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

Virginia Count and Mandatory Reload Question


sstephns

Recommended Posts

So we shot Melody Line as a classifier last night. This question came up because of how one person shot it.

 

The classifier shoots like this (abbreviated): 6 targets, one round each, mandatory reload, one round each. Each shot fired after 6 shots and before reload is a penalty.

 

Shooter shoots at the first target twice, realizes what he did, then shoots one round each to the remaining 5 for 7 shots total before the reload. Then he shoots 5 more shots after the reload into the remaining 5 targets that only have one round each already.

 

What we determined - Penalty for one extra shot prior to reload, Penalty for firing two shots at the first target for not following the WSB.

 

Then the question became, well he only fire 5 shots after the reload, does this incur a penalty for not firing at each target after the reload? And if he did fire 6 shots after his reload, obviously he has shot 13 rounds and gets a penalty for that.

 

Then the question became, how does the RO judge which target he engaged with that extra round? What if he accidentally threw that round into the adjacent target?

 

We went round and round and finally settled on what I stated above, which I believe is correct. 

 

Can anyone provide clarity to this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would assess 2 procedurals.  One  for:

9.4.5.1 Extra shots (i.e. shots fired in excess of the number specified in a component string or stage), will each incur one procedural penalty. Additionally, during scoring, no more than the specified number and highest scoring hits will be awarded.

 

One for :

9.4.5.3 Stacked shots (i.e. obviously shooting more than the required rounds on a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in any string), will incur one procedural penalty per target insufficiently engaged in any string. This penalty will not be applied if the written stage briefing specifically authorizes stacked shots.

 

10.2.2.1 Procedural penalties for failure to comply with stage procedures do not apply to the number of shots fired. Penalties for firing insufficient or additional shots are addressed in other rules and must not be penalized under the provisions of 10.2.2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many penalties can be assessed for one shot???? 2, 3, 4, 5???  Seems unreasonable, like piling on the penalties.

 

Yes, I know in Virginia you can have one for extra shot and one for extra hit.  That is explicitly written into the rules.

 

I am curious what the NROI instructors would say.

 

I seem to remember my CRO instructor mentioning something like this situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Nik Habicht said:

Neither 9.4.5.1 or 9.4.5.3 apply -- since all twelve rounds are fired in the same string.

 

The correct call is simply: one procedural under 10.2.4 for the extra round fired before the reload.

 

I agree 9.4.5.1 doesn't apply as there's no extra shots; however, I believe the correct ruling would be one procedural per 9.4.5.3 for stacked shots on the 1st target.  9.4.5.3 was reworded here to address situations like this.  The new wording is still pretty confusing, but the example makes it quite clear.

 

Now there's the question whether there should be a 2nd procedural for 10.2.4.  I would say no due to the double jeopardy ruling.  The competitor was already penalized for the 2nd shot he took on the first target with the stacking procedural.  And at that point the competitor had no choice but to shoot 7 shots before the reload.  Had he only shot 6 and then reloaded he wouldn't have engaged one target before the reload and then have to fire 2 shots at that last target after the reload; which would again be stacking and another procedural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta say -- not a huge fan of the rewritten 9.4.5.3.  The double jeopardy rule only applies to 10.2.2 however, so Yep, if you're assessing one under 9.4.5.3, you gotta assess one more under 10.2.4 for firing an extra round prior to the reload.  Pretty much, once you double-tap that first target, you're hosed one way or another.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah I missed that about the double jeopardy ruling.

 

Yes the new wording is a bit confusing, but addresses the issue with the old wording in that it only applied to separate strings.  And on a classifier like Melody Line (and a ton of others) it's only one string.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a one string stage that requires no more than 12 shots and there should be two holes in each target at the end of the COF.  This happened, so there are no extra shots, no extra hits and there was no stacking. 

 

I'd give 1 proceedural for not following the stage description for the two shots into the first target and 1 proceedure for the delayed reload.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Nik Habicht said:

I gotta say -- not a huge fan of the rewritten 9.4.5.3.  The double jeopardy rule only applies to 10.2.2 however, so Yep, if you're assessing one under 9.4.5.3, you gotta assess one more under 10.2.4 for firing an extra round prior to the reload.  Pretty much, once you double-tap that first target, you're hosed one way or another.....

 

Which rule number or ruling are you referring to when you say "double jeopardy rule"?  I'm not finding it for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lee Cabana said:

This is a one string stage that requires no more than 12 shots and there should be two holes in each target at the end of the COF.  This happened, so there are no extra shots, no extra hits and there was no stacking. 

 

I'd give 1 proceedural for not following the stage description for the two shots into the first target and 1 proceedure for the delayed reload.

 

You can't use 10.2.2 for the 2 shots into the first target because of 10.2.2.1. 

 

There is stacking though based on the new wording of 9.4.5.3 that I linked to above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lee Cabana said:

This is a one string stage that requires no more than 12 shots and there should be two holes in each target at the end of the COF.  This happened, so there are no extra shots, no extra hits and there was no stacking. 

 

I'd give 1 proceedural for not following the stage description for the two shots into the first target and 1 proceedure for the delayed reload.

The delayed reload is legit.  The other one gets overturned -- see 10.2.2.1 -- you can't assess a procedural for the extra shot at T1 under 10.2.2.

 

Now assessing it under stacking -- that would now be legit.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JAFO said:

 

Which rule number or ruling are you referring to when you say "double jeopardy rule"?  I'm not finding it for some reason.

Here's the ruling.  I don't know why it doesn't show up with the rest of the rulings on the USPSA site here.  I had to google it to get to the page...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Southpaw said:

Here's the ruling.  I don't know why it doesn't show up with the rest of the rulings on the USPSA site here.  I had to google it to get to the page...

 

The reason that double jeopardy ruling isn't visible on the rulings page is because it isn't active. Effective date is 0/00/00.

 

I think it would just be one procedural for stacking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Nik Habicht said:

Read 10.2.2.1......

Thanks.  I see what you are referring to now.

 

I agree that the re-wording of 9.4.5.3 is confusing and not exactly in line with the example.  The wording states:

9.4.5.3  Stacked shots (i.e. shooting more than the specified shots at a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in the stage briefing) will incur one  procedural penalty per target incorrectly engaged in the string or stage.

 

In this case, the shooter did shoot more than the number of specified shots at T1, but he did not shoot at any OTHER targets (T2-T6) with fewer shots than required.  But to read the example, it qualifies as stacking.

 

 

Concerning the procedural for the mandatory reload, should that be assessed?  The rule states:

10.2.4 A competitor who fails to comply with a mandatory reload will incur one procedural penalty for each shot fired after the point where the reload was required until a reload is performed.

 

But the stage description states:

Upon start signal, turn, then draw and from Box A engage T1-T6 with only one round per target, then make a mandatory reload and from Box A engage T1-T6 with only one round per target.

 

The shooter fired an extra shot at T1, but he did perform a mandatory reload after engaging T1-T6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, JAFO said:

Thanks.  I see what you are referring to now.

 

I agree that the re-wording of 9.4.5.3 is confusing and not exactly in line with the example.  The wording states:

9.4.5.3  Stacked shots (i.e. shooting more than the specified shots at a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in the stage briefing) will incur one  procedural penalty per target incorrectly engaged in the string or stage.

 

In this case, the shooter did shoot more than the number of specified shots at T1, but he did not shoot at any OTHER targets (T2-T6) with fewer shots than required.  But to read the example, it qualifies as stacking.

 

 

Concerning the procedural for the mandatory reload, should that be assessed?  The rule states:

10.2.4 A competitor who fails to comply with a mandatory reload will incur one procedural penalty for each shot fired after the point where the reload was required until a reload is performed.

 

But the stage description states:

Upon start signal, turn, then draw and from Box A engage T1-T6 with only one round per target, then make a mandatory reload and from Box A engage T1-T6 with only one round per target.

 

The shooter fired an extra shot at T1, but he did perform a mandatory reload after engaging T1-T6.

 

Interesting way to look at it. The WSB requires the reload after engaging each target, but it could be interpreted to mean 6 shots as well, because it specifies one round per target for six targets. Regardless, he gets a procedural for not following the stage brief.

 

Here is the specific penalty from the WSB: Failure to perform mandatory reload will result in one procedural penalty per shot fired.

 

So if the WSB says one shot at each target, then reload, does that imply 6 shots then reload? Or does the "engage the targets" "then reload" part take precedence?

 

So the answer to this question is 1) he engaged targets incorrectly under rule 9.4.5.3.

 

Since the WSB does not say mandatory reload after 6 shots, but after engaging each target, that would mean the competitor should only be assessed one penalty?

Edited by sstephns
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with sstephns...

1.   One procedural for stacking under the reworded 9.4.5.3 (as Nik points out, this is a one string stage but the example given by DNROI seems relevant to this situation);

2.   No reload penalty per 10.2.4 due the very specific language in the WSB requiring that all six targets be engaged before reload...which, as JAFO points out, the shooter did;

3.   No procedural incurred under 10.2.2, failure to engage the targets as specified in WSB, due to 10.2.2.1 which is very specific about not being applicable to number of shots fired.

 

On a separate note, some credit should be given to the shooter who screwed up the second shot but kept his/her head and pulled off a decent recovery with only a single penalty (by my assessment).

Edited by nuidad
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...