Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

WS "DQ?"


shooterbenedetto

Recommended Posts

This shooter fell and the muzzle pointed up in the sky. I know in IPSC rules, it is a DQ!

but for us in the States under Uspsa rules it is not because I see a lot of shooters

point their muzzle up in the sky especially when reloading or taking out the mag.

BAD PRACTICE!! for most of us.

Comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno about that one....

You still have to break the 180 yes? He didn't fire, so I dunno how that is unsafe.

The only possible DQ I see is MAYBE a sweep of the weak hand on the way down.

Edited by JThompson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only possible DQ I see is MAYBE a sweep of the weak hand on the way down.

I agree, and it is a very weak DQ if that is the case, it was not conclusive to me that this was even the case

Edited by zhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This shooter fell and the muzzle pointed up in the sky. I know in IPSC rules, it is a DQ!

If he breaks the vertical 90, it's a DQ in IPSC. Not breaking the 90 may be a DQ if a lower vertical safety angle is in effect at the range in Bali. I don't know if that's the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could have had finger in the trigger guard---Referee--I mean RO looks like he was able to see the gun at the RO's position.

I don't know about the "90 degree" rule, but did not look like a 180.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This shooter fell and the muzzle pointed up in the sky. I know in IPSC rules, it is a DQ!

If he breaks the vertical 90, it's a DQ in IPSC. Not breaking the 90 may be a DQ if a lower vertical safety angle is in effect at the range in Bali. I don't know if that's the case.

That's what I was thinking. We don't have provisions for declaring an unsafe angle in USPSA but I've read that it can be done in IPSC.

Anyone know if that's the case in Bali? Shred?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that it didn't look like much, but I'm not familiar with IPSC rules vs USPSA rules, I have no idea if there are local rules that pertain to this situation, and most importantly I've learned from first hand experience that video from a single angle is NOT a good tool for determining things like this. I'm assuming these are experienced RO's, and if so the last thing an experienced RO wants to do in his/her career is DQ someone from a WorldShoot so I have to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What IPSC calls the 90 from the backstop is the same as what USPSA calls the 180, I believe. So, no difference there?

(IPSC)10.5.2 If at any time during the course of fire, a competitor allows the muzzle of his handgun to point rearwards,

that is further than 90 degrees from the median intercept of the backstop, or in the case of no backstop, allows

the muzzle to point up range, whether the firearm is loaded or not (limited exceptions: see Rules 5.2.7.3 and

10.5.6).

Just going off the video, I don't see a muzzle angle violation. And, I don't know that the body would allow him to bend enough to break the 180 (his gun arm elbow is planted).

Sweeping or finger might be the DQ ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What IPSC calls the 90 from the backstop is the same as what USPSA calls the 180, I believe. So, no difference there?

(IPSC)10.5.2 If at any time during the course of fire, a competitor allows the muzzle of his handgun to point rearwards,

that is further than 90 degrees from the median intercept of the backstop, or in the case of no backstop, allows

the muzzle to point up range, whether the firearm is loaded or not (limited exceptions: see Rules 5.2.7.3 and

10.5.6).

Just going off the video, I don't see a muzzle angle violation. And, I don't know that the body would allow him to bend enough to break the 180 (his gun arm elbow is planted).

Sweeping or finger might be the DQ ?

That's the only thing I see possible too Flex....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flex, no difference on the 90/180 as you pointed out. But I remember reading they have the right to declare a certain angle of elevation of the muzzle as unsafe (I think it largely depends on local range conditions, how close the general public may be, etc.). I'll look for the reference when I get back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The video titled it DQ, if they did, that would suck big time especially at World Shoot and will definitely contest it using the video.

Neither video nor still images are admissible as evidence in an IPSC arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several issues with the way the RO ran the shooter, not the least of which is that he gave the AYR command while the shooter was still getting set.

Although no one seems to know the actual reason for the DQ, the RO's positioning was not optimum. Given that, I wonder what he could clearly see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shooter recovered quickly and was about to continue when stopped. Can't see the gun obviously in the video, but it certainly does look like he stayed safe and was in control. I vote bogus stoppage and DQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my opinion. I would let him continue..The video titled it DQ, if they did, that would suck big time especially at World Shoot and will definitely contest it using the video. I heard it is very strict INTERNATIONALLY.

11.1.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...