Leaving the start location after make ready?

[Nik Habicht]

You tell me Make ready, I load up, etc and then put my left foot on the right X and stretch my right foot away from the position did I just leave the start location and incur a procedural? That's what I'm getting at. If you give make ready a shooter can't walk over and look around the wall but can he alter the start position/location to do so?

Procedural? Under which rule?

The only thing I could see is a DQ under 10.6.1 -- and I don't even want to think about the level of bad behavior that would be required to open that door.....

That would have competitors ignoring the "Stop" command, or repeatedly ignoring a reasonable request.....

[Sarge]

I stand corrected. Did I just get mixed up with IPSC? Taking more than one sight picture?

So why is there a rule against it if we are not going to assess a penalty of some kind? That has always been the problem with rules or policies. If you can't, or don't want to enforce something then don't make it a rule.

I would say that since it is in the rule book there must have been some penalty in mind when it was written. So what is it?

If it says "must not", which it does, then it is against the rules to "do" it, right?

[Sarge]

You tell me Make ready, I load up, etc and then put my left foot on the right X and stretch my right foot away from the position did I just leave the start location and incur a procedural? That's what I'm getting at. If you give make ready a shooter can't walk over and look around the wall but can he alter the start position/location to do so?

The only thing I could see is a DQ under 10.6.1 -- and I don't even want to think about the level of bad behavior that would be required to open that door.....

I just had a thought. If the shooter leaves the start location and you take the unnecessary step of informing him it is against the rules, and he does it again, isn't that unsportsmanlike conduct?

[Skydiver]

You tell me Make ready, I load up, etc and then put my left foot on the right X and stretch my right foot away from the position did I just leave the start location and incur a procedural? That's what I'm getting at. If you give make ready a shooter can't walk over and look around the wall but can he alter the start position/location to do so?

The only thing I could see is a DQ under 10.6.1 -- and I don't even want to think about the level of bad behavior that would be required to open that door.....

I just had a thought. If the shooter leaves the start location and you take the unnecessary step of informing him it is against the rules, and he does it again, isn't that unsportsmanlike conduct?

Well, in the IPSC rules, there is no uncertainty about the consequences. Here's the 2012 IPSC version of 8.3.1.1:

8.3.1.1 Once the appropriate command has been given, the competitor must not move away from the start location prior to issuance of the "Start Signal" without the prior approval, and under the direct supervision, of the Range Officer. Violation will result in a warning for the first offense and may result in the application of Rule 10.6.1 for a subsequent offense in the same match.

I'm glad there's a little bit more leeway in USPSA.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Skydiver

[Gary Stevens]

While no longer in the RMI group, I never believed the singlular "a" in this rule was limiting to just one. I would hope that if we wanted only one sight picture we would have used the word one. Of course there are limits that at some time you just have to move things along with a gentle word.

I'm trying to figure out if there's a meaningful difference between "a" and "one," and struggling to find any relevant difference.

I didn't know that the rules involved evaluation of what "we wanted" or any evaluation of intent, but I'm open to suggestions.

If I told you that you could get "a" car wash at Joes Car Wash, would it prevent you from washing your car more than once while you were there?

Gary

[Nik Habicht]

So why is there a rule against it if we are not going to assess a penalty of some kind? That has always been the problem with rules or policies. If you can't, or don't want to enforce something then don't make it a rule.

I would say that since it is in the rule book there must have been some penalty in mind when it was written. So what is it?

If it says "must not", which it does, then it is against the rules to "do" it, right?

I believe the rule was written was written in that way, so that the RO has the ability to stop the shooter -- if the competitor is inclined to dryfire the entire stage at Make Ready. Not only would such an occurrence add a ridiculous amount of time, but it would also burn a lot of RO energy at major matches. (Remember how the ROs look on the last stage of the day, at a mid-summer match? Imagine how they'd look if they had to follow every shooter twice....)

Now, without that language, undoubtedly some would argue that "Stop" is not an appropriate command, for the shooter who wants to dryfire the entire stage.....

Enforcement is possible without penalties -- it doesn't always have to involve a procedural.

This walks a fine line in balancing the "prepare for the stage/rehearsal desires" of the competitor and the "run the competitors through the stage efficiently concerns" of the RO crew. I think they dropped the line in an appropriate place.....

[Nik Habicht]

You tell me Make ready, I load up, etc and then put my left foot on the right X and stretch my right foot away from the position did I just leave the start location and incur a procedural? That's what I'm getting at. If you give make ready a shooter can't walk over and look around the wall but can he alter the start position/location to do so?

The only thing I could see is a DQ under 10.6.1 -- and I don't even want to think about the level of bad behavior that would be required to open that door.....

I just had a thought. If the shooter leaves the start location and you take the unnecessary step of informing him it is against the rules, and he does it again, isn't that unsportsmanlike conduct?

That's going to depend on the situation. If the competitor starts running through the stage, dry-firing, and you issue the "Stop" command, counsel the shooter, and he does it again at "Make Ready," then as RM I might uphold that match DQ.

If you're issuing the "Stop" command when the competitor wants to take three steps so he can see a target at "Make Ready," I'll probably be less inclined to uphold that....

The devil's in the details. Whether you're the competitor or the RO, just be nice to each other. This doesn't have to be hard....

Running a stage well through a match weekend is hard enough; we don't need to make it harder. ROs need competitors, and competitors need ROs.

[Gary Stevens]

Nik is exactly correct. It was written to allow the CRO/RO to manage their stage. A simple "stop" and a short explaniation of why solves almost all of the probems.

However, if the shooter simply refuses to obey the repeted instructions of the RO crew, well there is a solution for that also.

[West Texas Granny]

My personal belief is if you step away from,out of the starting position/ starting box or however you describe it you should be on the clock.

Are you saying that if you step to the line, LAMR, and then realize you left one of your mags on your shooting bag, we should start the clock while you retrieve your mag?

I've seen mags and hearing protection left behind while shooters come to the line. If made ready, I'd like someone to bring their bag forward for the shooter, else unload, show clear, and fetch.

As for moving (safely) a little to get a sight picture(s)...move, but get back to the start position and assume the position before I start you.

Yes. Once you step away from the starting position you should be on the clock. If i had my way stepping into the start position without ear or eye protection or forgetting your mags should get you a DQ as your mind is somewhere else which is dangerous when handling a weapon. Just my opinion mind you.

[matgyver]

From the Range Officer's 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.

....

Maybe this could be part of the swearing in for all BOD members? Could we update the bylaws to require the creed to be read before any votes are made on motions?

[West Texas Granny]

My personal belief is if you step away from,out of the starting position/ starting box or however you describe it you should be on the clock.

Are you saying that if you step to the line, LAMR, and then realize you left one of your mags on your shooting bag, we should start the clock while you retrieve your mag?

I've seen mags and hearing protection left behind while shooters come to the line. If made ready, I'd like someone to bring their bag forward for the shooter, else unload, show clear, and fetch.

As for moving (safely) a little to get a sight picture(s)...move, but get back to the start position and assume the position before I start you.

You are forgetting that at WTG's range, they can only load and handle magazines at their cars (which coincidentally is also their safety area, but that's a discussion for another thread), so it is assumed that when the shooter gets to the line they have all their mags/gear needed for the CoF.

So I guess at your range it's mass confusion because when people step to the line they suddenly realize oops I don't have any mags,weapon, eye or hearing protection. Of course now everyone has to wait because the shooter is now running around trying to find their equipment so they can shoot the COF. Must be fun on match day at your range.

And yes at our range when you are called to the line/ starting position our shooters are ready and they are not running around looking for their equipment as you indicate that shooters at your range do.

[aztecdriver]

So I guess at your range it's mass confusion because when people step to the line they suddenly realize oops I don't have any mags,weapon, eye or hearing protection. Of course now everyone has to wait because the shooter is now running around trying to find their equipment so they can shoot the COF. Must be fun on match day at your range.

And yes at our range when you are called to the line/ starting position our shooters are ready and they are not running around looking for their equipment as you indicate that shooters at your range do.

When you are only running 18-20 shooters at a monthly match - it would seem to not be a problem. Try dealing with 90-100 at a local and then we'll talk about like experiences.

In all seriousness, occasionally someone will forget their second set of hearing protection to double plug - or something like that - or maybe they are just not ready. In which case, it's perfectly within their rights to unload and step back - allow the next shooter to come to the line and they'll get rotated back in the order.

It's rather simple when you run matches within the confines of the rulebook.

[remoandiris]

Yes. Once you step away from the starting position you should be on the clock. If i had my way stepping into the start position without ear or eye protection or forgetting your mags should get you a DQ as your mind is somewhere else which is dangerous when handling a weapon. Just my opinion mind you.

I'm surprised your range members don't take the offending shooter around the back berm and beat the hell out of them. That would be more effective than a DQ.

[West Texas Granny]

So I guess at your range it's mass confusion because when people step to the line they suddenly realize oops I don't have any mags,weapon, eye or hearing protection. Of course now everyone has to wait because the shooter is now running around trying to find their equipment so they can shoot the COF. Must be fun on match day at your range.

And yes at our range when you are called to the line/ starting position our shooters are ready and they are not running around looking for their equipment as you indicate that shooters at your range do.

When you are only running 18-20 shooters at a monthly match - it would seem to not be a problem. Try dealing with 90-100 at a local and then we'll talk about like experiences.

In all seriousness, occasionally someone will forget their second set of hearing protection to double plug - or something like that - or maybe they are just not ready. In which case, it's perfectly within their rights to unload and step back - allow the next shooter to come to the line and they'll get rotated back in the order.

It's rather simple when you run matches within the confines of the rulebook.

My outlook is simple. The shooter must be ready when it's their time to shoot. No excuses.Eeither you are ready or you're not. If you step into the box then step back out you need to be on the clock. Why? You are wasting the time of others and should receive some penalty for not being ready to shoot when called. You make my point by speaking about the factors involved with 90-100 shooters. Respect your fellow shooters and be ready when called.

[remoandiris]

My outlook is simple. The shooter must be ready when it's their time to shoot. No excuses.Eeither you are ready or you're not. If you step into the box then step back out you need to be on the clock. Why? You are wasting the time of others and should receive some penalty for not being ready to shoot when called. You make my point by speaking about the factors involved with 90-100 shooters. Respect your fellow shooters and be ready when called.

So stop working to reset the stage when you're 7 shooters down and make sure you're mags, ears, eyes, plan, and everything else is ready. That really shows respect for your fellow shooters.

In my experience, this whole argument is a non-issue. There are far more competitors who selfishly sit on their asses while others are working the stage than there are competitors who absent-mindedly forget their mags or additional hearing protection in their range bags.

The 10 seconds it takes a person to go back to their bag and get their mags pales in comparison to the time and energy everyone else spends picking up the slack of a squad member who thinks they paid their range fee and don't have to work.

In the matches I have attended over the last 6 years, I have never seen a shooter leave the starting position and airgun the entire stage when it is there turn to shoot and the range was clear. Not saying it hasn't happened, but I am saying it is infrequent.

[aztecdriver]

My outlook is simple. The shooter must be ready when it's their time to shoot. No excuses.Eeither you are ready or you're not. If you step into the box then step back out you need to be on the clock. Why? You are wasting the time of others and should receive some penalty for not being ready to shoot when called. You make my point by speaking about the factors involved with 90-100 shooters. Respect your fellow shooters and be ready when called.

You're outlook is wrong, baseless, and as I told you, because you have no experience outside of 20 people shooting on a 4 stage course once a month, you have no grounds to be making such assertions.

MY experience is that most people ARE ready when it's time to go. Those that are not ready when it's their time - have been people who have been busting their butt pasting, resetting steel, and at locals, working as ROs. Rarely, IF EVER, have I had to deal with someone who was simply BSing until it was their time to shoot. We have run squads the size of your entire match. The least of my worries is the few seconds it takes to drop someone back, or grab a set of mags. I have had one guy have to go to his bag for eye protection once. He was the first shooter at an indoor match - and - he had just had eye surgery so he wasn't used to going to get eye protection in the first place - it was always on his face.

I've also had people come up to the line and say "you know, I thought I was ready, but I'm not. I need to drop down a few... to which I say "unload and show clear". NO PROBLEM - why, because we are here to help the shooters - again - read the RO CREED or - get to an NROI class - oops, you are not a member.

You are thinking like a member of a club, not a sport. That's evidenced in that you're membership to USPSA expired, and you refused to renew it. I'd ask that you attend and participate in a major - but then again, you have to be a member to do so, and you won't renew. There's SO MUCH more to this sport than what you have seen at one range. It's why your "simple outlooks" are generally incorrect - because you have not seen the other side. You look at is as if this is the world of USPSA. 20 people tooling around 4 stages.

Come here - we run about 30 people through 2 indoor stages in 2 hours (do the math, that's sub 4 minute resets. We'll have maybe 80-90 people next Saturday on 6 stages, again, do the math. The least worry is someone coming to the line that needs to either drop back or get a towel or something. It's resetting the COF. Your foundation is flawed. Remoandiris said the rest.

Edited January 8, 2012 by aztecdriver

[twodownzero]

While no longer in the RMI group, I never believed the singlular "a" in this rule was limiting to just one. I would hope that if we wanted only one sight picture we would have used the word one. Of course there are limits that at some time you just have to move things along with a gentle word.

I'm trying to figure out if there's a meaningful difference between "a" and "one," and struggling to find any relevant difference.

I didn't know that the rules involved evaluation of what "we wanted" or any evaluation of intent, but I'm open to suggestions.

If I told you that you could get "a" car wash at Joes Car Wash, would it prevent you from washing your car more than once while you were there?

Gary

That's not a restriction.

If you told me that I could have "a" free car wash sometime today, I don't think that means I can go at 10 am and then again at 6 pm. I think that means what it says--"a" free car wash--one.

Some languages don't even recognize a difference between "a" and "one." I've noticed that a lot of people who speak Spanish as a native language will use the two words interchangeably.

I'm all for creative linguistics, but the distinction between singular and plural seems like a pretty bright line.

I don't think it really matters all that much, but why use singular language in the rules if not to restrict it to one sight picture?

[Nik Habicht]

O.K., I'll play along for a moment: It's one sight picture. What do you do about the competitor who tracks across the targets he can see from the start position?

[h2osport]

My outlook is simple. The shooter must be ready when it's their time to shoot. No excuses.Eeither you are ready or you're not. If you step into the box then step back out you need to be on the clock. Why? You are wasting the time of others and should receive some penalty for not being ready to shoot when called. You make my point by speaking about the factors involved with 90-100 shooters. Respect your fellow shooters and be ready when called.

I was gonna respond, but not sure it is worth it. Just curious how many people would be willing to reset, run the timer or scoreboard, or pick brass with your opinions enforced. Seems to me much more time would be wasted waiting for people to help out.

Randy

[Sarge]

Yes. Once you step away from the starting position you should be on the clock. If i had my way stepping into the start position without ear or eye protection or forgetting your mags should get you a DQ as your mind is somewhere else which is dangerous when handling a weapon. Just my opinion mind you.

I'm surprised your range members don't take the offending shooter around the back berm and beat the hell out of them. That would be more effective than a DQ.

After thinking this over I think these kinds of comments are counter productive and add nothing to the discussion at hand. Let's all please try to refrain from making any hurtful comments. West Texas Granny is entitled to her opinions just like the rest of us while on this forum and is free to conduct herself any way she sees fit at her local range.

Also, please , no name calling. I'm sure West Texas Granny is not a troll like some have accused her of being.

I only post these questions so that we can hopefully all learn something. If you can't help the thread achieve that goal then please don't post in it.

Thanks much

[twodownzero]

O.K., I'll play along for a moment: It's one sight picture. What do you do about the competitor who tracks across the targets he can see from the start position?

This is a very good criticism, but it ultimately misses the issue. If the BOD instituted a rule that cannot be enforced because it is administratively difficult or impossible, that doesn't give us carte blanche to change the rule to whatever we want to change it to. In other words, the feasibility of the rule has nothing to do with what it actually says and means.

Our enforcement is based on the meaning of the rule, of which we can, and do argue about what sources of authority are relevant to determine that meaning. If you read some of my old posts, I generally try to look at the actual text of the rule, or look at uses of similar text elsewhere in the rule book. Other people think that the "intent" matters or some people keep copies of old rule books and talk about "history" of the rules. Some might even think that the minutes from the BOD's meeting could shed some light on the "meaning" of the rules (a process I would absolutely oppose). But no matter what sort of evidence we deem important to determine what the rules really mean, we, as range officers, have zero power to change their effect. Our role is to enforce the rules to the best of our ability, but any change in the effect of a rule is, at the very least, an RO mistake, if not misconduct on our part.

Considering I just realized that the singular language is there, I don't have a good answer, yet. But maybe this thread will produce one.

"Sight picture" exists one more place in the magical blue book--in the glossary.

Sight picture . . . . . . . . . .Aiming at a target without actually shooting at it.

It appears that the definition here also uses singular language, and that a competitor who tracks across "targets" has taken sight "pictures." Also, another strange deficiency with this definition is that it doesn't seem to matter whether the competitor actually looks at the sights, and that once the competitor has 'aimed' at the target, he has taken his sight picture--which seems to me like a definition that proves too much.

I think the only practical solution to this is that we need to amend the rules to allow for 'sight pictures' if we want the current practice to continue and have textual support in the rules, but I'm open to any suggestion that doesn't involve ignoring the text and doing whatever we want.

After thinking this over I think these kinds of comments are counter productive and add nothing to the discussion at hand. Let's all please try to refrain from making any hurtful comments. West Texas Granny is entitled to her opinions just like the rest of us while on this forum and is free to conduct herself any way she sees fit at her local range.

Also, please , no name calling. I'm sure West Texas Granny is not a troll like some have accused her of being.

I don't know what the definition of a troll is, but certain nameless newer posters in the rule forum have been posting inflammatory things lately that are insulting to our sport, ignorant of the role of range officers and the rules, and advocate positions that arguably violate the intellectual property rights of the USPSA. The same individual remains anonymous here, whereas the norm of this website is to use one's own name or to post in a manner that recognizes that most of us have met a significant number of the others in person as a matter of courtesy. For example, a quick count of the participants in this thread recognizes that I've met at least five of the people posting in this thread at some point or another. I mean this in the most respectful way possible when I say that this particular individual makes me look tame in comparison, and really has me wondering if the moderators aren't going to crack down, because while this forum is normally cordial, the tone lately has been particularly nasty, and every thread that goes that direction seems to surround just one poster.

Given that the rules forum here is, I think, particularly valuable, and given that Brian has stated in no uncertain terms that the rules forum is so problematic that he might favor scrapping it altogether, it'd seem that a sincere and nice request not to feed a troll isn't too far out of line. If it is, please let me know, because I think this thread presents some pretty important issues, and I'd really appreciate it if we could discuss those rather than discussing whether a shooter who comes to the line sans hearing protection or magazines must be 'on the clock,' because anyone who is a Range Officer or has shot even a single match should already know the answer as to what happens in those situations and that they are not 'on the clock' during the time it takes to retrieve their hearing protection and/or magazines.

[Gary Stevens]

While no longer in the RMI group, I never believed singularular "a" in this rule was limiting to just one. I would hope that if we wanted only one sight picture we would have used the word one. Of course there are limits that at some time you just have to move things along with a gentle word.

I'm trying to figure out if there's a meaningful difference between "a" and "one," and struggling to find any relevant difference.

I didn't know that the rules involved evaluation of what "we wanted" or any evaluation of intent, but I'm open to suggestions.

If I told you that you could get "a" car wash at Joes Car Wash, would it prevent you from washing your car more than once while you were there?

Gary

That's not a restriction.

If you told me that I could have "a" free car wash sometime today, I don't think that means I can go at 10 am and then again at 6 pm. I think that means what it says--"a" free car wash--one.

Some languages don't even recognize a difference between "a" and "one." I've noticed that a lot of people who speak Spanish as a native language will use the two words interchangeably.

I'm all for creative linguistics, but the distinction between singular and plural seems like a pretty bright line.

I don't think it really matters all that much, but why use singular language in the rules if not to restrict it to one sight picture?

To quote that great philosopher Rodney King, "can't we all just get along"?

[GrumpyOne]

WTG said:

So I guess at your range it's mass confusion because when people step to the line they suddenly realize oops I don't have any mags,weapon, eye or hearing protection. Of course now everyone has to wait because the shooter is now running around trying to find their equipment so they can shoot the COF. Must be fun on match day at your range.

And yes at our range when you are called to the line/ starting position our shooters are ready and they are not running around looking for their equipment as you indicate that shooters at your range do.

Well then , I'd suggest you stay at your range, where the rules fit your idea of how they should be, and maybe stop commenting on things outside of your little world.

Edited January 9, 2012 by GrumpyOne

[GrumpyOne]

Double tap....

Edited January 9, 2012 by GrumpyOne

[Flexmoney]

Yes. Once you step away from the starting position you should be on the clock. If i had my way stepping into the start position without ear or eye protection or forgetting your mags should get you a DQ as your mind is somewhere else which is dangerous when handling a weapon. Just my opinion mind you.

I'm surprised your range members don't take the offending shooter around the back berm and beat the hell out of them. That would be more effective than a DQ.

After thinking this over I think these kinds of comments are counter productive and add nothing to the discussion at hand. Let's all please try to refrain from making any hurtful comments. West Texas Granny is entitled to her opinions just like the rest of us while on this forum and is free to conduct herself any way she sees fit at her local range.

Also, please , no name calling. I'm sure West Texas Granny is not a troll like some have accused her of being.

I only post these questions so that we can hopefully all learn something. If you can't help the thread achieve that goal then please don't post in it.

Thanks much

Wow. I was going to write that....nearly word for word.