procedural or not for not firing turner?

[A33435]

10.1.4.8 If a competitor fails to shoot at any target with at least one round, the competitor shall incur one procedural penalty (per target) for failing to shoot at a target as well as the appropriate number of misses.

But what in case the target is a turner and after activiting, it has disappaered, for what ever reason, before you could take shot?

Will you get 2 miss and a procedural for not firing the target?  That would be unfare because you cannot fire on a target you cannot see.

What should be the decision of the RO??

[Al Capizzo]

I don't have a rule book in front of me, but unless the rule has changed with version 14 there are no misses or failure to engage penalties for a target that completely disappears. In fact the EZScore program has a spot for recording "no penalty" misses, so the round count comes out correct but points are not deducted for these mikes.

Al

[ErikW]

Yes there's another rule that is an exception to the above rule. But then there's another exception that if it appears, disappears, then reappears (two or more exposures), penalties apply. [groan]

It's not always worth it to shoot at disappearing targets.

[Mario]

A33435 I noticed that you were from the Netherlands and the answer to this question will be different depending on whether you are aksing about USPSA or IPSC (Int) rules.  The USPSA has an exception.  There was a discussion about this on the IPSC Australia Forum http://www.ipsc.org.au/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000011.html that went on a little while back.

Hope it helps.

Mario

[Vince Pinto]

OK guys, here's the thing.

Under current IPSC rules, we need to consider two aspects when it comes to moving targets: the "activator" and the moving target itself. Here goes:

The Activator: This is usually (but not always) a reactive target (e.g. a popper or plate) which sets the moving target in motion. If the Activator is a popper or plate and you shoot at it but miss, you just get a miss. If you fail to even shoot at the popper or plate, you get a procedural and a miss (see Rule 9.9.2). So far, so good.

However note Rule 9.9.2 also says: "a competitor fails to activate the mechanism that controls the (moving) target movement".

So, if the activator is a door, window or lever which you have to push or pull, you obviously cannot get a miss (because it's not supposed to be shot!), but you do get a procedural.

The Moving Target: We have two types of moving target:

1.Disappearing Targets (DT) offer a single "exposure" then go away or they do not "present at least a portion of the highest scoring area (A zone) when at rest" (e.g. you can only see the D zone).

Most commonly these are "turners" or "droppers" (they start edge-on, then they turn to face you full-on, then they go edge-on again). They can also be "floppers" (they start flat on their back, they rise, then fall flat on their face). They could also be the "running man" style, which slide across you on rails then totally disappear behind something.

The key is that with DTs, you only get one exposure to engage them or they do not "present at least a portion of the highest scoring area (A zone) when at rest" (e.g. you can only see the D zone).

For DTs, you do not get penalties unless you fail to activate the activator (see Rule 9.9.2), in which case you get a procedural and the appropriate misses on the DT as well. Harsh but true.

2. Non Disappearing Targets (NDT) are usually "swingers" or "bobbers" (side to side motion in an arc) or "twisters" (they make multiple exposures, usually on a vertical axis).

With NDTs you always get procedurals and misses as they give you multiple exposures.

The most confusing part about all this is Rule 10.1.4.8. It currently says that in both cases (DT & NDT) you get a procedural for failure to engage any target.

This was not the intention, but doo-doo happens and we have to live with it for the time being, until the next rulebook is in effect (most likely 1 January 2003), which will make the whole issue of moving targets much clearer.

I hope this has made things clearer for you guys.

If not, please urge your course designers to avoid DTs as much as possible until we can make things clearer :-)

Whew! Now I really need an industrial strength coffee .......

[Bob Hostetter]

In USPSA, if the target completely disappears you would NOT receive either misses or procedurals.

In IDPA, regardless if the target disappears, you WOULD receive both misses and a "Failure to Neutralize".

[jmc9x23]

Bob, In IDPA there is no FTN for a target that disappears.

[Patrick Sweeney]

Vince,

I hope, as you say, the issue will be made a whole lot clearer.  Otherwise, we run the risk of doing to movers and turners what we did to no-shoot poppers: eliminate them.

If we end up making the whole thing a hassle and headache, stage designers and match directors will simply stop using them.

[Vince Pinto]

Hi Patrick,

Yes, we're working on clearer language and "fairer" penalties.

But what's this about the elimination of penalty (no shoot) poppers?? They're alive and well .........

[Bob Hostetter]

9x23,

There was at the 2000 IDPA Nationals....................

[DBChaffin]

Bob, they must have changed the rule since then.  According to the IDPA rulebook found here:

http://www.idpa.com/rulebook5-2-01/rulebook_new.htm

"Failure to Neutralize:  Add five (5) seconds per infraction (this penalty applies to any target that scores LESS than four (4) points total, regardless of the total number of hits specified).   Failure to neutralize penalties ONLY apply when standard Vickers Count scoring is used and the target(s) do not completely disappear. FTN does NOT apply to Limited Vickers scoring, PAR time scoring, or to disappearing targets."

I agree on USPSA rulings.

[Patrick Sweeney]

I don't know about other places, but no one here uses no-shoot poppers.  The whole idea of assessing a penalty for a paint chip, or a low hit that doesn't take it over, is too contrary.

We'd rather use it as another shoot target than go throught he hassle of complying precisely with the rules, and so a no-shoot popper is rare indeed.