11 In The Mag At The Start Signal

[gino_aki]

I, too, am all for the enforcement of the rules, but in my opinion this rule would be easier to enforce if it were changed. If the hypothetical situation did occur, there would be much less debate engendered (there's three pages of posts here already!) if the violation were treated as a procedural. I don't see where the rules need not appeal to common sense.

[GeorgeInNePa]

--- snip --- , as that basically the penalty for the violation is inappropriate. --- snip ---

I respectfully disagree. (I am not arguing for / against what the rules are, just for the enforcement of the rules ) The equipment for each division is specified. If you choose the inappropriate equipment, you are moved to a division in which the equipment is appropriate. Simple.

Or a short version: Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

And, yes I do shoot production and no, I have not done this one (yet )

Later,

Chuck

That's good, neither have I.

I just don't see the advantage to having 11 in the gun with an empty chamber. I think the penalty is too harsh for the infraction.

[Lee Bell]

Question for the informed. Is the rule that you may have no more than 10 rounds in the magazine or that the magazine's capacity may be no more than 10 rounds?

If the former, I prefer the not advantage, no infraction approach, but understand the strict construction approach as well. If the latter, which is how it's shown by some clubs I've recently looked into, then the infraction is the magazine and not the failure to chamber a round.

Since I shoot single stack major (first time earlier tonight), and my magazines only hold 8 rounds, the issue really doesn't apply to me.

Lee

[Flexmoney]

The capacity of the magazine is not the reason for the infraction.

You can use full capacity (hicaps) mags in Production.

[Chuck Anderson]

The penalty for the infraction is appropriate in that you have to change divisions. It would be more appropriate if they changed you to the actual division that you ended up shooting, i.e. Limited, in this case, but that creates a lot of headaches. As far as the idea of deciding whether or not an advantage is gained. Personally I hate that. I hate trying to decide whether some shooter gained a bit of ground or not. What about the shooter that knowingly loads 11 to build in a buffer. Now he shoots faster knowing he has an extra round but doesn't need it? Didn't use it but gained an advantage. Try using ESP to figure that one out.

IPSC right now is considering a rule where mags are checked against the factory listed spec. If they're one over you're okay. If they're two over you're DQ'd. And this is how many an RO can cram in, not whether they work or not. That's assinine.

I've had to DQ new shooters and I've had to send some to Open for equipment violations. I've also had to DQ a whole slew of my friends for safety violations, etc. It's not fun but the way you do it has a huge impact on how the shooter perceives it. If you do it with a great big grin like I've seen some RO's do, new shooter or not, you're gonna piss someone off. If you explain the rule, what happened and what's going to happen, 9 times out of 10 the shooter will understand. If a shooter doesn't understand that by not complying with the rules, there are consequences, maybe it's time he grew up. Most 3rd graders understand this.

[Lee Bell]

The penalty for the infraction is appropriate in that you have to change divisions. It would be more appropriate if they changed you to the actual division that you ended up shooting, i.e. Limited, in this case, but that creates a lot of headaches. As far as the idea of deciding whether or not an advantage is gained. Personally I hate that. I hate trying to decide whether some shooter gained a bit of ground or not. What about the shooter that knowingly loads 11 to build in a buffer. Now he shoots faster knowing he has an extra round but doesn't need it? Didn't use it but gained an advantage. Try using ESP to figure that one out.

OK. ESP tells me it's an advantage. In this case, you're not talking about someone that has 11 rounds total in the gun, all in the magazine, you're talking about someone with 12 rounds in the gun. The advantage is clear.

Lee

[Nik Habicht]

The penalty for the infraction is appropriate in that you have to change divisions. It would be more appropriate if they changed you to the actual division that you ended up shooting, i.e. Limited, in this case, but that creates a lot of headaches. As far as the idea of deciding whether or not an advantage is gained. Personally I hate that. I hate trying to decide whether some shooter gained a bit of ground or not. What about the shooter that knowingly loads 11 to build in a buffer. Now he shoots faster knowing he has an extra round but doesn't need it? Didn't use it but gained an advantage. Try using ESP to figure that one out.

OK. ESP tells me it's an advantage. In this case, you're not talking about someone that has 11 rounds total in the gun, all in the magazine, you're talking about someone with 12 rounds in the gun. The advantage is clear.

Lee

Lee,

you've got it. Part of the reason the rule may have been written as a move to Open is that it may date back to the days where there were just two divisions. Part of the reason for keeping it around that way, is to seriously discourage cheating.......

[GentlemanJim]

Reguardless of intent or advantage equal and just application of all rules apply to all people all the time!!!!!!

Its the American way!

Jim

[Chuck Anderson]

The penalty for the infraction is appropriate in that you have to change divisions. It would be more appropriate if they changed you to the actual division that you ended up shooting, i.e. Limited, in this case, but that creates a lot of headaches. As far as the idea of deciding whether or not an advantage is gained. Personally I hate that. I hate trying to decide whether some shooter gained a bit of ground or not. What about the shooter that knowingly loads 11 to build in a buffer. Now he shoots faster knowing he has an extra round but doesn't need it? Didn't use it but gained an advantage. Try using ESP to figure that one out.

OK. ESP tells me it's an advantage. In this case, you're not talking about someone that has 11 rounds total in the gun, all in the magazine, you're talking about someone with 12 rounds in the gun. The advantage is clear.

Lee

What advantage. Say he only fired 8 shots. Start a stage with 8 6" plates downrange and I would love to have 12 in the gun to start. If I get them all in 8 I still broke the rules. The problem is that reasonable people can disagree as to whether an advantage was gained. If that's the case then it is a bad rule.

[Right2Bear]

Advantage gained or not is completely irrelevant. We aren't talking about a procedural penalty here.

I think everyone here treats a club match a bit different than a major match. In fact, there is no question about that. For example, I'd be willing to bet some of the stages at club matches may not even be allowed at major matches. If you have a first time shooter, you always treat them a bit differently. You probably tell them to go slowly, take their time, etc. You tend to watch them a bit more closely and 'coach' them a bit as they shoot the stage. In fact, I think this is exactly what a good RO should do.

I don't expect you'd see many first time shooters at Nationals or an Area match so the scenario being described if at a major match would almost certainly be with an experienced shooter. You have to follow the rules and apply them evenly to everyone when RO'ing a major match. Some rules specifically mention an option for "at the discretion of the RO", 4.5.1, 8.6.2, and 9.1.1 to name a few. This rule doesn't. If they start with 11 in the mag, they get bumped to Open. Period.

[shred]

The intent of moving people to Open is to discourage them from trying to get away with cheating like that-- if you just get moved where 'you belong', then there's not really any penalty for trying to sneak by in another division.

[Chuck Anderson]

Advantage gained or not is completely irrelevant. We aren't talking about a procedural penalty here.

Actually my answer was with regard to a post suggesting that the penatly should be a procedural and the number should vary based on advantage gained. So it was relevant to that post. Sorry if you didn't get that.

[GeorgeInNePa]

Advantage gained or not is completely irrelevant. We aren't talking about a procedural penalty here.

I think everyone here treats a club match a bit different than a major match. In fact, there is no question about that. For example, I'd be willing to bet some of the stages at club matches may not even be allowed at major matches. If you have a first time shooter, you always treat them a bit differently. You probably tell them to go slowly, take their time, etc. You tend to watch them a bit more closely and 'coach' them a bit as they shoot the stage. In fact, I think this is exactly what a good RO should do.

I don't expect you'd see many first time shooters at Nationals or an Area match so the scenario being described if at a major match would almost certainly be with an experienced shooter. You have to follow the rules and apply them evenly to everyone when RO'ing a major match. Some rules specifically mention an option for "at the discretion of the RO", 4.5.1, 8.6.2, and 9.1.1 to name a few. This rule doesn't. If they start with 11 in the mag, they get bumped to Open. Period.

I love opinions that end with the word "period".

[Right2Bear]

I love opinions that end with the word "period".

Glad you enjoyed it. It is just an opinion but it's one based on the rule book. So when you look at the rule book, if you choose to follow that, there really isn't much gray area.

Actually my answer was with regard to a post suggesting that the penatly should be a procedural and the number should vary based on advantage gained. So it was relevant to that post. Sorry if you didn't get that.

Actually Lawman, my answer was in regard to several people who used the argument that since no advantage was gained, there was no infraction. Not just you. Sorry if you didn't get that. Edited January 6, 2007 by Right2Bear

[SA Friday]

Although I'm not an RO I do have some comments.

Pats' post #53 above is spot on. We have to work with the new shooters to get them to come back. Last thing we need is a come out once and get busted to Open guy who tells 3 of his buddies how hard assed we are. When it comes to safety issues we are hard assed. But 11 in the mag. Give it some slack at the local match level to the new shooter.

Just recently I had new shooter in my squad who was in Production. I mentioned the 10 round rule and his eyes went as big as saucers. He didn't know. He thought that he could load what his mags could hold. Did he fire more than 10 before reloading? Not that I could tell. Did he gain an advantage? Probably not. He quickly fixed his problem and went on to have a blast. No harm. No foul.

Recently I was trying my hand at Skeet. With shotgun I'm 90% a Trap shooter and tinker around with Skeet and Sporting Clays. The Clays Yoda came up and said I'd be DQ'd for a serious safety violation if it had been a match. He explained a quirk in the rules about station 8 and I dug into it further. Yup. I'd be DQ'd. Not as bad as a 180 violation in USPSA but a DQ none the less. I learned. I know now. It won't happen again.

Now me. If I had 11 in the mag at the beep. Shove me to Open with great prejudice. I know better and I screwed up.

Went past 90 degrees verticle didn't ya

[gino_aki]

The penalty for the infraction is appropriate in that you have to change divisions. It would be more appropriate if they changed you to the actual division that you ended up shooting, i.e. Limited....

If a shooter bozo's one stage without committing a safety infraction, I think they should pay with penalties on that stage, not with the whole match. Eleven in the gun IS eleven in the gun whether they're all in the mag or 10 in the mag plus 1 in the chamber...no advantage gained...if he re-stokes with an eleven loaded mag that's twelve, definite advantage gained or there would be no reason for 170mm or 140mm magazines. So if he forgets to rack the slide, 1 procedural. If he shoots with twelve, 1 procedural for each shot fired after he gains the advantage. If there are eleven in all his mags, I'd DQ him because to me that would signify intent to cheat.

Advantage gained or not is completely irrelevant. We aren't talking about a procedural penalty here....

I think the rule should be changed to treat this as a procedural for the reasons above.

The intent of moving people to Open is to discourage them from trying to get away with cheating like that-- if you just get moved where 'you belong', then there's not really any penalty for trying to sneak by in another division.

I'm pretty sure assessing procedural penalties would be discouragement enough for the straight up shooters who make an inadvertent mistake, as well as for the newbies who also would take a hit as a consequence that's appropriate for the infraction. Cheater's should be DQ'ed.

I guess I have to qualify my posts on this thread with the caveat that having just re-certified as an RO by taking another class (Bill Helm, great instructor),I really have been taking a close look at the rules again. I've also been reminded of the adage that the main job of the RO is to assist the shooter through the stage. I just don't see where bumping an L-10 shooter to Open for an inadvertent mistake contributes to that assistance. The shooter may feel that assessing the procedurals also didn't contribute but in light of what happens under the current rule, I'm sure they'd be less upset.

[richardschennberg]

I would support a couple slight rule changes:

1. Matches that do not recognize Open Division may bump Limited-10 and Production shooters to Limited Division for having 11 or more rounds in a mag after LAMR.

2. Matches that have no awards or prizes for Open Division may, at the discression of the MD and with the concurrence of the chief stats officer, score the shooters bumped to Open Division for "honors only."