Shooter allowed to utilize a timer?

[peterthefish]

Comps and dots lead to open right?

Yes. Because instead of saying "boy, that seems like cheating, let's keep it out of the sport", folks probably thought "boy, there's no rule against it and that seems neat - let's see what happens."

That's why Jerry won the 1990 USPSA Nationals with a dot. Not the "Open Nationals". Open didn't exist yet, and open and limited wouldn't be split for some time.

So yes, allowing new technology in the game may lead to changes in how it's played. I don't see that as supporting an argument that it should be banned.

Or is your argument that having an Open division is a bad thing? Because if we just banned technology because we thought it was cheating, we wouldn't.

/Of course this is all academic. If a beep before a par time changes the way you're shooting a stage, your plan probably needed some work to begin with.

[ctay]

Sometimes I say to myself during the COF "slow down". Is that coaching?

[Nik Habicht]

That seems like a very tortured reading of 8.6.1 to reach the desired result (That you think it should be prohibited).

The fact that a ShotMaxx may assist a competitor is one thing. But I just cannot accept that the phrase "given to a competitor" contemplates a competitor helping themselves.

Using a better gun, holster, or mag pouches (other equipment) are other things a competitor can do to help themselves. Same for counting shots to prevent going to slide lock. This is simply a case of using better equipment.

I think 8.7.4 is a reach too - the ROs timer could interfere with other shooters too.

I also disagree with the repeated characterization that this is a potential issue brought on by new technology. Anyone with a Timex in 1990 could set a countdown timer to an alarm.

Anyway, the way the question was asked "Whaahhhhh, I think this is cheating", I'm not surprised with the answer. Would have been interesting had the question actually been posed in a neutral manner. Because if this is the way compensators and red dots had been treated, it would be a very different sport today.

Comps and dots lead to open right?

Not really. Open was all there was at the time......

Limited got created in response to dots, comps, and big sticks.....

[peterthefish]

Sometimes I say to myself during the COF "slow down". Is that coaching?

A red dot sure helps or assists you in getting on target faster doesn't it?

[ctay]

Sometimes I say to myself during the COF "slow down". Is that coaching?

A red dot sure helps or assists you in getting on target faster doesn't it?

To be fair, I only use it occasionally...

[peterthefish]

Sometimes I say to myself during the COF "slow down". Is that coaching?

A red dot sure helps or assists you in getting on target faster doesn't it?

To be fair, I only use it occasionally...

I try to stick with using the force myself.

[Sarge]

If you know Troy at all you would know he tells you what he thinks, not what you want to hear.

[teros135]

There's a big difference here that the "helper beep" crowd seems to be ignoring. Red dots, comps, heavy guns, etc. are in the rules and part of the sport. They've been discussed, considered, and adopted. Self-timers with "reminder" beeps have not. Maybe they'll become part of the sport in time, but to claim that they're the same as basic shooting equipment is disingenuous.

[peterthefish]

If you know Troy at all you would know he tells you what he thinks, not what you want to hear.

1 - That fail to address any of the substance of arguments to the contrary of your position

2 - You can't unring a bell. We'll never know what the response would have been had the question been posed in a neutral manner which didn't

A ) presuppose use of a timer was cheating, and;

B ) provide rules and a train of thought (as ill formed as it might be) to help reaching that conclusion.

But hey, you went there first. And sometimes, even when you're wrong, you're right.

Edited June 30, 2015 by peterthefish

[peterthefish]

There's a big difference here that the "helper beep" crowd seems to be ignoring. Red dots, comps, heavy guns, etc. are in the rules and part of the sport. They've been discussed, considered, and adopted. Self-timers with "reminder" beeps have not. Maybe they'll become part of the sport in time, but to claim that they're the same as basic shooting equipment is disingenuous.

To claim that using certain available technology to maximize your performance is giving yourself assistance is disingenuous as well.

Red dots weren't always in the rules or part of the sport, and had this way of thinking existed in the late 80s, they may never have come into it.

[Corey]

One way to settle this. Someone wear this at Nationals, get told you can't, arb it and let everyone know how it went.

[jhgtyre]

Then there are the smart watches that can "tap" you on the wrist. I wonder if you would notice it while shooting? The RO certainly wouldn't.

[wtturn]

This is in the USPSA rules forum, and I don't care about 3 gun anyway, so this response is purely relating to USPSA.

My take is if you are taking the time to check your ShotMaxx during a COF you're boned anyway.

I fail to see where this creates a competitive inequity. Heck, I hope all my competition starts checking their wrist during a stage.

I know at least one guy who uses his as a diagnostic tool after the fact, as another poster mentioned, to check splits/transitions/draws/ etc.

The shotmaxx will give you a beep if you set it to do so. You would not be looking at it. You would hear a warning beep that you should stop before the real timer beeps.

So what? If you're concerned with anything other than SHOOTING the COF, you're boned.

I hope everyone starts using them.

[peterthefish]

This is in the USPSA rules forum, and I don't care about 3 gun anyway, so this response is purely relating to USPSA.

My take is if you are taking the time to check your ShotMaxx during a COF you're boned anyway.

I fail to see where this creates a competitive inequity. Heck, I hope all my competition starts checking their wrist during a stage.

I know at least one guy who uses his as a diagnostic tool after the fact, as another poster mentioned, to check splits/transitions/draws/ etc.

The shotmaxx will give you a beep if you set it to do so. You would not be looking at it. You would hear a warning beep that you should stop before the real timer beeps.

So what? If you're concerned with anything other than SHOOTING the COF, you're boned.

I hope everyone starts using them.

I agree with this 100%.

One more thought on this whole topic. When Red Dots came to USPSA they were big, bulky, impractical toys. And despite IPSC principle 4 stating "Any item of equipment, or modification to equipment, which sacrifices practical functionality for a competitive advantage contravenes the principles of this sport.", they were allowed.

I have no intent of ever using a ShotMaxx for a match, but if someone did and got a rule violation Id happily pay their arb fee and help argue the case.

[waktasz]

I have used the Shotmaxx spy mode at one match just so I could go back and review my splits and transitions to see what I needed to work on, but it's too much for me to worry about setting it before the stage starts so I stopped doing it.

[Sarge]

I have used the Shotmaxx spy mode at one match just so I could go back and review my splits and transitions to see what I needed to work on, but it's too much for me to worry about setting it before the stage starts so I stopped doing it.

Same here. I don't even fool with video. I get a kick out of the guys making sure they have their head camera on while trying to make ready. Some have it down to an art and you barely notice it others not so much.

[waktasz]

I have the camera glasses and have for about 4 years now. I typically turn them on before make ready and it only takes a second. In the beginning of using them I did forget a bunch of times to turn them on, but I really like having the footage to review so I do continue to use them.

[Gooldylocks]

I have used the Shotmaxx spy mode at one match just so I could go back and review my splits and transitions to see what I needed to work on, but it's too much for me to worry about setting it before the stage starts so I stopped doing it.

Same here. I don't even fool with video. I get a kick out of the guys making sure they have their head camera on while trying to make ready. Some have it down to an art and you barely notice it others not so much.

After doing it at the majority of local matches for awhile now, I have just worked it into my make ready routine. You wouldn't even notice. it just takes practice, same as anything in this game I would say.

On something like a classifier, where I can review my draw (likely the only straight draw and shoot to a 7-15 yard target in the match), transitions and splits to see where I am losing time from an X score, it is an excellent review and training tool.

As I have said, thats the way I use my shotmaxx at a match, not as a par timer. I still don't think there is anything cheating about doing so though.

I do agree, cameras tend to give a lot of shooters issues though..

[motosapiens]

There's a big difference here that the "helper beep" crowd seems to be ignoring. Red dots, comps, heavy guns, etc. are in the rules and part of the sport. They've been discussed, considered, and adopted. Self-timers with "reminder" beeps have not. Maybe they'll become part of the sport in time, but to claim that they're the same as basic shooting equipment is disingenuous.

What? As previously mentioned, those things originally were NOT in the rules. Someone showed up with them. Some old cranky guys probably complained about them too, but instead of just banning them (along with rock music and coarse language), they were adopted into the rules.

Of course that's an academic argument anyway, because I can't think of any possible situation where a 'reminder beep' would be anything but detrimental in USPSA shooting. This whole discussion is silly imho.

Use what you need to use. Let IDPA ban it. If someone has some heartache with it in USPSA, let's discuss it and consider it before just saying "hey, get off my dang lawn you kids".

[Nimitz]

I sense a "Failure To Do Right" rules addition campaign coming ....

[ctay]

This feels very similar to the discussions about "gaming" a stage. IE - "you know how the stage designer meant for it to be shot" or "you know you weren't supposed to shoot that target from there".

I'm firmly in the "if it isn't disallowed, it is allowed" camp. Rules should be the rules - not what we "feel" they should be.

On top of that I can't grasp the concept "assisting yourself" as a rule violation. If I talk to myself during a COF is it two procedurals - one for me and one for myself?

[Sarge]

This feels very similar to the discussions about "gaming" a stage. IE - "you know how the stage designer meant for it to be shot" or "you know you weren't supposed to shoot that target from there". Yep, I agree. That is always going to be bogus arguments in my opinion.

I'm firmly in the "if it isn't disallowed, it is allowed" camp. I generally feel that wat too. but you must admit every once in a while something comes along that nobody thought of before that should be addressed. Rules should be the rules - not what we "feel" they should be. Agree

On top of that I can't grasp the concept "assisting yourself" as a rule violation. You really are not assisting yourself as in talking to yourself. You are using a device to assist you during a COF. Since you made the decision to use the device then essentially you did assist yourself.

[Sarge]

I sense a "Failure To Do Right" rules addition campaign coming ....

That's just silly. Just like IDPA.

[ctay]

I'm firmly in the "if it isn't disallowed, it is allowed" camp. I generally feel that way too. but you must admit every once in a while something comes along that nobody thought of before that should be addressed.

Yes, I agree. Rather than try to shoehorn a solution out of an existing rule that really doesn't apply, I would rather deal with it by adding a new rule - *IF* it turns out to be needed (which I don't think it will be in this case).