Would you change the instructions?

[Chief Rick]

Stage has downrange movement.  Shotgun and rifle shot from platform/deck.

 

Shotgun shot first and restaged at position.

 

Rifle shot second and shooter has choice making rifle safe in vertical rack (to allow for safe downrange movement) or carrying rifle downrange and making rifle safe on table placed at pistol shooting position.

 

First shooter of the day chooses to carry rifle downrange.

 

While doing so, he catches his revolver grip and pulls a loaded revolver out of leather - dropped loaded gun = MDQ.

 

There were no environmental factors or gear failures playing into this.

 

Would you change the stage instructions to make all shooters make the rifle safe in the vertical rack or leave it shooters choice?

[Crisco]

Leave the instructions alone.  That DQ had nothing to do with the instructions.

[John Kloehr]

26 minutes ago, Chief Rick said:

There were no environmental factors ...

Taking these words at face value, the poor competitor klutzed it up. No change needed.

 

In the event of a respectful appeal, was the platform step to the ground really big and did it happen right when getting off the platform? Just asking to make sure. If this happened while simply walking... "Safe for movement" is otherwise clearly spelled out for both long guns and revolvers.

[The Original Lumpy Gritz]

Don't fix what ain't broke 

That MDQ is 110% on the shooter

[Rye Miles #13621]

Nope I wouldn’t change anything, sounds like only one person messed up and got a MDQ. We shouldn’t change stages based on one person’s actions. 

[Chief Rick]

31 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

Taking these words at face value, the poor competitor klutzed it up. No change needed.

 

In the event of a respectful appeal, was the platform step to the ground really big and did it happen right when getting off the platform? Just asking to make sure. If this happened while simply walking... "Safe for movement" is otherwise clearly spelled out for both long guns and revolvers.

No.  This happened after the competitor was on level ground.  This platform has a ramp, not steps, to get to ground level.

[John Kloehr]

9 minutes ago, Chief Rick said:

No.  This happened after the competitor was on level ground.  This platform has a ramp, not steps, to get to ground level.

 

The shooter has my sympathy and an MDQ.

[El Sobrante Kid]

"Would you change the instructions?" Well... that depends on what you want to accomplish. First, I agree with the other comments that the shooter is fully responsible for the error. That said, after reading many comments over the years that are generally along the lines of, "Benefit of the doubt..." and "Don't create P traps", etc., the overall sentiment that comes across is to not unnecessarily create any problems for the shooter. What kind of a stage do you want to create? If you want to reduce the risk of an accident as much as possible, I would change the instructions. If you want to have a stage with some additional level of risk of an accident like this, leave the wording as it is.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

If I had written the stage, I would look at what happened and realize that the instructions were not at fault, and that there was no need to change.

But, even if that is objectively true, and let us assume that it is, if I FELT that my instruction could have led to the shooter making a poor choice, I would not write the instructions this way again.  They'd be different at the next shoot.

 

But that's just me.

[Chief Rick]

41 minutes ago, El Sobrante Kid said:

"Would you change the instructions?" Well... that depends on what you want to accomplish. First, I agree with the other comments that the shooter is fully responsible for the error. That said, after reading many comments over the years that are generally along the lines of, "Benefit of the doubt..." and "Don't create P traps", etc., the overall sentiment that comes across is to not unnecessarily create any problems for the shooter. What kind of a stage do you want to create? If you want to reduce the risk of an accident as much as possible, I would change the instructions. If you want to have a stage with some additional level of risk of an accident like this, leave the wording as it is.

I'm going to go on a tangent to my own thread...

 

If the competitor had been in a rush to put the rifle in the vertical rack and dropped it, would you then mandate all other shooters to carry the rifle down range?

 

"Benefit of the doubt" and "don't create p traps" has nothing to do with safety.

 

Allowing a competitor to re-stage a long gun vertically or carry it downrange has no specific tendency to necessarily create a problem for a shooter, but mandating one or the other could very well. 

[El Sobrante Kid]

12 minutes ago, Chief Rick said:

I'm going to go on a tangent to my own thread...

 

If the competitor had been in a rush to put the rifle in the vertical rack and dropped it, would you then mandate all other shooters to carry the rifle down range?

 

"Benefit of the doubt" and "don't create p traps" has nothing to do with safety.

 

Allowing a competitor to re-stage a long gun vertically or carry it downrange has no specific tendency to necessarily create a problem for a shooter, but mandating one or the other could very well. 

 

I agree. When handling firearms there will always be some level of hazard. And I am not in any way advocating the idea of eliminating all risk. That would make for a very boring event. But there are instructions and stage props that can be utilized to greatly minimize likely safety issues. If a stage writer wants to make a stage more interesting/difficult/complicated so it is more of a challenge, that's not hard to do. However, as I tried to point out, making a stage more interesting/difficult/complicated at the risk of DQing a shooter, seems to go against the whole idea of good stage writing.

 

I don't think there was anything wrong with stage instructions that we are discussing. But that doesn't mean that there are no improvements that could be made. Again, what is the stage writer trying to accomplish.

 

 

[Sedalia Dave]

2 hours ago, Crisco said:

Leave the instructions alone.  That DQ had nothing to do with the instructions.

 

THIS ^^^^

[Sedalia Dave]

24 minutes ago, Chief Rick said:

I'm going to go on a tangent to my own thread...

 

If the competitor had been in a rush to put the rifle in the vertical rack and dropped it, would you then mandate all other shooters to carry the rifle down range?

 

"Benefit of the doubt" and "don't create p traps" has nothing to do with safety.

 

Allowing a competitor to re-stage a long gun vertically or carry it downrange has no specific tendency to necessarily create a problem for a shooter, but mandating one or the other could very well. 

 

Nope Instructions are fine.

 

In both scenarios the dropped gun was the fault of the shooter not the stage instructions.

[The Original Lumpy Gritz]

What questions were there on the Posse Marshall walk thru on this stage?

[Chief Rick]

2 hours ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said:

What questions were there on the Posse Marshall walk thru on this stage?

None. Only two posse's.

 

This stage was also shot last month (with a change in target numbers and sequence) two see it any unintended problems would come up.

[Tennessee williams]

I would definitely abolish the MDQ the shooter earned and restart the match since they messed up. I'd have to since I changed the instructions. I'd also make bubblewrap mandatory attire for all categories so as to protect every shooter just in case one of them trips or bumps a prop. I would personally hold my stagewriting responsible for every bad decision a shooter makes as well. 

 

Just kiddin', I wouldn't change a thing neither. 

[John Kloehr]

4 hours ago, El Sobrante Kid said:

... However, as I tried to point out, making a stage more interesting/difficult/complicated at the risk of DQing a shooter, seems to go against the whole idea of good stage writing.

 

I had written a response earlier on this subject (DQ traps), but was responding to a post focused more on not setting a P trap.

 

I cited two specific examples, one where the risk of breaking the 170 (180 in the actual examples, different sports) where a left-handed shooter was at much higher risk than a right-handed shooter of a DQ, and it was designed as a DQ trap! The other a stage involving two bays at right angles to each other, and having to exit the first bay (big move down-stage) to enter the second bay to the right... and the first shots at that point where to targets on the far right of the second bay... so exactly what was the 180 depended on where a shooter was in that stage (just keep the gun pointed away from people). It was not designed as a trap, but it was one simply due to it being a novel setup. If this is not clear, I can make and post a drawing.

 

From these various experiences, I can say I do not consider myself qualified to write a stage for any sport. This post is a lot shorter now than what I decided not to post earlier.

[Irish Pat]

the shooter could have easy staged the rifle before heading down the ramp carrying it. he was probably trying to be a gamer and saving a second.  It’s just a friendly game. he did it to himself nothing wrong with the stage instructions.  Good Match. Irish ☘️ Pat

[Matthew Duncan]

8 hours ago, Chief Rick said:

Would you change the stage instructions to make all shooters make the rifle safe in the vertical rack or leave it shooters choice?

Shooter’s choice.