EEH Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Shot idpa this weekend--stage--three walls six ft.x eight ft.all side by side,four targets behind each wall,cof--SO- puts hats on the targets he wants you to shoot-9- shots total--no one looks he changes hats on targets for every shooter--so no shooter shot the same COF --except for 9 shot total--none of the targets were marked good guy's,,some did have part of the target painted,,only one shot in each target-down -O - or down -1- is this OK?????????????????????/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganShootist Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 The rule book carefully defines how non-threat targets are to be painted... this apparently wasn't the case..... But at local club matches I have seen much much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Koski Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 They goofed a bit. Non-threats MUST have hand or hands. They should have made some "hands" cardboard hangers and hung them on the non-threat targets. This way you can move the non-threats around, and still be 100% compliant with the rules. You can also move around gun/knife hangers if you want, but it's not required. Page 47 Threat targets may be designated by the painting of a gun or clipping the cutout of a gun on the target. This target designation is not mandatory, but is highly recommended. In no case should a gun and an open hand be positioned on the same target. Targets should be clearly designated as threat or non-threat. Non-threat targets MUST be designated by the painting of an open hand or hands on the target or, in the case of a target Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeweyH Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 A few years ago they had a stage similar to this at the Nationals. Basically there were 5-6 targets behind a wall with a port with a door on it. When the buzzer went off you opened the port and shot 3 targets that had hats or guns and the targets changed for each shooter. So it may very well be legal. It is not the same test for each competitor. Some shooters will get easy targets and others may be a little harder. In my opinion that is not very fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shibby Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 They goofed a bit. Non-threats MUST have hand or hands. They should have made some "hands" cardboard hangers and hung them on the non-threat targets. This way you can move the non-threats around, and still be 100% compliant with the rules. You can also move around gun/knife hangers if you want, but it's not required. This and since there are fewer non threats than threats on any given stage it is easier to move the non threats than threats. If it was a sanctioned match I wouldn't really like the described stage, but at a local match it seems like good fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Koski Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 As far as "fair" goes, if one shooter has to shoot a target mostly covered in black paint (hard cover) and the next guy doesn't have any hard cover on his targets, that's not quite fair. Things don't have to be EXACTLY the same for each shooter, but the course designer should make sure that things are reasonably similar. Koski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke8401 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 CoF 21. After the match has started, all course design changes are final. CoF cannot be changed unless all competitors that have previously completed the stage get to re-shoot it. Sounds like a change to the COF to me. So in my book, not a legal stage. Like others have said, I have seen much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeidaho Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 COF has way too many non-threats too. kr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astephenson Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 CoF 21. After the match has started, all course design changes are final. CoF cannot be changed unless all competitors that have previously completed the stage get to re-shoot it. Sounds like a change to the COF to me. So in my book, not a legal stage. Like others have said, I have seen much worse. This isn't a course design change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke8401 Posted September 7, 2010 Share Posted September 7, 2010 This isn't a course design change. Swapping a threat target with a non-threat target is not a course design change???????? WellArmedSheep, You’re just kidding right? Just shinning me on right? Trying to get me to violate the forum rules for sarcasm? Do I know you? You can't be serious! Dave E. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astephenson Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) I'm just saying that this particular course of fire was designed to be different for every shooter, and each shooter knew that the threat/non-threats would change between shooters. The "course design" has not changed, only the layout (for lack of a better word). I'm not saying that the stage is legal, I'm just saying that the illegality is not due to the threat/non-threats changing. How they're designated, on the other hand isn't legit. Edited September 21, 2010 by WellArmedSheep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Halley Posted November 16, 2010 Share Posted November 16, 2010 1. Was this a sanctioned match? 2. I have shot a couple matches in IDPA format where they made you think on the fly by painting two targets out of four red and two black and threats were designated by the color of the last card drawn from a shuffled deck. Looking back upon this I think it was a good move and the experience was equally disrupting for everyone. So you couldn't game it out ahead of time...oh well. If you're playing the game enjoy it. If you're trying to use it as training it works all the better. How else do you illustrate a developing threat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie45 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 The non-threat marking maybe dismissed if they're not truely non-threats(i.e. no penalty for shooting them). Was there a penalty for shooting the non-hat targets? I have shot stages where half the target were maked green and half were red. You found out which ones you were shooting after the buzzer. There was no penalty if you shot the wrong color, just points down for what you were supposed to shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now