2 NS Hits Maximum, Good Or Bad?

[DogmaDog]

I've hit a no-shoot twice, on two occasions.

I have never hit a no-shoot 3 times.

I've never seen anyone else hit a no-shoot 3 times.

Any time I've hit a no-shoot even once, it pretty much means I've tanked the stage, and possibly the match.

So this rule will really have almost zero effect.

Also, I agree with the logic that if X hits are scored on brown targets, X hits should be scored on white targets too.

The only negative impact, which no one has mentioned, is that now, once you realize you've tanked the stage by hitting a no-shoot twice, there's nothing to stop you from just emtying a whole magazine (or two) into that no-shoot, just to vent your frustration. Shooters who do that will cause match delays with all the extra time it takes to paste 17 no-shoot hits. Clubs will have to order just as many white pasters as brown. Cats and dogs living together, oh my god!!!!

DogmaDog

[Vince Pinto]

Since the dawn of time we have counted all the NS hits.

An argument along the lines of "That's the way we've always done it" has no value to me. There are dozens of rules which have changed over the years, and my only regret is that we didn't pick up this particular inequity earlier, because we've limited the number of Scoring Hits, Misses and Procedurals for years, as explained by Neil.

HOWEVER, the idea Nik put forth is an acceptable alternative. If a NS borders two targets that each receives two hits, then the NS could have 4 hits.

That's not what Nik suggested, nor what I drafted as a possible alternate rule. Nik suggested that if we count, say, 3 hits per Scoring Target, we should also count 3 hits per Penalty Target. Hence, in a T1-PT1-T2 array which seems to be your greatest (and a narrow) concern, hits on PT1 would still be limited to the number of scoring hits counted on T1 (e.g. we'd count a maximum of 3 hits on each Scoring or Penalty Target).

As an aside, yesterday we had a work party at our range and there were 4-5 new shooters, about a year or less in the sport. They felt this new rule to be insulting to them. They felt unanimously that we should be 100% responsible for our shots.

Great, but did you also ask them whether they think they should also be credited with every scoring shot too? This is the very question I asked you, which you have failed to answer thus far, so I repeat:

If you want to count every hit on every Penalty Target, why do you only want to count 2 hits on every Scoring Target (i.e. the former system)?

[Jim Norman]

Vince,

If that is not what Nik suggested, I'll stand corrected on that point. It is what I have suggested. It holds to your logic, the alternative is that you can't cover two shoots with one NS. That is very restrictive as to stage design.

As to the acertian regarding Proceedurals and the rest. I do not advocate any change. I stated that point because I feel it is at least similar to the rule here at least as it regards the feelings of newcommers to the sport.

To answer others.

Stated: I've hit a no-shoot twice, on two occasions.

Answered:Then I assume you are a born GM. I bow to your superior marksmanship.

Stated:I have never hit a no-shoot 3 times.

Answered: Good for you. I have.

Stated:I've never seen anyone else hit a no-shoot 3 times.

Answered: I have.

Stated: Any time I've hit a no-shoot even once, it pretty much means I've tanked the stage, and possibly the match.

Answered: Really, Well wouldn't that depend upon who else was shooting, how they were doing and what class you are? Wouldn't having two misses also tank a match for you then as well? How about 10 C's or a couple D's. If we are talking about being points down, your logic fails here. As long as I don't zero, I still have some points. It seems to me that Chuck Bradley went on to win the AWARE in 2002 with 30 penalty point on Stage 7 and 10 points on stage 10. So, obviously, penalty point do not prevent one from winning a match even if a couple stages are finished in the 50's as to percentages.

It has also been stated that we are not responsible for all our shots. True we only count as a miss any target with fewrer than the required number of hits, but the shots that are fired better strike within the confines of the shooting bay.

Jim

[Vince Pinto]

It holds to your logic, the alternative is that you can't cover two shoots with one NS. That is very restrictive as to stage design.

It's only restrictive to you, because you continue to narrow-mindedly focus on a single type of target array to support your argument. Instead of insisting on having a T1-PT1-T2 array, why can't you have a PT1-T1-PT2 array? Are Penalty Targets that expensive where you live?

If not, you could have a stage with 12 Scoring Paper Targets and 144 Penalty Targets (or more) if you wish. The sky's the limit.

Jim, with all due respect, you created a "stacked" poll here and, despite the results not going the way you want, you continue to argue with everyone who has expressed a view contrary to yours and/or with those who've been patiently trying to explain that things are not nearly as bad as you make out.

This rule is not the end (or even the beginning of the end) of IPSC as we know it, but you seem almost fanatical in the way you argued against it for two weeks on the IPSC Digest, then with me privately, then by sending letters to all the USPSA Area Directors and President, and now here. If you want to make changing this rule your mission in life (and I suspect you do), so be it - that's your prerogative, and no hard feelings from me.

However I don't know how many more different ways I (and others) can explain the same thing to you, especially when you refuse to answer the single question I've asked of you twice.

[shred]

The only negative impact, which no one has mentioned, is that now, once you realize you've tanked the stage by hitting a no-shoot twice, there's nothing to stop you from just emtying a whole magazine (or two) into that no-shoot, just to vent your frustration.  Shooters who do that will cause match delays with all the extra time it takes to paste 17 no-shoot hits.

At our range that would get the shooter handed a roll of white tape and a "get patching" from the RO. Don't tell me you treat your prima-donnas any differently or I'll want to move

[DogmaDog]

At our range that would get the shooter handed a roll of white tape and a "get patching" from the RO.  Don't tell me you treat your prima-donnas any differently or I'll want to move

Shred,

I've just been moved from C class to Grand Master (see above), so I have every right to be a prima donna. If I want to spend some time off the clock taking practice shots on the penalty targets, then I should be allowed to do so. I would love to have you move here so you can praise my performance at matches, and paste up the no-shoots, and holes in hard cover, when I'm done. [/Royal Highness Mode]

As an aside, I note that IDPA rules posit that hits on a no-shoot target are assessed as a 5 second penalty per target, regardless of the actual number of hits on each...one hit or 10, it makes no difference. I wonder if IDPAs treatment of no-shoots has had any influence on this rule change?

DogmaDog

[Ron Ankeny]

Good grief, doesn't anyone listen anymore?

[AikiDale]

Good grief, doesn't anyone listen anymore?

Some Ron, not many, but some.

I did not vote. Like most of the multiple guess tests to which I have been subjected the correct answer was never there. But the topic has spawned a few thoughts.

In any contest all competitors must play by the same rules. I really do not care what the rules are as long as we all play by the same ones. As part of an international sporting organization I am all for universal rules.

As a matter of practical shooting (not to revisit an old thread, but I will define that here as non-sporting social encounters or hunting) each person is responsible for each and every round fired.

As a new shooter I would like there to be no NS targets, they hurt my score and the farther down the list of shooters I am the more my feelings are hurt. ( I should probably mention here that every penalty point, along with every M, D, C and B motivates me to spend more time working on accuracy).

And finally: "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."

Tacitus

[Vince Pinto]

Jim Norman,

In response to the request in your private message to me, here's the question you apparently missed in two of my earlier posts:

If you want to count every hit on every Penalty Target, why do you only want to count 2 hits on every Scoring Target (i.e. the former system)?

I ask this because you keep repeating that a competitor should be responsible for every shot, however you don't want to count all the good shots.

Thanks.

[Neil Beverley]

Amen to Vince's last posting.

There is a logical reason as to why we generally only count 2 hits per target and the same logic applies to penalty targets.

And as it is we heavily penalise even "edged" periphal hits. It's enough.

I find it interesting that even IDPA, who started with a clean sheet of paper for their rules, have limited the penalty per penalty target.

[Jim Norman]

Vince,

I apologize; you are asking me why we don’t score all the hits on a target since I think we should score all the hits on a NS. OK, here is why. Hit Factor Scoring. A long time ago a maximum number of points you could get on a target was determined. Now, if a target is worth as most are, 10 points, what would you do for a target with 4 A hits? How would you alter the scoring to allow for open-ended stage values? Now I suppose you could total the hits to a maximum target value and add in a number of shots fired value to the scoring program. But I don’t think you can factor in more that the points assigned to the stage.

Example 1

Shooter A shoots 20 rounds and gets all A’s because he is fast and accurate while Shooter B being faster yet, fires only the required number of shots (14) and gets all A's. The stage requires 14 hits to maximize the score. Both shooters have all 14 hits and they are all A's. But Shooter A has fired 6 additional A hits. Would you like to figure out the Hit Factor on that mess?

Futher Explaination:

This is not Bullseye. There is no perfect score. In High-Power or Bullseye there is a “Perfect Score”. There is even a clothing line named after it, 10-X. In Action there is only better than the rest. It is Hit Factor scoring. There is a finite number of points available, but they are factored as you well know by the points earned per second. If you open-ended the course, how would you determine a HF? Lets see, if I shoot 28 rounds (140) Points in 10 seconds, I have a HF of 14, but you are so fast you do a reload and get off another 28 rounds, but you do it in 19.5 seconds for a HF of 14.35 HF (280/19.5) Now another shooter comes along and is even faster and though to bring along a third magazine and does it in 28.5 seconds for a HF of 14.73. This could go on forever.

Now to be fair, maybe we should make all course Virginia Count, that way you count all your rounds, but of course the fun and thinking has pretty much gone. This would address all of your concerns. No more than X hits on a NS, No extra shots, so all misses would be counted, all hits could be counted. There is some additional work to be done on the wording, but I think it could be worked out.

In the early days of the sport I believe a shooter could score less than a zero on a stage. If that were still the case I would support the change you have made. I think that each stage, while a part of the match as a whole should stand alone. I think I have answered your question as to why I don’t want to count more than two hits on a target.

VInce,

The above is so obvious, I didn't realize it needed an explaination!

Jim

[Jim Norman]

A further note regarding IDPA.

A, if you want to shoot IDPA, go ahead.

B, IF IDPA only counts one penalty per NS, fine. If it is as you say and they ding you 5 seconds per NS, you are definately out of the running for that stage, figure the longes stge they run is around 18 shots, how long can a stage take to shoot? 6-10 seconds? so a single NS hit in IDPA is worh 50% of a stage.

That is a lot more serious than 10 points on a 160 point stage!

Jim

[Jim Norman]

A further explaination of why not to count all the hits.

Each stage has a upper limit of available points as well as a lower limit.

I have a full magazine when I get to the last target, I dump 20 rounds into it just because I can. Do I now get an additional 100 points? Lets say I break each shot in .16 seconds, so may added time was 3.2 seconds for an additional 100 points. that makes the HF for those last few rounds 31.25! This could really skew a course. I get to make up the penalties I received for leaving those three steel standing!

Vince,

If you don't like IPSC, shoot something else, but leave IPSC for those of us that like it!

Jim

[JFD]

I don't agree with the wording of any of the responses so I didn't vote. Pretty easy to see what was going on there.

Personally I don't care about the new rule. 2 NS hits would kill my chances anyway and I'd think it would be the same for anyone. How many people are going to be in contention with 3+ NS hits anyway.

Keep it, change it, whatever....

I do agree that a new shooter who is driven away from the sport due to a bunch of NS hits was probably going to leave anyway after his/her first major blunder. This rule would just delay it until they did something else equally bad.

[Vince Pinto]

Vince, If you don't like IPSC, shoot something else, but leave IPSC for those of us that like it!

Here's the thing. IPSC has already changed the rule, so I guess the decision whether to stay or leave is yours.

You started a stacked poll here, it hasn't gone the way you planned, yet you continue to belligerently argue with everybody. I very rarely close threads, but in this instance, I think it's justified.