Unfair DQs

[valerko]

I g DQd once for 180. I was 150% sure it was a BS call and so were couple of my squad mates , but arguing would just make me look like big crybaby. And this was on second to last stage and I was having great scores.

I just took it like a man and made mental note , never run under that RO again. :)

[BARRYJ]

As an RO, I feel like the match is all about the shooter. If a shooter asks to change RO's, I would gladly give up the timer. It has never been asked. How many people would actually ask an RO to give up the timer? Looks to me like that would throw you off your game mentally. Are you scared an RO is "out to get you" or is he incompetent? I'm trying to understand the thinking behind this. I have been DQ'd twice, and I hold no animosity toward the RO's, but I knew I was wrong in both instances.

[Sarge]

As an RO, I feel like the match is all about the shooter. If a shooter asks to change RO's, I would gladly give up the timer. It has never been asked. How many people would actually ask an RO to give up the timer? Looks to me like that would throw you off your game mentally. Are you scared an RO is "out to get you" or is he incompetent? I'm trying to understand the thinking behind this. I have been DQ'd twice, and I hold no animosity toward the RO's, but I knew I was wrong in both instances.

I would just not squad with them if it were a local. Or PITA shooters for that matter.

At a major, if I truly had a problem with a certain RO I would probably let it be known and see if the CRO could work it out. Fortunately I don't actually know an RO anywhere that I have that many issues with. On the whole, most seem pretty good.

BUT, there are shooters I prefer not to run and will discretely hand off the timer when they show up. And I didn't RO Matt Cheely at the Ohio State match last year because he sponsored me. To me it seemed the "right" thing to do.

[teros135]

As an RO, I feel like the match is all about the shooter. If a shooter asks to change RO's, I would gladly give up the timer. It has never been asked. How many people would actually ask an RO to give up the timer? Looks to me like that would throw you off your game mentally. Are you scared an RO is "out to get you" or is he incompetent? I'm trying to understand the thinking behind this. I have been DQ'd twice, and I hold no animosity toward the RO's, but I knew I was wrong in both instances.

Wouldn't you rather spend the brief time asking for another RO than to make a run with somebody who's going to distract you from what you're doing? An RO who isn't competent can ruin the run with extraneous comments or commands or by scoring it improperly.

At locals there have been a number of times we've had timer-holders who didn't know what they were doing (sorry, it's true) or who were overly gabby and didn't respect the need for concentration. It's the shooter's run, not theirs. The cavalier attitude of "it's just a local match, who cares" just doesn't work, either for safety or for seriously trying to shoot well. At those times it's pretty easy to ask an RO friend on the squad who respects the sport to run you.

Some of this happens at majors (although infrequently, fortunately), and it's fair to ask for a different RO. You don't have to say why or get into a long conversation about it. A good RO will simply turn over the timer to another RO and step back. I would. It's the right thing to do.

[diddomatic]

Take it an move on. There's a match every weekend if you want to shoot what does one match matter.

[Sarge]

Take it an move on. There's a match every weekend if you want to shoot what does one match matter.

Some places have two matches every weekend. It matters because some folks travel several hours, one way, for a local match. There is time and expense involved so we as RO's MUST be right when we make that call. Just like shooters need to be aware of risks involved in certain actions.

[teros135]

That's the problem - "take it and move on", like it doesn't matter. It does matter. If you don't want to stand up, fine, but those that do, can, and probably should, because letting those lapses go just reinforces them, and when it matters those ROs will just keep doing the same thing.

[BARRYJ]

That's the problem - "take it and move on", like it doesn't matter. It does matter. If you don't want to stand up, fine, but those that do, can, and probably should, because letting those lapses go just reinforces them, and when it matters those ROs will just keep doing the same thing.

You make it sound like the RO is always wrong. How do we know that the op didn't actually break the 180, but thinks he didn't?

[teros135]

That's the problem - "take it and move on", like it doesn't matter. It does matter. If you don't want to stand up, fine, but those that do, can, and probably should, because letting those lapses go just reinforces them, and when it matters those ROs will just keep doing the same thing.

You make it sound like the RO is always wrong. How do we know that the op didn't actually break the 180, but thinks he didn't?

Not at all. At locals many do a fine job, but we've all seen ROs who can use help but don't seem inclined to learn. Being responsible for safety, fairness, and efficiency is an honorable thing to *want* to do, and I just wish more folks didn't feel the need to blow it off because it's "just" a L1 match.

[Sarge]

That's the problem - "take it and move on", like it doesn't matter. It does matter. If you don't want to stand up, fine, but those that do, can, and probably should, because letting those lapses go just reinforces them, and when it matters those ROs will just keep doing the same thing.

You make it sound like the RO is always wrong. How do we know that the op didn't actually break the 180, but thinks he didn't?

Not at all. At locals many do a fine job, but we've all seen ROs who can use help but don't seem inclined to learn. Being responsible for safety, fairness, and efficiency is an honorable thing to *want* to do, and I just wish more folks didn't feel the need to blow it off because it's "just" a L1 match.

I get what you are saying. This isn't RO bashing at all. It's just that not all DQ's are cut and dried. Many are subjective. A 180 can be a very subjective call. Holstering single action with a safety off is cut and dry. Those are much easier to call and to live with if DQ'ed. If I get called for a 180 or some other infraction that is up to RO interpretation I won't just "take it and move on". I won't necessarily argue it but I will make dang sure the RO can explain it in a way that sells it.

[wtturn]

That's the problem - "take it and move on", like it doesn't matter. It does matter. If you don't want to stand up, fine, but those that do, can, and probably should, because letting those lapses go just reinforces them, and when it matters those ROs will just keep doing the same thing.

You make it sound like the RO is always wrong. How do we know that the op didn't actually break the 180, but thinks he didn't?

If only Occam's razor applied in this situation.....

[RJH]

Man, I worked a match where 2 ROs called 6 or so blatant 180 violations that could have been avoided if the shooters would have given themselves a little more room, and everyone of the DQed shooters couldn't believe that they had broken the 180. All were trying to go faster than their abilities would allow. They were in a place on the course that if you were not looking at the right place at the right time you would miss it. All this to say maybe the OP did break the 180, and the RO just called what he saw........

[Gary Stevens]

Just say I self identify as a shooter who has not broken the 180. That solves the problem.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Gary Stevens

[mreed911]

Just say I self identify as a shooter who has not broken the 180. That solves the problem.

Well that brings up a quandry. Should I self identify as a GM or a D? Maybe it varies depending on if I'm shooting a match or shooting my mouth off online (no relation to OP)?

[diddomatic]

We all know RO's don't do anything unintentional.

[bradsteimel]

I tell new guys I meet at matches and students I teach that they shouldn't give the RO even a hint that they were close to the 180. If you are working with a self imposed 160 line, it makes it a lot harder for an RO to make a bad call. Professional refs and umpires make game changing bad calls, volunteer ROs are subject to the same mistakes, so I try to make their jobs easier if I can.

Totally agree! If you can run the stage to avoid a moving-left reload, it'll make the RO much more comfortable and less likely to call you for breaking the 180.

That being said, some stages just flow better toward a weak-hand reload. In that case, by all means, run it the most efficient way... Just be extremely cognizant of where your gun's pointing! Reloads moving toward your weak-hand are not impossible, they just take more awareness.

[Neomet]

I tell new guys I meet at matches and students I teach that they shouldn't give the RO even a hint that they were close to the 180. If you are working with a self imposed 160 line, it makes it a lot harder for an RO to make a bad call. Professional refs and umpires make game changing bad calls, volunteer ROs are subject to the same mistakes, so I try to make their jobs easier if I can.

Totally agree! If you can run the stage to avoid a moving-left reload, it'll make the RO much more comfortable and less likely to call you for breaking the 180.

That being said, some stages just flow better toward a weak-hand reload. In that case, by all means, run it the most efficient way... Just be extremely cognizant of where your gun's pointing! Reloads moving toward your weak-hand are not impossible, they just take more awareness.

Bit of a thread drift but live in the world of a left handed shooter for a bit. Almost every stage is designed to be run left to right. (whine mode off now).

[frgood]

I tell new guys I meet at matches and students I teach that they shouldn't give the RO even a hint that they were close to the 180. If you are working with a self imposed 160 line, it makes it a lot harder for an RO to make a bad call. Professional refs and umpires make game changing bad calls, volunteer ROs are subject to the same mistakes, so I try to make their jobs easier if I can.

Totally agree! If you can run the stage to avoid a moving-left reload, it'll make the RO much more comfortable and less likely to call you for breaking the 180.

That being said, some stages just flow better toward a weak-hand reload. In that case, by all means, run it the most efficient way... Just be extremely cognizant of where your gun's pointing! Reloads moving toward your weak-hand are not impossible, they just take more awareness.

Bit of a thread drift but live in the world of a left handed shooter for a bit. Almost every stage is designed to be run left to right. (whine mode off now).

Agreed. Makes for annoying walkthroughs with everyone getting in the way.

On topic. There aer more DQ's than simply 180's. I think asking for a different RO is not unreasonable and does not require an explanation. I know some RO's that may be a little lax in scoring or their overall demeanor is sufficient enough to be distracting. Rare, but not unreasonable.

[bradsteimel]

I tell new guys I meet at matches and students I teach that they shouldn't give the RO even a hint that they were close to the 180. If you are working with a self imposed 160 line, it makes it a lot harder for an RO to make a bad call. Professional refs and umpires make game changing bad calls, volunteer ROs are subject to the same mistakes, so I try to make their jobs easier if I can.

Totally agree! If you can run the stage to avoid a moving-left reload, it'll make the RO much more comfortable and less likely to call you for breaking the 180.

That being said, some stages just flow better toward a weak-hand reload. In that case, by all means, run it the most efficient way... Just be extremely cognizant of where your gun's pointing! Reloads moving toward your weak-hand are not impossible, they just take more awareness.

Bit of a thread drift but live in the world of a left handed shooter for a bit. Almost every stage is designed to be run left to right. (whine mode off now).

I totally feel ya! That's why i always "complain" (tongue in cheek) when there's a stage that requires us to run it right to left and reload going left

[Audioman]

well said

[motosapiens]

I tell new guys I meet at matches and students I teach that they shouldn't give the RO even a hint that they were close to the 180. If you are working with a self imposed 160 line, it makes it a lot harder for an RO to make a bad call. Professional refs and umpires make game changing bad calls, volunteer ROs are subject to the same mistakes, so I try to make their jobs easier if I can.

Totally agree! If you can run the stage to avoid a moving-left reload, it'll make the RO much more comfortable and less likely to call you for breaking the 180.

That being said, some stages just flow better toward a weak-hand reload. In that case, by all means, run it the most efficient way... Just be extremely cognizant of where your gun's pointing! Reloads moving toward your weak-hand are not impossible, they just take more awareness.

Bit of a thread drift but live in the world of a left handed shooter for a bit. Almost every stage is designed to be run left to right. (whine mode off now).

really? it seems fairly uncommon to me for a stage with lots of lateral movement to not have the option to go either way. Maybe that's just the way we do things here.

[Jake Di Vita]

If you're left handed, you know damn well that you will be forced to do an awkward reload at least semi-frequently (as a right hander, I know I will have to reload moving left at least sometimes). The prudent move would be to work at them until you were confident you could safely and efficiently reload going left to right or whichever direction.

If you're looking at a stage saying "man I'm afraid of breaking the 180 during this reload", you haven't put enough work in yet.

Edited May 16, 2016 by Jake Di Vita

[Neomet]

I tell new guys I meet at matches and students I teach that they shouldn't give the RO even a hint that they were close to the 180. If you are working with a self imposed 160 line, it makes it a lot harder for an RO to make a bad call. Professional refs and umpires make game changing bad calls, volunteer ROs are subject to the same mistakes, so I try to make their jobs easier if I can.

Totally agree! If you can run the stage to avoid a moving-left reload, it'll make the RO much more comfortable and less likely to call you for breaking the 180.

That being said, some stages just flow better toward a weak-hand reload. In that case, by all means, run it the most efficient way... Just be extremely cognizant of where your gun's pointing! Reloads moving toward your weak-hand are not impossible, they just take more awareness.

Bit of a thread drift but live in the world of a left handed shooter for a bit. Almost every stage is designed to be run left to right. (whine mode off now).

really? it seems fairly uncommon to me for a stage with lots of lateral movement to not have the option to go either way. Maybe that's just the way we do things here.

There is almost always an option to go right to left. It is often the ugly sister though.

If you're left handed, you know damn well that you will be forced to do an awkward reload at least semi-frequently (as a right hander, I know I will have to reload moving left at least sometimes). The prudent move would be to work at them until you were confident you could safely and efficiently reload going left to right or whichever direction.

If you're looking at a stage saying "man I'm afraid of breaking the 180 during this reload", you haven't put enough work in yet.

I don't worry about it. I think most folks 180 during a reload because they aren't focused on the direction of the pistol. When it is awkward I am really focused on it. I just think awkward is slower. Personally I like Grauffel's technique when he runs against the grain of dropping the mag as he takes off and then inserting the new mag as he is stepping into position to shoot. Well, actually what don't we like about Grauffel's techniques?

[Jake Di Vita]

Well, actually what don't we like about Grauffel's techniques?

It's hard to use Eric as an example because I'm pretty sure he could do whatever the hell he wanted and still execute stages just as well. That guy puts more rounds downrange in a year than I have in my life. My personal opinion is that inserting a new mag when I'm stepping into position to shoot is an inefficient use of time because as I'm stepping into position I want to have the gun extending towards the target and be looking for the sights. I have also found that the way Eric does this is inconsistent for me, and if I make a mistake inserting the mag the clock is running, there is no space where you don't have a target to engage to use a buffer. Once again, this really isn't an issue for Eric because he doesn't make mistakes.

[Neomet]

Once again, this really isn't an issue for Eric because he doesn't make mistakes.

Ahhh, common ground. We agree! LOL