What Call Would You Make?

[Sherwyn]

Stage setup

Field course - 30' wide shooting box, start position at front center of box, swinger attivation rope in strong hand. 6 steel through port 15' to left, 2 paper left of port, 6 steel 15' right through port, 2 paper right of port, 2 swingers (completely exposed) directly in front of start position - 24 rounds total.

Walk through explained that for safety please don't pull the rope hard enough to get prop rods into the shooting box, also the rope has a bunge attached so the rope will be pulled back out of the shooting box.

Written procedure - On start signal engage as available, swingers must be activated before drawing pistol.

What happened - On start signal shooter starts moving to left port as he pulls activation rope, but since he went sideways as pulling the rope, it ran out of bunge before it activated the swingers, rope was jerked out of his hand and landed between shooting box and swingers. After engaging the first 6 steel and 2 paper targets, he paused to figure out why swingers were not moving, then shot both swingers and finished the rest of the course.

I'd rather not discuss the call that was made, but would like to know the right call and the rules to support it.

Sherwyn

[PhilTerry]

Re-shoot

Rule 4.6 Range Equipment Failure

[TriggerT]

Hmm... it was either a range malfuntion, which would mean a reshoot, OR and this is more likely, he just screwed up the activation of the targets. Did he then shoot the swingers while they were static? if so I know there is a new rule about that, and I would have to look it up.

[Shooter Grrl]

I would leave it as shot. If the swingers were visible without activating, the shooter fulfilled the requirements of the course. Chalk it up to poor course design and make a better activator next time

[short_round]

If you want to be nice:

Reshoot under 4.6 Range Equipment Failure.

If you don't want to be nice:

If there was no obstacle preventing the shooter from moving forward to retrieve the activation rope, it could be argued that the shooter could have moved forward and retrieved the activation rope and complied with the stage description "swingers must be activated before drawing pistol."

Since this did not happen then there could be 1 procedural for failure to comply with this portion of the stage description.

Furthermore, under 9.9.3 Moving targets will always incure failure to shoot at and miss penalties if a competitor fails to activate the mechanism, which initiates the target movement.

Since this happened then additional 2 procedurals for FTE and 4 misses regardless of the hits that the shooter had on the targets.

[David]

1 Procedural for not following course description "activate swinger before drawing" and score it as it stands.

Definitely falls under poor course design. BUT, the shooter also has the responsbility for activating.

[Shooter Grrl]

AAALLVVVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN!!!!

You can not assess FTE and miss penalties on a target with holes in it!!!!

[short_round]

AAALLVVVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN!!!!

You can not assess FTE and miss penalties on a target with holes in it!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sure you can

As it rule 9.9.3 reads: "competitor fails to activate the mechanism" = "Moving targets will always incure failure to shoot at and miss penalties."

Apparently there are two different schools of thought on this one:

School 1 and School 2.

It looks like there wasn't any resolution in that case either.

Poor course design appears to have played a factor in both cases.

Sounds like a job for the arbitration committee to me.

[Shooter Grrl]

9.9.1 Supersedes 9.9.3 If you can see it, you shoot it

[short_round]

9.9.1 Supersedes 9.9.3 If you can see it, you shoot it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think that 9.9.1 supersedes 9.9.3. 9.9.1 and 9.9.2 define a disappearing target. 9.9.3 addresses the activation of moving targets and what to do when that doesn't happen.

[Shooter Grrl]

The whole section is talking about appearing/disappearing targets, of which swingers are NOT.

[hopalong]

Just throwing this out for you to see....

Would shooting static moving targets that were not activated be considered a

"Considerate Advantage" ??????

Troy ??????? you out there MacTiger ??????

I agree on the poor course design.......

The other I would have to go to the rule book as I can vaugely remember something of the sort.....

Hop

[warpspeed]

Re-shoot

Rule 4.6 Range Equipment Failure

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm with Phil on this one.

Like stepping on an activator or opeing a door and the swinger doesn't work - he pulled, it did not activate. reshoot.

[sfinney]

If its judged that he pulled the rope, but some part of the mechanism did not work as designed, or broke, then he gets a reshoot...for range equip failure.

But just doing a half hearted tug isn't enough to satisfy the conditions for getting a reshoot... it's still the competitor's responsibility to activate the device properly, if its in working order.

If (more likely) he just did not give a good enough tug on the rope, and the swingers did not activate, I'd give:

1 Procedural for not activating the swingers, but drawing anyway.

1 Procedural per shot (max 2 per target) on the swingers as they were static.

?

[short_round]

The whole section is talking about appearing/disappearing targets, of which swingers are NOT.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A swinger could be considered a "disappearing target" by definition if when it comes to rest it does not "present at least a portion of the highest scoring area." For example a swinger that is fully behind a barricade when it is at its vertical, at rest position, that you can only see when it is moving.

[Nik Habicht]

Re-shoot. Range Equipment Failure. It's a freestyle sport --- meaning the competitor can engage any array he wants to first. The target activation mechanism needs to account for that possibility --- sounds like it didn't here. Having the activating line run through one or two staked pieces of 2x4, with an eyelet, to a knockdown by hand popper in front of the start position could have solved this handily. Poppers make good activators --- and not just when you shoot them down.

Sidenote to SG: Since 9.9.3 is 9.9.3 and not 9.9.1.x it's not inferior to rule 9.9.1, hence failure to activate moving targets always incurs miss and FTE penalties. (This may not have been the intention of the rule writers, but until someone changes it or issues an official interpretation, that's my take.) Stage design can and should deal with the situation --- it's not that hard to force shooters to activate targets. Heck, setting a single penalty target in front of each swinger to cover the target at rest would have been enough to turn the swingers into optional targets, while avoiding this quagmire......

There's also nothing, on a stage set up like the one described to keep a shooter from shooting all targets and then activating the swingers ---- before unload and show clear.......

Have I mentioned that I really hate it when people try to protect bad stage design with the rule book?

[Flexmoney]

Stage design sounds a bit rough on this one, for sure.

If the rope becomes unavailable before the draw, or it doesn't activate the target when pulled, that would seem to be range equipment failure (reshoot).

From what we have heard here...it sounds like the shooter made the attempt to pull the rope...and failed in that procedure. This might be similar to a stage that required the shooter to put something in a basket as part of the stage procedure. If the shooter doesn't get the item in the basket...then they have failed to follow procedure, and should get a penalty for doing so.

But, here we are...having to use judgement as to if the stage didn't work or the shooter didn't get the job done.

As for 9.9.3 saying "always"...this is a situation where the book isn't clear. I don't see how it can be anything aproaching fair to read 9.9.3 in a strict (literal) manner. If you think it should be read that way, then read 9.9.1 and tell me what you would do there (you would ALWAYS have to give mikes and fte's...even if shot in the regular execution of the stage).

But, the wording is poor. It needs fixed. And, I can see where some might think that applying the penalties (2 mikes and an fte for each target) would be the right thing to do.

My call...one procedural for not pulling the rope.

But....wait....there is this from the first post:

"On start signal shooter starts moving to left port as he pulls activation rope..."

[Flexmoney]

There's also nothing, on a stage set up like the one described to keep a shooter from shooting all targets and then activating the swingers ---- before unload and show clear.......

Ahhh....better take another read of the stage procedure Nik. "Activate before drawing gun"

[chuckw]

Geez you guys make simple calls so complicated. Phil Terry had it right in the first reply. It's a reshoot for REF. End of story.

[Shooter Grrl]

I'm not making it complicated it all. In my opinion, there are no rules that need to be discussed. The shooter fulfilled the course requirements and shot the stage. Score it and move on!

I am VERY disturbed though that there is actually people out there that believe that you can assess FTE's and Misses on a target with holes in it.

I found a couple of rules that I believe put this belief to rest once and for all.

First, 9.4.1 states that scoring hits on IPSC targets will be scored...

Then 9.4.4 Specifies how to score misses, EXCEPT in the case of 9.2.4.5 and 9.9.2 (NOTE - 9.9.3 is not listed as an exception!)

Lastly, 9.5.6 is where we find the FTE penalties, but it specifies that at least round must be fired AT the target. It does not list exceptions, but does say to see rule 10.2.7. Oh look, 10.2.7 clarifies FTE plus misses, EXCEPT in the case of 9.2.4.5 and 9.9.2 (NOTE - 9.9.3 is not listed as an exception!)

Guys, if the target is visible, even if it is an activating target that didn't get activated, and the shooter fires at it, you can not assess FTE penalties. If there are scoring hits on a target, ya gotta score it!

If it is your intention as a designer to penalize the shooter for not activating a target, just make sure it's not visible when it's not activated. Otherwise, shooters will, can and should, fire at it even if not activated!

[johnhurd]

Geez you guys make simple calls so complicated. Phil Terry had it right in the first reply. It's a reshoot for REF. End of story.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But what if they bring a little girl from the audience and she pulls and activates the targets, I say shooter failure, if it worked properly for the rest of the shooters ................! You younguns will "Range Lawyer" all the fun stuff right out of the game, we will be right back to stand and shoot to see which shooter is the fastest. THe shooter found a quicker way to his\her gun by not pulling the rope hard enough to activate, we shouldn't reward that.

[Tom Balko]

I saw the situation being discussed and can tell you it was not a light pull on the activator that caused this. The bungee cord attached was intended to pull the activator cord and handle forward and clear of the shooters box after activation as the shooter was going to be crossing this area while shooting as he/she moved from the left side targets to the right side targets. What was not anticipated, and not prohibited in description, was that a shooter may be able to move sideways fast enough at the start so as to cause the bungee to reach it's limits prior to the activator cord jerking the rods out from under the swingers. He pulled the cord as hard as anyone, but got farther to the left than the other shooters during the pull, and geometry got in the way. Subsequent shooters on the squad made a much more deliberate straight back pull on the activator after this happened.

I don't want to offer my opinion as to a resolution as I am too close to the situation (no, I wasn't the shooter) and may decide with some bias. I simply wanted to give the benefit of what I observed to those who did not see it, but are being asked to give opinion.

[johnhurd]

then REF

[sfinney]

With out having actually seen it, then I stand by my original call - it looks like he made an a attempt to do something different, the angle he attempted it at caused the prop not to work as designed, he ignored that it did not work, and shot the stage with swingers stationary. If he had noticed the swingers did not activate he could have gone forward and retrieved the rope, then retreated to the shooting box and tried acivating again, no matter how much time it added to his stage.

1 Procedural, drawing his gun without activating targets

1 Procedural for unfair advantgae gained for 2 x per targets engaged on the swingers.

5 total it sounds like.

I've seen many stages at even Area matches (bad design, maybe so) that had some kind of activator that required the rope to be pulled in a certain direction or a certain force to cause them to work..... if the shooter decided to pull a different way, direction, or to lightly in an attempt to go fast, and the prop did not activate. no one ever stopped them and said "range equipment failure" - they were expected to go back and activate the dang prop, assuming had not been broken somehow.

At a major match last year or so a top shooter threw his loaded magazine to "activate" a pressure box on the ground - worked. Another shooter tried it... the mag hit the pressure box but did not activate it.... he did not get stopped, he was expected to run over and activate it...... he had tried something different, a weak activation, and it bit him.

Another stage, same match, had a big wooden mug tied to a cable coming up through a hole in the middle of the table..... most people lifted the mug straight up and activated the prop easily.... those that started moving aggressively to the right for spped, as they pulled the mug to the right right (instead of straight up) caused the prop to either jam up and not pull easily, causing the shooter to have to stop and "repull" to get it to go (improper technique for activation ,no reshoot) ; or in the extreme to rip the whole table and cable assembly off the ground and disable the prop (range equip failure, reshoot).

The big test in my mind for the situation described in this thread would be after the stage was complete, to have the R.O. go up and retrieve the rope and activate it with mininum force, from the start position... if the swingers went, no reshoot. If the mechanism was frozen ,and it took excessive force to get the prop to work, reshoot. It really is a judgement call at that point.

Really should have had a set start area, and the wording"must activate swingers before drawing gun or leaving start box" or what not if the activator would only work properly from a certain driection.

I saw the situation being discussed and can tell you it was not a light pull on the activator that caused this. The bungee cord attached was intended to pull the activator cord and handle forward and clear of the shooters box after activation as the shooter was going to be crossing this area while shooting as he/she moved from the left side targets to the right side targets. What was not anticipated, and not prohibited in description, was that a shooter may be able to move sideways fast enough at the start so as to cause the bungee to reach it's limits prior to the activator cord jerking the rods out from under the swingers. He pulled the cord as hard as anyone, but got farther to the left than the other shooters during the pull, and geometry got in the way. Subsequent shooters on the squad made a much more deliberate straight back pull on the activator after this happened.

I don't want to offer my opinion as to a resolution as I am too close to the situation (no, I wasn't the shooter) and may decide with some bias. I simply wanted to give the benefit of what I observed to those who did not see it, but are being asked to give opinion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[mactiger]

My initial call after reading the original post was a procedural for not following the course description (activating targets prior to drawing gun), and one procedural per shot fired, up to the max scoring hits, for each swinger (because of the advantage gained if they were static). I think that would be a total of five. FTE penalties can't be awarded in this instance, as the competitor did engage the targets, and you also can't call misses on a target with bullet holes in it, except in certain circumstances. 9.9.3 is intended to address a target that is hidden, appears when activated, and then disappears completely. Since there are no miss penalties for such a target, there really is no penalty for not engaging or shooting at it--therefore it might be to a competitor's advantage to just skip it. That's fine, as long as the competitor does activate it, just like everyone else has to do. After that, solve the problem.

In this case, it does sound like poor course design to not hide the swingers. Simply doing that would have made this question much easier to answer: if the competitor did not activate them, he then gets the FTE and miss penalties as spelled out in 9.9.3. (Providing they didn't disappear.)

But, after reading Tom B's post, I'm thinking REF/reshoot would be the simplest, most appropriate call to make: if the stage was set up so that pulling on the rope, at whatever angle, could cause it to jam up and not activate, then the equipment is not working as designed. While the bungee idea sounds good, (getting the rope out of the way of the shooter), simply putting it up front, and very short would have probably solved the activation/tripping problem. But, I hate to second guess someone's course design. This sounds like a good "opportunity" for the setup/design folks at the club.

Bottom line, given what's been said here about the course: reshoot for REF, AFTER fixing the problem with the rope/bungees.

Troy