Is this a legal stage

[ultrablue]

I am wondering if this is a legal stage for a level 1 match. I do not see anything in the rule book addressing changing the round count per target in a course of fire.

2 VS 3.pdf

[JAFO]

I think it's good as a short course as long as you can't see all of the targets from one location in the shooting area. Otherwise, you might as well remove the walls and call it a Speed Shoot.

Like you said, no rule against different required hits per target. The following just says stipulated hits per target:

9.2.2 “Comstock” – Unlimited time stops on the last shot, unlimited number of shots to be fired, stipulated number of hits per target to count for score.

[sarnburg]

Why the requirement of 3 rounds on T1 & T5, but scoring is best 2 hits per paper?

[ultrablue]

Forgot to change that part in the scoring.

[MarkCO]

The problem I see is requiring 3 rounds on T1 and T5 but 2 on T2-T4 and only scoring best two per paper. You have created NPM where they are not allowed. You could add a Par Time then I think you would be good. You might send it to an RMI and ask for their input.

9.4.4 Each miss will be penalized twice the value of the maximum scoring hit available on that target, except in the case of Fixed Time or disappearing targets (see Rules 9.2.4.4 and 9.9.2).

[Ssanders224]

This is interesting. I think this would be a great way to add a little spice to a otherwise run of the mill stage.

I think this should be legal if under "scoring" on the WSB, the specific targets and # of hits required are defined.

[MarkCO]

I agree it adds spice, and I am sure there is a way to do it.

We ran a match, 5 stages, stage 1 was 1 scored hit per target, stage 2 was 2, stage 3 required 3 and stage 4 required 4. We ran can you count for the classifier which is 5 per target. Some people really got confused on a few stages.

[lawboy]

I agree it adds spice, and I am sure there is a way to do it.

We ran a match, 5 stages, stage 1 was 1 scored hit per target, stage 2 was 2, stage 3 required 3 and stage 4 required 4. We ran can you count for the classifier which is 5 per target. Some people really got confused on a few stages.

Ohhhh. Daddy like!

[pkm]

I can attest to the confusion but it was fun.

I agree it adds spice, and I am sure there is a way to do it.

We ran a match, 5 stages, stage 1 was 1 scored hit per target, stage 2 was 2, stage 3 required 3 and stage 4 required 4. We ran can you count for the classifier which is 5 per target. Some people really got confused on a few stages.

[CHA-LEE]

As stated before, to make it legal you need to define the scored hits per target such as.... Best 2 per T2 - T4, Best 3 per T1 & T5. Otherwise its a valid "Speed Shoot" type of stage.

The question you need to ask yourself is if you are simply regurgitating the shooting challenge of an existing classifier stage. What is the purpose of having different hit counts on different targets and mandating a reload in between arrays? Are you testing a specific shooting skill or are you just playing a mental game with people. You need to look at stages like a product that customers want to buy. To me, this isn't a stage design that I would "want" to shoot because it looks like meaningless blasting with a focus on trying to catch shooters in making mental errors while trying to follow the defined stage procedures. There is another sport that is built around mandating the target engagement order, tactics, and crap like that. Its called IDPA. USPSA matches are suppose to be "Freestyle" type of shooting where competitors are able to figure out the best plan for solving the shooting challenge. If you are force feeding how the stage should be shot then its not very "Freestyle".

[kitsapshooter]

There was a similar stage at Handgun nationals.

USPSA matches are suppose to be "Freestyle" type of shooting .

True, but freestyle is a Principle of USPSA, not a "rule." That is why the stages are legal.

[CHA-LEE]

Uuuuuuhhhhhh.... Rule number 1.1.5 is a RULE and I don't how it could be misconstrued as anything but a Rule when its listed in the rule book as such.

[teros135]

Well, freestyle is a rule, but there are also other rules that define shooter actions, or limit them. It would seem that would be a legit short course stage (1.2.1.1) with 12 rounds, if there are no more than two shooting locations (i.e., can T1 and T5 be seen/shot from the starting position, and T2-T4 from the port) and they all can't be seen/shot from one single location or view.

It also seems to be a legit medium course, which allows up to 3 shooting locations (1.2.1.2).

Either way, you'd have to fix the WSB under Scoring, to say best 3 on T1 & T5 and best 2 on T2-T4.

[Joe4d]

havent shot in a few years, and usually just lurk here once in a blue moon. BUT to play devils advocate, without putting THEN or some other order words in there.
Nothing in that COF prevents me from starting at T-1 shooting 3, 2,2,2, 3 ,,, the time stops due to last shot. Then I perform my mandatory reload but off the clock.

[MarkCO]

You would lose that argument.

[Joe4d]

Dont think so, runon sentence with no order requirements.
AND means to do two things. No specifics on when. Unless something has changed int he rules in last couple years. Been done before with stage descriptions like that.

[MaraW]

There was a similar stage at Handgun nationals.

USPSA matches are suppose to be "Freestyle" type of shooting .[/size]

True, but freestyle is a Principle of USPSA, not a "rule." That is why the stages are legal.[/size]

Which stage? I don't remember one like that...

[remoandiris]

Agree with Mark, you'd lose that argument. Stage description is clear; shoot one array, mandatory reload, shoot other array. No way around it.

[MarkCO]

Unless you use Clintonian English...

[Nik Habicht]

You would lose that argument.

Not if I was called to rule for that exact wording....

Then again, if I was going to be called to rule, I would have fixed the wording......

[Nik Habicht]

Agree with Mark, you'd lose that argument. Stage description is clear; shoot one array, mandatory reload, shoot other array. No way around it.

I see it as a list of actions to be performed, in no particular order with current wording. If I was the CRO on the stage or the RM, I'd be working to change the wording -- or to make it clearly understood that we would call no penalties for Joe's plan......

[MarkCO]

With your logic Nik, I guess I will just shoot all of the targets prior to the beep and smoke the stage. Then when you try to DQ me, toss your rationale right back at you. Again, Clintonian English is absurd.

Should the OP change the wording to keep the politicians in line? Sure, I guess the flawed logic on this thread would make it necessary just from a customer service perspective.

[teros135]

You know, whenever you hear someone talking about reloading "off the clock" when a reload is specified in the WSB, you know someone is d**king with the wording. The word game is so common it isn't even clever. Who on earth would think that kind of reload would be even remotely reasonable?

The other little clue is the instruction that the arrays "may be engaged in either order"...

[Nik Habicht]

With your logic Nik, I guess I will just shoot all of the targets prior to the beep and smoke the stage. Then when you try to DQ me, toss your rationale right back at you. Again, Clintonian English is absurd.

Should the OP change the wording to keep the politicians in line? Sure, I guess the flawed logic on this thread would make it necessary just from a customer service perspective.

Why wouldn't I try to stop you for a false start and restart you? What am I missing there?

[Nik Habicht]

With your logic Nik, I guess I will just shoot all of the targets prior to the beep and smoke the stage. Then when you try to DQ me, toss your rationale right back at you. Again, Clintonian English is absurd.

Should the OP change the wording to keep the politicians in line? Sure, I guess the flawed logic on this thread would make it necessary just from a customer service perspective.

OK Mark, since you're accusing me of flawed logic, why do stage procedures for classifiers read like this:

Upon start signal, turn then draw and from Box A engage T1-T3 with only two rounds per target, then perform a mandatory reload and from Box A engage T1-T3 with only two rounds per target.

And since when did it become difficult for stage designers, CROs and RMs to write procedures like that? I'm pretty sure that Amidon drilled that process into my head during the CRO class......

Don't be a lazy stage designer, CRO, or RM -- your match will go a lot smoother if you do the thinking and working before it starts.....