Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

should penalties have been given for the port shooting in this vid?


Sandbagger123

Recommended Posts

I would say it's subjective to the S.O. And how they wanted to call the stage. To me a port has to be wide enough for someone's body to be exposed on both sides. Those looked more like small holes to me.

At least 50% of his upper body was behind cover

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean penalties other than the fact that he has his finger on the trigger before dropping the slide, at a reload with the gun not pointing at a target? At time mark 1:13

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did that guy beat you by less than 3 seconds? If so, PE. Just kidding. A port is not low cover. You gotta shoot things in tactical priority and that happens by shooting from cover. Cover is never defined as as standing in the middle of something.......... So yeah, I'd say PE. The width of the port has nothing to do with it. I've shot at matches through a 2" vertical slit that looked more like a medieval bow and arrow port than something on a modern COF.

Reality? Targets are pretty dang close. Guy looks to be new-ish. Also looks like the RO isn't concerned about his positioning so they, and I'm guessing, probably briefed them as a "shoot these targets standing here through this port" rather than a more accurate way letting people know they needed to 'slice the pie'.

If it ain't set up to be shot near to far, or you're in the open then the vertical edge of your cover is where you should be shooting from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those "ports" suck but he definitely had a cover violation kneeling.

If briefed as slice the pie at the port, PEs all around but not for cover calls. PEs for failing to follow the stage instructions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to be briefed about slicing the pie at a port or a window. It's a rule:

3.5.4 At no time should a shooter stand directly in a window or port to engage targets. Shooters must slice the pie around the edge of the window or port. The portion of the shooter’s body above and below the window or port is of no concern when with using cover around the edge of the window or port. The opposite sides of a single window or port shall be considered separate positions of cover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True ^^^, totally true. But how much hand holding do you normally see in a stage brief? I see quite a bit......................

None the less screen cap I did and drawing in of lines shows it as it should be.

Now, did that guy beat you by less than a PE's worth of time OP? hahahahahaha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True ^^^, totally true. But how much hand holding do you normally see in a stage brief? I see quite a bit......................

None the less screen cap I did and drawing in of lines shows it as it should be.

Now, did that guy beat you by less than a PE's worth of time OP? hahahahahaha.

nah not even my match. i watch matches every weekend and noticed this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to be briefed about slicing the pie at a port or a window. It's a rule:

3.5.4 At no time should a shooter stand directly in a window or port to engage targets. Shooters must slice the pie around the edge of the window or port. The portion of the shooter’s body above and below the window or port is of no concern when with using cover around the edge of the window or port. The opposite sides of a single window or port shall be considered separate positions of cover.

So how exactly are the SOs supposed to judge whether or not a person is sufficiently behind "cover" in the case of a port? In other cases, we have the 100% of lower body/50% of upper body rules (unhelpful as they are) --- in the case of a port, as long as the shooter doesn't stand directly in front of the port, how exactly are the SOs going to define cover violations?

More importantly, how are the shooters supposed to know how SOs will define "cover"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You tell by looking at the stage, the port and each target and then looking where one's feet are in relation to that. The line I drew in the screen shot makes it easy if you can visualize this. Secondly, the rule book we all love says at the stage briefing each shooter gets to see each target from each position and how cover is to be defined. A competent SO, not just a timer tripod, can do this easily and quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I run a stage with ports, I give PEs for people that stand square in the window. If you stand to the side closest to where you came from (so you don't cross the port), you're usually good. The expectation of 50% of the torso behind cover just isn't there (3.5.4), unless the window is really big, I guess. You don't have to watch their feet because there is no way to expose their lower body. Technically, you could stand right in front of ports like the ones in the video and have 100% of your lower body and 50% of your upper body not visible from the other side of the window. That's why unless you stand directly in front, you're usually not going to get called, or if you don't move your body at all to engage more targets.

A good scorekeeper shadows the shooter where ever they can and lines up the center line of the target with the edge of the window/port and will get a pretty good view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You tell by looking at the stage, the port and each target and then looking where one's feet are in relation to that.

How? The rules themselves specifically say that the lower body rules and the 50% upper body rule do not apply. If my feet are ANYWHERE relative to the window it doesn't matter. After all, all walls are impenetrable, right?

The line I drew in the screen shot makes it easy if you can visualize this. Secondly, the rule book we all love says at the stage briefing each shooter gets to see each target from each position and how cover is to be defined. A competent SO, not just a timer tripod, can do this easily and quickly.

I'd like to see that on a narrow port, really. Short of "don't stand in the middle of the port" I'd be curious as to how (with a narrow port, which the shooter will completely obscure to the SO if the SO is behind the shooter, and if the SO is to the side they can't necessarily even see the targets that are being shot) you can define cover precisely for the shooter so you can tell it later--particularly because you aren't allowed to make any cover limit markings.

As has been quoted:

"3.5.4 At no time should a shooter stand directly in a window or port to engage targets. Shooters must slice the pie around the edge of the window or port. The portion of the shooter’s body above and below the window or port is of no concern when with using cover around the edge of the window or port. The opposite sides of a single window or port shall be considered separate positions of cover."

The only parts of that rule that give directives as to what constitutes "cover" (unlike other rules, which stipulate percentages of body obscured) are:

1) don't stand directly in front, and

2) must slice the pie.

That's it. It specifically REMOVES all other cover definitions and requirements. (And 3.5.3 is only applicable to vertical cover, horizontal cover, or a combination such as a barrel anyway.)

The foot placement of the shooter doesn't tell you anything---because the rule itself says that any part of the shooter's body above or below the port doesn't matter. And since in most cases the SO can't watch the shooter AND the targets at the same time with a narrow port, AND there is no rule about how much of your head/shoulders can show, I'm curious as to what rule you are using to define your lines where cover exists?

The screenshot shown above is NOT how cover is defined for a port. At least, not if you are acting as if the shooter's body needs to be on one side of that line.

If the shooter is pie-ing, and isn't in front of the window, what rule would you be using to PE them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like these kinds of stages as they are "cover traps" and make it hard to really difficult to call cover and be fair. I always make the argument that speed is the enemy of cover as if you can out move the RO then cover cant be called correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was watching this and noticed that there were no penalties given for not pieing the ports. should he have gotten them?

Just out of curiosity, how do you know no penalties were given? That's just a video (not even of your match, as you say), with no scores, and no idea what order the stages were even shot in even if scores were available. Since there was no scorekeeper following right behind the SO, I don't think the SO would even need to wave PE fingers around to record penalties.

How the cover rules apply to ports is a perfectly reasonable question—I just don't see why that question needs to framed in a way that is clearly critical of the SO.

As for the actual question, I think it is hard to say from the video if cover was violated. Without seeing where each target beyond the ports was located, I have no idea if the shooter was slicing the pie correctly or not. Also, do the current rules not state the cover positions need to be described as part of the stage description/walkthrough? Perhaps the SO's walkthrough (also not on video) did address how cover was being called on these stages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...