What Call Would You Make?

[Nik Habicht]

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"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Doh! I read that twice at least, while considering the situation --- and then promptly forgot it in time to write that last sentence. Posting on Sunday nights after a couple fo 18-20 hour days is not such a hot idea......

[Nik Habicht]

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.

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!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's actually why I'm glad we're discussing it here ---- before I make a boneheaded decision at my match one day. Thanks for the education......

As to course design: Movers should not be visible at rest, and activators need to be designed to allow for shooter movement in multiple directions, unless such movement is already restricted through physical barriers......

[TDean]

I say he's screwed unless you can find something mechanically wrong with the activation process.

He gambled by moving sideways before pulling the rope. Doing that, the rope rubbed against the prop reducing the effectivness of the mechanism. It was his actions that caused this, not the range equipment.

What if a shooter gambled and just stepped on the edge of a foot activator? Because he/she "attempted" but didn't activate, should you call it range equipment failure? Hell no!

[chuckw]

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

Good enough for me but like I said Phil had it right about 2 days ago

[omnia1911]

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. 

Troy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This would be my call.

The range equipment worked as designed, but the shooter decided to make it perform outside of its specifications. It is probably poor stage design, that runs the risk of being tossed for functioning inconsistently.

[Flexmoney]

Forgetting most of the discussion for a second...I want to bounce this out there..

Troy mentioned charging multiple procedurals for "significant advantage" under 10.2.2

I don't know...

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

With the procedure reading "engage as available", I'd have a hard time giving out extra procedurals under 10.2.2

If those targets are sitting out there...all fat and wide open...I think I would give those to the shooter as being "available". Let the stage designer eat those as a lesson.

??

[omnia1911]

Forgetting most of the discussion for a second...I want to bounce this out there..

Troy mentioned charging multiple procedurals for "significant advantage" under 10.2.2

I don't know...

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

With the procedure reading "engage as available", I'd have a hard time giving out extra procedurals under 10.2.2

If those targets are sitting out there...all fat and wide open...I think I would give those to the shooter as being "available".  Let the stage designer eat those as a lesson.

??

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course they were sitting out there, because the shooter didn't activate them. This is the part of the discussion we can't forget.

It is easier (advantageous) to engage a stationary target rather than a moving one.

[Loves2Shoot]

Re-shoot

Rule 4.6 Range Equipment Failure

If you don't get to yank on the rope to try it out first He probably had no idea it wouldn't activate it, don't penalize the shooter for a poor design.

All respect to Tom but, it isn't the same as an activator box because this prop is not a common prop, anybody who's seen boxes know you better stomp it good The exception to this would be if the RO explained that pulling it straight back was the only way to activate it.

Bottom line for me, if it's a "circus" stunt, design it to work. If it doesn't, be prepared for a long day of reshoots.

[Flexmoney]

Of course they were sitting out there, because the shooter didn't activate them. This is the part of the discussion we can't forget.

It is easier (advantageous) to engage a stationary target rather than a moving one.

Right. What I am suggesting is that there should be no penalty because the the written stage procedure says to "shoot targets as available." The only other procedure is to activate the targets "before drawing the gun."

[omnia1911]

Of course they were sitting out there, because the shooter didn't activate them. This is the part of the discussion we can't forget.

It is easier (advantageous) to engage a stationary target rather than a moving one.

Right. What I am suggesting is that there should be no penalty because the the written stage procedure says to "shoot targets as available." The only other procedure is to activate the targets "before drawing the gun."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess I'm not seeing your point.

The very first requirement in the stage procedures is for the competitor to active the swingers. Only then, can the shooter draw his gun to be able to "shoot the targets as available". The fact that moving targets were involved makes in not just a violation of the written procedures, but a significant advantage shooting at stationary targets, as opposed to moving targets.

If the stage procedures were arranged differently would you have a different position?

Example: "Activate swingers before drawing your gun. Then, engage targets as available".

One can't feel that they have complied with the "activate swingers" part of the procedures simply by the fact that they pulled the rope. The targets have to be put in motion, and there was definitely a reasonable way to do that. The shooter chose to take a different route.

I have seen my share of bad stage designs as a result of ideas for props that looked good on paper, but were poorly engineered for consistent functionality. This stage design seems to fall in that category. The problem that I have is that if the shooter pulled the rope as the designer had intended, the targets would have been activated. How can you claim REF? You either give the 5 penalties or toss the stage.

[wide45]

I like Flex's argument. The stage description did not say activate the swingers before shooting them.

The competitor gets a procedural for drawing before activating. That is the only thing he did wrong, and the only procedural he should get.

[omnia1911]

I like Flex's argument.  The stage description did not say activate the swingers before shooting them.

The competitor gets a procedural for drawing before activating.  That is the only thing he did wrong, and the only procedural he should get.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How does one shoot, activate, then draw? You either have to activate, draw, then shoot, draw, shoot, then activate, or draw, activate, then shoot. The procedures clearly state that activating comes before drawing. Shooting without first drawing is a near impossibility.

[omnia1911]

The only way I would issue a REF is if after pulling the rope to the side it mucked up the mechanism to the point that pulling it straight back, as the designer intended, the swingers still wouldn't activate.

[Flexmoney]

Omnia,

The procedure said to activate, then draw. Failing that...one procedural (for not following THAT procedure).

The only other thing that was stated was to engage the targets as available. (which is what the shooter did)

Nowhere does it say that targets have to be swinging when you engage them...only says to engage when available. If they are sitting out in the open...aren't they available (swinging or not)? In other stages, we engage swingers before they activate...perfectly legal. If the stage designer doesn't wish us to do so, then they need to get their design right.

The shooter didn't fault a line to get closer to targets. They didn't fail to shoot targets from a required shooting position or stance. The only thing they did wrong was fail to activate the swinger. Since the swinger were out in the open...available...shoot them, right?

[wide45]

Did the competitor shoot targets other than the swingers? Does he get procedurals for every shot he fired on the entire course to a maximum of 2 per target? Why would the swingers be scored different?

The draw before activating applies only to the draw. It means nothing for the rest of the stage.

[omnia1911]

Omnia,

The procedure said to activate, then draw.  Failing that...one procedural (for not following THAT procedure). 

The only other thing that was stated was to engage the targets as available.  (which is what the shooter did)

Nowhere does it say that targets have to be swinging when you engage them...only says to engage when available.  If they are sitting out in the open...aren't they available (swinging or not)?  In other stages, we engage swingers before they activate...perfectly legal.  If the stage designer doesn't wish us to do so, then they need to get their design right.

The shooter didn't fault a line to get closer to targets.  They didn't fail to shoot targets from a required shooting position or stance.  The only thing they did wrong was fail to activate the swinger.  Since the swinger were out in the open...available...shoot them, right?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is my point. The shooter didn't activate the swingers. He only pulled the rope. Incorrectly, I might add.

What I think we can agree on is that the stage design was not well thought out. Can you all see what happens when stages aren't designed properly (hide the swingers prior to their activation)? Come to think of it, 2.3.3 should be put into effect so that the swingers can be hidden. Then, we are only left with the activation mechanism issue.

I say, figure out how to pull it correctly. It's not REF.

[Nik Habicht]

The more I think about this, the more I think it's range equipment failure. From the green book:

4.6 Range Equipment Failure and Other Issues

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably

to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, but is not

limited to, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation

of metal or moving targets, the malfunction of mechanically

or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props

such as openings, ports, and barriers.

4.6.2 A competitor who is unable to complete a course of fire due to

range equipment failure, or if a metal or moving target was not

reset prior to his attempt at a course of fire, must be required to

reshoot the course of fire after corrective actions have been

taken.

4.6.3 Chronic malfunction of equipment in a course of fire may result

in the removal of that stage from the match results (see Rule

2.3.4).

It's a freestyle sport ---- so if it's possible to move in any direction from the start position, then the swinger activator must allow for activation in any direction --- it can't be allowed to activate correctly for people who choose to stand in place and deal with the swingers first and to not activate for people who wish to go the left or right first......

Want someone to deal with the swingers first? Place them at the beginning of the physical movement area for the stage --- that way the time penalty for returning there from the end of the stage becomes too great....

[omnia1911]

The more I think about this, the more I think it's range equipment failure.  From the green book:

4.6 Range Equipment Failure and Other Issues

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably

to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, but is not

limited to, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation

of metal or moving targets, the malfunction of mechanically

or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props

such as openings, ports, and barriers.

4.6.2 A competitor who is unable to complete a course of fire due to

range equipment failure, or if a metal or moving target was not

reset prior to his attempt at a course of fire, must be required to

reshoot the course of fire after corrective actions have been

taken.

4.6.3 Chronic malfunction of equipment in a course of fire may result

in the removal of that stage from the match results (see Rule

2.3.4).

It's a freestyle sport ---- so if it's possible to move in any direction from the start position, then the swinger activator must allow for activation in any direction --- it can't be allowed to activate correctly for people who choose to stand in place and deal with the swingers first and to not activate for people who wish to go the left or right first......

Want someone to deal with the swingers first? Place them at the beginning of the physical movement area for the stage --- that way the time penalty for returning there from the end of the stage becomes too great....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see nothing in the rulebook that states the props must work in a manner that a competitor wishes them to. They only have to work as the stage designer wishes them to. If the props happen to work in a manner beyond what the stage designer wishes, then the shooter is free to take advantage of that. In this case it doesn't seem that the props worked in any way but how the stage designer intended, which was capable of activating the swingers.

1.1.5 (freestyle rule) says:

However, conditions may be created, and barriers or other physical limitations may be constructed, to compel a competitor into shooting positions or stances.

I would say that the limited way the rope had to be pulled to activate the swingers was a "condition that was created to compel the shooter into a shooting position".

[Loves2Shoot]

... if it was made clear in the walk through it had to be pulled a particular way, yes. If it was reasonable that the way it was pulled (going sideways) and it should activate the props, then it deserves a reshoot right?

[omnia1911]

... if it was made clear in the walk through it had to be pulled a particular way, yes. If it was reasonable that the way it was pulled (going sideways) and it should activate the props, then it deserves a reshoot right?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

3.2.4 After the written stage briefing has been read to competitors, and

questions arising therefrom have been answered, competitors

should be permitted to conduct an orderly inspection (“walkthrough”)

of the course of fire. The duration of time for the

inspection must be stipulated by the Range Officer, and it should

be the same for all competitors. If the course of fire includes

moving targets or similar items, these should be demonstrated to

all competitors for the same duration and frequency.

If the shooter doesn't take advantage of what this rule affords him, and chooses to shoot the stage not knowing how to properly activate the moving targets, then it is his loss. You can't blame the props.

[Loves2Shoot]

Exactly my point for the reshoot It says nothing about the given situation in this rule. RO's don't let competitors activate the targets durting the walk through, they activate them (sometimes they let the first shooter do it,) and if the action was reasonable... reshoot ...

[Flexmoney]

On the reshoot issue...

It seems that most of us would agree that the course design might have left a little to be desired. If that is the case, then I would be inclined to issue the reshoot.

I know that I have been bitten be activating ropes and levers that I never had the chance to test (I wasn't familar with how they operated). When they didn't operate how I expected...

Having been biten by those things a few times, experience now tells me that, when I encounter a prop that I am not familar with, I will take a conservative approach to anything that deals with that prop.

That might sound like a good plan, but I don't think it presents the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Local shooters, who are familar with the props, will have an advantage.

[Flexmoney]

That is my point. The shooter didn't activate the swingers. He only pulled the rope. Incorrectly, I might add.

Right, the shooter didn't follow ONE procedure. So, that is ONE penalty. (IMO)

To give penalties on the the swinging targets, you would have to show significant advantage during non-compliance. (10.2.2)

My arguement is that the STAGE PROCEDURE stated to shoot the targets when they were available.

So, I wouldn't access the per shot penalties (under 10.2.2) because the swingers happen to be static at the time the shooter engaged them. We shoot moving targets all the time...that happen to be static, when the stage is "as available".

[Shooter Grrl]

I dunno guys - the shooter pulled the rope, thought the swingers were activated. I don't think I'd even give him a procedural! I'm still standing with score it as shot and move on.

[Nik Habicht]

The more I think about this, the more I think it's range equipment failure.  From the green book:

4.6 Range Equipment Failure and Other Issues

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably

to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, but is not

limited to, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation

of metal or moving targets, the malfunction of mechanically

or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props

such as openings, ports, and barriers.

4.6.2 A competitor who is unable to complete a course of fire due to

range equipment failure, or if a metal or moving target was not

reset prior to his attempt at a course of fire, must be required to

reshoot the course of fire after corrective actions have been

taken.

4.6.3 Chronic malfunction of equipment in a course of fire may result

in the removal of that stage from the match results (see Rule

2.3.4).

It's a freestyle sport ---- so if it's possible to move in any direction from the start position, then the swinger activator must allow for activation in any direction --- it can't be allowed to activate correctly for people who choose to stand in place and deal with the swingers first and to not activate for people who wish to go the left or right first......

Want someone to deal with the swingers first? Place them at the beginning of the physical movement area for the stage --- that way the time penalty for returning there from the end of the stage becomes too great....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see nothing in the rulebook that states the props must work in a manner that a competitor wishes them to. They only have to work as the stage designer wishes them to. If the props happen to work in a manner beyond what the stage designer wishes, then the shooter is free to take advantage of that. In this case it doesn't seem that the props worked in any way but how the stage designer intended, which was capable of activating the swingers.

1.1.5 (freestyle rule) says:

However, conditions may be created, and barriers or other physical limitations may be constructed, to compel a competitor into shooting positions or stances.

I would say that the limited way the rope had to be pulled to activate the swingers was a "condition that was created to compel the shooter into a shooting position".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No the limited way that the activator worked was designed to force a competitor to only "activate" targets in a specific direction --- and that's not what 1.1.5 is all about, if read in it's entirety:

1.1.5 Freestyle – IPSC matches are freestyle. Competitors must be permitted to solve the challenge presented in a freestyle manner, and

to shoot targets on an “as and when visible” basis. Courses of fire

must not require mandatory reloads nor dictate a shooting position

or stance, except as specified below. However, conditions

may be created, and barriers or other physical limitations may be

constructed, to compel a competitor into shooting positions or

stances.

There's nothing preventing a shooter from activating the swingers, then shooting the left and right arrays and finishing on the swingers. The only requirement in the stage description was to activate the swingers before drawing, hence it has nothing to do with compelling a shooter into a shooting position or stance. Want to compel either one of those? Start building vision barriers so the swingers can only be shot from one place. Activating targets should activate equally for all shooters, regardless of their engagement plan for the stage........