Definition of Facing downrange

[Husker95]

^^^^^^^^What Moto said x10.  I agree ROs have to be a stickler on rules and the book, but damn we can get hung up on some minor crap.  It can suck  the fun/enjoyment out of this sport for everyone involved.

[happygunner77]

2 hours ago, motosapiens said:

toes on marks, facing wherever TF you want, hand wherever TF you want.

 

if the WSB doesn't specify facing downrange but does specify other stuff, we use the wsb and not the default.

 

Then blame whoever wrote the rules. Whether we like it or not, is it what it is. I hardly follow it on level I matches but for level II and up, we have to be consistent with it, hence the WSB will say it all (location, stance and shooting position) so there are no inconsistencies. Don't get hung up on it, I don't.

Edited January 24, 2018 by happygunner77

[motosapiens]

5 minutes ago, happygunner77 said:

 

Then blame whoever wrote the rules. Whether we like it or not, is it what it is. I hardly follow it on level I matches but for level II and up, we have to be consistent with it, hence the WSB will say it all (location, stance and shooting position) so there are no inconsistencies. Don't get hung up on it, I don't.

I blame the people that interpret the rules in the most annoying possible manner. I agree it needs to be consistent. I don't think it needs to be consistently annoying. there are important things to worry about. where someone is looking is imho not one of them.

[JAFO]

We often use a starting position that dictates toes or heels touching either starting line, but the start lines are on either side of the shooting area.  There's no way to comfortably assume the default start position when the specified location naturally faces you towards a side berm.

[happygunner77]

12 hours ago, JAFO said:

We often use a starting position that dictates toes or heels touching either starting line, but the start lines are on either side of the shooting area.  There's no way to comfortably assume the default start position when the specified location naturally faces you towards a side berm.

 

Then it's a poor stage design or poorly written WSB. Look, I get it that many don't like it, I don't either, but I understood it and don't think it's misinterpreted. I don't like it coz like everyone else, it's restrictive. This is a game, I like to game. But it's the rules. It didn't add any competitive advantages, IMO, for me at least. Facing the targets didn't add time for me on big courses as I have to move most of the time to hit the first target anyways. And if ever you don't need to move, the time you draw the gun takes almost the same time for you to face the target anyways. I'm slow to draw, around 1.15-1.25sec , (depending on the target distance), that's enough time for me to face the target. 

 

But for now, lets just be consistent with the rules with an easy fix, just add a stance on the WSB and that fixes the problem. If we want this rule to change, why don't we write to NROI and make a case about it. 
 

Has anyone here at all asked NROI or the BOD as to why this was written that way it is? What was the reasoning behind it? 

 

Also, have the top shooters complained about this too? If they're not, why are we? Instead, they spend time practicing. It's a game, enjoy it. We can improve ourselves on other things other than this. We get all hung up so much on these little things that we forget the joy and why we joined this sport. 

Edited January 25, 2018 by happygunner77

[DKorn]

5 hours ago, happygunner77 said:

 

Then it's a poor stage design or poorly written WSB. Look, I get it that many don't like it, I don't either, but I understood it and don't think it's misinterpreted. I don't like it coz like everyone else, it's restrictive. This is a game, I like to game. But it's the rules. It didn't add any competitive advantages, IMO, for me at least. Facing the targets didn't add time for me on big courses as I have to move most of the time to hit the first target anyways. And if ever you don't need to move, the time you draw the gun takes almost the same time for you to face the target anyways. I'm slow to draw, around 1.15-1.25sec , (depending on the target distance), that's enough time for me to face the target. 

 

But for now, lets just be consistent with the rules with an easy fix, just add a stance on the WSB and that fixes the problem. If we want this rule to change, why don't we write to NROI and make a case about it. 
 

Has anyone here at all asked NROI or the BOD as to why this was written that way it is? What was the reasoning behind it? 

 

Also, have the top shooters complained about this too? If they're not, why are we? Instead, they spend time practicing. It's a game, enjoy it. We can improve ourselves on other things other than this. We get all hung up so much on these little things that we forget the joy and why we joined this sport. 

 

I agree that this is best solved by writing better WSBs that eliminate any questions. 

 

As as the shooter, I wouldn’t question it at all either, even if I disagree with the RO. It isn’t worth the hassle of arguing about the start position. Arguing is going to throw me off more mentally than changing my start position slightly would. 

 

Where I see this as an issue is if I’m the RO and am running a squad at a local match. I want to be consistent with the other squads in what I allow or don’t allow, but clearly there’s no consistency veteeen everyone’s opinion on how to interpret it. 

 

For instance, on Monday we had a stage that started “hands on marks”, and the marks were on a side wall of the indoor range. Per 8.2.2, the position of the rest of the shooter’s body is not specified, so should they have to start with the rest of their body facing downrange? Facing the wall? Wherever they want?

 

I was just a shooter at this match, and I watched different ROs allow (and not allow) shooters to start in different positions. I started with my hands touching the wall, but he rest of my body turned towards the first array (mostly this put me facing down range, but with my upper body twisted to the side). Another shooter tried to do this with a different RO and was told to face square to the wall.

 

Obviously, the better solution is to write a better WSB, but what do you do if the shooter questions the RO about the inconsistency?

 

For this reason, I think 8.2.2 needs to be rewritten so that “unless otherwise specified, the shooter may start facing any direction with hands relaxed at sides”. 

[waktasz]

If it says hands on marks, that's all you have to do.

If it's more specific than that (hands on marks with head centered between marks) do that. 

The rest of 8.2.2 is out the window.

[DKorn]

1 hour ago, waktasz said:

If it says hands on marks, that's all you have to do.

If it's more specific than that (hands on marks with head centered between marks) do that. 

The rest of 8.2.2 is out the window.

 

Why is “hands on marks” considered “otherwise specified” for 8.2.2 but everyone here seems convinced that “toes on marks” is not? Has there been a ruling or clarification for this? Has anyone asked an authoritative source? I emailed the RMI who taught my RO class and he seemed to think that the default start position specified in 8.2.2 does not apply to “toes on marks”. 

[motosapiens]

48 minutes ago, DKorn said:

 

Why is “hands on marks” considered “otherwise specified” for 8.2.2 but everyone here seems convinced that “toes on marks” is not?

 

because everyone here is wrong (except waktasz, of course). if it says toes on marks, 8.2.2 is out the window.  I agree with the RMI that taught your class. That's why it's so annoying when people try to enforce stuff that's not in the wsb. Now if it's a dedicated RO that stays on that stage, I don't really care how they interpret it as long as it's the same for everyone. the problem can come in with embedded RO's that move with the squad. OTOH, i've never been able to measure any time difference based on where I'm facing, even if the first target is available without moving, so I guess I don't really care, except for purposes of arguing on the interwebz.

Edited January 25, 2018 by motosapiens

[DKorn]

2 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

because everyone here is wrong (except waktasz, of course). if it says toes on marks, 8.2.2 is out the window.  I agree with the RMI that taught your class. That's why it's so annoying when people try to enforce stuff that's not in the wsb. Now if it's a dedicated RO that stays on that stage, I don't really care how they interpret it as long as it's the same for everyone. the problem can come in with embedded RO's that move with the squad. OTOH, i've never been able to measure any time difference based on where I'm facing, even if the first target is available without moving, so I guess I don't really care, except for purposes of arguing on the interwebz.

 

I agree with everything you just said. 

[happygunner77]

Hands on Marks/hands relax at sides/hand above shoulders/touching head above ears are stance, it's specified so you can look anywhere you want. Heels/toes on marks are just locations. If the former (stance) is not on WSB, you default to 8.2.2 and appendix E3.

 

Shooting positions are seated on chair, facing up range/downrange.

Edited January 25, 2018 by happygunner77

[motosapiens]

6 minutes ago, happygunner77 said:

Hands on Marks/hands relax at sides/hand above shoulders/touching head above ears are stance, it's specified so you can look anywhere you want. Heels/toes on marks are just locations. If the former (stance) is not on WSB, you default to 8.2.2 and appendix E3.

 

Shooting positions are seated on chair, facing up range/downrange.

 

I must respectfully disagree unless you can provide something more credible than your own opinion as a source for that claim. I don't however really care if you want to be wrong, as long as y'all are consistent at your local matches. We are pretty consistent at ours. If you want someone to face downrange, you have to say so. Many times the marks are not situated so as to face directly downrange, so it would be dumb to try to interpret them in such a way as to be annoying to people who just want to get on with the stage.

[DKorn]

6 minutes ago, happygunner77 said:

Hands on Marks/hands relax at sides/hand above shoulders/touching head above ears are stance, it's specified so you can look anywhere you want. Heels/toes on marks are just locations. If the former (stance) is not on WSB, you default to 8.2.2 and appendix E3.

 

Shooting positions are seated on chair, facing up range/downrange.

 

8.2.2 doesn’t make any mention of stance or location. 8.2.2 only talks about “start position”. 

[happygunner77]

per rulebook, it defines 3 things.

 

Start position  .................... The location, shooting position and stance prescribed by a COF prior to issuance of the “Start signal”.

 

it's really not my interpretation. Ask Troy about it. LOL. Just don't ask about the production hammer and trigger.

[happygunner77]

[waktasz]

I know anecdotal evidence doesn't really mean anything, but when so many Area and National matches just say "feet/hands touching marks" and nothing else, and then allow you to do whatever you want, that is a pretty clear indication that that is how the rule is supposed to be.

 

Just as an example, Stage 1 at Area 5 last year. "feet touching mark"   https://www.dropbox.com/s/rg4tp102unsy0hu/2017_USPSA_Area5_Matchbook.pdf?dl=0

 

Some people started standing outside the shooting area and facing straight ahead. Most started with their feet angled toward the first position, in a "sprinter" stance, ready to go. 

Others had one foot inside the shooting area and one foot out. 

 

 

 

 

[teros135]

3 minutes ago, waktasz said:

I know anecdotal evidence doesn't really mean anything, but when so many Area and National matches just say "feet/hands touching marks" and nothing else, and then allow you to do whatever you want, that is a pretty clear indication that that is how the rule is supposed to be.

 

Just as an example, Stage 1 at Area 5 last year. "feet touching mark"   https://www.dropbox.com/s/rg4tp102unsy0hu/2017_USPSA_Area5_Matchbook.pdf?dl=0

 

Some people started standing outside the shooting area and facing straight ahead. Most started with their feet angled toward the first position, in a "sprinter" stance, ready to go. 

Others had one foot inside the shooting area and one foot out. 

 

 

 

 

 

I would see this as anecdotal evidence that those matches are specifying a start position for the feet or hands and allowing the shooters to select the rest of their stance.  Because it's a practice at some matches doesn't make it a rule. 

[DKorn]

52 minutes ago, happygunner77 said:

per rulebook, it defines 3 things.

 

Start position  .................... The location, shooting position and stance prescribed by a COF prior to issuance of the “Start signal”.

 

it's really not my interpretation. Ask Troy about it. LOL. Just don't ask about the production hammer and trigger.

 

If 8.2.2 said “unless all aspects of the start position are otherwise specified”, then I would agree with you. 

[happygunner77]

18 minutes ago, DKorn said:

 

If 8.2.2 said “unless all aspects of the start position are otherwise specified”, then I would agree with you. 

 

The WSB doesn't have to specify all aspects of the start positions, I don't know why you would think that. It takes away variety. The rulebook just means "in the absence of specifics", you just default to appendix E3.  You're overthinking it.

 

You don't have to agree with me. This is not about my opinion or what I think.  I didn't make the rules. If in doubt, the DNROI is an email away. I'm just sharing how it's supposed to be. Other than that, just enjoy the sport and camaraderie.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2018 by happygunner77

[motosapiens]

After further review, the ruling on the field has been changed, even tho it's dumb and leads to conflicts, for example any time the marks are not parallel to the backstop (and even when they are parrallel, but you want the shooter inside the shooting area with toes on marks on back line, so they'd have to somehow twist around to 'face downrange'.  Even then, it is literally not possible for your feet to point directly towards the backstop (as per the definition of facing downrange).

 

Troy chimes in here http://www.multibriefs.com/briefs/uspsa/USPSA100215.php

 

The fact that this is often dumb is probably why it is so widely ignored. Best bet would be to just remove the default position entirely from the rules, since it's dumb. Second best would be to specify 'toes on marks, wrists below belt' which definitely renders the default start position inapplicable. 3rd best would be to just continue to ignore it like most people are, even at area matches and national matches where troy is the RM.

Edited January 25, 2018 by motosapiens

[DKorn]

21 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

After further review, the ruling on the field has been changed, even tho it's dumb and leads to conflicts, for example any time the marks are not parallel to the backstop (and even when they are parrallel, but you want the shooter inside the shooting area with toes on marks on back line, so they'd have to somehow twist around to 'face downrange'.  Even then, it is literally not possible for your feet to point directly towards the backstop (as per the definition of facing downrange).

 

Troy chimes in here http://www.multibriefs.com/briefs/uspsa/USPSA100215.php

 

The fact that this is often dumb is probably why it is so widely ignored. Best bet would be to just remove the default position entirely from the rules, since it's dumb. Second best would be to specify 'toes on marks, wrists below belt' which definitely renders the default start position inapplicable. 3rd best would be to just continue to ignore it like most people are, even at area matches and national matches where troy is the RM.

 

I will revise my understanding of this rule now that I have an interpretation from DNROI that contradicts my previous interpretation. I will now enforce as much of the default start position as is possible within a defined foot placement and allow anything safe and otherwise legal when hand position, etc. is defined. 

[happygunner77]

It's good now that we're on the same page.  If I'm ROing on local match, I would occasionally let the shooters know about this but I don't care if they follow or not. But on level 2 and up, we try to be consistent with this ruling. Thanks Moto for the article and for everyone to open up their minds about this as this is a long standing confusion. Hope everyone have a good year on matches this year. 

[DKorn]

1 hour ago, happygunner77 said:

It's good now that we're on the same page.  If I'm ROing on local match, I would occasionally let the shooters know about this but I don't care if they follow or not. But on level 2 and up, we try to be consistent with this ruling. Thanks Moto for the article and for everyone to open up their minds about this as this is a long standing confusion. Hope everyone have a good year on matches this year. 

 

I would think it would be less of an issue at level 2 matches and up since they are more likely to have dedicated stage ROs rather than ROs embedded in each squads. Not sure if this is correct since I’ve never been to a major match. 

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, happygunner77 said:

It's good now that we're on the same page.  If I'm ROing on local match, I would occasionally let the shooters know about this but I don't care if they follow or not. But on level 2 and up, we try to be consistent with this ruling. Thanks Moto for the article and for everyone to open up their minds about this as this is a long standing confusion. Hope everyone have a good year on matches this year. 

If you don’t enforce something locally you are not helping anybody.

[Chris Keen]

32 minutes ago, Sarge said:

If you don’t enforce something locally you are not helping anybody.