Mi 3Gun Championship Match - September 20th

[ramcharger]

Here are the names of the stages

1. Rival Gang Invasion (Blind Stage, Started Stage Sleeping in Bedroom)

2. No-Knock Raid (Blind Stage, Started Stage setting off Charge on Door)

3. Fuel Depot (Started shooting .50 Cal. Ma Deuce)

4. Knock-Knock (Blind Stage, Started Stage Breaching Door with Shotgun)

5. Save Bubba (Started Stage Crashing in Helo wearing Night Vision Goggles)

6. Hell House (Blind Stage, Dark House)

7. 0300 Hour (Blind Stage, Started with Bayonet and finding Suppressed Gun of choice)

8. Artillery Out ( Jungle Run Stage)

Edited September 23, 2009 by ramcharger

[SinistralRifleman]

Michigan State 3 Gun Match

Video:

The Michigan State 3 Gun Match hosted by the Livingston Gun Club was certainly a unique experience this year. Five of the eight stages were blind. The shooter had no idea what they were getting into until they went through the door. The shooter had to think much harder during the stages and constantly scan for targets. Two stages in addition to being blind required the shooter to determine what color of targets they were supposed to shoot after the shot clock went off; in one case clues in the room you woke up in and in another an intel-document you read on the clock. The dark kill house required the shooter to determine threat/non-threat based on weapons the 3-D targets were holding, clothing, or other visual cues (police badge for example).

Trooper Division was a very tight race this year with 17 shooters total. The top 4 slots were less than 22 seconds apart, and 3rd (my place) and 4th were less than 1.5 seconds apart. We typically havent seen scores this close together in Trooper Division at other competitions. People are definitely upping their game.

Saiga-12s have caught on in both Trooper and Open divisions. I spotted probably around a dozen total. Four of the eight shooters on my squad were using them. MD Arms 20 round drums were also common. No two of the guns were the same, many sporting a lot of the new custom add-ons.

Match attendance over all was way up from the previous year with 76 shooters total. The Livingston Gun Club puts on a quality match. If you live in the area or will be visiting I suggest checking it out.

[shooterready]

Great Match! Glad I was a part of it! Congrats to everyone that won. What a tough match, my head and body still hurt.

[chizzle]

I shot the Mi 3 Gun Championship match this year upon the recommendation from a friend. The stages were some of the most elaborate that I have seen, and I really appreciate the time that the Match Director and the RO's put into the match to make it happen.

As someone who's been to 100+ matches, I was very disappointed with the stage descriptions at the match, as they played a big role in the results. While there was no prize money at stake, I attend these matches to see how my skills compare with other shooters, and I always strive for an honest appraisal of my skills. The 4 incidences where I thought the stage descriptions adversely affected the match were:

Stage 1: The RO explained that we would be "blindfolded" which made myself and one other shooter in my squad believe that we had been kidnapped, and completely changed the meaning of the stage (we engaged ALL of the wrong targets, as did 10+% of the shooters). After we explained this to another RO, he said "they've been having trouble on that stage; we'll make sure it gets explained better in the future...." Unfortunately, the RO's more thorough explanation of the stage description was too late to affect our scores. When we discussed this with the MD, he explained that we should have been "reading his posts on BrianEnos" so that we understood the stage better. We had read the thread on BrianEnos the night before the match, and re-read it after the match, and I still believe that I would interpret the stage the same way, given the info that we received from our RO.

If the stage designers goal was to simulate the decision making pressure of real life, I appreciate his intent, but I can't imagine a scenario where the shooter doesn't at least know what side he's on. To me, this stage seemed to assume you have complete amnesia, which seems incredibly far fetched as a "real life scenario". I thought that the stage itself was a great idea, but that simply telling the shooter "you're red" or "you're blue" would have eliminated the different interpretation that 10% of the shooters had, and would have made the stage a true test of skill.

Stage 3: The RO made me start from a sitting position behind the Ma Deuce, and other shooters were allowed to kneel. This provided a competitive disadvantage, as it was much quicker to get up from a kneeling position. As an RO and stage designer, I understand the difficulty in providing a level playing field, but please make sure that the RO's are starting people in the same positions in the future to make it fair.

Stage 5: Per the stage description, you couldn't drag Bubba through the areas where there were unengaged targets. I hopped out of the chopper and engaged all of the targets except for the cooper tunnel with my rifle (sans Bubba). I then ran back to grab Bubba, ran him over to the drop area, and engaged the targets in the cooper tunnel with my pistol. After shooting, I was alerted that I was getting penalties for not going directly to Bubba, and dragging him along. While that is a fine stage requirement, the stage description did not specify that you had to go to Bubba first, then drag him along as you engage targets. I felt as though I had found a more efficient way to shoot the stage, but was being penalized because that's not what the stage designer "meant", but failed to write.

Stage 6: I asked the RO if there was anything that would help us identify the "good guys" from the "bad guys" on the stage, but the RO failed to offer any guidance. Since on other stages we have been virtual gang members repelling an invasion, army guys shooting a tank, and a rescue squad jumping from a helicopter, it would have been nice to know that "good guys" actually meant "cops and/or security guards". Again, under what real-life scenario do you not have at least some guidance of who the "good guys" are?

Again, I thought the stages were exceptionally creative and well put together. I just hope that next year the Match Director has more self-explanitory stage descriptions written, and he makes sure that a layman would interpret his intent the same way. If he does, I'd love to come back to the match. If he doesn't, I'd rather save my money for a match that levels the playing field through better communication. Either way, I hope that this post helps shooters coming to next year's match prepare for the stages that they will encounter.

[Send The Wolf]

I shot the Mi 3 Gun Championship match this year upon the recommendation from a friend. The stages were some of the most elaborate that I have seen, and I really appreciate the time that the Match Director and the RO's put into the match to make it happen.

Thanks chizzle. I will say that we appreciate all feedback, and it certainly shapes our program. You say you come to matches to get an honest appraisal of your skills. Well, apparently at this match, you got some feedback you didn't like regarding your listening and thinking skills, and that reflected accordingly on your 'run and gun' skills. You can certainly mentally reverse those stage penalties from your score that you felt were unfair and compare yourself that way, noone will know though and perhaps that the problem. ;-)

Less than 10% had similar cognitive pooch-screws, so clearly the intent to make people use their brains beyond 'run to box A, and if it's brown, mow it down' was not so challenging as to be unfair. The comments made by the ROs, MD on the forums, MD in the shooter's meeting, all clearly referenced _listen_ to your ROs and _think_, as this 3Gun is a very different test of skills than a typical IPSC match, for example. We specifically challenge our shooters with stages that emphasize thinking and solving problems in real time, and try to avoid any stage that begins with a 10 minute 'IPSC Parade'. That won't change. The vast majority of shooters seemed to welcome the challenge, even many of the ones who had similar brain-farts.

As far as the blindfolded stage, a lot of thought, discussion, and RO training went into that stage, as we knew some small percentage would be disoriented enough to not process the information in front of them (some of them were even RO staff). But that was the point, to artificially represent the confusion someone might have in a sudden high stress situation waking from a sound sleep. Nothing is perfect in the real world, but I'd say it worked out pretty well. I know for a fact (and I invite folks to watch Sinestral's video and listen to the ROs) that the ROs were consistently clear and thorough in their description all day. Noone is infallible, but I stand behind our ROs 100% in this case.

I'm sorry you had some disappointments. I hope you still managed to have fun, and went home with some cool stuff from the prize table.

Edited October 2, 2009 by Send The Wolf

[chizzle]

I will say that we appreciate all feedback, and it certainly shapes our program.

Thanks for taking the time to read the constructive criticism that I posted. Good luck on your match in 2010.

[Gaoler]

As someone who's been to 100+ matches, I was very disappointed with the stage descriptions at the match, as they played a big role in the results. While there was no prize money at stake, I attend these matches to see how my skills compare with other shooters, and I always strive for an honest appraisal of my skills. The 4 incidences where I thought the stage descriptions adversely affected the match were:

I thought stage one was very well explained... I too shot all the wrong targets, but... that's what y'get for shooting first and thinking later...

Stage six.... Again, in the context of this match it's safe to assume that a target wearing a jacket labbelled "security" is a no shoot as is one without a weapon...

These stages added "shoot/no shoot judgement to the game.... 'sometimes we don't excersize good judgement

I don't know how many of your 100 matches were of this type, but... if someone is used to shooting one game, especially a highly ruled/regulated game I can see how this type of match could be a little frustrating...

I think the trick is to forget everything you know about your other shooting game and just listen to the CoF instructions.

[rz317]

This is the second year I shot this match. I shoot it because it is fun and different, and extreme. Also as a 3-Gun MD myself, I fully appreciate the time and hard work that goes into even a club match let alone a state match.

I will agree that at least in the instance of the blindfolded stage, the briefing that our squad was given, needed to be better. There was too much to be left up to interpretation, where the shooter could just as logically concluded a completely different meaning, regardless how few or how many others did or didn’t.

However, it’s done now and being penalized on the stage didn’t cost me an earlier trip to a prize table, so to me, that’s not the biggest issue.

This is…

The weekend following this match I attended the Ozark 3-Gun Championship, where I was able to discuss the Blindfold stage, with other fellow shooters whom did not attend the MI State 3-Gun, I noticed that more than the unorthodox style of the stage, the theme of “Rival Gang Invasion” is what shocked them.

Now that I’ve had time to digest everything, I think that using any criminal based theme in shooting sports like this is a bad idea. It was mentioned in an earlier post that a lot of thought and discussion went into Stage 1. I’m curious, did anyone considered how such a theme, where the competitor is a playing a member of a notorious criminal gang may not have been a very responsible choice? Frankly, I find it embarrassing to the sport of 3-Gun to associate ourselves with that kind of activity. We’re the good guys! We, the shooting sportsmen represent responsible gun ownership. Simply using different terms such as “red and blue”, would have been better. Imagine if themes like “Rival Gang Invasion” became the norm, and what message this would send out. Picture talking to a new shooter, or one of another discipline, and trying to get him/her to come out and give 3-Gun a try. He/she, with limited knowledge of the sport responds: “3-Gun… isn’t that where you pretend to be a criminal?” Think about this, those who oppose our freedom don’t need additional excuses. It would be a shame for the dynamic sport of 3-Gun to somehow be associated with training for criminal activity.

[SinistralRifleman]

The only feedback I had, that I already discussed with the MD was that with as detailed as the killhouse was it was more of a simulation than a stage. This would have been fine if we could have verbally interrogated the targets with "Drop the gun!" "Stop", "show me your hands!" or something. and the RO or assistant could have yelled "threat", "innocent", or (Arnold voice) "I'm a cop you idiot!"...something along those lines.

Rival gang invasion could have been made more PC with "Red Team vs Blue Team" like the Team Fortress Computer Games and still have presented the same challenge.

Edited October 6, 2009 by SinistralRifleman

[00bullitt]

This is the second year I shot this match. I shoot it because it is fun and different, and extreme. Also as a 3-Gun MD myself, I fully appreciate the time and hard work that goes into even a club match let alone a state match.

I will agree that at least in the instance of the blindfolded stage, the briefing that our squad was given, needed to be better. There was too much to be left up to interpretation, where the shooter could just as logically concluded a completely different meaning, regardless how few or how many others did or didn’t.

However, it’s done now and being penalized on the stage didn’t cost me an earlier trip to a prize table, so to me, that’s not the biggest issue.

This is…

The weekend following this match I attended the Ozark 3-Gun Championship, where I was able to discuss the Blindfold stage, with other fellow shooters whom did not attend the MI State 3-Gun, I noticed that more than the unorthodox style of the stage, the theme of “Rival Gang Invasion” is what shocked them.

Now that I’ve had time to digest everything, I think that using any criminal based theme in shooting sports like this is a bad idea. It was mentioned in an earlier post that a lot of thought and discussion went into Stage 1. I’m curious, did anyone considered how such a theme, where the competitor is a playing a member of a notorious criminal gang may not have been a very responsible choice? Frankly, I find it embarrassing to the sport of 3-Gun to associate ourselves with that kind of activity. We’re the good guys! We, the shooting sportsmen represent responsible gun ownership. Simply using different terms such as “red and blue”, would have been better. Imagine if themes like “Rival Gang Invasion” became the norm, and what message this would send out. Picture talking to a new shooter, or one of another discipline, and trying to get him/her to come out and give 3-Gun a try. He/she, with limited knowledge of the sport responds: “3-Gun… isn’t that where you pretend to be a criminal?” Think about this, those who oppose our freedom don’t need additional excuses. It would be a shame for the dynamic sport of 3-Gun to somehow be associated with training for criminal activity.

While I wasn't at the match.....the buzz for this particular stage has gone around.....and I've got to say I tend to agree with you.