Starting Position "standing in box"

[dennisw1mac]

We've really gotten into the weeds here. As it pertains to the specific question and situation described by OP, there is no butt-hurt, and there is no need for a better written stage briefing. Maybe not using a start box would have eliminated the incident altogether, but it shouldn't have mattered. The OP/RO clearly handled it correctly, no further discussion needed.

 

The crux of the issue is whether or not you think that "in the box" can mean something other than what the reasonable population of shooters believes it to mean. And if you do think that it and "everything" is open to interpretation, then I believe YOU are a big part of this problem.

 

If an instruction is clearly stated and understood by all reasonable shooters (even the clever ones), and then you allow yourself to be bullied into some bulls#!t way of redefining it, then YOU should not be an RO. Or worse yet, if you are the one selling your BS to the RO, then shame on you for being a wannabe cheater. You'd get more mileage out of improving your shooting skills and keeping your head in the game.

 

I don't like this kind of behavior, much like I don't approve of sandbagging at trophy matches. It seems to me that our community needs to take every opportunity to discourage it.

[Sarge]

 

6 minutes ago, dennisw1mac said:

 there is no butt-hurt, .

 

The crux of the issue is whether or not you think that "in the box" can mean something other than what the reasonable population of shooters believes it to mean. And if you do think that it and "everything" is open to interpretation, then I believe YOU are a big part of this problem.

SOUNDS LIKE BUTT HURT

 

If an instruction is clearly stated and understood by all reasonable shooters (even the clever ones), and then you allow yourself to be bullied into some bulls#!t way of redefining it, then YOU should not be an RO.

SOUNDS LIKE BUTT HURT

 

Or worse yet, if you are the one selling your BS to the RO, then shame on you for being a wannabe cheater. 

SOUNDS LIKE BUTT HURT

 

 

[JAFO]

4 hours ago, dennisw1mac said:

We've really gotten into the weeds here. As it pertains to the specific question and situation described by OP, there is no butt-hurt, and there is no need for a better written stage briefing. Maybe not using a start box would have eliminated the incident altogether, but it shouldn't have mattered. The OP/RO clearly handled it correctly, no further discussion needed.

 

The crux of the issue is whether or not you think that "in the box" can mean something other than what the reasonable population of shooters believes it to mean. And if you do think that it and "everything" is open to interpretation, then I believe YOU are a big part of this problem.

 

If an instruction is clearly stated and understood by all reasonable shooters (even the clever ones), and then you allow yourself to be bullied into some bulls#!t way of redefining it, then YOU should not be an RO. Or worse yet, if you are the one selling your BS to the RO, then shame on you for being a wannabe cheater. You'd get more mileage out of improving your shooting skills and keeping your head in the game.

 

I don't like this kind of behavior, much like I don't approve of sandbagging at trophy matches. It seems to me that our community needs to take every opportunity to discourage it.

 

The reality is that, despite your obvious disagreement, NROI determined a while ago (for reasons not everyone agrees with or understands) that one foot in/one foot out is OK for the purposes of a start position.  I think the original discussion centered around one foot being inside the shooting area when the WSB said "Starting outside the shooting area."  But it has been applied in the reverse, as it is here.  I can't remember where it was published.  Perhaps in Front Sight, since it's not listed in the Rulings.  I didn't agree with it then, and I still don't.  But those who read it will use it to take advantage of loosely written WSBs.

 

We use start sticks instead of boxes, and simply require toes or heels touching the stick.  Or sometimes just let the shooter start anywhere in the shooting area.

 

As for the rest of the body position at the start, I was always under the assumption that telling someone where to start (location - heels/toes on marks/in shooting area/etc) was separate from how to start (head position/hand position).  If all you specify is where, then the default applies for facing downrange, hands relaxed at sides.  If you include anything else regarding what direction you face or where your hands are, the default is null and void and the shooter is free to do anything you did not specifically state in the WSB.  Am I wrong in thinking this?

[waktasz]

That's not correct. 
If the start position is "outside the shooting area" then you can be one foot in, one foot out...because you are OUT if any part of you is faulting the line.

 

If the start position is "inside the box" then you have to be completely inside the box, otherwise you are faulting, and therefore not IN the box. 

[dennisw1mac]

28 minutes ago, JAFO said:

The reality is that, despite your obvious disagreement, NROI determined a while ago (for reasons not everyone agrees with or understands) that one foot in/one foot out is OK for the purposes of a start position.  I think the original discussion centered around one foot being inside the shooting area when the WSB said "Starting outside the shooting area."  But it has been applied in the reverse, as it is here.  I can't remember where it was published.  Perhaps in Front Sight, since it's not listed in the Rulings.  I didn't agree with it then, and I still don't.  But those who read it will use it to take advantage of loosely written WSBs.

 

Actually this makes perfect sense to me. It is frequently referred to as, "if you're not IN, then you're OUT." And it further goes on to support my contention that "in the box" is a fully accepted condition with little to no variation in compliance. However, I don't see it being argued in reverse successfully. 

Edited November 27, 2018 by dennisw1mac

[motosapiens]

34 minutes ago, waktasz said:

If the start position is "inside the box" then you have to be completely inside the box, otherwise you are faulting, and therefore not IN the box. 

 

true, but standing on the fault lines that comprise the box is still 'in the box'.  But it sounds like the OP was referring to a situation where the shooter had a foot on some other far away fault line. that would be silly.

Edited November 27, 2018 by motosapiens

[waktasz]

If the start position is inside a box, that happens to be inside of a shooting area, I think the same rules apply. If you are "faulting" outside the start box, you're not in the box. 

[IHAVEGAS]

On 11/21/2018 at 8:42 AM, Bosshoss said:

NROI ruled on this a couple of years ago. 

 

 

1 hour ago, dennisw1mac said:

 However, I don't see it being argued in reverse successfully. 

 

A ruling makes debate moot.  We do not have to agree but it is what it is. 

[JAFO]

33 minutes ago, waktasz said:

If the start position is inside a box, that happens to be inside of a shooting area, I think the same rules apply. If you are "faulting" outside the start box, you're not in the box. 

 

OK, it's a one-way application.  It works for "outside the shooting area/box", but not inside.  I was mis-remembering some discussion on "wholly inside" vs "wholly outside" the box, or some variation.  This is why you don't quote rules from memory.

Edited November 27, 2018 by JAFO

[dennisw1mac]

8 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

A ruling makes debate moot.  We do not have to agree but it is what it is. 

 

Show me the money! I mean ruling.

[broadside72]

24 minutes ago, dennisw1mac said:

 

Show me the money! I mean ruling.

An official ruling, not a newsletter post....

[IHAVEGAS]

On 11/21/2018 at 8:42 AM, Bosshoss said:

I would look for the NROI ruling and post it but your going to make me go look for the RM because you don't know the rules  I'll let you go look for it.

 

Edit: Actually did look at rulings/clarifications in frontsight off the internet till I got bored with it (about 20 months I think). June 2016 has a different but similar question answered, it would be a good learning experience to go through all that stuff I suppose, yeck. 

Edited November 28, 2018 by IHAVEGAS

[CalTeacher]

https://uspsa.org/nroi/rulings

 

I see no rulings on this that even imply that one foot outside a box at the starting signal is the same as both feet inside.  What ruling are people referring to in defense of the “one foot out” strategy?  Is it a super secret ruling that USPSA hasn’t published?

 

If the definition of “behind” means uprange of and within the confines of the edges of a table, it would stand to reason that “standing in box facing downrange” would mean having both feet in the starting box.  

 

 

 

 

[Sarge]

5 minutes ago, CalTeacher said:

https://uspsa.org/nroi/rulings

 

I see no rulings on this that even imply that one foot outside a box at the starting signal is the same as both feet inside.  What ruling are people referring to in defense of the “one foot out” strategy?  Is it a super secret ruling that USPSA hasn’t published?

 

If the definition of “behind” means uprange of and within the confines of the edges of a table, it would stand to reason that “standing in box facing downrange” would mean having both feet in the starting box.  

 

 

 

 

Email DNROI and ask him about it. 

[broadside72]

13 minutes ago, CalTeacher said:

https://uspsa.org/nroi/rulings

 

I see no rulings on this that even imply that one foot outside a box at the starting signal is the same as both feet inside.  What ruling are people referring to in defense of the “one foot out” strategy?  Is it a super secret ruling that USPSA hasn’t published?

 

If the definition of “behind” means uprange of and within the confines of the edges of a table, it would stand to reason that “standing in box facing downrange” would mean having both feet in the starting box.  

 

 

 

 

 

If you are standing one foot on the concrete sidewalk and one foot on the grass, are you "standing on the grass" and violating the "keep off grass" sign or are you not on the grass because you are not "completely on the grass"?

[CalTeacher]

12 minutes ago, broadside72 said:

 

If you are standing one foot on the concrete sidewalk and one foot on the grass, are you "standing on the grass" and violating the "keep off grass" sign or are you not on the grass because you are not "completely on the grass"?

I can’t tell if this is serious or satire.

[broadside72]

2 minutes ago, CalTeacher said:

I can’t tell if this is serious or satire.

A bit of both

I am only going by the previous comments about reasonable person interpretations of the WSB.  Is my example too complicated for a reasonable person to understand? One foot on the grass is being on the grass, but one foot in the box is not being in the box.  I can see the confusion. I understand the intent of the WSB in the OP, but intent does not matter. 

[StuckinMS]

On 11/20/2018 at 9:47 PM, Sarge said:

This is the kind of crap that happens when DNROI rules that standing outside shooting area means one foot can be in and one can be out and visa versa. Opened a big can of worms and now it’s more of a wording game to get shooters where you want them.

Exactly,  now I have to bring my attorney to help me game the game lol 

[CalTeacher]

17 minutes ago, broadside72 said:

A bit of both

I am only going by the previous comments about reasonable person interpretations of the WSB.  Is my example too complicated for a reasonable person to understand? One foot on the grass is being on the grass, but one foot in the box is not being in the box.  I can see the confusion. I understand the intent of the WSB in the OP, but intent does not matter. 

But a WSB isn’t written to say “keep your feet out of the ‘out of bounds’ area.”  In fact, a WSB has a declaratory statement about what do do and where to stand, not a warning about what not to do or where not to stand.

 

Furthermore, look at the rulings I posted and read the definition of “behind.”  Why wouldn’t that concept apply to the confines of a starting/shooting box?

[broadside72]

2 minutes ago, CalTeacher said:

But a WSB isn’t written to say “keep your feet out of the ‘out of bounds’ area.”  In fact, a WSB has a declaratory statement about what do do and where to stand, not a warning about what not to do or where not to stand.

 

Furthermore, look at the rulings I posted and read the definition of “behind.”  Why wouldn’t that concept apply to the confines of a starting/shooting box?

 

But my example still applies. One foot on the grass is still being on the grass, but apparently one foot in the box is not being in the box. 

And the definition of behind is clear and articulated in a complete manner. Standing in the box is not defined anywhere other than in the stage designer's mind.

If you don't want these sort of discussions/debates, then write better WSBs

[waktasz]

Sure it is. 

What if it said standing within the fault lines? Could you still start one foot in and one out? No.

[CalTeacher]

13 minutes ago, broadside72 said:

 

But my example still applies. One foot on the grass is still being on the grass, but apparently one foot in the box is not being in the box. 

And the definition of behind is clear and articulated in a complete manner. Standing in the box is not defined anywhere other than in the stage designer's mind.

If you don't want these sort of discussions/debates, then write better WSBs

“Standing in box” is literally the language used on stages at nationals and on classifiers.

[broadside72]

Remember, in the context of the OP, the starting box is an area is wholly contained within the shooting area. It is not the same as a classifier or other stage where the starting box is the shooting area or is independent of the shooting area. In those cases had you had one foot out, you are out of bounds by default and I understand and accept the standing in the box description. 

Look, I am just playing devils advocate. I suck at this game and the tiny fraction of time gained by being one foot in, one foot out makes zero difference in my placement in my division even at the local Level I stuff I shoot at. I try to go by the intent of the WSB but this kind of crap is why we are page of 4 of this. 

[IHAVEGAS]

10 hours ago, CalTeacher said:

https://uspsa.org/nroi/rulings

 

I see no rulings on this that even imply that one foot outside a box at the starting signal is the same as both feet inside.  What ruling are people referring to in defense of the “one foot out” strategy?  Is it a super secret ruling that USPSA hasn’t published?

 

If the definition of “behind” means uprange of and within the confines of the edges of a table, it would stand to reason that “standing in box facing downrange” would mean having both feet in the starting box.  

 

 

 

 

 

https://uspsa.org/magazine

 

"Inside NROI" 

 

One of the folks on Enos used to have a PDF file of everything ruled on / clarified but it appears that the link to that file does not work now. 

[CalTeacher]

46 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

https://uspsa.org/magazine

 

"Inside NROI" 

 

One of the folks on Enos used to have a PDF file of everything ruled on / clarified but it appears that the link to that file does not work now. 

I see no rulings in that link, only a set of magazines that I don’t subscribe to.  I provided the link to NROI rulings from USPSA.  

 

I’ve still seen zero documentation that you can start with one foot in and one foot out of the starting position stipulates “standing in box.”  Why would “behind” mean fully uprange and within the confines of the edge of a table while “standing in box” means standing with one foot out of the box?