d_striker

Tough answer as there are a dozen ways to qualify "Top" or "Most Dominant". But if we put all of the top shooters in the world in a 30 stage match together, each at their "peak", who would win? I would guess: Open: Eric, Max, JJ Limited/Standard: Eric, Rob, Nils or Shane Production: Eric, Ben, Dave Sevigny Revolver: Jerry M. SS/Classic: Eric, Rob, Hetherington If you take the guys that show up multiple times, it's definitely Eric and Rob. Tough call on the third. I suppose Todd Jarret belongs in there somewhere too. Tough call.

The tabs on the front of the bow control how much pre-travel the trigger has. This does nothing for the amount of reset. Yes, the trigger pull will be longer with more pre-travel, but the trigger will reset and become "live" at the same point irrespective of how much pre-travel there is. The over travel screw is what controls how much reset there is. If you have more over travel, you will have a longer reset. Shorten over travel, and your reset distance is shorter. ETA-Don't go crazy with the overtravel screw though. Unless you want to ruin your hammer hooks.

Adjusting the sensitivity on a Pact Club Timer III involves removing the battery and using a small phillips screwdriver. That simply isn't going to happen between shooters in a squad. And there are many people that don't know how to adjust the sensitivity on their Pocket Pro or CED. It's not a realistic solution to adjust the timer's sensitivity between shooters multiple times. Even if there is only one PCC shooter on a squad, the timer's sensitivity would need to be adjusted twice. A more realistic solution would be to have a designated timer for PCC and one for pistols.

I think we are in agreement. I don't think the suggested edit is necessary either and is, in fact, not equitable. I think we've all been on both sides.....I've taped targets early on accident and I've had targets taped early on accident. It happens at the end of a long day in the heat and humidity, especially when the RO's change the order in how they are scoring targets. Penalizing a shooter with 2 mikes for an honest mistake is retarded. I do think that we should try to figure out a way to penalize those that are doing it intentionally to cheat with their buddies. But I don't think this is it.

I agree with you on the original language of the first section. The suggested edit, however, contradicts the original language. If the suggested edit is approved, which language should be applied? The original in the first section or the suggested edit?

I'm not too concerned about cheating RO's as I don't think that happens often enough to worry about it. I am concerned about NUMEROUS certified RO's that don't know how to properly use overlays and do not understand the simple concept of "touching" a scoring border/perforation. Your statement implies that the scoring calls of certified RO/CRO's is infallible and never incorrect. We all know this is not true.

I'm reading it like @JAFO is also. Looks like 2 mikes if a non-RO prematurely pastes a target that has not been scored yet. I'm not seeing your reference of "after being scored." The first sentence of the suggested edit is saying if a prematurely taped target prevents the RO from determining the score, which implies that said target has not yet been scored. Suggested edit: If a target is prematurely patched or taped which prevents a range official from determining the actual score, the Range Official must determine who patched or taped the target. If it was not a Range Official, the target will be scored as presented.

I’ve used both. I’ve loaded at least 40lbs of WAC in 9 major. I’ve used some lots that require .3gr more to hit same velocity as other lots. Which also means some lots take .3gr less. As as far as I can tell, WAC and CFE are the same powder. Feel the same and dot looks the same.

I think we're on the same page. But to answer your question, I would consider any quick movement with either the hands (draw stoke) or feet (taking a step) to be an attempt to begin a COF. I also consider both of those actions to be a false start if performed before the beep.

What should be the defining action of an attempt to start the COF if not the draw?

I still stand by getting rid of creeping altogether. Treat it like track and field racing. One false start and it’s a restart. If you have another one on the same stage you’re not racing. Zero the stage and done.

Exactly this.

I think most of us have been in this situation where we think we hear the beep or some sort of audible stimulus from the gallery or from the next bay set's us off prior to the beep. Most of the time when this happens, we attempt to bring our hands back to the correct start position or stop the draw. Personally, I don't think this is creeping. Check out pg 6 in the Sep/Oct Front Sight. And I'm not buying the RO's rationale that he couldn't stop the shooter because the buzzer went off. https://uspsa.org/magazine/view//2018-09#page=6

I don't think you're wrong. All I'm saying is that I think there's a bit of subjectivity which is not a great way to enforce rules. I would consider attempting to draw the gun as "beginning an attempt at a COF prior to the start signal.

I would consider it a perfect example of a false start. Ill ask you you the same question. Where in the rules does it state that you can’t stop a shooter after the buzzer goes off?

What prevents you from stopping him “as soon as possible” even if that means after the buzzer or even after shots are fired on a close target?

Personally, I believe that is the correct way to handle it. We have all been there on thinking we heard the beep or some other audible stimulus making us flinch. I would say 99.9% of the time, it is accidental and not someone trying to game the start.

It seems to me that no matter how many clarifications come out (Front Sight Sep/Oct 2018), there is still a lot of subjectivity to how these related rules are interpreted. It seems to me the easiest way to handle it is to just get rid of creeping and treat everything as a false start. Stop the shooter because they are in the incorrect start position and restart them.

I don't what the credentials of the guy running the timer were. I don't know if he was the designated CRO for the stage or not. I also don't know if the RM that arrived was an NROI guy.

I don't know the names and even if I did, I wouldn't post them on here.

Yeah, I just thought that as you replied and was adding it to the OP. They did use part of 8.3.4.1 to make the determination that they were not able to stop the shooter since the timer went off, though. Is your opinion on this that the RO/RM were correct in their ruling?

A shooter on my squad at a recent Level 3 match was assessed a Creeping procedural. He was originally in the correct start position, flinched his hands up but then returned them down, and then the timer went off. I am not certain if his hands returned to the correct original start position before the actual beep or not. The RO stated that since the buzzer went off, he was not able to stop the competitor and it was a creeping procedural. The RM backed up the RO's call on this. After the "Standby" command is given, I am super keyed in on any audible stimulus. Often, a gun shot or steel ringing on the next berm over will make me flinch in the same manner outlined above. IMO, I believe the part of the rule that states "prior to the issuance of the start signal" is simply referring to any attempt or movement prior to the start signal and DOES NOT mean the RO is not able to stop the competitor after the start signal. I believe the competitor should have been stopped and restarted under a false start. 8.3.4.1 In the event that a competitor begins his attempt at the course of fire prematurely ("false start" prior to the issuance of the start signal) the Range Officer will, as soon as possible, stop and restart the competitor once the course of fire has been restored. ETA: 10.2.6 A competitor who is creeping (e.g. moving hands towards the handgun, a reloading device or ammunition) or physically moving to a more advantageous shooting position or posture at the start signal, will incur one procedural penalty.

Those glasses are used by elite pro athletes at every level where the processing of visual information is involved. They are even used by athletes to improve proprioception as we are constantly using vision to keep ourselves balanced. Take away the vision element while balancing and you improve proprioception. This is empirical. Not snake oil like these headphones.

OP-Are you shooting with both eyes open?

I'm assuming you're talking about 38 Super/Super Comp? Do you feel the same way about shorties shooting 9 major?