IVC

Based on the picture, I'd definitely call it a no-shoot. The only way to say it wasn't a no-shoot is to claim that it was splatter, or ricochet from some OTHER steel target where it was a FULL hit on the steel. If we agree that the hole was made by a "whatever part" of the bullet that was a PARTIAL hit on steel, that hole counts as a no-shoot. As for not counting similar holes for score for some other shooters, my guess would be that they hit the steel properly, so it wasn't a partial hit, so it doesn't count down range.

Two problems: First, grease mark is just an example of what would be sufficient ("e.g." in brackets), and second, this was not a ricochet, but a partial hit with the bullet traveling down range after the hit. If this is was a FULL hit on the metal target, then 9.5.5 would say the rest doesn't count and it's NOT a no-shoot penalty. The fact that it was a PARTIAL hit on the metal target changes scoring quite a bit because such a bullet is explicitly allowed to score or incur a penalty down range.

Splatter is part of the jacket or bullet and doesn't count per rule 9.5.5. If the bullet itself was a partial hit and continued down range, then rule 9.1.5.3 says it counts for the penalty. The question here is "what hit the no-shoot?" A partial hit on metal target is similar to hitting the outside perforation on D zone, where part of the bullet counts for score on the target, but the other part allows it to count down range for score or penalty. It's also how shots on perforation of no-shoots count for targets beyond. The trick with metal targets is to determine what really happened - a full hit, a partial hit, was it the bullet or splatter.

The legality of this stage is not about how the targets are set up, but about the number of rounds and requirements for various courses in rules 1.2. It requires 24 rounds, so it only satisfies rule 1.2.1.3 for long courses (and does not satisfy any of the Special Courses of Fire in 1.2.2; the closest would be "Standard Exercise," but it requires "two or more" strings). However, this is not a legal long course out of the gate as it is shot from a single location (among other things, such as rule 9.2.3.2). There is nothing prohibitive about having targets arranged in the way you suggest, even though it's not a good idea and should be avoided. Also, a hit fully on hard cover doesn't count down range for anything (except for REF in case it knocks over steel).

No, the word "must" applies to "care," not to the stage setup. It doesn't say that "shoot through must not happen." Besides, there is a specific rule for scoring shoot through, which wouldn't exist if it was illegal for a stage: 9.1.5.3 If a bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a cardboard or metal target and continues on to strike the scoring area of another cardboard target, the hit on the subsequent cardboard target will also count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

It was a correct call. Rule 9.1.5.3 says that the extra hit will count for score or penalty. If the shot didn’t hit the perf, rule 9.1.5.1 says it wouldn’t have counted. Similar to how a no-shoot hits are handled when hitting the perf.

Have you heard about the dyslectic devil worshiper? He sold his soul to Santa.

Thanks - I now need to start performing at that level :). It's one thing to shoot a bunch of classifiers, and quite another to do well in matches. Luckily, most of the training I do in Limited is directly applicable in Revolver - movement, transitions, calling shots, shooting sooner, etc. I'm hanging in with the M/A guys in Limited and would beat them on a few stages every match, but the consistency is not there yet. I feel like a high-B shooter (which was my classification), where I pretty much beat all the rest of the B guys on all stages where I don't mess up. Now, I'm going to be that low-A guy... Oh, well. Too bad we don't have enough Revolver shooters to make it worthwhile to shoot Revolver regularly and be able to compare. We have one Revolver GM and a few A guys, but they also all shoot other divisions quite often, so it would be a hit or miss as far as competition goes...

This pretty much settles the argument as far as the rule 1.2.1 goes - "...must not require more than 8 scoring hits from any single location or view..." If a person shot the swinger from another location, it was not required from the port. QED. The only way to make the stage illegal is to use rule other than 1.2.1. I'm not sure there is such a rule...

Disappearing targets are covered explicitly in rule 9.9.2: "Moving scoring targets, which do not comply with the above criteria are considered disappearing targets and will not incur failure to shoot at or miss penalties except where Rule 9.9.3 applies." The "above criteria" refers to rule 9.9.1 which talks about how much of the A zone must be exposed, etc. There is no rule for moving targets that would imply their availability is defined by their rest position. Maybe there should be one, but there isn't one at the moment. (At least I haven't found it.)

^^^ That seems to be the consensus in this thread and it makes the most sense.

Are they available from another location at some point? Yes. Is it possible to engage targets from such location? Yes (assuming those are regular swingers that will swing for a period of time). Per rule 1.2.1.3, the course does not require more than 8 shots from a single location.

We just need threads: "I shoot a custom Infinity and I beat a bunch of guys with their stock Glocks." Imagine having more money AND being a better shooter than someone else! /sarcasm

It's not really making it clearer, it's two different WSB-s. Every mathematician knows that if you have 3 apples and someone asks you: "do you have 2 apples?" the answer is always "yes," as in "here is one apple and here is another apple, so yes, I do have two apples." A completely different question is "do you have EXACTLY 2 apples?" This is what you are accomplishing with the word "ONLY" in your example. You are changing from "engage one array, reload, engage the other array" to "engage one array, reload, engage the other array and nothing else." Two different logical structures. As a side issue, the way the OP stated the WSB (not the modified version later), it would be legal to shoot any combination of array 1 and array 2 as long as there is a reload and at least one shot after the reload at some point - all that the original WSB required was that there is one shot before the reload on one array and one shot after reload on the other. Adding the first "only" in your example prevents mixing arrays before the reload, while the second "only" prevents mixing of arrays after the reload. Agreed with everyone who said it's best to have the language that is already on classifiers of this type that simply says a reload is required any time arrays are switched. Simple and to the point, even if it allows multiple reloads which the above sentence with "ONLY" doesn't. Just my 2c...

Thanks everyone - it seems that I'm in the correct ballpark and will leave it as-is until I shoot it a bit and figure out whether I like it. I'll have to think about zeroing for the same distance. I can see the benefit, just don't want to tinker with it until I have shot at least a match or two. The way it's set up now it's close enough - about 2" or so low on close targets (pretty much just the distance from the center of the bore to the optics itself) and gradually going to dead-on at far (for USPSA) targets. Since I'll have to compensate for this no matter what, might as well start getting used to holding over high when hosing.

My JP GMR-15 has finally arrived and after the 10 day commie-wait I got to put on the dots and hit the range. I bought Holosun 510c green while I was waiting, so that's what's on top. There was an older Leupold DeltaPoint (first gen, not "Pro" ) I had laying around, so I got the Leupold 45 degree mount and put it on too. There is quite a bit of discussion about distances to zero red dots. I guess it pops up every time someone gets a new PCC . My initial setup was to zero 510c at 25 yards and Delta Point at 7 yards. I didn't immediately realize how much the optics offset would mess up the zero on close targets as I was thinking in terms of the (negligible) bullet drop instead of the geometry of the (high above the bore) sights. My DeltaPoint would shoot 6" high at 20 yards and around 2" high as early as 12 yards (makes sense that it would be about the offset of the sight at double the sighting distance). Since 7 - 15 yards are regular distances for USPSA, having such a huge variability seemed not to be a good idea, so I rezeroed DeltaPro at 15 yards. While the gun will shoot up to about 2" low on close targets (the value of the sight offset itself), at least it will be relatively clean "close targets - low by the amount of the offset, 30 yard targets - high by the amount of the offset less the small bullet drop." I guess I can live with this. The question: For those who actually use a 45 degree optics (I might remove it in the future if I don't like it), how far are the farthest targets you'd be shooting in a USPSA match using the 45 sight? If it's all about close targets on hard leans or over barricades, zeroing at a closer distance might not really be a problem... Just want to make sure I don't do anything silly.

Well, I shot a 100% classifier 18-06 "For That Day" during my regular match on 12/28 and it's sitting there in the system with the "P" flag until the classification program runs this Tuesday, at which point I should be a Master. Quite happy about that...

Interesting - I thought it was not allowed to cock the hammer during draw as it would be considered "unsafe gun handling," but I couldn't find such a rule, so it's clearly allowed. Anyone in Production actually using "cock while drawing" method?

There are two parts to a beginner's course - (1) gun and safety fundamentals, and (2) shooting technique. You absolutely need to either speak the language or to have written material translated to the target language for part (1). You can't mime safety and gun fundamentals. As for the shooting part, it's doable even if it might not be too effective. At least in the beginner course you can show most of the items and you can skip almost all of the nuances that would require more elaborate communication. Seems like you have ti handled with the translator. That's the best way to do it...

Here was my "aha" moment... Think of the reload the same as racing a car - if you get to the turn with too much speed, you did get there faster, but you won't make the turn. If you get to the turn at the correct speed for the turn, you spent too much time getting there. You *have to* go very fast getting to the turn, then you have to slow down to the correct speed to make the turn. Try to make up time by braking too late and you'll fumble the turn; try to go slow but at *constant speed* to figure it out (and then increase your speed), you'll be able to do it as long as your *constant* speed is what you can carry through the turn, but if you increase it beyond that, you'll be too slow on the approach and too fast in the turn. Back to reloading. You have to save time on your movement to the pouch and bringing the magazine to the magwell. Then you have to slow down to the correct speed for insertion, followed by another burst of speed into presentation. If you're fumbling the reload and just want to go slower, you still won't be doing "fast-slower-fast" which you need for a fast reload. Instead, you'll be doing "slower-slower-slower" which is a reloading pattern that won't bring you down to where you want to be. So, look to save 0.1 seconds on the movement of the weak hand, not on the insertion of the magazine. If you can get to the point where you go faster on the movement and slower on the insertion, you're way ahead even if your total time is the same - you can speed up this pattern. When you figure it out, you can see how far you can push the insertion speed, but you will know that this speed is *different* from the speed of support hand to get the magazine to the insertion point. I believe that this is why Burkett reloads are universally considered the best way to learn fast reloads - they subconsciously create this break in speed. This is no different than the draw itself, particularly on a very hard target. You do movement at full speed and just have to know when to slow down to settle the sights. Try to cheat and make up for slow movement by shooting too soon and you're point shooting, hoping you hit the target off of your index alone. It's also very similar to how you set into new position to shoot, where you have to slow down before you can shoot, not just get to the new position at full speed.

"Hero or zero" is a consequence of how the classification system works. More like ratchet wrench...

Yet, the classification system works off of the former.

What holsters work for Rugers? I haven't seen inserts for DAA Race Master, so it's either not supported, or it's compatible with S&W trigger guards.

Both are quality components and DAA is indeed the stiffest (and thickest - don't count on being able to use Tek-Lock on DAA premium belt). The price difference is primarily from two items (as broadside72 pointed out above) - two extra magazine pouches and the BOSS hanger. Belt and holsters are very comparable and are all high quality options. Personally, I wouldn't shoot low capacity division without at least 5 pouches. I used to shoot L10 (live in CA) for two years and having 5 pouches was necessary. I had 6 magazines, five on the belt and a Barney. I would load the first round from the Barney, then insert the last magazine, leaving 4 on the belt. On extra-nasty stages I would put Barney into the vacated last pouch, just in case. At least once I had to use it - fumbled one reload and a good stage plan called for 4 reloads to begin with. If you just have 3 pouches, you will always have to have two extra magazines in the pocket, one for Barney and one to load initially. Too much hassle to save a few bucks.

Thanks guys - it seems that after rollsizing, just run it on 1050 and it will be smooth, particularly after removing the U-die. Possibly go back to Dillon funnels instead of MBF, especially if there are no issues with seating (coated) bullets.