[rledwards]

At a recent match one of the COFs had the shooter moving for all shots fired.
This included shooting thru a window at a target but if the shooter stopped and used cover at the side of the window that shooter received a PE.
Also, the shooter was required to leave the cover of a wall to engage targets on the move.
The rule book requires cover to be used if it is available.
The question is: can a shooter be given a PE for using cover instead of moving, under the rules?
No, I wasn't the shooter. This was the first major I can remember that I did not get a PE, hit a NT or get a FTN!
--Lin

[Bill Nesbitt]

Was it written into the scenerio and course description that the targets to be engaged didn't "appear" until the shooter had left cover. In that case the shooter who stayed behind cover wasn't following the course design and should get a procedural.

[Chris Christian]

The Rule Book has many grey areas... and the MD is the final authority on what's what at a particular match. If the COF said "engage on the move"... then you engage them on the move.. and the guy who stopped to use cover didn't follow the COF. Yes, a PE.
Chris Christian

[Jim Watson]

There was no dramatic scenario justification or simulation, just do it:

SCENARIO: While raking your yard, trouble comes’ calling. Can
you make it through the gauntlet?
STAGE PROCEDURE: Engage T1-T3 in tac sequence while
retreating to P2. Perform mandatory reload, and engage T4-T7 while
on the move. ALL SHOTS ON THIS STAGE MUST BE DONE
ON THE MOVE.
Reloads at P2 and P3 only.

[DUKE]

Chris Christian, on Sep 15 2009, 01:15 PM, said:

The Rule Book has many grey areas... and the MD is the final authority on what's what at a particular match. If the COF said "engage on the move"... then you engage them on the move.. and the guy who stopped to use cover didn't follow the COF. Yes, a PE.
Chris Christian

+1 If The COF states that you make the shots while moving it sounds like a someone earned a Procedual !!

[Chris Christian]

Jim's COF descriprion sounds pretty clear to me. Yes... a PE if you stopped to use cover. Not much to debate there.
Chris Christian

[steel1212]

I'm not trying to stir the pot but does that mean that a MD can have you do what ever they want you to do even though its outside of the rule book just because they wrote it in the COF? That doesn't seem right to me. This is one of the times that its actually in the rule book but was ignored instead of the other way around.

[Chris Christian]

There are a number of things in the Rule Book that are ignored at club level matches... and one or two that are ignored at sanctioned matches. It's not perfect. But, when in doubt... follow the COF description. That is as close to the "Bible" as you'll get in IDPA. It would be nice if the Rule Book was carved in enough stone that a shooter in California could travel to a match in Florida and have things called exactly the same as in California. Doesn't happen. The MD, locally, seems to be the final authority... and that's according to the Rule Book. Doesn't make it right. Doesn't neccesarily make it wrong. Just makes it the way it is.
Chris Christian - IDPA SO

[steel1212]

Chris Christian, on Sep 15 2009, 04:40 PM, said:

There are a number of things in the Rule Book that are ignored at club level matches... and one or two that are ignored at sanctioned matches. It's not perfect. But, when in doubt... follow the COF description. That is as close to the "Bible" as you'll get in IDPA. It would be nice if the Rule Book was carved in enough stone that a shooter in California could travel to a match in Florida and have things called exactly the same as in California. Doesn't happen. The MD, locally, seems to be the final authority... and that's according to the Rule Book. Doesn't make it right. Doesn't neccesarily make it wrong. Just makes it the way it is.
Chris Christian - IDPA SO

In this case you don't have to drive to California to get conflicting ideas though you have them at the same match. The rule book says one thing the COF says another. If you don't have a SO walk through or SOs that stay on just that stage that your likely to get a squad that is going to follow the rule book and ones that are going to follow the COF.

[Flexmoney]

rledwards, on Sep 15 2009, 12:37 PM, said:

At a recent match one of the COFs had the shooter moving for all shots fired.
This included shooting thru a window at a target but if the shooter stopped and used cover at the side of the window that shooter received a PE.
Also, the shooter was required to leave the cover of a wall to engage targets on the move.
The rule book requires cover to be used if it is available.
The question is: can a shooter be given a PE for using cover instead of moving, under the rules?
No, I wasn't the shooter. This was the first major I can remember that I did not get a PE, hit a NT or get a FTN!
--Lin

Since this is really a rules question, I will move it to the IDPA Rules Forum.

- Mod. Squad

[Bill Nesbitt]

CoF 6. At least 5% of all shots required in a match are to be
fired on the move. A combination of shooting on the move and
the use of moving targets is even more realistic. Statistics show
that most shootings involve movement on the part of both good
and bad guys.


I think this rule will allow shooting on the move.

[steel1212]

Bill Nesbitt, on Sep 15 2009, 05:17 PM, said:

CoF 6. At least 5% of all shots required in a match are to be
fired on the move. A combination of shooting on the move and
the use of moving targets is even more realistic. Statistics show
that most shootings involve movement on the part of both good
and bad guys.


I think this rule will allow shooting on the move.

Bill I don't think that is the question. Unless I'm mistaken I think the question is if there is cover shouldn't we be required, per the rule book, to use it? I totally agree shooting on the move is something that should be in every match but you can design a stage for that and I think this one has you at cover already and tells you that you can't use it.

This post has been edited by steel1212: 15 September 2009 - 03:43 PM

[RobMoore]

I have to write this off as poor stage design. If MDs can't make courses of fire that test the skills they want to test AND follow the rulebook, they should go back to just being an SO or regular competitor, or just copy proven stages from other matches.

The IDPA rulebook is small enough to read 3 times in a single sitting. Its not difficult to follow, and it only becomes confusing when its read with an attempt to insert personal ideas about tactics into the mix. When read literally, the trouble spots become very small in number. "The MD has final authority" gets used too often. I think sometimes its used as an excuse for veering off the prescribed path.

[Jadeslade]

Jim Watson, on Sep 15 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

There was no dramatic scenario justification or simulation, just do it:

SCENARIO: While raking your yard, trouble comes’ calling. Can
you make it through the gauntlet?
STAGE PROCEDURE: Engage T1-T3 in tac sequence while
retreating to P2. Perform mandatory reload, and engage T4-T7 while
on the move. ALL SHOTS ON THIS STAGE MUST BE DONE
ON THE MOVE.
Reloads at P2 and P3 only.

What is tac sequence? I mean as it pertains to the rules. I assume it's short for tactical sequence. I just don't know what that means.

[steel1212]

Jadeslade, on Sep 16 2009, 01:49 PM, said:

Jim Watson, on Sep 15 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

There was no dramatic scenario justification or simulation, just do it:

SCENARIO: While raking your yard, trouble comes’ calling. Can
you make it through the gauntlet?
STAGE PROCEDURE: Engage T1-T3 in tac sequence while
retreating to P2. Perform mandatory reload, and engage T4-T7 while
on the move. ALL SHOTS ON THIS STAGE MUST BE DONE
ON THE MOVE.
Reloads at P2 and P3 only.

What is tac sequence? I mean as it pertains to the rules. I assume it's short for tactical sequence. I just don't know what that means.

You would be correct, it means tactical sequence.

[2kcrewcab]

Jadeslade, on Sep 16 2009, 12:49 PM, said:

Jim Watson, on Sep 15 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

There was no dramatic scenario justification or simulation, just do it:

SCENARIO: While raking your yard, trouble comes’ calling. Can
you make it through the gauntlet?
STAGE PROCEDURE: Engage T1-T3 in tac sequence while
retreating to P2. Perform mandatory reload, and engage T4-T7 while
on the move. ALL SHOTS ON THIS STAGE MUST BE DONE
ON THE MOVE.
Reloads at P2 and P3 only.

What is tac sequence? I mean as it pertains to the rules. I assume it's short for tactical sequence. I just don't know what that means.

Tac sequence = Tactical Sequence = engaging each target in an array with one round prior to adding any additional rounds. Example: 3 targets, 2 shots each in tac sequence would be a "pattern" of 1 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 1.

Hope that helps.

[Strick]

From the rulebook....

Quote

CoF 9. When cover is available, it MUST be used both when
shooting and reloading.

[Jadeslade]

2kcrewcab, on Sep 16 2009, 02:44 PM, said:

Tac sequence = Tactical Sequence = engaging each target in an array with one round prior to adding any additional rounds. Example: 3 targets, 2 shots each in tac sequence would be a "pattern" of 1 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 1.

Hope that helps.

Yep. Thanks.

[wsimpso1]

The art of giving direction was summarized by Eisenhower when he said that it is not about giving directions that can be understood, but in giving directions than will not be misunderstood. This one is a prime example of ambiguity. The shooters are conditioned by training and match procedure to shoot from cover whenever possible, and they can see the target while still at cover. So the directions have to be unambiguous or the COF has to force breaking cover.

A way to write the COF to preclude shooting from cover and force shooting on the move is to write "break cover from P1 and engage T1-3 while on the move to P2, reload at P2, break cover from P2 and engage T4-6 while on the move to P3" This makes the intent of the stage unambiguous, while the original description might allow a shooter to revert to "I can see it from here, I am shooting it from here".

There are ways to make the threat targets come into view after the shooter breaks cover, as they mght in a real encounter, but they do tend to get technical. If the club has a couple photo-eyes and actuators to either move the targets or drop a blind, it could be more realistic, and then you would not have to specify breaking cover, just "Move from P1 to P2 engaging targets as they appear, reload at P2, move from P2 to P3 engaging targets as they appear. All targets to be engaged while on the move and in tactical sequence"