Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

WTC Sweep


Creeker, SASS #43022

Recommended Posts

  Without specific instructions the shooter has no idea of the stage writers “INTENT”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 minutes ago, Wyatt said:

  Without specific instructions the shooter has no idea of the stage writers “INTENT”

It IS specific.

 

Sweep the targets.

 

Not "Nevada Sweep" or "Badger Sweep" or...whatever.

 

Again, what do you call a 1-2-3-4-5 Sweep???

 

I'll give you a hint: It has a one word name.

 

Phantom

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said:

WOW-talk about your classic 'P' trap scenario.............:unsure:

OLG 

No not really, most shooters shot a 1-2-2-5 with rifle, reload and hit target 4 . Then draw pistols and 5 rds each on targets 2-3...,, the gunfighters and outlaws loved it..... stage was written as a round count

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

It IS specific.

 

Sweep the targets.

 

Not "Nevada Sweep" or "Badger Sweep" or...whatever.

 

Again, what do you call a 1-2-3-4-5 Sweep???

 

I'll give you a hint: It has a one word name.

 

Phantom

 

  You say “Procedural”, I say “No Call”..............we’ll let the RO  decide 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stage instructions called for a sweep. 1-2-3-4-5-1-2-3-4-5 (or reverse)

You shot Outside - Inside - Centre then a sweep 1-5-2-4-3-1-2-3-4-5(or reverse for the last 5 shots)

You would have earned a P in the posses I shoot with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Wyatt said:

 

  You say “Procedural”, I say “No Call”..............we’ll let the RO  decide 

Can you address my argument???

 

Phantom

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the arguments/confusion/differing opinions, I'm glad our stages are written specifying the target order, i.e. 1-2-3-4-5

Makes it easier for the spotters and avoids "discussions", holding up the match.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Can you address my argument???

 

Phantom

 

 Nope  ;)

 

 And you’re not gonna change my opinion  :P

 

 Show me a rule 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Wyatt said:

 

 Nope  ;)

 

 And you’re not gonna change my opinion  :P

 

 Show me a rule 

A rule on what a sweep name means????

 

Great...

 

So please, by all means folks, tell me what to call a 1-2-3-4-5 or 5-4-3-2-1 sweep.

 

Reeeeeeally interested in what y'all call it.

 

Phantom

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said:

WOW-talk about your classic 'P' trap scenario.............:unsure:

OLG 

Jesus Christ. Not everything outside of a simple Nevada sweep is a darn “P trap”. I enjoy round count stages a lot. Not just to shoot them, but to see all the difference ways folks come up with to shoot the same stage. I find it fascinating watching folks play to their individual strengths. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Wyatt said:

 Never mind 

Never mind what?

 

Seriously, just want to know what those that think a 1-2-3-4-5 sweep should be called if not simply "Sweep".

 

Perhaps Redwood Kid would like to add his thoughts on what it should be called.

 

Phantom

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Never mind what?

 

Seriously, just want to know what those that think a 1-2-3-4-5 sweep should be called if not simply "Sweep".

 

Perhaps Redwood Kid would like to add his thoughts on what it should be called.

 

Phantom

 

 From now on and forever more two sweep‘s from left to right or right to left on five targets is to be known as the “Phantom Sweep”............Happy :lol: :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's try a different tactic.  If you're presented with a five target set-up and the stage instructions say, "Sweep the targets from the left."  Please tell me the order in which you'd shoot the targets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

A rule on what a sweep name means????

 

Great...

 

So please, by all means folks, tell me what to call a 1-2-3-4-5 or 5-4-3-2-1 sweep.

 

Reeeeeeally interested in what y'all call it.

 

Phantom

 

We usually call it a left to right or right to left sweep.  But apparently we get ink cheaper than some folks. 

 

I probably would have called this a P initially and let him talk me out of it.  I had a stage not too long ago with nearly the same wording and I wanted to shoot it different.  So I asked the PM and he said NO.  It has to be in order, and since there's no double taps, the sweeps have to be identical.  The instructions didn't say identical, which is what got me to wondering how many options I had.  At the time I argued that an inside outside sweep WAS a sweep, but he told me anytime it just says sweep, it means in order.  He clarified that if it didn't specify starting on the end, I could have started in the middle and shot it 3,4,5,1,2.  He said it with such conviction that I figured it must be in the rulebook somewhere. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Wyatt said:

 

 From now on and forever more two sweep‘s from left to right or right to left on five targets is to be known as the “Phantom Sweep”............Happy :lol: :lol:

Why is it that some folks feel as though it's a personal thing just to ask for some clarification/support for their position.

 

It's not about ME being happy...geeze...

 

Do some folks (not specifically directed at you Wyatt), just wanna make this game more complex?

 

For 15 years now, most of the folks that I've come in contact with understood that if the instructions say to sweep...from either direction, not this-sweep or that-sweep, just sweep, we knew exactly what that meant. So now folks want to add to the name "Sweep". 

 

Oy...

 

Phantom

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Why is it that some folks feel as though it's a personal thing just to ask for some clarification/support for their position.

 

It's not about ME being happy...geeze...

 

Do some folks (not specifically directed at you Wyatt), just wanna make this game more complex?

 

For 15 years now, most of the folks that I've come in contact with understood that if the instructions say to sweep...from either direction, not this-sweep or that-sweep, just sweep, we knew exactly what that meant. So now folks want to add to the name "Sweep". 

 

Oy...

 

Phantom

I totally 100% agree with you, but you have to admit the "Phantom Sweep" does have a nice ring to it!! :D

 

The sweep in question has always just been called as it's written left to right sweep or right to left sweep at least where I've shot at!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my limited experience, my first reaction is that a sweep is starting on one end and moving towards the other. 

 

BUT...

 

When I sweep with a broom, I go back and forth, generally not sweeping the same "spot" twice. In fact, I start around the edges of the room and work my way to the center pile. You know, outside, outside, inside, inside, center-like.

 

I'm fairly new to this game, but it's my opinion that the shooter can be creative if there is any room for interpretation in the instructions. If the stage writer wants a specific order, then simply put that in the instructions. In a game where we leave some decisions up to the shooters, the instructions need  to be very specific to limit those decisions if that is the intent.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mean gun mark said:

No not really, most shooters shot a 1-2-2-5 with rifle, reload and hit target 4 . Then draw pistols and 5 rds each on targets 2-3...,, the gunfighters and outlaws loved it..... stage was written as a round count

 

Exactly how I shot the 1776 stage, after a gunfighter said "it's easy just shoot it like this, 1-2-2-5 with rifle, reload and hit target 4,Then draw pistols and dump 5 rds each on targets 2&3".

I liked the the stage!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Yeah well...that's because a "Sweep" is just that. It's like asking for water. Not Lemon Water, not Carbonated Water...just Water.

 

I think Phantom uses a great analogy.

And I think this is exactly where the difference lies.

 

Water is water.  Period.

Any change to water requires a descriptor; lemon, sparkling, etc.

 

Sweeps do not work that way.

There is not a master, basic or simple sweep that everyone agrees upon as THE sweep.

If you present me with 5 targets and instruct me to begin on a certain target, do not double tap and give no more direction than that. 

You have to accept what I give you as long as it follows your instruction.

 

Any recognized sweep (sequences, target orders, and patterns are all referred to as sweeps) that complies with your instruction is a legal response.

 

To adapt Phantoms analogy.

There were specifics in the request.

You asked for a soda, brown and carbonated.

Yes, 90% of the world is expecting a Coke.

But, an RC does satisfy the instruction.

 

And if you want a left to right single tap sweep on five plates?

How about saying

L to R single tap sweep?

That precludes me from doing anything other than single tapping across the plates left to right.

 

Simply giving a start plate does not.

 

I shot the stage deliberately in a manner contrary to writers intention and knowing full well I might be dinged.

 

I posted this, not to start a war or cause hard feelings; but because as a stage writers, I feel it is important to understand and demonstrate that your instructions must match your expectations.  

You cannot fairly rely on unwritten rules or group think behaviors and expect compliance.

 

If you want your shooter to perform a specific action - state it clearly.

If you want your shooters to have the latitude to be creative - be vague.

 

Ink is cheap.  Electrons plentiful.

Do not penalize your shooter because you failed to give complete instruction and they did not follow your expectation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Yeah well...that's because a "Sweep" is just that. It's like asking for water. Not Lemon Water, not Carbonated Water...just Water.

 

I think Phantom uses a great analogy.

And I think this is exactly where the difference lies.

 

Water is water.  Period.

Any change to water requires a descriptor; lemon, sparkling, etc.

 

Sweeps do not work that way.

There is not a master, basic or simple sweep that everyone agrees upon as THE sweep.

If you present me with 5 targets and instruct me to begin on a certain target, do not double tap and give no more direction than that. 

You have to accept what I give you as long as it follows your instruction.

 

Any recognized sweep (sequences, target orders, and patterns are all referred to as sweeps) that complies with your instruction is a legal response.

 

To adapt Phantoms analogy.

There were specifics in the request.

You asked for a soda, brown and carbonated.

Yes, 90% of the world is expecting a Coke.

But, an RC does satisfy the instruction.

 

And if you want a left to right single tap sweep on five plates?

How about saying

L to R single tap sweep?

That precludes me from doing anything other than single tapping across the plates left to right.

 

Simply giving a start plate does not.

 

I shot the stage deliberately in a manner contrary to writers intention and knowing full well I might be dinged.

 

I posted this, not to start a war or cause hard feelings; but because as a stage writers, I feel it is important to understand and demonstrate that your instructions must match your expectations.  

You cannot fairly rely on unwritten rules or group think behaviors and expect compliance.

 

If you want your shooter to perform a specific action - state it clearly.

If you want your shooters to have the latitude to be creative - be vague.

 

Ink is cheap.  Electrons plentiful.

Do not penalize your shooter because you failed to give complete instruction and they did not follow your expectation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Yeah well...that's because a "Sweep" is just that. It's like asking for water. Not Lemon Water, not Carbonated Water...just Water.

 

I think Phantom uses a great analogy.

And I think this is exactly where the difference lies.

 

Water is water.  Period.

Any change to water requires a descriptor; lemon, sparkling, etc.

 

Sweeps do not work that way.

There is not a master, basic or simple sweep that everyone agrees upon as THE sweep.

If you present me with 5 targets and instruct me to begin on a certain target, do not double tap and give no more direction than that. 

You have to accept what I give you as long as it follows your instruction.

 

Any recognized sweep (sequences, target orders, and patterns are all referred to as sweeps) that complies with your instruction is a legal response.

 

To adapt Phantoms analogy.

There were specifics in the request.

You asked for a soda, brown and carbonated.

Yes, 90% of the world is expecting a Coke.

But, an RC does satisfy the instruction.

 

And if you want a left to right single tap sweep on five plates?

How about saying

L to R single tap sweep?

That precludes me from doing anything other than single tapping across the plates left to right.

 

Simply giving a start plate does not.

 

I shot the stage deliberately in a manner contrary to writers intention and knowing full well I might be dinged.

 

I posted this, not to start a war or cause hard feelings; but because as a stage writers, I feel it is important to understand and demonstrate that your instructions must match your expectations.  

You cannot fairly rely on unwritten rules or group think behaviors and expect compliance.

 

If you want your shooter to perform a specific action - state it clearly.

If you want your shooters to have the latitude to be creative - be vague.

 

Ink is cheap.  Electrons plentiful.

Do not penalize your shooter because you failed to give complete instruction and they did not follow your expectation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

Ok, that was a triple tap.

Give me the P.

 

There are no "Wire instructions" forbidding it...NO CALL!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a Gunfighter.  I firmly hold Stage Instructions are applied EXACTLY as written.  No alibi.  If you give the shooter room to be creative, don't get yer nickers inna twist if the shooter get creative.  Lacking more specific stage instruction, I'd have shot the stage exactly the same way Creeker shot it.  It was, after all, the more funner way to shoot it, hot and tired or not.  FUNNER!!

 

PS:  NO CALL!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears to me that the word "sweep" should not be used, or clearly defined in handbook.

When I read or listen to stage descriptions I always look for key words like;

a, the, then, next, no, first, last, after, choice, if, and probably others.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was the TO.

 

If we parse the instructions, Creeker was correct, he shot two sweeps and should not have gotten a “p”.

 

The question becomes, “do we have to write stages that are so precise that they cannot be misinterpreted by anyone?”  I challenge you to write one that is not five pages long and I will then show you the issue.

 

Or is it more appropriate to have “conventions” that are ”understood”? If the convention (what is generally understand) is that “sweep the targets from either end”  means, start on one end and shoot them in a row (I can hear the various interpretations already), should it be clarified each time that you shooot it (1,2,3,4,5 and 1,2,3,4,5 or 5,4,3,2,1 and 5,4,3,2,1?  Hopefully, the “start on either end” eliminated the start anywhere but an end.

 

Sometimes we forget it is a game.  If I had been brave, I would have not given Creeker a “p”.  However, he had a bad match going anyway, which is not really an issue, and I wasn’t ready for a lynching; mine!

 

As Creeker said, it was hot, the last stage and tempers were showing.

 

Flame suit on.

 

NN

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Nasty Nels said:

I was the TO.

 

If we parse the instructions, Creeker was correct, he shot two sweeps and should not have gotten a “p”.

 

The question becomes, “do we have to write stages that are so precise that they cannot be misinterpreted by anyone?”  I challenge you to write one that is not five pages long and I will then show you the issue.

 

Or is it more appropriate to have “conventions” that are ”understood”? If the convention (what is generally understand) is that “sweep the targets from either end”  means, start on one end and shoot them in a row (I can hear the various interpretations already), should it be clarified each time that you shooot it (1,2,3,4,5 and 1,2,3,4,5 or 5,4,3,2,1 and 5,4,3,2,1?  Hopefully, the “start on either end” eliminated the start anywhere but an end.

 

Sometimes we forget it is a game.  If I had been brave, I would have not given Creeker a “p”.  However, he had a bad match going anyway, which is not really an issue, and I wasn’t ready for a lynching; mine!

 

As Creeker said, it was hot, the last stage and tempers were showing.

 

Flame suit on.

 

NN

 

The very first convention I'd suggest is that we never EVER say "Creeker is correct". ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.