Start position question....chair start

[ima45dv8]

That's some funny sh!t right there!

[Joe4d]

turning the chair around and leaning against the back can equal match DQ 10.6 unsportsmanlike like conduct.

         

8.7.4.1 Altering stage props, targets or any other part of a COF without  the

approval of the Range Master is subject to the provisions of 10.6

Not to mention sit has a definition. WSB says sit not lean.
Sit means you are in an upright position with you weight supported by your buttocks, not your feet.

[David.Hylton]

10 hours ago, Joe4d said:

turning the chair around and leaning against the back can equal match DQ 10.6 unsportsmanlike like conduct.

         

8.7.4.1 Altering stage props, targets or any other part of a COF without  the

approval of the Range Master is subject to the provisions of 10.6

Not to mention sit has a definition. WSB says sit not lean.
Sit means you are in an upright position with you weight supported by your buttocks, not your feet.

I don't think it rises to 10.6 DQ level. It can be put back into position. I think 10.6 applies more to changing a stage when no one is around.

 

I just wouldn't start until the shooter was in the proper start position.

[SGT_Schultz]

13 hours ago, David.Hylton said:

I don't think it rises to 10.6 DQ level. It can be put back into position. I think 10.6 applies more to changing a stage when no one is around.

 

 

Whatever meaning or intent an individual infers from a rule is not important, absent some NROI clarification.  I take 8.7.4.1 literally.  If the chair is oriented in a certain way and you move it (other than moving it so that you can sit down in it), you're flirting with a DQ

[Nolan]

1 hour ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

Whatever meaning or intent an individual infers from a rule is not important, absent some NROI clarification.  I take 8.7.4.1 literally.  If the chair is oriented in a certain way and you move it (other than moving it so that you can sit down in it), you're flirting with a DQ

 

No DQ, just no start because 8.2.2 they are not in the correct starting position and if the RO lets them start after moving the chair, it's a reshoot.

 

Nolan

[MikeBurgess]

1 hour ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

Whatever meaning or intent an individual infers from a rule is not important, absent some NROI clarification.  I take 8.7.4.1 literally.  If the chair is oriented in a certain way and you move it (other than moving it so that you can sit down in it), you're flirting with a DQ

If you are being literal, why would moving it to sit down be different? 

[Matt1911]

I hate sitting starts with the metal folding chairs. Something on my belt always wants to hold on to the chair and bring it with me. 

[SGT_Schultz]

14 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

If you are being literal, why would moving it to sit down be different? 

If the shooter can't physically fit between the chair and some other object in front of it,......

[SGT_Schultz]

25 minutes ago, Nolan said:

 

No DQ, just no start because 8.2.2 they are not in the correct starting position and if the RO lets them start after moving the chair, it's a reshoot.

 

Nolan

Yes.  That's why I said "flirting" with a DQ.

[MikeBurgess]

1 minute ago, SGT_Schultz said:

If the shooter can't physically fit between the chair and some other object in front of it,......

so altering the stage to fit their physical limitations, how is that different than moving a wall so they don't have to lean as far if that is hard for them?

you said literal, I am just challenging that

[SGT_Schultz]

16 minutes ago, Matt1911 said:

I hate sitting starts with the metal folding chairs. Something on my belt always wants to hold on to the chair and bring it with me. 

Last weekend we had a seated start with back against the back of the chair and the chair was one of those white plastic patio chairs.  It got replaced with a wooden stool without arms or back ASAP.

[SGT_Schultz]

Just now, MikeBurgess said:

so altering the stage to fit their physical limitations, how is that different than moving a wall so they don't have to lean as far if that is hard for them?

you said literal, I am just challenging that

You make your ruling.  I make mine.

 

Done.

[Farmer]

Good thing my dad wasn’t a RO because he would just pop you in the back of the head with the clip board till you got it right. 

[Joe4d]

Rules are meant to be read , not read into. 

[Bigdeal929]

On 7/6/2020 at 3:18 PM, IHAVEGAS said:

 

It is until there is an argument, and somebody gets stubborn and slows the match down, and the shooter gets his head on crooked thinking about the argument instead of the stage plan. 

Yes^^^^

[DirkD]

if the stage brief isn't specific, the shooter can do what they want following the rules, let shooters do what they want then score the stage

If you want the shooter to shoot the stage a certain way, build the stage so it only makes sense to be shot that way

you want a specific start position write it down in the stage brief

you guys sound like idpa shooters

[TWHaz]

The devil is in the details. It must specify any specific way to “sit in the chair”. Or it is left up to the Shooter what it means. Sitting on the edge or in a aggressive position could save time. 

[pjb45]

On 7/4/2020 at 6:09 PM, Sarge said:

I strongly disagree with you. WSB needs to be specific. Sitting on chair could mean several different things. If you want to control it say something like sitting in chair with both feet on ground in front of chair, hands on knees. You can add back against back of chair for additional stringency.

This is the most reasonable approach.  It clearly identifies the designer's intent and reduces the variability of interpretations. 

[IVC]

On 2/25/2021 at 8:10 AM, pjb45 said:

It clearly identifies the designer's intent and reduces the variability of interpretations. 

Intent doesn't matter and "variability of interpretations" is irrelevant.

 

I've seen stage designers and ROs get upset about someone "gaming a stage" simply because the shooter found a way not to do what they wanted done, even if it was of absolutely no benefit to the stage. "Creative interpretations" most of the time just hinder the shooter, while providing entertainment to the rest of the squad, and there is nothing wrong with that. When there is a serious issue, such as the infamous shooting while standing on the outside wall legs in order to get to a swinger before activating it, those get fixed in the rules as we can see in the most current iteration of the rulebook. 

 

In the case of the OP, so what if someone wants to sit on the back of the chair? A shooter might even turn the chair sideways and claim it's not in the WSB. Why even care? Just let them do their own thing and watch them lose time. Even if they can eek out a fraction of a second, unless it's the top competitor at the top match, it won't translate to any meaningful match performance improvement. Quite the opposite - messing around with the rules for the sake of messing around with the rules and not paying attention to the shooting problem at hand is a sure way to have good time, entertain your squad and not finish at the best place you could've finished. 

[pjb45]

On 3/19/2021 at 11:37 AM, IVC said:

Intent doesn't matter and "variability of interpretations" is irrelevant.

 

I've seen stage designers and ROs get upset about someone "gaming a stage" simply because the shooter found a way not to do what they wanted done, even if it was of absolutely no benefit to the stage. "Creative interpretations" most of the time just hinder the shooter, while providing entertainment to the rest of the squad, and there is nothing wrong with that. When there is a serious issue, such as the infamous shooting while standing on the outside wall legs in order to get to a swinger before activating it, those get fixed in the rules as we can see in the most current iteration of the rulebook. 

 

In the case of the OP, so what if someone wants to sit on the back of the chair? A shooter might even turn the chair sideways and claim it's not in the WSB. Why even care? Just let them do their own thing and watch them lose time. Even if they can eek out a fraction of a second, unless it's the top competitor at the top match, it won't translate to any meaningful match performance improvement. Quite the opposite - messing around with the rules for the sake of messing around with the rules and not paying attention to the shooting problem at hand is a sure way to have good time, entertain your squad and not finish at the best place you could've finished. 

Intent doesn't matter and "variability of interpretations" is irrelevant.

  If this was true, then why even have a WSB?

Way too funny.

 

Your conclusions fall into being a non sequitur.

Every GM I have ever met and shot with, always tries to 'game' a stage.  They want the most efficient way to shoot a stage. 

 

.....messing around with the rules for the sake of messing around with the rules and not paying attention to the shooting problem at hand is a sure way to have good time, entertain your squad and not finish at the best place you could've finished. 

 

 Who recommended this thought?  Was it in the thread or are you just making stuff up?

 

[SGT_Schultz]

6 hours ago, pjb45 said:

Intent doesn't matter and "variability of interpretations" is irrelevant.

  If this was true, then why even have a WSB?

 

 

The WSB exists precisely because intent doesn't matter. 

 

If you don't spell out what you want done or not done, and the rules don't already cover it, your intent will be ignored with impunity.

 

And there will be nothing you can do except try again with more specific WSB

[NoSteel]

If you want me to sit IN a chair instead of ON a chair you need to define that in the wsb.  As to if it matters,  I have long arms so I’m going to place my butt ON the chair where it is going to give me the best advantage to reach the gun.  

[Joe4d]

You guys are getting wrapped around "IN" and "On" while completely forgetting that the word sit has a definition.
SIT in a chair,,, SIT on a chair means the same thing. 
Upright with your weight supported by your buttocks which in turn would be supported by the chair.
You want to sit on the back rest ? knock your self out but your feet would need to be on the seat of the chair,or held up in the air, not the ground. Or YOU AINT SITTING you are leaning.
Oh and as mentioned turning chair around isnt allowed by rule...   So go for it.

[Jim Watson]

I haven't seen anybody try to game a chair, but we have a couple of runners to whom "hands relaxed at sides" has no meaning.  Their standing start position is with the right hand at the holster, left hand at the crotch, left shoulder dropped and advanced toward the first target.

[pjb45]

7 hours ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

The WSB exists precisely because intent doesn't matter. 

 

If you don't spell out what you want done or not done, and the rules don't already cover it, your intent will be ignored with impunity.

 

And there will be nothing you can do except try again with more specific WSB

Your sentences contradict themselves.