2013 IRC

[LCARICH]

This is what has changed:

was: over time shot 10 second penalty

is: for far neat only over time shot 6 second penalty

clock time 10.30 seconds on a 10 second string is not over time

clock time 10.31 seconds on a 10 second string is over time and you will receive a penalty.

Rich

[seanc]

This is what has changed:

was: over time shot 10 second penalty

is: for far neat only over time shot 6 second penalty

clock time 10.30 seconds on a 10 second string is not over time

clock time 10.31 seconds on a 10 second string is over time and you will receive a penalty.

Rich

Ah, I was being dumb, that makes sense.

[TMC]

Ok so 6 is better than 10 but why not just make it 5 like a procedural?

[ChrisC]

the rule book says overtime shots may be 10 I believe. but it ultimately leaves it up to the course description.

[Ty Hamby]

It looks like the 6 seconds vs. 10 seconds decistion is still up in the air. Today this was posted by ICORE on their facebook page.

It has been pointed out, by those who actually read it, that the announced 6 second penalty on F&N is not legal per the ICORE Rule Book. 10 seconds for an over time shot is mandatory.

I guess, stay tuned.

[ChrisC]

I am pretty sure it say MAY enforce a 10 second overshot but it says penalties are per stage description. I'll have to go back when I'm near a real computer.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

[Carmoney]

It looks like the 6 seconds vs. 10 seconds decistion is still up in the air. Today this was posted by ICORE on their facebook page.

It has been pointed out, by those who actually read it, that the announced 6 second penalty on F&N is not legal per the ICORE Rule Book. 10 seconds for an over time shot is mandatory.

I guess, stay tuned.

Since when have they worried about the ICORE Rule Book at the IRC?

Edited November 20, 2012 by Carmoney

[Bubber]

I am pretty sure it say MAY enforce a 10 second overshot but it says penalties are per stage description. I'll have to go back when I'm near a real computer.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

It does say MAY, the rule is section 6 paragraph 7

7. The following penalties may be assessed during scoring:

1.

Miss

5 seconds

2.

Hitting No Shoot

5 seconds per hit if hole is a full bullet diameter inside the edge of No-Shoot.

3.

Premature start

5 seconds.

4.

Foot Fault

5 seconds.

5.

Failure to Engage

5 seconds per required target engagement that was omitted. FTE shall not apply for any steel target not engaged due to hitting Stop Plate out of order on a standing steel-only stage. FTE shall not apply for any target not engaged due to Par Time expiration.

6.

Procedural

5 seconds.

7.

Extra shot

5 seconds (Shots limited).

8.

Extra hit

5 seconds (Shots limited).

9.

Overtime shot

10 seconds (Fixed time stage).

10.

Failure to hit Stop Plate

30 seconds.

[ChrisC]

Huge difference between may and shall, at least in my world

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

[seanc]

Since when have they worried about the ICORE Rule Book at the IRC?

Indeed.

[jhgtyre]

If the "standards" are so vital to the IRC why isn't there a "standard" set of rules for it?

[ChrisC]

^ what he said

[underlug]

If the "standards" are so vital to the IRC why isn't there a "standard" set of rules for it?

They shot it the same way for years until some people complained about it being too tough. There is still the argument that it effects the final result too much.

I assume we are punning on the word standard vis a vis a standard exercise

Edited November 22, 2012 by underlug

[S&W627shooter]

Ok so 6 is better than 10 but why not just make it 5 like a procedural?

If we make an OT shot penalty only 5 seconds on a stage that has an X-ring bonus, there is a 1 second per shot incentive to keep shooting after the par time is up. With a 6 second penalty, it negates the advantage.

Let's say the timer beeped before I could shoot my last target. I would get 10 seconds in misses. However, if the OT penalty were only 5 seconds each, I would take my time and shoot two shots in the X ring. I would get 10 seconds in OT penalties, but I would get 2 more X's which would be a net of only 8 seconds in penalties. If I make the OT penalty 6 seconds, I would get 12 seconds in OT penalties and 2 more X's which would result in a net of 10 seconds in penalties--the same as taking the two misses.

The idea behind the change is to reduce the harshness of the OT penalty, but still keep the integrity of a par-time stage.

[underlug]

Has there ever been any consideration to multiplying the participant's total time by a factor (e.g. .5 or .8) to mitigate the stage's influence on the final match result?

[Bubber]

Has there ever been any consideration to multiplying the participant's total time by a factor (e.g. .5 or .8) to mitigate the stage's influence on the final match result?

Multiplying by a factor of .5 would decrease the time difference between shooters. This would make a difference when a disasteous reload on the stage, but a couple of longer field course type stages may be more beneficial to allow the contestants to make his way back, but in the scoring system with all stages one cannot do poorly on any stage and come out well. I can see where a penalty change from 10 seconds to a 5 second penalty for ALL overtime shots on all par time stage could help. It would also make it more uniform. But someone will have to fill out the rule change request form for it to be done. Later rdd

[okshootist]

Since we all know the course of fire, are subject to the same rules and have six months until the IRC. Maybe we could negate the overtime penalties and reduce the influence of the course by using that time to practice the Far and Near Standards?

[Bubber]

Since we all know the course of fire, are subject to the same rules and have six months until the IRC. Maybe we could negate the overtime penalties and reduce the influence of the course by using that time to practice the Far and Near Standards?

Practice? Blasphemy!!!! I do however, on occassionm make reloadable brass..

[Carmoney]

Since we all know the course of fire, are subject to the same rules and have six months until the IRC. Maybe we could negate the overtime penalties and reduce the influence of the course by using that time to practice the Far and Near Standards?

Yes, setting up and shooting the Far and Near Standards over and over and over is a time-proven way to finish ahead of shooters with a higher overall skill level.

[toothguy]

Since we all know the course of fire, are subject to the same rules and have six months until the IRC. Maybe we could negate the overtime penalties and reduce the influence of the course by using that time to practice the Far and Near Standards?

Yes, setting up and shooting the Far and Near Standards over and over and over is a time-proven way to finish ahead of shooters with a higher overall skill level.

That holds true for Bianchi as well. I have a much higher overall skill level than Doug Koenig, it's just that he practices the same course of fire over and over.

Edited November 28, 2012 by toothguy

[Carmoney]

What would happen if they actually changed up Bianchi from year to year, keeping the fundamental nature of the match, but varying the times/distances/requirements from one year to the next?

So you'd still have a mover, but every year it moves at a different speed, comes from different directions or angles, with a different number of shots required. (You find out the format when you get to the match, and no advance practice allowed on the bay.) You would still have the plates, but every year the plate racks would be at different distances and have different par times. Etc., etc.......you get the idea.

I think that would make the Bianchi Cup immensely more interesting, and I'll bet it would substantially mix up the match results!

[toothguy]

What would happen if they actually changed up Bianchi from year to year, keeping the fundamental nature of the match, but varying the times/distances/requirements from one year to the next?

So you'd still have a mover, but every year it moves at a different speed, comes from different directions or angles, with a different number of shots required. (You find out the format when you get to the match, and no advance practice allowed on the bay.) You would still have the plates, but every year the plate racks would be at different distances and have different par times. Etc., etc.......you get the idea.

I think that would make the Bianchi Cup immensely more interesting, and I'll bet it would substantially mix up the match results!

What you are suggesting is blasphemy, remember what happened to Galileo.

Seriously though, the top shooters are very well rounded shooters. It might effect the scores but no matter what you do to the match, the top shooters will float to the top. Koenig has won with a 1920 shooting a revolver if he or Piatt decide to shoot the IRC there might be some surprises.

Edited November 29, 2012 by toothguy

[Carmoney]

Koenig has won with a 1920 shooting a revolver if he or Piatt decide to shoot the IRC there might be some surprises.

Then why have they drifted away from every other type of shooting competition, other than the one very specific match where they are "grooved in"? Yeah, they're good shooters, but they get clobbered when they get outside their comfort zone.

[pskys2]

Actually the Cup back in 1985 or 86? changed it up and went to the International Rapid Fire instead of the Practicals. And guess what TGO took it.

That was the only one I ever made. But they went back to the Practicals due to a small, dedicated, vocal group and since it was the NRA who was administrating it by then, well the NRA is comfortable with fixed, unchanging matches. It's simpler to administer.

My view is that with anything, look at USPSA Classifiers, with a "Fixed" set of courses it is a moot point. Unless you don't announce in advance which of those courses will be used they will be set up and practiced over and over, and it just won't be kept secret from everyone. And if you have the skill and the mental make up to use it under pressure you will do well. If you don't have both of those you won't.

The Far and Near is a simple course to set up and practice so that in itself shouldn't be an issue, not like you need a mover/barricade/prop to practice on. And just practicing it over and over can actually lead to not focusing on it in the match, or putting too much pressure on it.

As with anything else, the big boys will go where the money is that they can cash in on.

But I'd love to hit the IRC, just can't seem to put it together to get out there.

It would be interesting to put one on and treat it like a USPSA match, with no fixed time stage and the added twist of a few of those bonus "X" hit courses thrown in!

Edited December 1, 2012 by pskys2

[toothguy]

Koenig has won with a 1920 shooting a revolver if he or Piatt decide to shoot the IRC there might be some surprises.

Then why have they drifted away from every other type of shooting competition, other than the one very specific match where they are "grooved in"? Yeah, they're good shooters, but they get clobbered when they get outside their comfort zone.

I can't speak for them but over the years I have concentrated on the more profitable aspects of what I do for a living, and referred out the less profitable things. Time for me has become more important than money.

The top shooters have natural talent but have also worked harder than other shooters to get where they are. To shoot an X-count in the 180's requires a continuous amount of hard work. The top shooters have lengthy proven track records. The only way they would get clobbered is if they came unprepared, which is unlikely.

It's funny that you mentioned it, but one of the primary reasons most shooters get into Bianchi is for the large comfort zone it provides.

Edited December 2, 2012 by toothguy