Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 56

Thread: Cover Rules

  1. #31
    We are diminished
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by JAD View Post
    That's the way I knew it. However, especially at larger matches, you needed a backpack for all the benefit of the doubt you needed to carry onto the range. An SO who is liberal with cover penalties was not welcomed by either the MD or the super squad. This was about the same time that round dumping was being legislated and the FTDR was being neutered, and we were generally exchanging the whole 'spirit of the game' thing for 'it's just a game.'
    BTDT. I shot Nationals six or seven times. The cover rule was interpreted and applied differently each year, on each stage, and by each SO. It's why half of the stage walkthrough became shooters taking position and asking SOs "is this ok?"

    FWIW, the original set of KSTG cover rules were:
    • 50%; the competitor protecting at least 50% of his torso from any Threat target that has not yet been neutralized if cover is available (as measured from the center of the target)
    • crowding; muzzle must not protrude past the uprange edge of the point of cover being used
    • pieing; shooters must engage targets in the order they become visible around a corner (applies to vertical cover only)
    • feet; both of shooter's feet must be in contact with the ground while shooting around cover (no silly IPSC 1-legged acrobatics)


    The rules specifically prohibited warnings.

    At our "beta match" we had multiple USPSA/IDPA national champions and the #1 complaint was the cover rule. Because of the lack of warnings, shooters frequently stepped into a position that earned them a 5s penalty for every target in an array. After the fact there's really no way to adjudicate... if the RO says you were an inch farther around the corner than you say you were, that's that. And it led to some pretty heated discussions.

    That's why we switched from the subjective judgment of the RO to an objective fault line. But as mentioned in the first post, that has proven to have its own weaknesses.

  2. #32
    Hokey / Ancient JAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kansas City
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    The fault lines are weak, though. There are a number of problems with using fault lines:
    • [1]shooter has to be looking at the ground and his feet as he comes up to a shooting position instead of looking downrange and thinking about the threat he's supposed to be engaging
      [2]in order to accommodate shooters of different sizes, ages, degrees of athleticism/flexibility, etc., the cover line has to be pretty generous... to the point where frequently a typical shooter is barely using cover at all
      [3]in order to accommodate an array of multiple targets, the cover line has to be generous enough to allow shooters to engage the "last" target they'll see around cover... meaning they're barely using cover at all for the earlier targets in the array
      [4]setting up flat, no-trip "fault lines" on grass, gravel, and other outdoor surfaces is difficult
    Thanks for the reminder to re-read the first post. I still don't think you're going to find something better than fault lines. To respond to each of your discontentitudes:
    1) no, expressly, he doesn't. If the fault lines are where they should be, his feet will be behind them if he's using cover. If he has to look, he's cheating (himself).
    2) this does suck.
    3) there's no problem with progressive fault lines (T1 blue, T2 red, T3 green) since they're there for the line judge and not the shooter.
    4) paint.

    They're far from perfect, but I think that with the addition of a line judge and clarification to the shooters that if they're using cover they're behind the line, they're better than anything else.




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Ignore Alien Orders

  3. #33
    Member cclaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna, Va
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    After the fact there's really no way to adjudicate... if the RO says you were an inch farther around the corner than you say you were, that's that. And it led to some pretty heated discussions.
    We need videotape replay.

    With all the video cameras around these days, why not have a video camera follow behind the shooter?

    Then, it is obvious to everyone.

    CC
    That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state;

  4. #34
    We are diminished
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by JAD View Post
    1) no, expressly, he doesn't. If the fault lines are where they should be, his feet will be behind them if he's using cover. If he has to look, he's cheating (himself).
    I agree with this in concept. As the other KSTG match officials can attest, this was precisely our viewpoint when we began: put the lines wide enough that anyone who violates the line has really done a poor job using cover. However, it's a game, and people see a limit and want to go right to the edge because it probably will, in fact, deliver a better score.

    3) there's no problem with progressive fault lines (T1 blue, T2 red, T3 green) since they're there for the line judge and not the shooter.
    In addition to the issue above, this also becomes a time/setup problem. Figuring out all those angles and laying down fault lines for each one is time consuming. If something has to change -- which happens pretty often during stage setup -- then you're stuck redrawing a lot of lines.

    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    We need videotape replay.
    With all the video cameras around these days, why not have a video camera follow behind the shooter?
    • The camera would have to be in the proper line from shooter to target for each target engaged. This essentially means the RO needs to be wearing it on his head. And that still won't work for instances in which there is a significant difference in height between the shooter and the RO, etc.
    • The image on a phone or even handheld video camera's screen is going to be tiny and much harder to judge than what the RO sees live in full scale.
    • Given how many cover penalties get awarded at a big match, on-demand instant replay would be a tremendous time sink. This might be overcome by some kind of risk: if you challenge the call and it's deemed to have been correct, you get an even bigger penalty. Though my guess is that would only really stop the serious competitors... the casual & "tactical" guys are still likely to freeze everything and demand a view of the stage every time.

  5. #35
    Hokey / Ancient JAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kansas City
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    . However, it's a game, and people see a limit and want to go right to the edge because it probably will, in fact, deliver a better score.
    Ooo! I know! Infra red lines, and the line judge wears goggles!

    I can't /imagine/ why I bailed on shooting competition.
    Ignore Alien Orders

  6. #36
    We are diminished
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by JAD View Post
    I can't /imagine/ why I bailed on shooting competition.
    A topic for another thread, but fwiw I've seen competition motivate people to get better in ways that something silly like "life and death" rarely does.

  7. #37
    Hokey / Ancient JAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kansas City
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    A topic for another thread, but fwiw I've seen competition motivate people to get better in ways that something silly like "life and death" rarely does.
    Split away -- I don't know if the forum really needs another thread on the validity of competition as part of a shootybetterment program -- but I absolutely enjoyed and profited from *participating* in competition. I wasn't very good, ever, but I shot a whole lot and got better, steadily. The problem was that outside of claybusting it's really hard for me to avidly shoot competition without participating in running the local matches, maintaining the local club, and SO'ing at higher levels. Which made me kittening crazy, because shooters, which made me bail.

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    A topic for another thread, but fwiw I've seen competition motivate people to get better in ways that something silly like "life and death" rarely does.
    Because people like winning. I'll probably never get into another self-defense situation in my life, but I will certainly have the chance to go out on the range and prove that I am better than x number of people. Increasing the value of "x" by getting better at shooting is a strong motivator.

  9. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Eye beam sensors at knee/mid thigh height:

    http://www.amazon.com/Aleko-Garage-O.../dp/B007TM32L6

    I'm sure you can find them cheaper somewhere.

    Should be pretty easy to make little stands for them, set them up so they break and turn on a light at the same spot you would set up a fault line.

    You can put one end of the sensor beyond cover (but close enough no one should be shooting at it), the other behind the shooter. That way, there is no visible guide for them to look off of, but if they keep to where they should be reasonably looking for cover, they wouldn't trip them. If you mount the sensors in a box with a roof, they will work in the rain and usually in bright sunlight (I know our autocross club uses them in all types of weather).

    You can power them off batteries, so no need for power out on the range. Reusable for practically forever.

  10. #40
    People's knees and thighs are frequently in different places.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •