

Here is an offer that I will make for anyone that wants it, if you are designing stages for a major match and want to have someone look at your stages from the standpoint of a "gaming, stage bending, description stretching, fool. If you will send them to me drawn out that way they will look in the final set up, with descriptions and all, I will have our Crack pot cast of Redneck Tactical instructors look at them, and game the piss out of it and return them to you with our comments. However do not expect this to be accomplished overnight, if you'll give us a month or more I think we can help, we get asked to design stages all the time, because we know what a good stage should look like. IPSC has staff that accomplish's this but I do not know of anyone in multigun that does this.

I'll do it for as long as I can, and then if it gets to be too much I won't.

[MarkCO]

What about the "Game" the Mayans played = trying to put the ball in the small stone ring. The winner's killed the the 2nd place team.

I wonder what happened to the RO in that game

I wonder what a procedural penalty was

If we did that, Daniel Horner would get awfully lonely awfully quickly after he killed us all.

Some of you all would be gone real quick drastically improving my overall placement. About 40 or 50 matches out, I might have to start sand-bagging to stay alive.

[ebg3]

Yes- gumbying is it. I forgat about Broadway Gumby Rose-the great New York City shooter who used to shoot everything while holding an excellent Churchill in his teeth. Used a Buck Rogers Open .45. Heres' a picture from the early days of IPSC. Gumby used to call it buckwheatin' a stage when he shot everything from one position and through hard and soft cover, getting all A's.

"Buckwheatin' a stage..." You just made me spill my Rum! That's some funny stuff.

[Jadeslade]

Yeah Buckwheat was a big shooter too-used to shoot TV's if the game wasn't good. Had another one hauled in so guests wouldn't complain. Ultimate gamer.He say" i dot daming you nebberr ded dat" and just walk away. He and Gumby thick as thieves.

[AlamoShooter]

I wonder how much the Ego drives stage design, And how many match planers could Handel the Stage Strip Down?

In just the small handgun matches I put on , I start a new stage plan /the match with a skill set I want to challenge the shooter with. And I throw in one or two regular steel challenge stages with a small twist. in the two or three separate stages I can sometime have it work out that that skill set got challenged. Some time it ends up as "What were you Thinking"?

Seams like that is reasonable thing to ask first of any stage.

in the Aztec and Mayan game the winners were not killed = the lousing team capt. was sometimes killed.

At least according to the version I read

Or depending on you illiterate tour guide, I heard some of the guides like to make up stuff.

louser tour guides that is.

Edited May 28, 2010 by AlamoShooter

[el pres]

I am perplexed ?? Apparently no one really knows the truth here ?? I've always read it the other way ?

http://www.jaguar-sun.com/ballgame.html

As for gaming, in the begining of my shooting adventures I had the heads up true intent philosophy until I started to get beat badly by players who just had a better plan but were not necessarily "shooting" any better, probably some of my early IDPA mindset (FTDR). However I quickly learned that this is a game and stage strategy is part of it like it or not, adapt or die..

A few years ago I heard a great reply to someone yelling out "gamer". To which one of our colorful forum members replied with,"timer,...scoresheet,...GAME"!!

Edited May 28, 2010 by P.Pres

[Outsydlooknin75]

Is it really that bad to be called a gamer? It is a game. I am always trying to find a way to accomplish the task freestyle faster and better than my competitors. Is it worth spending 60 seconds trying to hit targets, or to throw rounds at the targets to keep the FTE penalty away but take 40 seconds in FTN penalties. Like was said before make the COF state that the first target engaged must be neutralized before moving on to the following targets and that target must be neutralized prior to moving on to the next target. There is a way to take the "gaming" or as I like to refer to it the "thinking" out of a stage if thats not how you want a stage to be shot.

As a match designer one must think about any and all possibilities and if you can think of it to give you an advantage you better believe that someone else might do it as well.

I was in a sniper challenge with my partner one match and the shooter had to drag a set of cinderblocks on a rope about 25 feet or so, prior to being able to engage targets. We were late into the pack to shoot the stage and watched the shooters infront of us, each shooter had the spotter hold their rifle and stand there next to them while they pulled the rope and blocks. I asked the MD is there anything against me as the spotter setting the shooters rifle in position and getting into position myself while the shooter is dragging the blocks. Match Director told me no there is nothing against it, at the sound of the buzzer my shooter started dragging the blocks and I set his rifle and stuff up .... the peanut gallery kinda complained about it but the MD just said " I never said the spotter couldnt get set up ... I just said shooter had to drag the blocks before taking shots on target".

Is it exploiting the rules? I dont know, but I wasnt told that I could not do it and I felt that it would give us an advantage so I took it.

[AlamoShooter]

I am perplexed ?? Apparently no one really knows the truth here ?? I've always read it the other way ?

So , All That Matters Is! that you agree with me.....rite?

Edited May 28, 2010 by AlamoShooter

[el pres]

I am perplexed ?? Apparently no one really knows the truth here ?? I've always read it the other way ?

So , All That Matters Is! that you agree with me.....rite?

No !!

[bigbrowndog]

Look at a stage, like you would driving somewhere, would you follow all the regular traffic as a means of getting to your destination as quickly and efficiently as possible, or would you think of different ways to avoid the traffic even if its longer it can still be faster. A stage is much the same way, just because you have directions to your destination, or an idea of where you need to get to doesn't mean you would follow those instructions explicitly, if you are not required to.

True intent is only known by the stage designer and anyone they have shared their plan with, I prefer to work to my strengths so I can do as well as possible in a match , and practice on my weaknesses in practice.

Trapr

Edited May 28, 2010 by bigbrowndog

[pjb45]

Having shot with multiple GMs-including national and international champions, I can honestly say I do not believe in the gamer label.

These guys are extremely competitive. They know that one shot sometimes can make the difference in winning and losing. They look for the most efficient way to shoot a stage. I have noticed that they all do not shoot a stage the same way.

So if it is good for a GM to maximize their potential score shouldn't it be ok for every shooter to do the same? All shooters are to be treated equally- right.

[Jadeslade]

Except Gumby-he's special. Ultimate gamer.

[fastshooter03]

This is why I don't show up for local match setup in the morning anymore.

They want me to look through all the stages to try and "Gamer-Proof" them.

Adds too much time to setup

Bigger matches should be pretty well thought out ahead of time(Weeks, Months??) so if somebody finds a way around the ISD(Intended Stage Design)it's just too bad.

Maybe somebody needs to come out with a "Anti-Gamer Stage Designs vol 1:How to Please Everyone" booklet

Shooting is a skill. "Gaming" is a skill. So shooting = "gaming"??????

"Mongo just pawn in game of life"

Nick

[ken hebert]

Shoot it straight up sounds like IDPA. Not a dig against IDPA, but thats just how it is. "From area one engage T1 through T3 in barricade tactical order and perform a reload with retention before moving to area two and ....." I kinda thought that was why we hear "Upon start signal engage targets as they become visible from within the fault lines." THAT is why I am drawn to practical shooting, let me do my own thing from within the rules. If I find a way to exploit a situation then I'm just that much happier. Work those brain cells.

Gamer: someone working harder at doing it better than you.

Edited May 30, 2010 by ken hebert

[HRider]

One of the things that I like about practical/three gun competition is the freestyle aspect of it. It is an excercise in efficiency. It makes you make decisions under pressure. The rules only tell you what you can't do. If for some reason I see what others do not see and gain an advantage from it, someone calls me a Gamer, I will just say "Thank you".

Hurley

[Jack T]

Got a question here, little bit off topic, but still relates.

If a shooter engages targets behind a solid barricade or wall, with the intent of masking the shots from the timer (buries the muzzle further behind the barricade than actually necessary to make the shot) would this be considered "Gaming" or "Cheating"?

I have seen this done many times, sometimes to success, sometimes not. Forget about the RO checking the round count at the end of the stage, etc., because extra shots may or may not have been taken. Look at the act itself.

For me, this is where the lines get grey between "Gaming" and "Cheating". Good "Gamers" vs Bad "Gamers"

I see nothing wrong with taking the miss penalty for taking one shot at long range rifle steel and moving on. This is just a tactic. Risk Vs Reward. It is within the rules.

JT

Edited May 31, 2010 by Jack T

[mpeltier]

Got a question here, little bit off topic, but still relates.

If a shooter engages targets behind a solid barricade or wall, with the intent of masking the shots from the timer (buries the muzzle further behind the barricade than actually necessary to make the shot) would this be considered "Gaming" or "Cheating"?

I have seen this done many times, sometimes to success, sometimes not. Forget about the RO checking the round count at the end of the stage, etc., because extra shots may or may not have been taken. Look at the act itself.

JT

I wasn't going to get into this, but that is a good question. I have RO'd quite a bit and have never had this as an issue. First is that as Trapr said "Intent" exists in ones mind. How would you ever prove the shooters intent? Second is the RO should know and recognize the limitations of the timing equipment and be aware of the timer picking up the shots or not. If this is happening intentionally and succefully, I say shame on the RO...

[Jadeslade]

You have to get the last shot on the timer. Be in position to get it.

[Jack T]

You have to get the last shot on the timer. Be in position to get it.

I agree, but I am referring to stages where structure, barrels, alley ways, and such prevent the RO from following the shooter into the shooting position and they have to stand off from the shooter. Some experienced shooters know they can get away with this and exploit it.

I have seen this done at 3 different National Level Competitions and various area matches. I have never done it, but I have shown shooters how to do it, so they would be aware of it.

JT