6.2.5.1 - Should it be changed?

[diehli]

Rule 6.2.5.1 is about how if you declare a Division and for whatever reason your equipment doesn't meet it, you're penalized by being sent to Open.

6.2.5.1

However, if a competitor fails to satisfy the equipment or other requirements of a declared Division during a course of fire, the competitor will be placed in Open Division, if available, otherwise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

It's simple to administrate, definitely, but why are we penalizing people so harshly for what might be honest mistakes? Particularly when it's not that much harder to move someone to another Division (or power factor) that their equipment more closely matches.

Perhaps the greatest injustice occurs when someone screws up in loading their mags and puts one too many in in Production, Limited 10, or Singlestack Major. (From the "Are You F@#$ing Kidding Me?" File was the competitor—whose name escapes me; Dave something, methinks—that was booted from Production to Open [at the Nats, IINM] for inserting a mag with 11 rounds in it at LAMR and racking one in to start the stage with 10+1 as allowed by the Rules; yeah, that absurdity's been handled, but, nevertheless, it points out the injustice, particularly when there was zero competitive advantage gained.)

Isn't it enough of a penalty that they're moved from Limited-10 or Production to Limited, or from Singlestack Major to Minor (like IPSC does)? It almost seems systemically vindictive to move someone to Open for something of that nature.

With some of the good Division changes we have coming in 2013 (thinking the removal of the inadministrable 500 number and "external recoil reduction devices" language in Limited, not the Production TP minimum, which will hopefully be rescinded soon), I'd argue a rethink of this rule is appropriate in the interest of competitive equity and maybe just not pissing people off. Figuring out what Division a gun and ancillary equipment meets isn't rocket surgery, particularly where there's a simple mistake such as the round count thing or the application of grip tape in a disallowed spot.

So, is this just much ado about nothing and the results of 6.2.5.1 don't bother anybody else?

[Jim Norman]

The 'mistake' may or may not be honest. Actually if it is not 'honest' it is also not a mistake. It could then be covered under 10.6 USLC and the shooter could be DQ'd.

the 10+1 situation and the mag in pocket situation are already handled. Now if a shooter loads 10+1 or more after the beep, he goes to Open. Are you saying he should go to Limited? or that he should get a procedural?

How do we know the shooters intent with his 'Mistake' Hey if no one catches me I can put tape here or load that there. Shouldn't this type of action be sanctioned?

[Corey]

Something that serious (shooting a ss gun in Open is a serious penalty IMO) should prevent any "mistakes" from happening, no matter how honest they may be. There are rules for each division and if you dont follow them, there are penalties assessed. We all know what the penalties are ahead of time(follow the guidelines ror shoot Open for the day), and we have ample ability to adjust gear to fit within those rules.

[bikerburgess]

I think the rule is fine as is. if the penalty for cheating (or inadvertantly breaking a division rule) was just a bump to the next aplicable division we would see lots of people realy pushing the edge of the rules and it would make cheating a more atractive option.

Mike

[Flexmoney]

Man up!

Screw it up...go to Open.

If not, there is no disincentive to cheat the system. If getting caught only puts you in the division you should have properly declared in the first place...

[JakeMartens]

The 'mistake' may or may not be honest. Actually if it is not 'honest' it is also not a mistake. It could then be covered under 10.6 USLC and the shooter could be DQ'd.

the 10+1 situation and the mag in pocket situation are already handled. Now if a shooter loads 10+1 or more after the beep, he goes to Open. Are you saying he should go to Limited? or that he should get a procedural?

How do we know the shooters intent with his 'Mistake' Hey if no one catches me I can put tape here or load that there. Shouldn't this type of action be sanctioned?

I have witnessed at an Area match a shooter that on more than one stage must have mistakenly loaded his .40 single stack mags with 9 instead of 8 by doing so skipping reloads and not caught by RO

It is the rule, know the rules of the sport you are shooting in or get penalized

[JFlowers]

While the rule can seem very harsh in some cases, the administration of another option would likely be very complex. The Major to Minor penalty works in a very narrow set of circumstances. But what about everything else? How do you build a vast set of rules to cover all the possible cases? As is, the rule covers just about any case with a simple A to B penalty.

As others have said, know the rules. Penalties are suppose to be harsh, keeps you from making mistakes twice.

[rvb]

and if the penalty for doing 60 in a 55 was $5????

some may do it 'cause they can get away with it, some may not realize they are doing it. either way, the penalty has to make you not want to do it. Bump to open is the right rule, imo.

-rvb

[Skydiver]

I think that current rule that bumps shooters to Open is appropriate.

Let's says for a moment, though, that a shooter just gets bumped to a new accommodating division rather than Open. JA's opinion was that during that transition period of the bump, the shooter is allowed to reconfigure their gun/gear. Is your opinion that the shooter still must stick with the gear/configuration they started the match with, or are they also allowed to reconfigure their gear to the maximum allowed by their new division? For example Production shooter loads 11 instead of just 10 and gets moved to Limited. After getting moved, can they add on a mag well, swap to extended base pads, adjust their pouches, put on a Ghost holster, and load up their mags to capacity? Or must they continue the match with the gear they setup with? Can their gun suddenly lose a front sight, and so they ask the RM if they can swap to the 2011 that happens to be in the back of their car?

Edited January 11, 2012 by Skydiver

[bbbean]

I think the rule is fine as is. if the penalty for cheating (or inadvertantly breaking a division rule) was just a bump to the next aplicable division we would see lots of people realy pushing the edge of the rules and it would make cheating a more atractive option.

Mike

+1!

Besides, divisional requirements are pretty easy to meet. It just isn't that hard to keep track of how many rounds are in your mags or to make sure your equipment meets spec.

[Reshoot]

Rule 6.2.5.1 is about how if you declare a Division and for whatever reason your equipment doesn't meet it, you're penalized by being sent to Open.

6.2.5.1

However, if a competitor fails to satisfy the equipment or other requirements of a declared Division during a course of fire, the competitor will be placed in Open Division, if available, otherwise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

It's simple to administrate, definitely, but why are we penalizing people so harshly for what might be honest mistakes? Particularly when it's not that much harder to move someone to another Division (or power factor) that their equipment more closely matches.

Perhaps the greatest injustice occurs when someone screws up in loading their mags and puts one too many in in Production, Limited 10, or Singlestack Major. (From the "Are You F@#$ing Kidding Me?" File was the competitor—whose name escapes me; Dave something, methinks—that was booted from Production to Open [at the Nats, IINM] for inserting a mag with 11 rounds in it at LAMR and racking one in to start the stage with 10+1 as allowed by the Rules; yeah, that absurdity's been handled, but, nevertheless, it points out the injustice, particularly when there was zero competitive advantage gained.)

Isn't it enough of a penalty that they're moved from Limited-10 or Production to Limited, or from Singlestack Major to Minor (like IPSC does)? It almost seems systemically vindictive to move someone to Open for something of that nature.

With some of the good Division changes we have coming in 2013 (thinking the removal of the inadministrable 500 number and "external recoil reduction devices" language in Limited, not the Production TP minimum, which will hopefully be rescinded soon), I'd argue a rethink of this rule is appropriate in the interest of competitive equity and maybe just not pissing people off. Figuring out what Division a gun and ancillary equipment meets isn't rocket surgery, particularly where there's a simple mistake such as the round count thing or the application of grip tape in a disallowed spot.

So, is this just much ado about nothing and the results of 6.2.5.1 don't bother anybody else?

It does not bother me. The rules are the rules! You can't make it any clearer, can you?

A simple mistake? Seriously?!

[HS101]

If you take the bite out of the penalty, how many "gamers" would just bend the rules in production knowing the worst that could happen is they are moved to limited? Or Single Stack moved to L-10... There would be way too many what ifs, it should be thats, etc...

Screw up - - Welcome to OPEN!

better than Screw up - - Welcome to DQ!

[aztecdriver]

I like 6.2.5.1 for the simple reason is it removes any subjectiveness by an official to determine where a person goes based on their interpretation of the division of what their equipment qualifies... Everyone short of sticking a greater than 171mm mag in their gun, can go into open. It's fine the way it is....

[SLM]

As an Open shooter I don't agree with it, or to be more specific what I think is missing and maybe it's somewhere else in the rules but I can't find it. I think that if you are bumped you should not be eligible to receive a prize be it a plaque, money, etc.

Say a very high A classed limited shooter, gets bumped to open for an over length mag. Said shooter has classed in open just goofing off at a local special classifier match and has the required four. No matter how low they are s/he is going to be B classed. So now there is an A class shooter shooting against B class. That I see as unfair to the B Open people who are playing their game by the rules.

If you are bumped for a rules infraction I think you should also be scored as unclassified. You still get to see where you finish but you don't get to ruin somebody else's game.

Edit cuz I fat fingered my phone keyboard.

Edited January 14, 2012 by SLM

[rvb]

As an Open shooter I don't agree with it, or to be more specific what I think is missing and maybe it's somewhere else in the rules but I can't find it. I think that if you are bumped you should not be eligible to receive a prize be it a plaque, money, etc.

Say a very high A classed limited shooter, gets bumped to open for an over length mag. Said shooter has classed in open just goofing off at a local special classifier match and has the required four. No matter how low they are s/he is going to be B classed. So now there is an A class shooter shooting against B class. That I see as unfair to the B Open people who are playing their game by the rules.

If you are bumped for a rules infraction I think you should also be scored as unclassified. You still get to see where you finish but you don't get to ruin somebody else's game.

Edit cuz I fat fingered my phone keyboard.

Good point, and I could agree with that. Not much of a penalty if you go home with a trophy or something off a prize table.

although.... they would most likely be competing w/ gear from another division, and if they came from PD would be shooting a minor game, so maybe enough penalty IS built in there? Unless people are carrying a spare open gun with them (when I shoot PD, I carry big mags 'just in case,' but that's it). And you could argue that it's not a "penalty" so much as a catch-all correction for not shooting with the division-appropriate gear. I guess I'll have to think about this one....

If an A shooter classed in B class in open wins B class w/ production or Lim or SS gear, is that a problem? I'm starting to change my mind.

-rvb

Edited January 14, 2012 by rvb

[George Jones]

You mess up Division requirements. Regardless of intent, you get moved to Open.

It would not be a penalty at all if you got "bumped" to the Division you should have been in in the first place.

Too much of an invitation to "bend the rules".

And if you can place well in Open despite using a "lesser" gun, well, good for you. Just imagine how much better the results would have been if you had used a real Open gun.

[skeeter]

for the most part i think the rule is fine the way it is.

but(isn't there always a "but")at our section match a couple years ago a shooter on my squad was shooting an FN 45 in prodution. even though the gun was stock and on the list for some reason it wouldn't in to the box. so he got bumped to open, and even though his ammo made major he was scored minor because he declared it minor for production. this seemed a little harsh to me.

[Skydiver]

for the most part i think the rule is fine the way it is.

but(isn't there always a "but")at our section match a couple years ago a shooter on my squad was shooting an FN 45 in prodution. even though the gun was stock and on the list for some reason it wouldn't in to the box. so he got bumped to open, and even though his ammo made major he was scored minor because he declared it minor for production. this seemed a little harsh to me.

Possibly the big base pads on the FNP-45 competition model is too blame.

[skeeter]

for the most part i think the rule is fine the way it is.

but(isn't there always a "but")at our section match a couple years ago a shooter on my squad was shooting an FN 45 in prodution. even though the gun was stock and on the list for some reason it wouldn't in to the box. so he got bumped to open, and even though his ammo made major he was scored minor because he declared it minor for production. this seemed a little harsh to me.

Possibly the big base pads on the FNP-45 competition model is too blame.

i think that may have been it.

[ima45dv8]

I like the rule as currently written/administered. Is it punitive? Is it harsh? Yeah...and should be.

I know there are some otherwise innocent offenders caught in the net, but my experience tells me they are the minority.

[whitedog]

Play within the rules of yer division or get spanked. Harsh? Yes. However it is fair for everyone involved...not arbitrary in any way. Do this.....well this happens.

[HI5-O]

Play the game, better know the rules...break the rules (intentional or not), the penalty is already spelled out for the offender.

Don't like the rules, don't play the game or work on changing the rules. In the meantime, follow the rules as written.

I say don't change it.

[diehli]

Okay, I'm on board. Hard enough spanking so that those that do it unintentionally don't do it unintentionally again. I think the commonsense stuff's been codified, so there shouldn't be any further issues there.

Next question: if this is a recurring issue for a competitor (that is s/he's been warned or subjected to 6.2.5.1 on more than 1 occasion for the same issue or, perhaps, even a similar one), should there be some way to track it so that the grossest offenders can be DQ'd, or is the move to Open sufficient?

If someone's continually trying to sneak something by without being noticed, 10.6.1. If they've been 6.2.5.1'd before for the same issue, that seems like a knowing attempt to contravene the rules and should be dealt with more harshly than a mistake.

But can an RO/RM 10.6.1 someone based on conduct they know has happened before that indicates it's not a simple mistake? Is 6.2.5.1 the only recourse in that situation?

[aztecdriver]

Okay, I'm on board. Hard enough spanking so that those that do it unintentionally don't do it unintentionally again. I think the commonsense stuff's been codified, so there shouldn't be any further issues there.

Next question: if this is a recurring issue for a competitor (that is s/he's been warned or subjected to 6.2.5.1 on more than 1 occasion for the same issue or, perhaps, even a similar one), should there be some way to track it so that the grossest offenders can be DQ'd, or is the move to Open sufficient?

If someone's continually trying to sneak something by without being noticed, 10.6.1. If they've been 6.2.5.1'd before for the same issue, that seems like a knowing attempt to contravene the rules and should be dealt with more harshly than a mistake.

But can an RO/RM 10.6.1 someone based on conduct they know has happened before that indicates it's not a simple mistake? Is 6.2.5.1 the only recourse in that situation?

Very difficult to prove, wouldn't it be, unless you had first hand bumped him/her to open the previous time? This is why it should be done whether it's a local or not. If you let someone get away with it - intentional mistake or not - they'll never fix it, because they got away with it before. Intentionally --- or not.

[Skydiver]

Okay, I'm on board. Hard enough spanking so that those that do it unintentionally don't do it unintentionally again. I think the commonsense stuff's been codified, so there shouldn't be any further issues there.

Next question: if this is a recurring issue for a competitor (that is s/he's been warned or subjected to 6.2.5.1 on more than 1 occasion for the same issue or, perhaps, even a similar one), should there be some way to track it so that the grossest offenders can be DQ'd, or is the move to Open sufficient?

If someone's continually trying to sneak something by without being noticed, 10.6.1. If they've been 6.2.5.1'd before for the same issue, that seems like a knowing attempt to contravene the rules and should be dealt with more harshly than a mistake.

But can an RO/RM 10.6.1 someone based on conduct they know has happened before that indicates it's not a simple mistake? Is 6.2.5.1 the only recourse in that situation?

What? Like a shooter whose holster seems to keep shifting the gun out to more than 2", or whose mag pouches keep slipping forward in front of the hip bone in Production or Single Stack? First couple of matches bump them to Open, and then eventually, just DQ them with 10.6.1? Personally, I would just keep bumping them to Open.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Skydiver