'Leeway' in IPSC
- Thread starter Gothmog
- Start date
I'm not sure if more "leeway" is given to the "top" shooters for real or imagined infractions during a match, but it does seem from time to time that RO's are more ready, willing and able to critique the "bottom" shooters than the "top" shooters. Now, before all you RO's get bent out of shape, much of the "critiqueing" is justified, welcomed and appreciated, but some of it is not. It is rare to see or hear an RO telling a "top" shooter that they "almost" broke 90, or they "almost" had their finger in the trigger guard, etc...even if they did. 
I did witness the result of a very experienced RO (and very skilled shooter) mention to a "top" shooter that he came very close to not only breaking 90 with his first shot from the holster, he was "almost" going to call an AD on it. (I was scoring the stage, so was right there). The "top" shooter threw a temper tantrum that would rival a 2-year old, and accused the RO of being "over-zealous". He picked on the wrong guy, because the RO demanded that the shooter apologize immediately for the stupid remark, or he would DQ him immediately. He apologized. When safety is a factor, there is no such thing as an "over-zealous" RO.
I did witness the result of a very experienced RO (and very skilled shooter) mention to a "top" shooter that he came very close to not only breaking 90 with his first shot from the holster, he was "almost" going to call an AD on it. (I was scoring the stage, so was right there). The "top" shooter threw a temper tantrum that would rival a 2-year old, and accused the RO of being "over-zealous". He picked on the wrong guy, because the RO demanded that the shooter apologize immediately for the stupid remark, or he would DQ him immediately. He apologized. When safety is a factor, there is no such thing as an "over-zealous" RO.
Six Star said:I'm not sure if more "leeway" is given to the "top" shooters for real or imagined infractions during a match, but it does seem from time to time that RO's are more ready, willing and able to critique the "bottom" shooters than the "top" shooters. Now, before all you RO's get bent out of shape, much of the "critiqueing" is justified, welcomed and appreciated, but some of it is not. It is rare to see or hear an RO telling a "top" shooter that they "almost" broke 90, or they "almost" had their finger in the trigger guard, etc...even if they did.
I did witness the result of a very experienced RO (and very skilled shooter) mention to a "top" shooter that he came very close to not only breaking 90 with his first shot from the holster, he was "almost" going to call an AD on it. (I was scoring the stage, so was right there). The "top" shooter threw a temper tantrum that would rival a 2-year old, and accused the RO of being "over-zealous". He picked on the wrong guy, because the RO demanded that the shooter apologize immediately for the stupid remark, or he would DQ him immediately. He apologized. When safety is a factor, there is no such thing as an "over-zealous" RO.
I would say the safety is paramount, and it is the most important factors in IPSC. I would also say that I have only seen one or two "over-zealous" R.O's.
ie: not a shooter got by an RO who had safety suggestions or warnings for "everyone" on my squad at the 2005 nationals. WE were running hot from one stage to another, and in between he had a comment for everyone. If was not a complex stage with any close turns to breaking 90.
I guess all of us had were close to being unsafe.
But, I would rather go thru that than have an accident.
maurice said:
Absolutely!
Although in the particular event you mention, the warnings were "universal", I do want to know if I'm doing something that could develop into an unsafe practice. That's where it's difficult for an RO to be "fair", I think...If the RO 'knows' the shooter, chances are he'll/she'll let an "almost" infraction slide unless it becomes a habit...if the RO does not know the shooter (or the shooter's abilities or lack of), he/she will usually mention it.Six Star said:
Careful there. I believe there IS such a thing as being overzealous in the name of safety, and I have seen it. I have personally witnessed a CRO standing inside my 180 degree field of view and leaning forward intently just prior to the start signal. When queried about this the reason given was, "In order to see if you break 90 or not." That is both overzealous and stupid, not to mention grossly distracting and unfair since one must infer from these actions that the expectation is that I will indeed encroach; a presumption of guilt before the fact, and really, do we really need to have someone leaning into your vision cone as you are about to shoot a stage?
On a stage that forces a competitor into a close 90 degree situation, the proper procedure is to caution them about the potential problem in the walk-through, not after the stage has been shot. Either you break the line or you don't, and if you do you should burn for it.
Six star brings up some really good points. The rules are for every body not a different set for each class. Critiquing from a RO can be a good thing some time and some times it is bothersome. Example would be a RO saying your finger was almost on the trigger after the stage is done. either you finger is on the trigger or it is not. Instead of telling you after the stage give a warning during the stage.
As for the leeway I have seen it more towards lower class shooters ( that sounds really bad but I do not mean it that way ) then the top shooters.
The problem is that some RO's are intimidated by some shooters. That is wrong ,everybody should be equal at the line no matter of class. On the other hand I have seen some really good GM's in the states try to pull things and get put in there place and rightfully so.
As for the leeway I have seen it more towards lower class shooters ( that sounds really bad but I do not mean it that way ) then the top shooters.
The problem is that some RO's are intimidated by some shooters. That is wrong ,everybody should be equal at the line no matter of class. On the other hand I have seen some really good GM's in the states try to pull things and get put in there place and rightfully so.
Six Star said:Absolutely!
The warnings were not universal, everyone has something different.
Finger, 90, etc...
I think (although I am not sure of everones name on this website), Mobile 1 and Madness were on my squad at the 05 Nationals in NB.
Six Star said:Absolutely!
I hope I can safely disagree with this statement. No one looks forward to being DQ'd but in my case and that of my son both had been by RO's we
knew very well and as much as it crapped it was much easier to take than
from a stranger! FWIW
curtdad said:
I was referring to the "almost DQ" thing...not an actual "DQ-able" infraction. I would like to think that in a case of a REAL safety infraction an RO would DQ his mother... ;
And yes, getting DQ'd sucks period.
Six Star said:It is rare to see or hear an RO telling a "top" shooter that they "almost" broke 90, or they "almost" had their finger in the trigger guard, etc...even if they did.
Actually, it's not all that rare; however, most experienced (and note that I don't say "TOP") shooters have been around long enough that they ignore the over-exuberant RO and continue on their merry way. As for RO's critiquing shooters, most of the shooters I know critique the members of their own squad more than the RO does.
Most top shooters know if they were "close", often better than the RO.
As for new shooters (ie shooters who haven't shot more than a couple of "official" matches) getting critiqued more than a top shooter, well, duh! Maybe not so much out in Ontario, but I can look at a person locally and know if they've shot matches before, because I have a good memory and we don't have a huge population of shooters out here. A new shooter will get a comment or advice simply because I'd like to see them get through the match. I have also not been above giving warnings to shooters DURING a course of fire ("FINGER") as per 8.6.1.
Any advice is meant more as coaching, as opposed to critiquing, by the way.
USP said:
I'll agree with that. I know more people who have been knocked unconscious by golf balls (some near death), than people who have come close to being shot at an IPSC match.
As for the first question, I personally have never seen an RO "look the other way". More often than not they make a safety call for DQ or give warnings as maurice stated.
Been an R.O. - C.R.O. Long time. I hate to D.Q. people. I miss a lot because you can't see everything from behind a shooter but if you are looking the other way you are Not Doing your JOB.The whole sport suffers.
Have D.Q. a few former friends but most people realize what they have done before the call.
Have D.Q. a few former friends but most people realize what they have done before the call.
ENSHOOTER said:
You're not doing it, the competitor is doing it to themselves (unfortunately you (RO's) are the bearer of the bad news.)
ENSHOOTER said:
Hell, when I RO you, I'm lucky to see anything at all down range let alone your gun.
You opened yourself up for that one!
