Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Creeker, SASS #43022

Recommended Posts

As a stage writer and as a writer.

It is interesting to me to read the debates about stage writing.

The meanings of a single word - The absence of a word and the meaning that conveys.

The difference between a singular and a plural.

 

And it strikes me that the difficulties generally occur when we decide that brevity is preferable to explanation.

The trend in stage writing has embraced the concept that fewer words equate to improved writing.

Obviously if the SAME concept, instruction and expectation can be fully conveyed with 30 words instead of 300 - then brevity is for the better.

But when in the quest for fewer words - we omit words, phrases, plurals, etc. that directly pertain to our expectations - we have no one but ourselves to blame for the confusion or error.

 

if the shooter follows my instruction and then arrives at a different destination than I expected or intended - that is MY failing as a stage writer. 

I failed to anticipate the possibilities of my instructions or I failed to provide enough detailed instruction.

The shooter is only required to follow my INSTRUCTIONS - they are not expected to discern my expectations nor required to respect my intentions.

 

These failings are also tied to the continued usage of tired concepts like...

"We have always done it this way..."

"It is understood..."

"Everybody knows..."

"The stage writers intention was..."

 

If we want a shooter to do ANYTHING in an exact and specific manner - then WE as stage writers must write our instructions exactly and specifically to address that instruction.

And we must put forth the effort to read our instructions with a critical eye regarding any place where differing ideas, understandings or a shooter simply being pedantic could lead to a differing outcome than we wish.

 

Ink is cheap and electrons are plentiful.

If the stage begins hands on hat AND you believe the obtuse, pedantic or obnoxious shooter is going to push your expectation.

Add three words -  Hat on Head.

 

Hand and HandS are not the same.

If you wish both hands in contact - make it plural and add the S. 

Don't argue or debate about "Understood and Merriam Webster" - fix it.

Ink is cheap.

 

When I was learning to drive - the so-called "approved" following distance was a THREE second gap between you and the car in front of you.

The instructor then offered - if you are maintaining this three second gap and cars keep pulling into that gap.

And over the course of your trip to the store; that happens ten times.

Ten times, you have to slow down to re-establish that three second gap between you and the car in front of you.

How much did that delay your arrival?

We did the math - 10 times 3 seconds = 30 seconds...

He opined that 30 seconds did not seem a huge price to pay to maintain an safe following distance and avoid an accident.

 

If over the course of 6, 8 or 12 stages - you have to add an extra "S", a "Hat on Head", "Sweep must be sequential", "Moneybag must be carried only in hand or hands - not teeth, armpit or belt"

You and your shooters have paid a small price in time to ensure your instructions/ expectations are clear.

And because many TO's and Posse Marshals differ on enforcement and beliefs - Clear and exact instruction help to ensure no one has been allowed access to an option that every shooter did not share.

Ink is cheap.  Electrons are plentiful.

 

Write the best match possible.

If you want to encourage creativity - do so.

if you want an exacting match - do so.

 

No matter how trivial or insignificant you believe it to be.

Words matter. 

I would hate to have a shooter be penalized or their match or championship be ruined because I failed to use the sufficient number of words to clarify my expectation.

Ink is cheap.  Electrons are plentiful.

 

For want of a nail the shoe was lost,

For want of a shoe the horse was lost,

For want of a horse the rider was lost,

For want of a rider the battle was lost,

For want of a battle the kingdom was lost,

And all for the want of a nail.

-Benjamin Franklin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we moved to a new range, the Range Master came up with the stage scenarios for the first season.  He was just going back in the club archives and pulling out the old scenarios.  They were always a combination of the same couple of sweeps ending with "and knock down the shotgun targets with as many shots as needed".  

 

The next season, people stepped up to write new scenarios.  Sawmill Mary wrote scenarios for a couple of matches.  She included a couple of old standards but did a lot of research and added several that were fresh and different.  Oh did the shooters moan and complain!  

 

 

Here they are working out one of the new and different scenarios.  

 

Every shooter was convinced they would get a P on this stage.  Everyone watch each shooter in turn to see if they made it through without a P.  But all made it through the stage just fine and enjoyed the challenge.  They all complemented Mary on her creative stage scenarios.  But didn't want her to write more like that.  It was just too stressful!

 

The next year we had another person step up and write scenarios.  He put a lot of work in the writing.  He'd have a main theme with a story line running through all stages.  He wrote in a flowery, Victorian language, using uncommon words.  Although you could say his scenarios were well written, the TOs couldn't read them out loud to the posse to any degree of understandably.  The posse would just stand there confused.  Then the TO would parse out targets to be shot in what order and we'd go on. 

 

We had a new person writing stage scenarios starting last season.  There are no stories.  The instructions are clearly listed. There is a variety of target number and arrangement.  Some of the sequences are complex and some are simple.  But most always,  the shooter has options of shooting rifle, shotgun or pistols in any order.  This shooter option adds another level of variability and it evens out any advantage or disadvantage for a left or right handed shooter.

 

In the few years I've been cowboy action shooting,  I see the trend to make the scenarios simpler so to improve score times and get the match done sooner. Nothing but shooting is done on the clock. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

As a stage writer and as a writer.

It is interesting to me to read the debates about stage writing.

The meanings of a single word - The absence of a word and the meaning that conveys.

The difference between a singular and a plural.

 

And it strikes me that the difficulties generally occur when we decide that brevity is preferable to explanation.

The trend in stage writing has embraced the concept that fewer words equate to improved writing.

Obviously if the SAME concept, instruction and expectation can be fully conveyed with 30 words instead of 300 - then brevity is for the better.

But when in the quest for fewer words - we omit words, phrases, plurals, etc. that directly pertain to our expectations - we have no one but ourselves to blame for the confusion or error.

 

if the shooter follows my instruction and then arrives at a different destination than I expected or intended - that is MY failing as a stage writer. 

I failed to anticipate the possibilities of my instructions or I failed to provide enough detailed instruction.

The shooter is only required to follow my INSTRUCTIONS - they are not expected to discern my expectations nor required to respect my intentions.

 

These failings are also tied to the continued usage of tired concepts like...

"We have always done it this way..."

"It is understood..."

"Everybody knows..."

"The stage writers intention was..."

 

If we want a shooter to do ANYTHING in an exact and specific manner - then WE as stage writers must write our instructions exactly and specifically to address that instruction.

And we must put forth the effort to read our instructions with a critical eye regarding any place where differing ideas, understandings or a shooter simply being pedantic could lead to a differing outcome than we wish.

 

Ink is cheap and electrons are plentiful.

If the stage begins hands on hat AND you believe the obtuse, pedantic or obnoxious shooter is going to push your expectation.

Add three words -  Hat on Head.

 

Hand and HandS are not the same.

If you wish both hands in contact - make it plural and add the S. 

Don't argue or debate about "Understood and Merriam Webster" - fix it.

Ink is cheap.

 

When I was learning to drive - the so-called "approved" following distance was a THREE second gap between you and the car in front of you.

The instructor then offered - if you are maintaining this three second gap and cars keep pulling into that gap.

And over the course of your trip to the store; that happens ten times.

Ten times, you have to slow down to re-establish that three second gap between you and the car in front of you.

How much did that delay your arrival?

We did the math - 10 times 3 seconds = 30 seconds...

He opined that 30 seconds did not seem a huge price to pay to maintain an safe following distance and avoid an accident.

 

If over the course of 6, 8 or 12 stages - you have to add an extra "S", a "Hat on Head", "Sweep must be sequential", "Moneybag must be carried only in hand or hands - not teeth, armpit or belt"

You and your shooters have paid a small price in time to ensure your instructions/ expectations are clear.

And because many TO's and Posse Marshals differ on enforcement and beliefs - Clear and exact instruction help to ensure no one has been allowed access to an option that every shooter did not share.

Ink is cheap.  Electrons are plentiful.

 

Write the best match possible.

If you want to encourage creativity - do so.

if you want an exacting match - do so.

 

No matter how trivial or insignificant you believe it to be.

Words matter. 

I would hate to have a shooter be penalized or their match or championship be ruined because I failed to use the sufficient number of words to clarify my expectation.

Ink is cheap.  Electrons are plentiful.

 

For want of a nail the shoe was lost,

For want of a shoe the horse was lost,

For want of a horse the rider was lost,

For want of a rider the battle was lost,

For want of a battle the kingdom was lost,

And all for the want of a nail.

-Benjamin Franklin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And because many TO's and Posse Marshals differ on enforcement and beliefs - Clear and exact instruction help to ensure no one has been allowed access to an option that every shooter did not share.

Ink is cheap.  Electrons are plentiful.

 

This is a GREAT message not just the part above but all of it!!!

 

I would like to add the following to the list

 

Never say "It is only a monthly match",  There is no excuse for allowing someone to "get by" especially newbys and seasoned expert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

 

If we want a shooter to do ANYTHING in an exact and specific manner - then WE as stage writers must write our instructions exactly and specifically to address that instruction.

 

 

 

The trend for quite a while was to get away from telling the shooters EXACTLY what to do on every single aspect of a stage.  I LOVED that trend.  Unfortunately it seems to have died off a bit recently.  The more shooters choice that's built into a match the fewer complaints you'll get due to misunderstandings of the stage instructions.  This is one area where you my friend excel and why Eldorado has become a world class match. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shooting Bull said:

 

 

The trend for quite a while was to get away from telling the shooters EXACTLY what to do on every single aspect of a stage.  I LOVED that trend.  Unfortunately it seems to have died off a bit recently.  The more shooters choice that's built into a match the fewer complaints you'll get due to misunderstandings of the stage instructions.  This is one area where you my friend excel and why Eldorado has become a world class match. 

Thank you for the compliment. 

It means a lot to me.

 

But I think even when allowing or encouraging shooters to be creative; the stage instructions should be written with enough words to be clear to that point as well.

 

There should never be an instance where every shooter does not understand what options are available to them. 

 

Whether instructions are completely open or completely regimented; every shooter must have knowledge of/ access to every option that any other shooter has (within the confines of their chosen category). 

 

That access/ knowledge can only be delivered thru complete stage writing and full instructions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Driftwood Johnson, SASS #38283 said:

I wanna know how come that lady was allowed to wear sneakers???

Not my club; but I'll go out on a limb and guess one of two things...

Either she had just finished the steel set and had not changed into her shooting footwear yet. 

(I oftentimes, set steel in my Reebok's and a t shirt; then change to cowboy attire)

Or

she has an injury or medical condition allowing her use of differing shoes.

Link to comment
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.