wgnoyes Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 OK- so if you have no visable bullet hole in the target, and you shot at it, you don't get the "failure to shoot at" penalty? 'Cause that is the way it sounds to me for some reason.... Well.... you shot at it, so you engaged it (albeit missed it), so why would you get a FTE? Isn't that the way it's always been? (NOT- ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 How about these:9.5.7 A competitor who fails to shoot at the face of each scoring target in a course of fire with at least one round will incur one procedural penalty per target for failure to shoot at the target, as well as appropriate penalties for misses. Looks like the proposed rule that was intended to prevent shooting targets in the back(?). Yeah! You can have a target angled such that you can see the back of it from somewhere else unintended in the stage without breaking the "90" (gotta get used to saying 90 instead of 180) and some slick s##t's that push range lawyering to the extreme have shot targets in the back that way expecting them to be scored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resjudicata Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 I saw a couple other things about Production division I have questions about. (I don't normally shoot production so this may have been handled before). The weight restriction is 2 ounces over factory weight: Does anyone know if this is supposed to be measured with or without the empty magazine inserted? I am assuming just the gun since the rule regarding the box specifies that the empty magazine is inserted but the weight rule does not. Also, section 21 allows replacement of small parts such as safety and slide stop: Does this also allow replacement of trigger and hammer? Does it allow replacement with aftermarket non-identical parts (such as extended safety/slide stop). It appears to allow replacement with any aftermarket small parts as long as weight and box measurements are met. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 vluc, thanks for getting John's interpretation of this rule or appendix item so we can make people aware before getting sent to the dark side. I sometimes get anal in what I read and how I interpret things so I often need to be corrected, glad this was not one of those times. Personally I love hi cap magazines because the make it easier for me to load ammo. I HATE Glock 10 round magazines because I have to use the loading device to get the 10th round in which is why I paid $$$ for a hicap after the ban. I normally shoot L10 with a 1911 but I have a new XD45 Tacitical that I need trigger time on as the carry gun is an XD45 Compact. Be a hoot to use the XD in Production with BIG holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket35 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 How about these:9.5.7 A competitor who fails to shoot at the face of each scoring target in a course of fire with at least one round will incur one procedural penalty per target for failure to shoot at the target, as well as appropriate penalties for misses. Looks like the proposed rule that was intended to prevent shooting targets in the back(?). Yeah! You can have a target angled such that you can see the back of it from somewhere else unintended in the stage without breaking the "90" (gotta get used to saying 90 instead of 180) and some slick s##t's that push range lawyering to the extreme have shot targets in the back that way expecting them to be scored. I was unaware that we ever scored the back of the target. If we did that would be a no-shoot anyway! Right?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket35 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 BTW- That sounds like another "failure to do right" rule... Why do we continue the IDPA bashing when it doesn't have any buisness if this forum in the first place. My father IMPRESSED a part of my anatomy with the idea that if I couldn't say something nice about someone that I should keep my mouth shut. Perhaps the moderators should start doing the same thing. SPANK SPANK My intention or thought was not one of bashing IDPA. It was merely to suggest that any rule that leaves a door that open to interpretation is not necessarily a good idea. Other sports have had documented trouble with this kind of a rule and I am only suggesting that it is a bad idea. Sorry for the confusion. I degress.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoMiE Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 (edited) BTW- That sounds like another "failure to do right" rule... Why do we continue the IDPA bashing when it doesn't have any buisness if this forum in the first place. My father IMPRESSED a part of my anatomy with the idea that if I couldn't say something nice about someone that I should keep my mouth shut. Perhaps the moderators should start doing the same thing. SPANK SPANK My intention or thought was not one of bashing IDPA. It was merely to suggest that any rule that leaves a door that open to interpretation is not necessarily a good idea. Other sports have had documented trouble with this kind of a rule and I am only suggesting that it is a bad idea. Sorry for the confusion. I degress.... The Forbidden Action must be clearly stated, it is not left up to interpretation. It is too restrict things such as running out of a shooting area (boundary lines) or stepping up on props to shot over walls, etc. I do think however people will come up with some crazy things stating Forbidden Actions instead of having proper stage procedures. What's does that mean, getting a zero versus a procedural on a stage for not following the WSB. Edited November 30, 2007 by HoMiE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 vluc, thanks for getting John's interpretation of this rule or appendix item so we can make people aware before getting sent to the dark side. I sometimes get anal in what I read and how I interpret things so I often need to be corrected, glad this was not one of those times. Personally I love hi cap magazines because the make it easier for me to load ammo. I HATE Glock 10 round magazines because I have to use the loading device to get the 10th round in which is why I paid $$$ for a hicap after the ban. I normally shoot L10 with a 1911 but I have a new XD45 Tacitical that I need trigger time on as the carry gun is an XD45 Compact. Be a hoot to use the XD in Production with BIG holes. Part of my concern is "how do we know" unless they say something or it is passed on from what was seen at an earlier stage. There will always be a potential cloud for me each time a production shooter comes up to the line if they use high caps. Yes, we count as the rounds go off, but once the cof is done and we later discover that they did, in fact, have several mags that were at 11. Warning? Unsportsmanlike conduct? And how does the next RO down the line know that they did receive a warning? I hear the ease of reloading argument with the high caps, and really did try to warm to using them in matches, as I have as many high caps as I do 10 rounders, but just don't like using them. I love HAVING them, just don't like to use them when I shoot production. Now when I play in Limited minor, I have no problems with them. Go figure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoMiE Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 vluc, thanks for getting John's interpretation of this rule or appendix item so we can make people aware before getting sent to the dark side. I sometimes get anal in what I read and how I interpret things so I often need to be corrected, glad this was not one of those times. Personally I love hi cap magazines because the make it easier for me to load ammo. I HATE Glock 10 round magazines because I have to use the loading device to get the 10th round in which is why I paid $$$ for a hicap after the ban. I normally shoot L10 with a 1911 but I have a new XD45 Tacitical that I need trigger time on as the carry gun is an XD45 Compact. Be a hoot to use the XD in Production with BIG holes. Part of my concern is "how do we know" unless they say something or it is passed on from what was seen at an earlier stage. There will always be a potential cloud for me each time a production shooter comes up to the line if they use high caps. Yes, we count as the rounds go off, but once the cof is done and we later discover that they did, in fact, have several mags that were at 11. Warning? Unsportsmanlike conduct? And how does the next RO down the line know that they did receive a warning? I hear the ease of reloading argument with the high caps, and really did try to warm to using them in matches, as I have as many high caps as I do 10 rounders, but just don't like using them. I love HAVING them, just don't like to use them when I shoot production. Now when I play in Limited minor, I have no problems with them. Go figure... The score keeper should be paying attention to shots fired in L10/Production divisons. If you think the competitor loaded mags beyond 10 rounds, you can ask them..."How did you shoot at 6 targets if you only had 11 rounds (10+1) after you reloaded from that position." It will be obvious if the competitor continually does it, maybey they don't know the rules. Then you can politely remind them about it, give them a procedural, move them to open or DQ if you think it was unsportsman like conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket35 Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 BTW- That sounds like another "failure to do right" rule... Why do we continue the IDPA bashing when it doesn't have any buisness if this forum in the first place. My father IMPRESSED a part of my anatomy with the idea that if I couldn't say something nice about someone that I should keep my mouth shut. Perhaps the moderators should start doing the same thing. SPANK SPANK My intention or thought was not one of bashing IDPA. It was merely to suggest that any rule that leaves a door that open to interpretation is not necessarily a good idea. Other sports have had documented trouble with this kind of a rule and I am only suggesting that it is a bad idea. Sorry for the confusion. I degress.... The Forbidden Action must be clearly stated, it is not left up to interpretation. It is too restrict things such as running out of a shooting area (boundary lines) or stepping up on props to shot over walls, etc. I do think however people will come up with some crazy things stating Forbidden Actions instead of having proper stage procedures. What's does that mean, getting a zero versus a procedural on a stage for not following the WSB. Kind of like when someone says, "Well that is not the intent of the stage or drill". It isn't our job as competitors to figure out their "intent". It is to find the fastest way to shoot the most points within the WSB. Now if it doesn't say we can't shoot over a wall- shame on them for not articulating that or building the stage to physically prohibit that. I feel this rule is thrown in as an afterthought and undermines the whole "freestyle" format. Again- just one guys view. I am not trying to undermind some higher power here. Just stating some cautionary view points from my experience. I feel that someone will be like "Dang that ain't fair- he found a loophole in the stage design. I wish I thought of that. We will just hit him with the ol' catch all rule." I have heard it before, trust me. And not just once! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo radley Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Part of my concern is "how do we know" unless they say something or it is passed on from what was seen at an earlier stage. There will always be a potential cloud for me each time a production shooter comes up to the line if they use high caps. Yes, we count as the rounds go off, but once the cof is done and we later discover that they did, in fact, have several mags that were at 11. Warning? Unsportsmanlike conduct? And how does the next RO down the line know that they did receive a warning?I hear the ease of reloading argument with the high caps, and really did try to warm to using them in matches, as I have as many high caps as I do 10 rounders, but just don't like using them. I love HAVING them, just don't like to use them when I shoot production. Now when I play in Limited minor, I have no problems with them. Go figure... Vluc, but is that really a problem? My observation only, but it seems shooters are either 'Production Shooters', in which case they know *exactly* what the deal is, or first-timers/very-new shooters that have been told to go shoot in Production, in which case, they might mistakenly have more than 10 in a magazine at the start, but it's not going to be "11" - it's going to be 17, or whatever the full capacity is.... Maybe some experienced shooters keep *two* barney mags in a BDU pocket, or something, but Jeez...there's a case of don't ask, don't tell. Man, I hate having to top-off at LAMR; it's so much easier and more fluid to just pull a mag from a hip-pocket -- done. BIG fan, here of using downloaded high-caps in Production... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 (edited) BTW- That sounds like another "failure to do right" rule... Why do we continue the IDPA bashing when it doesn't have any buisness if this forum in the first place. My father IMPRESSED a part of my anatomy with the idea that if I couldn't say something nice about someone that I should keep my mouth shut. Perhaps the moderators should start doing the same thing. SPANK SPANK My intention or thought was not one of bashing IDPA. It was merely to suggest that any rule that leaves a door that open to interpretation is not necessarily a good idea. Other sports have had documented trouble with this kind of a rule and I am only suggesting that it is a bad idea. Sorry for the confusion. I degress.... The Forbidden Action must be clearly stated, it is not left up to interpretation. It is too restrict things such as running out of a shooting area (boundary lines) or stepping up on props to shot over walls, etc. I do think however people will come up with some crazy things stating Forbidden Actions instead of having proper stage procedures. What's does that mean, getting a zero versus a procedural on a stage for not following the WSB. Kind of like when someone says, "Well that is not the intent of the stage or drill". It isn't our job as competitors to figure out their "intent". It is to find the fastest way to shoot the most points within the WSB. Now if it doesn't say we can't shoot over a wall- shame on them for not articulating that or building the stage to physically prohibit that. I feel this rule is thrown in as an afterthought and undermines the whole "freestyle" format. Again- just one guys view. I am not trying to undermind some higher power here. Just stating some cautionary view points from my experience. I feel that someone will be like "Dang that ain't fair- he found a loophole in the stage design. I wish I thought of that. We will just hit him with the ol' catch all rule." I have heard it before, trust me. And not just once! That was my concern from earlier in the thread... I can see people crying to an RM... "He gained an advatage." If the RM agrees then it's a reshoot with a "forbidden action." It all depends on how it's used. I think it could be more an issue for local matches where there are sometimes.... clicks? I can see a hot shooter coming in and getting dinged with this one. At the majors, I would think it's less of an issue with better course design, but one can't be sure. I think freestyle should be freestyle unless it's a safety issue. If some guy/lady can game it and gain an advantage then good on him/her. That's part of our game. This rule could work well and it could be abused... before I get my back up, I will give it a chance and not flog it to death here. If it turns into an abuse, or tool for the "in" crowd, to hold down a gamer, I will cross the bridge. Edited December 1, 2007 by JThompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Vluc, but is that really a problem? My observation only, but it seems shooters are either 'Production Shooters', in which case they know *exactly* what the deal is, or first-timers/very-new shooters that have been told to go shoot in Production, in which case, they might mistakenly have more than 10 in a magazine at the start, but it's not going to be "11" - it's going to be 17, or whatever the full capacity is....Maybe some experienced shooters keep *two* barney mags in a BDU pocket, or something, but Jeez...there's a case of don't ask, don't tell. Man, I hate having to top-off at LAMR; it's so much easier and more fluid to just pull a mag from a hip-pocket -- done. BIG fan, here of using downloaded high-caps in Production... Boo, not a flame. Probably really not a problem if one figures, heck, it's just one round or what the heck, easier to load my mags, so what's the difference. IIRC, at Area 8 the last two years, several people did get nailed for exactly that - but they were for unloaded gun starts, not for action during the cof. If you don't have 11 in any magazine at the start, then the issue is moot. If, as JA stated, ANY magazine with more than 10 at the start has 11, then it's Open. An experienced shooter who knows "exactly" what the rules are and who still keep two +11 in their pockets, well....(probably it's just a local match ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 (edited) Since this is a new rule, and I am one who often has to make these decisions on the range, I may not have the absolute final view of it. With that being said though, I do not think having an extra round in the magazine is a "forbidden action" as the rule envisioned. This is a violation of the division requirements and not a new concept. The penalty is moving to Open. If an RO calls a forbidden action the RM must be called to make a determination if the action will be allowed or a re-shoot be required with appropriate notice of the prohibited action. An RM can not allow a re-shoot for violating the division requirements, the penalty is clear and has been applied several times in the past. It seems to me that some are mixing apples and watermelons here. If a shooter came to me and complained of another shooter having 11 rounds in a magazine after the start signal, I would refer them to the third party arbitration process. No RO, CRO, or RM can make a decision based on something they did not observe. If the shooter had personal knowledge of the infraction then they are in the best position to move the process forward. If they can convince an Arbitration Committee that they are right then the AC can make a final determination. My 2 cents. Gary Edited December 1, 2007 by Gary Stevens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 I am so happy to be young again, even if only for about 6 weeks. On Jan 1 I will no longer be considered a Senior. However, just six short (cold) weeks later, I am re-instated as a Senior. Since there are no Big Matches and clubs don't pay catagories locally, it really doesn't matter. Point of fact, I really don't care to win a Senior Trophy, I'd rather win High A or better yet High Overall. All in all a rather benign change to the rules. If the rest have as little impact we will see smooth sailing. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Hang on, back up a sec for me... I'm riding the short bus, ya know 9.5.1 - how am I supposed to interpret that, though? That "scoring paper targets must be shot with a minimum of one round each" section - it doesn't say "shot at with a minimum" (ie, the distinction that is made in 9.5.7 for purposes of determining engagement). It says "must be shot". There's no penalty specified, of course - its just an awkward phrasing that I'm not sure what its supposed to mean??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 (edited) Hang on, back up a sec for me... I'm riding the short bus, ya know 9.5.1 - how am I supposed to interpret that, though? That "scoring paper targets must be shot with a minimum of one round each" section - it doesn't say "shot at with a minimum" (ie, the distinction that is made in 9.5.7 for purposes of determining engagement). It says "must be shot". There's no penalty specified, of course - its just an awkward phrasing that I'm not sure what its supposed to mean??? 9.5.1 Unless otherwise specified in the written stage briefing, scoring paper targets must be shot with a minimum of one round each, with the best two hits to score. Scoring metal targets must be shot with a minimum of one round each and must fall to score. 9.5.7 A competitor who fails to shoot at the face of each scoring target in a course of fire with at least one round will incur one procedural penalty per target for failure to shoot at the target, as well as appropriate penalties for misses (see Rule 10.2.7). Then this: 10.2.7 A competitor who fails to shoot at any scoring target with at least one round will incur one procedural penalty per target, plus the applicable number of misses, except where the provisions of Rules 9.2.4.4 or 9.9.2 apply. 9.2.4.4 Fixed Time courses of fire do not incur failure to shoot at or miss penalties. 9.9.2 Moving scoring targets, which do not comply with the above criteria are considered disappearing targets and will not incur failure to shoot at or miss penalties except where Rule 9.9.3 applies. 9.9.3 Moving scoring targets will always incur failure to shoot at and miss penalties if a competitor fails to activate the mechanism which initiates the target movement. I don't see a problem here... it seems clear to me. Edited December 5, 2007 by JThompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 What I think is the question here is the phrasing. You need to fire at least one round at every target for it to be considered as "Engaged", If you fail to hit said target, you get Miss Penalties (-10 each) but if you also fail to engage the taret you get a Failure to Engage which is an additional -10. so if you blow past a target that requires 2 hits and you don't shoot at it, you will e assessed, -20 for the two misses and an additional -10 for failing to engage the target as well as missing out onthe possible 10 points you would have gotten for 2 A hits. Perhaps the book should be more specific in that the passage should read: "Unless otherwise specified in the written stage briefing, scoring paper targets must be shot AT with a minimum of one round each, with the best two hits to score. Scoring metal targets must be shot AT with a minimum of one round each and must fall to score." Even with all the time spent, we are likely to find a few loose ends such as this one. All in all I think that he book looks pretty good. In this case, we all know that you cannot mandate that a target MUST be hit, only engaged, so perhpas we might be being a bit too critical? Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 David, thanks for the catch because that looks to imply that each paper target must have at least one hit to be considered as engaged. As an RO I mainly concerned with how the shooter is handling the gun and not what he is shooting at, so how can I positively state that a blank target was actually shot at. Most scorekeepers are someone from the squad who had the job handed to them and are not concerned about round count but are watching the shooter to see if their approach might be faster than the one they had selected. A totally blank target might give me cause to check the timer IF the shooter didn't accept my call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 What I think is the question here is the phrasing. Yeah, that's all I was getting at. There's no net change to what we had before here... just the wording seems slightly awkward as I read it, right now... Almost as if it implies that there's to be a "failed to put a hole in the target" penalty if you engaged it, but missed it with every shot (which would put you in the same camp as not engaging....). Perhaps the book should be more specific in that the passage should read: That would have made it less awkward the way I'm reading it right now - but I think its just a semantic thing, in the end... Even with all the time spent, we are likely to find a few loose ends such as this one. All in all I think that he book looks pretty good. In this case, we all know that you cannot mandate that a target MUST be hit, only engaged, so perhpas we might be being a bit too critical I wholeheartedly agree - the rulebook looks and reads very nicely. I'm still in the middle of digesting it, but I like the fact that I can read through it without having to read all the US rules interspersed w/ the IPSC rules, etc. Its much cleaner, this way. By and large, I think the changes are very solid, as well. I'm personally still a taste grumpy about Forbidden Actions, but other than that... I'm sure we will find discrepancies, and things will get ironed out here and there as needed. I wasn't trying to be critical, just pointing out something that seemed a little bit odd, in the end, as I was reading through it David, thanks for the catch because that looks to imply that each paper target must have at least one hit to be considered as engaged. I'm sure we can agree, though, that two mikes is penal enough, eh?? 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