Additions to WSB for safety issues

[deacon12224]

As we know, 3.2.2 requires that the WSB be read verbatim to each competitor during the stage briefing. My question is when, if ever, is the RO allowed to add anything to the stage briefing? I understand that the RM must approve any changes to the WSB. However, at almost every match I have been to the RO sometimes adds comments after reading the WSB. Examples would be:

1. "Please be careful shooting at T7 as it is very close to the 180."

2. "Please make sure that you turn, then draw" for an uprange start

3. "Please don't sweep your hand as you open that door"

You get the picture. All of these warnings were probably brought on by someone in an earlier squad doing exactly what is being warned about and getting a DQ. If the guy in the earlier sqaud had these warnings, maybe he would still be shooting instead of heading home.

I am torn on how to handle this as an RO, I have a resposibility to keep everyone safe and to warn of possible dangers, but I also must present every shooter with a level playing field and not give later shooters an advantage by warning of a possible DQ threat that they hadn't thought of.

What say you all? Should we just read the approved WSB and let the chips fall where they may?

[Lewiston]

If the comments are made to emphasize safety then I see no reason not to make them as that is our primary responibility as ROs. I don't view this as giving the competitor an advantange as much as instilling the fact that bad things can happen if safety is not paramount in their approach of the COF.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Lewiston

[twodownzero]

For me, the primary concern is competitive equity. I would be glad to say "watch the 180" and even point out the location so long as I didn't think it would degrade competitive equity.

If T7 was close to the 180, I would fix that before anyone shot the stage.

I would also not warn about sweeping on a door, or do anything other than change my inflection when saying, "turn, THEN draw" if that were the instruction. Those two issues are common enough that most should get the message, and if they don't, another warning won't help.

I think the key is to be at least a little flexible, within the relevant rules, while still delivering the WSB verbatim.

The same goes for range commands. Follow the letter of the rule first, but safety warnings are permissible and a well-accepted part of being a good RO.

It's going to take me a long time to become a "good" RO, but I try to practice as much as is possible.

[Flatland Shooter]

If the comments are made to emphasize safety then I see no reason not to make them as that is our primary responibility as ROs. I don't view this as giving the competitor an advantange as much as instilling the fact that bad things can happen if safety is not paramount in their approach of the COF.

Per Rule 3.2.3 the RM can approve a change to the WSB at any time for reasons of clarity, consistency or safety. To keep it all legal, as an RO, I would run any revisions to the written stage briefing by the RM for his blessing.

As for "keeping it a level playing field", the changes that fall under Rule 2.3.1 must be RM approved. And under Rule 2.3.2, the competitors must be advised of changes under that rule. Note that under the changes listed under 2.3.1, "changes to enhance safety" are not listed.

So as far as I can tell, RM approved changes to the WSB are OK and do not require notifying prior shooters as long as they are safety related. JMHO.

Bill

edited to repair my crappy writing style.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Flatland Shooter

[whitedog]

At the only shoot I have worked so far, we looked over the stage before any shooters showed up. Made judgements on what to tell the shooters as far as 180 and such. Then every shooter was told the same thing. RM thought it was a good thing to do. Worked out well.

[Nik Habicht]

I am torn on how to handle this as an RO, I have a resposibility to keep everyone safe and to warn of possible dangers, but I also must present every shooter with a level playing field and not give later shooters an advantage by warning of a possible DQ threat that they hadn't thought of.

Safety always trumps competitive equity, right?

[deacon12224]

Let me give a concrete example of my concern. At a major match last year, we had a stage that had two pull handles on ropes that opened ports which had to be held open while you shot. For most shooters, this required them to shoot through one port stong hand only and one port weak hand only. However, being the "free stylers" that we all are, some would reach across their body and pull the hande with their weak hand and try to shoot strong hand on both ports. This was not something that was really anticipated but was certainly legal under the WSB and some shooters with long arms could pull that off. After one shooter DQed himself by sweeping his arm and one shooter very nearly did, we started saying something at the end of the stage briefing to the effect of "However you decide to handle the ports, be careful of not sweeping your arm or hand".

That seems like an entirely reasonable thing to do for and RO. However, all of the squads that get that warning are going to be at a slight advantage over the previous squads that did not get that warning. The shooter that got DQed earlier would probably still be competing in the match had he gotten that warning. You may also have shooters that are planning on doing the "reach across their body thing" and then change their minds when they hear the ROs warning about not sweeping. The RO has now given some shooters an advantage that others did not have.

I guess I am still up in the air on this one. Probably the thing to do is to stick to the WSB unless you have run it by the RM. That's why they make the big money afterall.

Edited January 25, 2012 by deacon12224

[JThompson]

You don't ad-lib on a WSB. You read it verbatim every time. IF you have something you think needs to be addressed get on the radio and call the RM over and let her make the call. If it's a level 1 with no RM, go with the MD or designer and work it out that way. When you figure it out you write in in the WSB and then you read the new one verbatim too.

No jokes, no crazy inflections, etc "Just the facts mam."

JT

[whitedog]

Yes, that's what I thought. That's why the RM gave the high holy ok after we looked over the stage. Every one got the same WSB, and it took some things into account safety wise. Not sure if the other stage workers did it, but our stage had no DQ'S based on briefing.

[bbbean]

1. "Please be careful shooting at T7 as it is very close to the 180."

2. "Please make sure that you turn, then draw" for an uprange start

3. "Please don't sweep your hand as you open that door"

While I agree that in principle, the WSB should be identical for every squad, I'm having a hard time imagining how any of the examples above create a competitive advantage or disadvantage.

Would you be similarly concerned about RO's who answer competitor questions like "I was going to start in this position, is this legal?", "Do I have to touch the marks with my palms or just my fingers?", or "If I engage that target from here, will I be breaking the 180?"

BB

Edited January 25, 2012 by bbbean

[Flexmoney]

If it is a safety concern...something we DQ for...then it is a safety concern. It needs to be mentioned, one way or another.

[Gary Stevens]

If it is a safety concern...something we DQ for...then it is a safety concern. It needs to be mentioned, one way or another.

Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate, why?

We provide rulebookls to members one way or the other, online or hardcopy, why do we need to repeat what is already in the rulebook?

Now for a Level 1 match, yeah put me in coach as you will always have new folks who do not know the rules.

At Level 2 and above, why do we need to tell folks to not break the 180, or sweep their hand, or shoot a round over the berm, or any of the other multitude of things that can get you DQ'd?

Putting helmet on at this time.

[Singlestack]

I agree Gary. Kinda like "Do you understand the course of fire?".

[aztecdriver]

If it is a safety concern...something we DQ for...then it is a safety concern. It needs to be mentioned, one way or another.

Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate, why?

We provide rulebookls to members one way or the other, online or hardcopy, why do we need to repeat what is already in the rulebook?

Now for a Level 1 match, yeah put me in coach as you will always have new folks who do not know the rules.

At Level 2 and above, why do we need to tell folks to not break the 180, or sweep their hand, or shoot a round over the berm, or any of the other multitude of things that can get you DQ'd?

Putting helmet on at this time.

Gary,

I was thinking this, just had not gotten around to responding. Here's the deal - and I have some experience on this stage - I may have been one of those people that "almost" DQ'd. Let me explain.

On our squad of ROs, we talked about that problem ahead of time when walking the stage. I was planning on going weakhand through the port, but when it came time to do that - I grabbed the handle with my weakhand before transitioning the gun so I just went into the port. I kept my weak hand pressed against my face and reached in front of my arms with my gun in the strong hand. I didn't notice that I had done it until I needed to stretch to keep my eyes behind the gun with my left arm in my mouth. At which point I said - wow, that wasn't what I planned to do.

I then had someone tell me (not the staff) that I could have DQ'd because the possibility of sweeping myself was there - of which I looked crosseyed at everyone and said - "Really, despite reaching across myself - at what point did my muzzle come close to passing over my arm? My reach for the handle was high until the gun was well past my arm. I was basically hugging myself with my left arm and the guns muzzle was two feet in front of it - what was the problem?" Just because someone else has the possibility of sweeping themselves based on their awareness during their run doesn't automatically make me anymore susceptible.

I worked another stage that had an uprange start with a draw that was at about the 75 degree to the median on the left side facing down range. Think about all of the women shooters you have seen with that "appendix" style holster rig? If they would turn 90 degrees towards the targets and stop, draw they would DQ because the muzzle of that gun would still be 20 degrees uprange. I warned every squad coming to the line about the turn and draw there. It worked - no DQs for the draw - one for a 180 later in the course.

As CRO, you have got to walk the stage - at speed - pretending to shoot the thing, in a few conceivable ways, while someone pretends to time you to see these things and catch any warnings you are going to attempt to provide ahead of time and chat with the RM about them. Nik's right - fix anything that's dangerous, but every port we need to open, every door we need to pull - anything that involves reaching in front of ourselves is going to be a potential to sweep. If we warned about all of them - what's the point?

Changing the briefing in mid match for a warning. I'd really like to hear more discussion on that. I tend to try and avoid it by catching the contingencies up front.

[Gary Stevens]

I agree Gary. Kinda like "Do you understand the course of fire?".

My normal answer is "we'll see when the timer goes off".

[Nik Habicht]

If it is a safety concern...something we DQ for...then it is a safety concern. It needs to be mentioned, one way or another.

Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate, why?

We provide rulebookls to members one way or the other, online or hardcopy, why do we need to repeat what is already in the rulebook?

Now for a Level 1 match, yeah put me in coach as you will always have new folks who do not know the rules.

At Level 2 and above, why do we need to tell folks to not break the 180, or sweep their hand, or shoot a round over the berm, or any of the other multitude of things that can get you DQ'd?

Putting helmet on at this time.

We might not need to generally speaking -- but we might want to for specific situations, that come up after the match has started.

Ideally, these things would be caught as possible during the walkthrough, and changed before first shot....

[Nik Habicht]

I agree Gary. Kinda like "Do you understand the course of fire?".

My normal answer is "we'll see when the timer goes off".

My smart-ass answer is "the first range command is make ready, why are you talking in my ear?"

[twodownzero]

I agree Gary. Kinda like "Do you understand the course of fire?".

My normal answer is "we'll see when the timer goes off".

My smart-ass answer is "the first range command is make ready, why are you talking in my ear?"

You're too nice. I prefer "stick to the range commands" or "I'm going to have the commands printed on a card for you guys."

Glad I'm not the only one with some humor about this.

[Chills1994]

as an MD, I feel like I am more in the entertainment business than I am in the gotchya business. I still have a fairly new "club" with fairly new shooters, so I probably do tend to overemphasize the safety aspect.

[Nik Habicht]

as an MD, I feel like I am more in the entertainment business than I am in the gotchya business. I still have a fairly new "club" with fairly new shooters, so I probably do tend to overemphasize the safety aspect.

That's the attitude that'll grow the sport.....

[Flexmoney]

If it is a safety concern...something we DQ for...then it is a safety concern. It needs to be mentioned, one way or another.

Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate, why?

We provide rulebookls to members one way or the other, online or hardcopy, why do we need to repeat what is already in the rulebook?

Now for a Level 1 match, yeah put me in coach as you will always have new folks who do not know the rules.

At Level 2 and above, why do we need to tell folks to not break the 180, or sweep their hand, or shoot a round over the berm, or any of the other multitude of things that can get you DQ'd?

Putting helmet on at this time.

Really?

It's not about the rules. It's about somebody going home with an extra hole in them!!

If we observe something that has become a safety issue (which we DQ for)...something that is overlooked but is happening to those that aren't readily aware of it...it needs mentioned.

If not, you can take the timer and I'll go home.

We aren't issuing DQ's because of competitive equity. We issue them because there are legit safety concerns involved.

[Gary Stevens]

If it is a safety concern...something we DQ for...then it is a safety concern. It needs to be mentioned, one way or another.

Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate, why?

We provide rulebookls to members one way or the other, online or hardcopy, why do we need to repeat what is already in the rulebook?

Now for a Level 1 match, yeah put me in coach as you will always have new folks who do not know the rules.

At Level 2 and above, why do we need to tell folks to not break the 180, or sweep their hand, or shoot a round over the berm, or any of the other multitude of things that can get you DQ'd?

Putting helmet on at this time.

Really?

It's not about the rules. It's about somebody going home with an extra hole in them!!

If we observe something that has become a safety issue (which we DQ for)...something that is overlooked but is happening to those that aren't readily aware of it...it needs mentioned.

If not, you can take the timer and I'll go home.

We aren't issuing DQ's because of competitive equity. We issue them because there are legit safety concerns involved.

I would think that if it is a safety issue of such importance that it needs to be brought to the shooters attention then it should be fixed and it is no longer a safety issue. Shooters want freestyle, that includes their actions. After all they control every aspect of their actions.

When we set up draws on the 180 we fail the shooter. When we set targets at the 180 we fail the shooter. When we make the shooter get into unsafe positions, we fail the shooter. Putting bandaids on the failure of the staff by warning them of a safety issue we caused, is the easy way out, IMO.

Edited January 27, 2012 by Gary Stevens

[Sarge]

I agree Gary. Kinda like "Do you understand the course of fire?".

My normal answer is "we'll see when the timer goes off".

My smart-ass answer is "the first range command is make ready, why are you talking in my ear?"

You're too nice. I prefer "stick to the range commands" or "I'm going to have the commands printed on a card for you guys."

Glad I'm not the only one with some humor about this.

I guess A guy could be a real wise ass and have the range commands put on the back of his shirt!

[sperman]

I agree Gary. Kinda like "Do you understand the course of fire?".

My normal answer is "we'll see when the timer goes off".

My smart-ass answer is "the first range command is make ready, why are you talking in my ear?"

You're too nice. I prefer "stick to the range commands" or "I'm going to have the commands printed on a card for you guys."

Glad I'm not the only one with some humor about this.

I guess A guy could be a real wise ass and have the range commands put on the back of his shirt!

I've thought about having one of those shirts made for Level 2 matches.

[Singlestack]

If it is a safety concern...something we DQ for...then it is a safety concern. It needs to be mentioned, one way or another.

Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate, why?

We provide rulebookls to members one way or the other, online or hardcopy, why do we need to repeat what is already in the rulebook?

Now for a Level 1 match, yeah put me in coach as you will always have new folks who do not know the rules.

At Level 2 and above, why do we need to tell folks to not break the 180, or sweep their hand, or shoot a round over the berm, or any of the other multitude of things that can get you DQ'd?

Putting helmet on at this time.

Really?

It's not about the rules. It's about somebody going home with an extra hole in them!!

If we observe something that has become a safety issue (which we DQ for)...something that is overlooked but is happening to those that aren't readily aware of it...it needs mentioned.

If not, you can take the timer and I'll go home.

We aren't issuing DQ's because of competitive equity. We issue them because there are legit safety concerns involved.

I would think that if it is a safety issue of such importance that it needs to be brought to the shooters attention then it should be fixed and it is no longer a safety issue. Shooters want freestyle, that includes their actions. After all they control every aspect of their actions.

When we set up draws on the 180 we fail the shooter. When we set targets at the 180 we fail the shooter. When we make the shooter get into unsafe positions, we fail the shooter. Putting bandaids on the failure of the staff by warning them of a safety issue we caused, is the easy way out, IMO.

+1

I don't need the rule book read to me at make ready.