Engaged as Non-Gamer & Gamer Stage

[Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217]

Hi Folks,

 

Here is something else to think about.

1. Some folks shoot the scenario as they've always seen it done a certain way.
2. Some folks shoot it differently than that because it's more efficient.
3. Some folks shoot it differently than the usual because they like to show their superior intellect.
4. Some folks shoot it differently because they like to argue and win or just argue.

I'll stick to the usual way (1), unless it is discussed during the stage explanation or is obvious. I would avoid 3 and 4. I'd rather be thought of as dumb than as a "condescending know it all" and that is how some of this stuff comes across, depending on the shooter's demeanor.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

[Widder, SASS #59054]

Allie,

 

ifn you don't mind, I would like to add #5 to your listing:

 

5. some stage writers will word a stage in such a way that 95% of the shooters will shoot it 1-5-4-2-3-3-4-2-1-5

 

Knowing all the while that they (the stage writer) will engage those targets 11-22-33-44-55 and then argue the stage instructions allowed it.

 

its kinda like the stage writer putting in a knife throwing portion to gain a bonus if the knife sticks in the stump..........and for the last 2 weeks, the stage writer had been practicing his knife throwing techniques.....

 

 

..........Widder

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

Allie,

 

ifn you don't mind, I would like to add #5 to your listing:

 

5. some stage writers will word a stage in such a way that 95% of the shooters will shoot it 1-5-4-2-3-3-4-2-1-5

 

Knowing all the while that they (the stage writer) will engage those targets 11-22-33-44-55 and then argue the stage instructions allowed it.

 

its kinda like the stage writer putting in a knife throwing portion to gain a bonus if the knife sticks in the stump..........and for the last 2 weeks, the stage writer had been practicing his knife throwing techniques.....

 

 

..........Widder

That would never happen. It ain't the cowboy way!

[Gold Canyon Kid #43974]

One thing I see happening at a lot of local matches and others is writing stages to allow the shooter maximum flexibility on how he shoots the stage. Like set out six targets of varying distances and give the shooter the direction to put 1 on any target, 2 on any target, 3 on any target, 4 on any target, 5 on any target, and 6 on any target including one reload. Lot of different ways to do that kind of stage which makes it really fun for the shooters but not so much for the spotters. As a result of those kind of stages, the spotters job can get really hard. At WR we had a stage like that and almost every shooter shot it exactly the same way. Last shooter was a lady and she shot it totally different than everyone else. All three spotters tried to give her a P. TO was on his game and asked them how she shot it and they all agreed, turns out she followed the stage instructions and it was OK and did not deserve or get a P. Point is, Spotters job is getting a bit more difficult When I shoot a stage like this I tell the TO and spotters my plan of attack. Sometimes it changes as I shoot and that is OK.

[Madd Mike #8595]

wow

geeeese

arrrrrr

where is the rum matey

 

for crying out loud

as hilary said

what difference does it make now

[Nasty Newt # 7365]

I use this sequence from time to time, and when I do, I write it, "Engage the 5 targets outside-in, then inside-out." A double tap sweep would definitely be a P. You have to work your way in, and work your way back out to comply with the instruction...I think.