I have seen this in the past as well and I've seen it accepted and denied. As with any sport, not everyone is perfect and that includes competitors and officials. I've also seen RO's walk away from running competitors that they don't want the hassle of dealing with. If they can do that, then I think competitors should be able to as well.
IPSC Rules: Can a competitor request a different RO
- Thread starter Redmaple
- Start date
- Location
- Prince George B.C.
Maybe some people are just a little too full of themselves.............
Last I heard it was still just a Game
John
Last I heard it was still just a Game
John
rules and creeds are fine, on paper, but there are some competitors and some officials that mix like oil and water. As such, I don't see the big deal if someone doesn't want to run an individual or be run by one. There are also those who have histories with each other, and placing them in a situation where one could be accused of some impropriety or another is simply unfair.
As for it being a game, yeah, it is, and some of us do take it seriously, we invest tens of thousands of dollars, or more, some times a lot more, in our game, and we want to make sure that investment is treated properly.
As for it being a game, yeah, it is, and some of us do take it seriously, we invest tens of thousands of dollars, or more, some times a lot more, in our game, and we want to make sure that investment is treated properly.
Don't burn bridges. The IPSC community is so small here " We, standing together are the Bridge" It was hard for me after my first DQ to admit I made a bad, thoroughly. RO's are our guardian angels and unless their touching your NO,NO, parts they deserve respect.
There are certain individuals that I wouldn't have a beer with, and maybe some that feel the same about me. When I RO one of those people the only thing I'm concerned with is my duty as an RO. I watch their trigger finger and muzzle direction through the COF. Unless a shooter makes a complaint that a MD deals with by informing me what I have done wrong, then my answer is 'Make Ready'. Maybe 'RO Preference' could be built into the Practiscore system.
This thread was started by a guy with an obvious hardon for IPSC. He's trying to justify his earlier comments about wonky rules.
Your question speaks volumes. There are numerous people on here who occupy positions that could do something if your story pans out in any way who have been waiting eagerly for details. Instead, you stand behind your cryptic, mysterious accusations of wrongdoing.
If you have participated in IPSC in any meaningful way long enough to be legitimately disgruntled, you would know who Freedom Ventures is and in what capacity he is involved with IPSC Canada.
- Location
- Halifax - NS
Sure, my role is that I am the Regional Director of IPSC Canada.
Now that I've answered your question (that you responded to my question with), how about letting us know the details about these "Wonky" situations so I can get hold of the appropriate authority (NROI president, Section Coordinators or Section NROI Reps) and have them fixed?
I have participated in some 35-40 matches at a local level. I have no idea who is behind his or any alias. No one is exactly forthright with their identity here. I have no clue who you are either. Am I supposed to??
I will send an email to the club executive, local NROI and copy you. Send me your email privately.
For the benefit of discussion here, does anyone want examples?
For the benefit of discussion here, does anyone want examples?
- Location
- Halifax - NS
OK - Email Address is in the sigline.
1riot1ranger
CGN Regular
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Yes, please.
Here's an interesting one..
7.1 Match Officials
7.1 Match Officials
Range Officer (“RO”) – Issues range commands, oversees competitor compliance with the written stage briefing and closely monitors safe competitor action. He also declares the time, scores and penalties achieved by each competitor and verifies that these are correctly recorded on the competitor's score sheet (under the authority of a Chief Range Officer and Range Master).
Practice: Another “official” is used to perform some RO duties. The “scorekeeper” – a position not defined anywhere - is almost always used to record the findings of the RO. While the practice is apparently widespread in Canada, there is no clear provision for the “scorekeeper” to call DQs, procedural faults or act as an appeal official on scoring. The club may or may not employ a scorekeeper in such a manner, even though the scorekeeper may or may not also be a qualified RO. Confusion prevails. . Practices vary within a match and from match to match.
Wonky? In need of fixing??
7.1 Match Officials
7.1 Match Officials
Range Officer (“RO”) – Issues range commands, oversees competitor compliance with the written stage briefing and closely monitors safe competitor action. He also declares the time, scores and penalties achieved by each competitor and verifies that these are correctly recorded on the competitor's score sheet (under the authority of a Chief Range Officer and Range Master).
Practice: Another “official” is used to perform some RO duties. The “scorekeeper” – a position not defined anywhere - is almost always used to record the findings of the RO. While the practice is apparently widespread in Canada, there is no clear provision for the “scorekeeper” to call DQs, procedural faults or act as an appeal official on scoring. The club may or may not employ a scorekeeper in such a manner, even though the scorekeeper may or may not also be a qualified RO. Confusion prevails. . Practices vary within a match and from match to match.
Wonky? In need of fixing??
Here's another..
8.6 Assistance or Interference
8.6.1 No assistance of any kind can be given to a competitor during a course of fire, except that any
Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue safety warnings to a competitor at any time. Such warnings will not be grounds for the competitor to be awarded a reshoot.
Practice: Some ROs will give a competitor a warning upon observing a rule violation and reserve an actual DQ when it is “clear” that a competitor is in error. The practice here is widely inconsistent with some ROs DQing a competitor for even slight infractions. There is evident discrimination with the same RO giving one competitor a warning while another is immediately DQed. Application of the rule is inconsistent.
8.6 Assistance or Interference
8.6.1 No assistance of any kind can be given to a competitor during a course of fire, except that any
Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue safety warnings to a competitor at any time. Such warnings will not be grounds for the competitor to be awarded a reshoot.
Practice: Some ROs will give a competitor a warning upon observing a rule violation and reserve an actual DQ when it is “clear” that a competitor is in error. The practice here is widely inconsistent with some ROs DQing a competitor for even slight infractions. There is evident discrimination with the same RO giving one competitor a warning while another is immediately DQed. Application of the rule is inconsistent.
Do go on...
Another wonky practice? How common is this at your club?
10.2 Procedural Penalties – Specific Examples
10.2.1 A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground or any object
beyond a Fault Line will receive 1 procedural penalty for each occurrence.
10.2.1.1 However, if the competitor has gained a significant advantage on any target(s) while faulting, the competitor may instead be assessed 1 procedural penalty for each shot fired at the subject target(s) while faulting. No penalty is assessed if a competitor does not fire any shots while faulting a line except when Rule 2.2.1.5 applies.
Practice: No one knows what this rule means. Some think, for example, one’s entire foot has to be over the fault line while firing a shot before assessing a procedural while others will assess a procedural if so much as a toe is over the fault line while firing a shot. Practices vary within a match and from match to match.
10.2 Procedural Penalties – Specific Examples
10.2.1 A competitor who fires shots while any part of their body is touching the ground or any object
beyond a Fault Line will receive 1 procedural penalty for each occurrence.
10.2.1.1 However, if the competitor has gained a significant advantage on any target(s) while faulting, the competitor may instead be assessed 1 procedural penalty for each shot fired at the subject target(s) while faulting. No penalty is assessed if a competitor does not fire any shots while faulting a line except when Rule 2.2.1.5 applies.
Practice: No one knows what this rule means. Some think, for example, one’s entire foot has to be over the fault line while firing a shot before assessing a procedural while others will assess a procedural if so much as a toe is over the fault line while firing a shot. Practices vary within a match and from match to match.
