Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

What does a "grease ring" really mean?


Chris iliff

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The way I was taught to interpret 9.5.9 is that if there is a whole through the target then it is a hit. Does not need to be a full diameter hole. 

 

 

Edited by IHAVEGAS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/3/2017 at 8:12 PM, race1911 said:

 

..the RO running a shooter is supposed to have their eyes on the gun and shooters trigger finger, NOT the target.......sounds like they didn't know what  overlays are for either
 

 

Unless you are brain-damaged, human beings can multi-task. A good RO doesn't subscribe to silly absolutes. I watch the gun, targets, other RO, fault lines and many other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

regarding the pic of the long  hole, did you guys actually look at the rulebook? if it went through the face of the target and not the back, and if it went all the way through, it's a hit. I can't tell that from the pic, but it's usually pretty clear in real life.

 

On the original subject of hard-cover hits and shoot-throughs, imho if you are not painting/taping/restoring your hardcover, you are just guessing at what are hits and what are not. I don't like guessing at scores. I find most shooters are pretty cool with a mike if you can show them the exact place where their bullet penetrated the wall, barrel or (god forbid) tire with a full-diameter hit before going on to strike the target. the grease ring imho is more helpful in determining whether the hold is caused by a bullet (even a deformed one), or simply plastic or wood fragments that the bullet sent flying.

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2017‎-‎01‎-‎03 at 9:12 PM, race1911 said:

 

..the RO running a shooter is supposed to have their eyes on the gun and shooters trigger finger, NOT the target.......sounds like they didn't know what  overlays are for either
 

 

I really wish this nonsensical myth would die.  The human field of vision is SUBSTANTIALLY wider than the 1-2 degree field of view required to monitor where the gun is pointed and whether or not the shooter's finger is inside the trigger guard.  If one cannot mentally monitor other things outside that 1-2 degree field of view while the shooter is going through the course of fire, then perhaps he/she should reconsider his/her competency as an RO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...the other RO and the CRO are supposed to take care of monitoring the rest of the shooters actions while the RO running the shooter maintains vigilence on the gun and trigger finger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, race1911 said:

...the other RO and the CRO are supposed to take care of monitoring the rest of the shooters actions while the RO running the shooter maintains vigilence on the gun and trigger finger

 

If that's how you RO, you are doing a great disservice to the sport. spreading such nonsense is an even *greater* disservice. I don't know who told you that, but either that person was very wrong, or you totally misinterpreted what was being said.

 

Humans are equipped with peripheral vision and high-capacity brains. That's how we can walk and chew gum at the same time. that's how we can watch the gun *and* the targets. All good RO's multi-task.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, race1911 said:

...a shooter who is running with his finger in the trigger guard or breaks 180 with his gun is multitasking with his mind on other things

Actually, such a shooter is simply poorly trained. If you have to consciously think about where your gun is pointed or where your finger is, you are doing it wrong.

 

At any rate, an RO who is not brain-damaged will see that even tho he also has to look where he is going and be aware of many other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are alot of "poorly trained" shooters out there which is exactly the reason why the RO running him should be concerned primarily with attention on where that gun is pointed and what he is doing with his trigger finger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, race1911 said:

there are alot of "poorly trained" shooters out there which is exactly the reason why the RO running him should be concerned primarily with attention on where that gun is pointed and what he is doing with his trigger finger

 

Correct ... PRIMARILY - but NOT EXCLUSIVELY!  Any competent RO is capable of observing much more than just the gun ... and MUST be able to so do if he is to run a stage safely!

 

I challenge you to tell us which RMI EVER told you the RO on the timer must look at the gun and NOTHING ELSE.  I feel reasonably confident that any of the Instructors reading this will tell you, in no uncertain terms, that is NOT what they teach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, race1911 said:

..exactly why I corrected myself and used the term "primarily"

 

Thank you.

 

It is unfortunate that there are some in our game who fully believe the RO on the timer is allowed to look only at the gun, the whole gun, and nothing but the gun while running a shooter.  While he needs to be fully aware of what the shooter is doing with the gun at any given point of time, there is absolutely no reason on earth why he cannot also observe other things that are happening within his field of view.

 

By way of comparison - A fighter pilot who focuses on his target and nothing but his target will eventually wind up with two things:  Target fixation and a heat-seeking missile up his a$$ 6!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you aim at a target, what do you aim at?  The A zone, I suspect.  But you can still see the rest of the target and the surrounding area.

 

My analogy:  When you RO (timer), your "A zone" is the trigger guard.  While it is your focus, your peripheral and downrange vision still allows you to see a lot more.  And there are times when it is not possible to see that "A zone" but you do the best you can, all the while seeing other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, race1911 said:

there are alot of "poorly trained" shooters out there which is exactly the reason why the RO running him should be concerned primarily with attention on where that gun is pointed and what he is doing with his trigger finger

 

Perhaps, but think about it for a second. When the shooter is stopped and actively shooting at targets downrange, there's not much going on with the gun that you need to tune out everything else. If you have a stage with LOTS of hardcover shoot-throughs (as I did at A1 last week), you can position yourself behind the shooter, and see everything you need to about the gun, but also keep an eye on targets and props. Seeing tires or barrels jump, or splinters fly from wood can be a valuable hint as to what to look for in scoring.

 

then the shooter is done with that position, and starts moving. Well hey, conveniently, there is no longer any need to be aware of the targets, but only movement-related safety issues, and fault lines, and of course your own safety as an RO, avoiding walls, props, trip hazards, etc.. At any particular time, there are only a limited number of crazy things a shooter can do, so you can adjust your focus as required.

 

and honestly, in several area matches and several nationals, I have not seen all that many poorly trained shooters. Almost everyone moves safely and has good muzzle awareness unless something weird happens, and you pretty quickly learn to keep an eye on the weird places if you officiate at major matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bram said:

He hit the target side on......so the bullet entered the side of the Delta and exited in the Charlie.

 

OK ... We understand now that the bullet went from left to right (in the picture.)  Now ... What did it hit FIRST:  The brown side or the white side of the target.  (Or did it truly hit the exact edge side of the target ... directly with the point of the bullet?)

 

From the image it's hard to tell, but it appears to me it MAY have hit the back first and exited out the front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2017 at 11:17 AM, Schutzenmeister said:

 

I really wish this nonsensical myth would die.  The human field of vision is SUBSTANTIALLY wider than the 1-2 degree field of view required to monitor where the gun is pointed and whether or not the shooter's finger is inside the trigger guard.  If one cannot mentally monitor other things outside that 1-2 degree field of view while the shooter is going through the course of fire, then perhaps he/she should reconsider his/her competency as an RO.

Amen!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree back to front.  It looks like fuzz on the front of the target rather than on the back.  The actual target would be much more noticeable as to how the bullet traveled.

 

As  to the RO focus, they watch everything in their area of attention.  Movement is more a gun handling and muzzle control focus.  Shooting targets is a trigger finger, muzzle control and partial target focus if the target is aligned with the shooter and RO.  If the shooter is shooting around a corner then a quick glance at the feet to ensure they are not outside the shooting area as they engage the targets.  RO'ing is like driving.  You have an area you need to concentrate on but you cannot become so fixated on that one area that you miss what is going on around you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
On 1/3/2017 at 9:32 PM, IHAVEGAS said:

What I get more of is folks wanting a double whenever the hole is not perfectly round, either due to just the way the cardboard tore or the shot being at an angle to the target. 

I have seen perfect doubles as well when running a shooter, on a target 8’ away. The rest are “c’mon that’s a double “

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2017 at 12:11 AM, Bram said:

Shooter at our recent club match had the drop turn close on him......he insisted this was a 'Alpha Charlie'..... RO said 'Alpha Mike'...... he went to the RM who said 'Alpha Mike' because there was no grease mark.

I told him it's a miss because the hole wasn't the diameter of his bullet.

 

Whats the correct call?

IMG_4419.JPG

 

Assuming the hit entered the front of the target, Alpha Charlie. In regards to scoring this target, that's really the only thing you have to consider. You and the RM had it wrong for various made up reasons.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, waktasz said:

 

Assuming the hit entered the front of the target, Alpha Charlie. In regards to scoring this target, that's really the only thing you have to consider. You and the RM had it wrong for various made up reasons.

 

 

 

We don't "assume", of course.  If there's no bullet diameter and no "grease mark" (actually, smoke mark), how can you call it a hit?  I'd say Alpha Mike, and hope he shoots faster next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any reason to believe it is a ricochet or splatter?

 

9.5.4.1 Enlarged holes in paper targets which exceed the competitor's bullet diameter will not count for score or penalty unless there is visible evidence within the remnants of the hole (e.g. a grease mark, striations or a "crown" etc.), to eliminate a presumption that the hole was caused by a ricochet or splatter.

 

There have been targets scored as A, for a bullet strike that almost cut the target in two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...