Checking targets during a Standards CoF

[Coach]

Someone always comes up with this knick knack crap.

[Skydiver]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

Such a simple solution!

[steel1212]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

That would solve the problem but damn that would be a long ass stage

I still say that if shooters are allowed to check targets on a 50 yard standard and you as a ro tell them no and they do it any way you send them packing for not follow the direction of the ro.

The rule (10.6.1) says "....failing to comply with the reasonable directions of a Match Official,..."

That's where we could open the door to a successful arbitration. It's not a "reasonable direction" to tell someone they can't fault a line. That's not a DQ. There are already penalties enumerated for that. Likewise, if someone goes out of the lines on a Standards course of fire, there may be penalties, but I can't see that as a DQ.

Anybody want to try it with out asking the ro at a major.

If I considered it, I sure as Hell wouldn't ask first.

I must be in a argumentative mood tonight so.... Said shooter wants to go down range. RO says no we'll check them after the second string. Said shooter goes anyway. RO says Stop. Said shooter goes anyway. Then what?

[ima45dv8]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

That would solve the problem but damn that would be a long ass stage

I still say that if shooters are allowed to check targets on a 50 yard standard and you as a ro tell them no and they do it any way you send them packing for not follow the direction of the ro.

The rule (10.6.1) says "....failing to comply with the reasonable directions of a Match Official,..."

That's where we could open the door to a successful arbitration. It's not a "reasonable direction" to tell someone they can't fault a line. That's not a DQ. There are already penalties enumerated for that. Likewise, if someone goes out of the lines on a Standards course of fire, there may be penalties, but I can't see that as a DQ.

Anybody want to try it with out asking the ro at a major.

If I considered it, I sure as Hell wouldn't ask first.

I must be in a argumentative mood tonight so.... Said shooter wants to go down range. RO says no we'll check them after the second string. Said shooter goes anyway. RO says Stop. Said shooter goes anyway. Then what?

Once the RO said Stop, it's probably a reshoot.

Be fair/consistent. Think of it as it relates to a regular ol' field course. You can't stop a shooter from going outside the lines. You can penalize them if they fire shots out there, but you can't stop them. So what all of a sudden makes us think we can stop them going outside the lines just because it's a Standards?

Show me a rule.

[ima45dv8]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

That used to be required on some classifiers (related to the "2 No-Shoot Max" rule, I believe), but not today.

Are we to just start scoring all Standards, Classifier or not, per string?

That sure would increase the turn-around time per shooter.

[JAFO]

Someone always comes up with this knick knack crap.

Not "someone", it's always Skydiver!!

[Skydiver]

Someone always comes up with this knick knack crap.

Not "someone", it's always Skydiver!!

LOL! Not a lot of blue skies right now to keep me occupied.

[Sean Gaines]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

That would solve the problem but damn that would be a long ass stage

I still say that if shooters are allowed to check targets on a 50 yard standard and you as a ro tell them no and they do it any way you send them packing for not follow the direction of the ro.

The rule (10.6.1) says "....failing to comply with the reasonable directions of a Match Official,..."

That's where we could open the door to a successful arbitration. It's not a "reasonable direction" to tell someone they can't fault a line. That's not a DQ. There are already penalties enumerated for that. Likewise, if someone goes out of the lines on a Standards course of fire, there may be penalties, but I can't see that as a DQ.

Anybody want to try it with out asking the ro at a major.

If I considered it, I sure as Hell wouldn't ask first.

I must be in a argumentative mood tonight so.... Said shooter wants to go down range. RO says no we'll check them after the second string. Said shooter goes anyway. RO says Stop. Said shooter goes anyway. Then what?

I guess the whole point is that the shooter can claim that he is not quite done shooting that string. So theoretically he could go look at the targets come back to the shooting box and then fire another round. Of course that would go against you, because of time, but its an excuse to go down range and look at targets. and you could figure out if you need to make up a shot on the second string.

Maybe this is a question for Mr. Amidon, since know one has given real specific evidence why this wouldn't be allowed.

[sperman]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

That used to be required on some classifiers (related to the "2 No-Shoot Max" rule, I believe), but not today.

Are we to just start scoring all Standards, Classifier or not, per string?

That sure would increase the turn-around time per shooter.

If the shooter wants to walk down and check the targets, follow with the clipboard and pasters. If he wants to stay uprange for the next string, then paste at the end. Legal?

[Nik Habicht]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

That used to be required on some classifiers (related to the "2 No-Shoot Max" rule, I believe), but not today.

Are we to just start scoring all Standards, Classifier or not, per string?

That sure would increase the turn-around time per shooter.

If the shooter wants to walk down and check the targets, follow with the clipboard and pasters. If he wants to stay uprange for the next string, then paste at the end. Legal?

Sure. As long as at some point you run through the "If finished, unload..." through "Range is Clear" commands....

That'll add time too....

Seriously, I like the odds of this not occurring in a real match. If it should, probably faster to just move through the situation, than it is to impose some of the suggestions here that would likely lead to arbitration, especially since a local match arbitration fee is pretty cheap....

[professor]

Just score between strings. Problem solved.

That used to be required on some classifiers (related to the "2 No-Shoot Max" rule, I believe), but not today.Are we to just start scoring all Standards, Classifier or not, per string?That sure would increase the turn-around time per shooter.

If the shooter wants to walk down and check the targets, follow with the clipboard and pasters. If he wants to stay uprange for the next string, then paste at the end. Legal?

Shakespeare said it 410 years ago... "Much Ado About Nothing".

Premise is that a shooter is engaged in a multi-string COF. After engaging targets as per instructions of a string, shooter takes off downrange, presumably with loaded gun in hand. The reason for doing so is not communicated to the RO, although the presumption is that said shooter wants to check out the hits on targets up close and personal.

Various actions and considerations proposed in this thread center around these issues:

(1) Should the RO yell "STOP" and prevent this action by the shooter.

(2) What penalties are available to punish the shooter for their action.

(3) How can this be prevented for other shooters.

(4) Is it allowed under the rules.

I'm of the opinion that the current rules contain nothing that would prevent a shooter from this act of proceeding downrange. He was given LMR and Start signal. He has engaged targets. He has not yet indicated to the RO that he is done shooting. He has not reloaded and holstered his gun, which would be the next thing to do in the normal course of affairs, in order to proceed with the next string.

About all he has done is deviated from the normal & expected actions of shooters partaking in this COF, and doing so has upset the RO.

The most important lesson from this discussion if for the RO is to be ready for anything, and to not overreact when a shooter deviates from 'normal & expected' actions.

What the RO should do is follow the shooter downrange, wait until they are done doing whatever, and politely inquire (through gritted teeth), "If you are done, reload and holster, and we will proceed with the next string."

If the RO yells "STOP", or otherwise attempts to restrain the shooter, the shooter is entitled to a reshoot due to RO interference, as the shooter was doing nothing illegal by the rules. The RO can make a mental note to be more cautious when this particular shooter is up, because the ONLY rational reason for such action would be to goad the RO into creating a reshoot opportunity, as I'll explain later.

As others have pointed out in this thread, this game is Freestyle, unless otherwise specified. The rules are not perfect, but they also allow shooters considerable latitude in their actions, unless said actions are a safety issue or violate the written stage description.

Now, for the rational evaluation of the shooter's actions, which were NOT, you will remember, voiced to the RO during the COF.

Was the shooter checking hits on the targets engaged so far? Possibly, but the only rational reason to do so would be to see if a makeup shot was necessary due to Mike or Mike + Noshoot on the hits so far. In either case, once the shooter is close enough to see the hits, there is no way that a rational person would fire another (or multiple) shots

from that forward location as makeup shots. (1) The clock is still running, and the time of an additional shot would destroy the HF for the stage. (2) An additional shot would incur Extra Shot penalty AND a procedural for engaging the target from outside the designated shooting box.

According to the rules, if the shooter could safely return to the original shooting box, they could fire make up shots from there, but this is even less rational, as the time penalty would be even greater, there would still be an Extra Shot penalty, and a shot from that distance would have the same potential for Mike / Noshoot results.

Furthermore, the next string in the COF is likely to be from a closer distance than the first shooting box. Had the shooter simply reloaded, holstered and proceeded to that box, he would have plenty of time before assuming a Ready position to evaluate the targets and to decide if any makeup shots are warranted.

So the only rational reason for running downrange that remains must be the real reason for the shooters action, which is to goad the RO into stopping him, so he gets a reshoot.

All the discussions about which rule to use to prevent the action therefore break down to whether it can be proved that a shooter attempted to get a reshoot by baiting the RO. This falls into the category of a shooter who aggressively backs up into the RO, causing contact that requires the offer of a reshoot. Or someone who maneuvers through the COF in an attempt to trap the RO downrange of their location, to then claim interference. [The ability to do this might be a matter of poor stage design, which can be addressed by modifications to the COF, possibly issuing a 'forbidden action', and requiring a reshoot.]

OK, so the RO is on his toes, hopes that the shooter isn't going to do anything stupid or irrational, and follows him downrange until the shooter gets tired of dicking around. Believe me, if this happens more than once, the other squad members are going to get on his case.

Comments on shooter strategy in multi-string COFs:

(1) Take your best shots at distant targets, and make sure ahead of time that you know your gun's bullet drop at distances out to 50 yds.

(2) Remember that you can make up shots on any string, so that if makeups are useful, do them at the nearest distance where you feel confident of the results. You will get Extra Shot penalties that eliminate Mikes, at the expense of slightly higher time and benefit of extra target points.

(3) It's not stacking, despite multiple shots on a given target, as long as you engage all targets in the array with the required number of shots.

As ROs, we are supposed to create a safe and fair match for all competitors. That implies that we should not be looking to twist the rules to punish a shooter for doing something that is unexpected, but not unsafe or prohibited in the written stage description.

[ima45dv8]

The most important lesson from this discussion if for the RO is to be ready for anything, and to not overreact when a shooter deviates from 'normal & expected' actions.

[snip]

As ROs, we are supposed to create a safe and fair match for all competitors. That implies that we should not be looking to twist the rules to punish a shooter for doing something that is unexpected, but not unsafe or prohibited in the written stage description.

That was well said.

[steel1212]

Once the RO said Stop, it's probably a reshoot.

Be fair/consistent. Think of it as it relates to a regular ol' field course. You can't stop a shooter from going outside the lines. You can penalize them if they fire shots out there, but you can't stop them. So what all of a sudden makes us think we can stop them going outside the lines just because it's a Standards?

Show me a rule.

I can't. Your perfectly right and the more I think about it the more I'm wrong. Told you I was being argumentative lol. It still is just a major waist of time. I know what some are saying, they want to check to see if there are shots they need to make up. Most standards are Virginia count so your going to incur another penalty for taking the extra shot which is going to counter act the miss you have. Don't take my counter questions as I'm one of those that is just itching to DQ somebody, that is far from it, As a MD I just want the match to run as smoothly as possible. Somebody walking the 100yards a extra time is going to add to the stage turn around. Hopefully any stage designers will read this thread and either make it Virginia count, so its not worth the walk, or just have one string on it.

Edited February 5, 2011 by steel1212

[ima45dv8]

Once the RO said Stop, it's probably a reshoot.

Be fair/consistent. Think of it as it relates to a regular ol' field course. You can't stop a shooter from going outside the lines. You can penalize them if they fire shots out there, but you can't stop them. So what all of a sudden makes us think we can stop them going outside the lines just because it's a Standards?

Show me a rule.

I can't. Your perfectly right and the more I think about it the more I'm wrong. Told you I was being argumentative lol. It still is just a major waist of time. I know what some are saying, they want to check to see if there are shots they need to make up. Most standards are Virginia count so your going to incur another penalty for taking the extra shot which is going to counter act the miss you have. Don't take my counter questions as I'm one of those that is just itching to DQ somebody, that is far from it, As a MD I just want the match to run as smoothly as possible. Somebody walking the 100yards a extra time is going to add to the stage turn around. Hopefully any stage designers will read this thread and either make it Virginia count, so its not worth the walk, or just have one string on it.

I never thought you were itching to DQ anyone.

And if it's a Standards, it will scored Virginia or Fixed Time, both incurring XS and XH penalties.

[sperman]

I'm not itching to DQ anyone either, but I do want to pursue one aspect of this scenario. If the shooter starts downrange, and the RO says "Stop," and the shooter continues to head downrange, is this not failure to obey a reasonable command of the RO? Maybe the shooter didn't see the person stick their head up behind the rear berm. Maybe the RO caught something out fo the corner of their eye that made them think someone was about to head downrange. Is ther EVER a case where Stop isn't a reasonable command? If the shooter stops, issue a re-shoot without question. If the shooter doesn't stop, I don't see how you avoid the DQ, regardless of the circumstances.

[Nik Habicht]

I'm not itching to DQ anyone either, but I do want to pursue one aspect of this scenario. If the shooter starts downrange, and the RO says "Stop," and the shooter continues to head downrange, is this not failure to obey a reasonable command of the RO? Maybe the shooter didn't see the person stick their head up behind the rear berm. Maybe the RO caught something out fo the corner of their eye that made them think someone was about to head downrange. Is ther EVER a case where Stop isn't a reasonable command? If the shooter stops, issue a re-shoot without question. If the shooter doesn't stop, I don't see how you avoid the DQ, regardless of the circumstances.

Ever issued the stop command? I have, only to have to issue it multiple times getting louder each time, until the shooter heard it.....

So that's tough too -- the shooter needs to comply with the stop command, but the shooter won't always hear it the first time....

It would have to be exceptional circumstances for that to go all the way to dq....

Basically, the RO would have to be certain that the shooter heard and ignored the command. I'm not clairvoyant -- and I've never had a shooter refuse to stop. The people in this game are pretty safety conscious....

[sperman]

I guess I should have been clearer in my explanation. I'm not referring to the shooter who doesn't hear the RO say stop, but who hears it and chooses to ignore the RO.

Maybe I'm trying too hard to read between the lines. Mark said this in an earlier post:

This is the groundwork for a successful Arbitration. What is the "reasonable" direction by an RO? Can an RO decide to stop you from stepping out of the box, as in foot-faulting, in a CoF. No. He can dump penalties on you, but can't stop you from hosing your score. So you're going to tell an Arb committee that because it was a Standards CoF it's okay to limit the competitor's movement? I think the result would be a reshoot.

I'm just trying to figure out how the shooter would successfully arbitrate this. Is he going to argue that he intentionally ignored the command of an RO because the RO didn't have the right to stop him from walking downrange?

[Nik Habicht]

I guess I should have been clearer in my explanation. I'm not referring to the shooter who doesn't hear the RO say stop, but who hears it and chooses to ignore the RO.

Maybe I'm trying too hard to read between the lines. Mark said this in an earlier post:

This is the groundwork for a successful Arbitration. What is the "reasonable" direction by an RO? Can an RO decide to stop you from stepping out of the box, as in foot-faulting, in a CoF. No. He can dump penalties on you, but can't stop you from hosing your score. So you're going to tell an Arb committee that because it was a Standards CoF it's okay to limit the competitor's movement? I think the result would be a reshoot.

I'm just trying to figure out how the shooter would successfully arbitrate this. Is he going to argue that he intentionally ignored the command of an RO because the RO didn't have the right to stop him from walking downrange?

Short version: If the RO issues the "Stop" command one of two things pretty much has to follow: A re-shoot or a DQ, right?

If I'm asked to rule on that (assume that I'm the CRO/RM/ or ARB committee, on the next rung of the ladder), I'm first going to try and establish what happened. Then we're going to look at the rules you cited in support of the DQ. If the RO issued the "Stop" command, when it wasn't reasonable to, i.e. there was no safety issue, the shooter didn't false-start, etc., then the DQ gets overturned, and the shooter gets to reshoot the stage.....

Trying to assert or prove that a shooter intentionally ignored the STOP command is going to be hard, absent an admission by the shooter, or a comment such as "I'm not stopping" at the time of occurrence....

Again -- I don't believe that we'll see that on a regular basis, we're simply to safety conscious. Could it happen at some point? Sure, but the likelihood is low, unless you're regularly shooting with folks who are rude and unsafe....

[pjb45]

Awesome thread. So make it a par time course.

Or

Proceed to the next shooting area, issue MR, Shooter Ready, Standby, Beep.

It is interesting to note that numerous Area Directors, CROs, etc., have been silent. I suspect they do not have a good response yet either.

[sperman]

Short version: If the RO issues the "Stop" command one of two things pretty much has to follow: A re-shoot or a DQ, right?

One last question. Is there any reason the shooter cannot finish the string after the stop command? I'm assuming the re-shoot would be for RO interference. If the shooter didn't feel like he had been interfered with then why can't he just continue? Granted, it's in the middle of the course of fire, but it's between strings and therefore off of the clock.

[Nik Habicht]

Short version: If the RO issues the "Stop" command one of two things pretty much has to follow: A re-shoot or a DQ, right?

One last question. Is there any reason the shooter cannot finish the string after the stop command? I'm assuming the re-shoot would be for RO interference. If the shooter didn't feel like he had been interfered with then why can't he just continue? Granted, it's in the middle of the course of fire, but it's between strings and therefore off of the clock.

I'm assuming that once the RO issues the "Stop" command, he'll keep repeating it louder and louder until the shooter stops? So most of the time I'd say, no, the shooter can't finish, unless perhaps the RO observes a safety rule violation on last target or array, then I could maybe see that happen....

Basically it comes down to this: RO's can only stop shooters in certain limited circumstances. If the circumstance is a disqualifying offense, then issue the DQ; if not you'll almost always reset the stage and re-shoot the competitor....

Rare exception: Stop for squib, barrel turns out to be obstructed....

[ima45dv8]

I guess I should have been clearer in my explanation. I'm not referring to the shooter who doesn't hear the RO say stop, but who hears it and chooses to ignore the RO.

Maybe I'm trying too hard to read between the lines. Mark said this in an earlier post:

This is the groundwork for a successful Arbitration. What is the "reasonable" direction by an RO? Can an RO decide to stop you from stepping out of the box, as in foot-faulting, in a CoF. No. He can dump penalties on you, but can't stop you from hosing your score. So you're going to tell an Arb committee that because it was a Standards CoF it's okay to limit the competitor's movement? I think the result would be a reshoot.

I'm just trying to figure out how the shooter would successfully arbitrate this. Is he going to argue that he intentionally ignored the command of an RO because the RO didn't have the right to stop him from walking downrange?

I may not have been as clear as I hoped, either.

My point was, if you say stop to me for moving outside of the box and walking downrange....I'll stop. [see 8.3.5]

If you can't cite a reasonable position for saying Stop, it opens the door to a reshoot due to interference, and if not offered, a possible arbitration..

***No I wouldn't actually do that for real (though I did do it for fun at a match today), but someone could.

[JAFO]

One last question. Is there any reason the shooter cannot finish the string after the stop command? I'm assuming the re-shoot would be for RO interference. If the shooter didn't feel like he had been interfered with then why can't he just continue? Granted, it's in the middle of the course of fire, but it's between strings and therefore off of the clock.

If you meant can he finish the CoF (as in, the remaining strings) after a Stop command where the competitor felt a re-shoot was not necessary (ie, declines the optional reshoot for RO interference), I'd say yes, as long as he does not continue down to see his targets after the stop command.

8.6.4 In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another

external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of

fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course

of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing

either the time or the score from the initial attempt. However, in the

event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such

interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

If the shooter walked down to see the targets, was issued a stop command and complied, but was able to see his hits, I'm thinking the reshoot becomes mandatory instead of optional since the option couldn't be given prior to the competitor seeing the hits.

[mhs]

One last question. Is there any reason the shooter cannot finish the string after the stop command? I'm assuming the re-shoot would be for RO interference. If the shooter didn't feel like he had been interfered with then why can't he just continue? Granted, it's in the middle of the course of fire, but it's between strings and therefore off of the clock.

If you meant can he finish the CoF (as in, the remaining strings) after a Stop command where the competitor felt a re-shoot was not necessary (ie, declines the optional reshoot for RO interference), I'd say yes, as long as he does not continue down to see his targets after the stop command.

8.6.4 In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another

external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of

fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course

of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing

either the time or the score from the initial attempt. However, in the

event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such

interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

If the shooter walked down to see the targets, was issued a stop command and complied, but was able to see his hits, I'm thinking the reshoot becomes mandatory instead of optional since the option couldn't be given prior to the competitor seeing the hits.

"May offer" leaves it up to the RO, so under this rule it's never mandatory.

Seeing your hits doesn't equal knowing your score.

[JAFO]

"May offer" leaves it up to the RO, so under this rule it's never mandatory.

Seeing your hits doesn't equal knowing your score.

That's true, offerring the reshoot is optional from the RO's perspective. In this case it would seem the majority of people here (many, if not all, of whom I assume to be ROs) have agreed that a Stop command wouldn't be warranted and could be RO interference. What happens if you don't offer the shooter a reshoot and they want one? Do they take it up with the CRO/RM?

As far as seeing your hits vs knowing your score, the rule says "prior to seeing either the time or the score". If we're talking about one string in a Standards CoF where you've probably only got a few targets downrange, wouldn't you consider seeing your targets pretty much knowing your score? It's not a 32 round field course. Or is the rule intended to just mean that the targets won't be scored prior to the RO offerring the reshoot and the competitor accepting or declining?

Edited February 8, 2011 by JAFO