David Benzick Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 How would you record a competitors score if they did nothing after the start signal. For instance, they blow the draw and then claim they were not ready, or they are creeping at the buzzer so claim they weren't ready, etc... Since hit factor is points divided by time and you can't divide by zero and time won't stop until last shot and there is no shot at all. What to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 If they didn't hear the buzzer, restart them. If they started the course and decided not to shoot, use EZWinScore's DNF "Did Not Fire" option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 if the person is not deaf, ask "if you are finished, unload and show clear." if they were creeping, give a procedural, too. vince...vince...calling vince! (Edited by lynn jones at 11:59 am on Dec. 12, 2002) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 Hi Lynn, My young apprentice Rules Wizard, Grasshopper Erik, is spot-on. If there's zero reaction, find out what's wrong, then restart him without penalty. If he reacts, the meter keeps running. If he doesn't fire a shot, his time is zero and you score the targets with a procedural and two misses each. If he creeps between the "Stand By" and the beep, that's a bonus procedural. If he makes fuss, see Section 10.4. Boy, do I feel like a Rage Nazi today ........ Achtung! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 One more thing: Here are two proposed new rules which cover this scenario: 8.3.4 "Start Signal" - The signal for the competitor to begin their attempt at the course of fire. If a competitor fails to react to a start signal, for any reason, the Range Officer will take appropriate action to restore the competitor and then resume the range commands from 8.3.2. New 9.10.3 The minimum time for a course of fire shall be zero. A competitor who reacts to a start signal but who, for any reason, does not continue their attempt at the course of fire and fails to have an official time recorded on the timing device operated by the Range Officer, shall be given a zero time for that course of fire (also see 9.5.9). These aren't law yet, but I'm confident they will be next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 hmmm, so his hit factor will be zero (points) divided by zero (time). Let me see what my computer says about this....UNDEFINED! Vince, seriously, new 9.10.3 has got to be a joke, right? We can reintroduce DNF (I hope not), or make a special rule like New 9.10.3 "A competitor who reacts to a start signal but who, for any reason, does not continue their attempt at the course of fire and fails to have an official time recorded on the timing device operated by the Range Officer, shall be given a zero time AND SCORE for that course of fire" but zero time alone makes no sense. I hope the powers-to-be can figure that out without hiring a number theorist... --Detlef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 but now imagine this (it's happened!). Competitor is called to the line as first shooter. Says he is *not ready* and requests to be put down a few shooters. Request denied by RO. Upon start signal, shooter does not react, just stands there. What to do? Likewise: same thing, except shooter answers *Not ready* repeatedly to *Are you ready*. What to do? Vince, more rules? --D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 12, 2002 Share Posted December 12, 2002 Detlef, What you describe sounds like either bad RO'ing or unsportsman-like conduct on the shooters part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 You can't enter a zero time in EZWinScore you have to choose Did Not Fire. I don't think you can enter the score or penalties for a DNF, and if you did I would expect them to be ignored because you can't have a below zero HF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 Detlef, No, we will definitely not be reintroducing DNF or any such animal. No, 9.10.3 is not a joke. Zero points divided by zero time is zero. It's the same end result as the former DNF, but it honours the more reasonable WYSIWYG concept we now use. If a competitor is not ready when he's called to the line, he tells the RO, but there's no way the RO can issue the start signal until the competitor complies with the LAMR command and so on. If the competitor continues to refuse to come to the line without a good reason, the RM is called and he can invoke Rule 6.6.1. or, in a worst case scenario, Rule 10.4.1. If the guy is loaded and he continually says "Not Ready" at AUR, then the RO should order him to ULSC, make him safe then call the RM. I'm not sure about WinMSS, but in DOSMSS, if you enter a zero time, the screen still shows DNF and you get a zero points. (Edited by Vince Pinto at 9:35 pm on Dec. 12, 2002) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 I witnessed just such an incident some years ago. J. Michael Plaxco was on a stage at the Nationals, and the RO was making himself a pain in the neck to all the shooters. The RO asks "Is the shooter ready?" and Mike says no, working on his plan. the RO pesters him several more times (Mike was obviously not ready to start, the RO was trying to hurry every one through the Stage) Mike finally nods, and the RO says "Stand by" and presses the button. Mike is like stone. He waits a few seconds, then turns to the RO and says "I'm ready now." It may be a shooters only defense against a range nazi. Is there a real problem here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 Patrick, it has already been suggested by two people to DQ the shooter. So yes, THERE IS a problem! I personally think if IPSC chooses to cover the non-reaction in the rule book, they better do it right (no, Vince, zero divided by zero is NOT zero! You better define that this represents a zero score, or you're opening up another gaping hole in the rules) and cover my scenario, too. I also believe that an unsportsmanlike conduct DQ is totally uncalled for in this instance! By covering it under the rules, such despicable Range-Nazi-ism would be prevented (or at least officially endorsed, at least then everyone knows up front...). And yes, I have seen this inappropriate RO behavior at big matches, too. Where did the *assist the shooter* unwritten USPSA rule go? --Detlef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 With these new rules, what about those 'start-off-a-light' stages? If you space that, you get a free retry. Even better, if it's one of those 'depending on what happens (light, card, etc), shoot a different set of targets' stages, you can plan for one and if the other shows, don't do anything and get to try again free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 at least for the card, I don't see the problem: You react by turning it, then if you don't start shooting you get the zero score. The light I agree, you plan for one and if the other color shows you pretend to be blind....or so...I'm not sure how exactly you'd cheat there, either... --D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 Ahh.. you're thinking inside the box again Detlef. The card doesn't have to be turned by the shooter. We can expect even more random start signals as time goes by... By the proposed rule, ignoring (or forgetting) a light, sound or whatever start signal = do over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 Good because if a course design has one of its random variations offering a better possible hit factor than the other random variations, it should be gamed like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted December 13, 2002 Share Posted December 13, 2002 shred, depends on the exact stage description. If it says *Upon start signal, turn card....engage...", then not turning the card would probably sack you a procedural. One of the reasons why we hardly see these stages anymore is probably that they're hard to make both fair and gamer-proof...I really liked those where you turned a card and then had to engage the *other* color, but only on the last position. 95% of the shooters had forgotten the card color by the time they got to it, it was always hilarious! --D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted December 14, 2002 Share Posted December 14, 2002 Patrick, I don't know which edition of the rulebook was in force when you saw the Plaxco incident but Rule 8.3.2 in the 14th Edition is very clear. The competitor has the right to declare "Not ready" when asked "AUR" by the RO, and unless the competitor assumes the required ready position, the RO can't even ask "AUR". If the RO is being pushy, the competitor can tell the RO "I need a few moments to compose myself and I'll indicate to you I'm ready to proceed when I adopt the required ready position". If the RO continues to be a pain, the competitor can tell the RO he can't proceed and he'd like to be unloaded, after which he can ask the RM for assistance. On the other hand, in an extreme example, what should the RO do if a competitor says he needs 10 minutes after loading to get into zen mode? We need to strike a balance here, and I think the rules cover it well. However once the competitor assumes the required position and he fails to say "Not Ready" when asked "AUR", and it goes to "Standby" then "beep", the meter is running and there's no excuse not to proceed. And no amount of rule writing will compensate for a lousy stage briefing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted December 14, 2002 Share Posted December 14, 2002 Detlef, What is zero divided by zero? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimel Posted December 14, 2002 Share Posted December 14, 2002 Back when I was taking a lot of math classes (blech!) any number divided by zero was equal to infinity. Cool! Win the match without ever firing a shot. ;-) Now, zero divided by zero is a conundrum. This all depends on whether zero is a number or not. Believe me, there was an entire semester course (Math 412, Theory of Numbers) devoted to this discussion, which I did not take. I had math major friends who did take it and would get very animated when discussing it, especially after a beer or three. I think that the suggestion to include the words "and zero score" is a good one because it eliminates any question as to what the score is. Unless there is a way to have a score and still have zero time...why not? Cheers! Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 Hi guys, After giving this matter considerable thought, I sent the following message to my colleagues (quote): We've already agreed to the new wording however I was recently advised that zero divided by zero causes a mathematical conundrum of biblical proportions which will, in turn, create a major interruption to the space time continuum. I therefore ask your consideration of the following revised new rule: 9.10.3 A competitor who reacts to a start signal but, for any reason, does not continue their attempt at the course of fire and fails to have an official time recorded on the timing device operated by the Range Officer, shall be given a zero time and score for that course of fire. (unquote) I'll let you know the outcome in due course. And thanks to Detlef who, despite being our resident "Angry Ant", can make a decent suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 Vince, I don't know exactly, but it would have been in the 89-90-91 timeframe. And the RO was behind on a slow stage, trying to make up schedule time by hustling shooters through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 Vince, thanks for taking *this* one seriously. It shows (I'm just returning the favor) that the ant can bite one of the two monkeys (you know the *no-hear* and the *no-see*) hard enough to open their eyes and/or ears.... --Detlef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 Detlef, I listen to all views, and that is precisely why I participate in this and two other IPSC forums. All I ask is that competitors identify problems and propose a reasonable solution (as you did). Guys who just say "This sucks" or who make me the issue, rather than the rule, get ignored. That's the reason why I unsubscribed from the IPSC List/Digest and why I enjoy the Enosverse so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 I know. I believe all of us here enjoy your presence and profit from it. Sometimes a wave of *This sucks* is an important message in itself though, think about it....I am still getting the IPSC digest, but the signal-to-noise ratio is just too low to pay much attention to it. --Detlef (Edited by Detlef at 1:41 pm on Dec. 16, 2002) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now