To FTDR or not to FTDR

[Gregg K]

Gregg - Following this logic, all procedurals become FTDRs.

The FTDR is meant to be a "big stick" to whomp someone with. 20 seconds effectively puts someone out of contention for any awards at a major match. If you're going to whomp somebody that hard, it needs to be for something really egregious.

Chuck

This is one of the cases spelled out in the rulebook for an FTDR. I guess you could argue that the shooter didn't do it on purpose and that he did not intend to try to gain an advantage and that no advantage was gained but then we are back to trying to guess about the shooters intent. In cases like this, I as an SO ask the shooter when he looks like he thinks that he is done "does the shooter choose to not complete the COF by reloading and firing the last shot"? I usually get the response "well screw it it's not worth it". I then say "shooters choice, it's 20 seconds, are you through?". Some would say I should not help the shooter but this will eliminate any argument about intent. It is an SO duty to help the shooter through the COF as spelled out in the rulebook page 53.

Certified Safety Officers are the people whose purpose and goal is for all the shooters at the match to have a safe and enjoyable day at the range by directing the shooter through the course of fire.

[revchuck]

I as an SO ask the shooter when he looks like he thinks that he is done "does the shooter choose to not complete the COF by reloading and firing the last shot"?

Gregg - I see where you're coming from here. At a major match in TX, I unloaded and showed clear, and the SO asked, "Are you SURE you're finished?" I then realized that I had failed to engage two targets, reloaded, shot, and then I was finished. I personally can't imagine intentionally not finishing the CoF. Shoot, I finish them in USPSA matches, even when it hurts my score.

If there's no doubt that the shooter intentionally failed to shoot the CoF as specified, then the FTDR is warranted. It just sounds like some folks are eager to pull that trigger, and I don't think that that's a good thing.

[Jim Watson]

At first I was inclined to the hard line. "By Yiminy, he did not reload and fire the last shot, so he gets the FTDR. Says so right here in the rule book."

Then I reread the rule: FTDR = "3. Not reloading to fire one more round because your score will be better even with the miss."

That "because clause" requires that the SO evaluate both the shooter's intent and the alternate history outcome.

Did he do it because he could not reload and put in another shot in 2.5 seconds? You sure about his state of mind?

If you are, would his score have been better? For sure? It doesn't say "might be better", it says "will be better."

This one goes in the bogus subjective rule trash can along with #1 of that heading, aka the dreaded "rule dumping" provision.

[Nik Habicht]

I spend much more time as a USPSA RO than as an IDPA SO --- but I've done the latter at a major match. I can generally tell when someone forgets a target, when someone remembers while unloading, and when someone has no clue when I point out a missed target during scoring. I've seen an A class USPSA shooter be totally certain that he engaged a target --- when I was equally certain he did not. Stuff sometimes happens when people are running a stage....

But you wanted a scoring call: Shooter forgets --- normal penalties.

Shooter remembers before unloading, chooses not to reengage --- FTDR

Shooter finally remembers when you point it out --- normal penalties

Shooter games the stage verbally to not reload, and then shoots it as gamed --- FTDR

Judgment call in every instance, right? Isn't that what they pay us for?

[rubberneck]

Most people equate giving an FTDR with calling someone a cheater but that is not always the case. It is possible to get an FTDR with an honest mistake. It just means that you failed to do something right.

I understand most folks going easy on new shooters because we want them to come back and have a good time. Most of the more competitive shooters that I know want to be scored hard even at club matches so they are better prepared for the sanctioned matches.

I see it a little differently. I view the intent of FTDR as a punishment for Failing to do the right thing. It is for acts that push the envelope on a match DQ for cheating (but don't quite rise to the level of a DQ) or for unsportsmanlike conduct.

IMHO The problem with the FTDR is that it often requires the SO to assume what was going on in the shooters mind. There is a difference between making a mental mistake and intentionally using an inappropriate technique to gain an advantage. I believe the intent of the FTDR is to punish intentional acts not mental mistakes. I could see how some would apply at FTDR. I wouldn't have. Either way you are forced to assume something you can't know for sure. I won't call it unless it is blatantly obvious and I am not shy about making tough calls.

[-JQ-]

NO way a SS or more experienced shooter would forget... since no guns in IDPA load to 12 rounds and most would have no problem remembering this.

I disagree with this part even pros drop footballs...strike out looking...etc. This was the 7th stage of a 98 degree day...actually the bank display said 99 when I left town...I dare say none of us were at the top of our game mentally by that point.

And while I don't really know roxy other than shooting in his squad all day, I can say this wasn't intentional. I think he was as shocked as anyone.

Again the other SO didn't just walk up say say "hey man that was an FTDR" He YELLED ranting about rules and it being a game, blah blah making quite a display...This was while wearing his bright red SO hat...maybe the heat was cooking his brain too. Maybe I just don't like strutting roosters.

It seems to me that there are many rules that have to be assessed quickly and with the discretion of the SO...its a human game...just like the ump he makes a call and that is it - like it or not.

just my 0.02

Still great match.

[Bob Hostetter]

A FTDR is a penalty to be awarded in response to an intential act designed to circumvent the perscribed course of fire to gain an advantage resulting in a better score. An unintential failure to adhere to the course description is awarded a procedural penalty.

One is a mistake, one is a willful act.

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consenus of at least two of them before being awarded. Both the shooter and the SO are likely to have some ego involved in the call and that is something that should not be allowed to influence the decision.

[want2race]

A FTDR is a penalty to be awarded in response to an intential act designed to circumvent the perscribed course of fire to gain an advantage resulting in a better score. An unintential failure to adhere to the course description is awarded a procedural penalty.

One is a mistake, one is a willful act.

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consenus of at least two of them before being awarded. Both the shooter and the SO are likely to have some ego involved in the call and that is something that should not be allowed to influence the decision.

BINGO! If I earned it I'll take it, but if I didn't intentially do something gamey for an advantage I will bring it up with the MD and ask for clearification (rule interpretation). No offense to the SO/RO who made the call but I will want it from another POV. FTDR is pretty serious to me.

I was discussing a different stage before shooting it earlier in the day and it's a good thing I did. I was planning on a tactical reload on the way to cover, since it was directed that I could not shoot the visible targets until behind barrel cover. If your not shooting while moving, you should be reloading while moving right? Wrong. I was informed that I could not reload while exposed to targets. My thinking was, the targets must not be a thread UNTIL I reach the barrels since I can't shoot them until I get to the barrels.

The point? I probably would have been tagged with an FTDR or at least a procedural. Instead I shot it just like everyone else and reloaded from behind the barrels.

Edited July 20, 2008 by want2race

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

None of the discussion has changed my position on the FTDR being a proper penalty. One thing I would like to add, the SO on the stage obviously did not think it was a deserved penalty. I would support his/her decision.

As for the comment made about being loaded to 12, that is a FTDR also.

SOs in this sport like the ROs in USPSA have a thankless job. Someone will always be trying to second guess your call or lack of a call. Whatever the calls are, take them, don't argue, and get over it. Shooters make mistakes, SOs make mistakes, Match Directors make mistakes. if a piece of paper award or a Lucite trophy means that much to you then you need to expand your horizons. I started playing this game in 1999 and have worked a lot of matches. My philosophy has always been that this is supposed to be fun. The day it is not, you will not see me around any more.

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consensus of at least two of them before being awarded.

Any match I have worked, my calls have been backed 100% by the match director. The day that changes, you will see many match staff members stop volunteering.

[steel1212]

A FTDR is a penalty to be awarded in response to an intential act designed to circumvent the perscribed course of fire to gain an advantage resulting in a better score. An unintential failure to adhere to the course description is awarded a procedural penalty.

One is a mistake, one is a willful act.

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consenus of at least two of them before being awarded. Both the shooter and the SO are likely to have some ego involved in the call and that is something that should not be allowed to influence the decision.

+1 this is exactly my point.

If he had loaded 12 and shot 12 with out a reload I would consider that as it would be HUGE advantage completely skipping the reload and still getting the hits.

[lugnut]

Seems to be a lot of varying interpretations of what an SO should or shouldn't do. Seems to me that in both cases below the SO is helping the shooting during the COF. I saw an SO ask a shooter the same thing: "Are you SURE you are finished?", the shooter looked up and realized he left a target unshot. Why is THAT fair when another shooter would get two Mikes and a procedural (or down 10, FTN in IDPA)??? FWIW I just bit my tongue and didn't say a word.

I as an SO ask the shooter when he looks like he thinks that he is done "does the shooter choose to not complete the COF by reloading and firing the last shot"?

Gregg - I see where you're coming from here. At a major match in TX, I unloaded and showed clear, and the SO asked, "Are you SURE you're finished?" I then realized that I had failed to engage two targets, reloaded, shot, and then I was finished. I personally can't imagine intentionally not finishing the CoF. Shoot, I finish them in USPSA matches, even when it hurts my score.

If there's no doubt that the shooter intentionally failed to shoot the CoF as specified, then the FTDR is warranted. It just sounds like some folks are eager to pull that trigger, and I don't think that that's a good thing.

[glock34shooter]

Well I think there is more to this than is the call right or wrong. Was this a sanctioned match? Was the shooter new to IDPA? Does the shooter have a history of making these type of "mistakes" or "brain farts"? I would say that if this is an experienced shooter, then there should with out question be a FTDR. If he was an inexperienced shooter then I would say maybe. You have to accept that if you are an experienced shooter, or at a sanctioned match there is no wiggle room. I will also say that just because the shooter did not gain an advantage, does not mean he did not intend to gain an advantage. The only thing that sounds wierd is that he got a procedual also.

[SteveU]

Does the shooter have a history of making these type of "mistakes" or "brain farts"?

Not that I'm one to talk....

I just wanted to comment that it's pretty interesting how opinions can vary about a situation as described on paper (screen). Clearly there is a subjective nature to the rules. Even the way they were written as expressed in this thread suggest that they need to be interpreted by the SO in order to award a big penalty like a FTDR.

This being the case, it's hard to be objective about it on paper, like people are saying -- trying to define what class the shooter must be in order to know better, or trying to determine the shooter's history of mistakes vs. gaming to determine whether the penalty is deserved.

Seems that the way the rule is written it is intended to be the SO's judgement as to whether the violation was ... for want of a better word ... intentional in order to give the FTDR. The SO didn't. Good call, in my eye.

We're all trying to wrap our brains around what FTDR would be -- spelled out objectively. I suggest after looking at the examples and the description of the rule, it is more like Justice Potter Stewart describing pornography/obscenity, "I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it." (paraphrased)

Also, I hope readers don't get the impression that there was a big fight about it with another SO making a scene. I shot in that squad (right after Roxy) and missed the whole thing. (Then again, I also didn't see a hummingbird feeder hanging by my head -- may say more about my level of awareness than anything else) Overall, it was a fun match and a great squad to shoot with. I encourage all from the KY area to shoot the BGSL IDPA matches.

[kgunz11]

The shooter knew (if I understand the COF) that a reload would be required to complete the course. Failure to do the reload (and thus shoot fewer rounds) is a clear FTDR offense.

Even if the shooter messed up by accident, it appears that a FTDR may have been required.

I agree, if you know you are to fire 12 rounds and you don't, rather you brain fart or not, rather it actually helps your score or not, it is a Failure To Do Right. The possibility of it helping your score is agruable. Knowing you have an extra round is not, and the shooter knew he had an extra round that had to be placed somewhere. The cost of an extra shot on one of the targets would have been null, he might have had a -0.5 sec penalty for the miss, but not a FTDR. He could have relaoded and fired the shot into any of the targets, he knew a reload was required and he simply did not do it, and no doing it is a failure to do right.

Just my opinion. If it happened to me I would not fuss about getting the penalty.

[steel1212]

The shooter knew (if I understand the COF) that a reload would be required to complete the course. Failure to do the reload (and thus shoot fewer rounds) is a clear FTDR offense.

Even if the shooter messed up by accident, it appears that a FTDR may have been required.

I agree, if you know you are to fire 12 rounds and you don't, rather you brain fart or not, rather it actually helps your score or not, it is a Failure To Do Right. The possibility of it helping your score is agruable. Knowing you have an extra round is not, and the shooter knew he had an extra round that had to be placed somewhere. The cost of an extra shot on one of the targets would have been null, he might have had a -0.5 sec penalty for the miss, but not a FTDR. He could have relaoded and fired the shot into any of the targets, he knew a reload was required and he simply did not do it, and no doing it is a failure to do right.

Just my opinion. If it happened to me I would not fuss about getting the penalty.

The miss would be -5 not -0.5, so therefore 2.5 seconds, the procedural for not doing the reload will be another 3 seconds.

But anyway, I see some people saying well if its a new shooter than no but if its Master then yes.....what would be the difference? If your going to do it for one you need to do it for the other and be CONSISTENT. I'm not sure but I think the guy had maybe 3-4 idpa matches under his belt either way it doesn't matter as it either is or isn't and nobody can give me a straight answer. Its either I think he should or I think he shouldn't.

[Nik Habicht]

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consensus of at least two of them before being awarded.

Any match I have worked, my calls have been backed 100% by the match director. The day that changes, you will see many match staff members stop volunteering.

Really? So, if you're wrong, you want the match director to back you anyway? :huh: :o

[kgunz11]

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consensus of at least two of them before being awarded.

Any match I have worked, my calls have been backed 100% by the match director. The day that changes, you will see many match staff members stop volunteering.

Really? So, if you're wrong, you want the match director to back you anyway?

Nik, I think he just wants the MD to stand behind his RO's. And to some extent that needs to happen, but if it is a bad call and other shooters can testify to it, the RO should not get his panties bunched up.

[lugnut]

But anyway, I see some people saying well if its a new shooter than no but if its Master then yes.....what would be the difference? If your going to do it for one you need to do it for the other and be CONSISTENT. I'm not sure but I think the guy had maybe 3-4 idpa matches under his belt either way it doesn't matter as it either is or isn't and nobody can give me a straight answer. Its either I think he should or I think he shouldn't.

From what I remember from my SO class discussions, FTDR is sometimes subjective (unlike breaking a 180 rule for example). It's a reasonable argument that a new shooter could have a brain fart and not intentionally do something like this. This is NOT something an experienced shooter would do.... surely not at the Master level. The lines aren't always clear on this. Our club discusses these things before a match to at least ensure some consistency.

If this was a club match I personally wouldn't give an FTDR to a newer shooter... it's not in the spirit of the sport to scare of a new shooter this way. Sanctioned matches often times require a certain level of experience (whether it's a minimum level of class or prior match experience) so the rules should be more rigid IMO.

It would be great if everything was white and black but it isn't. As long as it's not a safety issue- benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter.

You think this one is tough... try to determine if someone is intentionally dumping rounds to time a better reload!

[Nik Habicht]

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consensus of at least two of them before being awarded.

Any match I have worked, my calls have been backed 100% by the match director. The day that changes, you will see many match staff members stop volunteering.

Really? So, if you're wrong, you want the match director to back you anyway?

Nik, I think he just wants the MD to stand behind his RO's. And to some extent that needs to happen, but if it is a bad call and other shooters can testify to it, the RO should not get his panties bunched up.

Having read Gary here for a while now, I suspect you're right....

....I also wanted to point out that he was less than totally clear with his statement, in case he felt like expanding on it.....

[-JQ-]

As long as it's not a safety issue- benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter.

+1

[Clyde]

ICORE

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

I don't think a FTDR should be awarded solely by the SO. It should be reviewed by the Match Director and/or Range Master, and require a consensus of at least two of them before being awarded.

Any match I have worked, my calls have been backed 100% by the match director. The day that changes, you will see many match staff members stop volunteering.

Really? So, if you're wrong, you want the match director to back you anyway? :huh: :o

Thanks Nick, but I never have been wrong.

My point is, a FTDR or any other penalty needs to be assessed by the SO who sees the violation. It needs to be acted upon by the SO and not a committee. I had this discussion yesterday at a match with a friend. We were talking about round dumping. He stated he will dump a round to go to slide lock. I explained the FTDR so the discussion began. On something like that, The SO has the best advantage to make the call. He can not read your mind but must make a call or not. If the Match Director is consulted, it now is this:

Shooter " I thought I needed that shot." SO: " Why would he need to make up a Down Zero Hit?" Shooter " Just wanted to make sure" Match Director in this case would most likely side with his SO. If he did not, it would be a big mistake on his part.

Match Directors need to back SOs to the hilt. As many have stated in many threads, IDPA rules are subjective and the time to assess a penalty is when it happens. Kind of like when the dog pees on the rug. Punishing him a day later does not good at all.

Gary

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

I will add one thing to what I have posted. Several have mentioned that they would treat this different at a club match than they would at a major. I totally disagree with that. It does the shooter no good whatsoever when he/she attends their first major. They are used to the way they are called at home so they figure it is OK at the major. They then get very disillusioned with major matches and may give up attending.

This also goes for the newer shooter. After an initial break in period of a couple club matches the newer shooter needs to know the rules as good as the Master. It helps them and the sport in the long run. When running newer shooters, I will ask if they need help when it is a club match. If it is obviously a new shooter at a major, I will ask after the run if they would like a suggestion if I see a major problem. I have even gone so far as set up a time for range time to make them more comfortable.

My point is, the rules are the rules and must be the same for everyone or it hurts the sport in the long run and hurts the experience for the shooters.

[GmanCdp]

i say it's better to have happened around home,rather then 9hrs from home,$100.00 match fee,$180.00 motels,$250.00 in gas and $another $100.00 in food and spirits..i think he may have learned this on the cheap....