Verbal stage description interpretation

[Jack T]

This question may have been asked in the past, but I am also using this as a means of venting, as I have never been so infuriated at an USPSA match in my 30 years of shooting as I was today.

This was a local match in Florida.

Stage 6 consisted of 8 paper targets. Verbal stage brief: Hands relaxed at sides, toes touching lines, upon start signal, shoot em as you see em, with a mandatory reload required. (or words to that effect)

I see no problem with the intent of the stage, but we had one entire squad shoot the eight targets and then make a mandatory reload after they were finished shooting the targets and say, "I am finished". The reload was/is not on the clock.

I was totaly blown away when I heard the entire squad shot it like this. Not one person on that squad had the nads to say, I don't believe that is the intent of the stage, and go clarify it with the Match Director.

To me this is a complete lack of character and we loose the integrity of our sport by allowing this to happen. Someone on that squad should have stood up and done the right thing.

This is beyond gamming a stage and these were all experienced shooters with years of shooting USPSA/IPSC matches.

Of course it is best to have a written stage description, but that is not always possible at the club level. I feel it is our responsibility as fellow shooters to ensure the intregity of the match/sport if we see this hapening.

My question, is there an applicable rule in the rulebook that applies to this situation? I am not current on some of the new changes, my being overseas and such. I believe there is a rule about "Intent".

Regards,

Jack Travers

Edited May 9, 2009 by Jack T

[Nik Habicht]

There's no such thing as stage designer's intent. Written stage descriptions are a must --- and don't need to be overly complicated. We've been known to draw/write some on the back of a target the morning of the match.....

Mandatory reload required is different from "Mandatory reload required after the start signal and prior to firing the last shot......."

Bottom line: Verbal only stage descriptions do a disservice to all competitors at a match. Non-specific written descriptions may still leave gaping holes for competitors to legitimately drive through.....

[herky]

I understand why you feel the way you do..........but, as Nik says, there is no such thing as designer's intent. Written or oral, you leave a hole that big, someone is going to drive the Mack truck thru it, legally.

[jmaass]

Jack:

I don't know your experience level with USPSA competition, but if you have not already, I suggest that you take a Range Office class. It's not personal: I suggest that **everyone** should take a Range Office class!

Many people I know have noted that their shooting performance and their understanding of the rules was greatly enhanced by the RO class, even if they never plan to serve as a range officer at a match.

[styx]

Nik said it all. With the stage desciption worded that way, I would have reloaded after my last shot too. A good WRITTEN stage brief is a mandatory part of stage design. Without it, a lot of doors are left open for opportunistic people. The person that put this stage together should use it as a learning experience and apply the knowledge in the future.

[Skizeks]

Local club match maybe not alot os squads. Could have been easy to go back and ask the other squads how it was shot!

If you are trying to say the intent of the designer was to do a reload after you are finished shooting, well unless they have never designed or shot a stage before you can't honestly tell your self that they wanted to through a reload away. Sometimes you have to hope people have some common sense when they see things like this.

Duane

[blkbrd]

Jack;

If I would have gotten off my butt & made it today I would have been livid also, especially if I lost to several shooters by just a couple of percent.

Haven't seen the scores yet, but its a highly completive group of B-GM guys.

I am a gamer big-time, but I would have drawn performed the reload then hosed away.

Everyone is right about verbal vs. written stages, but someone should have said something?

The stage should be tossed and taken as a learning lesson to all.

By the way Jack has more "experience" than the vast majority of board members.

Edited May 9, 2009 by blkbrd

[Fireant]

Of course it is best to have a written stage description, but that is not always possible at the club level. I feel it is our responsibility as fellow shooters to ensure the intregity of the match/sport if we see this hapening.

Why not? I always have them at my match. It does not take much time at all to grab a piece of paper and write it out. I hate going to matches that don't have a WSB. There is one match that when I choose to go I accept that they will not have a WSB, I don't like it, but I like the group that shoots there.

[ihatepickles]

By the way Jack has more "experience" than the vast majority of board members.

Huh? So?

Toss out the stage if match director feels like some shooters shot it in an unintended way. Same stuff happens with appearing targets that are accessible prior to activating the target. Invariably someone figures it out, shoots the weird angle statically, then triggers the mechanism after the last shot (off the clock), Those folks who didn't see the COF shot that way cry foul since they didn't shoot it like that. I don't believe intent ever is a factor in USPSA matches, freestyle is the order of the day.

I don't like hearing about this kind of stuff but informal stage briefings seem to always cause this. I know it takes a bit of time to write these things down and people still get mad if the written stage briefing gets gamed, but hopefully matches go better in the future because of these kinds of disputes.

[steel1212]

Same stuff happens with appearing targets that are accessible prior to activating the target. Invariably someone figures it out, shoots the weird angle statically, then triggers the mechanism after the last shot (off the clock), Those folks who didn't see the COF shot that way cry foul since they didn't shoot it like that. I don't believe intent ever is a factor in USPSA matches, freestyle is the order of the day.

I had to look that up as I was under the impression you must actiavate a mover BEFORE shooting it. Rules say you just must activate it.

9.9.3 Moving scoring targets will always incur failure to shoot at and miss

penalties if a competitor fails to activate the mechanism, which initiates

the target movement.

I'm a gamer and if the "verbal" walk through was, "gun loaded and holsters, shoot targets as you see them, perform a mandatory reload." I would have shot the 6 targets then reloaded off the clock and said done. Hopefully next time there will be a WSB or at least a better walk through.

In my opinion a WSB isn't to much to ask for. It doesn't take much time to write one down if you don't have a pictured one done up before hand. It keeps everything the same for all shooters. If somebody games a stage and you didn't shot it that way.....they call it freestyle for a reason and I've won and lost several of those stages because I saw or did not see something.

[Jack T]

By the way Jack has more "experience" than the vast majority of board members.

Huh? So?

Toss out the stage if match director feels like some shooters shot it in an unintended way. Same stuff happens with appearing targets that are accessible prior to activating the target. Invariably someone figures it out, shoots the weird angle statically, then triggers the mechanism after the last shot (off the clock), Those folks who didn't see the COF shot that way cry foul since they didn't shoot it like that. I don't believe intent ever is a factor in USPSA matches, freestyle is the order of the day.

I don't like hearing about this kind of stuff but informal stage briefings seem to always cause this. I know it takes a bit of time to write these things down and people still get mad if the written stage briefing gets gamed, but hopefully matches go better in the future because of these kinds of disputes.

I am not talking about one or two shooters here. What infuriated me, is the fact the whole squad shot it like this. Not one of them had the morale conviction to say, "Hey, I am going to check with the MD and see about this."

It destroys the integrity of the stage, the match and the integrity of our sport. I am not talking about gaming a stage within the first and last shot fired. I am talking about making a reload after the last shot fired/off the timer. In my humble opinion, and thats all it is, this is not acceptable.

I am a Master Class Shooter and have been involved with the sport since 1979.

Jack

[jmaass]

Local club match maybe not alot os squads. Could have been easy to go back and ask the other squads how it was shot!

If you are trying to say the intent of the designer was to do a reload after you are finished shooting, well unless they have never designed or shot a stage before you can't honestly tell your self that they wanted to through a reload away. Sometimes you have to hope people have some common sense when they see things like this.

Duane

Au contraire, mon frere!

I have designed a lot of stages, several have been used at USPSA Area Matches of over the years, and even a few have been used at USPSA National Matches.

I have designed most courses with expectation that each shooter will use his brain by reading the course description and solve the problem in the best way he sees. That's all the shooters in the above example did. If you chose to use the most restrictive solution rather than the one that best solved the problem, you lost.

I've written stage descriptions that resulted in shooters doing things I didn't expect. Sometimes it trivialized the shooting problem I wanted to present, but it wsn't their fault, it was mine. Smile and learn.

All of which has no impact on the case described above.

• It does not matter what the designer "intended";
  
• It does not matter how any other shooter or squad shot the stage;
  
• It does not matter what your "common sense" says;
  

What matters is what the designer put on the paper in writing (or, in this case, as verbally briefed). As the briefing was described above, placing the mandatory reload after all shots are fired is the best solution of the problem. And solving the provlem is what practical shooting is supposed to be about.

Freestyle means freestyle. One fails to engage the brain before shooting at their own peril.

Edited May 10, 2009 by jmaass

[jkrispies]

Bottom line: it was the designer's fault... and I'll call it a fault because I'd put money down that it was unintentional. He should take note not to make the same mistake again. By the same token, you (and everybody reading this post, me included) should be duly warned to watch for this and exploit it in the future. To me, those who decry "gaming" and "gamers" are harking on moot issues as long as the rules remain unviolated, as in this case. Look at it like this: when Schwarzkopf ran through Iraq, nobody complained afterwards, "Hey, the Iraqi's designed their defenses for a totally different attack-- you weren't supposed to go that way! Wrong intent! Re-do!" He won, period, and congratulations to him.

[boo radley]

I have heard a great many oral stage instructions get lost in translation -- even simple things like the start position -- and I do agree that exploiting the stage weakness, without checking with the MD first, is poor sportsmanship.

Who's to say who heard what? If it's an obvious weakness, why not at least get the MD to carefully repeat the instructions, before telling him, "Hey -- I don't want to bust your chops, but I'm going to do X, Y, Z ?"

If there IS a WSB, that's been designed at leisure, I'd feel differently -- the instructions are explicit, and not based on what a shooter in one squad *thinks* he remembered hearing a couple hours earlier during the stage brief, but doesn't want to double-check.

[mactiger]

What matters is what the designer put on the paper in writing (or, in this case, as verbally briefed). As the briefing was described above, placing the mandatory reload after all shots are fired is the best solution of the problem. And solving the provlem is what practical shooting is supposed to be about.

Freestyle means freestyle. One fails to engage the brain before shooting at their own peril.

+1. Well said.

Troy

[Jack T]

I have heard a great many oral stage instructions get lost in translation -- even simple things like the start position -- and I do agree that exploiting the stage weakness, without checking with the MD first, is poor sportsmanship.

Who's to say who heard what? If it's an obvious weakness, why not at least get the MD to carefully repeat the instructions, before telling him, "Hey -- I don't want to bust your chops, but I'm going to do X, Y, Z ?"

If there IS a WSB, that's been designed at leisure, I'd feel differently -- the instructions are explicit, and not based on what a shooter in one squad *thinks* he remembered hearing a couple hours earlier during the stage brief, but doesn't want to double-check.

This is where my thoughts are. Maybe I am old school and believe we all have a responsibility to our sport to try to maintain its integrity.

I feel if we condone this type of sportsmanship we will destroy ourselves from within.

Gaming a stage is one thing, but when you know damn good and well you are supposed to make a mandatory reload between the first and last shot fired, but the MD did not think he has to treat you like new shooters and use lawyer speak for the stage description, then we have a problem.

Some of you guys can say all you want about flawed stage descriptions, solving the problem, and such, but seriously, we all know when we cross the line between gamemanship and unsportsmanlike conduct. I would at least hope so, or maybe it doesn't matter anymore and this is acceptable to many of us to try and win at any cost.

Oh well, whatever floats your boat!

Jack

[ima45dv8]

Even though this isn't the Hate forum, the following forum guideline applies here as well as anywhere else:

Hate Rants

Rants involving shooters, firearms, or shooting related manufacturers, such as but not limited to - IPSC, IDPA, USPSA, Colt, Brownell's, Dillon, or Match Staff - are NOT PERMITTED. Brian's Forums is not the place to resolve customer service issues or disputes you may have with a manufacturer, dealer, gunsmith, or individual.

I get Jack's point, and I'm glad Nik chimed in with some of his patented wisdom regarding intent. Dispite that, these forums are not the place for this. Half a story makes a great story, but it's still only half.

CLOSED.