What's The Definition of a Significant Advantage?

[Chris Keen]

10.2.1 A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground or while stepping on an object beyond a Shooting Box or a Fault Line, or who gains support or stability through contact with an object which is wholly beyond and not attached to a Shooting Box or Fault Line, will receive one procedural penalty for each occurrence. However, if the competitor has gained a significant advantage on any target(s) while faulting, the competitor may instead be assessed one procedural penalty for each shot fired at the subject target(s) while faulting. No penalty is assessed if a competitor does not fire any shots while faulting.

I did a search and came up empty. Close, but not exactly. So no where in the rule book do they define what determines a SIGNIFICANT advantage, when discussing foot faults. I have a big problem with this, because it leaves it up to interpretation of the individual RO. I have been told that it's something along the lines of ''a more stable position, a closer position, or eliminating a position'' but I'd sure like to see that in writing.

Personally I think it ought to be just like the no-shoot rule that recently changed back to ''if you shoot them, you earn them'' [no more max of 2] .... but I may be alone on this one.

I just don't know how it can be left up to interpretation, as to what EXACTLY is a significant advantage. Why can't they just put that definition in the Glossary of the rule book? They have a great definition of what ''facing uprange'' is now, so would it be that hard to define significant advantage?

Sorry, but this one frustrates me unequivocally.

Ugggghhhhh .........

Edited August 23, 2011 by Chris Keen

[Chris Keen]

Not to mention how do we define what is an advantage for a D class shooter, versus a GM?

[cyburg]

True, a GM has a significant advantage over me just by showing up. I say he or she automatically gets a procedural.

Edited August 23, 2011 by cyburg

[Jim Norman]

This has been a long time complaint of mine. I lean out and fault a line, I get 1 per, I am 6-2, did I really gain a SIGNIFICANT advantage? now a 5-1 shooter faults the same way, did they get a significant advantage?

I would like it, and it would bite me in the a$$ if we did it, to have this rule changed to you fault you get 1 per shot fired while faulting. How does the RO know that I am extremely flexible and this was not an advantage or that I am so stiff i can barely bend so the advantage is significant?

[Flexmoney]

Most don't use the rule as written anyway. They ignore the "significant" part.

[want2race]

I hear you Chris. I have been tagged with this twice. Once I got one per shot, the other one per occurrence. They were slighly different faults. One was a lean out fault line. If you step over it you gain the advantage of not having to lean or have partial targets. I was so pissed at myself for faulting I didn't argue it initially (too late). I complained about it all day, but it was mainly as a reminder to myself that I was stupid for letting it happen.

The 'one per occurrence' was at IN. I stepped right to open the door, didn't want to flag my hand and that was all I was thinking about. Stepping out and shooting actually put me at a disadvantage as I had to shift to see both targets where as if I were inside the shooting area I could have seen both without moving.

You can see both examples on Youtube. First one was Battle in the Bluegrass. Second was IN state.

I realize your point is that you want there to be no grey area in the rule book. I like the rule as it stands, but having it further defined needs to happen. A different RO (Corey) could have given a procedural for every shot fired outside the fault line regardless of advantage/disadvantage/planetary status/weather/mood/etc. Then it comes down to which RO you have per given stage.

Here's an example of "No significant advantage". You go prone and your toe hangs over the edge of the fault line. The last 2 shots of an 8 shot array your toe touches the ground outside the fault line. Where is the SIGNIFICANT advantage? There is none. One procedural.

This happened to me at my first ever 3 gun match, Area 6 4 years ago.

Edited August 23, 2011 by want2race

[Joe4d]

It's like pornorgraphy, I cant define it but I know it when I see it.

There is a subjective gray area I'll admit, but havent really seen this as an issue. Even with that at majors you tend to have the same RO team thats gonna rule the same way. I just dont think its that much of an issue.

[Gary Stevens]

It's funny how things disappear in the rulebook

In a previous edition, it listed examples of significant advantage. They were getting a better angle on a shot, or being able to see more targets than would normally be seen if you stayed within the fault lines, or moving closer to the targets. There might have been more, I can't remember. These are the "guidelines" I use. I say guidelines because a shooter who has 3 targets directly in front of him, but has one foot over a faultline is closer to the targets, but IMO does not receive a significant advantage. So no per shot fired in that case.

Other examples would be not carrying an object that you were required to carry or failing to do a task that you were required to do prior to shooting.

You are correct though that it normally falls to a judgment call.

Hope this helps Chris.

Gary

[bbbean]

Personally I think it ought to be just like the no-shoot rule that recently changed back to ''if you shoot them, you earn them'' [no more max of 2] .... but I may be alone on this one.

You're not alone. There are enough judgement calls in ROing as it is. A title, gun, slot, or $$ shouldn't ride on one RO's opinion of what constitutes "significant".

[steel1212]

How about this. A foot fault is there to prevent somebody from gaining an advantage right? So why isn't it one shot per while outside of the fault line. I never understood why, in reference to the foot fault, it could be not be considered a significant advantage the fault line is there to keep you in a certain place and you stepped over it. Its simple scoring to have it one shot per.

[Nik Habicht]

I have a big problem with this, because it leaves it up to interpretation of the individual RO.

Having learned from George, when working as RM at a bigger match, we try to define what might be a significant advantage call for faulting on each stage, during the final staff walkthrough....

That allows us to think about it, argue it out, and arrive at a decision, that fault X will result in call Y for every shooter ahead of time. It allows for consistency.....

The biggest problem for this rule is matches with embedded ROs -- it might be best for those to just announce that every foot fault will incur one per....

[Nik Habicht]

How about this. A foot fault is there to prevent somebody from gaining an advantage right? So why isn't it one shot per while outside of the fault line. I never understood why, in reference to the foot fault, it could be not be considered a significant advantage the fault line is there to keep you in a certain place and you stepped over it. Its simple scoring to have it one shot per.

Simple scoring isn't always the best solution. 50 yard standards -- competitor puts one toe over the line. Is he in a significantly advantageous position here? Is a competitor who runs 30 yards downrange?

How about the competitor who's toes touch past the rear fault line of a prone position, because the designers figured no one over 6 feet tall would be shooting the match?

There's all kinds of faulting that simply doesn't confer an advantage....

[Jim Norman]

The biggest problem for this rule is matches with embedded ROs -- it might be best for those to just announce that every foot fault will incur one per....

I like that Idea. We can easily add this to the standard stage WSB format that everyone uses at our matches. A fault is a per shot penalty, PERIOD.

Simple and Clean, no range lawyers need apply.

[steel1212]

How about this. A foot fault is there to prevent somebody from gaining an advantage right? So why isn't it one shot per while outside of the fault line. I never understood why, in reference to the foot fault, it could be not be considered a significant advantage the fault line is there to keep you in a certain place and you stepped over it. Its simple scoring to have it one shot per.

Simple scoring isn't always the best solution. 50 yard standards -- competitor puts one toe over the line. Is he in a significantly advantageous position here? Is a competitor who runs 30 yards downrange?

How about the competitor who's toes touch past the rear fault line of a prone position, because the designers figured no one over 6 feet tall would be shooting the match?

There's all kinds of faulting that simply doesn't confer an advantage....

In my opinon 50 yard standards you put a toe out, one shot per, the fault line was there to keep you in the box not a toe outside. The guy that runs 30 yards down range over the fault line, he ran outside of the shooting area to GAIN an advantage. The last one would be the only one and that is just simple piss poor stage design but if the box was 8 feet long and they put a toe out then one shot per. It is simple scoring.

[lcs]

Most don't use the rule as written anyway. They ignore the "significant" part.

Ignoring the "significant" is definitely wrong. IMO

[bbbean]

In my opinon 50 yard standards you put a toe out, one shot per, the fault line was there to keep you in the box not a toe outside.

+1!

[want2race]

The biggest problem for this rule is matches with embedded ROs -- it might be best for those to just announce that every foot fault will incur one per....

I like that Idea. We can easily add this to the standard stage WSB format that everyone uses at our matches. A fault is a per shot penalty, PERIOD.

Simple and Clean, no range lawyers need apply.

The rule states, regardless of opinions, a significant advantage must be gained in order to penalize one per shot. Cutting and pasting only what you want to use from the rule book is a slippery slope. If the shooter was not (intentionally) faulting to gain an advantage, one per incident. I read that to mean that if the shooter goofed and stepped out when breaking the shots, the damage is reduced. If the shooter blatantly faulted to benefit from it, the penalty is steep (one per shot).

There is not always an advantage to shooting outside the fault line. Agree with it or not, that how's it written. Sometimes it's a legitimate accident, one per incident.

A ticket for speeding 10 over is still a penalty. A ticket for racing and weaving through traffic is also a penalty, albeit with a steeper fine. One can be accidental, the other is intentional.

I have a feeling this one won't go away until an official ruling is made (wording changed in book), much like the front pocket barney magazine in SS. People on one side of the fence, can't see the other side.

[sperman]

How about this. A foot fault is there to prevent somebody from gaining an advantage right? So why isn't it one shot per while outside of the fault line. I never understood why, in reference to the foot fault, it could be not be considered a significant advantage the fault line is there to keep you in a certain place and you stepped over it. Its simple scoring to have it one shot per.

I would support a rule change like this.

If you don't want the penalties, don't fault the line.

[lcs]

Some of you guys are just plain mean! A procedural for every shot fired for a foot fault. Isn't that just a little over-the-top.

Having a concrete definition of "significant" would be impossible. Let's us presume you foot fault and the RO gives you 1 per shot and you made 8 shots. 80 points down and probably zero the stage.

Everything we do we learn by experience. Some ROs just do not have the experience and make the wrong calls. That is why our sport has CROs ( Which now require major match experience, not just a year of being an RO and taking a class). In addition we have Range Masters and ARB boards with experienced staff.

When you work AREA matches and Nationals as an RO and CRO you gain the experience necessary to make the right calls concerning "significant advantage" . I think the rule should stand as is.

[twodownzero]

True, a GM has a significant advantage over me just by showing up. I say he or she automatically gets a procedural.

One per shot fired.

It's like pornorgraphy, I cant define it but I know it when I see it.

There is a subjective gray area I'll admit, but havent really seen this as an issue. Even with that at majors you tend to have the same RO team thats gonna rule the same way. I just dont think its that much of an issue.

This is how I feel as well. At a major match, the same RO is going to officiate every competitor's attempt at the same stage.

Personally I think it ought to be just like the no-shoot rule that recently changed back to ''if you shoot them, you earn them'' [no more max of 2] .... but I may be alone on this one.

You're not alone. There are enough judgement calls in ROing as it is. A title, gun, slot, or $$ shouldn't ride on one RO's opinion of what constitutes "significant".

C'mon man, we're all volunteers here. If you have no faith in the "opinion" of the Range Officers, maybe this game just isn't for you. It's not like we're out to single out anyone.

[bbbean]

C'mon man, we're all volunteers here. If you have no faith in the "opinion" of the Range Officers, maybe this game just isn't for you. It's not like we're out to single out anyone.

I didn't say I had no faith in the "opinion"of ROs. I are one!

BB

[Corey]

I guess I fall into line with CorEy as well. The fault lines are there for a reason, to define where you can and can't stand while you complete the COF. Stand outside of it and get a penatly. Makes it pretty simple to understand and follow.

[Chris Keen]

+1

[lcs]

How about this. A foot fault is there to prevent somebody from gaining an advantage right? So why isn't it one shot per while outside of the fault line. I never understood why, in reference to the foot fault, it could be not be considered a significant advantage the fault line is there to keep you in a certain place and you stepped over it. Its simple scoring to have it one shot per.

I would support a rule change like this.

If you don't want the penalties, don't fault the line.

I don't think a foot fault was created because someone might be gaining an advantage.

A foot fault is just a simple rule violation (you stepped over the line). There are many gamers who could calculate that taking the shots while simple faulting could save10 seconds because they eliminated another shooting position (just an example). Now if we add "significant advantage" at 10 pts per shot, not such an advantage!

Not everything is so simple as to add a hard and fast rule. You pay $500 (entry fee + ammo) to shoot an Area match and your toes touch over the line and you get 80 points for firing 8 shots and not only loose the stage, but you loose the match. Simple ? Fair?

[Chris Keen]

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.