Episode 282 - How would you penalize the shooter for this IDPA stage?

Rick brought up an interesting conundrum in episode 276 as a Trivia question. In this episode he describes the situation and talks about the decision he made on how to properly penalize the shooter for making a procedural mistake. Do you agree with his interpretation of the rules?
Send questions and feedback to [e-mail]
Music used: Neuro Rhythm by Aaron Spencer machinimasound...
Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (creativecommons...)

[@bonesoncampus]

for more fun, if they were using cover and bounced back for that 3rd round on the first target its also a PE for cover because they would be exposed unless they tucked back in.

[@WRXXXual]

I am going to shoot my first IDPA match on November 9th, and I'm totally excited! I do have to say, the rule writers for the sport have to be System Engineers, because the rule book reads like a performance spec., hahaha!

[@chewycow]

Could you make that argument that he only fired 2 shots at T2 so technically didn't "engage" the target, and so the first actual engagement would have been T1, so no penalty?

[@ElecTechie]

So my thoughts on this stage is this .. 6.13 Only one (1) non-threat target may be used for every two (2) threat targets in any string of fire. Example: 1-2 threat targets = 1 non-threat target. 3-4 threat targets = 2 non-threat targets. 5-6 threat targets = 3 non-threat targets. 7-8 threat targets = 4 non-threat targets, etc. So according to that .. the stage violated the rules to start with .. So in your scenario with 4 threat targets the maximum number of non-threat targets is 2 ?? And you had 3 .. Or did I miss something ??

[@kimisdaman]

Interesting observation. Utterly irrelevant to the discussion, but yeah, the ratio is off. Pretend that there were only two Equal packets. Rick

[@ElecTechie]

Sorry Rick .. couldnt resist .. lol And you mentioned no one got it yet .. so thought I would go outside the box lol

[@ElecTechie]

Did this actually happen? Or is this just a hypothetical for purposes of making folks think ?

[@kimisdaman]

Yes/No; it actually did happen. The stage, as illustrated, isn't legal, but there was no reason for me to complicate or cloud the issue by even including the NTs. At the same time, why the heck am I using an illegal stage to illustrate a rules question? Rick

[@ElecTechie]

LOL ... Its all good .. was an interesting question for sure .. have to run .. my first USPSA match tomorrow .. still cleaning my gun ..

[@anthonypellegrino1633]

Holy Hell , how is someone supposed to remember all these rules ? I've been thinking about starting to shoot competitive because of the " FUN " factor but................

[@kimisdaman]

A new, provisional rule book was released last week, and it's about half the thickness of the 2015 rule book, so there aren't as many rules as there used to be. Really, the nitty-gritty details don't often come into play if you're not looking to "beat" the rule book. Fifteen years ago, a start position would have been, "seated in chair", but as people looked to save a tenth of a second here and a tenth of a second there, the same intended start position might have to read, "Seated fully within the lateral confines of the chair, facing directly downrange, knees under edge of table, back against back of chair, both cheeks in contact with chair seat . . ." Trying to close loopholes will turn one rule into five, each with five sub-headings, etc. In the case of the episode topic, remember that "engage" means "fire the required minimum number of rounds at the target", and "tactical priority" means engage the targets near-to-far. It's really only two, simple, universally applied rules . . . until you screw up. Rick

[@americasevilgenius]

Also, explanations like this make all of this sound a lot more complicated than it really is. Find a local club, shoot club matches, and you'll pick up on it in no time!

[@Taistopoika]

I think the call was right. Although, If it was a clubmatch (tier 1) I would have also considered, atleast in the case of a novice shooter, to let it pass but mention it to the shooter. He/she definately did not get any advantage from shooting targets that way.

[@TheHumbleMarksman]

Yikes! A lot of brain damage there.

[@waynehall8633]

well I really don't know anything about the rules regulations but when I was listening to you explain I thought only one penalty because he did not pass target two with the mistake so I thought only one penalty because he in my way of thinking only one penalty

[@mytmousemalibu]

And this is why I primarily shoot USPSA, lol. I do shoot IDPA on occasion but it's just additional trigger time/practice to me.

[@kimisdaman]

You'd prefer the salt shaker as P1?

[@mytmousemalibu]

Powerfactorguy Different strokes for different folks as they say. I just prefer the simplicity and action of USPSA. With the basic stage requirements met, you shoot the stage as you see fit. It's purely a competitive sport, it's great practice, it's a test of shooter skill under pressure and its lots of fun. It is however in no way, shape, or form, training or guidance for tactical engagement. That's what training classes are for. IDPA has some good core values from a practice standpoint but it feels a little like ad hoc training. The rules and reg's are taken way out there to the N-th degree. USPSA just suits my tastes better. For the record the two classes I shoot the most, Open division and Production. My Open gun, an M&P 9L PC did take some patience to run reliably. Open guns are fickle creatures. It does very well now If I did my job. My production gun is a bone stock Canik TP9SF and that gun has been as reliable as the sunrise! I have been known to run my carry guns in Limited or Open on occasion too.

[@mytmousemalibu]

***** Exactly. Reloading behind cover before moving, no dropping mags with rounds still in them, etc. If I ever end up in a dangerous situation, I think most of the things IDPA tries to pound home are going to be blatantly obvious in a real world situation. By all means, train for that one and a million chance, IDPA isn't that but it sure tries to smell like it. Just my opinion. Nice looking 2011 Limited gun in your avatar BTW!

[@kimisdaman]

Where did you get the impression that IDPA was not competition? Anything with rules and a timer is competition! Rick

[@mytmousemalibu]

Powerfactorguy Not saying it isn't competition, it is of course but there is more than a few clubs that pass it off like it's some kind of super training course. I think it's pretty common knowledge that this does indeed happen and i'm sure it happens to other sanctioned clubs besides IDPA. For me personally, it's just like trying to play something simple checkers but the checkers playbook is 900 pages long. That is some exaggeration but that's what it feels like to me, over complication. USPSA is more engaging, faster pace, and fairly simple in comparison from a rulebook standpoint.

[@waynehall8633]

sorry if it don't make much sense I was in a hurry

[@waynehall8633]

I came up with one but with a slightly different way of thinking

[@kimisdaman]

Let's hear it. Rick

[@waynehall8633]

I figured that the shooter only went backward one time

[@warrenrosen132]

Transition to uspsa.

[@5gunIDPAexpertGR]

Yes I agrre, it's very clear, 1 PE.