Is Gaming Cheating?

[LPatterson]

Time for me to admit that it is not shooting through the snow fence that bothers me it is the SNOW FENCE itself. It does nothing to challenge a shooter because they can see where the target is all the time and don't have to worry about it being a full or partial target, is it 3' or 5' tall. Sure it should be part of the walk through to identify what type target is located where BUT when the target is always visable it eliminates the oh sh-t factor of the target not being the type you remember it was during the walk through. If we continue to use snow fence at local matches because it is easy to set-up then shooters go to an Area or Nationals match where the RM or MD wants solid walls then we are handicapping their training. Sorta like shooting local matches without correcting PSSD or Production holster locations or not telling a police officer that he can't wear his thigh holster to an Area match. Or in Production not having more than 10 rounds in the magazine after the start signal.

[XRe]

Arb asks "was the mesh designated as hard cover"? "NO" Reshoot.

Wrong answer. Unless otherwise designated as soft cover, all props are hardcover - 9.1.6.

The arb committe is made up of fellow shooters who may be bigger gamers than the appellant.

I think you'd find that most arb committees make the right decision - and the committee is put together by the match staff and cannot involved anyone with a conflict of interest in the outcome (in other words, the shooter's buddies can't be on the arb committee). Read section 11 on the composition of arb committees....

Again if you don't want me to shoot thru soft cover then designate it hard cover.

9.1.6 says I don't have to.... 4.1.4.1 and 4.1.4.2 define roughly what the terms "hardcover" and "softcover" mean - 9.1.6 sets a default term to apply to all props, unless otherwise specified. If you went by what you could visibly confirm was "softcover" then there are very few instances when we truly have hardcover (ie, only when we have steel plate to guard certain target positions) - wood does not stop bullets, even though it prevents light from passing through to your eyes. So, you'd shoot through everything if someone didn't tell you not to....

However, at most matches (including those that I run), you'll be told in the shooters meeting, or in the WSB, that all props are hardcover, etc - even though its redundant to 9.1.6.

Sorry it was not "reading the shooter's mind" it was the shooter running at the RO and when the RO tried to dogde continued and ran into him.

And you'll note the "Unless...." in my response...

Time for me to admit that it is not shooting through the snow fence that bothers me it is the SNOW FENCE itself.

At the Open Nats last year, we had window screen walls for everything - there wasn't a solid wall to be found. So.... don't expect that you'll always have solid walls everywhere at big matches.... I agree that it changes the challenge when you can "draw a bead" on the target through the wall - I used that to great effect at the Nats, as I'm sure many other shooters did.

I have mixed feelings about them. As a stage designer, they somewhat defeat the purpose of having a wall (they still force the shooter to move somewhere else to shoot, but they don't block vision). As an RO I love them, because I can easily and positively confirm the safety of the range before starting a shooter. As a stage setup person, I like their lightweight and ease of setup. As a spectator, I like the fact that I can see the action on complicated stages....

Edited February 12, 2007 by XRe

[Kyle J]

1.yes

2.yes

3.no

Everything is fair game to me but follow the rule book and stay inside the lines.

[AikiDale]

But maybe we need some type of 'aftermarket' stage design handbook. I'm absolutely NOT suggesting adding anything to the rule book.

More shooters completing the CRO course offered by the NROI would go a long way towards improving local match designs.

[Flexmoney]

But maybe we need some type of 'aftermarket' stage design handbook. I'm absolutely NOT suggesting adding anything to the rule book.

More shooters completing the CRO course offered by the NROI would go a long way towards improving local match designs.

big +1

[Flexmoney]

I broke out the question and discussion on the shoot throughs into their own thread.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=48265

[Mr Glack]

3- Yes....it's also a crappy stage design.

I'm missing something I think. There's a fault line and someone goes past it intentionally to improve a score. What was the stage designer's problem using fault lines?

At the Open Nats last year, we had window screen walls for everything - there wasn't a solid wall to be found. So.... don't expect that you'll always have solid walls everywhere at big matches.... I agree that it changes the challenge when you can "draw a bead" on the target through the wall - I used that to great effect at the Nats, as I'm sure many other shooters did.

I have mixed feelings about them. As a stage designer, they somewhat defeat the purpose of having a wall (they still force the shooter to move somewhere else to shoot, but they don't block vision). As an RO I love them, because I can easily and positively confirm the safety of the range before starting a shooter. As a stage setup person, I like their lightweight and ease of setup. As a spectator, I like the fact that I can see the action on complicated stages....

+1

I count more good than bad with them.

[Chuck Merriam]

I do think the screen type barriers help you anticipate the shot. I don't think snow fence or at least the ones I have seen help too much though. They seem to have enough sight obscurance to limit my vision. I have been know to run right by a poorly marked port in one! I wasn't too happy about doing it knowing it was there. Black landscape fabrick is pretty hard to see through but not very durable. I do think ease of setup and cost is a factor for local small clubs. You could however, double up the snow fence and make it almost impossible to see through.

[SmittyFL]

3- Yes....it's also a crappy stage design.

I'm missing something I think. There's a fault line and someone goes past it intentionally to improve a score. What was the stage designer's problem using fault lines?

The problem with the stage would be that it is possible to improve your score doing what is suggested.

Option 1: Shooting outside the falut lines; You would receive two procedurals (assuming it's a paper target)

Option 2: Not engaging the target; You receive two mikes and a FTE

Net result +20 points and the time it took you to do it. (assuming you hit 2 A's)

Option 3: Moving to the point in the COF where you can engage the target from within the shooting area. No penalties; just the time it took you to get there and make the shots.

The only way Option 1 or 2 are going to Factor better than Option 3 is if you have to move a very long distance to clear the last target. Or do something stupid like putting the pin back in a grenade or rowing a boat across a pond or some other non-shooting task. Hence crappy stage design.

If you must have some such stuff in your stage, the fix is simple; put 3 targets and a plate at the last position. There is a point when it's so many points you have no option but go there.

Edited May 11, 2007 by SmittyFL

[ipscbob]

I do think the screen type barriers help you anticipate the shot. I don't think snow fence or at least the ones I have seen help too much though. They seem to have enough sight obscurance to limit my vision. I have been know to run right by a poorly marked port in one! I wasn't too happy about doing it knowing it was there. Black landscape fabrick is pretty hard to see through but not very durable. I do think ease of setup and cost is a factor for local small clubs. You could however, double up the snow fence and make it almost impossible to see through.

I agree. Most of our locals use orange storm fence that is easy to see through. I always use the fence to get an early sight picture as I am moving into a port or position. As has been stated many times in the past, this is all part of the game.

[Jim Norman]

Construction netting is a fantasitice material as is Snow Fence. They both have a use, Construction barrier as a, well Construction Barrier and Snow Fence as, you guessed it, Snow Fence.

The construction barrier has one benefit, it allows those uprange to see what is down range. It also allows for a very different COF. If you can see the targets before you get to the port or the end of the "wall" you have a different stage then if you cannot see them.

We use 8 x 6 panels of picket fence. cost about $25 each at Home Depot. 3 8-0 2 x 4's make three solid angle braces tohold up the walls. We cut in real ports, fasten sliding window covers to them or drop outs. We can fasten a door frame to the wall, turn corners and just about build a small town in a matter of about two hours (The usual amount of time we have to build our 7 seven stage monthly match)

A serious downside to the snow fence/ construction barrier is that a NS has to be carefully placed to sheild the backside from view since you can see through the walls, you don't want people seeing and shooting at teh "Wrong" targets. With the fence we use, you don't have this worry. Also, our fence generally lasts 3 years or longer.

Jim

[Nemo]

See Shadow's quote in my signature line

Edited May 14, 2007 by Nemo

[Big Guy]

See Shadow's quote in my signature line

+1!!!

Smarter shooters should not be handicapped for being “smart”.

If that’s the case, then, how about putting a handicap on athletic shooters that can outrun everybody else?

[rhett45acp]

I have a bit of experience in setting up and running a few matches....and it so fun too have your work picked a part……..

Having stated this, I really get irritated when I go to a match and a stage has an obvious "gamming" advantage. Whether it's manipulating a prop to advantage, skipping a reload, or whatever you can think of, but gaming.

So, me being the upright guy (right), I follow the stage designers "spirit of the stage" and follow the stage procedure. Doing this, only knowing in the back of my mind someone else is going to game this. Sure enough the next squad comes along with a hot shot and they game it. Did they cheat? Or did I just get cheated?

Do we need a NASCAR rule? - "12-4-A - actions detrimental to stock car racing"

[LPatterson]

If you like snow fence because it allows you to set up early for a shot then you will hate the Open Nationals because I heard they are using black plastic walls. Come and see how we hide targets.

[racerba]

Did they cheat? Or did I just get cheated?

No - you cheated yourself out of a better way to shoot the stage.

Do we need a NASCAR rule? - "12-4-A - actions detrimental to stock car racing"

You mean IDPA rule of FTDR? No we do not need any of those rules.

Edited June 15, 2007 by racerba

[Nik Habicht]

I have a bit of experience in setting up and running a few matches....and it so fun too have your work picked a part……..

Having stated this, I really get irritated when I go to a match and a stage has an obvious "gamming" advantage. Whether it's manipulating a prop to advantage, skipping a reload, or whatever you can think of, but gaming.

So, me being the upright guy (right), I follow the stage designers "spirit of the stage" and follow the stage procedure. Doing this, only knowing in the back of my mind someone else is going to game this. Sure enough the next squad comes along with a hot shot and they game it. Did they cheat? Or did I just get cheated?

Do we need a NASCAR rule? - "12-4-A - actions detrimental to stock car racing"

They didn't cheat ---- they chose to take advantage of an allowed opportunity. Personally I'd like to see more of the stages where there are choices, such as engaging or not engaging a target, doing something with a prop or taking the procedural.......