SMM3gun

[ap3]

If I wanted somebody to tell me how to shoot a stage, I'd shoot IDPA...

That is exactly right!!!!

[gose]

Well almost all. Stage 10 had some shooters taking two complete steps out of the out of the shooting area to engage the last target. The theroy was that the 5 esc proceedural was better then the time it took to engage the target in the shooting area.

Bad call by the ro's to allow this. IMO the first shooter to do this should have been made to reshoot it and anyone else doing it should have been DQed for unsportsmanlike behavior. Under rule 1.7.4. Willful disregard of Event Official instructions. Course description says "from within the shooting area".

It wasnt a bad call by the ROs, it was a slip in stage design that could easily have been fixed during stage "proofing" by putting one, or two, more targets next to that one.

Getting DQ'ed for not following the stage description? I thought that was what procedurals were for?

Out of the three SMM3Gs I've shot, I think this is probably the best one so far.

Big thanks to the organizers, ROs, sponsors and everyone else that made it happen!

[Hawthorne2k]

Well almost all. Stage 10 had some shooters taking two complete steps out of the out of the shooting area to engage the last target. The theory was that the 5 sec procedural was better then the time it took to engage the target in the shooting area.

Bad call by the ro's to allow this. IMO the first shooter to do this should have been made to reshoot it and anyone else doing it should have been DQed for unsportsmanlike behavior. Under rule 1.7.4. Willful disregard of Event Official instructions. Course description says "from within the shooting area".

It wasn't a bad call by the ROs, it was a slip in stage design that could easily have been fixed during stage "proofing" by putting one, or two, more targets next to that one.

Getting DQ'ed for not following the stage description? I thought that was what procedurals were for?

Out of the three SMM3Gs I've shot, I think this is probably the best one so far.

Big thanks to the organizers, ROs, sponsors and everyone else that made it happen!

I was one of the RO's on Stage 10, (though not the CRO), and honestly, I like that idea in the future, but that's not my call to make.

After 2 1/2 days of watching people shoot the stage, I could tell that people forgot that taking a procedural was NOT the extent of the time penalty for shooting outside of the designated area: Whether it was prepping for a "leap of faith" or walking outside of the fault lines, it took shooters a couple of seconds to get where they could make that last shot to the right on 10. What happened, in effect, was there was no effective time advantage either way.

As for stage video, I am but a mewling newbie to these boards and therefore lack linking privileges, but search for "Stage 10, 2011 Superstition Mountain Mystery 3 Gun" on YouTube and you'll see another of my videos from this very enjoyable (both as a shooter and an RO) match.

[D.Hayden]

Who won the 3 Gun Nation shootoff?

Just looking for official scores...

[DocMedic]

The way to win stage 8 WAS to engage all the targets AND get at least some hits. I ended up with a 78 "second" run (38 sec run plus 40 sec in penalties: 2 neutralized targets, 6 FTNs and one missed target) which far better than a one shot run (1 second-ish run plus 135 seconds in penalties: 9 missed targets). Horner scoring deals with the issue of LR targets better as they are worth more but even with Horner scoring, I think the target presentation on Stage 8 would require the stage winner to eat FTNs.

As for the "gaming" comments, I would note that this IS a game. Stage strategy is a HUGE component of our game. I did not particularly want to shoot stage 8 the way I did but I pretty much had to. I am not going to sacrifice myself on the altar of some vague greater good to make the Gods of Stage Design happy. I'm in the match for fun but I'm also there to win.

I also feel pretty strongly that the stage should not have been thrown out. As a match director, I have had shooters destroy my wonderfully dreamed up stages. And I have to say good for them. Mystery Mtn. should do a better job of proofing stages before the main event if it wants to call itself the greatest 3 gun match in the country. What were testing or proving with that buckshot stage?

Another philosophical issue which this match drudged up is the POSSIBLE imbalance in having ALL stages worth 100 points regardless of size or length. In a a 20 secondish stage, 2 seconds of time is worth about 10 points, 5 seconds in a 40 second stage, etc etc. What this means is that any little thing which goes wrong on stages like stage 1 or 10 or 11 can have a big effect on scores despite the relatively low number of targets presented and shots fired. I know Ft. Benning went out of its way to try to balance this issue out but not so with SMM3G. The counter argument is that with scenario based stages, this more accurately reflects real life. If stage 1 were real life, a malfunction may blow the operation, get yourself and hostages killed etc etc. In the match, it meant that you lost about 30-50 match points. Food for thought.

Thanks to the match staff and sponsors for all their hard work and effort, once again a fun match with an excellent prize table. Stage 1 was clever. Stage 2 was about the best stage that I ever seen in which the shooter really had to think about which weapon to pick: rifle or pistol. Usually it is not even close. But the stage designers have really been testing this out at the local matches.

And a final extra special thanks to Kurt Miller's front sight. So much for iron sights being more durable than optics (at least this time).

Fair enough, I'm still feeling the effects of driving 13 hours strait. I do agree that having every stage worth 100 pts was a bit of a surprise. receiving a FTN on stage 1 was the difference from being in the top 25 to being in the 100+ in placement for that stage.

Edited March 28, 2011 by DocMedic

[ninemmbill]

Who won the 3 Gun Nation shootoff?

Just looking for official scores...

Keith Garcia

[DocMedic]

I guess using your brain to solve problems and improve your opportunity for points in the competition is now secondary to making sure we meet the "intent" of the course designer. What about this angle, it is not fair to the shooters to have long range targets that present at random

times requiring 3 hits and no way for the shooter to know if he hit them. Isn't that getting away from the "intent" of competition to test our accuracy and speed for the sake of trickery in course design

Perhaps my using the word "intent" was the wrong choice of wording. I never had the opportunity to shoot stage 8 as it was thrown out the next morning, I was more or less talking about the other two stages such as stage5 with the 3 Larue Targets set at 300yards. I know in my squad only 2 shooters were able to hit all 3 Larue targets in under 15 secs of their last paper shot, due to the wind having a bit of a vortex up in the hill. with the current FTN rules you "could" just shoot 3 rounds at them and called it good with no hits and basically finished that part under 16+ seconds, if thats what you needed to "solve problems and improve your opportunity for points" then thats for you, not for me.

Edited March 28, 2011 by DocMedic

[gose]

Perhaps my using the word "intent" was the wrong choice of wording. I never had the opportunity to shoot stage 8 as it was thrown out the next morning, I was more or less talking about the other two stages such as stage5 with the 3 Larue Targets set at 300yards. I know in my squad only 2 shooters were able to hit all 3 Larue targets in under 15 secs of their last paper shot, due to the wind having a bit of a vortex up in the hill. with the current FTN rules you "could" just shoot 3 rounds at them and called it good with no hits and basically finished that part under 16+ seconds including penalties, if thats what you needed to "solve problems and improve your opportunity for points" then thats for you, not for me.

In this case it would be +30s (3x10s) for "Target not hit" though.

[TMC]

I was more or less talking about the other two stages such as stage5 with the 3 Larue Targets set at 300yards. I know in my squad only 2 shooters were able to hit all 3 Larue targets in under 15 secs of their last paper shot, due to the wind having a bit of a vortex up in the hill. with the current FTN rules you "could" just shoot 3 rounds at them and called it good with no hits and basically finished that part under 16+ seconds including penalties, if thats what you needed to "solve problems and improve your opportunity for points" then thats for you, not for me.

That would be +30 for 3 misses at 10 sec. each. Taking the 3 shots saves you the extra 5 seconds each for a Failure to Engage "FTE" which has a total of +15 sec. each.

A failure to neutralize only happens on paper targets which require 1 A/B or 2 hits anywhere and those targets on stage 8 which required 3 hits. If you had only 1 hit on the stage 8 targets they scored it as a FTN.

A missed steel or clay bird was +10 each.

[DocMedic]

In this case it would be +30s (3x10s) for "Target not hit" though.

That would be +30 for 3 misses at 10 sec. each. Taking the 3 shots saves you the extra 5 seconds each for a Failure to Engage "FTE" which has a total of +15 sec. each.

A failure to neutralize only happens on paper targets which require 1 A/B or 2 hits anywhere and those targets on stage 8 which required 3 hits. If you had only 1 hit on the stage 8 targets they scored it as a FTN.

A missed steel or clay bird was +10 each.

oops, then I stand corrected.

Since I'm batting a 1000 here I'm going back into my hole and sleeping.

Awesome Match though!

Edited March 28, 2011 by DocMedic

[gose]

In this case it would be +30s (3x10s) for "Target not hit" though.

That would be +30 for 3 misses at 10 sec. each. Taking the 3 shots saves you the extra 5 seconds each for a Failure to Engage "FTE" which has a total of +15 sec. each.

A failure to neutralize only happens on paper targets which require 1 A/B or 2 hits anywhere and those targets on stage 8 which required 3 hits. If you had only 1 hit on the stage 8 targets they scored it as a FTN.

A missed steel or clay bird was +10 each.

oops, then I stand corrected.

Though I would probably argue that even a 10s penalty for not making a "hard" shot is pretty low. The 20s penalty for targets beyond 100y that Benning uses seems more appropriate.

While on the subject I also think that 10s for not hitting a flying bird is a little harsh, especially with the sometimes erratic launches...

For next year I'd like to see:

* Stages weighed based on number of guns used, ie, 150p for 3-gun stages, 125 for two-gun and 100 for one gun.

* 20s "Target unhit" penalty for targets beyond 100 (or 200)

* 5s penalty for not hitting a flying bird

* a ton of SAAB targets

Edited March 28, 2011 by gose

[dchang0]

I do agree that having every stage worth 100 pts was a bit of a surprise. receiving a FTN on stage 1 was the difference from being in the top 25 to being in the 100+ in placement for that stage.

Yeah, that's a matter of improper weighting of short stages against long ones. A 5-second penalty in a stage that on average was run in 18.7 seconds will hurt like a 30-second penalty in a stage that was run in an average of 108.2 seconds.

The rules organizations need to start experimenting with either weighting stages against each other with simple high-school statistics OR playing with stage-appropriate penalties.

For instance, the whole fiasco with Stage 8 could've been averted with this hypothetical penalty system:

Unhit Targets = +10 seconds * n factorial. (Middle school math, remember?)

So if you had 1 UHT, it would be +10 sec * 1 = a total of a +10 second penalty.

And if you had 2 UHTs, it would be +10 sec * 2 * 1 = +20 seconds

3 UHTs would be +10 * 3 * 2 * 1 = +60 sec

4 UHTs would be +10 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 = +240 sec

5 UHTs would be +10 * 5 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 = +1200 sec

and so on...

OBVIOUSLY, the penalties are too great for anyone to want to game this stage. NOBODY would just take one pot-shot at each of the 9 targets and call it a day. It would forgive at most 2 UHTs, but not much more than that. We'd all have been forced to shoot Stage 8 with a good faith effort.

The scoring system matters--it incentivizes and rewards certain behaviors and players. Right now, the weighting of the stages means that people who can perform short stages flawlessly have a giant advantage over people who can perform long stages flawlessly (in other words, it favors "hoser" stages).

Does this mean that it's right or wrong, no. I include no judgment about the way SMM3G 2011 was scored. Math is math. All I'm saying is that MDs and Stage Designers are going to have to take into full account the scoring/penalty system while designing stages.

Edited March 28, 2011 by dchang0

[AlamoShooter]

Jamie looked like you were limping there. What happened?

re tore my calf muscle during the my stage prep. Its not as bad as it sounds.

Definitely put a gimp in my style, I had to shoot a few things diffrent than I liked.

Edited March 29, 2011 by AlamoShooter

[StealthyBlagga]

I also feel pretty strongly that the stage should not have been thrown out. As a match director, I have had shooters destroy my wonderfully dreamed up stages. And I have to say good for them. Mystery Mtn. should do a better job of proofing stages before the main event if it wants to call itself the greatest 3 gun match in the country. What were testing or proving with that buckshot stage?

Please read my earlier post: The stage really was pulled for SAFETY reasons, despite the musings of the conspiracy theorists. Some folks who scored highly on Stage 8 may have been disappointed when it was pulled, which is unfortunate. In your case you won Tac Limited anyway despite losing the points from your performance in this stage.

I agree that we should have done a better job of game-proofing the stages. Setting up a match of this magnitude is HARD WORK. The build crew worked long hours for the week before the match and we did not have as much time to test fire the stages as we would have liked. We therefore relied on the RO match to uncover any problems. Despite having some of the most aggressive and competitive gamers in the nation at Rio Salado, none of the ROs uncovered this chink in the armor. I expect this is not a mistake we will repeat in future years. Be careful what you wish for

Edited March 28, 2011 by StealthyBlagga

[TMC]

GREAT MATCH and a HUGE THANKS to the match staff and all the RO's who are the best around. They are all friendly, helpful and make the stages fun. A BIG THANKS to all the match sponsors for making it possible and for a fantastic prize table.

I was going to wade in here with a long post but after 12+ hours of driving and 4 hours of sleep I'm just too tired. I'll just say that if you think trying to win within the rules is wrong fine, I hope the air is good up there on your high horse but please don't infer that those of us who work a bit harder that others to finish well are somehow cheating when we take every advantage available. It's not our fault the stage wasn't more thoroughly thought out. Maybe next year they will invite a couple of local big dogs to come out and look things over before the stage designs are finalized. If someone like Kelly or Nils had been able to look that stage over prior to the match this thread would much shorter. And no, I don't think that seeing the stage a week in advance would be an advantage and I wouldn't care.

Edited March 28, 2011 by TMC

[Gruyere]

For those who shot the stage, please tell me at what point in the briefing did the RO mention the "intent" of the stage?

Straight out of the stage description:

"when you see T5 appear, you may start shooting. The RO will stop you after the exposure sequence is completed".

[bigbrowndog]

A target that is not able to be arbitrated has no business being in a match of this size and importance. Those targets used on stage 8 are not designed to register multiple rapid hits, and as they get used they lose the integrity to register accurate counts of actual hits, as well as registering impacts from gravel as hits, if plastic impacts on paper from barrels doesn't count as a hit then gravel shouldn't either.

As for it being used in an IPSC match, I don't think you would ever see that system used in a level 3 or higher IPSC match simply because a competitor cannot arbitrate the target, and its not a legal IPSC target. The stage wasn't gamed because it was hard to run the stage "as intended" but because it was faster to do it that way, essentially the competitor was on a Par time due to the target sequencing, so the fastest way to shorten your Par time and receive the least amount of penalties was to go thru the first sequence only and try to neutralize what you could.

Larger penalties does not FIX poor stage design, good stage design does. As a stage designer if someone figures out how to game your stage, then you should have gained knowledge from their gaming the stage rather the competitor learning something from your stage design.

trapr

BTW, I shot very poorly, but had the most fun at this match than I have at any previous SMMG. Thanks to all the staff that have to put up with all of our crap during the match and still manages to have smile on your face at the end of the day.

woo hoo!!!!!

Edited March 28, 2011 by bigbrowndog

[ERIC]

What were testing or proving with that buckshot stage?

I've been wondering that since it was introduced into our montly matches. What next, shotshell ammo with our pistols.

Despite having some of the most aggressive and competitive gamers in the nation at Rio Salado, none of the ROs uncovered this chink in the armor.

That's because the more aggressive and competitive local gamers shot Fri-Sun.

[TMC]

What were testing or proving with that buckshot stage?

I've been wondering that since it was introduced into our montly matches. What next, shotshell ammo with our pistols.

They are testing what is the number of buck shot rounds required for 3-gunners to stop showing up. Those little dudes are like a dollar each!

We have a local club that does monthly shotgun/pistol matches where they usually shoot 25-30 rounds of buckshot and they can't figure out why more people don't show up.

Edited March 29, 2011 by TMC

[chendersby]

Well almost all. Stage 10 had some shooters taking two complete steps out of the out of the shooting area to engage the last target. The theory was that the 5 sec procedural was better then the time it took to engage the target in the shooting area.

Bad call by the ro's to allow this. IMO the first shooter to do this should have been made to reshoot it and anyone else doing it should have been DQed for unsportsmanlike behavior. Under rule 1.7.4. Willful disregard of Event Official instructions. Course description says "from within the shooting area".

It wasn't a bad call by the ROs, it was a slip in stage design that could easily have been fixed during stage "proofing" by putting one, or two, more targets next to that one.

Getting DQ'ed for not following the stage description? I thought that was what procedurals were for?

Out of the three SMM3Gs I've shot, I think this is probably the best one so far.

Big thanks to the organizers, ROs, sponsors and everyone else that made it happen!

I was one of the RO's on Stage 10, (though not the CRO), and honestly, I like that idea in the future, but that's not my call to make.

After 2 1/2 days of watching people shoot the stage, I could tell that people forgot that taking a procedural was NOT the extent of the time penalty for shooting outside of the designated area: Whether it was prepping for a "leap of faith" or walking outside of the fault lines, it took shooters a couple of seconds to get where they could make that last shot to the right on 10. What happened, in effect, was there was no effective time advantage either way.

As for stage video, I am but a mewling newbie to these boards and therefore lack linking privileges, but search for "Stage 10, 2011 Superstition Mountain Mystery 3 Gun" on YouTube and you'll see another of my videos from this very enjoyable (both as a shooter and an RO) match.

You are correct that it was not your call but I wish you had brought in a range master to make the call. Did not mean to put that on you guys, the RO's at Rio Salado are among the best in the country. And you guys put on another excellent match.

I'm the first guy to drive a truck through a hole in a stage design. I'm as gamey as they come but I think purposely foot faulting by two full steps to gain an advantage is stepping into the realm of unsportsmanlike conduct and in some cases safety issues also. The freestyle means you are free solve the problem presented. Part of that is solving it within the rules and physical layout of the stage. I've designed, built, ROed and debugged one hell of a lot of stages over the years and would have never caught that "flaw" in the stage. Also one of the reasons we use fault lines is to control angles of fire so bullets don't go in unsafe directions. On this particular stage there was no real advantage gained as it was a wash time wise, I can think of a few stages over the years that it wiould have been a huge advantage to do something like that.

Edited March 29, 2011 by chendersby

[StealthyBlagga]

...Those targets used on stage 8 are not designed to register multiple rapid hits, and as they get used they lose the integrity to register accurate counts of actual hits...

This is not an accurate assertion. The manufacturer's spec indicates resolution of hits at a rate of 600 rounds per minute. We tested these targets extensively before the match, and they faithfully registered multiple HITS as fast as I could pull the trigger at 10 yards. If hits were not registered, it was because folks weren't making hits. I know the concept that 3-gunners can miss a target is shocking, but there it is.

[StealthyBlagga]

What were testing or proving with that buckshot stage?

I've been wondering that since it was introduced into our montly matches. What next, shotshell ammo with our pistols.

Buckshot stages are rarely encountered in the US 3-gun scene, but are surprisingly common in IPSC. I wanted to try it this year to create an interesting new challenge. While Stage 10 did not turn out quite as I would have liked, it ran on schedule and had a result distribution comparable to any other 3-gun stage. The "gaming" concern could have arisen just as much with a birdshot stage, or for that matter a pistol or rifle stage... nothing to do with the buckshot.

As Eric indicated, we have been testing buckshot stages in recent local matches - there WAS a lot of testing, on paper and steel before I designed Stage 10. The use of buckshot has not been particularly excessive in our matches (only a few rounds per match) and has been done in lieu of slugs to keep the cost manageable. I'm sometimes a bit disappointed by how negative some 3-gunners can be when they encounter anything outside the narrow norms they have become used to.

Oh, and shotshell ammo in pistols is an excellent idea - I'll look into it .

Edited March 29, 2011 by StealthyBlagga

[kellyn]

I also feel pretty strongly that the stage should not have been thrown out. As a match director, I have had shooters destroy my wonderfully dreamed up stages. And I have to say good for them. Mystery Mtn. should do a better job of proofing stages before the main event if it wants to call itself the greatest 3 gun match in the country. What were testing or proving with that buckshot stage?

Please read my earlier post: The stage really was pulled for SAFETY reasons, despite the musings of the conspiracy theorists. Some folks who scored highly on Stage 8 may have been disappointed when it was pulled, which is unfortunate. In your case you won Tac Limited anyway despite losing the points from your performance in this stage.

I agree that we should have done a better job of game-proofing the stages. Setting up a match of this magnitude is HARD WORK. The build crew worked long hours for the week before the match and we did not have as much time to test fire the stages as we would have liked. We therefore relied on the RO match to uncover any problems. Despite having some of the most aggressive and competitive gamers in the nation at Rio Salado, none of the ROs uncovered this chink in the armor. I expect this is not a mistake we will repeat in future years. Be careful what you wish for

I know and appreciate the very hard work. It is not easy to put a match on of that size and complexity (ask the AMU!). You guys were out there for a couple of weeks hard at it. BUT my comments have absolutely nothing to do with whether I won the stage and/or the match or not.

I'm not against buckshot stages although I was very much against SOF's requirement for ALL buckshot as I could hardly afford it. I just don't that THAT particular stage was a good buckshot test (I did not think the no shoots were tight enough shots) although having spoken with some other shooters I could be wrong about that. I thought it would be fairly rare to hit a no shoot on that stage but seems like I was wrong.

[StealthyBlagga]

I also feel pretty strongly that the stage should not have been thrown out. As a match director, I have had shooters destroy my wonderfully dreamed up stages. And I have to say good for them. Mystery Mtn. should do a better job of proofing stages before the main event if it wants to call itself the greatest 3 gun match in the country. What were testing or proving with that buckshot stage?

Please read my earlier post: The stage really was pulled for SAFETY reasons, despite the musings of the conspiracy theorists. Some folks who scored highly on Stage 8 may have been disappointed when it was pulled, which is unfortunate. In your case you won Tac Limited anyway despite losing the points from your performance in this stage.

I agree that we should have done a better job of game-proofing the stages. Setting up a match of this magnitude is HARD WORK. The build crew worked long hours for the week before the match and we did not have as much time to test fire the stages as we would have liked. We therefore relied on the RO match to uncover any problems. Despite having some of the most aggressive and competitive gamers in the nation at Rio Salado, none of the ROs uncovered this chink in the armor. I expect this is not a mistake we will repeat in future years. Be careful what you wish for

I know and appreciate the very hard work. It is not easy to put a match on of that size and complexity (ask the AMU!). You guys were out there for a couple of weeks hard at it. BUT my comments have absolutely nothing to do with whether I won the stage and/or the match or not.

Fair enough - my point is that the stage was properly thrown out for the reasons I gave earlier. In light of the safety issues that materialized, we could not continue to let competitors shoot that stage as originally designed, and it was too late to change it and have everyone reshoot it. Pulling it was the only option.

Edited March 29, 2011 by StealthyBlagga

[DocMedic]

Rough version but all stages.

Work warning, there maybe a bit of cursing on my part..

Edited March 29, 2011 by DocMedic