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

No Walkthrough for the stage


Recommended Posts

As we all know, rule 3.2.4 reads "After the written stage briefing has been read to competitors, and any questions about the course of fire have been answered, competitors shouldbe permitted to conduct an orderly inspection (“walkthrough”) of the courseof fire. The duration of time for the inspection must be stipulated by the Range Officer, and it should be the same for all competitors. If the course of fire includes moving targets or similar items, these should be demonstrated to all competitors for the same duration and frequency..."

 

A stage idea I have been toying with is where the competitor is not allowed to inspect the stage before hand, basically going through the stage without prior knowledge. This can be achieved in several ways, but is of interest since it might replicate a more realistic shooting scenario. The shooter truly would not know the stage design before hand. I did this during a PRS long range match in which the shooter was given 3 minutes to find the target, range it using only their reticle and then take 2 shots. ("Find it, mill it, kill it").

 

The question is, does this contravene the rule above and how to interpret the word "should"? Has anyone tried this before and what were the results? Is there a safety concern?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done it in an end of season fun match. It does contradict the rules in my opinion though. I would never do it in a legit match though. I don’t see any safety concerns as long as it’s kept on the less complex side. And if your set up crew shoots it somebody will always cry about them having an advantage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the glossary in the rule book:

 

Should Optional but highly recommended.

 

I think the biggest complaint competitors might lodge with this is won't be fair and consistent for everyone, unless non-shooters are resetting the stage until enough shooters from the squad have gone through and then can reset.  Someone is going to have an unfair advantage if they reset before shooting

Edited by BZ919
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would never allow this in any official uspsa match. If you want to run blind stages setup an outlaw match or IDPA.

 

My biggest issue is that of competitive equity and there is none if the people who set up the stage are shooting it against people who were barred from seeing it beforehand.

 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BZ919 said:

From the glossary in the rule book:

 

Should Optional but highly recommended.

 

I think the biggest complaint competitors might lodge with this is won't be fair and consistent for everyone, unless non-shooters are resetting the stage until enough shooters from the squad have .  Someone is going to have an unfair advantage if they reset before shooting

In addition to the set & reset up advantages, the shooters that can see (or even just hear) other shooters run the course get some advantage over the first shooter. This is a good idea for a fun outlaw match, not such a good idea for a sanctioned match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Sarge said:

I have done it in an end of season fun match. It does contradict the rules in my opinion though. I would never do it in a legit match though. I don’t see any safety concerns as long as it’s kept on the less complex side. And if your set up crew shoots it somebody will always cry about them having an advantage

Agreed. I’ve hosted a match and shot matches with blind stages. It’s interesting and a lot harder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Nevadazielmeister said:

 

A stage idea I have been toying with is where the competitor is not allowed to inspect the stage before hand, basically going through the stage without prior knowledge. This can be achieved in several ways, but is of interest since it might replicate a more realistic shooting scenario. The shooter truly would not know the stage design before hand. I did this during a PRS long range match in which the shooter was given 3 minutes to find the target, range it using only their reticle and then take 2 shots. ("Find it, mill it, kill it").

 

The question is, does this contravene the rule above and how to interpret the word "should"? Has anyone tried this before and what were the results? Is there a safety concern?

 

 

If you are talking about a rifle match, I have no opinion on this.

 

In IDPA I absolutely HATE blind stages.  There is no way to create an even playing field.  People will help their buddies that haven't shot it yet.  The staff that are also competing for a trophy will have an advantage if they helped set the stage up. 14 years ago I shot an IDPA match in Texas.  One of the competitors beat me on that stage by 20 seconds.  There is no way he did that to me without help.   If you insist on doing a blind stage to make it more realistic, then set an obtainable par time and just add penalties to the time.

 

There is also a safety concern for me.  I have personally witnessed a competitor downrange pasting targets when the next shooter was about to be given the start signal.  There is also a video floating around of a USPSA stage being run while someone is downrange pasting targets.  Multiple targets were engaged with someone in harms way.  When I am the next shooter, I like to personally verify the range is clear before I go hot.  If I shoot someone accidentally, it's my fault.  I'm the guy that is going to be held accountable.  As much as I want to trust the match staff to verify a clear range, I trust myself more.

 

I'm of the opinion that range safety is just something many people pretend to care about.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, guys, IDPA no longer allows blind stages, either.

6.6.10 Blind stages and movable non-threat targets are not allowed.

 

I see no reason not to have a novelty non-USPSA, non-IDPA match with blind stages, but there are limits.

As said, only staff and shooters who have already been through may paste and reset.

Staff involved in design and setup may not shoot for record. 

 

And as the old saw goes, "Anything worth winning is worth cheating for."  The last such match I shot, there was little doubt in anybody's mind that one guy was coaching his buds on the upcoming surprise stage.  But it could not be proven to the point of DQing them. 

Edited by Jim Watson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we all know, rule 3.2.4 reads "After the written stage briefing has been read to competitors, and any questions about the course of fire have been answered, competitors shouldbe permitted to conduct an orderly inspection (“walkthrough”) of the courseof fire. The duration of time for the inspection must be stipulated by the Range Officer, and it should be the same for all competitors. If the course of fire includes moving targets or similar items, these should be demonstrated to all competitors for the same duration and frequency..."
 
A stage idea I have been toying with is where the competitor is not allowed to inspect the stage before hand, basically going through the stage without prior knowledge. This can be achieved in several ways, but is of interest since it might replicate a more realistic shooting scenario. The shooter truly would not know the stage design before hand. I did this during a PRS long range match in which the shooter was given 3 minutes to find the target, range it using only their reticle and then take 2 shots. ("Find it, mill it, kill it").
 
The question is, does this contravene the rule above and how to interpret the word "should"? Has anyone tried this before and what were the results? Is there a safety concern?
 
[emoji58][emoji58][emoji58][emoji58] why not just design a memory stage and mind fudge everyone?? Throw original idea in[emoji706][emoji706][emoji706][emoji706][emoji706][emoji706][emoji706][emoji706][emoji706]

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

If a competitor gets a reshoot on the stage for any reason then they will have gained a potentially significant advantage, as they will know where all the targets are.

Shot a local IDPA match 4-5 years ago with a blind stage.  My run was ok but there were 2 targets that took most people extra time to find.  After my run there was an issue with scoring, targets were missed and I would need to reshoot.  Cut my initial time in half, won the stage by over 20 seconds and ended up winning the match.  I had no business winning that match.  Blind stages sound fun and interesting but no way to make it fair for all competitors.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USPSA used to have blind 'surprise' stages and random stages every so often.  They were fun to shoot, but in no way competitively equal as others have said-- there's buddies, video, drones, audio cues, staff, reshoots, etc.

 

At the World Shoot in England (shows how long ago that was), they had a no shoot and some shoot targets they'd randomly move between 3 positions, but people soon figured out that if you didn't see the no-shoot in the first two, you could skip the third because that's where it had to be.  IIRC that was about the last time they did anything like that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CSEMARTIN said:

 

There is also a safety concern for me.  I have personally witnessed a competitor downrange pasting targets when the next shooter was about to be given the start signal.  There is also a video floating around of a USPSA stage being run while someone is downrange pasting targets.  Multiple targets were engaged with someone in harms way.  When I am the next shooter, I like to personally verify the range is clear before I go hot.  If I shoot someone accidentally, it's my fault.  I'm the guy that is going to be held accountable.  As much as I want to trust the match staff to verify a clear range, I trust myself more.

 

I'm of the opinion that range safety is just something many people pretend to care about.  

I work enough matches to know it’s not my primary job as a shooter to ensure the stage is clear. That is the primary job of the staff. I drill into RO’s to check every target to ensure they are pasted. As an extra bonus this just happens to put them in an excellent position to be the last one off the stage.

  That video floating around is an example of total RO failure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, shred said:

At the World Shoot in England (shows how long ago that was), they had a no shoot and some shoot targets they'd randomly move between 3 positions, but people soon figured out that if you didn't see the no-shoot in the first two, you could skip the third because that's where it had to be.

 

I remember that stage; Start position was hands fully immersed in soapy water... hard to believe that was 26 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, though about this a little more, i like the idea even though it has some trouble spots. Here is how i would do it.

 

1 it would be a side match. You would shoot it right along with the match, but it would not count for match score. Anyone who did not like  the idea  could opt out with no match penalties. 

 

2 match personnel who helped with the  stage would be scored separately,  they would also get no walk through, but obviously they would see the stage,  so scoring them together wouldn't be fair  at all.

 

3 no reshoots allowed, so no steel or movers that could cause issues

 

4 winner of the stage would get a certificate saying that they were a badass. The certificate would be on cheap copy paper written in sharpie.

 

5 pre match i would explain that telling anyone about the stage would be a stage dq for the teller and the person being told. Also let everyone know that by telling anyone about the stage would be robbing that person of the experience,  so don't do it.

 

6:  sounds, nothing can be done here 100percent,  but once again pre match,  instruct people to try not to and form a plan based on shots, because then they would be robbing themselves of the experience.  Also adjustable targets  as mentioned would be good too. But basically honor system. 

 

I think most would follow an honor system, i know i would because i would love to get to shoot a truly (as possible) blind stage. 

 

So IMO, go  for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like RJH's take on this. It should be just for FUN. there's too many worried about how someone else would get some kind of advantage. This whole sport is supposed to be fun. Too many are worried about rules and competition. There's no new pick-up being awarded to the winner. Lighten up and enjoy the sport.

 

ETA  If someone does cheat they are just cheating themselves out of the chance to do something different and fun, so to heck with them.

Edited by egd5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, egd5 said:

I like RJH's take on this. It should be just for FUN. there's too many worried about how someone else would get some kind of advantage. This whole sport is supposed to be fun. Too many are worried about rules and competition. There's no new pick-up being awarded to the winner. Lighten up and enjoy the sport.

 

ETA  If someone does cheat they are just cheating themselves out of the chance to do something different and fun, so to heck with them.

In a sport that holds competitions with rules, following the rules is part of the game. So is fair competition. Those are the hallmarks of any sport. But in a non sanctioned fun shoot these kinds of stages can add some fun. The point everybody is making is that even in a fun shoot it sucks to be at a disadvantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shot an indoor match 20 years ago, where everyone was kept in another room

until it was your turn to shoot - there were three doors.

 

You loaded, holstered, and opened one door at a time, in a low-light situation.

 

Exhilirating.

 

But, the wait was forever, and then over in five minutes.

 

And, a tremendous amount of work for the staff.

 

I really enjoyed it - didn't care about competitive advantage, etc.

 

It really was a blast.    :)   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should = optional.

 

It can be cool to do BUT... it would be a pain to run in a contest. Besides, word about the stage would leak to friends and team mates.

(done it at a non-IPSC/USPSA contest, years ago. It was a trail in a wooded area. I believe it was the first and last time the organisers tried it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also tried IDPA when it started.

Designed a stage:  Shooter made ready, then turned uprange, back to stage. Everyone except RO/SO then went out, scored the previous shooter and also moved targets and walls.Very simple lay out.  On buzzer shooter turned.

Nothing super special or fancy but it worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anecdote alert:

 

Some years ago, we had one with tarps hung across the indoor range, no walkthrough. 

Lights out.

Step through the curtain, draw pistol, illuminate flashlight, engage. 

I ended up with one target having six bullet holes because I would find it anew every time I moved between props. 

We only got in the one stage that evening but it was a challenge. 

 

A highway patrolman had dropped in to see what we were doing on Tuesdays after the store closed. He didn't shoot but he still seemed surprised.  Maybe it got him to thinking about what would be required if he had to enter a dark space for real.   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion this is an outlaw only sort of thing. I've been subjected to one of these one time and it's a terrible idea, at least in the context of USPSA. 

 

USPSA is about high level execution. You are presented a shooting problem, you formulate a plan, and then you execute, all in the interest of maximizing your score. It's not about being realistic, it's about testing your skillset. And that skillset involves planning a solution and executing. Without those two items it's not the sport we train to play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...