8.3.3

[bikerburgess]

The thing that puzzles me is that we strive, in so many ways, to run things exactly the same way from shooter to shooter, from state to state, from Area to Area. We call it equity.

Yet is seems fair to start 3 guys on a squad at 4 seconds and then start the next guy in 1?

It is very fair that way you are supposed to react to the beep not stand by plus 2.5 seconds because you have timed the RO's cadence and he always hits the button at 3 seconds.

If the intent was to have a count down to the start signal then we would have timers that went beep, beep, BEEP so everybody would have a consistent count down, like the start gate for skiing or the lights at a drag strip.

Mike

[Sarge]

It is very fair that way you are supposed to react to the beep not stand by plus 2.5 seconds because you have timed the RO's cadence and he always hits the button at 3 seconds.

Using that logic why are we so concerned when certain props don't give a consistent performance and end up getting a stage tossed? As long as a door opens who cares if one guy got to tap it to open and the next guy had to kick it open?

Because it's inconsistent is why.

[Flexmoney]

The thing that puzzles me is that we strive, in so many ways, to run things exactly the same way from shooter to shooter, from state to state, from Area to Area. We call it equity.

Yet is seems fair to start 3 guys on a squad at 4 seconds and then start the next guy in 1?

Exactly the same , in this regard, is random...between 1-4 seconds.

I wish more of our RO's ran shooters in Steel Challenge. Actually...I wish Steel Challenge RO's used "random" a bit more...randomly. With 5 draws per stage...that really count...I can gain a REAL time on the match if the RO is running the beep at the same interval all day long. I will get his/her timing. It will benefit me.

[Skydiver]

Conversely, I always try to vary the time that I wait so that shooters don't catch on to a pattern and get an advantage on the start.

Me, too.

Me, three. If you give a consistent start beep, the shooters will start anticipating when you'll beep and will get a .3-ish jump on the beep...

Interestingly, in the Level I RO course I sat through recently, Mr. McMeanus recommended that, if you get a "StandbyBEEP" command, you turn to the RO and remind them about how long a second is... the "should" there is not to protect the RO being douchey or lazy... (he didn't say that last part, but that's was his point)

I recall that from a recent class by Troy, and I believe that Jay also makes the same point in his class.

Note the interesting paradox: by turning and reminding the RO immediately, you reacted to the Start Signal. You obviously heard the Start Signal because you are talking to the RO about it. The RO could just stand there and stare at you, or waggle timer at you as a non-verbal signal that "you are on the clock."

Personally, I would stand there for about 7 seconds not reacting, and then turn to the RO, and ask "Is there a problem?" (i.e. Not even acknowledge that there was a BEEP.)

[bikerburgess]

Consistency is the shooter reacting to the start signal. everybody gets the same start signal and it should be random to keep it consistent.

No you shouldn't start the first however many shooters with a 3 second pause and then hit the next with a 4 or 1 second pause, they should all be random otherwise shooter 1 is at a disadvantage to the shooters that got to learn the cadence and the shooter that got a different pause may creep and get hit with a procedural per rule 10.2.6. or just stand there for the extra 2 second counting in their head

The start signal is the only thing that the shooter should be using to start his course of fire, the rest of the commands are a question(are you ready?) and a notification (stand by) that the start signal is coming soon, and you may want to pay attention for it.

I just played with a reaction time tester and found that with a mouse I run about .2 seconds if I could eliminate that on every stage by knowing the cadence that would add up to a real advantage.

10.2.6 Acompetitor who is creeping (e.g. moving hands towards the handgun,

a reloading device or ammunition) or physically moving to a more

advantageous shooting position or posture at the start signal, will incur

one procedural penalty.

Mike

[whitedog]

I have not run many shooters, and only local, but I use words. Such as alligator, rubber goldfish, mainly nonsense. It keeps me from having an exact cadence, but they ate within about 1 1/2 to 3 seconds. I vary them with each shooter. Seems to work for me, and I have had no complaints...yet.

[lcs]

It is very fair that way you are supposed to react to the beep not stand by plus 2.5 seconds because you have timed the RO's cadence and he always hits the button at 3 seconds.

Using that logic why are we so concerned when certain props don't give a consistent performance and end up getting a stage tossed? As long as a door opens who cares if one guy got to tap it to open and the next guy had to kick it open?

Because it's inconsistent is why.

Only the 1 to 4 seconds is inconsistent, the BEEP is the same every time. In theory, no one gains an advantage or suffers a disadvantage, but a slow swinger for one GM is definitely an advantage if the other GM has to shoot a faster moving swinger.

[Vlad]

I don't buy this line of reasoning. I try to use close to the same timing for everyone. This is a competitive event, no? Not some form of whack-a-mole game? I don't see drag races varying the timing of the lights, downhill skiers being presented with random beeps, or runners with random gun shots. This is a game about shooting right, we don't actually score things that happen before the beep? I see that 1-4sec rule as a guideline for not rushing the beep before standby and don't hold the shooter there forever making him wonder if you fell asleep, not a license to play some gotcha game.

[Sarge]

not a license to play some gotcha game.

I wholeheartedly agree.

In a human I don't think it's possible to be totally random. Even using key words like the other poster mentioned will fall into a routine eventually.

And if you start telling yourself OK I have had some longer pauses this next guy is getting a short count in my mind you are screwing with the shooter. It's hard to explain I guess. I would never do anything to intentionally mess with a shooter during a COF but somehow not starting them the same seems like I would be unintentionally messing with them.

Once an RO starts thinking, "hmm, these guys are on to my timing, I better do something about that", he is playing a little game of gotcha. It's unavoidable.

I guess you could just set a timer to random start and hit it as soon as you say "stand by". Anything other than that and you are imposing your will on the shooter.

[mhs]

By 8.3.4 if you react the COF has started.

Ah, but has it-- by the strict letter of the rule?

8.3.4

"Start Signal"-- The signal for the competitor to begin their attempt at the course of fire. If a competitor fails to react to a start signal, for any reason, the Range Officer will confirm that the competitor is ready to attempt the course of fire, and will resume the range commands from "Are You Ready?".

I bolded the most pertinent words and phrases, as therein lies the ambiguity.

Is a "twitch" indicative of me beginning the CoF? I twitch when I hear rounds touching off in the next bay; I twitch when I hear them zipping around the top of the berm; I twitch when a fly lands on my nose; I twitch when I've got an itch in a "sensitive area".

More logically, the drawing of the pistol, movement of the feet out of the start position (or hands, if in a non-conventional start position), or even the firing of the first shot is indisputable evidence that I've begun the CoF. In fact, I would argue that it's the first shot only, as it's used in other portions of the Rule Book as a defining moment (i.e. reshoot or scored stage in the case of a malfunction).

Also note the "react" and "for any reason". It doesn't say anything about not hearing the start signal, but in fact gives the shooter full leeway to not react at all. Maybe they just didn't feel like moving-- that counts as "any reason". I won't go into the full implications of that rule, as it's written, but... there's a lot of room for the shooter.

Not sure where you see the ambiguity.

8.3.4 says: “Start Signal” – The signal for the competitor to begin their attempt at the course of fire. If a competitor fails to react to a start signal, for any

reason, the Range Officer will confirm that the competitor is ready to attempt the course of fire, and will resume the range commands from “Are You Ready?”.

I said "By 8.3.4 if you react the COF has started."

With mild paraphrasing, the rules say if the competitor doesn't react, the COF hasn't started. I said if he does react, it has.

Where's the ambiguity?

[Nik Habicht]

The thing that puzzles me is that we strive, in so many ways, to run things exactly the same way from shooter to shooter, from state to state, from Area to Area. We call it equity.

Yet is seems fair to start 3 guys on a squad at 4 seconds and then start the next guy in 1?

Assuming that you start them randomly, yes.....

If you start three competitors in a row at 4 seconds, and I'm that third guy -- I may be anticipating (jumping) the signal....

Basically, if you start everyone at the same time the first/second competitors get hosed, because they can't figure out that you're predictable....

If you start a bunch of folks at 3 seconds and then switch to 1 second for a shooter before running five shooters at 3 seconds and then switching back to 1 second for the next guy -- the 1 second competitors get hosed hard....

Randomly starting everyone between 1-4 seconds means that no one should be able to anticipate the beep....

[Nik Habicht]

It is very fair that way you are supposed to react to the beep not stand by plus 2.5 seconds because you have timed the RO's cadence and he always hits the button at 3 seconds.

Using that logic why are we so concerned when certain props don't give a consistent performance and end up getting a stage tossed? As long as a door opens who cares if one guy got to tap it to open and the next guy had to kick it open?

Because it's inconsistent is why.

Target presentation is different from starting a shooter.....

[Nik Habicht]

I don't buy this line of reasoning. I try to use close to the same timing for everyone. This is a competitive event, no? Not some form of whack-a-mole game? I don't see drag races varying the timing of the lights, downhill skiers being presented with random beeps, or runners with random gun shots. This is a game about shooting right, we don't actually score things that happen before the beep? I see that 1-4sec rule as a guideline for not rushing the beep before standby and don't hold the shooter there forever making him wonder if you fell asleep, not a license to play some gotcha game.

Not a matter of a gotcha game, rather an opportunity for every competitor to hear and react to the beep.....

....not to launch themselves when they're ready, knowing that the beep will arrive to coincide with their movement....

[Vlad]

I don't buy it. RO's are not machines, if if they try to be consistent they are still going to be somewhere in a .5 of a second range, not a .1 of a second range. And again, who cares if they anticipate the beep, we measure, score, quantify and analyze ONLY what happens after it. Guess what ,, we are all anticipating the beep anyway, its not like we are sleeping relaxed with an arm over a strange blond and then a gun fight breaks out. Ever other damn sport makes is very damn clear when the beep is coming with flashing lights, changing tones and if they could a guy squeezing your bum. Why do we choose to "surprise" the shooter? If you REALLY care about that then put it in the rules, explicitly and set the timer to random.

Edited March 30, 2012 by Vlad

[aztecdriver]

I don't buy it. RO's are not machines, if if they try to be consistent they are still going to be somewhere in a .5 of a second range, not a .1 of a second range. And again, who cares if they anticipate the beep, we measure, score, quantify and analyze ONLY what happens after it. Guess what ,, we are all anticipating the beep anyway, its not like we are sleeping relaxed with an arm over a strange blond and then a gun fight breaks out. Ever other damn sport makes is very damn clear when the beep is coming with flashing lights, changing tones and if they could a guy squeezing your bum. Why do we choose to "surprise" the shooter? If you REALLY care about that then put it in the rules, explicitly and set the timer to random.

I don't buy your analogy to every other sport. The examples you used are all over the map. Down hill skiers the clock starts when they go through the gate. Drag racing - well, the RT there is made over what/ a quarter second at the upper levels? They still have to wait until the initial flash - which is not always a specific time after the stage lights all go lit. All of those other sports like swimming and running have EXTREME penalties compared to ours for false starts (2 and you are DQ'd for the event). Also those sports have multiple contestants reacting to the SAME start signal and most times those competitions are within heats - so if everyone gets the same opportunity to prep for the start signal - where is the competitive inequity if it's the same.

As others have stated, our sport has a premise - it can't be compared to other sports by what ever purpose - that premise is that you must HEAR and REACT to the start signal. If you are starting by any other means - ie. timing the RO, you are not hearing and reacting.

[kevin c]

it's inconsistent is why.

Only the 1 to 4 seconds is inconsistent, the BEEP is the same every time. In theory, no one gains an advantage or suffers a disadvantage, but a slow swinger for one GM is definitely an advantage if the other GM has to shoot a faster moving swinger.

//drift// Actually, I'm thinking that, faster or slower, the advantage depends on the specifics of the targets and the time they're available in. Either way, it'd be inequitable, presenting different opportunities to different people. //drift//

[Vlad]

As others have stated, our sport has a premise - it can't be compared to other sports by what ever purpose - that premise is that you must HEAR and REACT to the start signal. If you are starting by any other means - ie. timing the RO, you are not hearing and reacting.

Hmm show me. Show me where in our rule book does it say that our sport has a premise that you must hear and react to a RANDOM start signal. For one the rule book allows me to tap a deaf shooter on the shoulder, but that is not even the issue. I just want to see where in the rule book do we have this principle of surprise and please don't say 8.3.3 because if it meant to say that it would say that.

I think some people are basically making up a story here about reactions to signal being part of the game. To some extent yes, because if you are slow you are slow, but the randomness factor I call bullshit on. This is a SHOOTING SPORT not a game of slapsies. I've just looked at my books and it says power, accuracy, speed and not a damn word about auditory reaction time. If someone wants to time the RO and indeed DON'T jump the gun but are very very ready at the beep that is called being good, we don't ask that GMs run around with a 100lb backpack to slow them down a bit or attach a gnome to their forearm to stab them in the wrist at random time to screw with their aiming.

There is nowhere else in our game where we think random, different, inconsistent is good. Sure as hell there is no other spot in this game where we think the actions of someone other then the shooter should matter. But somehow we take a line that most definitely doesn't say that the RO should be inconsistent assume the word "should" should be somewhere in there and run away with this bullshit gotcha game.

[Nuke8401]

USPSA Rulebook, App A3, Glossary, pg 58.

My link

"Should . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Optional but highly recommended."

Seems clear.

David E.

[Vlad]

Where EXACTLY does it say that the RO should be random? Because as I said before I read 8.3.3 as basically saying don't rush the shooter with a standbybeep and don't say standby before you answer your phone, not that should be random in that time window.

[Nik Habicht]

Vlad,

if we wanted it to say that, we could have really specified a 1 second start. Since that's the lower limit, it wouldn't be rushing the shooter.....

So why did we say 1-4 seconds? To maintain competitive equity, by giving all shooters equal opportunity to listen for and react to the timer's tone, regardless of whether they're first or last on a particular stage.....

Considering that we've had national championships decided by less than one point, are you really trying to tell me that a .1 or .2 of a second of shaved time isn't going to matter?

By randomly starting competitors we're not affecting competitive equity for all match participants...

[aztecdriver]

As others have stated, our sport has a premise - it can't be compared to other sports by what ever purpose - that premise is that you must HEAR and REACT to the start signal. If you are starting by any other means - ie. timing the RO, you are not hearing and reacting.

Hmm show me. Show me where in our rule book does it say that our sport has a premise that you must hear and react to a RANDOM start signal. For one the rule book allows me to tap a deaf shooter on the shoulder, but that is not even the issue. I just want to see where in the rule book do we have this principle of surprise and please don't say 8.3.3 because if it meant to say that it would say that.

I think some people are basically making up a story here about reactions to signal being part of the game. To some extent yes, because if you are slow you are slow, but the randomness factor I call bullshit on. This is a SHOOTING SPORT not a game of slapsies. I've just looked at my books and it says power, accuracy, speed and not a damn word about auditory reaction time. If someone wants to time the RO and indeed DON'T jump the gun but are very very ready at the beep that is called being good, we don't ask that GMs run around with a 100lb backpack to slow them down a bit or attach a gnome to their forearm to stab them in the wrist at random time to screw with their aiming.

There is nowhere else in our game where we think random, different, inconsistent is good. Sure as hell there is no other spot in this game where we think the actions of someone other then the shooter should matter. But somehow we take a line that most definitely doesn't say that the RO should be inconsistent assume the word "should" should be somewhere in there and run away with this bullshit gotcha game.

Tell you what, Vlad... Considering your attitude in the discussion - I'm going to bow out of it. It's clear your mind is set, and has been from the beginning with this 'is a bullshit "gotcha" game', but considering near every respected member of NROI has said we "SHOULD" do it this way and "why", and considering I've actually witnessed people trying to time RO's, at every level match, including nationals, I'm going to say that I've got enough experience in this argument to clearly say you are wrong and not care about your inciting comments with language like "damn" and "bullshit".

That said, feel free to let me know the next major you are working the timer - and I'll come and gladly take the extra quarter second you are giving out to those that pay attention...

[XRe]

As others have stated, our sport has a premise - it can't be compared to other sports by what ever purpose - that premise is that you must HEAR and REACT to the start signal. If you are starting by any other means - ie. timing the RO, you are not hearing and reacting.

Bingo. Couldn't have said it better....

[Vlad]

Removed my own post, because I'm done arguing.

Also I remembered why I'm carrying less and less about USPSA rules, with stuff being invented but not actually put in the rule book. If NROI want this to be a rule the make it a rule and use random start on the timer, they all have it now. Take the RO out of equation because now I can favor my buddies with "random" instead of using constant.

Edited March 30, 2012 by Vlad

[Skydiver]

Tangent to this discussion about "HEARING and REACTING to the Start Signal". As I understand things, the start signal doesn't have to be audible. Yes, it's the most common one we have because the equipment we currently have makes it so easy. As I understand it, it's legal to create a stage where there is a visual start signal like a drop turner turning to face the shooter in a fixed time stage. (I learned this when I asked about 9.2.4.2.)

I'm dreaming of creating a stage someday that is a self-start stage with an Indiana Jones theme: grabbing the idol gets the ball rolling if you'll pardon the pun. I just need to figure out how to have that self-start synchronize with a shot timer, so that as the shooter goes and runs the rest of the course, the RO can get at accurate last shot fired time.

[NMBOpen]

Tangent to this discussion about "HEARING and REACTING to the Start Signal". As I understand things, the start signal doesn't have to be audible. Yes, it's the most common one we have because the equipment we currently have makes it so easy. As I understand it, it's legal to create a stage where there is a visual start signal like a drop turner turning to face the shooter in a fixed time stage. (I learned this when I asked about 9.2.4.2.)

I'm dreaming of creating a stage someday that is a self-start stage with an Indiana Jones theme: grabbing the idol gets the ball rolling if you'll pardon the pun. I just need to figure out how to have that self-start synchronize with a shot timer, so that as the shooter goes and runs the rest of the course, the RO can get at accurate last shot fired time.

For self-start, I don't remember the location, but one stage used a telephone going on-hook or off-hook wired to start the timer, which was located near the end of the COF to pick up the last shot. May have been Yuma Match Masters. Have also seen a small speed shoot stage with the timer attached to a table, shooter pressed start with strong hand.

Edited March 30, 2012 by NMBOpen