Shooting order of targets?

[bkeeler]

This is Classifier CM13-04 The Roscoe Rattle.

String 1: On signal, turn and engage T2 with 6 rounds

only, from within area A.

String 2: On signal, turn and engage T1 with 6 rounds

only. Perform a mandatory reload and engage T3

with six rounds only. All shots fired from within

area A.

On string 2 Can you shoot T3 first then reload and shoot T1?

Reason I ask because we shot this a while back and the decision was you had to shoot T1 then T3.

But thinking about this on the CM99-11 El Pres and others an order is given to shoot the targets.

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.

I shoot T3-T1 after the reload on this classifier and never been told I couldn't shoot it that way.

Edited November 7, 2014 by bkeeler

[motosapiens]

I personally think you should be able to shoot it either direction, and that's the way we've run it when I was around (after some discussion). There is certainly no fairness-oriented reason to disallow it, and otherwise the stage is clearly biased against lefties.

I like to make the classifiers a test of shooting skill rather than a gaming/lawyering exercise.

[bkeeler]

I personally think you should be able to shoot it either direction, and that's the way we've run it when I was around (after some discussion). There is certainly no fairness-oriented reason to disallow it, and otherwise the stage is clearly biased against lefties.

I like to make the classifiers a test of shooting skill rather than a gaming/lawyering exercise.

I agree. It was decided by our SC/CRO that T1 was to be engaged first. Even the lefty said looks like it is to be shot that way....

[JAFO]

Unfortunately, the way its written, T1 is engaged first. It would have been more equitable for lefties to write:

String 2: On signal, turn and engage either T1 or T3 with 6 rounds only. Perform a mandatory reload and engage the remaining target T3 or T1 with six rounds only.

Or something to that effect. Just saying engage the remaining target would probably confuse some poor soul because T2 is not engaged in that string.

[bkeeler]

So does that mean you can't shoot the el pres T3-T1 or any other classifier that says shoot T1-Tx?

[bkeeler]

How about CM99-10 times Two.

STAGE PROCEDURE

From Box A engage only T1-T3 with two rounds each. From Box B engage only T4-T6 with two rounds each. Start in either Box A or Box B. Upon start signal, from the starting box engage the appropriate targets. Move to the remaining box and engage the appropriate targets.

Does this mean from box A you have to engage T1-T3 ( near to far)in that order? And from box B T4-T6 (far to near) in that order?

Doesn't say "in any order" in the stage procedure on times two or the el pres.

Edited November 7, 2014 by bkeeler

[motosapiens]

Unfortunately, the way its written, T1 is engaged first.

But the way it is written is dumb and unfair, and I can't think of any earthly reason to intentionally handicap lefties. Note that this phrase is found in the classifier book on page 3:

The primary responsibility for honoring this concept

of fairness as it applies to the classification system lies

with the competitor. The secondary responsibility is that

of the match directors and range officers to ensure that

the stages are run properly. If the stage description leaves

any doubt as to the proper procedure, please call the

office for clarification before the match.

Fairness is important. I believe it was simply an oversight to write the wording so that *some* people might think they really had to go in a particular order, even tho no other classifier that I can think of does that.

However, if Troy says otherwise, I will happily be unfair instead.

Edited November 8, 2014 by motosapiens

[bkeeler]

That's my point look at some of the other wording in the classifiers. If 13-04 must be shot in string two the way it is written then all the classifiers should be shot in the same manner. Examples in previous post. I have been shooting the El Pres the wrong way or at least not according to what is written the same for times two.

El pres and Times Two. "In any order" is not written any where in the stage procedure. So the way I read shoot T1-T3 is you are to shoot T1,T2,T3.......and so on??

Edited November 8, 2014 by bkeeler

[davsco]

no way "shoot t1 - t3" can be construed to say t1, then t2 then t3. it means 'shoot those three targets' and no order is implied or stated.

[bkeeler]

no way "shoot t1 - t3" can be construed to say t1, then t2 then t3. it means 'shoot those three targets' and no order is implied or stated.

Well that makes sense. So in that case 13-04 procedure was written this way intentially? So a lefty has a slight disadvantage, because if he turns to his gun side he has a further swing to T1, and if he turns to his weak side he has to turn farther to T1 than a right handed shooter?

[teros135]

How about CM99-10 times Two.

STAGE PROCEDURE

From Box A engage only T1-T3 with two rounds each. From Box B engage only T4-T6 with two rounds each. Start in either Box A or Box B. Upon start signal, from the starting box engage the appropriate targets. Move to the remaining box and engage the appropriate targets.

Does this mean from box A you have to engage T1-T3 ( near to far)in that order? And from box B T4-T6 (far to near) in that order?

Doesn't say "in any order" in the stage procedure on times two or the el pres.

No, you shoot T1-T3 and T4-T6, respectively, in any order. There's nothing to say it has to be some particular order, just shoot the three targets in each group, from their respective boxes. If no particular order is specified, you choose the order. All classifiers and stages are that way.

In the Roscoe Rattle, on the other hand, the order is specified, and it's hard to justify changing the order just to satisfy someone's sense of rightness. If we think it should be changed, contact NROI/USPSA, but we shouldn't change it ourselves, because then everyone's going to be shooting it differently, and that's not fair. We don't get to second-guess the Classifier rules, or the rule book. Same for everyone is what fair is about.

[teros135]

no way "shoot t1 - t3" can be construed to say t1, then t2 then t3. it means 'shoot those three targets' and no order is implied or stated.

Well that makes sense. So in that case 13-04 procedure was written this way intentially? So a lefty has a slight disadvantage, because if he turns to his gun side he has a further swing to T1, and if he turns to his weak side he has to turn farther to T1 than a right handed shooter?

Any of us can have some type of "disadvantage" in one stage or another. I don't shoot left side of barricades well, but leftys may have an advantage there. There was a stage at a Level II in September that required two head-box shots around a wall on the left side, requiring leaning inward, and that was a bear for right-handers but likely easier for the leftys. Gotta practice everything, and the disadvantages start to diminish.

[bkeeler]

no way "shoot t1 - t3" can be construed to say t1, then t2 then t3. it means 'shoot those three targets' and no order is implied or stated.

Well that makes sense. So in that case 13-04 procedure was written this way intentially? So a lefty has a slight disadvantage, because if he turns to his gun side he has a further swing to T1, and if he turns to his weak side he has to turn farther to T1 than a right handed shooter?

Any of us can have some type of "disadvantage" in one stage or another. I don't shoot left side of barricades well, but leftys may have an advantage there. There was a stage at a Level II in September that required two head-box shots around a wall on the left side, requiring leaning inward, and that was a bear for right-handers but likely easier for the leftys. Gotta practice everything, and the disadvantages start to diminish.

All good points. Just thought it was a little odd. So we shot CM13-04 correctly then. I just have a feeling that not all are shooting it that way. Just got me thinking is all which isn't a bad thing LOL! Edited November 8, 2014 by bkeeler

[Nik Habicht]

That's my point look at some of the other wording in the classifiers. If 13-04 must be shot in string two the way it is written then all the classifiers should be shot in the same manner. Examples in previous post. I have been shooting the El Pres the wrong way or at least not according to what is written the same for times two.

El pres and Times Two. "In any order" is not written any where in the stage procedure. So the way I read shoot T1-T3 is you are to shoot T1,T2,T3.......and so on??

The stage description for El Pres doesn't specify an order. It simply lists a bunch of targets that must be engaged, so the shooter has a choice of which target to shoot first, second, and third.....

This classifier, unfortunately, is really specific -- so I'd say it needs to be shot as written, unless DNROI wants to issue an interpretation that says it's ok.....

[MaraW]

Under the freestyle rules there are specifics about classifiers. 1.1.5.2 and 1.1.5.3 only cover mandatory reloads, shooting position, stance, strong hand and weak hand (so these things can be specified). Otherwise freestyle rules still apply and targets in an array can be engaged in any order. Roscoe Rattle is basically telling you to perform a mandatory reload between arrays, in this case the arrays have only one target, but this is no different than any classifier that says engage T1-3, mandatory reload, engage T4-6. You can start on either array and shoot each in any order you want.

[motosapiens]

no way "shoot t1 - t3" can be construed to say t1, then t2 then t3. it means 'shoot those three targets' and no order is implied or stated.

Well that makes sense. So in that case 13-04 procedure was written this way intentially? So a lefty has a slight disadvantage, because if he turns to his gun side he has a further swing to T1, and if he turns to his weak side he has to turn farther to T1 than a right handed shooter?

Any of us can have some type of "disadvantage" in one stage or another. I don't shoot left side of barricades well, but leftys may have an advantage there. There was a stage at a Level II in September that required two head-box shots around a wall on the left side, requiring leaning inward, and that was a bear for right-handers but likely easier for the leftys. Gotta practice everything, and the disadvantages start to diminish.

stages are different than classifiers. Barricades are different than specifying the order of target engagements.

I know of no other classfier where order of engagement is specified, therefore unless DNROI specifically states that this classifier is the unusual exception, a reasonable person would have conclude that all that was intended was a reload between the two targets, not a specific order. I predict this will eventually get fixed when some lefty meets one of the overly literal RO's and complains about it.

[eric4069]

I'm a lefty and I shot it t3 then t1. No comments from the RO and the MD said it was ok when I asked him

I would like to see the instructions re-worded.

Eric

Edited November 8, 2014 by eric4069

[Nik Habicht]

no way "shoot t1 - t3" can be construed to say t1, then t2 then t3. it means 'shoot those three targets' and no order is implied or stated.

Well that makes sense. So in that case 13-04 procedure was written this way intentially? So a lefty has a slight disadvantage, because if he turns to his gun side he has a further swing to T1, and if he turns to his weak side he has to turn farther to T1 than a right handed shooter?

Any of us can have some type of "disadvantage" in one stage or another. I don't shoot left side of barricades well, but leftys may have an advantage there. There was a stage at a Level II in September that required two head-box shots around a wall on the left side, requiring leaning inward, and that was a bear for right-handers but likely easier for the leftys. Gotta practice everything, and the disadvantages start to diminish.

stages are different than classifiers. Barricades are different than specifying the order of target engagements.

I know of no other classfier where order of engagement is specified, therefore unless DNROI specifically states that this classifier is the unusual exception, a reasonable person would have conclude that all that was intended was a reload between the two targets, not a specific order. I predict this will eventually get fixed when some lefty meets one of the overly literal RO's and complains about it.

Devil's Advocate Mode on: How do you square your interpretation with the admonition not to read into/game/or otherwise interpret in the intro to the Classifier Course Book?

/DAM

[George Post]

I'm left handed.

I read the course description. The second string states you must shoot T1 first. I think it is unfair, but so are many stages to us leftys.

I think everyone who has ever shot T 3 first in the second string of this classifier should turn them selfs into headquarters ( j/k)

On the other hand, if enough called HQ maybe it will get fixed or at least confirmed as to be shot as stated.

I know at my local club, the MD/RM's take correct shooting and set up of classifiers very seriously. I have seen several classifier stages not submitted because the measurements between targets were off by a very small amount.

Look at the stage drawing for Bang and Clang. Do you measure the distance to the popper from the base of the popper or from the calibration circle? What about CM 99-28 are the no-shoots suppose to be right behind the poppers or are they to be set up 5 foot at the shoulder and be useless? Yes my club is that strict. I have heard other clubs just pace off the distance between targets. Nothing I can do about that. It's not the same classifier for everyone, so it's really not fair.

I think classifier stage descriptions have to be written and drawn correctly. They should be set up correctly (as humanly possible.) Then shot as written.

If this course description said shoot T3, reload, then shoot T1 it would never have passed muster. It was probably written by a right handed person, checked by a right handed and made into a classifier. I have news for everyone, 10 to 15% of shooter are not right handed.

But if want classifiers to be fair you have set them up as shown and shoot them as written.

[teros135]

I agree with George, at least about "set them up as shown and shoot them as written", and about communicating with USPSA HQ to get something changed if we don't feel it's right.

Otherwise, it's just do-as-we-wish, "interpret" how a classifier/rule/standard "should" have been written, and change the stage or rules to suit ourselves and then complain about it here. Do something constructive about it! In the mean time, we need to keep the classifiers the same for everyone, as the classifier system was intended.

BTW, I would support changing Roscoe Rattle's instructions to "either order" for String 2, unless HQ has a specific reason it was written the way it is. (And apparently it's been run the way it is for the two or so years it's been used, starting at 2012 Nationals, I believe.).

[motosapiens]

Devil's Advocate Mode on: How do you square your interpretation with the admonition not to read into/game/or otherwise interpret in the intro to the Classifier Course Book?

I don't think it's gaming, I think it's trying to properly adhere to the spirit of the classifier system. I think being overly literal so as to make things unfair is just plain silly.

I also think it's silly for some people to claim that the roscoe rattle *requires* a particular order, yet the wording of "T1-T3" in other classifiers does *not* imply a particular order. That's just people trying do-as-we-wish, "interpret" how a classifier/rule/standard "should" have been written, and change the stage or rules to suit ourselves and then complain about it here.

Fortunately, it doesn't really matter what anyone here thinks. There is a clear disagreement among experienced and qualified RO's on this point, so it should be clarified by DNROI, and then everyone can live happily with it.

Edited November 10, 2014 by motosapiens

[Graham Smith]

It is extremely unfortunate, but classifier descriptions are often extremely inconsistent. Some specifically say in any order and others don't. I would have to read each description but I don't think that there are many the specify an exact order. However some like this one imply an order.

El Pres neither specifies nor implies an order. It says to shoot the array T1-T3, reload and do it again. It doesn't say shoot T1 then T2 then T3, which is basically what the Roscoe Rattle does.

Edited November 10, 2014 by Graham Smith

[motosapiens]

It is extremely unfortunate, but classifier descriptions are often extremely inconsistent. Some specifically say in any order and others don't. I would have to read each description but I don't think that there are many the specify an exact order. However some like this one imply an order.

El Pres neither specifies nor implies an order. It says to shoot the array T1-T3, reload and do it again. It doesn't say shoot T1 then T2 then T3, which is basically what the Roscoe Rattle does.

T1-T3 (pronounced T1 through T3) could definitely be seen as implying an order. You're used to doing it differently so you choose to interpret it differently, more like "T1, T2 and T3" (no order implied).

[jdd817]

The designer of this classifier occasionally shoots at the club I shoot at, and was there for a match where we had it set up. He specifically said it was never his intent to specify order on the second string, regardless of how it may read.

[bkeeler]

It is extremely unfortunate, but classifier descriptions are often extremely inconsistent. Some specifically say in any order and others don't. I would have to read each description but I don't think that there are many the specify an exact order. However some like this one imply an order.

El Pres neither specifies nor implies an order. It says to shoot the array T1-T3, reload and do it again. It doesn't say shoot T1 then T2 then T3, which is basically what the Roscoe Rattle does.

T1-T3 (pronounced T1 through T3) could definitely be seen as implying an order.

This is what I was getting at with the El Pres and other classifiers that say Tx-Ty

Edited November 10, 2014 by bkeeler