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

New 10.2.1 and Non-Existence

Recommended Posts

Okay - 200 IQ big brain new rulebook questions. Maybe someone can weigh in on this.

 

10.2.1 reads:

 

A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground or platform surface outside a shooting area, or while stepping on or gaining support from an object wholly beyond a shooting area, will receive one procedural penalty for each occurrence. Only wall edges that are in direct contact with or inside the shooting area may be used for support while firing shots. All wall or platform supporting structures, including, but not limited to: feet, braces, angle supports, chains, cables etc., are deemed to be non-existent and cannot be used for support. Any wall sections completely outside the fault lines cannot be used for support, even if that wall section touches a wall section that is in direct contact with the shooting area. The edge of the wall or structure must touch, or be completely inside of, the shooting area in order to be used for support. Wall feet or supports that touch fault lines do not constitute touching for purposes of this rule.

 

So, wall feet, supports, etc, are non-existent and you can't stand on them. The rule says you "cannot" do it, but seeing as we are physically capable of doing it, I conclude this is a permissive cannot. If it's a permissive cannot, what is the punishment for breaking the rule?

 

You would think a procedural as referenced in the first sentence, however we see that "A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground or platform surface outside a shooting area, or while stepping on or gaining support from an object wholly beyond a shooting area, will receive one procedural penalty for each occurrence." Logically, if a wall support does not exist, the wall support cannot be outside the shooting area. It is not anywhere. Therefore, if I am touching it, I am not touching outside the shooting area, I am just touching nothing.

 

So it would then follow that there is no listed punishment for doing something you cannot do. What is the proper way to resolve this problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is non-existent then you are touching whatever is underneath the non-existent element. AKA the ground...
And since you fire a shot. It is one penalty per shot fired up to the maximum scoring hits in that area per 10.2.3

That is what I would tell a competitor at a match I RM...

I think you are reading too much into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, RadarTech said:

If it is non-existent then you are touching whatever is underneath the non-existent element. AKA the ground...
And since you fire a shot. It is one penalty per shot fired up to the maximum scoring hits in that area per 10.2.3

That is what I would tell a competitor at a match I RM...

I think you are reading too much into it.

 

I don't accept that answer as true, but if it was, it doesn't satisfactorily resolve the question - since the action of gaining support from a wall support cannot be done regardless of where it is, even if it is contained entirely inside the shooting area (so I wouldn't be faulting since the ground under it is shooting area). I am doing something I cannot do, still.

Edited by NickBlasta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule ONLY addresses standing on a wall support that is OUTSIDE the shooting area...

If it is INSIDE the shooting area this rule for a penalty would not apply...

But— if you see 10.3.7

So WSB May now contain- climbing on or standing on support structures is NOT permitted.


There is your punitive rule...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RadarTech said:

The rule ONLY addresses standing on a wall support that is OUTSIDE the shooting area...

If it is INSIDE the shooting area this rule for a penalty would not apply...

But— if you see 10.3.7

So WSB May now contain- climbing on or standing on support structures is NOT permitted.


There is your punitive rule...
 

 

"All wall or platform supporting structures, including, but not limited to: feet, braces, angle supports, chains, cables etc., are deemed to be non-existent and cannot be used for support."

 

All would be the inclusive term here regardless of where they happen to be positioned. Also keep in mind they don't exist, so they are neither inside or outside the shooting area anyway.

 

So utilizing 10.3.7 might be a solution but it isn't a listed solution to 10.2.1, so we're back to question one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, teros135 said:

Don't feed the troll, guys.  🤣😂🤣

 

This isn't a troll, this is a huge rule change. You can't step on wall feet, even ones that are completely inside the shooting area anymore. Reasonably you could expect to be able to step on something inside the shooting area - even, say, you do it accidentally, and the RO says he's giving you 6 procedurals for gaining support from a wall foot stand, are we able to argue it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay - 200 IQ big brain new rulebook questions. Maybe someone can weigh in on this.
 
10.2.1 reads:
 
A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground or platform surface outside a shooting area, or while stepping on or gaining support from an object wholly beyond a shooting area, will receive one procedural penalty for each occurrence. Only wall edges that are in direct contact with or inside the shooting area may be used for support while firing shots. All wall or platform supporting structures, including, but not limited to: feet, braces, angle supports, chains, cables etc., are deemed to be non-existent and cannot be used for support. Any wall sections completely outside the fault lines cannot be used for support, even if that wall section touches a wall section that is in direct contact with the shooting area. The edge of the wall or structure must touch, or be completely inside of, the shooting area in order to be used for support. Wall feet or supports that touch fault lines do not constitute touching for purposes of this rule.
 
So, wall feet, supports, etc, are non-existent and you can't stand on them. The rule says you "cannot" do it, but seeing as we are physically capable of doing it, I conclude this is a permissive cannot. If it's a permissive cannot, what is the punishment for breaking the rule?
 
You would think a procedural as referenced in the first sentence, however we see that "A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground or platform surface outside a shooting area, or while stepping on or gaining support from an object wholly beyond a shooting area, will receive one procedural penalty for each occurrence." Logically, if a wall support does not exist, the wall support cannot be outside the shooting area. It is not anywhere. Therefore, if I am touching it, I am not touching outside the shooting area, I am just touching nothing.
 
So it would then follow that there is no listed punishment for doing something you cannot do. What is the proper way to resolve this problem?
Vlieger why are you trolling us c4817d1c2460388b4a44ba1cb95b8f77.jpg

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
This isn't a troll, this is a huge rule change. You can't step on wall feet, even ones that are completely inside the shooting area anymore. Reasonably you could expect to be able to step on something inside the shooting area - even, say, you do it accidentally, and the RO says he's giving you 6 procedurals for gaining support from a wall foot stand, are we able to argue it?


Ok...
I would simply say— RO— read the entire rule..
Now please call the RM...

The read the entire rule was told to me time and time again in the past...
This rule is based off the first sentence...
The rest is supporting arguments...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rnlinebacker said:

Vlieger why are you trolling us emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngc4817d1c2460388b4a44ba1cb95b8f77.jpg

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

😂😂 Amen! This will forever be known as the Vlieger rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RadarTech said:

 


Ok...
I would simply say— RO— read the entire rule..
Now please call the RM...

The read the entire rule was told to me time and time again in the past...
This rule is based off the first sentence...
The rest is supporting arguments...
 

 

 

Okay, so, to restate this - the conclusion would be that even though it's something that the rule says you can't do, you can do it, because the penalty in the first sentence doesn't apply?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first sentence clearly says OUTSIDE the shooting area then says wholly beyond the shooting area... so does being inside the shooting area meet that??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RadarTech said:

The first sentence clearly says OUTSIDE the shooting area then says wholly beyond the shooting area... so does being inside the shooting area meet that??


Is something that doesn't exist inside or outside the shooting area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easiest way for me to understand this is as Radartech explained it.

  If it doesn’t exist then your foot is touching the ground beneath it. If it’s in you are in. If it’s out you are out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Easiest way for me to understand this is as Radartech explained it.

  If it doesn’t exist then your foot is touching the ground beneath it. If it’s in you are in. If it’s out you are out.

 

That isn't supported by a rule, so I don't really think it's gonna be useful in arb.

 

Mental experiment - I straddle a fault line, one foot in the shooting area, one foot raised in open space outside the shooting area. I fire shots before I put my foot down. My foot was touching nothing, not the ground. If I straddle the same fault line with my foot on a wall support outside the shooting area, a wall support that the rule says doesn't exist, my foot is still on nothing, not on the ground. The issue at hand is that I "cannot" touch a wall support, and there is no listed punishment for touching a wall support.

Edited by NickBlasta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sarge said:

Easiest way for me to understand this is as Radartech explained it.

  If it doesn’t exist then your foot is touching the ground beneath it. If it’s in you are in. If it’s out you are out.

 

But I can see the OP's point. Don't necessarily agree with it, but I can see it. You are not actually standing on the ground beneath it, you are standing on something the rules deem non-existent and the the rules do not deem them as "ground". That would have been a better definition/rule.  It should have read "All wall or platform supporting structures, including, but not limited to: feet, braces, angle supports, chains, cables etc., are deemed to be *ground*"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.2.1.2 - defines "shooting area." 

10.2.1.2 - penalty for shots fired outside "shooting area." 

10.2.1 - supports outside "shooting area" do not extend it, so shooting from such supports is the same as shooting from any other outside location.

 

The rule is there to prevent people establishing a valid shooting position on the *back* side of walls by stepping on protruding supports. Now, since those don't exist, a person stepping on such supports is "outside the shooting area" and is treated the same as if you ran to a target that is 15 yards away and hosed it from 3 yards - procedural for every shot because you are fully outside the shooting area. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, broadside72 said:

It should have read "All wall or platform supporting structures, including, but not limited to: feet, braces, angle supports, chains, cables etc., are deemed to be *ground*"

 

It really doesn't matter what those outside structures are since the rules for penalizing are based on being *outside the shooting area*, not based on what the other object is. Whether you are standing on ground or non-existent support or are jumping in the air while you're firing a shot, it doesn't matter - the question for penalty is "are you within a shooting area" (BTW, that's also why you can jump and shoot around the barrier while in the air IF you took off from inside the shooting area, but cannot get in front of a distant target, jump in the air and shoot it.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, IVC said:

 

It really doesn't matter what those outside structures are since the rules for penalizing are based on being *outside the shooting area*, not based on what the other object is. Whether you are standing on ground or non-existent support or are jumping in the air while you're firing a shot, it doesn't matter - the question for penalty is "are you within a shooting area" (BTW, that's also why you can jump and shoot around the barrier while in the air IF you took off from inside the shooting area, but cannot get in front of a distant target, jump in the air and shoot it.)

 

There are two fundamental debates here, obviously.

 

One is the question of whether or not you can fault on something that doesn't exist and as such does not have a position outside a shooting area.

 

The other is what is the penalty for standing on something you cannot stand on (ie, the rulebook says don't do it), when there isn't a punishment associated with doing so.

Edited by NickBlasta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IVC said:

 

It really doesn't matter what those outside structures are since the rules for penalizing are based on being *outside the shooting area*, not based on what the other object is. Whether you are standing on ground or non-existent support or are jumping in the air while you're firing a shot, it doesn't matter - the question for penalty is "are you within a shooting area" (BTW, that's also why you can jump and shoot around the barrier while in the air IF you took off from inside the shooting area, but cannot get in front of a distant target, jump in the air and shoot it.)

 

The issue the OP is raising is the use of the term "non-existent". If it does not exist, then how can one be penalized for for using a structure outside the shooting area? He is implying that it is no different than your example of shooting while in the air having left from inside the shooting area. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to be aginst ipsc rules regarding movement outside of the shooting area, but the more of this crap i see, and the variable definitions of in and out, the more i see their point.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dropped a note to Troy...
Let’s see what he says... maybe we will get a rule edit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, NickBlasta said:

One is the question of whether or not you can fault on something that doesn't exist and as such does not have a position outside a shooting area.

 

The other is what is the penalty for standing on something you cannot stand on (ie, the rulebook says don't do it), when there isn't a punishment associated with doing so.

 

There is no such thing as "faulting" - you have to be within a shooting area. The rules define what is "INSIDE," then define "outside" as "not being inside," whatever that might be. If it's a non-existent object, the question is not whether it is "outside," but whether it is "inside." If it's "not inside," then the penalty applies whether you can establish that it is "outside" or not. It's similar to how "nulls" are used in database programming. 

 

The rule says that "...or while stepping on or gaining support from an object wholly beyond a shooting area..." If you are stepping on a support, you are "gaining support from an object wholly beyond shooting area." Whether it is deemed non-existent or not, it's still an object that is outside the shooting area and you are still gaining support, so you get a procedural. How do I know that it is "outside the shooting area?" Simple - it's not "inside." 

Edited by IVC
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, broadside72 said:

The issue the OP is raising is the use of the term "non-existent". If it does not exist, then how can one be penalized for for using a structure outside the shooting area? He is implying that it is no different than your example of shooting while in the air having left from inside the shooting area. 

 

The way you get penalized is that you are "gaining support from on object that is wholly outside the shooting area." To by philosophical, you have to prove that you are not gaining support, not that the object exists. If you are gaining support, even if the object doesn't exist, you are in violation of 10.2.1 and you get the procedural. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, broadside72 said:

He is implying that it is no different than your example of shooting while in the air having left from inside the shooting area. 

 

A quick add-on about this. 

 

10.2.1 defines when penalty applies and it is based on "touching a surface." That's why jumping in the air and shooting, if initiated from a valid shooting position, does not incur any penalties. In contrast, 10.2.1.3 establishes procedurals for "completely outside the shooting area" (notice the lack of references to touching anything, so jumping in the air while outside the shooting area is still "outside") and 10.2.1.2 defines what is required to "re-establish presence in the shooting area."

 

If I were to score a shooter who ran to a target, jumped in the air, then hosed it, I would give them a procedural under 10.2.1.3 for each shot fired. 

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...