ok, let's whack the beehive - light speed swinger discussion

2Filthy said:
I hope that you do not feel that questioning the legality of a stage through the proper channels (CRO...to RM) to be whining.
Click to expand...

My "official" position on that...I like the competitors to challenge the rules (obvioulsy within reason...and this was a reasonable challenge)

It just means that we're all thinking about the rules...and keeping the Stage designers and officals on their toes...

Nothing wrong with that...as long as everyone is being a good sport (which was the case)
 
././

Popurhedoff

A lot of people donated a lot of their time and efforts desiging, building and running this match. They did a fantastic job, and yet there will always people who will complain. For those, may a suggest trying another sport and quit spoiling the fun of others. Try showing some sportsmanship... Like... "dang ...that was a challanging stage"

SUCK IT UP AND GET OVER IT... its just a game.
Click to expand...

Thanks Pop's that sums it up. I'm of the same opinion.

Cheers
BMW
 
2Filthy said:
Being in Equador and at the Provincials I would have to say that this particular swinger in question was at least 80% faster (from behind cover with no view of the down stroke).
Click to expand...
Yeah, they were significantly faster than Ecuador's.

What also should be noted is that Barrie stepped up to take the provincials - something to congratulate them on.

Now, Level 3 approval is a very important thing... It is handed out with some very tight review and often with conditions attached.
If those things are not followed it is very important to see why not and what happened.

Every time a L3 is not run to the standards, it cheapens the other L3s. We have standards for our stages, and they are there for important reasons.

This is not a negative thing, it is a positive thing for the next time to keep making things better.

I'm sure if there is this much discussion, then someone will be looking into the L3 approval that was given to see if an issue exists.
 
Last edited:
2Filthy said:
I hope that you do not feel that questioning the legality of a stage through the proper channels (CRO...to RM) to be whining...
Click to expand...

Not at all and I encourage that...Whinning is when an individual or a group complains incessantly to anyone within ear shot and continues on and on and on. If they have a problem then by all means go through the proper channels... after that STFU and dont start whining.

I wonder what the guys would have said about a 32 round Weak hand only Field Stage?????
 
whew, ok, I'm glad people let their feelings out, haha!

I'm hoping it's obvious to the MDs/etc, especially given my previous statements about the match, that this wasn't in any way a negative comment about the match itself, or what have you. In fact, I did like the 12 shots thing, especially since it allowed a number of difference possibiilties, it allowed you to skip a mag change by not shooting at the drop turners, so it was a good stage tactically - lots of ways of doing it.

In all honesty, I did not notice the "static" part of the swinger - if that is, in fact, what was available, then guess what - I totally have to withdraw my comments. There is nothing wrong with a target that only looks impossible, but if you pay attention (which I clearly didn't) and notice a very doable way, that's a totally different ball game ;)

The only question is: was the 'easy' aspect of this target a design characteristic, or accidental? Given Mats' previous swingers, I'd be inclined to think the latter, haha! :D

Lesson learned - when faced with really fast moving swingers/etc, look at the motion, and look for more static parts...
 
What I did on them, is:
pick the center of the "A" zone of the target in the upright position & then started to empty my mag in that same position.
not super rapid fire, but consistant average speed (not too slow either)

i did not try to lead it or time it, just started shooting straight thru the center. as the target swings back in forth, it actual gets in the way of my bullet(s) by chance or by chance, they all could of missed.

As luck was on my side on this stage (not so much on others) :(

I got 3 A's. :eek: (out of 10 rnds.)...in a straight horizontal line no less :cool:

As for the Turning / disapearing targets, I'm with "pops" on this one.
you gotta go for them, that's the spirit & the challenge.
Unless your that anal to get every single possible point. Real men go for it :p

My last stage shot was stage 2 & my only miss of the day (no penalties or preceedures :D ) came on that stage, on one of the static targets, no less :( :rolleyes: :eek:

It was a great & fun match. I had some hick-ups that cost me lots of points & an award, but no sense in crying about it.

I shot with a great group of guys & had a great day !!

Thanx to all the Barrie folks for everything !!

I'm looking forward to the nationals !!
 
omen said:
In all honesty, I did not notice the "static" part of the swinger - if that is, in fact, what was available,
Click to expand...


there was nothing static about that swinger. on both sides of the "swing" it starts and stops behind cover. The only shot you got, was as the target was in full motion, you never saw it when it started to slow down, and change back in the other direction (Well, you could if you waited until it slowed down at about 60 seconds after it was activated, but I'm not counting that).

There were some swingers that were exposed during the reverse in direction, and you could use that to time your shot more, but this one was a beast ;) ;) ;)

I was the first in my squad to shoot it (and the first swinger I had ever shot at.).. needless to say.. 2 mikes ;)
 
Hey folks let's not forget here that Omen started this discussion with the knowledge that he was 'whacking the beehive' and put down some reasoned thoughts about the stage to start a discussion.

Given that he won I don't think that this thread can be written off by whinging after the fact. I personally think that it's healthy that a stage design can generate this much debate by the people who did well on it as a healthy debate can only add the the quality of future matches.

Now of course if Omen had zeroed the stage and starting by #####ing about how he's lost points 'flame on' would have been fair, but as he didn't kudos for stepping up and starting the debate and framing it constructively.
 
I don't want Omen to take the full brunt of this one since I am the one who issued the statement in the first place. And thanks for the yummy wings Omen. Very gracious of you.

First off: I thought the match was excellent and I want to thank and commend all of those selfless folks who sacrificed their time and most likely their chance to be at all competitive to provide the rest of us with a great match and a good time. Well done! You people make the sport what it is, and I had a great time shooting it.

On the swinger: Let me preface my comments by saying that I got one look at it in the walk-through before I shot it, first up on my squad. I had no chance to pre-dope the stage so I went with the safe but slow solution. I ended up with seven shots at it and four hits, none of which I was sure of. After shooting it, I watched it some more to see If I could find a way to KNOW if I hit it without actually scoring the targets, and the answer I came up with was no. The only way to be sure you had hit the target was to shoot a bouquet of rounds at it and try to cherry pick your moment. There was no way to really call the shot; no way to put the shot in the "A" box on demand for any skill level. In my mind, that makes that particular target a random exercise rather than a test of skill. Was it the same for eveyone? Sure. But it was blind luck, not a test of skill.

I do not think I am whining when I say this, as I was asked for my opinion and I gave it in good faith. If we are at the point where constructive criticism will always be met with derisive commentary, then I think we can safely say that our matches will get no better from here on in. There was nothing negative intended in my comments, and in fact, I've had this conversation with Matts (who I consider a good friend) privately in the past. We differ in our philosophy it seems, but that is fine by me. There will always be something in a match that leaves room for improvement, and that means we will always have an opportunity to grow.

FWIW: In my opinion, if a target moves so fast that no one in the match can say for sure that they hit it and say where they hit it before walking forward, then it creates a random variable, and random variables are not skills tests. I have no problem with fast swingers, and envite any challenge as an opportunity to learn something new and expand my skill set. There is however, no way to practice something like this, and no one I spoke to could say they knew for sure that they hit it, and if so, where they hit it. That target probably moved from apex to apex in two tenths of a second.....Three at most. The average human reaction time to visual stimulus is three tenths of a second, though that can be improved with training somewhat. By the time you see cardboard rising at the edge of the hard cover you are too late to fire an accurrate shot, so you can only try to pick your shots by timing the swing interval and then just shoot enough shots that the law of averages says you'll probably hang two hits on it somewhere. That is shooting "hopers," not "hitters."

The fact that only 22 people zero'd the stage seems less important to me than how many people zero'd that specific target.

Having said all this, I have created less than ideal stages in the past as well, and that is part of the learning experience. No big deal. The rest of this stage was actually pretty cool. And as I said; I thoroughly enjoyed the match and the people running it. Well, stage 2 sucked for me but that was only because my gun hates me. It was a pretty cool stage that I wish I could have shot better.

Oh well.
 
It was a great match, this was the only targe that i couldn't call my shot. I would even say nobody could have called their shots on that target. You could have MAYBE timed your HITS on the TARGET but it was impossible to know you got an A/C/D.
 
Without reading ALL of the above posts, I have a video of stage one being fired if anyone care's to host it.

I zeroed the stage, in front of some of the best shooters at the match... but I take consolation in the fact that it was the first stage on my third IPSC match!
 
from the moment you decided, pull trigger NOW!,
I doubt IF anyone could even count how many times the thing swung by,
before the bullet left the chamber. LOL :confused: :p :eek:
 
FWIW, I was not at this match, but I know I would have enjoyed the opportunity to try a stage like that. I have been in IPSC for about 1 1/2 years here in Manitoba and love seeing new challenges. I remember the first time I had to shoot a swinger, and a clam trap, etc. How many people remember the first static target they shot at? One of the best matches I went to was the Saskatchewan Provincials in Saskatoon last year. I had shot most of the matches here and they were usually the same kind of stages with minor changes. But at the Sask. match different people with different views of the sport had designed the match. There was lots of running, a cooper tunnel which I had only heard of in Manitoba like some kind of myth, and spring loaded doors which you had to hold open while shooting. IT WAS GREAT! :D :D :D
This sport is not suppose to be about luck, perhaps a level 3 match is not where this swinger should have been applied. But who in their right mind would pass up the opportunity to try something new as long as it was equal for everybody. Have you forgotten to HAVE FUN, or are you only thinking about winning. That one target was worth points that may have cost someone the match of they didn't score well on it. My point of view, for my own growth if it was me, that was one target in one stage. Is this just the easiest thing to point to as the cause of not winning? How many other points on other stages did you not get during the match? Could you have gone a little faster on some of those stages? I think it is easier for some people to say that the stage design was at fault than to accept that on that stage, which was the same for everybody, they got beat. You can't win them all.
I'm not trying to knock anyone with this post, I don't even know anyone who shot this match. But I see politics growing in this sport and it rubs me the wrong way. It's a sport, a game for fun. If I do poorly in a match because I didn't practise a certain skill, then I will practise and become a better shooter.;)
 
yeah right maybe with a shotgun... :)

For all those who posted above..

If a target doesnt challenge a shooters skill but results in luck mostly to get a hit, is it a worthwhile target? I know some might say the best shooters make their own luck...but still? Seems abit fast huh?
 
yeah it's fast but I think you have plenty of opportunities to hit it. there is a fairly long exposure at the bottom of the target during it's cycle. But yes it's a spray and pray target for me. I like it though.
 
Slavex said:
yeah it's fast but I think you have plenty of opportunities to hit it. there is a fairly long exposure at the bottom of the target during it's cycle. But yes it's a spray and pray target for me. I like it though.
Click to expand...


The trouble is, both the extreme points it was behind hard cover. It was only visible at the fastest part of its arc.
 
hmm, interesting. Obviously not the angle the shooter would see, and still don't know the distance. But the drop turners look like they had a good exposure time.
Was it possible to game the stage by getting two good hits on each of the droppers and just throwing one shot at the bobber. then it would be an 11 round stage and the score from the droppers would cancel out any penalties on the bobber.
 
Dan-O-Mite said:
as long as it was equal for everybody.
Click to expand...

I'm a little tired of hearing that.

A coin toss is the same for everyone, are we going to decided matches with that now? Probably now. Why not? Because it has little to do with shooting ability, regardless how equal it is for everyone.

On another note, this is something that gets much easier to shoot the more times you see it, since you get to learn/see the motion, you memorize the timing/etc. As such, if you take the first person on a squad who has to shoot it and take the last person, this stage did not provide the same challenge to them both equally. Seeing it once in a walkthrough, or having a chance to see it 10 times, is not equal, especially since everyone in the back could see it from the same position/angle as when they'd get to shoot it from (not true in most mover stages).

My main problem with this is that we are supposed to reward advanced skill, not penalize lack of it. If we have very quick disappearing targets, that's great - if you're "good enough" to get an extra couple of points, good for you. On the other hand, this stage penalized you, it took points which you earned on other targets and took them away, because you were not able to hit a target which even the top shooters had problems with, and had reality concerns about. I don't like that. It would have been easy to balance the mechanism so that the target stops behind cover - i.e. it is disappearing, IN THE LONG RUN, so there wouldn't be any miss penalties. Then it would have been perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom