Area 7: Match DQ

[Johann the Horrible]

If he is engaging a target while moving there is no problem, it is the moving without engaging that gets the DQ.

[Skywalker]

as I moved the gun up, back into my field of vision, taking a couple of steps to engage targets to my right in the free fire zone, I was stopped.

Here lies the possible exemption I was talking about.

IF your finger was placed on trigger after you finished bringing back the gun up at eye level, and IF you had targets in line with your eyesight AND your gun, then the rules say NO DQ.

In any other situation that could have occurred in this case (e.g. finger on trigger while bringing the gun UP), it was a righteous call.

[Crusher]

If the gun is mounted and ready to fire while moving during engagement of a target array (even for those arrays where wide transitions where a step or step and a half is sometimes the norn or within a step from entering an array) I will never call for a finger in the trigger guard. If however the the competitor is movving between arrays (dead space) or during a reload thats a DQ.

Stage design as well as the shooting solutions play a role in "where is" and "where is not" acceptable "trigger finger" placement. From the video posted there was only one area of "dead space" I saw (movement toward the end of the stage where it looked like 16 shots could be taken). On a side note whats up with a sweet spot for 16 shots in a level 3?

[Al Capizzo]

Number two... as a shooter - do everything you can to disambiguate[/i] the situation.

Is that really a word?

[bgary]

dis·am·big·u·ate –verb (used with object). to remove the ambiguity from; make unambiguous

[LPatterson]

There are only two perspectives that allow you to consistently and accurately call "finger in the trigger guard". Those are directly above and directly below the gun. As an RO, you don't want to be in either place. From any other angle, I can easily demonstrate to you that you cannot tell - for certain - where my finger is in relation to the trigger guard. Is it it in, or just out? You can't tell with everything standing still, how the heck can you possibly do it when I'm moving at warp speed and you're either 10+ yards away or struggling to keep up looking over my shoulder? You can't.

However - two important points result from this. Number one, as an RO, you need to be absolutely, positively, without-a-doubt-in-the-whole-wide-world-of-sports certain that you saw this before you call it. The position of the gun, shooter, and the shooter's trigger finger can easily deceive you into thinking you see something that you don't. You may think you saw it.. but did you?

Number two... as a shooter - do everything you can to disambiguate the situation. There's only two places your finger should ever be - on the trigger (when engaging targets), and plastered to the side of the frame or slide (every other time). The latter gets the trigger finger away from the trigger guard in 3 different dimensions, and makes it much easier to see that your finger in fact is not in the trigger guard...

As you move up the ranks, you pick up an additional advantage - you'll be engaging targets on the move more frequently, and moving fast enough when you're not that all the RO is typically seeing is your back. So, that's not to say that you should just be faster and you can run around being unsafe - just that you're not as likely to be called on this sort of thing by accident (and if you are called on it, it will likely be because of an AD - when you're "at speed", you cannot afford the kind of sloppy gun handling that legitimately nets you this DQ anyhow...).

Actually Dave there is another, it is the right handed shooter moving left to right on the 15-20 yard run from one position to another. I don't need to dog your heels to be able to see where the gun is pointing or when you are aiming it. As good as you are you are probably not going to make the above run with the gun in a mounted position especially if the 1st visable target is another 15 yards behind a vision barrier.

[XRe]

Actually Dave there is another, it is the right handed shooter moving left to right on the 15-20 yard run from one position to another. I don't need to dog your heels to be able to see where the gun is pointing or when you are aiming it. As good as you are you are probably not going to make the above run with the gun in a mounted position especially if the 1st visable target is another 15 yards behind a vision barrier.

That's not the question at hand, Leroy - it has nothing to do with whether or not you can tell I'm aiming the gun or where I'm aiming it. The question is whether or not you can accurately, consistently, reliably tell for 100% certainty whether or not my finger is inside the trigger guard.

As far as your statement goes, it doesn't matter which direction it is that I'm running - if its 15-20 yards to the next position where I can engage targets, the gun is not going to be mounted, period. But that has nothing to do with whether you can see my finger in the trigger guard or not (there was a different thread recently that discussed burning a round into a table that touched on the subjects of what constitutes aiming at targets, and movement).

[coldchar]

If I may make an analogy-

Having done both ROing and umpiring I think there is an analogy between the two occupations even though one is a safety issue and one is not

Experienced umpires know you never "guess at an out". Likewise you had better see the out before making the call and you had best be in a physical position to allow you to see the out or you will catch a lot of anger.

Likewise, if I have an experienced shooter in front of me, as compared to someone obviously struggling with gun handling, I am not calling a DQ for a finger just because I think I see it.

I might say, just loud enough for the competitor to hear it, "finger" if I think I there might be a finger in the guard.

[George Jones]

So, when running full tilt ahead, gun unmounted, weak hand pumping for all it's worth, the onus is on the shooter to have that finger visibly out of the trigger guard. If the RO perceives that the trigger finger is not visibly out of the trigger guard --- the proper command is "Stop!" What's hard about that?

I hate to disagree with Nik, but I have to comment on that statement.

Perception of finger position is NOT an acceptable justification for STOP and a DQ. There is a big difference between "seeing a finger in the trigger guard" and "not seeing the finger out". I suggest that "not seeing it out" is never cause for a DQ. (There's an old anecdote about a shooter being DQ for his index finger in the trigger guard - turns out he didn't have one! The RO called what he didn't see.)

Having said that, I do agree that many shooters should make a better effort to have the finger more visibly out. I teach new shooters to keep their finger extended against the frame. Not only is it easier for the RO to "see it out", it also helps stabilize the gun for any handling (reloads, malfunction clearances, etc).

As to the general subject of the validity of finger calls, they are not much different than 180 calls. Both are very subjective and leave no residual evidence. As an RO it is always uncomfortable not being able to produce hard evidence of a DQ call, but it's still our responsibility to make the calls as best we can.... and as we see it!

Edited June 11, 2008 by George Jones

[Carmoney]

dis·am·big·u·ate –verb (used with object). to remove the ambiguity from; make unambiguous

It's the opposite of discombobulate.

[Nik Habicht]

So, when running full tilt ahead, gun unmounted, weak hand pumping for all it's worth, the onus is on the shooter to have that finger visibly out of the trigger guard. If the RO perceives that the trigger finger is not visibly out of the trigger guard --- the proper command is "Stop!" What's hard about that?

I hate to disagree with Nik, but I have to comment on that statement.

Perception of finger position is NOT an acceptable justification for STOP and a DQ. There is a big difference between "seeing a finger in the trigger guard" and "not seeing the finger out". I suggest that "not seeing it out" is never cause for a DQ. (There's an old anecdote about a shooter being DQ for his index finger in the trigger guard - turns out he didn't have one! The RO called what he didn't see.)

Having said that, I do agree that many shooters should make a better effort to have the finger more visibly out. I teach new shooters to keep their finger extended against the frame. Not only is it easier for the RO to "see it out", it also helps stabilize the gun for any handling (reloads, malfunction clearances, etc).

As to the general subject of the validity of finger calls, they are not much different than 180 calls. Both are very subjective and leave no residual evidence. As an RO it is always uncomfortable not being able to produce hard evidence of a DQ call, but it's still our responsibility to make the calls as best we can.... and as we see it!

I was hoping you'd chime in here.....

This thread forced me to dig through the rulebook again. Why, if you are correct, was 8.5.1 written in a manner that puts the onus on the shooter to visibly move his finger out of the trigger guard during movement? Given the wording of 8.5.1, and that 10.5.10 refers back to it, why wouldn't "not seeing the finger out" be enough? (That's assuming that the shooter has a trigger finger....) Educate me, please....

[Johann the Horrible]

The onus is indeed on the shooter to hold his finger visibly out of the trigger guard. The rule was made because of safety concerns. Obviously you can run with your finger on the trigger all day long and as long as you hold the gun so close to your body that the RO cannot see it you will not get DQ`ed, until you get an AD. There is many way around this but if the RO does not see you finger out of the trigger guard, he will stop you - if he is not sure he will normally warn you.

I just want to repeat: The RO`s are there to make sure of safety first and the rest later.

[Vlad]

The onus is on the shooter to not have his finger in the trigger guard. To place on him the responsibility of that being VISIBLE is sorta mad in my opinion. What if the RO is behind the shooter? Well he can't see the finger or the whole gun for that matter. What if the RO blinks? Yes I'm being extreme here but thats to prove a point. The shooter can't ever ensure that some body part of his is visible to the RO because of bodies in motion and all that.

but thats just me.

[AZ38super]

- if he is not sure he will normally warn you.

This is actually not an option. This was a question of major dispute in class and on my recent RO test. The only option in the rule book is a DQ.

I have seen many many times where someone was warned of trigger and thought this should be an option but that is not how it is written.

The fault is on the shooter for not making it clear and the RO must do their best to make a correct judgement call when the time arrives.

[Jim Norman]

I have to agree with George Jones and Vlad. You can only call what you SEE, not what you THINK you see.

If you can't see where my finger is, you cannot assume it is somewhere it shouldn't be.

The perfect example of this is the story George told, there was no finger to be anywhere!

The other side of this argument is impossible to maintain. The shooter would have to do all the things he already does safely and add to that know exactly where the RO is so that at anytime he is taking a step, he can be sure that the RO can see where his fingers are. That is insanity!

Now, wee do allow for warnings such as "Muzzle" and "Finger" My take is that his should problably be limited to level one matches and even there to newer shooters (I have no idea how to or where to draw the line) and after that, if the shooter fires a round when he shouldn't have, DQ, Break the 180? DQ Actually pretty simple.

One thing that needs to be addressed is the setting of targets that draw shooters to the 180. All targets should be placed so that a 180 break is unlikely. I.E., don't put a target on each side of the range in line with the start position, or at the end of a COF and just up range of a wall that is parallel to the back stop. The shooter is at the wall and turns to shoot and breaks the 180, set those targets in front of the wall line so that a 180 break is unlikely.

Finger calls are nearly impossible to make safely. As has been pointed out, there are very few positions that the RO can be in where he will not be in a bad place if the shooter is moving at a High C or better level!

Jim

[JThompson]

- if he is not sure he will normally warn you.

This is actually not an option. This was a question of major dispute in class and on my recent RO test. The only option in the rule book is a DQ.

I have seen many many times where someone was warned of trigger and thought this should be an option but that is not how it is written.

The fault is on the shooter for not making it clear and the RO must do their best to make a correct judgement call when the time arrives.

"Actually," that is wrong... you can issue a safety warning at any time during the cof per:

8.6.1

No assistance of any kind can be given to a competitor during a course

of fire, except that any Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue

safety warnings to a competitor at any time. Such warnings will not be

grounds for the competitor to be awarded a reshoot.

I will, damn well, say finger if I'm not positive and DQ if I'm sure. If I see someone approaching the 180 I will also give a muzzle warning, providing there is time. Let's face it... in most of these cases it is a new shooter. If it's an A and up by the time you see it it has already happened and all you are left with is STOP. It's helpful to be able to say finger or muzzle when a guy is close or you "think" it's there or close. If you know you DQ, but I would rather prevent it than DQ for it. If someone is approaching the 180 I would rather have said muzzle at the 175 and prevent the break than have the break and possibly someone getting injured. I will error on safety side every time. A lot of new shooters have a want for speed, but little in the way of gun handling skills. This gives us a way to put their mind back on safety since we can't say. "Slow your ass down!" Although I have given that advice after the cof was closed.

Edited June 11, 2008 by JThompson

[sfinney]

This rule exists for a reason. Having said that, its the consistency of its application that is usually suspect.

I see this rule getting called more on lower Class shooters as the R.O. is more apt to be able to "see" what is going on, the shooter is slower, or more apt to shoot then move, rather shoot on the move....

As pointed out above, usually at club matches I've been to, the first thing an R.O. says is "finger!" to remind the shooter to take his finge out of the guard, if he does it again, then DQ at the extreme.

And not that some R.O.s are out to DQ people for fun, but every R.O. has their own "hot buttons" - things they just look for more than others...

As to its the shooters responsibiltiy to make sure his finger is "visible" outside the trigger guard, ..... well, to who? Himself? the R.O.? It doesn't really say. So a shooter should always hold and display his gun so that where ever the R.O. is, they can be assured to see daylight between gun and finger? Like the shooter doesn't have enough going on already. Please. Its the R.O.'s responsibiltiy to position himself to observe the shooters movements and any safety infractions that may occur.... R.O. doesn't see the infraction 100% for SURE, it did not happen. Maybe a verbal warning at most.

[SouthpawG26]

We recently had the good fortune of having our regional RO certification course conducted by the current IPSC and former IROA President, Nick Alexakos, with whom we were able to speak at length on this issue. Basically he stated that he will DQ for a visible finger THROUGH the triggerguard (while moving AND not engaging), ie a finger that clearly protrudes on the other side of the gun. This also implies observing the shooter from his non-firing side, while he moves.

[L9X25]

You cannot DQ a person because the RO was unable to get into a position where they could easily detemine that the finger was definitely out of the guard. Saying that it is the shooters responsibility to make it visible is not acceptable because he cannot control (or even be aware) of the RO's position.

[JThompson]

You cannot DQ a person because the RO was unable to get into a position where they could easily detemine that the finger was definitely out of the guard. Saying that it is the shooters responsibility to make it visible is not acceptable because he cannot control (or even be aware) of the RO's position.

I agree, but we have to apply some reason here. You know what they meant was that if I am in a good position to see it, I should be able to tell if it is in or out. IE straighten that damn thing out so I can tell. I see some shooters who keep the crook in their finger and then it just becomes a depth perception thing and that's where this comes in IMO I lay mine right on the frame as I think it gives better control than holding it way out.

I do agree that it could have been written better and we should prob have the BOD write something to take some of the ambiguity out of it. They way it's written now we could DQ every shooter than we run... nobody is going to do that and common sense prevails, but for the sake of consistency maybe it needs to be looked at.

To the topic: I think this is the toughest of all calls we can make. I'm 100% on three shooters and one of those was an AD. I have given the finger warning a few times and I was pretty sure I was right, but I will not DQ on "pretty sure." There can be a problem where an RO thinks he sees more than he can.

Edited June 11, 2008 by JThompson

[L9X25]

I agree, but we have to apply some reason here. You know what they meant was that if I am in a good position to see it, I should be able to tell if it is in or out. IE straighten that damn thing out so I can tell. I see some shooters who keep the crook in their finger and then it just becomes a depth perception thing and that's where this comes in IMO I lay mine right on the frame as I think it gives better control than holding it way out.

To the topic: I think this is the toughest of all calls we can make. I'm 100% on three shooters and one of those was an AD. I have given the finger warning a few times and I was pretty sure I was right, but I will not DQ on "pretty sure." There can be a problem where an RO thinks he sees more than he can.

The problem is that some RO's apply the rules (without interpretation) and then we have situations that are difficult to handle.

We had an RO at the last Florida Open that gave out several finger warnings after the ULSC to the folks on my squad. We were mostly "M" shooters and I thought the percentage of warnings was very high. In this situation we had 2 targets that were about 45 degress apart and were partially visible from one spot. To increase the available target area, folks were taking a lateral step during the transition to expose more of the second target. The RO (and the shooter) were almost static and that gave the RO a good vantage point to observe without movement. 75% of our shooters (myself included) did not take our finger out of the guard during the transition. We were in a shooting box, with targets visible and gun mounted. I do not see how you can make a finger call if you are in a free fire zone with the gun "mounted" and targets visible. Definitely NOT a call that I would make or support.

[SingleStacker45]

I think there needs to be some consideration from the RO on the intent of the rule. Seems like if the gun is down range in a safe direction and there is a posibility of engaging a target there should be no DQ. If the muzzle is not in a safe direction during the move or there is no possibility of engaging the target than there should be a DQ. Seems like there has to be a jdgement by the RO.

Mule

[AZ38super]

- if he is not sure he will normally warn you.

This is actually not an option. This was a question of major dispute in class and on my recent RO test. The only option in the rule book is a DQ.

I have seen many many times where someone was warned of trigger and thought this should be an option but that is not how it is written.

The fault is on the shooter for not making it clear and the RO must do their best to make a correct judgement call when the time arrives.

"Actually," that is wrong... you can issue a safety warning at any time during the cof per:

8.6.1

No assistance of any kind can be given to a competitor during a course

of fire, except that any Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue

safety warnings to a competitor at any time. Such warnings will not be

grounds for the competitor to be awarded a reshoot.

I will, damn well, say finger if I'm not positive and DQ if I'm sure. If I see someone approaching the 180 I will also give a muzzle warning, providing there is time. Let's face it... in most of these cases it is a new shooter. If it's an A and up by the time you see it it has already happened and all you are left with is STOP. It's helpful to be able to say finger or muzzle when a guy is close or you "think" it's there or close. If you know you DQ, but I would rather prevent it than DQ for it. If someone is approaching the 180 I would rather have said muzzle at the 175 and prevent the break than have the break and possibly someone getting injured. I will error on safety side every time. A lot of new shooters have a want for speed, but little in the way of gun handling skills. This gives us a way to put their mind back on safety since we can't say. "Slow your ass down!" Although I have given that advice after the cof was closed.

As I stated in my May RO certification class this was a question on the final test.

I answered the following:

It is a judgment call for the RO, in most first time cases he may call out a verbal warning to the competitor, repeated violation can result in a match DQ. 8.5.1, Appendix A3 and 10.5.10

and was corrected to simply:

match DQ. 8.5.1, Appendix A3 and 10.5.10

I stated the same points as many stated here but I lost in the end. This was why I missed my 100%

Edited June 11, 2008 by AZ38super

[9x21]

You cannot DQ a person because the RO was unable to get into a position where they could easily detemine that the finger was definitely out of the guard. Saying that it is the shooters responsibility to make it visible is not acceptable because he cannot control (or even be aware) of the RO's position.

I agree.

Maybe we can all paint our fingernails a nice bright color

I think the real issue in this case was the shooter engaging anything?

And what is engagement?

One look at that stage, and there was plenty to shoot at while moving.

and that is where the problem with fingers & free fire zones begins........IMHO of course

Oh yeah, I shot that stage soon after the incident.

You can bet I was thinking about my finger all the time!

Edited June 11, 2008 by 9x21

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

I have followed this closely and read every argument. My question would be what is the experience of the RO and is he truly a NROI certified RO or a shooter with a timer?

We all know help is hard to find for matches and sometimes you do not have a person with the proper experience making these calls. I would like to know the answer on this one.