shred Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I guess not too many of y'all have been to an RO class lately. They use one of my videos from the 2004 Nationals to discuss this point exactly. Here's the thread about it and what was decided. The video is partway down the first page http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=16944 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbean Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 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? You could say the same thing about a gun that picks match day to develop hammer follow, a bad batch of primers, or sticking a single stack/production mag in your front pocket by mistake. You're not going to like it, but if any of these things happen, you're not winning your match, and you may even go home early. It's not that hard to avoid foot faults - plan your stage so you aren't shooting on the ragged edge, and you're safe. If you do shoot on the ragged edge, you know you're taking a chance, but that's a decision you made. There's a risk/reward for everything in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 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. Same call at Nationals...I saw get multiple penalty ding. I suggested the shooter arb. He did not do so. I guess not too many of y'all have been to an RO class lately. They use one of my videos from the 2004 Nationals to discuss this point exactly. Here's the thread about it and what was decided. The video is partway down the first page http://www.brianenos...showtopic=16944 D-oh...Roy beat me to it...with videos and everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 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.... If you do all that up front work, it might be good to go ahead and write it into the WSB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcs Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 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? You could say the same thing about a gun that picks match day to develop hammer follow, a bad batch of primers, or sticking a single stack/production mag in your front pocket by mistake. You're not going to like it, but if any of these things happen, you're not winning your match, and you may even go home early. It's not that hard to avoid foot faults - plan your stage so you aren't shooting on the ragged edge, and you're safe. If you do shoot on the ragged edge, you know you're taking a chance, but that's a decision you made. There's a risk/reward for everything in this game. I can bring a backup gun to mitigate my gun failure. Shooting on the ragged edge is the reason for a foot fault? If it were so easy to avoid, why not just classify it as I safety violation (after all, your shooting on the ragged edge) and issue a DQ? So, does the penalty equal the rule infraction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 In the name of consistency then, say a shooter 'creeps' the buzzer. Should we give him a procedural for every shot fired thereafter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbean Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I can bring a backup gun to mitigate my gun failure. Shooting on the ragged edge is the reason for a foot fault? It's one reason. Inattention and miscalculation are others. If it were so easy to avoid, why not just classify it as I safety violation (after all, your shooting on the ragged edge) and issue a DQ? So, does the penalty equal the rule infraction? Because it isn't a safety violation- it's a competitive violation akin to running ammo that doesn't make power factor, failing to follow the provisions of the WSB, or taking extra shots on a Virginia count stage. I can't think of a more appropriate consequence to a competitive violation than a procedural penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supermoto Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 If the shooter is able to engage a target that they would not be able to engage inside the fault lines, that's a significant advantage. Having your foot accidentally touch outside of the fault line is not a significant advantage. I have seen a few to many RO enjoy giving a shooter per shot fired penalties. Lets not go out of our way to screw the shooter over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
want2race Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 If the shooter is able to engage a target that they would not be able to engage inside the fault lines, that's a significant advantage. Having your foot accidentally touch outside of the fault line is not a significant advantage. I have seen a few to many RO enjoy giving a shooter per shot fired penalties. Lets not go out of our way to screw the shooter over. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 If the shooter is able to engage a target that they would not be able to engage inside the fault lines, that's a significant advantage. Having your foot accidentally touch outside of the fault line is not a significant advantage. I have seen a few to many RO enjoy giving a shooter per shot fired penalties. Lets not go out of our way to screw the shooter over. This. Still not specific enough. Consider CM 06-01 Big Barricade. A shooter can definitely hit all targets within the fault lines either by running to both sides of the barricade, or by staying on one side of the barricade and leaning/hanging out and shoot one handed. If a shooter plants a foot beyond the left side (or right side) fault line and forward of the wall, they can easily shoot all 7 targets from a single stable position without any leaning or hanging and/or one handed shooting. I feel like that is a significant advantage deserving per shot procedurals, but by the bolded text above, it would not be one.procedural. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 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. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supermoto Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Still not specific enough. Consider CM 06-01 Big Barricade. A shooter can definitely hit all targets within the fault lines either by running to both sides of the barricade, or by staying on one side of the barricade and leaning/hanging out and shoot one handed. If a shooter plants a foot beyond the left side (or right side) fault line and forward of the wall, they can easily shoot all 7 targets from a single stable position without any leaning or hanging and/or one handed shooting. I feel like that is a significant advantage deserving per shot procedurals, but by the bolded text above, it would not be one.procedural. If the shooter is able to engage in a similar manner a target that they would not be able to engage inside the fault lines, that's a significant advantage. We could add the bold section, but my point was that RO and shooters know what a Significant advantage is, Its obvious, because its significant. Not slight, not a little, but a significant advantage. Being 6" closer to a target is not a significant advantage, being a 6" past a wall is not a significant advantage. Penalty per shot should only be reserved for when the action is so egregious that is bordering on cheating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Having every foot fault scored as a per-shot penalty would make it easier, and would remove any judgment calls by the RO(s), but I'm not in favor of it. It would become just another Zero-Tolerance policy and we've likely all seen many examples outside of this sport to show how counterproductive that can be in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjb45 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Why does everything have to be spelled out in black and white. Why can't we as sometimes rational adults apply reasonable judgement. In law they call it a reasonable man rule. The Nazi said anything not explicitly permitted is forbidden. In America things are permitted unless forbidden. We follow what is reasonable as a theme in our society. Three times at last years National i watch Carl S. exercise good judgement in this area. It made sense. A foot over a fault line that at best was hard to feel and did not alter the shooters ability or inability to see the targets was given the judgement on NOT a Significant Advantage. I also saw Travis robbed at the mud fest Nationals in Tulsa- IMO. For those who want everything spelled out in black and white and not have an exercise in judgement perhaps you expect too much of humans. As a not a baseball fan, thank goodness for the no reply rule. Let the game be a game. I would rather put up with mis-judgements than rigid totalitarianism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodownzero Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. It's consistently defining the "crime" that is at issue here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corey Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. It's consistently defining the "crime" that is at issue here. Foot touching outside the box/fault line seems a like an easy way of doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 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. The fault line may not really be there to keep you in the box -- of course it is, but let go of that concept for a moment and look at the bigger picture. Is being a foot closer at 50 yards an advantage? Probably not...... Do I personally think that "one per" is overkill in that situation? Yep. Could I live with it? Sure...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 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! Better make sure that the faultlines are appropriately constructed and maintained by the stage crew throughout the match as well..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 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.... If you do all that up front work, it might be good to go ahead and write it into the WSB? Why? Do you want to read it to every squad? If you're the CRO, and know what the call should be, why do you need to announce it in advance? What other calls should we write into the WSB? :P Unless of course you meant for matches with embedded ROs -- in which case I think you're right, that should be specified.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 If the shooter is able to engage a target that they would not be able to engage inside the fault lines, that's a significant advantage. Having your foot accidentally touch outside of the fault line is not a significant advantage. I have seen a few to many RO enjoy giving a shooter per shot fired penalties. Lets not go out of our way to screw the shooter over. This. Still not specific enough. Consider CM 06-01 Big Barricade. A shooter can definitely hit all targets within the fault lines either by running to both sides of the barricade, or by staying on one side of the barricade and leaning/hanging out and shoot one handed. If a shooter plants a foot beyond the left side (or right side) fault line and forward of the wall, they can easily shoot all 7 targets from a single stable position without any leaning or hanging and/or one handed shooting. I feel like that is a significant advantage deserving per shot procedurals, but by the bolded text above, it would not be one.procedural. No it wouldn't -- you're reading something into the comment that (I think) wasn't intended. That would clearly qualify on a per shot fired, because the competitor cut out a position/had a better angle/more A zone available.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. It's consistently defining the "crime" that is at issue here. Foot touching outside the box/fault line seems a like an easy way of doing so. If every shooter has the ability to consistently tell -- by feel -- where the fault lines are, then it's pretty simple. I've seen fault lines with gravel pushed up against them, at the end of a match -- made it hard for the last squad to tell where inbounds was, probably harder than for the first squad to shoot the stage.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 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. The fault line may not really be there to keep you in the box -- of course it is, but let go of that concept for a moment and look at the bigger picture. Is being a foot closer at 50 yards an advantage? Probably not...... Do I personally think that "one per" is overkill in that situation? Yep. Could I live with it? Sure...... So lets go back to just issuing 2 penalties per NS hit. Unless the shooter was gaining an advantage by going to fast then we'll just use the per shot. I like black and white rules it takes out the judgement calls, it either is or is not, not maybe sometimes or maybe sometimes not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 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. Not exactly that is two different laws. More closely related would be two people speeding 10 over. One is accidental the other is on purpose which one gets a ticket per mile over and which one gets a ticket just for speeding :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 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.... If you do all that up front work, it might be good to go ahead and write it into the WSB? Why? Do you want to read it to every squad? If you're the CRO, and know what the call should be, why do you need to announce it in advance? What other calls should we write into the WSB? :P Unless of course you meant for matches with embedded ROs -- in which case I think you're right, that should be specified.... First off, I am the world's biggest fan of shortening a WSB (more so than even George) You ask "why?" Really? Because the RO is not the competitor. The sport...and the rules...are not about the RO. Tell the competitor what is expected. Kinda like the RO creed. It is my duty to assist all competitors in their attempts to accomplish their goals and not to hinder them by undue harassment and authoritarian behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Chris and I have discussed this at length and find that it is in the realm of an FTDR: meaning that it is a gut-check decision without the rules backing it up one way or the other. I STRONGLY suggest that we do to foot faults the same thing that we did with no-shoots. If you shot a no-shoot 5 times, you now have 5 procedurals. If you took 5 shots out of bounds, you now have 5 procedurals. What Chris and I might call a competitive advantage might not be what other CROs will call because it is simply up to the CRO. Take the guess work out of the equation and make it a 1 procedural per shot fired. 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