2007 LPR Nationals Foot Fault Question

[aerosigns]

While shooting a ground level port at the 2007 LPR Nationals I got dinged for 4 foot faults. Shooting from a low kneeling position inside the shooting box, my toes had extended over the back fault line. I was shooting with the the tops of my feet flat on the ground and my toes pointing up range.

I only ask this so that I can correctly apply the rule as an RO in the future.

Let's forget that the fault lines had sunken into the hamster chips and mud. And, in now way did these faults hinder my attempt to overthrow Jerry M. as the King of Wheel. Also, I want to thank all of the people who CRO'ed and RO'ed. I am not questioning their judgement at the time one little bit. They made the call and that's it, but I want to learn how I should call that when I see a similar situation.

My first thought was well I was over the line and that's that. But in reading the rule book I find this rule:

10.2.1 - A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground beyond a Fault or Charge Line will receive 1 procedural penalty. However, if the competitor has gained a significant advantage while faulting, the competitor will be assessed 1 procedural penalty for each shot fired while faulting, instead of a single penalty. No penalty is assessed if a competitor does not fire any shots while faulting a line.

I don't feel that this created a significant advantage, and should probably have been scored as a single procedural.

The thoughts of more experienced RO's are appreciated.

[Shooter Grrl]

Advantage gained is an objective call. Usually though, it's pretty clear - if you were able to stretch out more, rather than say "hunker" down real tight, that would be considered an advantage.

Also, the written stage briefing can specify that a fault is an advantage - do you remember how it was stated? Did the RO explain the "advantage"? If not, ask next time

Also, the shooter hardly ever feels that it was an advantage :wink:

[G-ManBart]

Sounds like it should have been one procedural to me, but I guess someone could argue the opposite.

I guess I don't really like shooting positions that call for unusual postures when there is a rear fault line like that, but that's just me. It would seem if you had side fault lines and a low port, everyone is going to have to either squat down or kneel to shoot through it and how far back your feet are will be determined by how long your legs are. A short person (read me) has an easier time getting down to that port in the first place, so why make it even harder on the tall people by making it possible for them to fault the line behind them? It's not like you're going prone and that was an advantage...not that anyone would go prone unless nearly forced to do so.

[driver8M3]

i'm guessing this was stage 15. the main point was to get into a low shooting position and shoot through the port, which you did. i don't see having your toes hanging over the rear fault line as a significant advantage. therefore i'd give a single procedural.

something similar happened to me a few years ago (the infamous clown stage at east huntingdon). shooting prone through a low port my elbow touched the ground just forward of the fault line. 16 procedurals...for a 2-inch "advantage." i was a new shooter and didn't know any better. but it seems like 1 procedural would have been the better call then as well.

the new rules sort of address the issue:

2.2.1.7 The use of Shooting Boxes, Fault Lines and Boundary Lines at prone shooting positions should be

avoided or used with caution.

[Flexmoney]

I have seen that called with multiple procedurals at a past Nationals. I don't agree with it. The Range Master upheld the call and the shooter didn't arbitrate it.

My call would be 1 procedural...unless it was specifically spelled out differently in the WSB.

[Bigbadaboom]

I don't know if you gained an advantage or not but the penalty, rather it's 1 for offense or 1 per shot should be the same for every shooter and be written in the stage briefing and announced during the walk-through.

[dajarrel]

FWIW, I agree that it should be 1 proc. I can't see any advantage in that case.

dj

[racerba]

Another shooter on my squad was also dinged with 4 penalties. We agree that it should have been 1 since it was not a significant advantage. The reason, and I somewhat agree, was that they had been giving 4 penalties for everybody. At least they were consistent in their calls. So in answering the original question, I would give one penalty, not four.

[baa]

This was Stage 15?

A shooter on our squad also kneeled at that port and his right foot faulted the line. He was given 2 procedurals, 1 for each target engaged. The rule states he should have gotten 1 or 4 faults. Goes to show even at the nationals, you never know how and if the rules are going to be enforced.

[Bear23]

Don't even bring up stages 9 and 18....

[racerba]

This was Stage 15?

A shooter on our squad also kneeled at that port and his right foot faulted the line. He was given 2 procedurals, 1 for each target engaged. The rule states he should have gotten 1 or 4 faults. Goes to show even at the nationals, you never know how and if the rules are going to be enforced.

Giving 2 penalties is definitely WRONG.

[driver8M3]

Giving 2 penalties is definitely WRONG.

it might be wrong. it's possible he only touched the ground during 2 of the 4 shots.

[lcs]

Partial Quote

While shooting a ground level port at the 2007 LPR Nationals I got dinged for 4 foot faults. Shooting from a low kneeling position inside the shooting box, my toes had extended over the back fault line. I was shooting with the the tops of my feet flat on the ground and my toes pointing up range.

Not having been there, but a visual of what you described could have given you a "significant advantage" because the position you took was a more stable platform to shoot from. Brian describes that position as very stable in his book compared to someone doing "one knee" down.

IF you were able to acheive the same position and stay within the fault line, I would have called it 1 procedural as there was not a "significant advantage" gained by you with your toes outside the box.

[LPatterson]

Rear fault lines at low ports/prone position should not be used because it discriminates against shooters & shooting styles. This came up at the Open Nationals and though I don't have the WSB and I don't know if the shooter arbitrated the call, I do know that several shooters had their score sheets changed from mutiple procedurals to only one. As good as we were we made a call that could not be supported by the rule book, so we were chastised & scores corrected.

[ima45dv8]

I wasn't there to see it, but from the description, I'd say 1.

[racerba]

Giving 2 penalties is definitely WRONG.

it might be wrong. it's possible he only touched the ground during 2 of the 4 shots.

OK - point taken.

[racerba]

IF you were able to acheive the same position and stay within the fault line, I would have called it 1 procedural as there was not a "significant advantage" gained by you with your toes outside the box.

Yes, you could have achieve the same position and stay within the faule line - just a few inch difference.

[professor]

At the 2004 Factory Gun Nationals, on Stage 20 "Get It Done". you started sitting on a plywood, immovable seat. On start signal, you had to retrieve gun, scoot behind the chair to engage 3 targets through a low port, then go forward and prone to engage 3 more targets through another low port. According to the RO, my toes went over the rear fault line when I was behind the chair. I got dinged 2 procedurals on one target, for which the RO said my foot fault gave me significant advantage, and 1 more for engaging the other two targets from that position, supposedly because there was no significant advantage for them, for a total of -30 pts on a 60 pt stage. My argument, that the gravel buildup against that rear fault line had eliminated any indication that my foot had reached the line, was ignored.

I guess I was lucky to be short, because a number of shooters violated the rear fault line when they went prone for the final 3 targets.

Edited October 4, 2007 by professor

[XRe]

Rear fault lines at low ports/prone position should not be used because it discriminates against shooters & shooting styles.

+1

And... I have a hard time imagining how a shooter who is shooting prone, and has their foot come in contact with the ground outside those fault lines, is somehow gaining a significant advantage over someone who doesn't (either picked the feet up, or assumed a more angled position.

I'm a bit surprised they had this issue crop up at a 2nd Nationals this year... seems a little strange...

[mike4045]

If you went prone on this position you would have had 2/3 of your body outside the box. You had to kneel or squat very low to shoot it. We had someone shooting thru who got 4 procedurals for it. I know it would have been easier to shoot with a foot outside the box, you would be able to get lower and much better look at the targets.

Mike

[professor]

With my bad knees and lack of mobility, going prone was out of the question, and going to one knee to aim at the targets wasn't that great an option, either.

But, you could see the two targets and your gun position through the mesh hard cover, even though the port was below knee level. So I just bent over low enough to get my hands down to the port, cranked my wrists up to aim the gun horizontally, and shot to "body mass" of the two targets [2A, 2C, I believe].

Turned out this was my second best stage finish of the Nationals.

[aerosigns]

I guess the lessons learned here are:

Stage design - Don't design a stage that includes a built in disadvantage for tall shooters (not that I am but we could get some ex-NBA players any day now). Or, as has been said be specific about the instruction in the walk through.

Stage design - Like the Prof. said (nice shooting with you by the way) what some shooters were doing was to kneel or squat, stick your arm through to the elbow and blast away at the targets. The screen material allowed the shooters to clearly see muzzle direction etc., but this type of design at the club level could have negative consequences.

RO consistency - as we have heard whatever call you decide to make do it for everone.

Fault lines - rear fault lines suck. In my case I was close enough to the front wall that I cut my hand on the port.

Oh well, I didn't go expecting to win, but I did expect to learn. This definitely was one of those learning experiences.

And, I did keep my ammo cans under my belt on 9 & 18.

[Nemo]

And, I did keep my ammo cans under my belt on 9 & 18.

I resent that comment!

[Carmoney]

Jim, I'll say it--you got screwed. Should have been one procedural. Simple as that.

The people running LPR this year seemed to completely forget how to reasonably apply the "no significant competitive advantage" rule.

[HI5-O]

Rear fault lines at low ports/prone position should not be used because it discriminates against shooters & shooting styles. This came up at the Open Nationals and though I don't have the WSB and I don't know if the shooter arbitrated the call, I do know that several shooters had their score sheets changed from mutiple procedurals to only one. As good as we were we made a call that could not be supported by the rule book, so we were chastised & scores corrected.

I was one of those shooters who had 4 foot faults then changed to 1 at the Open Nationals and I didn't feel like I had gained an advantage.