Jump to content


Photo

DNROI Term Limits


  • Please log in to reply
202 replies to this topic

#21 bgary

bgary

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 406 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 09:51 AM

I understand that the word of law hasn't changed but it is also seems that under this interpretation I now need to move my mags back one full spot from where they have always been on my belt to comply with the new Facebook picture.

Given that the word of law is unchanged there are limited possible options. Either my current mag position was always illegal (as was the mag position of many other shooters) and every RO missed it or the rule has effectively changed (even though the written rulebook hasn't). The only other option I can think of is that we all misunderstood the picture and nothing changes.

 

I think the crux of this is "interpretation".  I have no way of knowing whether your current mag position was illegal or not.  Apparently, neither do you.  But what I do know is that "behind" means "behind".   Like, as in, not next to, not in front of, not overlapping with, not lined up at an angle from somewhere else, but "behind".  Behind means "to the rear of" or "further back than".   If I'm standing next to the back corner of my truck, I'm not behind it. 

 

If your interpretation of your mag position is one thing, and mine is another, then we have to find some way to resolve that.   Maybe we need a new diagram or something that would help clarify what "behind" means.  I know, that's just crazy talk

 

The fact that "every RO missed it" doesn't mean your mag position was "legal".  There's no punch-card that says if you get away with something 20 times it grandfathers it in as legal.  The whole point of the exercise is to make it so there is a clear distinction between "legal" and "not legal", that we can *all* understand.

 

How could that clarity possibly be a bad thing?

 

$.02


  • Cheap Shot, Doc and GuanoLoco like this

Disclaimer: I post here as an individual member of USPSA, and speak only for myself...


 


#22 aceinyerface

aceinyerface

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,166 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 10:00 AM

I still can't find my iliac crest or bisect it. I will just have to shoot limited or open.

 

It should come as no surprise that we have people who are retards, either legit or pretend. It should also come as no surprise that we have trolls. I think many people are just being a pain in the ass on the subject.

 

If it requires writing it in a less literate manner, I'm sure Troy could do it. I find the ruling remarkably clear.

 

Find the front edge of each hip bone, draw an imaginary line between them. All your stuff has to be completely behind this line.


  • Cheap Shot, RockOutGLOCKOut and bailey like this

#23 ZackJones

ZackJones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,679 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 10:13 AM

Other than Grizzly Adams how many of you have changed your gear position? I haven't and don't plan to until someone tells me it's wrong.
  • edub224 likes this
Not to be confused with ZachJ

#24 ToddKS

ToddKS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts
  • LocationGetting killed in the streets

Posted 13 March 2016 - 11:20 AM



I think the crux of this is "interpretation". I have no way of knowing whether your current mag position was illegal or not. Apparently, neither do you. But what I do know is that "behind" means "behind". Like, as in, not next to, not in front of, not overlapping with, not lined up at an angle from somewhere else, but "behind". Behind means "to the rear of" or "further back than". If I'm standing next to the back corner of my truck, I'm not behind it.

If your interpretation of your mag position is one thing, and mine is another, then we have to find some way to resolve that. Maybe we need a new diagram or something that would help clarify what "behind" means. I know, that's just crazy talk

The fact that "every RO missed it" doesn't mean your mag position was "legal". There's no punch-card that says if you get away with something 20 times it grandfathers it in as legal. The whole point of the exercise is to make it so there is a clear distinction between "legal" and "not legal", that we can *all* understand.

How could that clarity possibly be a bad thing?

$.02


Clarity is a good thing. We agree on that.

The question Mike posed was "What is the issue". I was attempting to provide my perspective on that.

You mention my interpretation of my mag position. Reality is that I never had my own interpretation. When I went to my first match I asked where I needed to put my stuff on my belt. The gentleman in charge said put it like this because those are the rules. I complied and was declared good to go. Ever since then I put my stuff in the same place (which appears to be just like every else) and have always been deemed in compliance with the rule by those in charge.

The only interpretation I made on my own was that based on the picture I need to move my mags back. I don't believe that "every RO missed it". I believe that they were interpreting the rule and enforcing it as they thought it was supposed to be.

For the record I have no problem moving my gear. My "issue" if you will is that the official feedback I read here was "the rule didn't change". I don't disagree with that on paper but something changed because I am now needing to move stuff on my belt to be in compliance.

What if you were to just say "Hey guys, this may be different from the way it was being enforced previously in some cases but we think this is right way to go."?

People may have different feelings about the ruling and how it was communicated but that would at least end the debate over "change".



#25 ToddKS

ToddKS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts
  • LocationGetting killed in the streets

Posted 13 March 2016 - 11:23 AM

Other than Grizzly Adams how many of you have changed your gear position? I haven't and don't plan to until someone tells me it's wrong.

I am changing mine because I don't want the mental distraction that would result from an RO asking me to move my gear because they saw the picture. Might not happen but I would rather eliminate the possibility all together.
  • nwhpfan likes this

#26 ToddKS

ToddKS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts
  • LocationGetting killed in the streets

Posted 13 March 2016 - 11:28 AM



It should come as no surprise that we have people who are retards, either legit or pretend. It should also come as no surprise that we have trolls. I think many people are just being a pain in the ass on the subject.

If it requires writing it in a less literate manner, I'm sure Troy could do it. I find the ruling remarkably clear.

Find the front edge of each hip bone, draw an imaginary line between them. All your stuff has to be completely behind this line.


I self identify as pretend retard with trolling tendencies.
  • aceinyerface and peterthefish like this

#27 Sprewell

Sprewell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • LocationBanned

Posted 13 March 2016 - 11:32 AM

Why does there need to be a rule about where you put gear on your belt?

Seems to me like it would be a lot simpler to just let everybody put it wherever they wanted to.


  • pmt likes this

#28 Mike Foley

Mike Foley

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 907 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:01 PM

^That starts about 15 other arguments.
  • Brownie, aceinyerface and bgary like this

#29 aceinyerface

aceinyerface

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,166 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:01 PM

Because "Practical".

You have to do the rules thing because some tard will get stupid. Mag pouches on your forearm would probably be faster but not practical.

#30 nwhpfan

nwhpfan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,002 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:13 PM

Other than Grizzly Adams how many of you have changed your gear position? I haven't and don't plan to until someone tells me it's wrong.

 

Am I Grizzly Adams?

 

Yes, I've changed and put me down for one of the people effected, and irritated by this.  And, with all due respect, the attitude of people that don't see how/why this came about is a problem.

 

I changed because I want to do my best always and once the "facebook" picture came out it seemed imminent the rule would change.  I figured it would be "That Teusday" and I didn't want to get caught unprepared for the next match.  Fact is, it probably takes a month or more of DF to rewire the circuits.  I do compete to do my very  best and gear position matters to performance.

 

Here's my other concerns.

 

I have been in the sport for 5 years.  After 1 year I became an RO.  Not to dime out the RMI but we were taught to put your finger on the hip bone and everything had to be behind it.  I was in the class with at least one top level shooter.  To this day if you put your finger on your hip bone if your gear is behind it, it is behind it.  To me, it is unequivocal.  I never even knew their was a question....

 

The next concern I have is why?"  Why is this the way to measure.  Especially when the other measurement works?  It seems clear to me that the way "I" have been doing it is the way (most) every single Production shooter has been doing it. So why was an option picked that would disrupt Production?  I'm concerned either that wasn't thought about or considered. 

 

The next concern I have is the manner this comes out.  1 person asks a question on a forum....  Now, I'm always a bit suspect whenever somebody asks a question and immediately gives what they think the answer is but anyway the question is given along with a picture.  The response from NROI is that, "yep it's #2" and that picture is good.  I was "confronted" nearly two weeks later by a shooting friend of mine in a very polite way.  I was shocked....I had not heard of such a "ruling" because I never went to USPSA Forums. 

 

To my knowledge their is no prior information out there that would lead one to believe measurement is from the front or from the side and that picture "does" make a drastic change in where I can put my gear.  With a forum post, their is this disruption among many shooters, and again it seems unnecessary.

 

There are people in our sport that aren't here necessarily y for the enjoyment of shooting guns in a game to win.  And I don't think I'm the only one that have seen these people but these are the types that look to restrict gaming, they believe in "gotchas", the line is out, vs. on the line is in...that kind of thing.    I RO'd at a big match with a CRO who actually believed a questionable hit, his job was to score it low and it was the competitors responsibility to ask for an overlay.  He also went around threatening to DQ people based on his "own rules."  It was very disappointing but I/we know these people exist.  We've had in our sport people who wanted to bump to Open a shooter who at LMR removes a mag from their pocket....  And just recently there was a discussion about if a lady shooter drops her pants should she be DQ'd in the portapotty.  I think their are many that are constantly guarded against these types of people and that attitude as it goes against the freestyle, competitive, and community spirit of our sport.

 

The issues are where the line is to be drawn, the need for it, the reasoning, the methodology, AND the manner in which it is communicated initially, AND the uncertainty that surrounds it now.

 

I do think we would be better off to say, ...." oops, my bad forget this happened" and go back to the drawing board on this issue.

 

I do think unless it is an actual clarification there should be more input from effected shooters.



#31 Sprewell

Sprewell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • LocationBanned

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:19 PM

Because "Practical".

You have to do the rules thing because some tard will get stupid. Mag pouches on your forearm would probably be faster but not practical.

 

I'm not saying there shouldn't be rules.  A rule that results in people arguing about the position of a holster or mag pouch on a belt is stupid.



#32 LeadChucker

LeadChucker

    CO

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,044 posts
  • LocationHC, Utah

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:30 PM

Let's just simplify the rules and go shoot!

I don't have a vote, but if I did it would be anywhere on the belt and let's get after it.

Seems simple and enforceable

#33 Alfred Salveti

Alfred Salveti

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 514 posts
  • LocationSugar City, USA

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:37 PM

I would be interested in knowing what the "actual" problem was?  As a CRO, having worked Chrono, I've never been aware of an issue with this rule.  And I shoot production.   I've never even read somewhere; or heard their was an issue with it's application, fairness, interpretation, etc?  This really did seem to come out of left field.  And at least in my area....everyone thought you touched your hip bone and put your gear "behind it."


I like to rewatch election night 2016 coverage and I want to marry a conservative black girl who likes to shoot.

#34 bgary

bgary

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 406 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:51 PM

The only interpretation I made on my own was that based on the picture I need to move my mags back. I don't believe that "every RO missed it". I believe that they were interpreting the rule and enforcing it as they thought it was supposed to be.

For the record I have no problem moving my gear. My "issue" if you will is that the official feedback I read here was "the rule didn't change". I don't disagree with that on paper but something changed because I am now needing to move stuff on my belt to be in compliance.

What if you were to just say "Hey guys, this may be different from the way it was being enforced previously in some cases but we think this is right way to go."?

People may have different feelings about the ruling and how it was communicated but that would at least end the debate over "change".

 

Yeah, OK, but... for the sake of argument, let's put this in a different context.

 

Let's say you've played club-level basketball for years.  You've gotten really good at hitting your three-pointer, and no one has ever raised an eyebrow about the times your foot has been on the line when you launched.

 

Then one day someone comes along and points out what the rule actually says:  "A player's feet must be completely behind the three-point line".

 

Are you going to call that guy out for "enforcing" the rule different than it had been "interpreted"?  And complain about the way it was "commuicated"?

 

Or are you going to nod your head, acknowledge that the rule actually says what it says, and make sure - like a good sportsman - that there's no way your play can be interpreted as anything other than fully compliant with the rule?

 

The rule didn't change.


Disclaimer: I post here as an individual member of USPSA, and speak only for myself...


 


#35 Larry Costa

Larry Costa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 797 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 01:01 PM

Yeah, OK, but... for the sake of argument, let's put this in a different context.

 

Let's say you've played club-level basketball for years.  You've gotten really good at hitting your three-pointer, and no one has ever raised an eyebrow about the times your foot has been on the line when you launched.

 

Then one day someone comes along and points out what the rule actually says:  "A player's feet must be completely behind the three-point line".

 

Are you going to call that guy out for "enforcing" the rule different than it had been "interpreted"?  And complain about the way it was "commuicated"?

 

Or are you going to nod your head, acknowledge that the rule actually says what it says, and make sure - like a good sportsman - that there's no way your play can be interpreted as anything other than fully compliant with the rule?

 

The rule didn't change.

 

That's not even close to what is happening here.  Do you have some historical information that says the measurement was supposed to go from east to west?  You just keep saying the same thing.  You might as well just tell people if they don't' like it they can leave. 

 

People are concerned and what is your answer?  It's like from your rose colored lenses you just tell people the answer is right and to deal with it?

 

Not saying Rome is burning here but gee whiz ......


Because of who I am dawg = EABOD


#36 peterthefish

peterthefish

    Banned.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,999 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 01:05 PM


The rule didn't change.


I think you're oversimplifying. In your example, the only reasonable interpretation of the rule is the latter.

While Troy's interpretation is reasonable, it is not the ONLY reasonable interpretation. As I said in another post, an alternately reasonable interpretation is could be:

1) Draw a line tangent to the circumference of your waist that intersects with your hip.
2) draw a line perpendicular to the tangent that intersects your hip.

Because math, any point on your belt further to the right (or left) of that is also behind that.

This could lead to another interpretation allowing another inch or two of forward space.

The rule, as written, is vague. If there an interpretation clarifying that, great. Go through the process to publish and enforce that interpretation.

But don't pretend that it's the only possibly valid interpretation and everyone else is being deliberately obtuse and there's no need to change anything because the rule didn't change.

#37 bgary

bgary

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 406 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 01:06 PM

Do you have some historical information that says the measurement was supposed to go from east to west? 

 

Do you have something you can point to that says "behind" means something other than.... um... "behind"?


Disclaimer: I post here as an individual member of USPSA, and speak only for myself...


 


#38 bgary

bgary

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 406 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 01:09 PM

1) Draw a line tangent to the circumference of your waist that intersects with your hip.
2) draw a line perpendicular to the tangent that intersects your hip.

 

I get it.

 

I know that's how people have decided to interpret it.

 

I just can't find any - ANY - support for that interpretation, in our rulebook ....or in real life, for that matter.

 

If I draw a line tangent to the door of my car, draw a line perpendicular to that tangent, and then stand behind that line... am I standing behind my car?


Disclaimer: I post here as an individual member of USPSA, and speak only for myself...


 


#39 LeadChucker

LeadChucker

    CO

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,044 posts
  • LocationHC, Utah

Posted 13 March 2016 - 01:23 PM

Ok, a rule exists, I agree with Bruce, behind is pretty simple! My take is:

Is the rule needed? It's a game we play, what purpose does this rule serve? If we had a rule that states "must be on belt", would it diminish the division? Would it change the division beyond simplifying things? Certainly it would make RO's jobs easier.

I think we are focusing on the wrong things
  • pmt, u sofa king we todd ed and ZackJones like this

#40 Larry Costa

Larry Costa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 797 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 01:50 PM

Do you have something you can point to that says "behind" means something other than.... um... "behind"?

 

Dude, you can argue with yourself from this point....

 

Gear has always been "behind the hip bone."   I don't even know what point your trying to make here...


Because of who I am dawg = EABOD





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users