Stages getting Thrown Out at Major Matches..... Lets fix this problem

[CHA-LEE]

I have noticed some common trends in Stage, Process or Staff failures which cause stages to get thrown out at major matches. Listed below are some examples of such along with some proposed solutions. My intent with this thread isn't to create a Match, Match Staff, or Personal Attack bash fest. Specific Match or Personal info isn't needed to define an issue and propose a solution. The goal of this thread is to create a list of common mistakes which lead to stages getting thrown out for whatever reason along with a proposed solution to keep the issue from happening in the first place. Basically, you don't get to whine about stages getting thrown out without also proposing a solution for said issue....... GO!!!

 

1 - Displaced or Misaligned Targets 

Issue = The stage is initially setup in one target configuration then at some point the targets are not replaced properly leading to a different presentation. If this issue isn't caught soon enough then there will not be enough time in the match schedule to reshoot the required competitors who shot the stage in the invalid target configuration.

 

Solution = Maintaining consistent target presentation is primarily the task of the stage RO's. This can be done by putting witness marks on the lath the targets are stapled to and also keeping the original target attached as a backer/alignment tool. I think this could also be improved by taking pictures of the target arrays after they are initially setup. These pictures should be taken by the Stage RO's and the RM so they can be easily referenced if needed. In addition to this I think it would also help if the RM did an inspection of every stage before the start of the match each day or during the first squads cycle through the stage. It only takes a couple of minutes to quickly walk through a stage to verify accurate target placement and replacement so there is no reason no to do so on a regular basis.

 

2 - Inconsistently enforced Start Positions

Issue = Throughout the varied match schedules (Staff match vs Competitor match) specific start position requirements are enforced in differently. Such as one squad or schedule is allowed to do one variation and another squad/schedule is required to assume a different start position. 

 

Solution = The root cause of this inconsistent start position enforcement is usually a combination of two different failures. The first failure is when the WSB dictates a start position which is too vague and allows for multiple interpretations of what an acceptable start position can be. This is easily fixed by strictly deploying a clearly defined starting position with all potential variables accounted for. Or clearly defining that the start position is up to the shooter to deploy in however they see fit. Such as "Standing anywhere within shooting area, facing any direction with wrists below belt". The second failure happens when RO's feel the need to mandate whatever they feel is the "intended" start position. There is no such thing as "intended" without specific instructions or requirements to enforce it accurately in a freestyle sport like practical shooting. The start position can only be restricted to what is written in the WSB or defined by the rules. Any additional enforcement beyond that isn't needed or required regardless of how you "feel" it should be deployed or how you have done it through the match. Just because you have incorrectly enforced the start position with artificially imposed requirements doesn't mean that you should continue to do so without RM assessment and approval. When in doubt confirm with the RM. 

 

3 - Inconsistent Stage Configuration or Function

Issue = Sometimes mother nature throws us a curve ball and decides to blow down walls or even shred whole stages. If the stage can't be restored to the exact original configuration then it isn't the same for everyone and will need to be thrown out. This also applies to how stage props wear or get damaged through the match. A good example would be a port that gets shot up excessively and it effectively grows larger as more people shoot through it. Another good example is using activated props which function differently after hundreds of uses or the prop timing is dramatically changed by wind or excessive use.

 

Solution = Since we have no control of mother nature all we can do is try our best to enable ourselves to reproduce a stage in a repeatable manner. This usually starts by securing the props to the ground as much as possible so it will remain unmoved during extreme wind conditions. If the props can't be restrained consistently then marking the ground where the props reside helps us move them back to where they should be. This can easily be done with spray paint, nails or something similar. The next is using a consistent method of attaching targets to lath and using specific lengths of lath. For example, if you set a simple requirement that all targets will have the shoulder registered at the top of the lath stick then you can easily restore targets by ensuring the same length of lath is installed in the target stand. Then have multiple common lengths of lath for varied target heights. You don't need more than 3 - 4 common lengths of lath to have a bunch of different variations in target presentation for stages. This becomes a tremendous help when a wind gust comes through and transports the target and its sticks into the next county.

 

Inconsistent stage presentation is best managed by observing commonly damaged props and repairing them as needed between shooters. If a prop gets shot up to the point of it not being repairable with basic tools (Tape, Paint, Wood, etc) then have the prop repaired or replaced by the match staff responsible for that stuff. Activated targets and their associated components need to be constructed in a manner that will survive the full duration of the match or proactively replaced or repaired as they start to degrade. This means that backup parts, cables, targets, or mechanisms must be on hand for immediate replacement. The latest and greatest whizzbang activator that you only have one of is usually a recipe for failure when you try to use it in a major match and it starts to have problems in the middle of the event. Consistency of activated target function also applies to how consistent the activated target functions in varied weather conditions. If the timing of an activated target changes when its windy or rainy then its not consistent enough to rely on for all competitors. Complex activated targets serve more as an overall match risk verses an additional match value for the competitors.

 

4 - Rule enforcement or lack of rules knowledge

Issue = Some times even the most dedicated match staff volunteers simply don't have the proper rules knowledge or ability to enforce the rules in a fair manner. This leads to complacency or inaccurately officiating shooters while running them through the stage. If the rules are not deployed in a fair, consistent and valid manner then the stage can be thrown out.

 

Solution = The Match Director and Range Master should vet their potential stage RO's for rules knowledge and also have them prove competency in handling complex ruling situations. For example, if you have an RO/CRO who is in charge of a Virginia Count Standards type of stage then they should fully understand how Extra Shot, Extra Hit and required actions should be enforced or penalized. Just because an eager volunteer wants to RO the match doesn't mean they are the best person for the job. Range Officials should be interviewed and provide historical successful experience in that function. We all understand that the practical shooting sports can only happen with dedicated volunteer help from many. But we also need those volunteers to understand that the job MUST be done right or their help will not be needed. Volunteering doesn't authorize the excuse of performing the job in a substandard manner. Do the job right, or don't do the job.          

[broadside72]

Even at Level I matches, #2 and #4 are a pain point with me, especially as a newer shooter. Learn bad habits and bad interpretations when those things happen

[Hi-Power Jack]

I've seen #4 over and over - easiest one to solve , too.      

[Glock26Toter]

 

14 minutes ago, broadside72 said:

Even at Level I matches,

 

This, to me hits the nail on the head.  I don't know how to try to get Level 1 match staff to take #'s 2 and 4 more seriously.  If we were used to seeing this stuff, then when we volunteered for RO positions at major matches we might know more about how to properly execute our duties.  Actually, that's probably the case for all the issues.  It boils down to training, and we need to have the training at Level 1, so that we can properly execute at Level 2 and 3.   

 

[George Jones]

All of this falls under the responsibilities of the individual acting as the Range Master - at all levels.  That, IMO, is where the solutions begin.

[CHA-LEE]

For local Level 1 matches that have these problems I think the potential solutions are pretty obvious....

 

Solution 1 - Express your concerns to the MD and also provide some suggestions on how to resolve the issue. Contrary to what most people think, the group of people running local matches really want to do what is best and make the match the best it can be. They may be overwhelmed with the task at hand in the heat of the moment so timing your comments or suggestions is always advised. Advising them of an issue then backing it up with a viable solution (A solution you may have to put effort into deploying) will usually get the issue handled.  

 

Solution 2 - Get involved in running the club matches so you can lead by example. Showing others how little "extra" work is really required to do things properly goes a long way in changing peoples ways. Cutting corners usually leads to getting caught off guard mid match by issues that could have been avoided up front. A lot of people get stuck in their "Way" of doing things until a more optimized way of doing things is proven to be successful. A minimal amount of extra work up front to ensure everything is solid will dramatically reduce mid match issues or drama. Mid or Post match issues are what burns match staff out because nobody wants to deal with unplanned issues or conflict when they are already busting their hump to make the match happen.  

 

Solution 3 - If Solutions #1 & #2 don't work, then all you really can do is choose not to attend. Practical Shooting matches are nothing more than products that clubs produce so shooters will buy it. Just like any other product in the world, if you make the product sucky enough people will stop buying it. The hard fact of life is that if a business or product is mismanaged long enough it will go out of business. For some clubs who continually fail at producing safe, fun and fair matches its probably best for them to go under. 

[JAFO]

I also see #2 the most.  From past experience with different shooters at our local matches, I'd also add this...

 

Issue: Not accounting for different shooter height and ability during setup/walk-through, which can result in match delays, unanticipated shots over the berm, or shoot-throughs.  The shorter height of a junior shooter, wheelchair-bound shooter, or other vertically-challenged adult on something like a double-set drop-turner can lead to potential shots over the berm.  Like-wise, the same shooters can have issues shooting at close targets over 4' vision barrier walls or even through high ports.  Alternately, not accounting for the lean potential of very tall shooters can create the possibility of a shoot-through around a wall that may not be obvious to a shorter shooter.

 

Solution:  Make sure walk-throughs take into account height perspectives other than the person performing the walk-through.  If a step needs to be added for a low wall or high port, do so before the match starts, rather than adding a prop midway through a match that half the shooters did not have available.  If wheelchair-bound or otherwise handicapped shooters are a possibility, have any potential Special Penalties decided beforehand for shots they are not able to make.  Also take those shooters into account regarding the width of shooting areas.

[broadside72]

29 minutes ago, CHA-LEE said:

For local Level 1 matches that have these problems I think the potential solutions are pretty obvious....

 

Solution 1 - Express your concerns to the MD and also provide some suggestions on how to resolve the issue. Contrary to what most people think, the group of people running local matches really want to do what is best and make the match the best it can be. They may be overwhelmed with the task at hand in the heat of the moment so timing your comments or suggestions is always advised. Advising them of an issue then backing it up with a viable solution (A solution you may have to put effort into deploying) will usually get the issue handled.  

 

Solution 2 - Get involved in running the club matches so you can lead by example. Showing others how little "extra" work is really required to do things properly goes a long way in changing peoples ways. Cutting corners usually leads to getting caught off guard mid match by issues that could have been avoided up front. A lot of people get stuck in their "Way" of doing things until a more optimized way of doing things is proven to be successful. A minimal amount of extra work up front to ensure everything is solid will dramatically reduce mid match issues or drama. Mid or Post match issues are what burns match staff out because nobody wants to deal with unplanned issues or conflict when they are already busting their hump to make the match happen.  

 

Solution 3 - If Solutions #1 & #2 don't work, then all you really can do is choose not to attend. Practical Shooting matches are nothing more than products that clubs produce so shooters will buy it. Just like any other product in the world, if you make the product sucky enough people will stop buying it. The hard fact of life is that if a business or product is mismanaged long enough it will go out of business. For some clubs who continually fail at producing safe, fun and fair matches its probably best for them to go under. 

 

There is a balance to be made I think when it comes to newer shooters and these issues. No one wants to be "that guy" that complains every match and then never makes friends. Safety issues I will call out right away. Steel too close, targets close to 180, trip hazards, etc

When I have a major issue I have gone to the MD/CRO, for smaller issues I will talk to the friendlier folks about it and see if it something that should be addressed or not. I personally don't mind if our squad interprets the WSB start position slightly different than other squads when it is not a huge advantage between interpretations.  AFter all, practical shooting is about finding solutions to problems and everyone has different solutions.

[BritinUSA]

2 - A picture paints a thousand words; For major matches have a photograph of a person in the correct start position and attach to WSB. No need to describe the start position/location in excruciating detail.  

[IHAVEGAS]

1 hour ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

I've seen #4 over and over - easiest one to solve , too.      

 

Two years ago (I think, it might have been three, level 2 match) the stage after the one I was working was a Virginia count stage. Troy McManus didn't follow the stage procedure correctly, for the next 10 minutes or so Troy and Mike Foley and the RM politely discussed how many penalties should be accessed. 

My learning was that situations are not always clear cut, if there is any confusion then get on the radio & let the RM keep you out of trouble. 

Edited November 14, 2018 by IHAVEGAS

[DKorn]

A lot of this sounds like stage RO and stage setup best practices. 

[nasty618]

I think it's awesome that the format of this post identifies a problem and offers potential solutions. Thank you for that.

 

At local matches I see a combination of 2 and 4 quite often.  Things like unloaded starts and ammo pick ups where ROs start shooters with a mag in their hands or allow them to store mags in sweatshirt pockets.  Also incorrect scoring of targets.  I called these things out a couple of times and guess what... i think i've become "that guy".  I've also witnessed gross fault line/barrier violations by higher level shooters (A class)... when i told the shooter that it was no allowed, they shrugged - "i didnt know that", while RO heard the remark, but just ignored it.  I've also seen blatant 180s with newer shooters becoming "warnings", bringing a loaded RF rifle to the start position (in SCSA) and RO not saying anything....  So lately i have been leaning towards trying to avoid seeing these issues so i dont have to deal with them and become "that guy"...  and i dont like that.

 

It feels like these issues would be less of a problem at bigger matches where the combined level of competitors' skills and their knowledge of the rules are generally much higher.  While the issues may still pop up, they are much less likely to go unnoticed and unaddressed.  Peer accountability in action. 

 

So the point i wanted to make - i think it's critical to include Level 1 matches in this discussion.  Vast majority of USPSA members compete at local matches only and that is where these issues are abundant and often are never addressed even within the squads, much less being brought up to the RM... As a certified RO who is not acting as an RO at the local match,  I have struggled with giving feedback to the "i am just here to have fun" guys and the somewhat sensitive ROs... I realize part of it might be presentation and i should care about their feelings (maybe?)... but nonetheless, would love to hear some thoughts on how to help elevate the idea of importance of rules and adhering to them locally - both with the squad members and roaming ROs while avoiding becoming "that guy". 

Edited November 14, 2018 by nasty618

[ATLDave]

Great post/thread (as usual for a CHA-LEE effort).  Regarding #1, I think it is extremely helpful for RO's and MD's to have some discussion about the way the stage is likely to be shot, what "concepts" are involved, etc.  If a target is wide open and available from a large number of places in the shooting area, then millimetric precision of its height is unlikley to matter.  But if it is a target that is partially obscured by an no-shoot or hard cover some distance away from it, then small deviations in placement can dramatically change the difficulty of the shot or the location that the shooters have to go to in order to shoot it (or shoot it without risk).  Perhaps for major matches everything should get witness marks on the sticks, but if time is short, then identifying the small number of targets where location is critical can help RO's focus their attention on making sure that those stay correct.  

 

This isn't limited to paper target locations, of course.  Let's say you have a stage where some poppers are arranged in tandem (one behind the other), with the "concept" being that the first popper in line must fall before the second popper is accessible, and the second before the third, and so on.  If one of the poppers has a little horizontal slop at the hinge, the RO will need to pay attention when the steel is reset to make sure that the faces of the poppers are lined up enough that one cannot shoot the poppers "out of order."  Just calling an RO's attention to this kind of issue in advance can help keep things on-track and equitable.  It's unlikely that a re-shoot would even be required for this kind of thing being wrong for one or more shooters, much less result in a toss-out, but it might materially change the way the stage is shot. 

[CHA-LEE]

1 hour ago, nasty618 said:

I think it's awesome that the format of this post identifies a problem and offers potential solutions. Thank you for that.

 

At local matches I see a combination of 2 and 4 quite often.  Things like unloaded starts and ammo pick ups where ROs start shooters with a mag in their hands or allow them to store mags in sweatshirt pockets.  Also incorrect scoring of targets.  I called these things out a couple of times and guess what... i think i've become "that guy".  I've also witnessed gross fault line/barrier violations by higher level shooters (A class)... when i told the shooter that it was no allowed, they shrugged - "i didnt know that", while RO heard the remark, but just ignored it.  I've also seen blatant 180s with newer shooters becoming "warnings", bringing a loaded RF rifle to the start position (in SCSA) and RO not saying anything....  So lately i have been leaning towards trying to avoid seeing these issues so i dont have to deal with them and become "that guy"...  and i dont like that.

 

It feels like these issues would be less of a problem at bigger matches where the combined level of competitors' skills and their knowledge of the rules are generally much higher.  While the issues may still pop up, they are much less likely to go unnoticed and unaddressed.  Peer accountability in action. 

 

So the point i wanted to make - i think it's critical to include Level 1 matches in this discussion.  Vast majority of USPSA members compete at local matches only and that is where these issues are abundant and often are never addressed even within the squads, much less being brought up to the RM... As a certified RO who is not acting as an RO at the local match,  I have struggled with giving feedback to the "i am just here to have fun" guys and the somewhat sensitive ROs... I realize part of it might be presentation and i should care about their feelings (maybe?)... but nonetheless, would love to hear some thoughts on how to help elevate the idea of importance of rules and adhering to them locally - both with the squad members and roaming ROs while avoiding becoming "that guy". 

 

I fully agree that all of this stuff can apply to all levels of matches. The primary reasoning for my focus on "Major Matches" is that we usually have a higher level of match execution expectation, staff management depth (RO, CRO, RM, MD, etc) and RO/CRO/RM experience. When entry fees for major matches are in the several hundred dollar range, these basic mistakes that lead to stages getting thrown out SHOULDN'T happen....... EVER. But they still happen and that is why I have started this thread. 

 

Local club matches have a much more restricted timeline and smaller match staff to make it all happen. We normally use existing shooters in the squads to RO each other and that is where a lot of variability in officiating can happen depending on the RO's experience or their interpretation of the rules. This is where the "I am just a volunteer" excuse comes into play and many lean on that to not put the proper effort into doing the job correctly.

 

We have all experienced a situation at local club matches where the RO has made some type of mistake while officiating. These mistakes will always happen and actually have to happen in order for people to learn how to do the job correctly. This is where the more experienced shooters and RO's on the squad can help educate the misguided RO on how to deal with the situation properly while adhering to the rules. There have been plenty of times where I have had to interject myself into the situation to ensure that the "issue" Is handled within the bounds of the rules. This is best done in a factual manner that minimizes confrontation. I also have zero tolerance for RO's with the attitude of "Its my way or the highway" as they try to deploy whatever made up rules or requirements they want. When I run into those guys at local matches I will explain their incorrect understanding of the situation and literally take the timer/pad away from them and start ROing myself. I have also run into this at major matches and requested the RM to replace the RO with someone else who can do the job properly. This gets back to the requirement of "If you are not willing to do the job right, then don't do the job".

 

The reality is that given that this is a volunteer sport we can't expect the officiating to be 100% solid all the time. Mistakes can and will happen and that is where we as competitors need to help resolve the issue. This starts by knowing the rules yourself so you can immediately know there is a problem and reference whatever rules needed to help resolve the issue. Holding RO's accountable for producing high quality officiating, regardless of match level, is what eliminates ongoing issues. If calling poor RO's out for not adhering to the rules of the game makes me "That Guy" I could care less. We can't play a game properly if the game isn't officiated properly. Not adhering to the rules at local matches only hurts the sport. This usually ends up causing people more problems in the long run because they get caught off guard when they attend a major match where the rules are fully enforced.     

Edited November 14, 2018 by CHA-LEE

[jhgtyre]

21 hours ago, CHA-LEE said:

The start position can only be restricted to what is written in the WSB or defined by the rules. Any additional enforcement beyond that isn't needed or required regardless of how you "feel" it should be deployed or how you have done it through the match. Just because you have incorrectly enforced the start position with artificially imposed requirements doesn't mean that you should continue to do so without RM assessment and approval.

I just checked this forum looking for discussions about RO's that decide to "interpret" the start position as something other than what is specifically laid out in the WSB.  A perfect example occurred at a recent match where the WSB said, "Standing in Shooting Area heels touching X's, hands relaxed at sides."  The RO made everyone stand with feet pointed squarely downrange, shoulders square to the backstop and nose pointing directly at the backstop.  This is NOT what the WSB stated and I was a bit annoyed that the crew felt the need to exert their own will in this situation.  In the end I didn't care enough to argue and I let it slide, which is my own failing, but I was curious about the right of the RO to force shooters into their "interpretation" of the start position so I came here.

[DKorn]

59 minutes ago, jhgtyre said:

I just checked this forum looking for discussions about RO's that decide to "interpret" the start position as something other than what is specifically laid out in the WSB.  A perfect example occurred at a recent match where the WSB said, "Standing in Shooting Area heels touching X's, hands relaxed at sides."  The RO made everyone stand with feet pointed squarely downrange, shoulders square to the backstop and nose pointing directly at the backstop.  This is NOT what the WSB stated and I was a bit annoyed that the crew felt the need to exert their own will in this situation.  In the end I didn't care enough to argue and I let it slide, which is my own failing, but I was curious about the right of the RO to force shooters into their "interpretation" of the start position so I came here.

 

I had a CRO at a major match this year that had us (I was one of the ROs) enforce “hands touching X’s” to mean “palms touching X’s”. While we made a point of consistently enforcing it over the 2 days we were officiating, I made the point that we couldn’t know for sure what all the staff had done the previous day so we shouldn’t restrict it. I’m guessing some people the previous day did “fingertips touching marks”, but I can’t prove it either way. Ultimately, I was overruled. Maybe I should’ve made a bigger deal out of it?

[jhgtyre]

11 minutes ago, DKorn said:

 

I had a CRO at a major match this year that had us (I was one of the ROs) enforce “hands touching X’s” to mean “palms touching X’s”. While we made a point of consistently enforcing it over the 2 days we were officiating, I made the point that we couldn’t know for sure what all the staff had done the previous day so we shouldn’t restrict it. I’m guessing some people the previous day did “fingertips touching marks”, but I can’t prove it either way. Ultimately, I was overruled. Maybe I should’ve made a bigger deal out of it?

Actually we had RO's on a different stage state that it had to be palms and not fingers on the X's for their start position.  I just googled "anatomy of the hand" (just to make sure there wasn't some wording that says fingers are attached to but not part of the hand) and the fingers are part of the hand so just fingers would suffice unless the WSB specifically said palms. 

[DKorn]

Just now, jhgtyre said:

Actually we had RO's on a different stage state that it had to be palms and not fingers on the X's for their start position.  I just googled "anatomy of the hand" and the fingers are part of the hand so just fingers would suffice unless the WSB specifically said palms. 

 

Here’s an interesting wrinkle - I didn’t realize it until now, but I just reviewed my match video from months ago and I was started the day before with fingertips on the marks. 

 

I definitely wouldve made a bigger bigger deal out of it if I’d realized this at the time. 

 

What’s also interesting is that the CRO’s stated intention in enforcing the restriction was to try to make the start position more fair, but I would argue that he effectively accomplished the opposite. 

 

 

On a related note, what is the proper course of action as a shooter if you realize you were started incorrectly? On another stage at that match, I was started as the first shooter with hands relaxed at sides instead of wrists above shoulders but didn’t realize it at the time. On the second shooter, we realized that he was started in the wrong position and had him reshoot. 

 

When I watched my video that night I realized that I was also started in the wrong position. Since I was staffing the match I was back the next day, so I talked to the RM and offered to reshoot the stage and was told not to bother. 

 

What if I had been a competitor who had left and only realized the mistake after getting home?

[Hi-Power Jack]

5 minutes ago, DKorn said:

 

  I started in the wrong position.  The next day I offered to reshoot the stage and was told not to bother. 

 

If that was a Level I (local) match, my opinion is that you were way overthinking this.     

 

But, you did the right thing bringing it to the CRO's attention.    

[DKorn]

6 minutes ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

If that was a Level I (local) match, my opinion is that you were way overthinking this.     

 

But, you did the right thing bringing it to the CRO's attention.    

 

This was a Level 2 match lasting 3 days shot in a 1 day format. 

[CHA-LEE]

11 minutes ago, jhgtyre said:

I just checked this forum looking for discussions about RO's that decide to "interpret" the start position as something other than what is specifically laid out in the WSB.  A perfect example occurred at a recent match where the WSB said, "Standing in Shooting Area heels touching X's, hands relaxed at sides."  The RO made everyone stand with feet pointed squarely downrange, shoulders square to the backstop and nose pointing directly at the backstop.  This is NOT what the WSB stated and I was a bit annoyed that the crew felt the need to exert their own will in this situation.  In the end I didn't care enough to argue and I let it slide, which is my own failing, but I was curious about the right of the RO to force shooters into their "interpretation" of the start position so I came here.

 

I have been there and experienced that myself many times. How much of a "deal" I make of it usually comes down to stage performance impact. If an alternate starting position has a significant advantage that is legal per the verbiage of the WSB isn't being allowed I will escalate it as needed. If the exact start position really doesn't matter from a stage performance perspective I will mention that they shouldn't be mandating position requirements that don't exist in the WSB but also roll with the flow. If they are manufacturing unfounded penalties or whatever else for not assuming their invalid start position I will not allow that to stand and escalate it all the way to arbitration if needed.  

[ATLDave]

1 hour ago, CHA-LEE said:

penalties or whatever else for not assuming their invalid start position

How would they... what could... huh?  Why would they sound the buzzer if they thought (rightly or wrongly) the shooter wasn't in the correct starting position?  I don't get it.  

[CHA-LEE]

13 minutes ago, ATLDave said:

How would they... what could... huh?  Why would they sound the buzzer if they thought (rightly or wrongly) the shooter wasn't in the correct starting position?  I don't get it.  

 

You are assuming that they were using valid rules and logic which they weren't. Just this year I attended a Level 2 match where the CRO said in the walk through that if someone started in the wrong position a Procedural would be assessed. I whipped out my rule book and kindly asked him to show me where that type of penalty exists. He tried brushing me off and I then mandated that he show me the specific rule within the rule book he would use to enforce the penalties he described. He gave it a half hearted attempt at flipping through the rule book and then handed it back like the issue was resolved. I then told him to call the RM over to resolve the situation. The RM showed up, I explained the situation and he had the appropriate "WTF are you doing???" question for the RO and everything was straightened out. Standing up for myself and forcing the resolution to a misinformed RO wasn't "Fun" but it was required to ensure that the match was being officiated properly. Too many RO's get offended by that kind of situation because they think its "Them vs Shooter" when in reality its "Them vs Rule Book".   

[EEH]

To me, if the RO lets me start in the wrong position it should be a penalty on him.

[IHAVEGAS]

9 hours ago, EEH said:

To me, if the RO lets me start in the wrong position it should be a penalty on him.

 

8.2.2 mandatory reshoot if the r.o. did not catch the error initially.

 

8.3.1 R.O. does not proceed beyond "make ready" until the shooter is in the correct start position. 

 

No penalties for r.o.'s, they are being punished enough for being volunteer workers  .