What is the last sentence of 9.1.4 for?

[Skydiver]

I'm trying to understand what the last sentence of 9.1.4 is used for.

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 target 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. For the purpose of this rule, B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and the same.

Is there a historical reason for this sentence being here? What scenario is this sentence trying to address?

[wide45]

The value of B's an C's are the same.

If you can establish the number of hits, but don't know if they are B's, or C's, you can still determine the proper score.

In the distant past, they would not show ties in the results. If two or more competitors were tied, the higher finish would go to the one with the most A's, if that did not resolve it, B hits were counted,etc. If both were still tied after tallying all hits ,it would go to a shootoff. Doubt it ever went that far. In those days the difference between B's and C's could theoretically affect the final results.

[George Jones]

In the olden days, prior to timers and EzWS, when time was kept with a stopwatch and scores were done manually. it was possible to have ties in match results. Back then, if there was a tie, it was decided by the number of B hits between the shooters. Since Bs and Cs had the same value, the highest number of Bs broke the tie.

Now that we have timers (two decimal points) and Hit Factors go to four decimals, a tie is virtually impossible.

In order to avoid unnecessary reshoots, that rule allows Bs and Cs to be considered the same for the purpose of determining a shooter's correct "score" on that target. For example, a target having two Cs and two Bs (all looking identical) on it no longer requires a reshoot since the scoring values for those hits are the same. It no longer matters whether you score the B hits or the C hits and a reshoot is avoided.

[wide45]

Beat ya!

[Skydiver]

So with the target below where tape has been blown off, how should it be scored?

a. 8 or 6 points (e.g. 2 C's)

b. -12 or -14 points (e.g. 2 B's and 2 no-shoots)

c. not scored, declare a reshoot

(I've removed the none scoring border to make it obvious that the B hits broke the perf.)

Edited August 17, 2010 by Skydiver

[rhgunguy]

Read the second to last sentence in 9.1.4. Reshoot

[Nik Habicht]

Read the second to last sentence in 9.1.4. Reshoot

Really? the shooter fired four rounds.....

[George Jones]

So with the target below where tape has been blown off, how should it be scored?

a. 8 or 6 points (e.g. 2 C's)

b. -12 or -14 points (e.g. 2 B's and 2 no-shoots)

c. not scored, declare a reshoot

(I've removed the none scoring border to make it obvious that the B hits broke the perf.)

You have introduced an additional condition, therefore....

Although the B and C hits are worth the same, the potential no-shoot hits are not. In this case, unless you can identify the shooter's hits, this is a reshoot.

[Flexmoney]

Sky,

Lets say you shoot before me and was shooting 40 caliber. You hit two-Bravo. They didn't get pasted. I shot next, with 40 caliber and hit two-Charlie.

Since those all score the same points, and accurate score can be determined. No need for a reshoot.

[mhs]

What does this part of 9.1.4 mean:

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.

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits?

What are "questionable penalty hits"?

[Gary Johnson]

What are "questionable penalty hits"?

A competitor engages a scoring target with a penalty target stuck to it. I see him fire twice but don't observe the actual hits.

When we score the target there is one Bravo, one Charlie, and one hit on the penalty target. It's apparent that a paster has fallen off but I don't know which target it came from.

If the penalty target was clean the score would be Bravo-Charlie. The hit on the penalty target means it's either Bravo-Charlie, Bravo-noshoot, or Charlie-noshoot. Those don't all score the same so an accurate score can not be determined.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Gary Johnson

[mhs]

What are "questionable penalty hits"?

A competitor engages a scoring target with a penalty target stuck to it. I see him fire twice but don't observe the actual hits.

When we score the target there is one Bravo, one Charlie, and one hit on the penalty target. It's apparent that a paster has fallen off but I don't know which target it came from.

If the penalty target was clean the score would be Bravo-Charlie. The hit on the penalty target means it's either Bravo-Charlie, Bravo-noshoot, or Charlie-noshoot. Those don't all score the same so an accurate score can not be determined.

I think I was being too literal again. I don't see why the word "questionable" is in there. Just saying "If there are extra scoring or penalty hits thereon", or even "If there are extra hits thereon" seems clearer to me.

[Corey]

What does this part of 9.1.4 mean:

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.

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits?

What are "questionable penalty hits"?

If there are 3 A hits, even with 2 shots, its prettyy easy to establish an accurate score (at least in my little mind). 2 alpha and move along is the route id see there.

[mhs]

What does this part of 9.1.4 mean:

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.

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits?

What are "questionable penalty hits"?

If there are 3 A hits, even with 2 shots, its prettyy easy to establish an accurate score (at least in my little mind). 2 alpha and move along is the route id see there.

I agree about it being easy to establish an accurate score, but what about the part of the rule I quoted. In this case, it is not obvious who made which hits.

[rhgunguy]

Example:12 round COF, shooter fires 12 rounds-according to the timer-and you find 13 holes downrange, all the same caliber. If the target with 3 holes has them all in the same scoring area-or 2 C and a B-then the score can be determined. If it is 2A, one B no-shoot, there are questionable scoring/penatly hits and a reshoot is ordered.

Second example:Long field course, say 25 rounds with some steel thrown in. Shooter fires 30 rounds, it is the job of the second RO to keep track of which if any targets the shooter took more than two shots on. Otherwise a shooter could screw up early in the stage and on one of the last targets fire a third shot into the D zone or a no-shoot, claim he fired only 2 and get a reshoot.

[Skydiver]

What does this part of 9.1.4 mean:

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.

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits?

What are "questionable penalty hits"?

If there are 3 A hits, even with 2 shots, its prettyy easy to establish an accurate score (at least in my little mind). 2 alpha and move along is the route id see there.

Personally, I'd also do the same thing.

Playing devil's advocate, though, what if for that particular target you were watching the shooter fire two shots: nice steady hold on the first shot, and a really bad downward flinch on the second shot and out of the corner of your eye you see a puff of dust in front of the target where the bullet hits the ground. When you come back around to scoring the targets, you discover 3 A hits. Still award the 2 A hits?

[sperman]

The RO doesn't look for hits on the target during the COF.

[mhs]

I'll try this one more time.

This part of 9.1.4 does not mention determining an accurate score. It specifically requires that which hits were made by the current competitor be determined, or it's a reshoot.

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.

With this in mind, my question:

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits? If not, how do you get around the part of 9.1.4 that I quoted?

[JThompson]

I'll try this one more time.

This part of 9.1.4 does not mention determining an accurate score. It specifically requires that which hits were made by the current competitor be determined, or it's a reshoot.

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.

With this in mind, my question:

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits? If not, how do you get around the part of 9.1.4 that I quoted?

Because it wouldn't matter of there was 2 or 20 holes in the target since all of them are As it makes no difference. He/she gets two Alpha and you move on.

Edited August 18, 2010 by JThompson

[SteveU]

I'll try this one more time.

This part of 9.1.4 does not mention determining an accurate score. It specifically requires that which hits were made by the current competitor be determined, or it's a reshoot.

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.

With this in mind, my question:

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits? If not, how do you get around the part of 9.1.4 that I quoted?

Because it wouldn't matter of there was 2 or 20 holes in the target since all of them are As it makes no difference. He/she gets two Alpha and you move on.

What if the current competitor got alpha mike and the last competitor got 2A? If targets are unrestored, the rule reads, in it's simplest form, if the RO can determine the accurate score, no reshoot is required. If there is any question, it's a reshoot. If there are 3 holes, and it is clear that the targets were unrestored, and the shooter engaged the target twice, the RO will have to judge whether he knows that it is 2 alphas or alpha mike. If he doesn't know, RESHOOT. If he knows, he can score.

That's how I read it.

[mhs]

I'll try this one more time.

This part of 9.1.4 does not mention determining an accurate score. It specifically requires that which hits were made by the current competitor be determined, or it's a reshoot.

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.

With this in mind, my question:

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits? If not, how do you get around the part of 9.1.4 that I quoted?

Because it wouldn't matter of there was 2 or 20 holes in the target since all of them are As it makes no difference. He/she gets two Alpha and you move on.

Is there a reason for that sentence, other than the reshoot part? Is it left over from some other version? If a competitor arbed for a reshoot using that part of the rule how could you deny it? It doesn't make sense, but it seems clearly written.

[JThompson]

I'll try this one more time.

This part of 9.1.4 does not mention determining an accurate score. It specifically requires that which hits were made by the current competitor be determined, or it's a reshoot.

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.

With this in mind, my question:

Does it mean that if there are 3 A hits (current competitor shot only twice at target), and they're all .40 with identical holes, that it's a reshoot because it's not obvious who made which hits? If not, how do you get around the part of 9.1.4 that I quoted?

Because it wouldn't matter of there was 2 or 20 holes in the target since all of them are As it makes no difference. He/she gets two Alpha and you move on.

What if the current competitor got alpha mike and the last competitor got 2A? If targets are unrestored, the rule reads, in it's simplest form, if the RO can determine the accurate score, no reshoot is required. If there is any question, it's a reshoot. If there are 3 holes, and it is clear that the targets were unrestored, and the shooter engaged the target twice, the RO will have to judge whether he knows that it is 2 alphas or alpha mike. If he doesn't know, RESHOOT. If he knows, he can score.

That's how I read it.

We're not talking about an A-M we are talking about all hits in one scoring zone or all hits in equal scoring zones. It's very simple really... If I can score the targets correctly, regardless of how many hits are on the target, there's no need for a reshoot. It's all in if you can determine what the correct hits are. Look at it like this... do I care which C hit you got if all of them are Cs? Same with As, Bs/Cs or Ds. No. As long as I can determine the "score" not what bullet was fired by which guy, that matters not...

JT

Edited August 18, 2010 by JThompson