Extend Into Infinity

Tigers and Lions and Bears, oh my!

A few weeks I talked about the proposed 2008 version of USPSA rules, with special reference to Fault Lines (which) "... are deemed to extend rearwards to infinity".

I almost lost a very good friend there; the MD who approved a stage with such an assumption. Fortunately, he is a reasonable and thinking man who is unlikely to take criticism personally.

But he did manage to take his revenge upon me this past weekend, and I must say I enjoyed it immensely.

I refer here to the Dundee Practical Shooters' monthly club match, and specifically to Stage 6 ("Guard Shack 47"), which provided the perfect illustration of precisely WHY the current "... deemed to extend rearwards to infinity" clause is the subject of so much objective -- and erroneous -- interpretation.

Our squad ("Fourth Squad") came onto the stage while the previous squad ("Third Squad") was still shooting it. We watched them, and discovered that those last few competitors engaged the stage in the same way; lateral movement, not 'movement in depth'.

A short description of the stage is in order:

The competitor begins in a "guard hut" (a 4' x 4' covered platform, enclosed only in the frontal view which features a 2' square shooting port). Through the front port, you can engage a six-plate rack and an IPSC target on both sides. 3o feet on either side are paired IPSC targets, the view of which is partially obscured by a vision barrier. A Charge Line (note the nomenclature ... there will be a test!) runs laterally from the front of the Guard Shack along the 180 line to a point approximately uprange of the far IPSC target, on each side.

There was no rear charge line behind the guard shack, which would have limited rearward movement (away from the targets)!

Fault lines extend eight or ten feet back uprange from each end of this charge line, and these fault lines are 'stubbed off' with 3' charge lines. These short charge lines point toward the center of the bay, and (according to the Match Director and the Stage Designer, both of which were members of Squad 4, are "deemed to extend to infinity".

Why were these "charge lines" not extended as one contiuous, physical foot-barrier from one fault line to its opposite?

1. They were defined as "extending to infinity".
2. The club didn't have enough 2x4 boards to place, representing a continuous charge line.

While we were going through our walk-through, Norm the Ungrateful casually suggested:

Look, all you have to do is shoot the center array from the Guard Shack, then fall back a couple of steps and [plink-plink] shoot the left two targets, move a step to the right and [plink-pling] shoot the right two targets. Why would you want to do all of this running back and forth stuff? It's just a waste of time?

(Or words to that effect.)

I looked at the stage, nodded my head in a manner reminiscent of Clark Griswold when presented with the grandeur of the Grand Canyon in "National Lampoon's 'Vacation'", and decided that this is the way I would shoot this stage.

The strategy offered a number of advantages:

• It was faster ... because it required a LOT less time during movement;
• It was risky (because of the hard-cover steel IPSC-target partially covering plates on the plate rack), and therefore a more challenging approach with the potential to reward the bold and skilled competitor;
• With any luck at all, the Range Officer would be forced to make a judgement call which was completely unsupported by physical evidence if he thought I had violated the 'extended to infinity' but physically absent charge line and ALSO establish the difference between a "Charge Line" and a "Fault Line" in the minds of my friends and neighbors;
• I would get to request an Arbitration on a club match;
  
• Somewhere along the line, somebody (maybe not even me!) would get pissed off, and;
• The resulting discussion would firmly establish the reasoning why assuming that "fault lines (may be) ... deemed to extend ... to infinity" is NOT sufficient justification for scrimping on stage prop material.

Note the elipses (...) in the last sentence. It's important.

Therefore, when I shot the stage, I didn't make any lateral movement. I shot the center plate rack, and the bracketting IPSC targets, from within the Guard Shack. Then I took too giant steps backwards and engaged the two IPSC targets on the far left side.

Moving one pace to the right, I engaged the two IPSC targets to the right, and I was done.

The first comment from the RO:

Time: 14.63 seconds. Six steel.

The second comment from the RO:

Eight Procedural Penalies.

This is my cue:

"What are the penalties for?"

"Faulting the rear fault line!"

Geek:
"Huh? What fault line?" (Stomping around as if looking for a Fault line.) I can't see it. I can't feel it. It isn't there. How could I have faulted a fault line that isn't there?"

RO:

"The fault lines are deemed to extend into infinity!"

Geek:

"But how can you ding me on a foot fault when there isn't a fault line there?"

When the RO was adamant and unyielding on the point, I looked around and found the Match Director, Paul the Soccer Coach.

I requested an arbitration. He said "it's the RO's call".

"Yes", I said, "And I formally request that you call for an arbitration committee under USPSA rules."

Someone suggested that I would have to pony up a $100 Arbitration Fee. (Actually, it's not a fee. It's a deposit; if I win the arbitration, my deposit would be refunded.) "Okay, I'll write a check. I request arbitration."

Then Barsoom Bill, who was NOT the Match Director, asked me under what rule I would protest the call.

"I don't know the rule number, but I know the rule. I don't have a rule book handy; give me your rule book and I'll find it."

Barsoom Bill exceeded all expectations when he disappeared for a couple of minutes and returned with the most decrepit USPSA Rule Book I've seen since the 14th edition (2000) "Toilet paper" rule book version. I was ecstatic. Barsoom Bill, in the three years since it has been published, has obviously worked the current "January, 2004" USPSA rule book hard. I knew at that moment that I was dealing with people who had a complete and abiding respect for the rules.

That was all I needed.

While I was reading the rule book (without my reading glasses) in an attempt to find my mitigating rule, the match continued. The RO had scored my targets, and my score sheet reflected eight procedural penalties; however, it had not been presented for my initials, and so it was not yet accepted.

Three competitors shot the stage while waiting for me to complete my discussion with the MD. Every one of them used the "non-traditional" approach of using 'in-depth' movement (rather than lateral movement) to engage the far lateral IPSC targets. Every time, I commented to the Match Director: "I think he violated the non-existant rear 'fault line'; I protest." (My protest was implied to be on the grounds that the rules were not being imposed impartially; actually, it was a general protest that -- lacking a physical, visible representation of the "CHARGE LINE", it was impossible for the competitor, the Range Officer or even the spectators to definitively determine whether the competitor had violated the non-existant Charge Line ... which was repeatedly and erroneously referred to as a 'fault line'.)

One of the competitors was dinged for 8 procedural penalties by the RO. I said "I don't think he violated the non-existant rear 'fault line'; I protest on his behalf."

Finally, after three competitors had shot the stage, I cited the following to the Match Director:

2.2.1 Charge Lines and Fault Lines – Competitor movement should preferably be restricted through the use of physical barriers, however, the use of Charge and Fault Lines is permitted. Charge Lines and Fault Lines should be constructed of wooden boards or other suitable material and should rise at least 2 centimeters (0.79 inches) above ground level. This will provide both physical and visible references to competitors to prevent inadvertent faulting. Fault Lines and Charge Lines must be fixed firmly in place to ensure they remain consistent throughout the match.

2.2.1.1 Charge Lines are used to restrict unreasonable movement by competitors toward or away from targets.

2.2.1.2 Fault Lines are used to force the competitor to shoot at targets from behind physical barriers. They may be positioned at any angle extending to the rear of these barriers. Fault Lines should be a minimum of 1 meter (3.28 feet) in length and unless otherwise stated in the written stage briefing, they are deemed to extend rearwards to infinity.

Please note the applicability of existing rules as they come into play:

2.2.1 - both Charge Lines and Fault Lines must be represented by physical barriers, to "... provide both physical and visible references to competitors to prevent inadvertent faulting." There existed no "Physical (or) visible reference" for either me or the Range Officer to determine whether I had been guilty of "inadvertent faulting".

2.2.1.1 - defines the difference between "Charge Lines" and "Fault Lines". Because my movement was decidedly not "lateral", the rules for "Fault Lines" clearly did not apply.

2.2.1.2 - is applicable only to "Fault Lines", so a "Charge Line" (limiting movement "... toward or away from targets ...") may not be "... deemed to extend rearwards to infinity."

Summary:

• Under the current rules, there is a definitive difference between a "Charge Line" (regulating movement toward and away from targets) and a "Fault Line" (regulating lateral movement, generally understood as defining the area behind a barrier.)
• The phrase 'deemed to extend rearwards to infinity' is so full of possibilities to misinterpretation AND misapplication that we are better off without its inclusion in the rule book.
• The proposed 2008 version of the rule book removes the definition of "Charge Lines", and replaces it entirely with a single definition of "Fault Lines". However, in the process it fails to address the topic described in excruciating detail here.

The current confusion between "Charge Lines" and "Fault Lines" is subject to innocent interpretation, as we have seen here.

However, without the distinction between the two lines, we run the risk of even more misunderstandings and misinterpretation in 2008.

The "extend rearward to infinity" clause will obviously not address the situation where competitors are restricted from rearward movement in order to engage several, OR ALL, targets from a single position.

This contradition between intent and rules interpretation is bound to cause problems in future matches.

I was able (perhaps maliciously, perhaps in order to make a point) to delay a simple club match because of this simple misunderstanding.

When, in 2008, there are no rules to guide us ... what delay might ensue from the lack of this simple definition in terms? How many otherwise-acceptable stages might be thrown out because the design is faulty?

If USPSA was unable to avoid this contretemps today, how are they planning to avoid it next year?

In illustration of the advantage of a rear "charge line", I offer this video which clearly shows how a rear "charge line" may avoid these problems.




(NOTE: Squire Tomasie and I both incurred 8 procedural penalties during our original efforts, because we had been judged to have violated rear charge lines; eventually we were required to reshoot the stage after a rear charge line had been added to the stage. Both of us added about three seconds to our stage time on the reshoot, significantly lowering our stage factors.

Final match results are available here.)