Target discrimination (hand, gun)

[Flexmoney]

A common practice in IDPA seems to be to paint a set of hands on a target to designate it as a no-shoot/penalty target. And, to paint a weapon onto the target to mark it as a threat/shoot target.

- IDPA targets are the same color (brown) on both the front and back.

- USPSA/IPSC targets are brown on one side and white on the other. A shoot target will be presented as brown, while a no-shoot target will be presented as white.

We got to shoot with some of the IDPA regulars at our last USPSA match. During setup, these differences were mentioned. One of the IDPA regulars pined that it would be nice if IDPA used white targets to define their no-shoots. His reason was that...to figure out if an IDPA target was a shoot target or not...he had to drop the gun down so that he could see what was painted on it.

I mentioned that I believed that was the point. IDPA wants target discrimination ("look at the hands") as part of the shooting test.

Anyway...I thought I'd put that our for discussion. Perhaps folks weren't aware of the reasoning (and, perhaps I didn't get the reasoning right?).

[rvb]

Tactics asside, a couple of thoughts:

-- "Hands" are required on no-shoots, guns/knives/etc "may be" painted on shoot targets.

-- You get a walkthough MOST of the time so before the buzzer you SHOULD already know which targets to shoot.

-- If you are snapping your eyes on the transition and not following the front sight, you should not have to lower the gun. If no walkthrough is given the transitions might be slower, but seldom is it necessary to bring the gun down if you really are leading with your eyes.

-- Pay attention at the walkthrough... lots of stage designers these days like to make the gun/knife/etc on the shoot target = hard cover.

-- In low-light w/ a flashlight, the "hands" can make discerning a NS actually easier than all white or all brown due the color of the light or the brightness.

-- Beware of the tendancy to shoot "at" the gun/knife etc vs at the center of the -0. I see this a lot RO'ing. Often the gun/knife is painted under the -0 ring down in the -1 but it has more pasters on it than the A zone.

I think your reasoning behind the difference is right on.

-rvb

Edited December 12, 2008 by rvb

[dajarrel]

It's been a few years since I shot IDPA but when I was shooting it regularly, that seemed like the point. Each stage is scenario based. Each and every target was to be evaluated and then dealt with accordingly.

In IPSC, our game is a game of speed and accuracy. We pretty much know which targets are shoot or noshoot. We can usually get this information in our walkthrough.

So Flex, IMHO, it is as you noted, "...I mentioned that I believed that was the point. IDPA wants target discrimination ("look at the hands") as part of the shooting test."

I think too, that this is why it is difficult (but still fun) for one discipline to cross over to the other on an infrequent basis. I, for one, was always drawing proceedurals for doing the wrong thing

But it was sure fun.

fwiw

dj

[p99shooter]

... our game is a game of speed and accuracy.

So is IDPA

There are very few times when you don't get a walkthrough that would let you know where the no shoots are. When I know where they are, I don't even look at them. I'm transitioning to the shoot targets and picking my spot to hit. It's almost like they are not there.

There's two circumstances that I can think of where I actually have to look to see if a target is a no-shoot: "blind" stages, and stages where there is a rotating no-shoot that is chosen before the start of the stage. This is usually done by placing some marker, like a pin-on badge, to a target.

The good thing is there won't be that many no shoots. Rules say that there can only be 1 non-threat for every 3 threat targets. Combine that with the max round count rule for a stage (18), and you pretty much limited to 3 or less no-shoots on any stage.

[Joe D]

I kind of like having threat targets with a gun or knife on them and leave the non-threat bare. Would seem to be more "real world".

[Jim Watson]

I agree with Joe, in principle, but that is not The Rule.

[Steve J]

We paint guns, knives, and hands religiously. I would like to see some enterprising company manufacture the targets with a gun pre-printed on the face and hands on the reverse. I like the way USPSA targets are reversible.

[freeidaho]

We paint guns, knives, and hands religiously. I would like to see some enterprising company manufacture the targets with a gun pre-printed on the face and hands on the reverse. I like the way USPSA targets are reversible.

One of the alternates to IDPA, I think it is TSA has the hands and gun marked on the target in perforations. Then all the setup crew needs is a wide permanent marker to draw along the dotted line. Pretty clever indeed. However it means all targets are marked the same, which probably isn't a good idea. Having to actually look for the object, where ever it is, and then identify it is a good thing.

kr

[Joe4d]

I have seen some silliness, like having to yell "drop the knife!" or "drop the gun" or say nothing before shooting each target on a stage depending on whether it had a gun or knife painted on it. Screw it up and it was a procedural. I also got burned twice by the white hands thing. I was shooting a major where you had a very brief walk through then the lights went out. 5 stages in the dark followed by the same or very similar stages in the daytime. In one room to the right, targets where laying sideways, if you pied the door opening the no shoot got drilled in the head as you couild see half the target before seeing the hands. The stage was a catch 22, if you leaned out far enough to figure out which was the threat. You got nailed with a cover penalty. That particular match was full of traps like that. It seamed like more of a test of memory games than shooting. The only way to do well at that match was to be a member of the match staff and have the cof's memorized from setup and scoring in the light. Come to think of it that was the last IDPA match I shot.

[steel1212]

I shoot both games and I break down both types of stages the same. During the walk through know what to shoot and what not to shoot. Know when your going to reload and when not to. Its the same for both games. Now when they pull crap like Joe said and put nothing but the head of a Nonthreat out so you have to go farther to see if its a shoot or not then you get dinged with a cover call is kind of BS. Sure in the walk through you should have known it was a nonthreat but in the spirit of the game your not going to know it unless you see the hands and they are lower on the target.

Side note, I put up a white target one day when helping setup IDPA, last match I think actually. It was taken down as quickly as it went up and you should have seen the looks I got. Yeah, I forgot....sue me :-)

Edited December 13, 2008 by steel1212

[kdmoore]

I'll add to r.v.b's thought thread ....

When they are putting cut outs of knives and guns on the targets, and then mixing them up ...

Make sure it is a knife and not a cell phone

But that was many bullets ago.

[Chills1994]

[Pittbug]

I think it might help novices, since their minds tend go to putty once the buzzer sounds. But I don't think it's going to make any difference for seasoned shooters because they'll have the stage planned out in their minds even before the LAMR.

I once shot a surprise stage where the hands were moved to different targets for each shooter, so that made it challenging, but it was the same challenge for everyone. We all had to confirm the target before shooting, so you just did what you had to, depending on your height, body/gun position and relationship to the targets.

[JKSNIPER]

Flex and all,

A long time ago when the range staff used to run the tactical training for our ES Unit we had them put out those picture targets you guys are referring to.....the ones where you can interchange the hands so one time it holds a cell phone and another time it has a weapon in them?

Well this guy put the weapon one in the targets hand but in the other hand was a police/sheriff shield/badge.

(Important note the weapon was pointed directly at the guy going through the course)

I go through the course and when its finished we do a walk through. (The Course was shot "cold" no one knew it ahead of time nor could we observe it from our waiting area.)

We get to the target in question and the range dweeb starts to give me guff for shooting this target. "You shot a good guy! You can see his badge!"

I then pointed out that this plainclothes guy (target) was pointing a weapon at a uniformed police officer.

I informed him that I did not take the time to look at what was in his other hand once I saw the weapon pointed at me.

This guy then started making noises about what I had done and I got pissed and said

"If you're off duty and carrying a firearm and get involved in a deadly force situation it is incumbent on YOU to make the effort to not get shot by responding officers. If YOU point a weapon at ME you're going to get shot. I don't give a scheiss what you have in you other hand.

If the gun is pointed at me...then you'd better have your life insurance paid up 'cos I'm shooting you.

Don't want to get shot? Then don't point weapons at uniformed police officers. Point it at the ground or the sky or whatever but do NOT point a weapon at me because that signifys hostile intent and I'm not waiting to do 20 questions to find out if you really really really mean it or not."

The guy started trying to justify his position when my C.O. who was listening to all this said "Good point John." Then he turned to the range dweeb and said "Whats next?"

My point is if you make it a COF and have this situation in there expect a few good guy targets to get shot.

Try to position them so the weapons presented do NOT point at the shooter going through the course.

JK

[texan]

I kind of like having threat targets with a gun or knife on them and leave the non-threat bare. Would seem to be more "real world".

Wow. My local club has a match called real world gun and the threat targets get a gun and the non-threat targets are left bare.

[Steve J]

One of the IDPA regulars pined that it would be nice if IDPA used white targets to define their no-shoots. His reason was that...to figure out if an IDPA target was a shoot target or not...he had to drop the gun down so that he could see what was painted on it.

There's definitely something wrong with the way he is seeing. Even in a blind stage which is exceedingly rare, a non-threat target should be obivious without lowing the gun from the threat targets while shooting. You should also know where all the threat and non-threats are in your mind before the start signal.

[Steve J]

I kind of like having threat targets with a gun or knife on them and leave the non-threat bare. Would seem to be more "real world".

Wow. My local club has a match called real world gun and the threat targets get a gun and the non-threat targets are left bare.

Some IDPA clubs only paint hands on the non-threats and leave the threat targets bare. We use a gun or knife on all threats and hands on the non-threats.

[Ted Murphy]

Most people I know who shoot IDPA look for pasters. Lack of pasters in the -0 is usually the non threat target.

This is a bit tongue in cheek, but it does work most the time.

At one of the earlier nationals the hands on the non threats were made of black card stock and attached to the targets above the shoulders. That created quite a stir at the time.

The rules do specify that an open hand denotes a non threat target. Some clubs paint guns or knives on the targets. It is encouraged but not required.

In my indoor range if the targets from one stage get a bit close to another and I cannot squeeze in a vision barrier, I will paint guns on one of the stages so the shooter can tell them apart in the walk through. That works far better than I thought it would have.

Ted

[detonics]

Ted is correct that some people look at the pasters to determine if it is a threat or not. Pasters = shoot. I guess i am just an azz as when I was setting up, I always shot the non-threats then taped them before the match started. It was kind of funny the number of people this tripped up.

Edited April 7, 2009 by detonics

[Duane Thomas]

The rules do specify that an open hand denotes a non threat target. Some clubs paint guns or knives on the targets. It is encouraged but not required.

"Don't shoot the guys with black gloves!"

[Duane Thomas]

Ted is correct that some people look at the pasters to determine if it is a threat or not. Pasters = shoot. I guess i am just an azz as when I was setting up, I always shot the non-threats then taped them before the match started. It was kind of funny the number of people this tripped up.

You're EVIL.

[Sac Law Man]

Talk about really causing a stir...We had a scenario a few years back that was a blind scenario. The match director painted hands on a pepper popper, almost 90% of all shooters shot it.

[steel1212]

Talk about really causing a stir...We had a scenario a few years back that was a blind scenario. The match director painted hands on a pepper popper, almost 90% of all shooters shot it.

Now that is some sneaky stuff....I like it!

[Duane Thomas]

Talk about really causing a stir...We had a scenario a few years back that was a blind scenario. The match director painted hands on a pepper popper, almost 90% of all shooters shot it.

I love it.