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

Smithcity

Classified
  • Content Count

    195
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Smithcity

  • Rank
    Looks for Target

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico
  • Real Name
    Nathan Smith

Recent Profile Visitors

422 profile views
  1. Smithcity

    P320 X5 Thread

    Awesome, thanks for sharing, looks pretty good.
  2. Yes, in that scenario the shooter agreed, everyone was reasonable. What if the shooter is not reasonable, im trying to understand the proper procedure and accompanying rules for that case.
  3. So what is the rule to justify the reshoot and what would the procedure be.
  4. Well, never thought of 2.3.3.3 in an unlimited context. There must be a limit to it. If a range official doesnt like a competitors hair and tells them to reshoot, and the competitor refuses, the competitor receives a zero score? Tell me it isnt so.
  5. Smithcity

    P320 X5 Thread

    Good to hear, got any pics to share?
  6. In this case, the closest anyone would have come to him was 60%, thats enough to take a match win from someone. Sounds like there isnt grounds for a reshoot unless it is voluntary and the range master agrees to it, or arbitration. All along i thought the only reshoot that was left up to the shooter was in the case of ro interference.
  7. I understand that 11.7.1 allows an appeal by a "third party", however, this is a unique case where the score is accepted and definitive. 9.7.4 is the only rule I can find that talks about changing a definitive score. The only argument I could see to invoke the reasons given in 9.7.4 is "due to an arbitration decision", but then it goes on to say that changes are defined as a modification to the score sheet after both parties have signed off on the score sheet. Shooter A could say, "I don't care if the time looks ridiculous, we all agreed that the score was correct and it has been accepted". 9.7.4 doesn't leave room for a re-shoot, and I agree, the timer wasn't defective, it was the RO that was defective (held the timer poorly, didn't keep up with the shooter, didn't apply thought to the recorded time, and or "PCC"). Perhaps a combination of 11.7.1 (arbitration by a 3rd party) and 9.7.4 (arbitration being allowed to address a definitive score), and 9.10.2 (arbitration committee decides time is unrealistic = reshoot). So the process should potentially be: 1. Shooter B requests arbitration to review Shooter A's time under 9.7.4 and 11.7.1, pays his $100 2. Arbitration committee reviews the time, decides it is unrealistic under 9.10.2 and issues a reshoot If this is the process, if Shooter B doesn't request arbitration and pay $100, then the ridiculous score stands? I don't see grounds in the rule book for a MD to come by, review the definitive time and say, "Yeah go reshoot that, the time looks ridiculous to me" (which is what took place).
  8. Smithcity

    P320 X5 Thread

    My understanding for those that have done silicon carbide on the X5 frame, is that they use a dremel first to take material away before adding the epoxy / silicon carbide. If this new grip is laced with tungsten, isn't there the risk of dremeling away plastic and tungsten through this process? I haven't seen anyone simply lay epoxy and then silicon carbide over a x5 grip without dremeling material away first.
  9. Can the score be challenged by another shooter via arbitration?
  10. I'll try to make it short: Level 2 match, shooter A finishes the stage, score keeper records all the hits and time, RO and shooter approve of the score. shooter B in the same division shoots not a clean run but not a disaster, his time is 2.25x of shooter A. Calls B.S. on his time after knowing what shooter A's time was. RO goes through the timer and has all the hits recorded. They go back and look at shooter A's time compared to the 50% of competitors that have shot the stage, and shooter A's time is twice as fast as the top GMs at the match. It is concluded that the shot timer did not pick up several of his shots and Shooter A is made to reshoot. Later, review of video shows that shooter A indeed shot the stage in about twice the recorded time, regardless, video is irrelevant for contesting a score. There were no rules given for the mandatory reshoot. I was under the impression that after a score is considered conclusive after affirmation by both the competitor and RO in an uncontested manner, the score is definitive per 9.7.4. Maybe there is some interpretation between 9.7.4, 9.10.1, and 9.10.2 to justify a mandatory reshoot but I would have thought arbitration by shooter B would have been necessary to initiate a review after the score was deemed definitive, forcing a review by the arbitration board where they may or may not have decided the time was unrealistic. Ultimately this is a case of bad ROing. The RO's should have realized after ROing the same stage all day that the time was suspect and should have checked for shots, but they didn't. What would the rules / proper procedure been in this case to justify a reshoot?
  11. Shooting fast is important however most of our stages are movement not shooting. Moving "fast enough" is a requirement. The separation amongst the tiers of shooters are those that dont necessarily move faster but shoot sooner. That comes down to efficiency in body movement combined with operating the gun. Something that needs to be drilled. Not sure which exercise teaches that competency.
  12. Round count for l1 and l2 matches can be higher than 32
  13. Stick with shooting what you have, after 6 months to a year of the sport you will have a much better understanding of the sport, the gear, and the guns. At that point you will know if you want to keep shooting the sport and if you choose to do so you will have a better idea of what high quality gear to get. Lots of people shoot a match or two, decide to go all in, and regret it 6months later when they stop shooting or realize they dont really like what they bought once they better understand whats out there and what works for them.
  14. Most people in this sport would benefit from one or both of the following: 1. Overweight and need to slim down. 2. Put some muscle on to aid in explosive movements. If you look at many of the top shooters, they typically arent grossly overweight nor are they heavily built, rather they are slim to moderately muscular. In short, most of us need to put the carbs down, get our rear on the elliptical, and do a semblance of resistance training. That's really about it. Enough that your body isnt in your way, and hopefully aids in some efficient foot work. "Uspsa fitness" isnt about moving quicker, its more about enabling yourself to shoot sooner.
  15. Thanks! Looks like their site is down. Will check them out when they come back online.
×
×
  • Create New...