Failure to engage

[dmshozer1]

Level 1 USPSA match,

A very complicated memory stage. The type where you could forget to shoot a target or two.

When the RO is scoring a target that has two misses, he automatically added a failure to engage penalty.

The shooter says they engaged it. His argument was the RO should have called the failure after the unload and show clear.

Because if the RO was watching the gun he could not tell what target he failed to engage.

The rule book addressed the failure to engage penalty but not when it should be called.

Ideas?

 

[JohnStewart]

They way I've learned to treat this, as the RO, if I KNEW that the shooter didn't engage the target when the shooter was finished then I would assign an FTSA.  If I only questioned the fact when we were scoring targets, then the shooter gets the mikes, but no FTSA.  

[RadarTech]

All procedural penalties are typically called during the scoring  process. for multiple reasons..

1. Multiple ROs would have different perspectives, the timer RO? not so much.

2. if it is SOLEY on the timer RO- then a when it will be called prevents the other ROs from saying anything.. Especially if the course is of size where the other ROs may not be close by at RIC.

3. A range official that has ran a stage more than once should be able to discern muzzle general direction by watching it.  Some may not be able to put it together when watching the shooter, as they are safety focused.  BUT when scoring the targets-- "wait the shooter never swept the gun this direction"  at that point they realize it- this becomes a cue to ask other ROs... 

 

 

IF in doubt-- you SHOULD NEVER call FTSA. 

 

At a Level 1- you may not have the benefit from multiple stage ROs watching--- so it can be iffy... 

 

If called to a stage and told that the FTSA was not given at the ULSC, I would say scoring is NOT complete until signed by staff and competitor or signed by the RM if the competitor refuses to sign...

[Rookie]

Could just be the way that I am reading the situation statement, but... my take is:

• The competitors argument (call FTE at ULASC) is not valid
• 2 Mikes on a target does not equal a Failure to Engage penalty
• Just because the RO is watching the gun, does not mean that he/she cannot observe the competitors failure to engage a target 

Was the RM called to join the debate?  By the way... I have had FTE's called more than once at ULASC and before scoring was started, and subsequently the RO discovered hits on the suspect target.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Rookie

[DKorn]

If the ROs knows that the shooter didn’t fire at least one round at a target, then they can call it a Failure to Shoot At (FTSA) and impose a procedural penalty under 10.2.7, assuming that none of the exceptions apply. If the ROs aren’t sure, they shouldn’t apply the penalty. Personally, I’ve never seen it called until scoring of the targets happens - so as they’re scoring, the RO will call “2 mikes, 1 FTSA”.

 

Thats it. If the shooter disagrees, they can appeal to the CRO, then the RM as needed. 
 

Usually if the primary RO scoring targets isn’t sure if a target was shot at or not, and if the shooter in fact didn’t shoot at it, it goes one of three ways:

1 - The RO calls “2 mikes” and the shooter goes “Darn, I forgot that one!”, and the ROs apply an FTSA penalty. 

2 - The RO asks the other RO if he saw the shooter engage the target. If the other RO is sure that the target was not engaged, then an FTSA penalty is applied. 
3 - The RO asks the other RO if he saw the shooter engage the target. If the other RO is sure that the target was engaged or is not sure, then an FTSA penalty is not applied. 

[IVC]

There is no rule for the "timing" of FTSA procedural penalty, so the RO can call it at any time until the scoring is complete. 

 

Normally, a good RO will notice that some targets weren't engaged and will point it to the shooter after the "Range is Clear" so the shooter is aware of what's coming, but this is not necessary. The RO can call it while scoring, or at the end. Above posts have some good examples and reasoning for different timing. 

 

If the RO is going off of two mikes to determine FTSA and to automatically add the procedural, then he is wrong. The shooter might not be able to prove it, but the RO is still wrong. A FTSA is a procedural that the RO has to see, not deduce, especially not from two mikes since that does not imply a FTSA. My guess is that this RO simply doesn't know better, not that he is playing a game of "his word against shooter's word." 

[Sarge]

I’ll add that too many people, sadly even many RO’s, think the timer RO must stare at the gun the entire time. On a typical stage there are only a few critical times an RO needs to watch the gun. Reloads, moving, clearing malfs, come to mind. When a shooter is just hammering away at targets I check for foot faults, and even watch for wall, barrel hits etc. I often can tell a shooter which shot he pulled if there is only one hit on a target, etc. 

  Timer RO’s PRIMARY job is to watch the gun but it’s not his ONLY job.

[IHAVEGAS]

 

1 hour ago, dmshozer1 said:

When the RO is scoring a target that has two misses, he automatically added a failure to engage penalty.

 

Interesting topic.

At r.o. class the instructor will tell you that counting shots is a good habit.

On a "very complex memory stage" the r.o. may know that you forgot a target (counting) and he may even know which array you were shooting when the target was forgotten (more counting), but as noted elsewhere the r.o. may not know which particular target you forgot until the scoring is being done. 

 

[cjmill87]

Having shot this stage (and screwed it up in wonderful fashion) and looking at Practiscore, 9 competitors out of 46 were assessed with procedurals which I believe were all FTSA as the OP described.  Yet there were many shooters who had multiple misses that did not have procedurals assigned (this stage had 9 paper targets and required 3 shots per target, assumption is that people with more than 4 misses and no procedural had different ROs who followed what's been stated so far in the thread or they only landed {perhaps shot} 2 rounds per paper).

Edited July 29, 2020 by cjmill87

[MikeBurgess]

I have assigned many many FTSA over the years at L1, 2 and 3 matches and have always done it at the target in question. to me it makes way more sense to start scoring as usual, when you get to the target in question you can score the mikes and apply the FTSA, the shooter is likely following along and can see what target you are applying the penalty for and make any protests at that time,  the alternative of going ULSC, apply FTSA  try to explain its for that target behind the barrel on the left at the 3rd position with the no shoot on it, and hoping while your attempting to explain all this to the competitor the squad hasn't pre taped targets because you are not scoring as usual and they are on auto pilot, causing a reshoot, makes no sense to me. 

 

I will add that I have mentioned to shooters when I started scoring that they may want to come along because they are not going to like one, or more of the targets to encourage them to see for themselves whats being scored.

Edited July 29, 2020 by MikeBurgess

[Mcfoto]

45 minutes ago, Sarge said:

I’ll add that too many people, sadly even many RO’s, think the timer RO must stare at the gun the entire time. On a typical stage there are only a few critical times an RO needs to watch the gun. Reloads, moving, clearing malfs, come to mind. When a shooter is just hammering away at targets I check for foot faults, and even watch for wall, barrel hits etc. I often can tell a shooter which shot he pulled if there is only one hit on a target, etc. 

  Timer RO’s PRIMARY job is to watch the gun but it’s not his ONLY job.

the way I was taught: the timer RO should be watching the gun since they are on the strong side and can see the trigger. The RO with the pad should be concerned mostly with targets and foot faults on the weak side. Understand this is ideal and at Level 1, scorekeepers are often not certified ROs.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Mcfoto

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, Mcfoto said:

the way I was taught: the timer RO should be watching the gun since they are on the strong side and can see the trigger. The RO with the pad should be concerned mostly with targets and foot faults on the weak side. Understand this is ideal and at Level 1, scorekeepers are often not certified ROs.

RO’s should be able to multi task. I was probably taught the same but experience teaches you to “see” as much as I can. Unless the pad RO is standing right behind me as I run the timer There is no way he can be sure of FTSA etc

[dmshozer1]

3 hours ago, dmshozer1 said:

Level 1 USPSA match,

A very complicated memory stage. The type where you could forget to shoot a target or two.

When the RO is scoring a target that has two misses, he automatically added a failure to engage penalty.

The shooter says they engaged it. His argument was the RO should have called the failure after the unload and show clear.

Because if the RO was watching the gun he could not tell what target he failed to engage.

The rule book addressed the failure to engage penalty but not when it should be called.

Ideas?

 

Thanks for the feed back guys,

From the different views I guess it would be up to the M.D. to rule on it,

Years ago when I was very competitive I had an RO say I didn't engage a target when

I knew I absolutely did. I voiced the same argument and the M.D. ruled the two misses but no  failure.

The RO admitted he did see the failure but saw the misses and applied the penalty. Same kind of stage.

[pjb45]

THIS:  A FTSA is a procedural that the RO has to see, not deduce, especially not from two mikes since that does not imply a FTSA.  IVC is correct.

[DKorn]

8 hours ago, pjb45 said:

THIS:  A FTSA is a procedural that the RO has to see, not deduce, especially not from two mikes since that does not imply a FTSA.  IVC is correct.

This is a great way to put it, even more so if you change “see” to “observe” since sometimes you can know without seeing which shots go towards which targets - for example, if there’s an array of 3 steel and the shooter only fires twice. 
 

Here’s one to ponder - what call would you make if a shooter moves to a position with 4 closely spaced paper targets and fires 6 shots? Let’s say that due to the close spacing, you are unable to tell from the angle of the shooter’s body or gun which target is being engaged on any given shot. I know what I would say but I’d like to hear what others would do. 

[Joe4d]

 no FTSA. If the targets are right on each other, or so close no way to tell.

[-JCN-]

Similar type question from a match last night:

 

1. If a shooter goes to engage a steel target and pulls the trigger... but is dry and no rounds sent. Failure to engage, right? Because no actual shot sent downrange?

 

2. Same scenario, but patient goes to engage and has a squib that doesn't leave the barrel and decides to be done with the COF. Is it a failure to engage? He "shot" at it... but no bullet left the muzzle.

 

 

[ima45dv8]

1 hour ago, -JCN- said:

2. Same scenario, but patient goes to engage and has a squib that doesn't leave the barrel and decides to be done with the COF. Is it a failure to engage? He "shot" at it... but no bullet left the muzzle.

Per the glossary, if no bullet passes completely through the barrel, then the competitor did NOT shoot at it. A squib in the barrel is not a shot in this instance.

[IVC]

5 hours ago, DKorn said:

Here’s one to ponder - what call would you make if a shooter moves to a position with 4 closely spaced paper targets and fires 6 shots? Let’s say that due to the close spacing, you are unable to tell from the angle of the shooter’s body or gun which target is being engaged on any given shot. I know what I would say but I’d like to hear what others would do. 

He shot at at least one shot at each target unless I can positively determine he didn't, so no FTSA (one exception below). 

 

The break goes to the shooter and the FTSA is not there to play games about a close miss, no hits on paper or alike. It's there to penalize forgetting targets or not engaging them. If he fires 3 shots at a 4-target array, then he does get at least one FTSA, possibly two if he ran dry. Otherwise there is no point in trying to play games about which target he shot *unless* it was something obvious, e.g., he shot at three targets, ran dry, decided to end COF. Then it is clear that he didn't engage the last target. 

[IVC]

3 hours ago, -JCN- said:

2. Same scenario, but patient goes to engage and has a squib that doesn't leave the barrel and decides to be done with the COF. Is it a failure to engage? He "shot" at it... but no bullet left the muzzle.

Are you an MD? Hopefully he doesn't become a patient after the squib... 

[IVC]

1 hour ago, ima45dv8 said:

Per the glossary, if no bullet passes completely through the barrel, then the competitor did NOT shoot at it. A squib in the barrel is not a shot in this instance.

This is great insight - I wasn't aware of this definition in the Glossary (look under "Shot") so I would say that if the gun went "bang" it was a shot. But it's not if it's a squib... Very interesting. 

[IVC]

5 hours ago, DKorn said:

Here’s one to ponder - what call would you make if a shooter moves to a position with 4 closely spaced paper targets and fires 6 shots? Let’s say that due to the close spacing, you are unable to tell from the angle of the shooter’s body or gun which target is being engaged on any given shot. I know what I would say but I’d like to hear what others would do. 

A quick add-on thought...

 

If he hit three targets with two rounds each and he only fired 6 shots, then it IS a FTSA on the last target. Saying that he engaged the last target, missed, and hit the A zone on the nearby target is not something he could try to sell at arbitration. At least not with a straight face. I guess it always comes down to the details of the particular situation...

[DKorn]

6 hours ago, IVC said:

A quick add-on thought...

 

If he hit three targets with two rounds each and he only fired 6 shots, then it IS a FTSA on the last target. Saying that he engaged the last target, missed, and hit the A zone on the nearby target is not something he could try to sell at arbitration. At least not with a straight face. I guess it always comes down to the details of the particular situation...

I could absolutely see scenarios if the targets are very close together (like stacked targets overlapping with a no shoot between them, or targets shoulder to shoulder) where a hit on one target could very easily have been aimed at another target. I’ve done it, sometimes due to a really bad trigger pull yanking the shot low or left, sometimes due to transitioning between targets and firing early or late (which would normally be a mike, but if the targets were close together I could see clipping another target), and once because my optic lost zero midway through a stage and started shooting way to the right. 

[IVC]

59 minutes ago, DKorn said:

I could absolutely see scenarios if the targets are very close together (like stacked targets overlapping with a no shoot between them, or targets shoulder to shoulder) where a hit on one target could very easily have been aimed at another target. I’ve done it, sometimes due to a really bad trigger pull yanking the shot low or left, sometimes due to transitioning between targets and firing early or late (which would normally be a mike, but if the targets were close together I could see clipping another target), and once because my optic lost zero midway through a stage and started shooting way to the right. 

Did you fire two less shots than required?

 

The scenario would be that you had 4 targets, you fired 6 shots, ran dry and chose not to shoot the remaining 2 shots... You would claim that you chose to engage two of four targets with a single shot (for no apparent reason) AND that you missed one of them only to hit the other with the extra shot, so you ended up with 4A, 2M and no FTSA... If you fired 8 shots, then it's pretty clear. 

[Talon75]

4 hours ago, IVC said:

Did you fire two less shots than required?

 

The scenario would be that you had 4 targets, you fired 6 shots, ran dry and chose not to shoot the remaining 2 shots... You would LIE that you chose to engage two of four targets with a single shot (for no apparent reason) AND that you missed one of them only to hit the other with the extra shot, so you ended up with 4A, 2M and no FTSA... If you fired 8 shots, then it's pretty clear. 

Fixed it for you ! Just take the damn FTSA that you earned and move on . 

 

IVC trying to explain why he didn't FTSA. Ain't nobody got time for that!!

Edited July 31, 2020 by Talon75