Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!
levellinebrad

Floating 180?

Recommended Posts

Is a floating 180 legal?

 

To clarify, 180 starts parallel to the back berm but when you get down range it changes to 180 almost parallel to the right berm

Edited by levellinebrad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, PatJones said:

I dunno. I've never shot a stage on a boat before.

 

22 minutes ago, teros135 said:

What's a "floating"180?

I edited the original post to clarify

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that new "180" is parallel to the side berm, how much uprange territory  (and how many potential spectators) does it uncover?  

 

In most cases, the "180" (actually 90 degrees to the perpendicular intercept to the backstop, or similar language) is the parallel to the backstop, regardless where the targets or shooting direction are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, teros135 said:

If that new "180" is parallel to the side berm, how much uprange territory  (and how many potential spectators) does it uncover?  

 

In most cases, the "180" (actually 90 degrees to the perpendicular intercept to the backstop, or similar language) is the parallel to the backstop, regardless where the targets or shooting direction are.

It did not uncover any spectators uprange. There was a rope blocking the area uprange 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, levellinebrad said:

It did not uncover any spectators uprange. There was a rope blocking the area uprange 

Try and draw a sketch of the bay/stage showing the berms. My only though so far is that bullets in flight pretty much ignore ropes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't find it in the rule book. It's as legal as every other "big boy rule". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kraj said:

You won't find it in the rule book. It's as legal as every other "big boy rule". 

I agree. Somewhere on here there was video of what I seem to recall was a major match that basically had a box or diamond shaped bay that the 180 did indeed “float” as the shooting area went around the bay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure if this is any help in this situation, but this is the closest thing I have found to a definition of the 180.

 

10.5 Match Disqualification –Unsafe Gun Handling

 

10.5.2 If at any time during the course of fire, a competitor allows the muzzle of

his handgun to point rearwards, that is further than 90 degrees from the

median intercept of the backstop, or in the case of no backstop, allows

the muzzle to point up range, whether the handgun is loaded or not

 

I am guessing that the side berm would now be the backstop.

 

 

Edited by petrojc
adding a thought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sarge said:

I agree. Somewhere on here there was video of what I seem to recall was a major match that basically had a box or diamond shaped bay that the 180 did indeed “float” as the shooting area went around the bay.

 

7 minutes ago, petrojc said:

I am not sure if this is any help in this situation, but this is the closest thing I have found to a definition of the 180.

 

10.5 Match Disqualification –Unsafe Gun Handling

 

10.5.2 If at any time during the course of fire, a competitor allows the muzzle of

his handgun to point rearwards, that is further than 90 degrees from the

median intercept of the backstop, or in the case of no backstop, allows

the muzzle to point up range, whether the handgun is loaded or not

 

I am guessing that the side berm would now be the backstop.

 

 

This is what I was wondering. My first instinct was to say that would be against the rules but there really is no wording that says the backstop cannot change which would mean that the 180 plane could change. I would think that the definition of uprange would prevent this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you consider that the backstop can change according to the stage layout, then the rule posted above fits.

 

If you have a range/bay with equal  berms/height on three sides you can, if you wish, explain that in the match description.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have shot stages in Level 3 matches where the berms were man made and natural terrain. The 180 was different as a function of shooter position. See the highly detailed drawing below. The stage is the same, the bay is different. For the left stage, the 180 runs E-W (or W-E ;) ) for the entire stage. For the stage on the right, the 180 would be N-S once the shooter is fully east of point A. I seem to recall the 180 "float" was covered in the WSB. My sketch is not to scale but typically none of the right-most 3 targets would be visible until the shooter was fully east of point A.

berms001.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, levellinebrad said:

Thanks for the replies. I’m taking it that it is legal to have a floating 180

 

It's not that simple.  In the example above there is a clear side berm that essentially creates a new "backstop", with protective side berms.  Absent that, no amount of ropes, flags, or WSB instructions is going to make the COF safe.   

 

I would think that the "floating 180" situation would be fairly rare,  would be very carefully thought out,  and would be clearly discussed in the WSB.

 

Edited by teros135

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve changed my mind after seeing this from Troy back in 2011.

 

No such thing as a roaming 180, and if some state match or other called it that, they were wrong.

The 180 can be shifted to be parallel to the back of the course of fire, especially if the stage is set into the corner and designed to be shot "diagonally", but just because you have a corner there doesn't mean it moves. The way that stage is laid out, the 180 is parallel to the backstop. 

Troy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, remember, as everybody was eager to point out when I tried to say Troys comments meant something, his opinion doesn’t mean jack. He must make an official ruling and an answer to an email isn’t one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sarge said:

Well, remember, as everybody was eager to point out when I tried to say Troys comments meant something, his opinion doesn’t mean jack. He must make an official ruling and an answer to an email isn’t one.

Troy's response is not an official ruling and one is not required pursuant to the question in review.

This is a clarification to those that may not understand that on any given stage there is only one backstop.

The "180" is defined in 10.5.2 as 90 degrees from the median intercept of "the" backstop. 

Note that this rule does not include "berm or berms".

 

The rule book does differentiate between backstop and berm.

An example is 10.4.1. which states "A shot which travels over a backstop or berm etc." 

Definitions of each can be found in the rule book.

Hope this is helpful.

Edited by TxD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, TxD said:

Troy's response is not an official ruling and one is not required pursuant to the question in review.

This is a clarification to those that may not understand that on any given stage there is only one backstop.

The "180" is defined in 10.5.2 as 90 degrees from the median intercept of "the" backstop. 

Note that this rule does not include "berm or berms".

 

The rule book does differentiate between backstop and berm.

An example is 10.4.1. which states "A shot which travels over a backstop or berm etc." 

Definitions of each can be found in the rule book.

Hope this is helpful.

It’s not, but thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 10:17 AM, Steve RA said:

If you consider that the backstop can change according to the stage layout, then the rule posted above fits.

 

If you have a range/bay with equal  berms/height on three sides you can, if you wish, explain that in the match description.

 

This would not work unless you have a corner or alcove in your bay, as Chuck drew above.  If you have a 3-sided bay with equal height berms and halfway down decide that the left-hand berm is now the "backstop" for the purposes of a 180 infraction, the shooter can now point his gun uprange of the original 180 line with no physical berm or barrier between the shooter and the rest of the bay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen a uspsa stage like it, but we shoot a uspsa-ish outlaw match every year that has some very deep and irregular bays (l-shaped or t-shaped), so for different positions on the stage you have a different backstop. It's pretty obvious in real life. once you turn down the base of the L, you are shooting at a different backstop, and so the 180 from that backstop is different than the one at the start position. In this instance, there is a physical barrier between the shooter and what was considered uprange from the previous positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the range I was using in my description, the spectator area was at the very left and blocked off over less than half of the distance to the right berm.  So, sticking to the 180 on the right side there was no way to hit anyone as the shooting lane was marked off about 10 yards from the berm.  Obviously this will change with any particular bay layout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are stages in natural terrain, not just in berms.

 

Troy's opinion does count.  He was providing the logic to allow the proper interpretation of the rule.  Do you truly expect a "Ruling" on every question about interpreting a rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, pjb45 said:

There are stages in natural terrain, not just in berms.

 

Troy's opinion does count.  He was providing the logic to allow the proper interpretation of the rule.  Do you truly expect a "Ruling" on every question about interpreting a rule?

Evidently rulings are all that count. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, at what point does the new median take over from the old median?

Looking at the drawing, I can find places to DQ almost everyone. Bad stage design.

Could be fixed by adding a charge line extending from point A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...