Rules Discussion

[Pstmstr]

As we enter the new shooting season, I have a question I'd like to get some feedback on.

Should a shooter do their best to shoot as well as they can and adhere to all the rules, even if they can get away with a few things now and then?
Or.....should they bend the rules and take advantage of certain situations to give themselves a chance to finish higher in a match or win stuff from future matches?

I've seen shooters call penalties on themselves and then other shooters bend the rules so far I was ashamed for them. What do you guys think?

I've always been a stickler for rules. If you've got the ability, why spoil it by shaving a few seconds here and there with gamer stuff. Just shoot your best and hold your head high when you visit the prize table. Your thoughts?

 

[Scott Hearn]

I'm not going to BREAK any rules on purpose. Bend maybe, that's what I personally consider gaming, but actually breaking one to gain an advantage I just view as lying to myself. Because I just shoot against myself basically to see where I stand and where I'd like to go. Prizes are nice, but I'm there to have a good time and hopefully improve at every match. Everything else is just a bonus. How's that for a non-nonsensical rant?

 

[Pstmstr]

fair enough, what would you consider bending?

 

[Bubber]

Just shoot it the best way you can. If you can take an avantage of the stage design, do it. It is not against the rules, and the rules do not bend. The only thing is..If I see a better way to shoot a stage I will let the guys in the squad know about it as soon as I can so they have the same oppurtunity as I do. It's just the Revo in me comming out.

 

[The Antichrome]

'Gaming' and 'Bending the rules' are two completely different things.
In USPSA, the rules do not bend. You have either complied with the rule, or you have broken it.
But gaming is totally ok.

I guess I need an example of what you mean.

 

[dennishoddy]

Just my opinion, if one is within the rules of the discipline/ match, any advantage one can gain by whatever reasonable means is ok as long as it stays within the rules of the contest.

 

[The Antichrome]

Unless otherwise noted, all stages are considered 'Freestyle' so any and all methods are valid.
Unique or unusual methods (basically anything that you didnt think of) are considered 'gaming'.

Any procedural rules that are broken will garner a penalty.
Any safety rules that are broken will earn you a trip to the Dairy Queen.

 

[Scott Hearn]

Mike they pretty much covered it. Bending and gaming to me is the same.

For instance taking a long range target from one position when that target is really intended by the stage designer to be taken at another position and it's a much easier target to take from the intended position. The intention is to keep from going to that position at all to save time. Almost never happens and a more likely scenario would save a reload somewhere, but as long as it's safe to take that target and it's not forbidden in the course description I'll sometimes do it.

 

[Pstmstr]

I guess bending is more what I'm referring to. Things that you know are wrong but you don't get caught at it. I understand it's a game (to most) and if there is a way to shoot a stage within the rules that no one has thought of yet, etc.
For example, take classifiers, I've seen shooters deliberately not shoot to their ability so they don't move up in classification. On the reverse side, I've seen a shooter do poorly and then reshoot the classifier again with a better score to be submitted for classification. To me, both are wrong, even though we have allowed it before at HH. I guess the more I RO, the more I notice things. I could be a range NAZI but I don't think that's right either.
Another example, at a match the other day, a shooter was in what I call the CLEET crouch with hand poised above his pistol. I asked him to stand natural with hands at naturally at sides. Turns out he was new and was fine the rest of the match.

 

[Chambers]

I guess I need an example of what you mean.

Yep.

One thing I love about USPSA/3 gun is figuring out the most efficient way to shoot a stage.

For instance, at a recent match there was a stage where a ribbon was used as a boundary for a shooting area. If you pushed the ribbon just a little bit, you could take more targets from one position and save some movement. Was it the stage designers intention for this to be possible? Probably not. Did nearly everybody do it? Yes. Could it have been easily prevented? Yes, by nailing down a fault line, and forcing the shooter to take another position.

As a stage designer, if you want me to do something a certain way, you have to force me to do it via barricades/fault lines or the written stage description...which is very easy to do.

Some people get all butthurt when they miss things and use "gaming" in a derogatory sense. Those people need to buy some fishing vests and go shoot IDPA where they can give each other failure-to-do-rights, because this is a GAME!! I have never won a Cadillac!

 

[dennishoddy]

If using a weight on the barrel vs a brake, is that gaming, or breaking the rules?
Bull barrell vs pencil barrel?

 

[Pstmstr]

I'd agree the stage design and description need to be specific. A good example would be walls that extend all the way from ground to infinity. In your example, they should have specified no leaning on the rope if that was the intent of the stage designer. Fishing Vest? Armageddon, I must have missed that one. .

 

[Scott Hearn]

Okay bending is fair game. But I like to try to stay with the spirit of the stage. But at the same time, if you can solve the problem in an unconventional way, I say go for it if you have the skills, it's within the stage description and it's safe.

And yes classifiers are a different matter. They are measuring skills on more than one level. C class shooters like me could make B class almost every time if we could "warm up" by shooting it 2 or 3 times before shooting for score. That probably goes away a little for every class you go up. But I'm right there with you.

 

[jtischauser]

Breaking rules is bad. My main concern is that everyone shoots the same match. That way everyone has the same chance of winning. Unfortunately sometimes MD's, RM's, RO's, and/or matches aren't always on the same page or the same rule sets and things get confused all the time.

 

[Pstmstr]

If using a weight on the barrel vs a brake, is that gaming, or breaking the rules?

Bull barrell vs pencil barrel?

Not sure but if USPSA, the types of mods are in the appendix in back of the rule book.

 

[jtischauser]

The hands relaxed at sides example is probably the best example of the rule that always gets bent and never gets enforced. If I RO I make sure everyone gets to start the same way.

 

[The Antichrome]

Mike they pretty much covered it. Bending and gaming to me is the same.

For instance taking a long range target from one position when that target is really intended by the stage designer to be taken at another position and it's a much easier target to take from the intended position. The intention is to keep from going to that position at all to save time. Almost never happens and a more likely scenario would save a reload somewhere, but as long as it's safe to take that target and it's not forbidden in the course description I'll sometimes do it.

Scott, I respectfully disagree with your premise.
"...intended by the stage designer..." is absolutely not part of USPSA stage design.
USPSA stages are 'Freestyle' (unless they are standards exercises, classifiers, etc.)
Targets may all be shot as available from any safe position in any order.
Stage designers have a whole slew of tools at their disposal to compell you to do something one way or another.
But their 'intent' means nothing.

The only things that matter in a stage are:
#1. You shoot safely and within the rules.
#2. You have fun.
#3. You obtain as many points per second as possible.

 

[The Antichrome]

Yep.

One thing I love about USPSA/3 gun is figuring out the most efficient way to shoot a stage.

For instance, at a recent match there was a stage where a ribbon was used as a boundary for a shooting area. If you pushed the ribbon just a little bit, you could take more targets from one position and save some movement. Was it the stage designers intention for this to be possible? Probably not. Did nearly everybody do it? Yes. Could it have been easily prevented? Yes, by nailing down a fault line, and forcing the shooter to take another position.

As a stage designer, if you want me to do something a certain way, you have to force me to do it via barricades/fault lines or the written stage description...which is very easy to do.

Some people get all butthurt when they miss things and use "gaming" in a derogatory sense. Those people need to buy some fishing vests and go shoot IDPA, because this is a GAME!! I have never won a Cadillac!

Exactly.
The ribbon stage 'could' have been constructed more cleverly...the stage designers intent had nothing to do with it. The volunteer construction crew was supposed to have the ribbon a little further in and make it either awkward to shoot it this way, or easier but more time consuming to shoot it the other way...shooters choice. The designer was totally ok with whatever method you employ to engage the targets.

 

[Chambers]

Ahh, cool. I hated to even use that one as an example because that club is the EPITOME of how a local match should be adminstered.

 

[Chambers]

My main concern is that everyone shoots the same match.

I am never concerned in the slightest at a pistol match...but it's a big problem at some major 3 gun matches with Outlaw rules!!