Lee Bell Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 First the primary goal of competition is to determine which individual is the best at that particular skill. A great deal of effort is expended in our sport to present a consistent shooting challenege from the first competitor on the stage to the last. I can't help but note how many people posted in agreement. I can't help to wonder how many of them are gamers that believe that finding a loop hole in the stage directions that gives them an advantage others did not have, differs from finding a loop hole in the RO's scoring mistakes. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I can't help but note how many people posted in agreement.I can't help to wonder how many of them are gamers that believe that finding a loop hole in the stage directions that gives them an advantage others did not have, differs from finding a loop hole in the RO's scoring mistakes. Lee How very interesting this comment is. Hmmmmmm....... What came to my mind is how many people that read this thread had an immediate picture of a/some specific shooter known for being without any of the "honor" this thread reffers to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihatepickles Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I can't help to wonder how many of them are gamers that believe that finding a loop hole in the stage directions that gives them an advantage others did not have, differs from finding a loop hole in the RO's scoring mistakes. Lee, The other shooters did have the same opportunity though. I game any stage I can game because it's faster and I'm there to win. I know 100% without a doubt I'm not cheating, 1.1.5 specifically allows me to game a stage. 1.1.5 Freestyle – IPSC matches are freestyle. Competitors must be permitted to solve the challenge presented in a freestyle manner, and to shoot targets on an “as and when visible” basis. Courses of fire must not require mandatory reloads nor dictate a shooting position or stance, except as specified below. However, conditions may be created, and barriers or other physical limitations may be constructed, to compel a competitor into shooting positions or stances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I realy like our game..and I try to solve stages for an advantage. I cant remember ever seeing anyone do or say anything dishonorable. I am sure it can happen,,but I think it would be uncommon. I have a lot of respect for my fellow shooters. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L9X25 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 We have shooters at out local clubs that make sport out of gaming stages. They are honorable but take the challenge of gaming stages as another might take the challenge of a 50 yard head shot. Last year there was a thread concerning how physical (running wise) some of the recent matches had become. There were stages that featured 20+ yard runs between shooting positions and a discussion ensued as to how much running was acceptable before the stage became more of a track meet than shooting match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 There is a difference between cheating and gaming. Gaming is not cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFD Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I'm proud to be a gamer. Everyone at a match has the same opportunity to find a better way to shoot any stage. Someone whining because they didn't think of it first is pathetic IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airic Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Someone whining because they didn't think of it first is pathetic IMHO. In my experience, the people who whine about a person gaming a stage are the ones who have already shot and saw someone else shoot a stage a faster and better way. Or they dont have the skill to pull off what the "gaming" shooter did. All I have to say is....learn from it and make yourself a better shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSeevers Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I am a "gamer" and hope to be even better one. Gaming is a combination of experience and thinking. Both are skills that should be measured in USPSA shooting. When somebody runs a stage faster by gaming it, they did beat you just the same as shooting .10 faster splits and transistions. You had your chance and if they say took T6 through a window for a gaming advantage and you didn't, well learn and go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Though rare, if I see a scoring mistake, I bring it to the RO's attention. I want to earn my points. I enjoy the mental aspect of the game. Therefore I may be considered a gamer. Knowing how I want to approach a stage and then see a "better gamer" run it gives me the incentive to improve. Just watch a GM or M go through what we thought was a straight forward stage. They are doing what they do best while us lowly B and C shooters watch hoping for the day we look that good. And how many times do they manage to do something that if a fellow B shooter tried, he would be labeled a gamer? And just because a gamer finds a better way doesn't mean I can duplicate his or her feat. If the better gamer just displayed a skill that I have not practiced, it would be fool hardy for me to try it in a match. But if its a skill I want to develope, I will practice it and wait for the stage I can use it. If tomorrow this game eliminated the free-style aspect, many may no longer be interested. Dang, the sinus medicine must be kicking in. I better log off before I dig myself any deeper. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 [admin hat on] Lets ease off of the "whiner" talk. People come with different perspectives...we don't need to beat them up for it. [/admin hat off] If tomorrow this game eliminated the free-style aspect, many may no longer be interested. That is a very good point. USPSA shooting is about "freestyle" to me. There are other shooting games I can play if I want to do things in a different manner. And, I like some of the other games a lot. But, "freestyle" is what I like best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear23 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I've always noticed, at least in my neck of the woods. They only call you a gamer if you are handing their asses to them during a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 People tell me I am kinda gamey. Is being gamey the same as being a gamer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 People tell me I am kinda gamey. Is being gamey the same as being a gamer? depends if they are talking about the way you shoot or the way you smell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kane Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 To me, gaming is thinking and it's the thinking I really enjoy. It starts with figuring out the fastest way to shoot the targets and goes to what other things you can do to complete the course of fire as fast as you possibly can. Isn't this a game anyway? In comparrison to cheating, like someone moving a no-shoot in front of a target leaving only D shots available for the next squad. Believe it or not that happened at the match last weekend. I think those people should be banned from the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 USPSA is ONLY a game so what is wrong with being called a gamer. After all GM & gamer start with the same letter and I have listened to a few super squads discuss how were going to shoot a stage during the walk through, only to shoot it differently when their turn came. So in effect they were trying to game their own class of competitor. My opinion of a gamer is someone who tries to redifine what the word is is after you have read the walkthrough and asked for questions, i.e. why can't I shoot that array first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Bell Posted February 1, 2007 Author Share Posted February 1, 2007 The other shooters did have the same opportunity though. Opinions vary. I don't know you, or how far you'll take gaming in order to win. I do feel, though, that if the intent is to measure shooting skills on a equal basis, gaming a stage by doing somthing other than what you know was intended, doesn't meet that goal. We all want to win, but some or us prefer to do it on the basis of our skills rather than our trickery. Of course, there are degrees to all such things and I'm not in a position to say where the line should be drawn for anyone but myself. You're out there to win. I'm out there to do the best I can according to my best. I choose to act within my understanding of what was intended for the stage, demonstrating speed and shooting skills rather than my ability to take advantage of loopholes. I prefer to compete with others who are doing the same. When I win that first match, I'd much rather be patted on the back with a smile and complemented on my skills, than cursed for the tricks I had to use because my skills weren't good enough. YMMV. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Bell Posted February 1, 2007 Author Share Posted February 1, 2007 USPSA is ONLY a game so what is wrong with being called a gamer. After all GM & gamer start with the same letter and I have listened to a few super squads discuss how were going to shoot a stage during the walk through, only to shoot it differently when their turn came. So in effect they were trying to game their own class of competitor.My opinion of a gamer is someone who tries to redifine what the word is is after you have read the walkthrough and asked for questions, i.e. why can't I shoot that array first? I don't have a good definition of a gamer. There are those we call gamers and smile and those we call gamers and wish they'd find someplace else to play. It's one of those things you know when you see it. To me, it involves taking advantage of loopholes that you know weren't what was intended simply to get an advantage over those who try to use skill rather than trickery. YMMV. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 Preach on, Lee! Oh wait, this isn't church or that other sport that throws the intent word around. Never mind.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 USPSA is ONLY a game so what is wrong with being called a gamer. After all GM & gamer start with the same letter and I have listened to a few super squads discuss how were going to shoot a stage during the walk through, only to shoot it differently when their turn came. So in effect they were trying to game their own class of competitor. My opinion of a gamer is someone who tries to redifine what the word is is after you have read the walkthrough and asked for questions, i.e. why can't I shoot that array first? I don't have a good definition of a gamer. There are those we call gamers and smile and those we call gamers and wish they'd find someplace else to play. It's one of those things you know when you see it. To me, it involves taking advantage of loopholes that you know weren't what was intended simply to get an advantage over those who try to use skill rather than trickery. YMMV. Lee Exactly...any way that is within the rules...that is the attraction for some and is within the capabilities of those who study, look and learn... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott R Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 (edited) Lee The shooters that are competing to earn the highest hit facter they are capable of should look for every angle to earn points in the least possible time elapsed. As long as they don't violate any of the current rules and satisfy the Written Stage Briefing then its all good. There is no mention of "what the stage designer intended" in the rule book. If you want to restrict yourself to shooting a stage the way you think the designer intended, that's great, but don't expect everyone else to. Edited February 1, 2007 by Scott R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihatepickles Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 Examples of gaming: The CoF had 1 piece of steel at the end of a visual barrier zip-zag. The front part of the stage had fault lines on the left and right to prevent early engagement of the steel. I stepped out of the fault lines far enough to see the final steel and engaged it in one shot, took my procedural and saved 5 seconds. The last steel netted me -5 points (5 for the knocked down steel and -10 for the procedural). A meager 5 point penalty for saving 5 seconds I'll take every time, I'd probably take that penalty to save 3 seconds too. On CoF with stage briefings that read "unloaded gun on table, slide forward and hammer down", I always prop the pistol up with the magazine I intend to load the gun with, like an A-frame. If it's a gun-in-a-box start and the written briefing doesn't say "lid closed" I don't close the lid. On any stage with moving targets, I always check the entire CoF for a position that these can be engaged statically before they're activated. The stage description read something like "Engage array A from the left side of the barricade, B from the right side, and array C from the opposite side of the barricade from the previous array. Shooter may engage arrays in any order." So I started on the right side of the barricade, engaged C and then engaged B without switching sides, after all there was no array engaged previous to me engaging C so that whole "opposite side of barricade from the previous array" didn't apply. I finished by shooting A from the left side of the barricade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 Good afternoon ihatepickles, I have no problem with any of the examples you have given and through the years have probably seen each of them in action. In my case, I would probably not try the first example simply because I do not intentionally incur any penalties. If I can lean out far enough to see that piece of steel, then its dead meat. But I will not cross the fault line to engage. But just because I would not do it that way does not in any way mean someone else should not do it. (disclaimer: If,in the future, I ever come across a stage that will really help my score by taking a procedural, I reserve the right to go for it.) All of the others are examples of a "thinking" shooter. The course of fire does not disallow it and the rule book does not disallow it, so where is the problem? Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GmanCdp Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 On any stage with moving targets, I always check the entire CoF for a position that these can be engaged statically before they're activated. YOU CAN DO THAT ??? not joking..can you?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevepitt Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 Ihatepickles, Those are all good examples of gaming, and I make the same deicsions you do on them. The last one with the array order is a GOOD example of exactly why I don't agree with those that talk about "the intent of the stage designer". Locally, we have a stage designer that purposely sets up stages like that to get people to think "outside the box". It's interesting to hear the walk throughs.... "but that's not the intent!" "how do you know?" "well, it's just not." The "tricky" stage designer's a pretty good guy and will usually shoot first on that stage letting the "trick" be known. He TELLS people that shooting it the non-convential way was his INTENT and people still argue about whether it's ok to do. Amazing... It sure has made me better able to analyze a stage! There's not many times someone comes up with a better plan.... of course, executing said plan is a whole 'nuther thing! Steve Pitt 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