South Florida USPSA club that allows AIWB usage

[Olim9]

I think good matches have a mix of stage types - some complex ones you have to think through/figure out, and some simple ones that are designed for fun. 180 traps and other stage design/construction that set shooters up to be in situations where they're likely to get DQed only serve to make people feel bad and make the job of the ROs more difficult. I've never been excited about props. The suspension/wobble bridge somebody brought to a match I attended a while ago was pretty fun for me, but if there had been anybody there with physical limitations, it could have been problematic for them to navigate it safely. Not sure if that's what you mean by props, but I feel like we're at least mostly on the same page.

There couldn't possibly be people who will deliberately design stages to DQ people would they? I already shot in 3 90 degree stages and had no problems with my gun handling.

[olstyn]

There couldn't possibly be people who will deliberately design stages to DQ people would they?

I don't think it's common, but the word "intentional" placed before "180 traps" in caleb's post responding to mine earlier is probably a clue that some stage designers/builders do it. The ones I've seen that could cause issues usually involve targets that can be seen from multiple places, and some of the views you could get on them are such that the target in question is slightly uprange of you, or stages that are designed such that the last shot you fire is right up against the 180, so you need to be aware of it and turn downrange before unload/show clear, etc. In my experience, though, ROs will usually warn a squad during the stage briefing if there's something iffy about the stage, which tends to mitigate that sort of issue. That said, if a stage has multiple "features" of that type, shooters have lots of opportunities to screw up in DQable ways, and we're all human, so...

[rob_s]

I don’t be,ieve I’ve ever seen a deliberate 180 trap designed into a stage. I have seen a lot of stages where there was a 180 trap, often from trying to replicate a stage from another range onto a range where it’s not possible, and stage designers that were unwilling to modify the stage once it was pointedly out.

[Mr_White]

It’s not the norm and when you behave outside the norm it draws attention. And often when someone is at a match doing something “wrong”, aka, different, it’s usually a newbie who showed up with what he has and is fumbling through, so some guys immediately go into “i’m helping!” mode.

I shot a match from appendix last week and got a lot of questions, too. One guy was really confused and came over while I was reloading mags and questioned me pretty hard like I didn’t understand how this all worked. Oh well.

One person very kindly told me that I don't have to shoot from concealment. I said oh I know, I just like to do it that way. He seemed really concerned at first, then not so much later. I pretty much just smile and say yeah but I like it.

[ragnar_d]

I don’t be,ieve I’ve ever seen a deliberate 180 trap designed into a stage. I have seen a lot of stages where there was a 180 trap, often from trying to replicate a stage from another range onto a range where it’s not possible, and stage designers that were unwilling to modify the stage once it was pointedly out.

Agreed. I've never seen it done intentionally. If I remember correctly, it was something we spent time on when I got my RO certification. I've been lucky enough that the MDs I've had were very conscientious about it.

At Markham, I could see some issues since (from the pictures I've seen via google maps) there aren't really bays but just a bunch of stages setup along the impact been with nothing dividing them. I could see that causing some issues with stage design if so . . .

Also, is Homestead doing any weekend IDPA/USPSA matches for the rest of the year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Olim9]

Also, is Homestead doing any weekend IDPA/USPSA matches for the rest of the year?

I'm not seeing anything USPSA but they do have Steel Challenge every third Sunday of the month. Their USPSA matches are rather small, according to a guy I spoke with over there.

[Sal Picante]

I don’t be,ieve I’ve ever seen a deliberate 180 trap designed into a stage. I have seen a lot of stages where there was a 180 trap, often from trying to replicate a stage from another range onto a range where it’s not possible, and stage designers that were unwilling to modify the stage once it was pointedly out.

2017 Iron Sight Nationals, stage 1.

[Peally]

2017 Iron Sight Nationals, stage 1.

Diagram looks completely mundane, but I didn't see it in person. Are the NS targets beyond 180 by a degree from the ports or something?

Regardless, was it designed that way to intentionally goad people into violating rules? Or was it simply an oversight/shit design/stubbornness?

[jetfire]

I don't think it's common, but the word "intentional" placed before "180 traps" in caleb's post responding to mine earlier is probably a clue that some stage designers/builders do it. The ones I've seen that could cause issues usually involve targets that can be seen from multiple places, and some of the views you could get on them are such that the target in question is slightly uprange of you, or stages that are designed such that the last shot you fire is right up against the 180, so you need to be aware of it and turn downrange before unload/show clear, etc. In my experience, though, ROs will usually warn a squad during the stage briefing if there's something iffy about the stage, which tends to mitigate that sort of issue. That said, if a stage has multiple "features" of that type, shooters have lots of opportunities to screw up in DQable ways, and we're all human, so...

Like Mr Pepperoni said right above here, it's absolutely happened. If I never left Palm Beach/Broward/Miami-Dade county, I probably wouldn't see intentional 180 traps; however when you get out and shoot travelling matches you get exposed to a lot of different stage design ideas. I've shot stages where there were clearly 180 traps that were put in place by the stage designers to "force people to pay attention or they'll go home" which I think is a messed up way to design a stage.

When I talk about gimmick props, a really good (bad?) example of that would be a lot of the stages from 2017's Area 3 match, which had shooters do some really goofy stuff like run with a big stupid baton, or run through a forest of pool noodles; things like that. I like props that test people's physicality and agility, I don't like things that are just sort of tossed into a stage with no apparent reason.

A good stage prop should test your either your physical ability or your marksmanship ability, and if a prop doesn't test either of those, I question its inclusion.

[Sal Picante]

Diagram looks completely mundane, but I didn't see it in person. Are the NS targets beyond 180 by a degree from the ports or something?

Regardless, was it designed that way to intentionally goad people into violating rules? Or was it simply an oversight/shit design/stubbornness?

They DQ'd Doug Koenig for a very dubious 180 call. The middle, left array was setup for a reload on exit and you had them hawking to see if people were even near the 170 while pushing off.
A lot of people would kinda square up and face the targets which were maybe 30 degrees off the 180.

The fact that they used it as a 180 trap was the BS. It was bullshit and the response was "Hey the stage is as built". I dunno if that implies it was intentional or not.

In the past one of our local MD's would build stages with difficult upward movement (he was IPSC-oriented vs USPSA oriented) and he certainly relished "catching a few newer people".

One of the reasons I took control of the club and started changing things...