IPSC Rules: When To Cover Targets With Transparent Plastic?

The Canadian Nationals 2013 was a wet affair. We had to contend with a lot of rain. I don't know what it is with 2013; I've shot more in the rain and snow this year than ever before, and it's not without it's problems.

 

What is the rule regarding covering the targets with transparent plastic bags?

 

"Rule 2.3.5: During inclement weather, the  Range  Master  may  order  that  paper  targets be fitted with transparent protective covers and/or overhead shelters, and this order is not subject to appeal by competitors. Such items must be applied and remain fitted to all affected targets for the same period of time, until the order is rescinded by the Range Master."

 

The above rule applies to both IPSC and USPSA.

 

I raise this issue for a reason. I was the CRO on a stage, which meant that I was responsible for ensuring that targets were covered. One particular squad, consisting of top caliber competitors, was on the receiving end of the "call to cover" order.

 

 

The call to cover targets came through with the instruction, "Cover as soon as possible". I am fully aware that competitors do not like engaging targets with plastic covers, since it makes it more difficult to "see your hits". It was raining fairly heavily at the time, so I made the decision to cover the targets in the midst of a squad. One of the competitors was facing a reshoot, and was upset, as were the remaining squad mates. The verbal exchange, which is usually of the bullying variety in order to get you to respond in favour of the competitors, insisted that the rules specified I had to cover the targets between squads.

 

Of course this is nonsense. The key component of the rule is "for the same period of time". Let me explain why. In this particular event we had 16 stages. It is highly unlikely that any two stages start at the same time, let alone 16 stages. Actually, the probability of 16 stages starting at the same time is 16^2, or 1 in 256. It is for this reason that we cover when the order comes through, if we are to approximately cover all targets for the same period of time. So you cover as soon as possible. Naturally their whining was ignored.

 

Then, in conclusion, make sure you're equipped for the rain. Have a raincoat, umbrella, something to cover your gear, a towel, hand warmers and perhaps a change of shoes.

IPSC Rules: Should No-Shoot Targets Be Listed In The Written Stage Briefing?

This has some background.

 

A recent Level II match had a competitor shoot a No-Shoot target. He argued that the WSB did not specifically highlight No-Shoot targets, and therefore how was he to know they were penalty targets. Something to that effect.

 

The match director responded by saying that a No-Shoot is not a target, and that it is not mandatory to list No-Shoots. This was confirmed by an individual who was involved in obtaining IPSC sanctioning for a Level III match.

 

I disagreed as follows:

 

"A No-Shoot IS a target, and the current IPSC rulebook specifically says this in the glossary. The only time one differentiates between the two, is where a specific rule makes mention of the two different types of targets.

 

Target(s) - A term that can include both scoring target(s) and no-shoot(s) unless a Rule (e.g.  4.1.3) differentiates between them.

 

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to expect the stage briefing to include a tally of no-shoots, given that Rule 3.2.1 does not differentiate between the type of targets [snip]"

 

I also took the issue to Global Village, to find some clarity. This is the response that I received:

 

"The RM was correct. It is not necessary to state the number of No Shoots in the Written Stage Briefing. We include regular targets, because they are things you are supposed to shoot, so you need to know how many to seek during your walkthrough. It also impacts the production of score sheets.

 

Under Rule 3.2.1, "Targets (type and number)" means how many paper targets, poppers and plates to shoot.

 

The Glossary definition of Targets is an overlooked remnant of a short period of time when No-Shoots were called Penalty Targets. We will remove the definition from the 2015 Rulebooks."

 

Fair enough, except this past weekend yielded an experience that makes me think that listing No-Shoot targets in the WSB should be considered good practice.

 

Whilst viewing the stages for the 32 Special, I noticed that the No-Shoots were the same colour (white) as the metal targets. This prompted me to suggest that I place a conspicuous X across the face of each No-Shoot, which I duly did.

 

Rule 4.1.3 No-Shoots must be clearly marked with a conspicuous "X" or be of a single, unique color different from scoring targets throughout a match or tournament (i.e. if no-shoots are yellow, they must all be yellow in a match or tournament).

 

You would think that was the end of it, but no.

 

 

 

I have included two pictures as examples. During the aforesaid match I was approached by more than one person, asking if the targets with "X's" were actually No-Shoots, or merely simulated hard cover. At the time I didn't respond with clarity because the rule is clear, but upon reflection I can see how competitors can become confused.

 

Firstly, we seldom shoot matches with No-Shoots marked with "X's". Secondly, the WSB did not list any No-Shoots. Therefore, I would contend that, even though it is "officially" not necessary to list No-Shoots in the WSB, it should be considered good practice. Will it? That's unlikely. It's likely that there will be as many opinions as there are Range Masters.