The FTDR

[Jake Di Vita]

As a disclaimer I only read the first post in this thread because I'm feelin lazy.

I do agree with it though. The FTDR is a great rule for deterring blatant rules violations for IDPA.

However even if I do put 3 rounds into the down 0 zone of a target, that doesn't mean I was dumping rounds. If I call a shot questionable or don't call it at all I'm going to make it up. I'm not going to look at the target to check it.

I honestly am not sure what to do to fix it but I do know that it shouldn't be a subjective call by an official who didn't see what I saw - or perhaps doesn't understand the ability of many people to call their shots.

[Chills1994]

Jim Watson Wrote:

....

Did any of the foreigners win, place or show by less than 20 seconds?

....

Heck yeah they did!

Several of them received plaques. Maybe half their team did. I don't know. I didn't keep count.

Take a look at the results here:

http://idpa.com/matchresults/2007_nationals/2007_nats.pdf

Now, I placed 1st in SSP SS with a time of 289.84.

The winner of Stock Service Pistol division MARKSMAN CLASS won with a time of 284.30 AND was from the same international team. Also he only had 37 points down for the whole match. He beat the SECOND place SSP MM by 52.12 seconds.

Out of the 19 SSP MM who shot Nationals only one other shooter had just double digit points down the rest were in the triple digits.

Of the SSP MASTERS, only 7 of them had fewer than 37 points down for the entire match. Bob Vogel, SSP division champ, had 28 points down.

Me? I had 100 points down for the entire match. Forty-nine of them came from the standards stage alone. That's right! Almost half my down points came from the standards, but that's another thread entirely.

CRUSHER, did you SO the Nat's?

Did you even shoot Nat's?

Have you ever SO'ed a major match before?

Should you really be Monday morning quarterbacking Mike Webb's and the MD's decision to issue an FTDR?

Yeah, I don't like the 20 second hit that an FTDR gives out, but the flip side to it is that it is such a huge penalty that it is a deterrent to risky/gamey/cheating like behavior. Also, a 20 second hit, I hope would be severe enough to drop anyone from walking away from a match with a trophy. The people who shot an honest, clean, but a really fast and accuracte match should then feel vindicated and that the system works.

I do wish there was something in between, like a 10 second penalty we could give out instead. Us SO's don't like to give out penalties, really we don't. Even moreso with a 20 second FTDR because we all know that the various internet forums will be all "a-buzz" about it when the match is over, especially a match like the Nat's.

Iron Mike, which target and or array was this round dumping occuring at? I take it that it was stage 2, with the car and the RV mockups?

Lastly, just look at my signature line. There is a reason it is in such a large font.

Edited October 1, 2007 by Chills1994

[rubberneck]

Just because a stage is a Vickers count stage it doesn't automatically exempt the assessment of a penalty for round dumping. The two can and should co-exist.

Every single sport that I can think off calls on it's rules officials to exercise their judgment in making calls during the course of an event. This notion that an official making a judgment call in IDPA is completely unfair must be unique to IDPA in the sporting world.

If you don't think it is your place as an official to use your best judgment and experience to assign a penalty as called for in the rule book than you might want to rethink being an SO. What is the point of having a rule book when an official will tell you flat out that he will never ever enforce one of the rules under any circumstances.

Really? the definition of "VICKERS COUNT STAGES" is simple and I quote from the rule book:

In Vickers Count scoring, as many shots as desired may be fired, but only the best hits as specified by the course description will be scored.

Let's now check the good old dictionary for the definition of "DESIRED"

de·sire

de·sire [di zr]

vt (past and past participle de·sired, present participle de·sir·ing, 3rd person present singular de·sires)

1. wish for something: to want something very strongly

2. find somebody sexually attractive: to want to have sexual relations with somebody

3. request something: to wish for and request something (formal)

n (plural de·sires)

1. craving: a wish, craving, or longing for something

2. something wished for: something that or somebody who is wished for (formal)

3. sexual craving: a strong wish for sexual relations with somebody

[13th century. Via French désirer < Latin desiderare ]

-de·sir·er, , n

Word Key: Synonyms

See want.

Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Additionaly in ALL other sports that I am aware of there is not a "duality or conflict" within the rule set when the application of penatiles is accessed by officials making a judgment call.

If you are going to be a smart alec you might as well look up the words caveat and exception while you are at it.

You can take as many shots as you like, except when you dump a round with the express purpose of causing a premature slide lock. The two can co-exist even if you don't like it or refuse to acknowledge it.

Just because the rulebook says you can take as many shots as you like during a COF doesn't mean that they can't list exceptions to that rule, and round dumping is quite clearly an exception to a Vickers count stage. I don't understand why that is so hard to fathom. Sort of like in USPSA where everything is supposed to be shot freestyle, except where otherwise noted.

[tightloop]

All toghther now....Closing down this thread, closing down this thread......

[markm]

Two quick thoughts for my .02 worth.

First, after people have been shooting a stage and not getting penalized, how can you then penalize someone for doing the same thing they have been watching as OK? How is that consistent and how is that even remotely justified?

You can take as many shots as you like, except when you dump a round with the express purpose of causing a premature slide lock. The two can co-exist even if you don't like it or refuse to acknowledge it.

Just because the rulebook says you can take as many shots as you like during a COF doesn't mean that they can't list exceptions to that rule, and round dumping is quite clearly an exception to a Vickers count stage. I don't understand why that is so hard to fathom. Sort of like in USPSA where everything is supposed to be shot freestyle, except where otherwise noted.

I've looked all thru the USPSA rule books ( the old red one, the new green one, and what I can find on the new proposed 2008) and I found penalties for shooting too many rounds on virginia count stages, extra hits, penalties for shots out of a shooing area, over fault lines, but I'm missing where the ones on "What shooter was thinking"....can someone direct me there?

[GmanCdp]

Edited October 1, 2007 by GmanCdp

[Tindjin]

I've looked all thru the USPSA rule books

Honestly who cares about USPSA in an IDPA thread? Every sport out there has it's odd, frustrating or just plain stupid (in the eyes of some) rules. If you don't like it then play something else, it is really that simple.

People are latching onto the "what's in the shooter's head" argument. In the case listed the target is under 10 yards, the people shooting (with only a few exeptions) have shot at the nationals or at least a few major competitions. Vickers states that the round count is not limited to allow someone to better their score at the penalty of taking that extra shot. If they are pumping two into the -0 and the holes are not touching then pumping a third it is pretty obvious with a needed reload coming up. Sure the person can have a large case of nerves but still it's not like any of those people had round counts below 1k. Some calls have to be at the SO/MD discretion and as long as they make the ATTEMPT to keep it fair then that is all we can ask.

As to the "what's in their head" argument and someone asking for any other sports that have it, take a look at just about EVERY sport. Football, Soccer, Baseball, they all have areas that are "gray" and you have to put your faith into the officials. It is funny to me that everyone is so concerned about this one case at the nationals but don't mention the THOUSANDS of other calls that were made the rest of the time. Mike (or whoever it was sorry if name is wrong) didn't call it because he was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but when the entire team was progressing with the same tactic he called over another official and got their advice. Some have said that the entire team or no one should have gotten it, well that sounds like watching the film tape from Sunday's football games and turning over a referee's decision. It is unfortunate the the one shooter got the penalty (my opinion is that RDing should be a procedural unless multiple infractions occur) but they still went against the rulebook. A Cop sees 3 people speeding and is only able to pull one over, sucks to be the person who gets pulled over but they were still breaking the law.

p.s. Sincere thanks to all the officials and other volunteers that spend the time getting Nationals to be possible. Hope to be there next year!

Edited October 1, 2007 by Tindjin

[Crusher]

Intentional “round dumping” to gain a competitive advantage will result in a twenty (20) second FTDR penalty. A good example is firing extra rounds from a position in the open so you will be at slide lock and thus reload at a more advantageous time.

Above is the ONLY statement listed in the current rule book regarding the actionable offence/penalty concerning "doin da dump". The passage also lists a GOOD example.

Now to Chills (nice sig line), while I’m sure (from your post) you believe me to be questioning Iron Mike (with the Knife in his belt cross draw) and Ted with regard to their decision re: the penalty at the IDPA Nationals I can assure you IM NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't believe most SO's enjoy accessing penalties or look to gig their customers. Let's stick to the thread of FTDR/round dumping, you want my pedigree e-mail me I'll be happy to provide it.

All of my posts in this thread are relevant to the Round Dumping rule that is BOTH contradictory to the concept of Vickers Count stages and the ability of most humans to engage in the art of Mind Reading.

Edit:

Jake I was saving this point for my last post in this thread, but YOU NAILED IT:

or perhaps doesn't understand the ability of many people to call their shots.

If I had a dime for every time I saw a "customer" pick their head up off the sights to scan for hole I coul have paid for all the cost in attending this year, additionally there were a few SO's (if you watched them) who were watching for holes to appear in targets.

Edited October 1, 2007 by Crusher

[Nik Habicht]

I will say that the rule has a purpose but disagree about the round dumping. It is way to subjective of a call to apply such a steep penalty. It should be assessed for other blatant violataions such as equipment violations. I just don't see how SO's can be in my head and see my sight picture and read my mind about what is going on.

As I said in the other thread when the targets are close, say 5 yards or less, and you put a tight group of three into the down zero on the last target of an array which also happens to get you to slide lock at an advantageous moment it is obvious. You can always claim that the SO can never know what is going through a shooters mind and you would be correct, but if you are warned before hand that they are going to be watching for round dumping at a particular spot in a COF and you go ahead and do it, than it's all on the shooter.

I'll disagree with that: If my vision's really on for a stage, I'll realize that I triggered a shot without seeing the sights, and trigger a makeup based on that alone. They'll often sound like two identical splits, because that's pretty much what they are ---- on a close target, the odds are I won't need the makeup, but I'm working on not training it to make those distinctions......

That's not round dumping --- it's simply shooting by reading the sights, and reacting appropriately to any visual error.....

[Singlestack Wonder]

Honestly who cares about USPSA in an IDPA thread?

+10

[HiPowering Along]

Well, since my Chief Safety Officer "Iron Mike" has already chimed in on the FTDR, I'll provide the backup since I was the SO that first noticed the round dumping.

There is a definite difference between questionable round dumping and BLATANT round dumping. As for the "clairvoyant" tendencies, I have none. However, I can say that after watching a day and a half of squads going through Stage 2 (the car / stagecoach stage with the Newbolds to start it), there was absolutely no question in my mind that the squad had a gameplan on how to shoot the stage. EVERY shooter in that squad dumped three shots on T5, reloaded from emergency slide lock behind cover, and then broke cover to the next prop to take out T7. EVERY ONE. Whether the target needed it or not.

I'm not going to go into the exact things that set my mind off to call it, but let's just say that there was no doubt in my mind. I was the SO doing the scoring; I saw EVERY target. I do not like dinging anyone for a penalty, but when you earn it, you earn it. Round dumping is against the current rules, and as a SO, it is my DUTY to protect the rest of the field that is adhering to the Rules as they should.

Mike and I had a discussion about it, several more shooters demonstrated the exact same thing, and after a mock bet after scoring the last set to targets, I told him that the next shooter would dump three into T5, or I'd owe him a Texas sized steak dinner and a beer.

I don't owe him the dinner.

It was after that shooter that we called for the MD, and after the next one (the lady) did the exact same thing in front of the MD, she was dinged (dented?) with the FTDR and the whole squad was put on notice.

As a competitor in the match, I don't appreciate cheaters screwing me or any other competitor by breaking the rules and crying "I didn't do it!" when the situation was so blatantly obvious. If anyone wants to second guess me, go right ahead. I know what I saw, how I assessed the situation, and will do it again in a New York minute.

Mike is a great guy, a great SO, and gave everyone the benefit of the doubt until the doubt was removed by the next couple of shooters. I'll sleep at night very well knowing that I did the right thing to protect the rest of the field that was playing by IDPA rules, whether they agreed with them or not.

Keep safe and zero down!

Edited October 1, 2007 by HiPowering Along

[NEPAKevin]

I won't waste my breath or your time trying to defend the penalty against round dumping but will simply point out that it is clearly defined as an illegal technique in the rule book. The FTDR was created as a rule to deal with actions which are perceived as making a travesty of the sport and that there is no doubt in my mind that Mike knows a travesty when he sees it. The problem here is not that this group of competitors was gaming but that they were crossing the line between gaming and cheating in a lazy, obvious and unimaginative manner. The real travesty may be that such talented shooters felt the need to cheat at all.

Kevin

[Jake Di Vita]

No one here is disputing the accuracy of the call - stop being so defensive.

The comment about looking in the USPSA book was because he thought this was a thread about USPSA - take it easy on an innocent mistake for Christ's sake.

In that situation - I think it was a good call. However that isn't how it will always be and what I want to avoid is hearing shooters individually called on this when they aren't intentionally dumping rounds. So far from the comments on this thread that doesn't seem like an issue - but invariably there will be some over-zealous official that will make a bad call...hopefully some of them read this thread before that happens and it makes them think that it could just as easily be making up a questionable shot as dumping rounds.

[00bullitt]

Well, since my Chief Safety Officer "Iron Mike" has already chimed in on the FTDR, I'll provide the backup since I was the SO that first noticed the round dumping.

There is a definite difference between questionable round dumping and BLATANT round dumping. As for the "clairvoyant" tendencies, I have none. However, I can say that after watching a day and a half of squads going through Stage 2 (the car / stagecoach stage with the Newbolds to start it), there was absolutely no question in my mind that the squad had a gameplan on how to shoot the stage. EVERY shooter in that squad dumped three shots on T5, reloaded from emergency slide lock behind cover, and then broke cover to the next prop to take out T7. EVERY ONE. Whether the target needed it or not.

I'm not going to go into the exact things that set my mind off to call it, but let's just say that there was no doubt in my mind. I was the SO doing the scoring; I saw EVERY target. I do not like dinging anyone for a penalty, but when you earn it, you earn it. Round dumping is against the current rules, and as a SO, it is my DUTY to protect the rest of the field that is adhering to the Rules as they should.

Mike and I had a discussion about it, several more shooters demonstrated the exact same thing, and after a mock bet after scoring the last set to targets, I told him that the next shooter would dump three into T5, or I'd owe him a Texas sized steak dinner and a beer.

I don't owe him the dinner.

It was after that shooter that we called for the MD, and after the next one (the lady) did the exact same thing in front of the MD, she was dinged (dented?) with the FTDR and the whole squad was put on notice.

As a competitor in the match, I don't appreciate cheaters screwing me or any other competitor by breaking the rules and crying "I didn't do it!" when the situation was so blatantly obvious. If anyone wants to second guess me, go right ahead. I know what I saw, how I assessed the situation, and will do it again in a New York minute.

Mike is a great guy, a great SO, and gave everyone the benefit of the doubt until the doubt was removed by the next couple of shooters. I'll sleep at night very well knowing that I did the right thing to protect the rest of the field that was playing by IDPA rules, whether they agreed with them or not.

Keep safe and zero down!

The purpose of this thread was never to question the call made at the Nationals by yourself or Iron Mike. It was started with hopes of gathering information to present to IDPA headquarters in hopes of changing the rule to a more suitable penalty for such a subjective call as round dumping. If the call were to be so blatant and obvios as you say it was.....then the unsportsmanlike conduct application of a DQ may have been more appropriate. Cheaters are not welcome by anyone,at any sport,at any level.

Your service at the match was appreciated. If you feel that round dumping does not have a place as a FTDR penalty......you're help in boycotting IDPA HQ to possibly revise it in the future would greatly be appreciated. We all need to work together to make this change,or anything we disagree with for that matter happen. If we speak loud enough,they will listen.

[ima45dv8]

Since this thread is pretty much focused on the application of an FTDR for Round Dumping, I split Ed's question about cleats at the Nationals into a new thread.

You can find it here.

[tightloop]

It needs clarification or it should be removed...

[HiPowering Along]

The purpose of this thread was never to question the call made at the Nationals by yourself or Iron Mike. It was started with hopes of gathering information to present to IDPA headquarters in hopes of changing the rule to a more suitable penalty for such a subjective call as round dumping. If the call were to be so blatant and obvios as you say it was.....then the unsportsmanlike conduct application of a DQ may have been more appropriate. Cheaters are not welcome by anyone,at any sport,at any level.

Your service at the match was appreciated. If you feel that round dumping does not have a place as a FTDR penalty......you're help in petitioning IDPA HQ to possibly revise it in the future would greatly be appreciated. We all need to work together to make this change,or anything we disagree with for that matter happen. If we speak loud enough,they will listen.

Hi, 00Bullitt -

It's appreciated - the support of those that worked the match. I didn't post the comments I did to 'defend' us, simply explain. The thread seemed to be getting to the point that the call was getting Monday morning quarterbacked, and a good SO's name getting questioned for doing it (Mike). Hopefully that's the end of the deal.

I support the "nuclear option" of the FTDR for dumping rounds or anything else it's specified for. I also have no problem wth how the rule is written. In this situation, there was a major difference between Vickers and cheating. Vickers is used during the stage to put as many rounds as is necessary to complete your course of fire under the Rules. Cheating is when you use the excuse of Vickers to gain an unfair advantage over your competitors.

Thanks for the kind words - the "Dew Crew" appreciates it! ("Dew Crew" due to the inability of the drink cart guy not to give more Mountain Dew to the shortest SO on Bay 1 each time he passed our bay...and she definitely didn't need anymore caffeine!!! )

[Jim Watson]

Maybe B'ville could just revise the definition of Vickers Count to include "... as many shots as desired may be fired except when the SO considers it unreasonable as provided elsewhere in the rules."

Then I come up to each stage and ask how many shots I may fire at T1, T2, T3, etc without being penalized.

[kdmoore]

unfortunate that the first part of the squad got away with it.

From what I've read, I do have to wonder if going back and awarding all who had shot it the same way in the same squad the FTDR would have been ok? In my mind, the realization came because of all of the shooters, that all shooters were cheating. I'm not questioning your call, just want to know if it was discussed and decided against, or never considered.

Serious question, did any of the following shooters end up with 3 0's on T-5?

I trust implicitly the call as I respect both Ted and Mike from thier contributions to the sport and these boards.

What bothers me (and it sounds like it bothers Mike), is that it took an organized group of competitors shooting a stage in lock step technique to award a single call. I don't buy the speeding ticket analogy. If 3 cars speed past a cop, and the cop has all of the drivers sitting in front of him, he's going to write 3 speeding tickets.

I do hope that it sends a signal to potential cheaters, but worry that individual cheaters will always get away scott free.

[00bullitt]

The purpose of this thread was never to question the call made at the Nationals by yourself or Iron Mike. It was started with hopes of gathering information to present to IDPA headquarters in hopes of changing the rule to a more suitable penalty for such a subjective call as round dumping. If the call were to be so blatant and obvios as you say it was.....then the unsportsmanlike conduct application of a DQ may have been more appropriate. Cheaters are not welcome by anyone,at any sport,at any level.

Your service at the match was appreciated. If you feel that round dumping does not have a place as a FTDR penalty......you're help in petitioning IDPA HQ to possibly revise it in the future would greatly be appreciated. We all need to work together to make this change,or anything we disagree with for that matter happen. If we speak loud enough,they will listen.

Hi, 00Bullitt -

It's appreciated - the support of those that worked the match. I didn't post the comments I did to 'defend' us, simply explain. The thread seemed to be getting to the point that the call was getting Monday morning quarterbacked, and a good SO's name getting questioned for doing it (Mike). Hopefully that's the end of the deal.

I support the "nuclear option" of the FTDR for dumping rounds or anything else it's specified for. I also have no problem wth how the rule is written. In this situation, there was a major difference between Vickers and cheating. Vickers is used during the stage to put as many rounds as is necessary to complete your course of fire under the Rules. Cheating is when you use the excuse of Vickers to gain an unfair advantage over your competitors.

Thanks for the kind words - the "Dew Crew" appreciates it! ("Dew Crew" due to the inability of the drink cart guy not to give more Mountain Dew to the shortest SO on Bay 1 each time he passed our bay...and she definitely didn't need anymore caffeine!!! )

You guys made a call according to the current rules. No fault there. Unfortunately many folks as well as myself feel this rule is flawed and contradictory. My whole point is that there needs to be a definitive way of determining RD'ing if its going to be assessed such a steep penalty as the FTDR. I have been accused of it twice with absolutely no intention of doing such. It irritated me severely both times since my integrity was questioned and I was basically being called a cheater. I can perform a tactical reload only about a quarter second second slower than an emergency reload so there was no true advantage to me either time given the extra time of an extra shot. As was told by Mike earlier....he suspected RD'ing but was too unsure to call it. That screams subjective to me. It cannot and should not be a subjective call by any means. If it becomes blatant and obvious as you state.........that is called unsportsmanlike conduct and punishable by the FTDR and DQ if necessary. A subjective call should not be assessed anymore than a procedural. Too many SO's abuse the penalty. Ask anyone else who has ever been warned about it how they felt when their integrity was questioned. Some folks don't take too kindly to being called a cheater or liar.

[Joe D]

Round dumping is very easy to deal with - never call it. If enough of us SOs never call it then maybe BW will get the message. Let me repeat myself. I will never give a penality for round dumping.

When you shoot my stage at the Georgia match this weekend shoot as many rounds into a target as you wish - that is as long as you are not in my Division.

[Mayonaise]

Those who don't understand why round dumping is a no no in IDPA that should read the rulebook again, use the search feature on just about any forum or contact HQ and ask why it's a rule. I don't believe it going away anytime soon.

[00bullitt]

Those who don't understand why round dumping is a no no in IDPA that should read the rulebook again, use the search feature on just about any forum or contact HQ and ask why it's a rule. I don't believe it going away anytime soon.

Understanding why round dumping is a rule is not the issue. It is not a positively definable offense the majority of the time(the nationals possibly proves to be a case of blatant and obvious). Some SO's like to abuse it and warn about it when it is inappropriate.

The 20 second penalty involved is too harsh given the subjectivity of it. Not to mention it is contradictory. I don't expect it to disappear. I would just like to see it properly revised. Its a hot button for me. Its the one thing I hate about IDPA. I have hopes that it may get addressed in the near future.

[RickB]

Round dumping is very easy to deal with - never call it. If enough of us SOs never call it then maybe BW will get the message. Let me repeat myself. I will never give a penality for round dumping.

When you shoot my stage at the Georgia match this weekend shoot as many rounds into a target as you wish - that is as long as you are not in my Division.

I've been a SOI since '01, and have worked seven sanctioned matches. I've never given a FTDR, and never seen another SO "award" one. I won't give a FTDR for round-dumping, either. If a guy shoots one "extra" round, I certainly can't tell why he did so (every shooter gets the same benefit of the doubt). If a shooter intentionally fires two or three extra rounds, they're probably getting no advantage from doing so, so again, no FTDR. I'm fairly ambivalent about the existence of the FTDR rule, as it applies to round-dumping, but I just have never seen an appropriate time to apply it. However . . . experienced shooters know when, or where, to put the "extra" round, so making my job easier; they don't put me in a position to make such a call. New shooters get a warning to not do it again, if they do something obvious (like three-each on an array requiring two-each) and so become experienced shooters. If I saw five "buddies" all do the same thing, such as firing an "extra" round at the same target, I might say something like, "Gee, what a coincidence . . .", but since they hadn't done anything a bunch of other shooters hadn't already done, and other shooters would do in the future - putting a round on a target that didn't "need" it - I wouldn't penalize the guys who all were guilty only of doing it back-to-back-to-back.

At the same time, I certainly won't say someone else, who's in a position to make such a call, couldn't or shouldn't do it. Maybe if I saw what they saw, I'd make the call too, but I just can't, or haven't, seen it.

Actually, I lied. I did have it called on me one time, and I didn't argue it, so I could use it as an example of when it shouldn't be called. The stage included a plate rack. I cleaned the first five plates with five rounds, burned the rest of the mag on the last plate, and it was still standing. I reloaded, and frustratedly unleashed a hail of rounds, with perhaps the second or third of five or six rounds hitting the plate. Since it allowed a slidelock reload on the next array (a reload I wouldn't have had to do at all if I'd shot fewer rounds), the SO decided I deserved a FTDR for firing the extra shots at the plate.

[Loves2Shoot]

It was after that shooter that we called for the MD, and after the next one (the lady) did the exact same thing in front of the MD, she was dinged (dented?) with the FTDR and the whole squad was put on notice.

Mike is a great guy, a great SO, and gave everyone the benefit of the doubt until the doubt was removed by the next couple of shooters.

Is that disturbing to anyone else?

It takes a series of shooters to issue a FTDR to one random shooter who copied the others?

I think he stated quite clearly a few problems:

1. He was unwilling to act the first instance he "knew" round dumping was happening. This places too much pressure on the SO's.

2. A round dumping FTDR was not handed out evenly or fairly, because it can not be, as each competitor is their own person and can take no responsibility for shooters before or after them. As far as I've read, IDPA is a single competitor sport. The idea of putting a group of shooter "on notice" is quite alarming to me.

3. A shooter executed a field of fire identically as many other shooters as was not scored the same.

4. Rules that can not or are not applied with equal measure need to have their validity questioned for the sport's sake.