If the location selected by one of them is better than the other—for instance, one of the two stations faces the sun or the wind (1) while the alternate station has both at its back—the preference goes to the choice of the person who designated that advantageous position (2). It is closer to realizing the object of the contest, and it is the place to which the contract naturally refers when no further qualification is made.

If, however, their mutual stipulation specifies the opposite, then in our school the stipulation takes precedence, just as it would if they had agreed to shoot at night. Still, it can be argued that the more suitable station ought to prevail and be granted to whoever requests it, for that is nearer to their common benefit and to the purpose of the contract.

When the two positions are equal, the first competitor may stand wherever he wishes within it, and the second follows him. Under the second opinion, the second competitor chooses first and the first follows after him. In either case, neither may step in front of the other toward the target; they must line up shoulder-to-shoulder.

If they willingly allow one of them to move ahead, a slight advance is permissible; but if the advantage is excessive, it is forbidden, because it grants an exclusive privilege that contradicts fairness. This is analogous to stipulating that one contestant wins with nine hits while the other must score ten—such a condition is unanimously invalid.

Should all the competitors agree to move forward or backward from their appointed line, it is permissible. According to the Shāfiʿī jurists, however, the earlier disagreement re-emerges whenever the distance is increased or reduced.