IPSC 2012 national

noon? On a good day I have one before I go to bed :cool:

Oh ya...I forgot to mention squading. It's also part of the system, and as of the last update it also automatically assigns the competitor number using the format of:

first one or two digits - squad number
second two digits - shooter number.

This is useful for sorting of score sheets and verification.

I noticed that the Stats Crew in Brandon also used this format (probably as a result of Bill working with us in stats at the Nationals Last Year)
 
I only know of one as well.
Just bustin balls.

I'll be shooting open sooner rather than later.

For the nationals, I think an open gun with iron sights would have worked well.
Less chance of shooting though walls and such....

What caused them to be bumped to open? I'm finding some of the divisions complicated to understand.
 
What about complete stage results ???????

The quality of the props and appearance was great.

With the exception of stage 4,5,12 which were quite nice and unusual for this match the placement of the targets was waaaayyy waaayyy to close and usually just behind a wall so shorter shooters had a real problem to shoot them without broken wrist point shooting. As a matter of fact I doubt anyone used their sights on 90% of the targets.

The placement of targets on many stages was at 90 degrees and they allowed shooters to break 90 to shoot targets on certain stages, ridiculous. Appantley no one read the rule book where at level III matches targets are not supposed to be visible past 90, here they wer not visible until almost 90.

Like I said, thre match was beautiful to look at and well run with a few exceptions (don't even talk about Competitors as RO's) but target placement was strictly the amateur nonsense we are used to at many Canadian matches.

I will send the complete stage results to be put up on the website. Yes, lots of the targets were close and on opposing angles through ports/windows providing a different challenge than many were used to. There were zero targets that couldn't be shot at less than 90, and in only two instances was there marks indicating points that if you were past you were breaking 90, but both could be shot at less than 90. Please show me in the rule book were targets cannot be visible past 90 at a level III match? The 90 referred to in the book is for target presentation off the vertical not targets visible as you go past them? Better reread that yourself. I do take offense to your reference to target placement as amatuer nonsense, much thought was put into target placement and variation from the norm., sorry if it is not what "you" consider good target placement, I didn't realize there was a seperate authority we should have consulted first. As far as competitors acting as RO's, get over it already, not every section is the size of Ontario and have an unlimited available workforce and funding to make it happen (No offence intended to the Ontario Section whatsoever, used only as a reference of size). As far as I am concerned the match went very well and the RO's did an exceptional job, many thanks to them for helping out.

Thanks to everyone that came and enjoyed the match, we did the best we could and I feel it turned out quite well. Apologies for the delay in stats, after packing up at the range the files has to change hands a couple times before making it onto the site, thanks for your patience. Of course it is impossible to please everyone but as long as we pleased most I am happy with the outcome, thanks again.
 
Big thanks to the Brandon guys for putting on a great match. I thought the stages were challenging and well thought out. Nothing goofy, just good stages.

I do have one question however that I need answered. Perhaps it's because this was only my second nationals but I am at a total loss for the answer. In my competitors package there is a brush. No matter how hard I try it will not fit down the barrel of my 9mm. What the heck was this thing for?
 
Big thanks to the Brandon guys for putting on a great match. I thought the stages were challenging and well thought out. Nothing goofy, just good stages.

I do have one question however that I need answered. Perhaps it's because this was only my second nationals but I am at a total loss for the answer. In my competitors package there is a brush. No matter how hard I try it will not fit down the barrel of my 9mm. What the heck was this thing for?

Because that is for brushing your teeth.
Good luck
 
Big thanks to the Brandon guys for putting on a great match. I thought the stages were challenging and well thought out. Nothing goofy, just good stages.

I do have one question however that I need answered. Perhaps it's because this was only my second nationals but I am at a total loss for the answer. In my competitors package there is a brush. No matter how hard I try it will not fit down the barrel of my 9mm. What the heck was this thing for?

its a back scratcher.....:p
 
I was very impressed with how the ROing was done. Essentially no one competitive with each other was ROing each other. I much prefer this way to spending tons of money on dedicated ROs.
 
I will send the complete stage results to be put up on the website. Yes, lots of the targets were close and on opposing angles through ports/windows providing a different challenge than many were used to. There were zero targets that couldn't be shot at less than 90, and in only two instances was there marks indicating points that if you were past you were breaking 90, but both could be shot at less than 90. Please show me in the rule book were targets cannot be visible past 90 at a level III match? The 90 referred to in the book is for target presentation off the vertical not targets visible as you go past them? Better reread that yourself. I do take offense to your reference to target placement as amatuer nonsense, much thought was put into target placement and variation from the norm., sorry if it is not what "you" consider good target placement, I didn't realize there was a seperate authority we should have consulted first. As far as competitors acting as RO's, get over it already, not every section is the size of Ontario and have an unlimited available workforce and funding to make it happen (No offence intended to the Ontario Section whatsoever, used only as a reference of size). As far as I am concerned the match went very well and the RO's did an exceptional job, many thanks to them for helping out.

Thanks to everyone that came and enjoyed the match, we did the best we could and I feel it turned out quite well. Apologies for the delay in stats, after packing up at the range the files has to change hands a couple times before making it onto the site, thanks for your patience. Of course it is impossible to please everyone but as long as we pleased most I am happy with the outcome, thanks again.

thanks for all your hard work...it is appreciated.:canadaFlag:

My only suggestion for the future (for any Nationals) would be to use the RU Ready timers. Easier to read the screen. Nice big numbers.
 
I was very impressed with how the ROing was done. Essentially no one competitive with each other was ROing each other. I much prefer this way to spending tons of money on dedicated ROs.

+1 on the CRO's and RO's, and helpers and everyone else.
I am spoiled here in Alberta where we get stats in less than 24 hours, so sorry about my complaining. It was a really solid III match.
 
90 targets

Please show me in the rule book were targets cannot be visible past 90 at a level III match

2.1.1 Physical Construction – Safety considerations in the design, physical construction, and stated requirementsfor any course of fire are the responsibility of the host organization subject to the approval of the Range Master. Reasonable effort must be made to prevent injury to competitors, officials and spectators during the
match.Course design should prevent inadvertent unsafe actions wherever possible. Consideration must be given to the operation of any course of fire to provide suitable access for officials supervising the competitors.


2.1.2 Safe Angles of Fire – Courses of fire must always be constructed taking into account safe angles of fire.
Consideration must be given to safe target and frame construction and the angle of any possible ricochets.
Where appropriate the physical dimensions and suitability of backstops and side berms must be determined as part of the construction process.
Unless otherwise specified, the default maximum muzzle angle is 90 degrees in all directions, measured from the front of the competitor facing directly center downrange.Violations are subject to Rule 10.5.2.

2.1.2.1 Subject to the direction and approval of the Regional Director, stage(s) or range specific muzzle angles (reduced or increased) may be permitted. Violations are subject to Rule 10.5.2. Full details of the applicable angles and any conditional factors (e.g. a reduced vertical muzzle angle only applies when a finger is inside the trigger guard), must be published in advance of the match and must be included in the written stage briefings (also see Section 2.3).

2.1.4 Target Locations – When a course is constructed to include target locations other than immediately downrange, organizers and officials must protect or restrictsurrounding areas to which competitors, officials or spectators have access. Each competitor must be permitted to solve the competitive problem in his ownway and must not be hindered by being forced to act in any manner which might cause unsafe action.
Targets must be arranged so that shooting at them as presented will not cause competitors to breach safe angles of fire.

I have been to matches all around the world and it sometimes targets are placed to be shot at 90 degrees bur it is NEVER a good way to do it and doing it simply shows a lack of understanding that it could be done where the targets could be shot at a much safer angle.

You can place the targets as close as you want and as many on 1 target stand as you like, just don't expect everyone to like it.

A varied target distance and large angle transitions with targets to be shot on the move is not well liked by those who cannot do it either.
 
My only suggestion for the future (for any Nationals) would be to use the RU Ready timers. Easier to read the screen. Nice big numbers.

RU Ready can be flakey. I found the little CED hard to read in the rain threw polarized lenses however. Other than that little issue it's a great timer.
 
10 highly regarded CRO`s shot the pre-match and we had two very well qualified Range Masters. Based on their opinions, adjustments were made before the stages were shot, but if you feel that these people would let a match proceed with rules and safety violations you`re really flinging your poop far and wide!
 
Which means you either shoot production in which case they are brother and sister or you shoot standard and then they are just first cousins....:adult:


Wrong on both counts. Now you only get one more guess so you have a 50% chance of getting it right! :HR: :p
 
Back
Top Bottom