My Competition Project

[vmi-mo]

Recently I got burned out of the typical shooting competitions I have encountered. For me competitions usually consisted of just standing static and shooting 5 targets is some order with some other sort of reload required. While originally they were fun they are not that stimulating for me.

I have had the past 20 days to think this up and plan it all out. I wanted to create my own match that is much more mentally and physically stimulating, has at least a little bit of applicability to real life (not tactics). Overall I wanted to make something that tested the shooter as a whole, rather than just his trigger finger. So I came up with some guidelines for how I am going to execute this.

In order to get the BHG working during my stage designs I ceated a list of applicable things that I felt would make the shooter work his brain. These included:
1)KIMS games
2)Tgt discromination
3)Problem solving
4)Task stacking/Task prioritization

Next was to recreate the frictions typically faced on the battle field. These included:
1)Force use of cover (not in the gay IDPA way) but with more of a pain compliance method
2)Firing from akward positions
3)Small targets, with limited exposure
4)Reactive "drop" targets

Finally a big one is the physical side of the house. To many comps have always lacked this. The best comp I have ever shot in was also the equivalent of a crossfit WOD. To make the shooters physically beat Stages include:
1)lots and lots of sprinting, moving and getting up and down
2)casualty drags/carry
3)carrying heavy awkward shit

Next weekend I will be giving this project its first run. Hopefully its turns out well. I will post up some pics/video and an AAR with lessons learned

If anyone has any suggestions, send it.

PJ

[Kyle Reese]

-Malfunction drills

[vmi-mo]

-Malfunction drills

I included that under the task stacking and problem solving.

My b for not specifying


PJ

[ToddG]

Right off the bat you need to decide whether it's a competition (which requires fairness) or a training exercise. If you really intend it to be a competition, you need to figure out a way to deliver the target discrimination and decision-making challenges in a way that doesn't disadvantage the first shooter while still giving all shooters the same problem. This is one area where USPSA shines over IDPA. I can't tell you the number of IDPA matches I've been to where one shooter would have to move 5' and another would have to move 15' because of "random" target arrays; or, where the first shooter had to engage a target array sight unseen but the rest of the guys in his squad all got to watch and learn; or, "surprise" stages which aren't really much of a surprise if your best friend tells you what he saw before it's your turn.

The same holds true for any subjective calls you might need to make. The more subjectivity involved in the process, the less you're achieving in terms of legitimate competition. For example, I shot a match once where the RO told us we had to shoot on the move and be moving at "a realistic pace." He then proceeded to demo -- without shooting -- a pace where very few people in the world could get hits on the targets. We then watched him make on the spot judgments about who was moving fast enough and who wasn't all based purely on his "feeling" when watching.

[Lon]

"Recently I got burned out of the typical shooting competitions I have encountered. For me competitions usually consisted of just standing static and shooting 5 targets is some order with some other sort of reload required. While originally they were fun they are not that stimulating for me."

Sounds like you have been going to the wrong competitions. I dont go to IDPA matches because, to me, they are boring. Around here, I can go to several different USPSA matches every month and they all offer challenging stages. Far from boring.

[fuse]

Sounds like you have been going to the wrong competitions. I dont go to IDPA matches because, to me, they are boring. Around here, I can go to several different USPSA matches every month and they all offer challenging stages. Far from boring.

All well and good, but pure uspsa does not offer him the realism he seeks.

Hence the making his own.

[Wheeler]

Is this similar to some of the ironman type competitions with a 2-man shooting team?

[vmi-mo]

My description of a typical match was a gross dramatization to make a point.

Todd, following your descriptions this would be more "scenario based" training, i guess.....

I would love to shoot in the iron man, or larue match or similar matches. And in the end of the day, I drew alot of my ideas and motivation from clips and pics of those matches.


PJ

[Wheeler]

My description of a typical match was a gross dramatization to make a point.

Todd, following your descriptions this would be more "scenario based" training, i guess.....

I would love to shoot in the iron man, or larue match or similar matches. And in the end of the day, I drew alot of my ideas and motivation from clips and pics of those matches.


PJ

As would I, perhaps when time and money permit...

[smithjd]

Or perhaps, you could make it more of a test or challenge than either training or competition, more on the line of the National Tactical Invitational. For example, if you can accomplish all your tasks (all targets neutralized, stoppages remediated, physical tasks done, safely of course etc) in a stringent, but fair par time, then you receive a "go". Those who care about a rank wouldn't like it, but you aren't catering to them anyway, you are going after the group who wants to meet a challenge and win.

Much like the "Tough Mudder's" and such, if you make the challenge hard enough, just completing it is more than enough to stroke the ego. If you fall short, but even one person can do it, then you know you have more work to do.

[smithjd]

And I forgot to add:

Part of the task stacking / prioritation could be addressing GSW's, on yourself or others.

[vmi-mo]

The overall scoring will be a GO/NO GO for each stage.

We are going to put care under fire into practice which is mainly TQ'ing someone.


PJ

[Failure2Stop]

Tactical tasks on a timer tend to be a sub-optimal approach unless you specify exactly what is to be done and what the minimum acceptable standard is, but then you come to the question of whether to award superior action or lower time.

I generally prefer to put marksmanship/identification/location on time comparison, and leave the rest to tactical and proficiency evaluation.

Not all things need to be put on a timer.
It's a weird thing, and something that lots of tactical shooters get pulled into if they shoot competition.
I had to learn the hard way.

[ToddG]

A good solution is to establish a reasonable time limit and do it all on a PAR. When I was running the IDPA program at the NRA Range, we did all "house clearing" stages as PAR time to discourage folks from racing in and playing Captain Dynamic. We'd usually pair it with a string of fire at the beginning which was timed so not everyone had the same score.

For example, the shooter's brief might be "draw and fire six on T1 while retreating, then enter the building and clear it." We'd record the time for the initial six shots while the shooter was moving to the doorway. It wouldn't even require a second start, it happened transparently for the shooter.

[Little Creek]

A lot of matches are not much of a shooting challenge, but much of a physical fitness challenge. The advantage goes to the young and fit.

[theblacknight]

Range 37 PSR has a"gunfighter" match that actually gets people to forget about winning and just shoot the stage. here's the rules.


GUNFIGHTER LEAGUE RULES
Safety
Any unsafe act observed by anyone on the range warrants a cease-fire command
The four rules of firearms are to be followed at all times during the conduct of a Gunfighter Match.
1. Know the condition of your weapon at all times and treat it as such
2. Never point the muzzle of your weapon at anything you are not willing to destroy
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to engage a tgt, keep it alongside the trigger guard
4. Know what your target is and what is behind it, alongside it and in front of it.
5. No entering the shoot house before the RO instructs you to.
6. No moving down range before the RO instructs you to.
7. No loading of weapons until told to do so by the stage RO
8. Anytime you have a question ask, stupid people don’t ask questions, smart people do!
Weapons
Any type weapon in a service caliber can be used in the Gunfighter League; the types of weapons allowed include Rifles, Pistols, Shotguns, Knives, Axes and other blunt implements.
Holsters and Gear
Holsters must hold a weapon safely and securely and not allow the pistol to fall out while conducting the stage. Use of shoulder holsters is strictly forbidden. Use of full tactical kit is authorized and encouraged to facilitate the training value of real life engagements. Slings must hold the weapon safely and securely to the shooter while conducting the stage. Any sling type is authorized. For shooters that do not have slings on either a rifle or a shotgun must unload and clear the weapon before setting the weapon down on a surface or placing it in a designated “drop” location. High Capacity magazines are authorized
Targets
Targets are to be cardboard silhouettes or steel in material, can be reactive or non-reactive, and placed in a manner that it is safe for shooters and spectators alike when fired upon. The kill zone for each target will be designated before the start of every match in a match brief. The threat and non-threat tgts will be designated prior to the match in the match brief.
Minimum safe distance for Steel tgts
Pistol- 7m
Rifle -35m
Shotgun (#8 shot)-7m
Shotgun (buckshot/Slugs)-20m
Penalties
Penalties will be assessed every time the shooter commits one. A penalty is five points for each infraction. Penalties will be totaled at the end of the stage and added to the total time to determine the overall total score. Penalties are infractions that would lead the Range Officer to believe that the shooter
1. Would be lethally engaged by a threat target
2. Conducted an action that would give the shooter’s position away in the tactical environment (muzzle)
3. Conducts a tactical reload without retention of the magazine with live rounds in it.
4. Conducted movement with the weapon off safe and the finger on the trigger unless actively engaging targets.
5. Conducts a tactical reload in a position that leaves the shooter exposed to threat tgts
6. Moves forward into a position of tactical advantage without a loaded weapon (moving to a cover position after running empty is the only time a penalty will not be assessed)
7. Used a carry position that would jeopardize the shooter or anyone else on the range
8. Carried the weapon off safe for single action pistols or failed to de-cock double action pistols, or carried rifles off safe when not actively engaging tgts.
9. Over exposed himself with the use of white light illumination (3 seconds is a guideline)
10. Over exposed himself to threat tgts
12. Stops in a position of exposure and fires on threat tgts (not shooting while moving in the open)
13. Shoots any surface of the barricade or item he is using as cover (each shot= penalty)
14. Moves into a position to fire that exposes himself more than 50% to a threat tgt
15. Failed to retain his weapon in a safe manner or the weapon falls out of his holster or gear
16. Failed to retain his magazines in a manner that they can be used in the tactical gunfight.(dropped magazines on the ground out of pouches)
17. Fails to unload and clear a weapon before setting it down on a surface when not carried with either a sling or in the hands
18. Just acts like a dumbass and does stupid stuff.
Disqualification
The terms for disqualification in the Gunfighter league are few but serious in nature. Only unsafe acts will be reason for disqualification. The following are listed
1. Pointing the muzzle of a loaded weapon at anyone on the range
2. Negligent discharge of any weapon , anytime and in any manner
Exemptions
1. When the shooting situation requires the shooter to decide against hitting a non-threat target the shooter can go “dynamic” and expose himself to a threat tgt.
2. When the shooter is engaging tgts from his “weak” side he is allowed to go “dynamic” only after he has reached his full extension and has to move into exposure for the last threat tgt.
3. When the shooter engages threat tgts at a rapid pace, faster than one shot every second, in an exposed position while moving.
4. When the shooter is moving from one covered/concealed position to another in a rapid pace without engaging threat tgts.
Shooting
Shooting is to be conducted anytime the shooter is able to engage a threat tgt, as long as it is in a safe direction. Shooting each target with at least two hits in the designated kill zone is all that is required. A shot can be made up if the shooter sees that he has missed the kill zone, with no penalties. A target that has two hits in the designated kill zone will not be penalized for any misses outside of the kill zone. ALL hits on a Non Threat target are counted against the shooter for a twenty point penalty. There is no limit to the number of penalties a shooter can get on a non-threat tgt.
Movement
Movement is to be conducted in a tactical manner that gives the shooter the least amount of exposure to threat targets . Any time that a shooter is exposed more than 50% of his body to ANY threat target he will be penalized 1 procedural penalty. Shooting while moving is authorized and encouraged, however, stopping in the open and shooting a threat target is an exposure penalty. When using low barricades the shooter must not expose himself more than 50% to threat tgts and when moving can crouch and continue to move and reduce the exposure when approaching low barricades. When a shooter moves into a barricade and uses it for cover he is to approach in a manner that limits his exposure to the maximum extent possible.
Weapon carry positions are the LOW READY, HIGH CARRY AND HIGH PORT. These are the only authorized carry positions for weapons when moving during the match.

this is the scoring

Scoring is a par score system that calculates misses+ procedurals+ non-threat hits+ raw time for a score per stage. The stage totals are added together for a total match score. Two hits in the kill zone are required per target. Misses are counted against the shooter when there are no hits OR ONLY ONE HIT in the kill zone and only a maximum penalty of two misses are counted.
Misses are 5 points each.
Procedurals are any infraction that would lead the RO to believe that the shooter would have been lethally engaged by the threat target. Procedurals are on a progressive scale of 10 pts for the first and an additional 10 pts for each consecutive procedural during the stage.(Example10 points for the first procedural and 20 pts for the second and 30 points for the 3rd penalties).
Non-threat hits are 20 points and ALL hits are counted against the shooter.
The shooter with the lowest combined score is the winner of the match.
A TWENTY SECOND BONUS IS AWARDED FOR SHOOTERS THAT GO THRU A STAGE AND COMMIT NO PROCEDURALS OR HAVE ANY MISSES.
Match placement is important in the leader board scoring system. A shooter is given points that coincide with his placement in a match. If a match has 10 participates then the person that places 1st will receive 90 points and 2nd place receives 80 points and so on.The last place shooter is awarded 10 points. If a registered participant misses a match he receives 0 points for that match.


It's a fun match.

[theblacknight]

A lot of matches are not much of a shooting challenge, but much of a physical fitness challenge. The advantage goes to the young and fit.

Such as life.

[John Hearne]

While the NTI is the best attempt to roll everything together, it was a very resource intensive event and as they moved away from hard core scoring they got less participation. Over the years, the Polite Society Event at the Rangemaster Tactical Conference had recognition for the "Conspicuously Competent." It was a separate recognition based on how you solved the stage versus raw score. RO's were asked to keep an eye out for people "doing it right." If someone was mentioned by all of the RO's, they were honored. Interestingly, the people who were recognized as Conspicuously Competent were in the top 25% of shooting skill.

The best event I've attended, as far as balancing resources and being realistic was at the now defunct Sun Dog Shooters in Arizona. Their final event of the year had seven stages. Each was graded on a pass/fail basis. Two of the events were Sims scenarios. Everything else was done on par times and included a blind malfunction clearance stage. Only one person passed all seven stages, there were several of us who passed six. One of the sims stages was "winnable" only be leaving the scene.

I used to shoot with some tactically oriented guys that played by IDPAish rules but were open for experimenting. I played around with the idea of carrots as well as sticks. One of the stages I designed had a piece of low cover by the shooter. On the beep the shooter turned and had a target array of three targets to the left. Of the three, one of the targets was randomly selected as a no shoot. If you stood an engaged the two threats, you received your straight time. If you moved to kneeling, time was taken off your score. If you moved to prone, more time was taken off. The idea was that the "bonus" was greater than the time it took to perform. As you moved down range, two targets appeared simultaneously. One was a shoot, one was a no-shoot, again randomly selected. Once you engaged those two, there was a hostage shot that was fairly difficult. This seemed to work fairly well as you were discriminating and awarded for using some tactics.

[ToddG]

The problem with penalizing "bad tactics" (or giving bonuses for "good tactics") is that not everyone agrees on which is which.

For example, I got dinged at a "tactical" side match years ago because I dropped a partially loaded magazine on the ground halfway through a room clearing exercise. Now keep in mind, after reloading and abandoning those five or six rounds I still had thirty one rounds on me. Or put another way, I still had more than twice as much ammo as the match director who carried a 7+1 1911 and one spare mag. His 15 was enough to begin with, but my 31 wasn't enough to finish with? But it wasn't about logic, it was about A Tactical Rule.

Another example is IDPA's reload rule. In an attempt to force folks to "be tactical," you have to run to cover before reloading if you're caught out in the open when your gun goes empty. Sounds tactical, right? But what happens in practice is that folks are in the open exposed to multiple threats and they cannot get their gun back into fighting condition until they first run behind cover. You're not even allowed to drop the empty mag on the ground.

Or take something as seemingly straightforward as IDPA's cover rule. It's not about being tactical, it's about having one half of your torso behind cover. As anyone who's ever watched different sized competitors in different squads with different ROs can tell you, that 50% judgment is made extremely inconsistently. I've had ROs give me cover penalties when I barely had more than an eyeball and elbow around a corner, while others have allowed me to stand 95% out in the open without even yelling a warning. As soon as you add a subjective evaluation or require the scorekeeping system to rely on judgment calls like that, it's no longer a competition.

There's also the matter of context. Even if there is a good stage description, two different shooters can be thinking of it in two completely different contexts. What might make sense tactically against static targets won't necessarily be tactically sound against moving, thinking, aggressive opponents.

Is that barricade really a thin piece of plywood barely as wide as my shoulders that provides no ballistic protection and minimal line-of-sight protection against previously unidentified aggressors who might try to flank you? If so, I'm not going to be as worried about using it as "cover" against the guy who knows where I am but I might be more concerned about using it to blind my position to folks on the flank. Or is it representative of a long brick wall that will stop whatever bullets you're imagining the cardboard badguys are shooting? If so, suddenly I need to make sure I'm using its bullet-stopping goodness as best I can.

The standing/kneeling/prone example above is another good one. Depending on context, there might be times when going prone isn't the best idea even if it gives the best use of cover. If there are three threats five yards away from me, taking the time to get on the ground is not likely to be my first choice unless those threats are somehow incapable of moving toward me.

How about something as simple as t-shirt wearing static cardboard targets? That was all the rage in IDPA back when I was shooting at a national level. It's just about the stupidest thing ever. There's nothing tactical about making it impossible for me to assess my target after engaging it. If I don't know I've delivered effective hits, I wouldn't stop shooting. Try that in a match, though, and you empty your pistol on Target 1 and DNF the stage. The guy who set up the stage wanted to be more tactical by making the targets more realistic ("real people don't have bullseyes!") but he's trying to enforce a particular sliver of realism that actually makes the test less realistic.

[theblacknight]

I agree with on all of that,and all of those things are why I like matches like the gunfighter. There's soo many variables, it's impossible to ensure any kind of standard for competition, so you just say fuck it and shoot it like you know you should. dudes who like to argue usually dont stay around.

[fuse]

How about something as simple as t-shirt wearing static cardboard targets? That was all the rage in IDPA back when I was shooting at a national level. It's just about the stupidest thing ever. There's nothing tactical about making it impossible for me to assess my target after engaging it. If I don't know I've delivered effective hits, I wouldn't stop shooting. Try that in a match, though, and you empty your pistol on Target 1 and DNF the stage. The guy who set up the stage wanted to be more tactical by making the targets more realistic ("real people don't have bullseyes!") but he's trying to enforce a particular sliver of realism that actually makes the test less realistic.

Wow. This makes way too much sense for 97% of competitors (myself included) to NEVER consider.

[ToddG]

I agree with on all of that,and all of those things are why I like matches like the gunfighter. There's soo many variables, it's impossible to ensure any kind of standard for competition, so you just say fuck it and shoot it like you know you should. dudes who like to argue usually dont stay around.

Which is perfectly fine for a small group of guys who know each other. Heck, we have "competitions" all the time when our little band of numbskulls gets together and we make up new rules on the fly! But once you step past that and want to induce outsiders to participate you can no longer have arbitrary rules unless they're well spelled out. IDPA does that part fairly well. I don't agree with a lot of the "tactics" enforced by IDPA -- tactical order, no reloads in the open, etc. -- but at least you are 100% clear going in what the rules are. Play by the rules or get dinged.


Wow. This makes way too much sense for 97% of competitors (myself included) to NEVER consider.

It's a serious pet peeve of mine. Sorry for the rant. I just get aggravated by people trying to make an unmoving, non-reactive cardboard target "more realistic" by dressing it up like a Barbie doll. If you want me to engage it like a threat, it needs to fall down after I shoot it enough times in the right place. Like these (http://dvctargets.com/):

http://dvctargets.com/Images/hht_animated.gif

[irishshooter]

Like these (http://dvctargets.com/):

http://dvctargets.com/Images/hht_animated.gif

true. it looks like Matt Dillon playing a gang member acting as if he were shot. i'll take 6.

[jar]

As soon as you add a subjective evaluation or require the scorekeeping system to rely on judgment calls like that, it's no longer a competition.


The whole post was excellent, but this line is fabulous. That, in a nutshell, is why I've grown to prefer USPSA to IDPA. USPSA is completely unapologetic about being a game. It's a game that tests a variety of skills that would be useful in a defensive context, but has no pretensions beyond that.

I think competitive exercises in defensive training are a great idea, but I don't think they translate well to an actual match.

[JAD]

The whole post was excellent, but this line is fabulous.

Funny, it was the one thing that seemed wrong on the face of it to me. You can't have subjectively judged competition? Really? So half the events in the Olympics are bullshit? OK, bad example. Wait, there might not be a good example.

Anyway, I generally agree with Todd: legislating appropriate behavior into a shooting competition is pointless, and as far as I'm concerned trying to make competition 'realistic' is pointless. I think it's more dangerous to your good habits to train for a pseudorealistic competition than to train for video games like steel challenge, bianchi, and USPSA; and the less the sport tries to be realistic, the safer it is to participate in.

[ToddG]

1 - the Olympic competitions judged subjectively are always the most controversial and, for the most part, most artistic. Not to take anything at all away from divers and gymnasts, but the perfect backflip isn't the same as who ran from point a to point b the fastest.

2 - the standards for those sports are sill fairly well defined and universally accepted. No one says you need to stick your landing our you'll die, and no one else is arguing that sticking your landing is a bad way to do it.

[JAD]

but the perfect backflip isn't the same as who ran from point a to point b the fastest.
Neither is the most likely to survive a gunfight the same as the person who punched holes in static paper most quickly. Tactics are 'artistic,' which is why several posters seem to generally agree that measuring tactical performance is perhaps best done in a subjectively judged environment like NTI, and that if you do it really well (like NTI) no one will show up (like NTI).