How wide is a Metric Target including the non-scoring area?

[Skydiver]

I'm a little confused by Appendix B3. The measurements across the top of the page indicate that the scoring area of a metric target is 45cm. The measurement at the lower right corner of the page says that there is a 0.5cm non-scoring border around the entire target. So 45 + 0.05 + 0.05 = 46cm, but the measurements along the bottom of the page says that the target is only 45cm wide.

So how wide is a metric target including the non-scoring area? 45cm or 46cm?

The corollary question is how tall is a metric target including the non-scoring area? 75cm or 75.05cm or 76cm?

Can somebody successfully arbitrate that a stage is illegal because of use of a non-approved targets if the target measures as being too wide/narrow by 1cm or too tall/short by 0.5cm?

Edited January 13, 2011 by Skydiver

[JAFO]

I think the measurements at the bottom are meant to mirror the width of the scoring areas shown at the top, although I agree it doesn't look like they were drawn that way. It should be 46cm wide x 76cm tall overall. I'd think you'd be hardpressed to argue illegal targets based on one being off by half the total non-scoring border in one dimension. But I also have no idea what the tolerances are on the machines that punch out the targets. And if they're not USPSA-approved targets, then is it even a USPSA match?

Edited January 14, 2011 by JAFO

[AlamoShooter]

I am not a certified match director, but If you make it known before the match that you are using targets off in size. your good and so long as the target size is the same for all shooters.

And you could increase the Arbitration fee to $1,000 instead of $100

[Nik Habicht]

You can arbitrate anything. To win the arbitration though, you'd need to prove a loss of competitive equity -- i.e. different squads got different targets, as multiple, different batches were in use; a mover that had a single target on it for the first rotation had the head cut off and a second target stapled over the body of the first for subsequent squads, a mover had targets of lighter weight during some rotations than others.....

I've seen some slight variances between the different suppliers -- not much of an issue in and of itself....

[kevin c]

...Can somebody successfully arbitrate that a stage is illegal because of use of a non-approved targets if the target measures as being too wide/narrow by 1cm or too tall/short by 0.5cm?...

I suppose it could be done. Doubt the arb would win, for the reasons Nik points out.

If somebody were to use this argument, I'd say he was probably pretty desperate to be grasping at straws as flimsy as this.

[Skydiver]

Just playing Devil's Advocate here: So a paper target that doesn't match up with Appendix B is okay as per 4.1.1. Then a stage that has square plates that are 5 1/2" rather than 6" required by B5 is also okay?

[outerlimits]

In my case, it's usually .355 smaller than it should be.

[Nik Habicht]

Just playing Devil's Advocate here: So a paper target that doesn't match up with Appendix B is okay as per 4.1.1. Then a stage that has square plates that are 5 1/2" rather than 6" required by B5 is also okay?

There's 2 differences between steel and paper targets, right? Steel doesn't have a non-scoring border, paper does; Steel (essentially) only has an A-zone, paper has other scoring zones....

A skinny non-scoring border makes life harder for the RO; an undersize plate is a different sort of problem for every competitor....

[Chills1994]

I though you could NOT arbitrate a DQ from a safety violation....say like breaking the 180.

[ima45dv8]

I though you could NOT arbitrate a DQ from a safety violation....say like breaking the 180.

See 11.1.2, second sentence.