DarthMuffin Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Earlier this year we had a "retreat" stage (I hate those, they are very seldom safely designed) where you started upstage and engaged some targets from there, backed up to a mid position and engaged some from there, then finally backed all the way up and engaged the remainder. I discovered that you could omit the middle stop as you could see just a sliver of those targets from the final positions -- good enough for me. Anyhow, in hindsight it would have worked better if I informed the RO of my plan, but on the other hand it's not the responsibility of the shooter to do so. I ended up passing the RO so that he was downrange of me, at about 2:00. I hesitated for a second but he did not call stop, so I kept shooting at some targets at about my 10:00 position and the RO had gotten behind me by the time I moved on. What was the correct thing for me to do here? I know the RO should have stopped me and done a reshoot, but he didn't. If I stopped myself, am I guaranteed a reshoot? Should I (or the RO) have been DQ'd for a safety violation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 (edited) No DQ for you, and you can't really DQ an RO. If it was me, I'd have yelled stop and issued a reshoot for interference. Stopping yourself is always an iffy proposition, but in this case, it's pretty clear to me that a reshoot would have been warranted. Troy Edited December 21, 2009 by mactiger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Miles Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I would have stopped at the point of noticing the RO downrange from me, strictly for safety considerations.I would have, in this case, demanded a reshoot citing rule 8.6.4. An external influence, the RO, interferred with you during the course of fire. Backup stages are indeed awkward at best and as you know, dangerous at their worst. Yeah, you should have notified the RO of your plan even though nothing says you have to. Your safety and the safety of the RO dictated that. By doing so this post might not be here. Also, the RO should have considered ALL possibilities given the stage design and given you plenty of backward leeway. Many RO's feel that they have to be in the shooters back pocket at all times. This could be problematic and as in this case, dangerous. Don't know about DQing the RO but I sure would have had a few words with him about his personal safety. CYa, Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide45 Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I would have stopped at the point of noticing the RO downrange from me, strictly for safety considerations.I would have, in this case, demanded a reshoot citing rule 8.6.4. An external influence, the RO, interferred with you during the course of fire. Backup stages are indeed awkward at best and as you know, dangerous at their worst. Yeah, you should have notified the RO of your plan even though nothing says you have to. Your safety and the safety of the RO dictated that. By doing so this post might not be here. Also, the RO should have considered ALL possibilities given the stage design and given you plenty of backward leeway. Many RO's feel that they have to be in the shooters back pocket at all times. This could be problematic and as in this case, dangerous. Don't know about DQing the RO but I sure would have had a few words with him about his personal safety. CYa, Pat The fault lies with whoever designed, and constructed the stage, not that pointing fingers helps now. 8.6.4 does not allow the competitor to demand a reshoot. You could request it, but the RO is not required to listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I hardly think the course designer is to blame for an RO who just wasn't fast enough, or quick thinking enough to stay behind the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSeevers Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I have backed up before, I'm fairly quick and put the RO in front of or beside me. I have had to let a couple know that they interfeared with me. You think they would have noticed that I kept my muzzle direction safe and didn't shoot them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Miles Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 (edited) The fault lies with whoever designed, and constructed the stage, not that pointing fingers helps now.8.6.4 does not allow the competitor to demand a reshoot. You could request it, but the RO is not required to listen. I also don't think that any blame should be laid at the feet of the course designer. Just because a stage required backward movement does not make it dangerous. Each shooter should know their abilities and if necessary walk backwards or sideways. I have RO'd GM's in a stage such as this. They simply throw the gun up over their left shoulder (Right handed shooters) while turning completely around (up range) and sprint to their preprogrammed spot for the next target engagement. It is up to the RO to know the stage design and possible shooter movements and make safe adjustments for them. I also understand that I cannot demand a reshoot but I can sure make a strong case for a reshoot. Depending on the importance I place on the situation I might just plunk down the arb fee if necessary. The fact that I did nothing wrong and stopped because of a serious safety threat would bolster my request for a reshoot. CYa, Pat Edited December 22, 2009 by whatmeworry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boz1911 Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 When I RO a stage like this I am very aware of where the shooter will be backing up and try to give him/her plenty of room to run. Since I'm not the fleetest afoot that means giving more room than I normally would like to give. I just have to control the shooter the best I can given the course design. Back to the original question. The RO should have stopped you or in worst case when you stopped/hesitated for safety reasons he should have stopped you and offered a reshoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Anyhow, in hindsight it would have worked better if I informed the RO of my plan, but on the other hand it's not the responsibility of the shooter to do so. It may not be your responsibility per the rule book, but it might be a good idea based on the general principle that your are running around with a hot gun and shooting stuff. And, of course, it may have prevented any debate. Reshoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 BTW... I don't think we should have less of this type of design. More would actually help folks to come to understand what is needed. Better to learn at the local match (as shooter and RO). I can says this...when I run a Major match, I look to get a stage design in that has an element of going from down-to-up range. (IPSC seems to do a lot more of this than most of USPSA.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineshootah Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Anyhow, in hindsight it would have worked better if I informed the RO of my plan, but on the other hand it's not the responsibility of the shooter to do so. It may not be your responsibility per the rule book, but it might be a good idea based on the general principle that your are running around with a hot gun and shooting stuff. And, of course, it may have prevented any debate. Reshoot. +1 The RO has been running folks all day.. tired, hot.. sweaty..sticky.. pick one, or all of the above. Just give them a heads up and no one runs the risk or a safety issue or a reshoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I would have stopped at the point of noticing the RO downrange from me, strictly for safety considerations You would also get a reshoot for this, assuming that (a ) The RO was doing his job properly and (b ) The RO concurred with your position that you had to stop to avoid overrunning him I tried to back out of a room at a nationals, but the doorway was not big enough for both me and the RO. I stopped one step away from backing into the open door. When given "if you are done, unload and show clear", I told the RO "I was unable to finish, since doing so would have put you downrange of my gun". I was granted a reshoot, and, since the RO knew what he was doing, I didn't even have to ask for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 BTW...I don't think we should have less of this type of design. More would actually help folks to come to understand what is needed. Better to learn at the local match (as shooter and RO). I can says this...when I run a Major match, I look to get a stage design in that has an element of going from down-to-up range. (IPSC seems to do a lot more of this than most of USPSA.) I've always thought USPSA fostered an aggressive sport not a defensive one. Retreat is a hateful word and no other game awards points for retreating so why should ours. This is not a tactical sport where retreat is a means of saving lives and no battle was ever won by a retreating force. I disagree with the comments about the RO not being fast enough or quick witted enough to stay behind the shooter because you are welcome to take my place for the next romp in the desert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 BTW...I don't think we should have less of this type of design. More would actually help folks to come to understand what is needed. Better to learn at the local match (as shooter and RO). I can says this...when I run a Major match, I look to get a stage design in that has an element of going from down-to-up range. (IPSC seems to do a lot more of this than most of USPSA.) I've always thought USPSA fostered an aggressive sport not a defensive one. Retreat is a hateful word and no other game awards points for retreating so why should ours. This is not a tactical sport where retreat is a means of saving lives and no battle was ever won by a retreating force. I disagree with your philosophy. I have set many a trap for the overly aggressive. (But that would be taking us into a massive thread drift and into "tactics"...which is beyond the scope of this forum.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 BTW...I don't think we should have less of this type of design. More would actually help folks to come to understand what is needed. Better to learn at the local match (as shooter and RO). I can says this...when I run a Major match, I look to get a stage design in that has an element of going from down-to-up range. (IPSC seems to do a lot more of this than most of USPSA.) I've always thought USPSA fostered an aggressive sport not a defensive one. Retreat is a hateful word and no other game awards points for retreating so why should ours. This is not a tactical sport where retreat is a means of saving lives and no battle was ever won by a retreating force. I disagree with the comments about the RO not being fast enough or quick witted enough to stay behind the shooter because you are welcome to take my place for the next romp in the desert. To move backwards from one engagement zone to another is not reatreat. It maybe the only tactical way to move without getting shot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 USPSA is NOT about tactics that is that other sport. And I don't believe in deliberate traps nor parking a RO for a turn & draw stage to see how many DQ's there can be. I disagree with your philosophy. I have set many a trap for the overly aggressive. (But that would be taking us into a massive thread drift and into "tactics"...which is beyond the scope of this forum.) Bring out the beating the dead horse icon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 I damn sure didn't mean "traps" to DQ shooters on. (I can see how that might read like that.) Sorry for any confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasOPM Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 How often did it happen in the match? We do retreating stages almost every match, and rarely have a problem. One or two re-shoots a month is not a big problem in my eyes. If the shooter is planning on doing something different it is a good idea to let the RO know. The RO's also have to change tactics a little bit by giving shooters a little more space- especially when retreating. The shooter has the option of turning uprange and running, while the RO needs to back up to keep the shooter in view. In our club, the ROs are instructed to stop the shooter if they ever end up downrange of the shooter. The way our shoot house is constructed the potential for ROs ending up in the wrong place is very real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Miles Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 I damn sure didn't mean "traps" to DQ shooters on. (I can see how that might read like that.)Sorry for any confusion. Now the back peddling begins. Later, Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 One or two re-shoots a month is not a big problem in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide45 Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 ... One or two re-shoots a month is not a big problem in my eyes. ... In our club, the ROs are instructed to stop the shooter if they ever end up downrange of the shooter. The way our shoot house is constructed the potential for ROs ending up in the wrong place is very real. Having the RO downrange of a loaded gun once, is once too often. It is a big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joecichlid Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 When I RO a stage like this I am very aware of where the shooter will be backing up and try to give him/her plenty of room to run. Since I'm not the fleetest afoot that means giving more room than I normally would like to give. I just have to control the shooter the best I can given the course design.Back to the original question. The RO should have stopped you or in worst case when you stopped/hesitated for safety reasons he should have stopped you and offered a reshoot. +1 I always give the shooter a pretty wide birth when there is a need to back up. As for stage design, if I know there is a need for the shooter to back up I make sure to leave PLENTY of room for the RO to get his butt out of the way safely as needed. This year I had a major oh crap moment on such a stage. The RO hadn't figured how I would back up so when I turned my whole body *excluding strong hand with gun* and ran flat out up range *gun pointed down range upside down, get the idea?* I about ran the poor guy over. Mind you I am 6'0" and about 230 with the RO being about 5'nothing" and maybe 140 soaking wet so it could have gotten pretty ugly pretty fast with us balled up on the floor while I try to control the muzzle of my gun. Moral of the story? Make sure the RO knows you are going to do something like that if there is even the slightest chance of them getting in the way. For me I just slowed my run down a bit until the ROs eyes re-oriented themselves properly in their sockets and returned to normal size. Being a local club match we both joked about it after I changed my drawers, he was very sorry for slowing me down any but for me it was a learning event and I didn't bother asking about a reshoot. If you know you are going to do something a little different than other shooters let the RO know what you are going to do. I can't say that enough. Joe W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 I have 100% corrected the problem of dealing with shooters on a retreating stage, I let someone else RO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joecichlid Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 I have 100% corrected the problem of dealing with shooters on a retreating stage, I let someone else RO. LOL Smart man there. See, there? I fixed it, it's YOU'R problem now. Joe W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodownzero Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 If you ask me, this is just one of many reasons why we need to get rid of the 180 rule and go to something more like "muzzle safe points." It should be DQ-able for someone to shoot with the RO downrange of them. The fact that it is not (and that the RO did not stop you) is a shortcoming in the rules if you ask me. I also think that unless the USPSA is going to eliminate the 180 rule and go to something more practical, stages that require lateral movement and/or backward movement should be eliminated. The 180 rule has its roots in safety, but for things like this, it's an invitation for unsafe acts and/or putting people in a bad position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now