Shooting Multiple Guns

[ZackJones]

I'd like to get your input regarding shooting multiple guns and shooting order. For example we currently permit competitors to shoot up to 3 guns, in any order, at our club match. At SC State we followed the sequence used at WSSC which was:

1 - If you are shooting the same gun in two divisions you had to shoot all 8 stages once and then go back through a second time. (This isn't practical for me because we have to shoot 4, reset and then shoot 4 so we required at least one competitor to shoot between guns)

2 - If you are shooting two hand guns or two long guns you had to have someone shot between your runs.

3 - If you were shooting a hand gun and long gun you could shoot back to back.

This morning I was adding this to the rule book revision that I'm working on. Speaking of which it will be out for public review and commentary next week. I got to thinking about it and now I'm wondering if we should not permit back-to-back shooting in any case. Perhaps the better way to go is to permit competitors to shoot up to the maximum allowable number of guns but require they shoot one gun at a time. I'm not talking about a competitor shooting 3 guns to have to shoot all 8 with first gun then all 8 with second, etc. I'm saying let him shoot the three guns but separate attempts by at least one other competitor.

 

 

[conditionone]

At our matches we limit shooters to two divisions which can not be shot back to back whether it is the same gun or not. The problem we have with a shooter shooting three divisions on smaller squads, say less than ten shooters, is that they are always loading mags, shooting or on deck with no opportunity to help out. Now if and or when we have larger squads we could accommodate shooters that want to shoot three divisions.

"I'm saying let him shoot the three guns but separate attempts by at least one other competitor" I think this sums it up nicely.

[Thomas H]

I'm thinking---that this should be completely up to the match director.  Making it specific to the rulebook means that individual matches may not be able to do what would be best for their match.

I don't see any reason why the rulebook should specify this, and I don't see any reason why individual match directors can't simply make this decision on their own.

If the match directors think that shooting the same gun twice in a row (or more) is an unfair advantage (note:  I think it is) then they should do something about it.  This is separate from shooting other guns in a row, or any other combination of issues.  No matter what, the match directors can make this decision for their match.

 

I note that for our local matches, we don't have time for competitors to shoot multiple guns.  For our Level II match, competitors can shoot up to two divisions per squad they are in (and squad in separate squads in different time frames) but on any particular squad, everyone shoots their first gun, then everyone shoots their second (if they have one).  When the order changes, it goes by changing order of the first gun.  No one shoots two guns in a row.  (We also shoot centerfire first, if they are shooting two guns.) 

This has worked well for us---but that doesn't mean it would work well for anyone else.  Attempting to make a rule that everyone in different situations must follow sounds like a poor idea for micromanagement, in my opinion.

Edited November 8, 2016 by Thomas H
typos!

[pmd]

57 minutes ago, Thomas H said:

If the match directors think that shooting the same gun twice in a row (or more) is an unfair advantage (note:  I think it is) then they should do something about it.  This is separate from shooting other guns in a row, or any other combination of issues.  No matter what, the match directors can make this decision for their match.

I feel shooting two guns - any platform  (pistol, pistol or pistol, rifle or rifle, rifle or? in a row is an advantage.

I also feel that if a person is shooting two guns and others are only shooting one gun  the shooter shooting two guns should hustle and paint more.

 

BTW - I am usually the guy shooting two guns..

 

 

 

Edited November 7, 2016 by pmd

[hornetx40]

In a tier 1 match leave it up to the match director.

In a tier 2, 3 or 4  there should be 1 competitor between entries. So as not to allow the shooter the advantage of practice.

Also if the shooter is using the same gun to shoot 2 divisions he must shoot the harder division first. Example: a shooter will shoot in Production and Limited with a Production gun. They will shoot limited first as a throw away  (practice) then shoot Production. This should not be allowed. 

Special rule changes for certain matches can always be granted for certain matches due to range conditions...like what you have Zack with only 4 bays.  This should be announced in advance for any match. 

[Thomas H]

9 hours ago, hornetx40 said:

In a tier 2, 3 or 4  there should be 1 competitor between entries. So as not to allow the shooter the advantage of practice.

Also if the shooter is using the same gun to shoot 2 divisions he must shoot the harder division first. Example: a shooter will shoot in Production and Limited with a Production gun. They will shoot limited first as a throw away  (practice) then shoot Production. This should not be allowed. 

Why is this something that the rules needs to address?  Why can't match directors make these decisions themselves?

Why instead can't there be a "suggested practice" document, separate from the official rules?

Why does this have to be micromanaged in a way that obviously won't actually take into account the individual clubs that hold the matches?

Edited November 8, 2016 by Thomas H
forgot a line

[hornetx40]

Because of the couple of percent that feel the need to gain any advantage they can. Because if it isn't in the rules then its legal. I'm all for the least amount of rules possible but if it isn't spelled out then people will take advantage. Will it ever hurt a top shooter /... probably not. It's all the rest of the shooters that end up below someone that shouldn't have happened. 

[Thomas H]

14 minutes ago, hornetx40 said:

Because of the couple of percent that feel the need to gain any advantage they can. Because if it isn't in the rules then its legal. I'm all for the least amount of rules possible but if it isn't spelled out then people will take advantage. Will it ever hurt a top shooter /... probably not. It's all the rest of the shooters that end up below someone that shouldn't have happened. 

Again....why can't the match directors specify how their match will be shot?  That's a match administration topic, and there isn't any need for a top-down rule that isn't necessarily applicable to all matches equally.

[Nimitz]

I believe that allowing competitiors to shoot more than one gun is a competitive equity issue.  It doesn't matter if you do not allow them to shoot 2 pistols back to back or if you require them to have at least one competitior in between.  You are still allowing them to practice the stage once or twice before they shoot the one gun they really care about for score. This is a competitive equity issue and is unfair to the competitor who only shoots one gun.

take a look at EVERY competitior who was shooting multiple guns on the same day and you'l find in every case that the LAST gun they shot on each stage is the one they consider to be their best and the one they believe they are the most competitive in the match for.

the East Coast Championship has in right IMO, they run A morning match and an afternoon match over 3 days, managed to put over 400 guns through the match (the largest SC event in the world) and they eliminated the competitive equity issue but only allowing competitiors to shoot single gun per match.

my hat's off to them ..... Bravo ....

Edited November 12, 2016 by Nimitz

[bigtimelarry]

Every time I shoot 2 guns back to back my first Gun my times are faster..  I tried spacing them out and still about 70% of the time my first shoot is better.. Cant figure it out.  No advantage in my case..

Edited November 11, 2016 by bigtimelarry

[zzt]

I am also of the opinion the rules need not address this.

I  second Nimitz's post in its entirety.

I run all the non-bullseye matches at my club.  For reasons of fairness, throughput, and participation in painting, taping, etc., the rule has become one event- one gun.  I tried lots of other ways, and this rule gets the most people through in the shortest amount of time, with the most help.  Want to shoot a second gun- sign up for the second match.

[Thomas H]

On 11/10/2016 at 8:48 PM, Nimitz said:

take a look at EVERY competitior who was shooting multiple guns on the same day and you'l find in every case that the LAST gun they shot on each stage is the one they consider to be their best and the one they believe they are the most competitive in the match for.

Every?  Nope.  (As in "match results will not show this in every case", not merely, "Nope, I disagree.")

I do agree that if someone is shooting the same gun in more than one division, letting them shoot the same gun twice in the same squad is effectively giving them a practice run, and I disagree with that.  I think that is pretty different from shooting a Production gun first, and an Open Rimfire Pistol four shooters later, though. 

No matter what, however, I think that the match director should make those decisions based on what their match can handle, as opposed to external requirements imposed via the rulebook.

[Onepocket]

On 11/10/2016 at 9:48 PM, Nimitz said:

I believe that allowing competitiors to shoot more than one gun is a competitive equity issue.  It doesn't matter if you do not allow them to shoot 2 pistols back to back or if you require them to have at least one competitior in between.  You are still allowing them to practice the stage once or twice before they shoot the one gun they really care about for score. This is a competitive equity issue and is unfair to the competitor who only shoots one gun.

take a look at EVERY competitior who was shooting multiple guns on the same day and you'l find in every case that the LAST gun they shot on each stage is the one they consider to be their best and the one they believe they are the most competitive in the match for.

the East Coast Championship has in right IMO, they run A morning match and an afternoon match over 3 days, managed to put over 400 guns through the match (the largest SC event in the world) and they eliminated the competitive equity issue but only allowing competitiors to shoot single gun per match.

my hat's off to them ..... Bravo ....

You are wrong here, this year they let one guy shoot open and limited Sunday morning and rimfire pistol rifle in the afternoon. He won Limited.  I will never shoot another steel challenge match again. If you are a good shooter in this sport and if you whine enough they will give you a hit that is clearly not there. This sport needs an integrity make over. PAINT THE EDGES OF THE TARGETS.

[hornetx40]

6 hours ago, Onepocket said:

You are wrong here, this year they let one guy shoot open and limited Sunday morning and rimfire pistol rifle in the afternoon. He won Limited.  I will never shoot another steel challenge match again. If you are a good shooter in this sport and if you whine enough they will give you a hit that is clearly not there. This sport needs an integrity make over. PAINT THE EDGES OF THE TARGETS.

One Pocket, Try not to let the actions of one RO be your opinion of all steel challenge matches. Qualified RO's at major matches are extremely difficult to come by. Often people that aren't qualified are wrestled into service because they are willing to help.   The sport isn't the issue just some shooters. The rules spell out most of what is needed...and the committee is working to fix things. It is slowly making a comeback. I don't agree with everything the committee has done but I will play within the rules as written.  

[ZackJones]

The general consensus is leave it up to the MD. I'm okay with that so that's how I'll word it in the rules revision.

[wyliearms]

On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 1:36 AM, bigtimelarry said:

Every time I shoot 2 guns back to back my first Gun my times are faster..  I tried spacing them out and still about 70% of the time my first shoot is better.. Cant figure it out.  No advantage in my case..

I shoot my "main gun" first too...

[wyliearms]

There does however need to be a rule for people who whine and complain after each string that they have a miss on. It should be a mandatory kick to the shin.