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

tape blowing off, can the RO determine an accurate score


motosapiens

Recommended Posts

Entertaining situation in today's match. On a standards stage, the first string was unloaded start, 6 shots into a zebra target (hardcover on both sides of the a-zone), at about 18 yards. We were probably the last squad to shoot it, so the target was pretty beat up from 40+ shooters. A respected and knowledgeable RO (recently certified as CRO) and GM stepped up to shoot, and as he was shooting at least 3 of us (experienced shooters and major match RO's and CRO's) observed some brown tape being blown off the middle of the a-zone. We get down there and find 3 clean hits in the hardcover, and a number of exposed holes in the a-zone. Shooter claims that we can't determine an accurate score purely from the target alone. We claim that the rulebook doesn't say we have to use *only* the target, and not our observance of the brown tape coming off of the a-zone. Shooter wants a reshoot. Experienced RO's and CRO's say 3 A, 3 mike. What say you?

 

Here's what the rulebook has to say on the matter:

 

9.1.4 Unrestored Targets – If, following completion of a course of fire by a previous competitor, one or more targets have not been properly patched or taped or if previously applied pasters have fallen off the tar-get for the competitor being scored, "the Range Officer must judge whether or not an accurate score can be determined. If there are extra scoring hits or questionable penalty hits thereon, and it is not obvious which hits were made by the competitor being scored, the affected competitor must be ordered to reshoot the course of fire."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What's the difference between "clean hits" (hardcover) and "exposed holes" (A zone)?  Sounds like you had your mine made up from the start. Did all your experienced guys observe the target - this one, specific target, the whole time, and do you really want to ignore the principle of scoring hits at the target  (not from wherever y'all were standing during the COF)?  

 

I'll vote for the reshoot - sounds like the target was in poor repair and the pasters on it were unreliable.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the RO running him see this all transpire? If not, he scores it as HE sees it. If he can't score it then it's a reshoot. Makes no difference how much experience is in the peanut gallery. They are still just the peanut gallery and have no say in the scoring

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WJM said:

Assuming the target is taped after every shooter, how else would there be 3 mikes in the hardcover if it wasn't for him?

How could you (or the RO, or anybody else) know which of the many holes in the target were made by the shooter? Really.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, teros135 said:

How could you (or the RO, or anybody else) know which of the many holes in the target were made by the shooter? Really.  

Right, the same logic would say the alphas are the hits. Reshoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, teros135 said:

How could you (or the RO, or anybody else) know which of the many holes in the target were made by the shooter? Really.  

 

that's a reasonable point, and it's also a reasonable point that the target was in poor repair. we should have replaced it before our squad started shooting.

 

Fact: we all saw brown tape blow off the a-zone.

Fact: black tape sticks much better than brown tape, and there is much less of it on the target. There is pretty much no chance whatsoever that any black tape blew off the target.

 

From those two facts, a reasonable person would conclude that there were at least 3 mikes, and some undetermined number of alphas. It is in fact possible but highly unlikely that one of the shots could have completely missed the target

 

I think all of us (including the shooter) know full well that he actually shot 3A and 3M. After much discussion, and a little gratuituous trolling of the shooter (he speaks with an adorable aussie accent, so it's a bit of sport to take the piss out of him, whatever that means), we ended up having him re-shoot because of the above-mentioned points. In my experience working many area and national matches, it would have been a judgement call on the RM's part. At a bigger match, the CRO probably would have got a minor ass-chewing for not changing the target earlier, but honestly the same thing can happen even with a target in pretty good condition. I have had similar calls come up at nationals and area matches and go both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kraj said:

Right, the same logic would say the alphas are the hits. Reshoot

no black tape blew off the target, and in fact the hardcover area had MUCH less tape on it, so it is completely different (and incorrect) logic to suggest that. just sayin', yo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the final arbiter of these things is of course, the Lord, and on the reshoot, the shooter had an extra shot, extra hit and mike on string 2, but only 1 mike instead of 3 on string 1, so overall, about the same stage score. Clearly the Lord knows it was 3A, and 3M the first time around. :cheers:

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Experienced RO's and CRO's say 3 A, 3 mike. 

 

Their experience apparently is in something of less intellectual demand. 

 

First, the first reply to this thread does hint at  confirmation bias, although this could just be a poorly worded original post. He states that brown tape was observed being blasted off, which would may mean black tape wasn't. If they taped the shoot zone with typical garbage paper pasters and the noshoot zone with something more adhesive like electrical tape, then this is completely plausible.

 

So they walk up and the RO sees 3 clear Mike's and an large number of hits that may not be the shooters. The score cannot be determined because the shooter has 3 M's and an unknown number of A's. The person who said 3M 3A is making an assumption that is not supported.

 

Should have been a reshoot, typical RO screw up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JimmyBob said:

So they walk up and the RO sees 3 clear Mike's and an large number of hits that may not be the shooters. The score cannot be determined because the shooter has 3 M's and an unknown number of A's. The person who said 3M 3A is making an assumption that is not supported.

 

 

the funny thing is, the only other possibility is that the shooter got MORE than 3 mikes, some of which didn't even hit the paper at all. So he's essentially arguing, "my score might be even worse than this, and you can't tell for sure, and we all know I screwed the pooch on this stage, so I want a second chance that no one else will get, even tho we all know exactly what happened."

 

And I understand that is how the game is played by many folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, WJM said:

Assuming the target is taped after every shooter, how else would there be 3 mikes in the hardcover if it wasn't for him?

Peanut gallery already said they saw  tape blowing off the target. Tape could be from those hardcover hits.... or wait, they only saw pieces blowing from the A Zone.

 

In any case, the R/O scores the target...  its his judgement, not the gallery. Gallery observation "we all saw" should not even enter into it. Can the R.O determine in his judgement how to score the target? Yes? Score it.    No? Reshoot.

 

Now, as a shooter, I'd be lobbying pretty hard for the reshoot, and asking the R.O. to tell me which pieces of tape blew of which holes, exactly....  and even if I admit the 3 hardcover hits look likely to mine, I'd challenge that you could not verify I had 3 A's as well, or just more misses, to much tape blew off. Reshoot.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, motosapiens said:

 

And I understand that is how the game is played by many folks.

 

That's the rules. Sometimes reshoots work in your favor, others not.... but the criteria should be applied equally every time, as to whether one is required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sfinney said:

 

That's the rules. Sometimes reshoots work in your favor, others not.... but the criteria should be applied equally every time, as to whether one is required.

 

sure, i cant argue that. my point is that what the RO actually sees (especially when it comes to tape getting blown off of a specific spot on the target) is an entirely valid data point. The rulebook says  "the Range Officer must judge whether or not an accurate score can be determined. "  It doesn't get into specifics about *how* that score is determined when it comes to visual evidence. Some folks will argue that you can ONLY take the appearance of target into account, and not anything you saw, but that is not what the rulebook says.

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

sure, i cant argue that. my point is that what the RO actually sees (especially when it comes to tape getting blown off of a specific spot on the target) is an entirely valid data point. The rulebook says  "the Range Officer must judge whether or not an accurate score can be determined. "  It doesn't get into specifics about *how* that score is determined when it comes to visual evidence. Some folks will argue that you can ONLY take the appearance of target into account, and not anything you saw, but that is not what the rulebook says.

 

Yes, and based on what we're being told, an honest RO can't tell which were which.  It was a failure of the target.  So be honest about it and require a reshoot, not go on and on about "it could be this, it could be that".  (What it WAS was a target beyond replacement time, withpasters blowing off.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, motosapiens said:

 

sure, i cant argue that. my point is that what the RO actually sees (especially when it comes to tape getting blown off of a specific spot on the target) is an entirely valid data point. The rulebook says  "the Range Officer must judge whether or not an accurate score can be determined. "  It doesn't get into specifics about *how* that score is determined when it comes to visual evidence. Some folks will argue that you can ONLY take the appearance of target into account, and not anything you saw, but that is not what the rulebook says.

Totally agree... its a judgement call for the R.O. - "the Range Officer must judge whether or not an accurate score can be determined. " - so if the R.O. himself saw the tape blowing, off, knew from which holes, and it wasn't just communicated to him from the gallery, and felt confident no tape blew off the hardcover, he could score it. To be 100% sure, did the R.O also see the 3 new A hits appear in the target? Or is he just guessing they are in there somewhere in the middle of all those missing pasters?

 

I have seen some club matches where for expedience sake during scoring where pasters have blown off, they just gave the shooter mystery A's, rather than do a reshoot....   not sure that's correct or not, depending on situation; but it does move things along.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its amazing what would fly at certain clubs and certain RO's but wouldn't fly at others.

I wouldn't give a reshoot. Tape flies off when it is struck by another bullet after it has been taped on top of more tape, or at close distances where the gas from the gun blows it off. 

Either way, its mainly the fault of the MD. That target should've been replaced long before the last squad. No sense in being cheap when targets are what 50 cents?


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So as an RO you literally watch the guy put three rounds in the hardcover. Plain as day. YOU WATCH HIM   Put three in the hardcover, as in while watching the shooter, IAW all the safety responsibilities of an RO. But can't help but see 3 holes appear in the black. And a clot of tape falls off of the way over used target to reveal like 40 a zone hits. 

 

Do do you guys really think that shooter shouldnt own the shots you saw him put in the black?

 

Mark, 

i chatted with some of your guys about this. While initially I argued the whole "you can only score the target" approach, Kenny called bullshit on me, as in literally seeing him drill the black, a bunch of dudes saw it.  

The rule talks about determining score,  I guess if the eyewitness testimony of the RO is admissible then....

Edited by Ultimo-Hombre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WJM said:

Either way, its mainly the fault of the MD. That target should've been replaced long before the last squad. No sense in being cheap when targets are what 50 cents?


 

 

I'd say at a local match the way we run them, the squad takes the blame. we shoulda changed it. We had a lot of very experienced shooters/ro's/md's on the squad.

 

but now i'm wondering, esp in wintertime, it is not unusual to lose tape on a target, particularly close ones. Do all the smarty-pantses on this thread really give a reshoot every time they go up to a target and tape has blown off the a-zone and you can see a charlie and multiple A's exposed, and you know the shooter only took two shots? We just score it alpha charlie and move on. It only ever becomes an issue if the stage turns into a complete goat-f*ck and the shooter is channeling johnnie cochran and desperately looking for some technicality to make it all go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I vote for a reshoot only because it is impossible to determine the total number of misses.  We have 3 on the hard cover and a bunch of tape blown off making impossible to determine if the shooter hit it twice and had a complete Mike or even hit it once taking off the tape and two shots completely missing the target.  We cannot make a definitive call so reshoot it is and it looks like the reshoot gods balanced things out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

I'd say at a local match the way we run them, the squad takes the blame. we shoulda changed it. We had a lot of very experienced shooters/ro's/md's on the squad.

 

but now i'm wondering, esp in wintertime, it is not unusual to lose tape on a target, particularly close ones. Do all the smarty-pantses on this thread really give a reshoot every time they go up to a target and tape has blown off the a-zone and you can see a charlie and multiple A's exposed, and you know the shooter only took two shots? We just score it alpha charlie and move on. It only ever becomes an issue if the stage turns into a complete goat-f*ck and the shooter is channeling johnnie cochran and desperately looking for some technicality to make it all go away.


True maybe it is on the squad instead of MD. I know that at our locals when I build stages and it requires a hardcover that is gonna get shot up I always put a few under the rock next to the stage.

It isn't unusual at locals to have tape blow off especially on close targets. Technically speaking by the rules its a reshoot. But in cold weather that happens almost every stage for every shooter, so I generally go with two best hits I can see (unless I watch one go into hardcover or on the side of the target).
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ultimo-Hombre said:

So as an RO you literally watch the guy put three rounds in the hardcover. Plain as day. YOU WATCH HIM   Put three in the hardcover, as in while watching the shooter, IAW all the safety responsibilities of an RO. But can't help but see 3 holes appear in the black. And a clot of tape falls off of the way over used target to reveal like 40 a zone hits. 

 

Do do you guys really think that shooter shouldnt own the shots you saw him put in the black?

 

Mark, 

i chatted with some of your guys about this. While initially I argued the whole "you can only score the target" approach, Kenny called bullshit on me, as in literally seeing him drill the black, a bunch of dudes saw it.  And yeah, manipulating rules to say it didn't happen is, well,, unfortunate. 

The rule talks about determining score,  I guess if the eyewitness testimony of the RO is admissible then....

 

Well, the target was 18 yards away, I can't see sh!t for holes out there. I can see tape falling tho, out of the a-zone.

 

I can honestly see it both ways, and really he was going to get a re-shoot anyway if he had just asked for one based on the incorrect stage briefing he got (which said you had to shoot the left array first on string 2). Also, I think based on the condition of the target he would have probably gotten a reshoot at a major. I can just imagine trying to explain to troy or carl why we hadn't replaced the target 2 squads ago. That would hurt my feelings.

 

I think the bottom line is we all know exactly what the shots really were, but because of general inattention by our squad, a reshoot was justified. Good discussion, good learning experience, good opportunity to mock and troll one of my shooting buddies, and on a beautiful day! What could be better?

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WJM said:


It isn't unusual at locals to have tape blow off especially on close targets. Technically speaking by the rules its a reshoot. But in cold weather that happens almost every stage for every shooter, so I generally go with two best hits I can see (unless I watch one go into hardcover or on the side of the target).
 

 

It's only a reshoot if the RO judges that he can't accurately determine the score.

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...