Cover from engaged targets

[GOF]

Lugnut's point about slicing the piece from a barricade (Stage 3 of the Classifier comes immediately to mind)is an excellent one. The Rule Book indicates that if a shooter can shoot two or more targets without shifting his position on the barricade then he/she is not using cover proeprly and gets a PE. The shooter must shift their position, however slightly, for each target. If you shoot T-1 (outside target) and then shift position to shoot T-2 (inside middle target) you are exposing yourself to the already engaged T-1. Should that be a PE? If it is, how does anyone run the Classifier without getting a PE on Strings 1, 2 and 3? If you cannot expose yourself to a target that has been engaged, then that's the only one you can shoot without drawing a PE.

GOF

[Strick]

It is important that the SOs and competitors define within the context of a particular course of fire, how the rule will be applied. The rule book is not the be all, end all. It should be the basis from which a course of fire is designed and run. The rule book is the base, but it does not define and address every situation.

You can lobby to change the rule, but it is the rule. I don't like it. You don't like it. It just is, until it isn't.

This is the part I disagree with. The rulebook should be the end all of rules and should clearly lay out what is the legal definition of cover. The use of cover is one of the most important and basic ideals of IDPA so leaving it up to SO or MD interpretation leads to inconsistency and confusion. The criticism of IDPA is that there are to many rules and restrictions, personally i feel the opposite is the real problem. Rules are looked at as mere guidelines and are applied inconsistently.

Your first sentence above is the problem. The rules should define how the COF is shot not the other way around. I should be able to shoot a match in any state and expect the rules to be applied as they are at local matches.

[GOF]

+1 to Strick on that. I've shot in PA, SC, NC, GA, AR and FL... in most cases the Rules have been applied consistently. There were times when they were left up to the MD, and not applied in a way that this five year SO could understand, and sometimes in a direct contridiction with the current Rule Book. Given the travel expenses involved, I would love to see some consistency. I hear the same complaint from upper level shooters who travel. If you spend the time and money to travel to a sanctioned match, and know the Rule Book, you should expect it to be enforced as written. You shouldn't have to ask " How do ya'll do it here?"

GOF

Edited December 30, 2010 by GOF

[Ahab]

Stick is 100% correct. The rulebook should be absolutely crystal clear on any issue that can affect a shooter's performance detrimentally so that there is never, ever an issue of "regional interpretation" in the rules. It should be like McDonalds - a Big Mac is exactly the same no matter where in the country you get it. Like everyone has pointed out, the rulebook specifically allows you to be exposed to engaged targets, that's the issue. If I'm shooting an array, call it T1-T3 and I'm using cover properly for T1, when I shift to shoot T2 then I'm more than 50% exposed to T1. That's okay according to the rulebook, which then states I'm allowed to reload from that exact position as long as I don't over expose myself to T3 (the target I have not engaged).

So on the stage in the postal match, following that interpretation of the rules, I would be "behind cover" from all the remaining threats on the stage. That's why this is 100% about whether or not you need cover from an engaged target.

[lugnut]

So on the stage in the postal match, following that interpretation of the rules, I would be "behind cover" from all the remaining threats on the stage. That's why this is 100% about whether or not you need cover from an engaged target.

That about sums it up from my perspective as well. Many may not agree but there is no way IMO that you can argue this from another perspective based solely with what we have in the rule book today.

[Chills1994]

always!

ALWAYS!

read the CoF description for yourself....

despite what the rules say....

and despite if the SO read it out loud.

[GOF]

And what exactly does "reading the COF description for yourself" accomplish if you know the Rule Book and the SO doesn't...and he decides to throw a PE on you, despite what the Rules says? At what point does reading the COF do you any more good than asking the SO how he is going to call things? Which... if the SO knew the Rule Book... and you knew the Rule Book... shouldn't be a question you have to ask.

GOF

[Glshooter]

I have the answer regarding the 2nd procedural on the postal match stage. The rule book clearly states you can't break cover when doing a reload. Therefore, you should have waited until you stepped into the open area and then started the reload. Since people are contending the first reload should be allowed there then it should be fine to reload a 2nd time in the same spot right? Those center targets were engaged and no longer exist and since you waited until you left the wall you never broke cover. Well maybe that wouldn't work with an empty revolver since it also says you can't leave cover with an empty gun but certainly an auto guy could have done a tac load there.

We can also argue that on the 2nd reload you never did break cover even if you started the reload before the opening. The wall to the right is cover from the targets on the right isn't it? You were always behind that wall the whole time and therefore always behind cover.

It could go on and on.

As far as the whole slicing the pie argument, the exact line reads "A general rule of thumb is that the shooter will have to lean out of cover more for each target he engages (slicing the pie)". Where does it say cover does not have to be used for targets that have been engaged? It seems to me this applies to exposing yourself to the inner targets during a slicing the pie scenario. How does one get "its OK to reload out in the open even if there are targets that have already been shot" out of that sentence from the rulebook?

[lugnut]

And what exactly does "reading the COF description for yourself" accomplish if you know the Rule Book and the SO doesn't...and he decides to throw a PE on you, despite what the Rules says? At what point does reading the COF do you any more good than asking the SO how he is going to call things? Which... if the SO knew the Rule Book... and you knew the Rule Book... shouldn't be a question you have to ask.

GOF

This is near and dear to me. Unfortunately because of the ways "cover" and the use of "cover" is interpreted... I ask at every COF where there could be any issues at all... and when I run a match/stage- I will often explain how I expect cover to be used. Yeah it's stupid but it sure eliminates any issues... I wish the rule book could make it easier for all of us.

Edited December 30, 2010 by lugnut

[COF]

Ahab, I'm not quite sure what all the confusion is about. Did you have cover when you engaged T1 & T2? - No. You had to engage these two targets in the open while retreating to P2 or P3. Your cover from T1/T2 are the same walls that are cover from T3/T4 or T5/T6. Competition rule 3 says that reloads can only be initiated while behind cover so your PE was a violation of this rule. It might have helped if the course description said "Draw and engage T1/T2 with 3 rounds each while retreating to cover at P2 or P3.

On the classifier Stage 3 or any stage where you are shooting around cover, cover is relative to the targets being engaged, so after you have engaged the first target your cover is relative to the second target and so on, BUT, you still have cover to move back behind if the first threat target started shooting back. In this scenario you had no cover from the first two targets until you got behind one of the end walls.

I don't agree with every rule in the rulebook and have stated so numerous times in my 13 years as an IDPA match director, SO and SOI. In my experience, most of the interpretation issues have come out as a result of SO's being trained by others who don't understand the rulebook themselves. This leads to confusion on the local level and then when you go to a regional/national match - more confusion. The standardized SO training instituted a couple years ago has helped this to a degree. I also know there are some rules that need additional clarification - the addenda we received this year helped on some of these but added confusion on others.

[lugnut]

On the classifier Stage 3 or any stage where you are shooting around cover, cover is relative to the targets being engaged, so after you have engaged the first target your cover is relative to the second target and so on,

Exactly. With all due respect I think you are being inconsistent though. If you are saying that cover is relative the the targets being engaged.. then I will argue that the need of cover is relative to the target being engaged in this stage (postal stage) as well. Cover has to be relevant to targets that haven't been engaged. Once you engage those two targets you can't be in the open relative to the others on the other side of the walls.

Here is another example:

T4 T3

xxxxxxxxxxx

T1 T2

P1

If you start at P1 you are in the open right?. Once you engage T1 and T2 are you still in the open? I say not. Why? The wall is between the remaining threat targets, T1 and T2 are irrelevant once they are engaged. Now I have to use cover while engaging T3 and T4 of course. I can do this by moving laterally to the right OR left (not forward). I can also move forward to the right of left side of the wall to engage T3 and T4 right? Well am I behind cover if I'm still 5 yds from the wall? I say yes. You can't specify when the shooter is behind cover. So.. .If I initiate a reload at P1 would that be a PE? I say not. If you say it should be then exactly how close to the wall do you need to be? Where does it specify this in rulebook?

EDIT: for some reason the spaces were ignored on my mock up stage. T1 and T2 are wider than the wall, P1 is centered with the middle of the wall. T3 and T4 are centered behind the wall.

Edited December 31, 2010 by lugnut

[Chills1994]

I'll be back later when I can get to a real computer to post a video link...

and that will explain why you need to read the CoF description for yourself.

as far as rules and different SO interprations, you only have to watch a few IDPA videos on youtube and listen for the SO's range commands:

"Have you read and understand the course of fire description?"

"Okay, shooter give me a nod when you are ready???"

"SHOOTER INDICATES READY!!!"

"GOING HOT EVERYBODY!"

"Standby!"

BEEEEPPPP!!!

then the next video will be a different SO giving an entirely different set of range commands.

outside of getting short beeped, messed up non-rulebook range commands is my biggest pet peeve.

it kinda makes me wonder what else the SO doesn't know about the rules.

I'll be honest with you all ....I had never heard of dinging somebody with a cover procedural after the targets are scored and at least one of them is also a FTN. That is a new one on me.

Is that in the rule book?

Or is that in that repository of clarifications and addendums that I keep hearing about?

[waktasz]

Here is another example:

T4 T3

xxxxxxxxxxx

T1 T2

P1

If you start at P1 you are in the open right?. Once you engage T1 and T2 are you still in the open? I say not. Why? The wall is between the remaining threat targets, T1 and T2 are irrelevant once they are engaged. Now I have to use cover while engaging T3 and T4 of course. I can do this by moving laterally to the right OR left (not forward). I can also move forward to the right of left side of the wall to engage T3 and T4 right? Well am I behind cover if I'm still 5 yds from the wall? I say yes. You can't specify when the shooter is behind cover. So.. .If I initiate a reload at P1 would that be a PE? I say not. If you say it should be then exactly how close to the wall do you need to be? Where does it specify this in rulebook?

EDIT: for some reason the spaces were ignored on my mock up stage. T1 and T2 are wider than the wall, P1 is centered with the middle of the wall. T3 and T4 are centered behind the wall.

The difference is that you must you cover if available. If you need to take 20 shots to hit t1 and t2 and reload from p1 it's OK because there is no cover available. You could also reload on the way to the wall after shooting t1 and t2.

Now say p1 was a bianchi barracade...you could not shoot t1 and t2 then reload while on the move to the wall because you would be leaving cover at p1.

[Chills1994]

GOF wrote:

And what exactly does "reading the COF description for yourself" accomplish if you know the Rule Book and the SO doesn't...and he decides to throw a PE on you, despite what the Rules says? At what point does reading the COF do you any more good than asking the SO how he is going to call things? Which... if the SO knew the Rule Book... and you knew the Rule Book... shouldn't be a question you have to ask.

GOF

Here is the video link that I am talking about:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2752295558924527560#

Stay tuned for about the 1:10 mark.

I was under the impression that plastic drums were cover and concealment, and not necessarily just a target holder.

I guess they ran out of target stands at that match. (shrugs shoulders)

And, yes, I did take it up with the MD and his reply was, "Well, did you read the CoF description?"

And my answer was a sheepish, "No".

It's been almost 4 years ago, but I guess that the CoF description said where to reload and that the no-shoot target was "mom" and not cover.

So the 3 second procedural or whater other penalties I got still stuck.

getting back more on topic....I guess we could all go with reactive targets, like what Ken Reed built or just shoot poppers from cover, but that would get expensive quick. At least you and everybody else would know that the target was engaged and also neutralized.

[COF]

"The difference is that you must you cover if available."

Exactly

Brad, there is no such rule.

Edited December 31, 2010 by COF

[Chills1994]

Thanks, Jerry!

[hankfan79]

I have no dog in this fight but I will say I am a avid IDPA shooter (&SO) and have been for years. Matter of fact, it is the only shooting sport I compete in besides The Pro Am. Having said that...

I have had calls question by shooters while SOing. If there is any static, I tell them to locate the MD and bring him back with you and we will discuss it. Until then, NEXT SHOOTER.

I have (as a shooter) questioned some calls. I bring it to the MD's attention and he makes the final rule. Some times I agree....sometimes I don't. Oh well.

Lets just shoot and have some fun. I'm not on the range to argue with another shooter or SO. People remember bad SO's and shooters. I try my hardest not to be either one of those.

[waktasz]

If you guys want a real ruling email IDPA HQ...since this was the postal match it will be easy for them to make a quick reply.

[lugnut]

If you guys want a real ruling email IDPA HQ...since this was the postal match it will be easy for them to make a quick reply.

the

That would fix that match but clarification needs to in the rulebooks..... what is posted in a forum or what HQ responds to in an email doesn't help at the next match.

[waktasz]

I think it is in the rulebook but no one here is reading it right.

[Ahab]

Ahab, I'm not quite sure what all the confusion is about. Did you have cover when you engaged T1 & T2? - No. You had to engage these two targets in the open while retreating to P2 or P3.

Right, I agree with that. The thing is that once those targets were engaged, I was behind cover from all remaining targets in the stage, right? So I should be free to reload at my leisure since cover is relative to unengaged targets in the array.

Now, if the stage description had said "retreating to cover at P2 or P3" that would have defined those points as the available cover on the stage and this discussion would be moot.

[GOF]

The Rule Book is so ambiguous, and sometimes contradictory, that there may not be a correct answer to this basic question. I would submit the following thought process. What is a Threat Target? It is one that needs to be shot with the minimum number of rounds specified by the COF, and which you cannot expose more than 50% of your torso or any of your lower body to while shooting it from cover. If it's in the open, with no cover for the shooter to use, you just shoot 'em as you can, and if the COF says "On The Move" then you better be moving. When does a threat target cease to be an "active threat target" that you can then expose yourself to as you move through the various firing positions mandated by the COF? The answer is "after you shot/engaged it". After that point it is a non-factor for cover calls. If this was not the case, then there would be no way for a shooter to run one of the most standard IDPA courses there is... i.e... engage one target array from a firing position and then move to another to engage a second target array... while exposing yourself to the ones you just shot/engaged (they're done and out of the picture until they're scored, and penalties will be assessed then), without drawing a PE.

What is cover? It is an object that shields you from unengaged targets. If you can't see them, they can't see you, and cover exists. Where do you have to reload? Behind cover. If you are "covered" from active threat targets (not the ones already engaged... they're out of the equation) can you consider that to be "behind cover" and reload then... when an intervening object prevents you from seeing them and them from seeing you... is that "cover"? Yes. Can you move behind that cover, staying behind cover, while you reload? Yes. I'm not sure what the problem with this scenario is.

But, there is another Rule that comes into play. Can you leave a firing position with an empty gun and advance to another firing position? No, you can't. If the shooter has engaged T-1 & T-2 in the open, and has run dry... he/she is at a "firing position". If the shooter is behind cover from T-3 & T-4.... what the heck is he supposed to do? "Leave" that firing position with an empty gun to run to another firing position? Or, just reload behind the cover he's already behind.

Which Rule do you violate? Leaving a firing position with an empty gun to advance to another? Or, reloading behind some SO's incorrect definition of cover? What is cover? Does anyone have an iron clad... IDPA HQ approved... definition as to what constitutes cover and how close one has to be to it?

GOF

Edited December 31, 2010 by GOF

[Duane Thomas]

You just reload behind the cover you're already behind. There is no rules violation or contradiction there.

Yes, with all respect, you are seriously over-thinking this.

[sirveyr]

As Duane stated, don't over think it. Just ask the local SO how they want you to shoot the COF. I know this seems silly, but that's how it needs to be done. Each SO has his own version of IDPA rules. We just need to play their game, sometimes one bay at a time.

[GOF]

Duane,

I would be happy to reload behind any cover I'm already behind. Can you please tell me if I am behind cover? And, what is the Rule Book definition of "Cover".

Sirvyr, If IDPA is an International organization (as the name implies) with a Rule Book and Rules, why should I have to ask a "local" SO at a sanctioned match in "wherever" how their version of the IDPA Rules goes? Shouldn't the Rules be the same everywhere? Why should we have to learn the "local" rules,... "one bay at a time"... for an International organization with a Rule Book that is supposed to apply everywhere?

I don't really think I'm "over thinking" this. I actually think I am logically-thinking this. And, I am a five year SO, who was asked to become a SO by one MD, and trained as a SO by the AC.

GOF