IDPA stage approval

[Bob Hostetter]

<< A troll >>

Actually I do think this issue is a problem and I am interested in what other people think the solution should be. I was taken a bit back by some of the answers that have been given which range from, "as long as they are only cheating a little bit" to " as long as you do it for free it's ok to be a sloppy" to "grow a pair and start acting like a Big Boy" that I have had a little fun but really ... a troll. You obviously don't know me.

[Glock3422]

I my experience, which I won't bore you with, setting up a match according to the rules is the easy part. The hard part is utilizing large numbers of SOs from outside the local area to officiate the match. Inspite of specific stage direction and COF brief in writing, someone will invariably put their own spin on how they are going to run the stage. Volunteers can be fired and certainly not invited back to reinterprete a stage in the future.

I have never seen a 16 stage match where something wasn't done by the SO staff either to the SOs or regular competitors incorrectly. It is the human element and it is unavoidable. Try as you might, nothing is perfect and no one is more frustrated than the people who spent six months designing and two weeks building the match.

[GOF]

Thomas H... I'll edit my post as many times as it takes to get the spelling right. Unlike you and some others.

And, you're right. If it's a minor issue it can be fixed. But, if it's a 'minor issue' "Hey look, the targets are two yards too far away"... and it gets overlooked... how big a whiner do you have to be to bitch about it and make a major case out of it? And mess up the match for the "non-whiners" who just shot the targets?

But, if it's a major issue then... as you noted... we have to talk about whether the MD is going to continue to hold IDPA matches at their club? OK, so he says "No! Screw you!"

So back to my original question. Do we fire them all? And, when we do, where do you go to shoot your shiny toys?

If you demand "Perfection" in an imperfect world, you may have to travel quite a ways 'to' (that was the grammar edit... just so Thomas H knows) find that perfection. And, that distance may prevent/preclude your participation. Just a thought.

Be careful what you wish for

Edited to note that I got the spelling right on the first try!

Dang! had to edit again to get the grammar right.

Edited November 7, 2014 by GOF

[BillR1]

I my experience, which I won't bore you with, setting up a match according to the rules is the easy part. The hard part is utilizing large numbers of SOs from outside the local area to officiate the match. Inspite of specific stage direction and COF brief in writing, someone will invariably put their own spin on how they are going to run the stage. Volunteers can be fired and certainly not invited back to reinterprete a stage in the future.

I have never seen a 16 stage match where something wasn't done by the SO staff either to the SOs or regular competitors incorrectly. It is the human element and it is unavoidable. Try as you might, nothing is perfect and no one is more frustrated than the people who spent six months designing and two weeks building the match.

This is completely different from an MD being aware of an illegal stage and refusing to correct it. Apples and oranges...

Edited November 7, 2014 by BillR1

[BillR1]

Thomas H... I'll edit my post as many times as it takes to get the spelling right. Unlike you and some others.

And, you're right. If it's a minor issue it can be fixed. But, if it's a 'minor issue' "Hey look, the targets are two yards too far away"... and it gets overlooked... how big a whiner do you have to be to bitch about it and make a major case out of it? And mess up the match for the "non-whiners" who just shot the targets?

If something is worth doing at all, then it's worth doing right. If the stage is set-up legally the first time, then there's little reason to be a "whiner" later.

[S-Hurt]

Troll or not it brought up some discussion.

[Bob Hostetter]

<< Brought up some discussion >>

Is that a bad thing?

[GOF]

Hostetter's not a troll. I've seen his posts on too many forums to believe he's a troll.

[S-Hurt]

<< Brought up some discussion >>

Is that a bad thing?

Nope

[GmanCdp]

I shot with Bob a few years ago in Az and he wasn't short and pudgy,no pointy ears,no heavy beard,he wore shoes,did not have a gruff growling voice, so he didn't seem like a troll...lol..

[Thomas H]

Thomas H... I'll edit my post as many times as it takes to get the spelling right. Unlike you and some others.

Yes, I see how adding a completely new paragraph is checking spelling. Oh wait, that's two edits and two new paragraphs.

Wow, your definition of "spelling" and mine is a little different. Huh. (Then again, I wasn't aware we critiqued spelling on this forum, so it shouldn't matter.)

And, you're right. If it's a minor issue it can be fixed. But, if it's a 'minor issue' "Hey look, the targets are two yards too far away"... and it gets overlooked... how big a whiner do you have to be to bitch about it and make a major case out of it? And mess up the match for the "non-whiners" who just shot the targets?

So again, your contention is that if a stage is thrown out because it was illegal, it was the person who officially noted the illegal stage's fault, as opposed to the people who designed, built, and ran the illegal stage who were at fault for having an illegal stage that couldn't be used at the match.

Ok. I'm thinking that not only is that flat-out not true in a factual sense, but it also is probably a significantly poor way to handle issues or errors at any level of just about anything. The error needs to attributed in the correct fashion, so that the people who caused the error can be helped to not do it anymore. Placing the blame on someone else who merely brought it to official attention is a great way to make sure that errors are never pointed out and thus, never fixed.

Unless, of course, someone is an MD who doesn't care about breaking the rules, so of course they'd want to drop the blame on someone else, in an attempt to get peer pressure working so that no one ever questions the MD's decisions. Of course, that'll make for a poor club...

But, if it's a major issue then... as you noted... we have to talk about whether the MD is going to continue to hold IDPA matches at their club? OK, so he says "No! Screw you!"

So back to my original question. Do we fire them all? And, when we do, where do you go to shoot your shiny toys?

If you demand "Perfection" in an imperfect world, you may have to travel quite a ways 'to' (that was the grammar edit... just so Thomas H knows) find that perfection. And, that distance may prevent/preclude your participation. Just a thought.

So, your strawman contention is that since we can't get perfection in an imperfect world, we should just let MDs and SOs set up and run illegal stages of all kinds. Nice.

I disagree. And, from the viewpoint of someone who has seen numerous local and major matches where the rules WERE followed, I think you are flat-out wrong. Demonstrably so, since again, many places do manage to do this year after year.

You also seem to say that if an MD is officially asked to fix an illegal stage, their response will be to say "Screw you, I quit" and then we won't have IDPA matches. That seems a far stretch, and again another strawman argument.

If people let MDs run illegal matches with illegal stages, then they will continue to do so. If they are corrected, then the number of times they will do so will become less---or eventually someone else will take over and do it right.

Either way---the sport will be the better for it.

[GOF]

Wow! I seem to have a fan club that follows my every word. How cool!

I hope you wasted a lot of time putting the above together, and then stayed up late at night waiting for me to respond to your troll.

In a perfect world everything would be done right. But, we live in an imperfect world. Consider the clubs that finally said "The heck with it" (GADPA comes immediately to mind and they have a big shooter base, and there are smaller clubs on their same page).

When these clubs leave, as some have, do their members drive an extra 100 miles to shoot a "real" IDPA match (and renew their IDPA memberships) or do they just go shoot the now-Outlaw matches the clubs put on? Think human nature here, and you'll find the answer. Most IDPA members shoot local matches and not sanctioned matches. They just want to have fun on a weekend day and shoot their shiny toys.

The loser in your "perfect world' philosophy is IDPA itself... and those $40 annual memberships. Most shooters could care less as long as they have a fun match to shoot that is located reasonably close to home.

Saving $40 on their IDPA membership by not having to renew? Cool, more gas & ammo money for them.

Edited, para 4. Changed third word in sentence from "of" to "in" for grammar purposes". Didn't want some folks to think I was cheating. I know that there are some fans who hang on my every word.

Edited November 10, 2014 by GOF

[Bob Hostetter]

I think we are starting to miss the point ... the people who are in charge of making sure the competitors follow the rules to a "T", should start by doing the same thing. And again we are discussing sanctioned matches not local club matches.

If HQ enforces a penalty for illegal stages and the AC's actually attend the sanctioned matches in their areas and make sure the stages are legal 'after' set up (After all, IDPA does pay them to attend the matches) then there won't be any problems staying within the rules. Pull the sanctioning a couple of times and MD's would start caring and paying attention to those kinds of details.

[Jim Watson]

It is making less and less difference to me.

My sanctioned match attendance will be way down next year, two or three instead of 6 to 8.

Matches have been relocated and rescheduled unfavorably to me, or just dropped.

Some on whineybutt disagreement with HQ, some on MD burnout, some on petty politics, some on money.

It doesn't matter, they are not serving me as well as I was accustomed to so I will not/cannot attend.

I have enough club shoots to keep the Dillon hot; even if two or three of the the eight I can get to are outlaw. Or not even action shooting at all.

[chuck s]

If the stages have been approved by HQ prior to the match and I show up and there are a few discrepancies with the rules, I'm going to shoot it and enjoy it. Try and get a stage thrown out, are you kidding me? Man up, shoot to win and don't come back next year if a you are butthurt about it.

[elguapo]

So...

Bob Hostetter says,"How hard can I troll these fools who actually think I was looking for a serious answer to a question?"

Ya got me. I'm done.

Unbelievable......

A serious question gets asked and it gets dismissed as trolling by the sport's staunch defenders.

James Yeager was right.

[Bob Hostetter]

If the MD's aren't going to follow the rules restricting stage design, AC's/HQ isn't going to enforce them, and a major portion of the membership is ok with that, why doesn't IDPA just eliminate the rules in question? Then the MD's won't have a compliance issue. And again, we are only discussing sanctioned matches.

Edited November 11, 2014 by Bob Hostetter

[GOF]

I think there are a couple of reasons why MDs sometimes insert a stage that is a bit at odds with IDPA regarding target distances, number of non-threats, etc. One reason that sometimes occurs at sanctioned matches is that the COF as laid out on paper looked real good. But, when they went to set it up in the assigned bay two days before the match, it didn't quite fit the space, and some target adjustment was needed. As well, there may have been some safety issues that were discovered when the SOs shot the stages before the match and dictated changes. These things do happen.

Another reason, and one often seen at smaller local clubs, is that the IDPA-legal stages are often just plain boring! I mean, how many times do you want to engage T-1 through T-3 at P1 and advance to P2 and engage T-4 through T-6, and then ULSC? Some MDs want to spice things up, provide a challenge to the shooters, and make their 'customer base' happy. I've designed stages like that myself. They wouldn't pass an AC/HQ review... but the shooters loved them!. And, they came back next month.

I do think that at a sanctioned match the rules should be followed as closely as safety allows. But, on the club level? Some MDs (and a lot of weekend shooters who will never shoot a sanctioned match) just wanna have fun.

[Bob Hostetter]

Why cant the AC's show up the day before the match, and staying one stage ahead of the SO shooting, look over the stage and enforce compliance by requiring the necessary changes be made before anyone shoots them. Again, HQ is paying them to do just that. Why is that such a horrible thing?

[GOF]

Bob, how much does IDPA pay the ACs? Is it enough to cover their gas, food on the road, and overnight lodging if the match is a distance from them? And, do that for every match they are supposed to cover... including monitoring new clubs?

I don't know the answer to that, but a couple of years ago a AC did mention a stipend figure, and I didn't think it would be enough - especially given the time it would take to carry those duties out. IDPA may have increased the stipend, but I still don't know. I do know that $3 a gallon gas can eat a lot of $, not to mention the other expenses.

[Bob Hostetter]

Each AC will have to decide for themselves if the amount of money they get is enough to cover their expenses. Large states like Texas and California would have much higher expenses then say Rhode Island or Maine. But each AC made a commitment to IDPA to both assist the clubs and members in their area's and to ensure compliance with the rules regardless of cost reimbursement.

[GOF]

Bob, if the ACs decide that their stipend is not enough to cover the costs incurred in carrying out their mandated duties and say "The heck with it, I'm outa here". Where does that leave IDPA? How about if MDs get tired of interference and complaints, and say "The heck with this, I'm outa here." That is happening now, at least with respect to some MDs/clubs..

Where does that leave IDPA. Who is going to hold IDPA matches? And, who is going to bring those $40 a year new members that IDPA depends upon into the fold?

Edited to change para one wording from "mandated rules" to mandated duties" ... just wanted some to know I didn't really add anything new

Edited November 11, 2014 by GOF

[GmanCdp]

I've been saying that for years to have the AC show up even when the SO's shoot.. adjustments can be made in a matter of minutes to make a stage legal. When I was running a State match I invited any AC to shoot for free and asked them to shoot with the SO's, however most of the time they shot with the shooters. Out of the 10 matches I ran, I only had one stage that I know of that had and issue and was missed by me,16 SO's and the AC, but we corrected it on the SO shoot day. Now that's not to say I didn't have emails back and forth with the AC,SO's and other MD's before the match. Over the 10 matches I put on, the 5 stages I did have several shooters complain about were legal stages, just something completely different that they have never seen before and got butt hurt when they did bad on the stage.

[GOF]

Tanking a stage can bring on a lot of butthurt, and the burning desire to find something wrong with the stage - other than their tanking it (their shooting skill and stage planning was never an issue... it had to be the stage ). I have heard, but cannot yet confirm, that one well-respected law school has introduce a new class - IDPA Range Lawyer..

Graduates will be awarded a Magna Cum Loud certificate.

[Thomas H]

Tanking a stage can bring on a lot of butthurt, and the burning desire to find something wrong with the stage - other than their tanking it (their shooting skill and stage planning was never an issue... it had to be the stage ). I have heard, but cannot yet confirm, that one well-respected law school has introduce a new class - IDPA Range Lawyer..

Graduates will be awarded a Magna Cum Loud certificate.

I see that you are still blaming the shooter for match staff putting together illegal stages. Nicely done!

That, along with your commentary about how we should allow match staff to design, build, and run illegal stages (and then ignore it) is an excellent way to grow the sport in a fashion that will draw in shooters from all sorts of places.

After all, everyone wants to go shoot matches where the rules change all the time, and if there is a problem, the MD will ignore it and tell his staff "Oh look, a Range Lawyer" and belittle them. Indeed, that'll help IDPA become even more well known and respected.

Really. Absolutely.