Forcing activation of prop at level 2

[Chills1994]

Then what's the point of having CRO/RM training?

To provide a foundation. Where the individual goes with that, is up to them. Some can build a skyscraper with the foundation, while others will have difficulty getting a single story house built. It's the way it works with a volunteer RO corps....

I started to rethink my post ... Maybe the better question would have been "why even have a rulebook?"

Just from a logic standpoint or in the "this makes sense" category... Why even have an activator controlling something that is 100% visible prior to activation?

[remoandiris]

On several occasions I've wondered if the requirements to be a L2 RM should be more stringent.

At a L2 I worked months ago, we had an issue on my stage. It was the second L2 match I ROd. I explained to the RM what happened and what rule I used. RM agreed. After the decision was made, another RO on the stage told me it was the wrong call and cited a rule. I could have called the RM back and changed his decision based on the other ROs input, but that just tears the shooter a different direction and, IMO, is not fair. The other RO should have chimed in before the RM's decision.

My point to all this is everyone with decision-making authority needs to help everyone else when it comes to stage management. Sure, it takes an extra 2 minutes, but is that really a lot of time when dealing with fairness and proper rules interpretation?

I think the rules for ROs to become CROs need to be more stringent...starting with 2 yrs as an RO and more match experience than currently required. I've worked two L2s and two L3s since the RO course. I learn something new at each match. At least I have gotten much better at making calls and enforcing the rules.

Edited September 29, 2012 by remoandiris

[38SuperDub]

The competitors were informed prior to shooting that the staff knew the stage wasn't legal. That we still had to shoot it that way and if we want we can arb it.

How does that make you feel?

[sperman]

That match would probably not ever be on my schedule again, at least not without major changes in the match management.

[Skydiver]

The competitors were informed prior to shooting that the staff knew the stage wasn't legal. That we still had to shoot it that way and if we want we can arb it.

How does that make you feel?

I feel like that is undue pressure to accept the stage as is. To be able to arb it, you have to do the appeal before shooting it:

11.1.2 Access - Appeals may be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the following rules for any matter except where specifically denied by another rule. ... Challenges to the construction or layout of the course, safety, or shooting conditions may not be submitted after the competitor attempts the course of fire. Should a course of fire be changed after the competitor completes the stage, he is entitled to the process under appeals providing that no DQ has occurred.

[Carmoney]

You can always file a complaint with NROI after the fact if you still think they got it wrong.

Ah, but it's so much more gratifying to follow in the rich tradition of driving home and immediately jumping on the Brian Enos Forum in order to bitch about it publicly.

[aztecdriver]

The competitors were informed prior to shooting that the staff knew the stage wasn't legal. That we still had to shoot it that way and if we want we can arb it.

How does that make you feel?

I've already expressed how I would feel. If you are willing to host an illegal stage at a major - you don't have much respect for the sport, and you're integrity as a match official is suspect. I'd probably file the arb anyway, and then I would place a few phone calls to people to complain at immediately. Then I'll vote with me feet - they'll not have me as a match official again, ever. And, I'll not shoot that match, and explain to the SC and AD why. Then from there, they can do as they please.

Why do I have the feeling you are trying to bait this further than it is going. Out with the discussion, and stop being all coy with the lead ins.

[38SuperDub]

Just updating with what we were told earlier today. I shot it as they said because I didn't have $100 to throw away and they basically said you'd lose if you arb. I'll send my emails Monday to those involved and other parts of NROI

[Nik Habicht]

On several occasions I've wondered if the requirements to be a L2 RM should be more stringent.

I've seen great RO or CRO performances in the RM role.....

I've also seen bad ones.....

I've seen mostly great RM performances in the RM role.....

...but also experienced some less than ideal ones.....

A lot comes down to the the individuals involved, and their willingness to learn. For example, I'd always be willing to travel for a Larry Houck, Howard Thompson or Kyle Farris produced match, regardless of who the RM is.....

And I don't worry about match quality when one of the RMIs is working as RM, because they'll elevate the quality, and resolve any major issues prior to the first shot....

[38SuperDub]

So here is a thought that makes some sense:

Stages are sent to NROI and approved for legality - those stages should be signed and the SIGNED WSB's should be posted on each stage. The ONLY changes should be for SAFETY reasons. I can bet that NROI wouldn't approve a L2 match forcing a competitor to activate something prior to engaging if its wide open or shooting from a certain area.

If its not in the SIGNED NROI WSB then it doesnt count.

Is that too much to ask?

[DrawandDuck]

shooting tomorrow and it is a cool stage. I have no issues shooting it as is. seems some are complaining just to be complaining....shoot it, have fun and move on. Everyone is shooting it the same way.

[38SuperDub]

Shooting it the same way or not. It's ILLEGAL. I wanted to take the visible static target first. At my skill level it makes a difference.

It was a cool stage. But why not let people shoot it FREESTYLE?!?!

[Nik Habicht]

So here is a thought that makes some sense:

Stages are sent to NROI and approved for legality - those stages should be signed and the SIGNED WSB's should be posted on each stage. The ONLY changes should be for SAFETY reasons. I can bet that NROI wouldn't approve a L2 match forcing a competitor to activate something prior to engaging if its wide open or shooting from a certain area.

If its not in the SIGNED NROI WSB then it doesnt count.

Is that too much to ask?

Yes. Have you ever run a major USPSA match? Designed and built and officiated a stage at one?

A stage designer with more than a decade's experience designing stages, running a monthly 7 stage USPSA match, running multiple majors including at least one Area match, submitted a stage to this year's MASC, that was based on a design from 8-10 years ago, at the same club, before the pits were significantly downsized. The match directors submitted it to NROI as written/designed, and it was approved.

During the building process significant changes needed to be made to allow the stage to fit, to allow for choices in target engagement for shooters in all divisions, and to maintain minimum distances to steel. The end result was a completely legal stage -- but one that was a bit different from what NROI approved.....

Would it be nice to have perfect matches every time? Sure. Are we willing to pay $1000 entry fees to pay professionals to design, build and officiate these matches? I don't think so.....

Volunteers will make mistakes. The ones who are serious about quality will learn from them. The ones who aren't serious, well, their matches will most likely die out....

[DrawandDuck]

shooting tomorrow and it is a cool stage. I have no issues shooting it as is. seems some are complaining just to be complaining....shoot it, have fun and move on. Everyone is shooting it the same way.

[bagdad45]

I guess 1.1.5 would also apply right?

Freestyle – USPSA matches are freestyle. Competitors must be permit- ted to solve the challenge presented in a freestyle manner, and to shoot targets on an "as and when visible" basis. Courses of fire must not require mandatory reloads nor dictate a shooting position, location or stance, except as specified below. However, conditions may be created, and barriers or other physical limitations may be constructed, to com- pel a competitor into shooting positions, locations or stances.

It does apply but not as much as the other, more specific, rules already cited.

There is one other outcome then those discussed so far. The RM could declare shooting the target prior to activation a forbiden action; 2.3.1.1. A good example of this happened on a stage I worked at the 2012 Multi-Gun Nationals, sorry I can't remember the stage number might have been 4. On signal pull cord to open a window, engage popper that activates clam shell that is shot through a different port to the right. Window won't stay open unless cord is held somehow. Last two shooters of the first day asked the CRO if shoot target of the clam shell could be shot before activating the target. WSB doesn't say you can't, target is visible on the ground but a pretty tough shot. Both shooters do it that way. CRO calls the RM, discussions abound. How many shot it like this, what are the other options? Only two shot it like this, but it is commonly seen once somebody figures it out everyone starts shooting it that way. Other options are let anyone that wants to shoot it that way do so. Is it a competitve advantage? Hard to say don't think so, unless you are 6 foot tall. Or throwing the stage out, not really the desirable choice. I am guessing that there was discussion with NROI before this decision was made. The next day the WSB says engaging the clam shell before activation is a forbidden action. The two shooters who did this were told of the decision and given the day to reshoot the stage or take a 0. Guess they could have gone to arbitaration. They came back at the end of the day. Both guys shot it faster the second time through.

[wide45]

Lets be careful to stay within the guidelines of the forum, and not be going off on a particular match.

An illegal stage is a legitimate beef. The stage being fun or not is irrelevant.

Should the competitors bring gear that meets the requirements of the division rules under which they intend to compete?

Should the competitors follow the rules governing their conduct at the match, and attempt at each stage?

Should the match officials not hold to the same standard?

Running an illegal stage at a sanctioned match says clearly that you don't know the rules, or you don't care to follow them. It shows lack of respect for the competitors, and for the sport.

[38SuperDub]

I guess wide pretty much hit the nail on the head. Seems counter intuitive to be following two sets of rules. One that makes the competitors follow the rules exactly and ones that let those who run the match not follow them. And give them a rule (forbidden action) that allows them to stop any loophole in a stage a competitor finds.

Things are getting out of hand. I like being creative in my stage plans. If I find a better way to shoot. Go me. Maybe it will be slower. But let me try as long as its safe.

You want to force me to activate something first. USE A DOOR not a stomp box. Problem solved. By using a stomp box at a position where 1 target is 100% visible it's almost like you want me to try to figure which way is best.

Edited September 30, 2012 by bsdubois00

[38SuperDub]

Nik

Don't take this wrong but I think that a bad example.

You moved a few targets in or to te left or right. Had to reposition a piece of steel so it would be SAFE. You didn't change a WSB to force a competitor to do something or shoot a target from a certain prop because that's how you meant the stage to be done did you? There is a difference on adjusting targets to make sure the stage is legal and scribbling on the ROs talk script that we have to shoot targets after we activate them. What you did was guarantee the stage was safe and legal. What was done here was make sure people shot it how they wanted legal or not. See the difference?

No I've never run a major match. BUT I know what the rules say. Maybe more people should.

[Nik Habicht]

Running an illegal stage at a sanctioned match says clearly that you don't know the rules, or you don't care to follow them. It shows lack of respect for the competitors, and for the sport.

I agree, on the whole. I also know, from personal experience, that dedicated folks who want nothing more than to build legal and fun stages sometimes struggle as they are learning. I don't expect perfection at matches of any level in this sport. I do expect, when issues are raised for the problems to be addressed in some manner:

Ideally the stage is fixed prior to the first shot, and there are no further issues.

Second choice is -- oops, you found an unintentional hole, but there's no safety issue, so we're going leave it.

Third choice is -- oops, you fond a hole, we can't leave that, we really don't want to toss that stage, we're terribly sorry about that, and won't make that mistake again.

I can live with those three. I have a bigger problem with the fourth version:

Oh, that's against the rules? Too bad, everyone needs to shoot those three targets from there, even though they can be seen from somewhere else, so do it that way because we say so.

That one leaves me not wanting to play in a match that is run by those people, or by that RM.....

[Nik Habicht]

You want to force me to activate something first. USE A DOOR not a stomp box. Problem solved. By using a stomp box at a position where 1 target is 100% visible it's almost like you want me to try to figure which way is best.

Generally it comes down to stage design.....

Solid design, and building eliminates most problems. Personally I won't impose a forbidden action, unless there's a safety issue with the stage, or unless not issuing the forbidden action means that we need to have Mr. Fix-it repair the stage after every shooter....

[Nik Habicht]

Nik

Don't take this wrong but I think that a bad example.

You moved a few targets in or to te left or right. Had to reposition a piece of steel so it would be SAFE. You didn't change a WSB to force a competitor to do something or shoot a target from a certain prop because that's how you meant the stage to be done did you? There is a difference on adjusting targets to make sure the stage is legal and scribbling on the ROs talk script that we have to shoot targets after we activate them. What you did was guarantee the stage was safe and legal. What was done here was make sure people shot it how they wanted legal or not. See the difference?

No I've never run a major match. BUT I know what the rules say. Maybe more people should.

Actually we needed to build half walls to restrict competitor movement, in ways that the original -- approved by NROI -- design had not....

There's often a big difference between a drawing, and what is actually built. And for the record, NROI doesn't and realistically can't approve the WSB or talkie -- as too many things change in the days leading up to the match. I usually draft the WSBs at home prior to the match, then amend them significantly as the match is being built, and as we walk through the stages with the staff, both to address last minute construction differences and to provide any necessary special guidance to the shooters, which could relate to everything from the 180 for corner built stages or 270 degree pits, to how the staff will score the stage. Sometimes requirements are more or less stringently worded -- place brick in container, instead of brick must stay in container for instance.

As far as knowing the rules goes, I couldn't agree more. In an ideal world, every competitor with a year in the game would be an RO, every competitor with five years in a CRO, and RM at ten years. Unrealistic for a volunteer sport, but it would be nice if it were possible.....

[38SuperDub]

I still think FA needs to be removed for all issues that are not safety related.

This would solve a lot of issues. Basically it would allow stages to actually be freestyle and not giving staff an out for forcing their ideal way to shoot it on someone. Using FA to do this is the biggest cop out out there. This is about solving a problem the fastest way I think possible. Not some way someone wants me to.

[Chills1994]

Imposing an FA = IDPA, basically.

[Chills1994]

Nik wrote:

Yes. Have you ever run a major USPSA match? Designed and built and officiated a stage at one?

Nik, you posed the same question to me a couple of weeks ago.

The vast majority of USPSA'ers aren't ever going to RO/MD/RM a major match.

So does that make their comments/opinions/criticism as a paying customer at some major match any less valid?

[Skydiver]

<sarcasm>This is going to make a great question for next year's crop of RO test questions:

"At a Level 2 match, can a shooter be penalized for shooting a wide open moving target prior to activation?"

Possible answers are:

No. 2.1.8.5.

Maybe. 2.3.1.1.a.

</sarcasm>