Did I screw up?

[ima45dv8]

I agree with ima45dv8, no cause for a DQ.

The 10 procedurals are what I would have called.

No coaching after the MR command.

If/when the shooter disagrees with the call, it should bump up to the CRO and then the Range Master..not Match Director (though they may be one in the same for a local match...always a good idea to spell that out before the match, btw).

It's not only a good idea, but required under the new rulebook (reprinted here in case anyone missed it):

7.3.3 Matches of all Levels shall publicly publish or announce to competitors,

the identity of the Match Director, Range Master, Stats Officer or

other match officials as appropriate to the level of match.

[lugnut]

In fact, the shooter that we're talking about is actually the person that read the stage description for the squad out loud.

He knew the course description.

This part sounds strange. Why would this shooter read the course description??

[SA Friday]

In fact, the shooter that we're talking about is actually the person that read the stage description for the squad out loud.

He knew the course description.

This part sounds strange. Why would this shooter read the course description??

At the standard club match in CO, there are no dedicated RO's, so at the beginning of each new stage someone from the squad reads the course description and written stage brief to everyone in the squad right before the walk-through.

[Jim Norman]

That is also how it works in Eastern PA and NJ. Squads have RO's embedded and we all work so we all can shoot. Someone reads the WSB and we take turns on the timer and board.

Without reading all the various posts, (I did read some) I looked at the WSB, it shows a clearly defined shooting area and also states quite clearly to engage targets from within the shooting area.

Now, if he steeped back WITHIN the shooting area, no procedural, no penalty, but since he apparently stepped back out of the Shooting Area, and from the drawing apparently gained a significant advantage, a per shot penalty is appropriate.

Jim

[lugnut]

In fact, the shooter that we're talking about is actually the person that read the stage description for the squad out loud.

He knew the course description.

This part sounds strange. Why would this shooter read the course description??

At the standard club match in CO, there are no dedicated RO's, so at the beginning of each new stage someone from the squad reads the course description and written stage brief to everyone in the squad right before the walk-through.

Fair enough. Having enough staff to run matches is a tough thing sometimes. Of course there are rules that need to be followed no question. I guess I'd consider giving a reshoot in this situation- I certainly understand why in most cases that wouldn't be allowed. Of course knowing the shooter and trying to figure out his real intent is a mind game no one can do. He either tried to game it to the max or had a mental fart. If he knows anything about shooting USPSA I'd find it hard to believe that he could think he could do something so blatantly obvious and get away with it. Personally if that happened to me... I'd suck it up, take the procedurals and move on. Leaving a club match for something like that is... well... childish. Every mistake I make helps me become a better shooter- that's the way I see it.

[George Jones]

I guess I'd consider giving a reshoot in this situation- I certainly understand why in most cases that wouldn't be allowed.

A reshoot would be an unlikely outcome in the event as described.

When the "Are You Ready?" command is given, if the shooter does not reply in the negative, he essentailly states that he is indeed ready (the implication being that he understand the requirements of the stage and is prepared to go). Since the shooter indicated he was ready (by not replying in the negative) a reshoot would not be justified.

You pays attention or you pays the price. Nothing in the rules allows reshoots for lack of attention or misinterpretation.

In other words, shooter brain farts do not constitute Range Equipment Failure.

[ima45dv8]

I guess I'd consider giving a reshoot in this situation- I certainly understand why in most cases that wouldn't be allowed.

A reshoot would be an unlikely outcome in the event as described.

When the "Are You Ready?" command is given, if the shooter does not reply in the negative, he essentailly states that he is indeed ready (the implication being that he understand the requirements of the stage and is prepared to go). Since the shooter indicated he was ready (by not replying in the negative) a reshoot would not be justified.

You pays attention or you pays the price. Nothing in the rules allows reshoots for lack of attention or misinterpretation.

In other words, shooter brain farts do not constitute Range Equipment Failure.

George, I'm surprised you would use such an undignified and derogatory term.

We should refer to it as , "Cerebral Flatulence".

And no reshoot for CF.

[D.Hayden]

The 10 procedurals are what I would have called.

Why only 10?

[ima45dv8]

From the opening post:

"On the buzzer he steps back a couple steps, engages the 5 targets on the left with 2 rounds each. He engaged all of them outside the shooting area. He then finishes the stage without any further procedurals or issues."

Per shot fired for significant advantage. Now if your question was about whether or not to add on some more penalties for not following the WSB, or some other such thing...

10.2.3 Where multiple penalties are assessed in the above cases, they must not

exceed the maximum number of scoring hits that can be attained by the

competitor. For example, a competitor who gains an advantage while

faulting a Fault Line where only four metal targets are visible will

receive one procedural penalty for each shot fired while faulting, up to

a maximum of four procedural penalties, regardless of number of shots

fired.

[D.Hayden]

Thanks.. I read right over that.. I was thinking he shot all the paper from outside..

[lugnut]

I guess I'd consider giving a reshoot in this situation- I certainly understand why in most cases that wouldn't be allowed.

A reshoot would be an unlikely outcome in the event as described.

When the "Are You Ready?" command is given, if the shooter does not reply in the negative, he essentailly states that he is indeed ready (the implication being that he understand the requirements of the stage and is prepared to go). Since the shooter indicated he was ready (by not replying in the negative) a reshoot would not be justified.

You pays attention or you pays the price. Nothing in the rules allows reshoots for lack of attention or misinterpretation.

In other words, shooter brain farts do not constitute Range Equipment Failure.

I hear what you are saying and maybe I'm drifting from the OP... and I've only been doing USPSA for a short time but in this case where you don't have enough SOs to effectively run a match without extra help (meaning sharing SOing, shooters reading the COF, etc) isn't it best for the sport to encourage shooters to help out? If I were a new shooter in the squad I'd be a little leary of jumping in to help out. I understand there are rules to be followed but we're talking about a club match. What's best- to adhere to the rules but possibly intimidate shooters from helping out?

I know this is a slippery slope argument but sometimes I think there has to be some judgement calls. (I'm talking in general context here now).

This is a very interesting subject as I've been very active in IDPA and we are constantly discussing these types of scenarios. We've seen high level shooters "bump" the SO and get a reshoot, I've heard shooters vehmently arguing that their single shoot was a perfect double, etc. On the other hand many SOs will usually do what they can to help out new shooters. No new shooter wants to look like a fool by making obvious mistakes.

Like I said, personally I'd take the 10 procedurals and move on...

[Singlestack]

If the shooter stepped back and breaks a few shots by accident without gaining an advantage, it would by one procedural penalty; if he steps back and gains an advantage by having more targets available to shoot at – it would be penalties per shot fired; if he steps back to specifically gain an advantage then it would be a Match DQ per 10.6.1. …failing to comply with the reasonable directions of a Match Official… The question still is which reasonable directions can be construed as more important than the other: stage description or RO permission to step back. (I think I dug myself to deep by now).

How does one "break a few shots by accident"?

How does a RO read a shooters mind and call a DQ for trying to "gain a advantage? I believe thats what Procedural penalties are for.

[sslav]

To clarify there was a rear fault line made of wood. There were no other obstacles other than the forward fault line.

That means nothing. It was obviously there only because the stage builder had too much time and an extra piece of wood on his hands.

[ipscgal]

That means nothing. It was obviously there only because the stage builder had too much time and an extra piece of wood on his hands.

Actually it means the stage builder was following the stage diagram. Correctly delineating the back of the shooting area with a fault line that met USPSA's rule book discription of a fault line. rule: 2.2.1.1

[Jim Norman]

That means nothing. It was obviously there only because the stage builder had too much time and an extra piece of wood on his hands.

Actually it means the stage builder was following the stage diagram. Correctly delineating the back of the shooting area with a fault line that met USPSA's rule book discription of a fault line. rule: 2.2.1.1

Knowing Slav, I am pretty sure that he said what he did with his tongue firmly placed in check.

The shooter Screwed Up. Pure and simple. OR he deliberately tried to cheat. This I don't want to believe.

Jim

[XRe]

No, because the rules do not make any provisions for what is to happen if 3.2.2 is not followed.

Sure they do. Its called an Arbitration Committee... and you'd normally get a reshoot out of it. However... local matches typically do not have an assigned RO, and its generally up to the squads as a whole to be clear on what's going on (since several on the squad might RO through the running of the stage). Its also quite normal for there not to be a formal reading of the course description (which might be sloppy and lazy, but....).

If the course were set up as it reads, its quite clear. For all you knew, the guy was telling you that he was going to kick a leg back in a drop-step maneuver in order to get moving forward. I mean "I'm going to step back" is pretty ambiguous. He didn't say "I'm going to step back, and engage those targets down the side from back here..." or whatever.

[VegasOPM]

All I can say is that stories like this make me really love my club. If someone screwed up like that with us, and then complained, the mocking would never abate. I can see the rest of the squad saying at the next stage "okay, I'm going to knock down this white target so I can see these targets better..."

[kgunz11]

Thanks.. I read right over that.. I was thinking he shot all the paper from outside..

I reckons I read over that too. Disregard my last question.

[SA Friday]

The shooter Screwed Up. Pure and simple. OR he deliberately tried to cheat. This I don't want to believe.

Jim

Depending on how you would classify it, I would suspect the shooter was attempting to "litigate" a reshoot after he realized he was a dumb-ass and stepped out of the shooting area. When it didn't work, his narcisism kicked in and he left.

There's a history here, and a track record that hasn't been mentioned. rtr, to his credit, is the type of guy to review what he could have done to make this situation not happen or better (and not mention the history). Unfortunately, I doubt there was anything anyone could have done differently short of the shooter to change the outcome.

ME? I would love to mention the history here, but fear the flex-hammer.

[coldchar]

I guess I'd consider giving a reshoot in this situation- I certainly understand why in most cases that wouldn't be allowed.

A reshoot would be an unlikely outcome in the event as described.

When the "Are You Ready?" command is given, if the shooter does not reply in the negative, he essentailly states that he is indeed ready (the implication being that he understand the requirements of the stage and is prepared to go). Since the shooter indicated he was ready (by not replying in the negative) a reshoot would not be justified.

You pays attention or you pays the price. Nothing in the rules allows reshoots for lack of attention or misinterpretation.

In other words, shooter brain farts do not constitute Range Equipment Failure.

Always meant to ask, are you the one driving that helicopter? If so, that looks a little bit outside of its normal range of operation?

Jim G

Edited November 24, 2008 by coldchar

[George Jones]

Always meant to ask, are you the one driving that helicopter? If so, that looks a little bit outside of its normal range of operation?

Jim G

Flew that model for 12 years, but never quite so "positively".

The picture is real. It's from a military experimental flight test protocol.

Wish I'd been there. ------> ------>

[Tom Freeman]

Depending on how you would classify it, I would suspect the shooter was attempting to "litigate" a reshoot after he realized he was a dumb-ass and stepped out of the shooting area. When it didn't work, his narcisism kicked in and he left.

A reshoot was in fact was the first thing he demanded when I agreed with rtr's call of 10 procedurals. I was the guy on the clipboard.

He is the one that real the stage description to the squad and *he* volunteered to go first.

When he started getting pissed at me, I referred him directly to the match director who was also on our squad. Then he complained about the guy that designed the stage. Oh wait, same guy. And I am pretty sure the MD also set most of that stage up. Of the 10-12 people on our squad I think all but 3 were either an RO or a CRO. We all agreed with the call.

I hate to see anyone leave a stage/match feeling like they got screwed, but getting nasty with the RO/CRO and the MD is bullshit. Be a man and learn from your mistakes. I hope this guy takes up golf so I never have to see him again.

[Flexmoney]

We don't need to talk about the individual here, only the rule. I think it's been covered.

CLOSED