remoandiris Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 This IPSC rules eliminates the need for off-limit lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperman Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 (edited) This IPSC rules eliminates the need for option of off-limit lines. I fixed it for you. Edited January 6, 2013 by sperman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remoandiris Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 This IPSC rules eliminates the need for option of off-limit lines. I fixed it for you. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodman Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 I thought the Front Sight article was highlighting the differences in USPSA and IPSC for the World Shoot in Frostproof in 2014. I recall reading the rule was noted because it will be enforced for that event. It was in November's magazine. But I'm at work today and do not have immediate access to it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 Nik, We will have to disagree on this. Define a shooting area without walls that is 12 inches wide and winds through the various arrays without having to elevate it. I do agree that it should be the exception in stage design. I don't think we do actually. The rule as currently written written outlaws all out of fault lines movement. That's a larger correction than is needed to achieve what you want to be able to achieve....... And I seem to remember shooting a Harry Foltz designed with a very narrow FFZ that would it's way past targets -- and that actively discouraged people from moving out of bounds by careful attention to target presentation -- in other words the right way to shoot it was to keep moving and shooting deliberately..... There was no possible gain by stepping out of bounds..... Folks who ask for restrictions via rules, need to sharpen their design skills...... :ph34r: :roflol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 (edited) personaly I would not vote for this rule, but I also do not believe it would change the game as some have eluded here. I see it helpful to ranges with a lack of props Edited January 6, 2013 by juan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 As of right now, there is nothing in the proposed 2013 rulebook regarding this rule--it was suggested, but I believe we've written it out in favor of more practical rules regarding stage design and restrictions on movement. I do not believe that the entire board, nor the RMI corps, has had time to review the 2013 rules, but we are working towards it. Troy Troy, It looks like the first major is less than 2 weeks away. Florida State Championship - Frostproof, FL. Any chance the new rulebook will be out by then? At the current rate of review by the board, NO. Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 At the risk of being redundant, what part of "we aren't going with this" did y'all not understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyOne Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 At the risk of being redundant, what part of "we aren't going with this" did y'all not understand? I understood every single part of it, hence my lack of further response in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beltjones Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 At the risk of being redundant, what part of "we aren't going with this" did y'all not understand? I think this is one of those rules threads where people read the first couple of posts and immediately begin typing out a rant before they finish reading the other comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justaute Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Knee-jerk reaction? No way -- that never happens. At the risk of being redundant, what part of "we aren't going with this" did y'all not understand? I think this is one of those rules threads where people read the first couple of posts and immediately begin typing out a rant before they finish reading the other comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctay Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 At the risk of being redundant, what part of "we aren't going with this" did y'all not understand? Come on like you would know...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got Juice? Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 At the risk of being redundant, what part of "we aren't going with this" did y'all not understand? It's far from redundant. Discussing the 'ins and outs' of rules are what make IPSC and USPSA what they are. The sports are evolving and healthy constructive conversations in regards to rules, equipment or whatever keeps the sport fresh. Don't get caught in a rut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akkid17 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 (edited) At the risk of being redundant, what part of "we aren't going with this" did y'all not understand? It's far from redundant. Discussing the 'ins and outs' of rules are what make IPSC and USPSA what they are. The sports are evolving and healthy constructive conversations in regards to rules, equipment or whatever keeps the sport fresh. Don't get caught in a rut Dang, I wish I would have found this thread earlier so I could have beat you to that one. But I can see IF this rule were to someday be proposed to be put into the rules I'm sure there would be plenty of people with plenty of reasons for and against this prospective rule and a decision would not be made without proper consideration as to the full ramifications of such a rule. This could help the less fortunate clubs that have 4 walls total and 1 barricade to be able to make more intricate or challenging or fun stages that would normally be impossible to do from a materials standpoint. Many ways to look at it and many reasons for why one person wants it one way or another. Interesting to see how many people were outraged at the possibility of not being able to jump from lane to lane in a CoF rather than moving along the faults. Edited January 21, 2013 by Akkid17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Smith Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 For smaller clubs with a limited number of props, walls, etc, something like this might be nice to have because it allows for a bit more creativity. But IF it were going to be implemented, I would think it should be limited to a level 1 match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 For smaller clubs with a limited number of props, walls, etc, something like this might be nice to have because it allows for a bit more creativity. But IF it were going to be implemented, I would think it should be limited to a level 1 match. .....as an option, not as the default..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akkid17 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 I haven't read the rule book too closely, but its hard to imagine that there isn't something already in place to cover this issue. I would think that by putting it into the stage rules/brief/description/procedure that you shall not cross fault lines on a stage that would pretty well take care of the argument and then it would only be a matter of assessing the penalties associated with that portion of the stage procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now