8.6.1 RO giving assistance during COF

[Dazhi]

See attached stage wsb.

 

Shooter shot string 2 first. While still loaded hot ready to start the next string, was told by RO that 6 PEs had incurred, and shooter need to think carefully what to do next if shooter does not want to zero the stage. 

 

Shooter initially argued that the order of the strings were implied in the wsb but not explicitly stated in wsb.

 

Then a CRO squad mate informed the shooter that by "giving assistance in the course of fire", the RO violated rule 8.6.1.  

 

Shooter proceeded to ask RM about 8.6.1 but RM stood behind RO's decision and offered arbitration.

 

Shooter proceeded to pay $100 and filed an arbitration form.  

 

An hour later, committee came to shooter to ask for what happened, and said it collaborated with witness and RO's description as well.  

 

Then 30 min after that, RM informed the shooter the request for reshoot is denied.

 

This was not reason given by the committee. The decision was written on the form as following:

 

"We find that even though the RO's commands during the course of fire DO qualify as assistance per 8.6.1, by that rule there are no grounds for reshoot".

 

Does anyone know what exactly does rule 8.6.1 mean and how it is applied? Is it true there are no grounds for a reshoot for 8.6.1?

 

Thanks.

 

Arbitration decision below:

 

[Dazhi]

I got some explanation from an CRO friend who said RO can provide assistance before the beep.  So this should be the reason no reshoot was given.  Living and learning!

 

Added:

Another CRO friend just told me it is still in the COF because range is not clear yet. So technically between the strings while the shooter was still loaded after one string, it's considered during COF.

Edited June 4, 2022 by Dazhi

[broadside72]

There is no reshoot option here for coaching. Only is the shooter penalized for acting on the coaching or the RO penalized (if even possible if they have already shot the match) for giving the coaching. 

[Dazhi]

That's what I am learning too.  I am curious if 8.6.1 is really just in the rulebook to guide the ROs without any punitive consequences.

 

On the other hand, the text of 8.6.1 does not explicitly talk about reshoot but it says "safety warning given by RO during COF does not warrant a reshoot".  That seems to imply non safety related assistance does.  I wish the language of the rules can be a bit more explicit.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2022 by Dazhi
Typo

[JFlowers]

What were the PEs given for?  I would agree with the shooter that the order is implied but not specified in the briefing, so PEs for shooting our of order would not be applicable.  Often hard to figure how an Arbitration Committee will rule, sometimes their decisions seem to make no sense.

[motosapiens]

this topic was discussed extensively during the staff briefing. The order is not “implied”, it is very clearly specified in the wsb. I won’t venture an opinion as to whether six procedurals is appropriate or not but that is how it has been interpreted and enforced by dnroi in the last year or two.

 

just looking at the literal text of the arbitration there is nothing in the assistance or coaching sections that would allow a reshoot (only procedurals are mentioned). Perhaps a different rule citation would have been more successful.

 

this is a little bit of a tricky situation. On the one hand, it is absolutely appropriate for the RO to note that there would be six procedurals and why in between strings, because they should be recorded before going on to the second string. On the other hand any assistance beyond that information is probably not 100% appropriate. on the other other hand it is a bit of a wild technicality to try to get a reshoot based on the RO inappropriately helping you. on the other other other hand, six procedurals is a crap ton and I don’t blame anyone for grasping at any kind of straws to try to wiggle out of it.

 

sorry this happened. we worked the previous stage and your squad was a fun and hardworking and enjoyable group.

Edited June 5, 2022 by motosapiens

[ima45dv8]

Having a hot-walk stage can be tricky. 

As a competitor I don't mind them because I walk around with a hot gun every damn day. I just wait until I get very clear commands. As an RO, there's a lot of pressure to not let silly things happen that have big consequences, and then dealing with them when they do. 

 

[Bagellord]

If the competitor fired 6 shots weak hand when they should have been strong hand, that would be a procedural per shot fired.

 

10.2.8If a course of fire stipulates shooting strong or weak hand only, a competitor not be penalized for using the other hand (i.e. the other arm from the shoulder to the hand) to disengage an external safety, to reload or to correct a malfunction. However, the competitor will be issued one procedural penalty per shot fired while:

10.2.8.1Touching the handgun with the other hand while firing shots;

10.2.8.2Using the other hand to support the handgun, wrist or shooting arm while firing shots;

10.2.8.3Using the other hand on a barricade or another prop to increase stability while firing shots.

 

By holding the gun with the weak hand instead of the strong hand, IMO that satisfies touching the handgun with the other hand while firing shots.

 

As far as interference - between strings, telling the shooter what happened isn't interference in my opinion. It's along the lines of if the shooter asked the RO a question ("what's the hand position" or something like that). If you're not interrupting the shooter getting set for the next string then it should be okay.

[JusticeOfToren]

Shooter is right handed and started on the right? Does not seem the RO was trying to help seeing right handed shooter starting a strong hand string going right to left and saying nothing. RO does not have to say anything, but "trying to help" afterfact seemed like a gotcha.  I'd remind shooters when I RO in that situation and state it is string 1 we doing.

[praetorian97]

I’ll chime in.

 

Account 1:

WSB is clear. Have to shoot first string Strong Hand after reload. There is no “OR” stated for which hand to transition to. It says “Strong Hand”. Shooter transitioned to WH. 6 procedurals. 

 

Account 2:

Shooter believes RO was coaching when RO stated (Paraphrasing) “Be mindful of what you do for string 2, you just got 6 procedurals.” Shooter Arbed rule 8.6.1 Coaching. There are no grounds for a reshoot under coaching. In fact you as the shooter can get a procedural and or the “coacher”. I’m sure the Shooter/arbitrator wasn’t trying to accumulate a 7th procedural as he took the ROs advice on how to shoot string 2.

 

Arbing for RO interference (a different rule) would have been a better platform. 
 

 

Edited June 5, 2022 by praetorian97

[praetorian97]

6 hours ago, broadside72 said:

There is no reshoot option here for coaching. Only is the shooter penalized for acting on the coaching or the RO penalized (if even possible if they have already shot the match) for giving the coaching. 

This unfortunately 

[JusticeOfToren]

Looking at this match, quite a few ppl got 12 procedures, while others got 6.  Did the RO provided the same coaching to all these shooters, and they all just decided to zero the stage? Or the RO only coached some but not all.  Seems like the stage needs to be thrown out if that's the case.

[praetorian97]

4 hours ago, JusticeOfToren said:

Looking at this match, quite a few ppl got 12 procedures, while others got 6.  Did the RO provided the same coaching to all these shooters, and they all just decided to zero the stage? Or the RO only coached some but not all.  Seems like the stage needs to be thrown out if that's the case.

3 out of 400 plus is quite a few? 

[Sarge]

10 minutes ago, praetorian97 said:

3 out of 400 plus is quite a few? 

Agree with you on terminology but if an RO helped anyone they must help all for competitive equity

[JusticeOfToren]

54 minutes ago, praetorian97 said:

3 out of 400 plus is quite a few? 

 

1/3 of the competitors will shoot the stage today

[RJH]

I am trying to figure out how anyone thought shooting string one weak hand would be ok after looking at the WSB.

 

Maybe the guys with 12 procedurals came after the arbitration incident?

[Dazhi]

4 minutes ago, RJH said:

I am trying to figure out how anyone thought shooting string one weak hand would be ok after looking at the WSB.

 

Maybe the guys with 12 procedurals came after the arbitration incident?

 

I did screw up on the order.  I assumed I can do string 2 first. 

It was raining, and I thought getting the hard part done first (weak hand) so that Pro Grip do not get washed away on the weak hand.  Then I do strong hand with less Pro Grip on is still OK.  I honestly have not shot a single stage (classifier or not) where SH and WH strings are mandated in a specific order.  My screwup on this part.  I took it for granted. 

 

7 hours ago, praetorian97 said:

This unfortunately 

Yes this is what I am learning too.  I know very little about rules, and the idea of arbitration on 8.6.1 was suggested by a CRO friend on the squad. 

I also emailed Troy to clarify the purpose of 8.6.1.  

If it's meant to just guide ROs, then true there won't be grounds for reshoot.  To me, language in 8.6.1 does imply (not explicitly) - non safety related assistance rendered by RO during COF does warrant a reshoot.  

[JusticeOfToren]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

Maybe the guys with 12 procedurals came after the arbitration incident?

On 2 different days. OP got general procs and the other dude got SHWH procs a day before

 

[RJH]

51 minutes ago, JusticeOfToren said:

On 2 different days. OP got general procs and the other dude got SHWH procs a day before

 

 

Interesting. But I guess if they earned them, they earned them. 

 

If people have questions they can always ask them right after the WSB was read. 

 

 

[Cuz]

What amazes me the most is that someone paid $100 to arbitrate a stage at a match.  How often does that happen???

 

[Dazhi]

18 hours ago, motosapiens said:

on the other other other hand, six procedurals is a crap ton and I don’t blame anyone for grasping at any kind of straws to try to wiggle out of it.

 

sorry this happened. we worked the previous stage and your squad was a fun and hardworking and enjoyable group.

 

Thanks.  The squad was fantastic and I felt bad for holding them up in the rain on this stage for all these (our 2nd to last stage).  

 

When chasing a shooting god like Max, I'd grab any straws or wiggle more if I have a chance of catching up with him

 

It turned out the 60+ points did decide the winner.

 

Regardlessly, I am curious what the DNROI's interpretation on 8.6.1 is.  If the final interpretation is no grounds for reshoot when RO coaches shooter during COF, then at least that may save someone $100 in trying in the future.

[Cuz]

4 hours ago, Cuz said:

What amazes me the most is that someone paid $100 to arbitrate a stage at a match.  How often does that happen???

 

 

I retract my statement, now that I have more info, I understand why someone would do it.

I'm nowhere near that level yet, but I do understand.

 

[praetorian97]

Dazhi you are are great shooter and I don’t fault you for looking for a way out from the procedurals. 
 

Sadly if we want to use the RO “coaching” as the escape, we are pretty much saying he should have said nothing and then given you the full 12 procedurals. 

[motosapiens]

There's a valuable lesson here. It would never have occurred to me in a million years to shoot weak-hand first without asking if it was allowed that way. Some classifiers are worded so it doesn't matter, but for most, the sequence does matter. If you're ever going to do anything unusual, it makes sense to ask.

 

Pretty amazing shooting by Dazhi to be that close to max. (5 pts, if not for those procedurals). I don't think I've every seen anyone that close to him since CO became a thing. Hope to see more of Dazhi in the future.

[Dazhi]

1 hour ago, praetorian97 said:

Dazhi you are are great shooter and I don’t fault you for looking for a way out from the procedurals. 
 

Sadly if we want to use the RO “coaching” as the escape, we are pretty much saying he should have said nothing and then given you the full 12 procedurals. 

I agree 8.6.4 makes more sense, but this is all in the hindsight. 

As someone knowing so little about rules, I did what my CRO friend told me in order to dig me out of a big hole LOL