Popper Challenge

[mildot1]

Please explain this to me!

If I am the shooter and someone pastes the target before it is scored I get a re-shoot, correct?

If I am the shooter and I shoot a popper,it does not go down. I call for a calibration challenge but someone touchs it before the challenge and it falls, I lose the challenge.Correct?

I don't see the reasoning here.

I think that anyone who screws up the scoring of a target should get a procedural.

If you are in love with your your buddy enuff to cheat, then take one for him!

What is the difference between me running out and pasting a target you had a miss on to get you a reshoot compared to me running out and bumpimg a piece of steel and voiding the challenge??

This came up at a RO class recently, I didn't like the answer I got so I'm wondering if I am out in left field or not.

Mildot

[ima45dv8]

Please explain this to me!

If I am the shooter and someone pastes the target before it is scored I get a re-shoot, correct?

That's correct.

If I am the shooter and I shoot a popper,it does not go down. I call for a calibration challenge but someone touchs it before the challenge and it falls, I lose the challenge.Correct?

Also correct.

I don't see the reasoning here.

I think that anyone who screws up the scoring of a target should get a procedural.

If you are in love with your your buddy enuff to cheat, then take one for him!

It's not automatically a sign of someone cheating. I had a very good friend who didn't understand the rule walk over to a popper while we were waiting for the RM. Not knowing any better he said, "Maybe it's set heavy", whacks it and it goes down.

What is the difference between me running out and pasting a target you had a miss on to get you a reshoot compared to me running out and bumpimg a piece of steel and voiding the challenge??

This came up at a RO class recently, I didn't like the answer I got so I'm wondering if I am out in left field or not.

Look around. If you see a fence and bleachers, you may be.

[mildot1]

You are absolutely right "it is not automatically a sign of someone cheating", so why is the shooter penalized for something that is beyond his control?

If we are going to go on the premise that the act of pasting a target prematurely or touching a popper before calibration was purely accidental, why would we award a re-shoot in one case and penalize in another?

Just asking

Mildot

[ima45dv8]

You are absolutely right "it is not automatically a sign of someone cheating", so why is the shooter penalized for something that is beyond his control?

If we are going to go on the premise that the act of pasting a target prematurely or touching a popper before calibration was purely accidental, why would we award a re-shoot in one case and penalize in another?

Just asking

Mildot

That's a good question. I don't know with any certainty, but maybe it's because in the case of the popper, the score is binary. Up or down. Hit or Miss. 5 points or a Mike. When my buddy knocked mine over it would definitely have improved my score, where in the case of a paper target the score could go up or down.

I'm just guessing. Anyone know for sure?

[mhs]

Please explain this to me!

If I am the shooter and someone pastes the target before it is scored I get a re-shoot, correct?

If I am the shooter and I shoot a popper,it does not go down. I call for a calibration challenge but someone touchs it before the challenge and it falls, I lose the challenge.Correct?

I don't see the reasoning here.

I think that anyone who screws up the scoring of a target should get a procedural.

If you are in love with your your buddy enuff to cheat, then take one for him!

What is the difference between me running out and pasting a target you had a miss on to get you a reshoot compared to me running out and bumpimg a piece of steel and voiding the challenge??

This came up at a RO class recently, I didn't like the answer I got so I'm wondering if I am out in left field or not.

Mildot

If someone pastes a target, it must have had a hole to paste. The assumption is that there was a hole, you were entitled to whatever that hole scored, you were denied that, you get a reshoot.

If a popper is standing the assumption is that you didn't hit it, or didn't hit it well. If someone screws up the calibration, the assumption is that you probably wouldn't have gotten anything anyway.

Or so it seems to me.

[Coach]

Please explain this to me!

If I am the shooter and someone pastes the target before it is scored I get a re-shoot, correct?

If I am the shooter and I shoot a popper,it does not go down. I call for a calibration challenge but someone touchs it before the challenge and it falls, I lose the challenge.Correct?

I don't see the reasoning here.

I think that anyone who screws up the scoring of a target should get a procedural.

If you are in love with your your buddy enuff to cheat, then take one for him!

What is the difference between me running out and pasting a target you had a miss on to get you a reshoot compared to me running out and bumpimg a piece of steel and voiding the challenge??

This came up at a RO class recently, I didn't like the answer I got so I'm wondering if I am out in left field or not.

Mildot

If someone pastes a target, it must have had a hole to paste. The assumption is that there was a hole, you were entitled to whatever that hole scored, you were denied that, you get a reshoot.

If a popper is standing the assumption is that you didn't hit it, or didn't hit it well. If someone screws up the calibration, the assumption is that you probably wouldn't have gotten anything anyway.

Or so it seems to me.

I like the logic. Poppers do get out of calibration. What is there was a hit because it was painted every time. Seems like in such a situation the shooter could be wronged. He/she hit it and we can prove it but the strike on the paint and now the challenge that might bring about a re-shoot has been lost. What then? Just scoring is what we are after.

[Gary Johnson]

In the first case it is not possible to determine an accurate score so the competitor has to reshoot. In the second, it is not possible to establish that REF has occurred so there is no basis to order a reshoot.

In either case, if the RO believes the 'accident' was deliberate he calls the RM who introduces the offender to rule 10.6.

Please explain this to me!

If I am the shooter and someone pastes the target before it is scored I get a re-shoot, correct?

If I am the shooter and I shoot a popper,it does not go down. I call for a calibration challenge but someone touchs it before the challenge and it falls, I lose the challenge.Correct?

I don't see the reasoning here.

I think that anyone who screws up the scoring of a target should get a procedural.

If you are in love with your your buddy enuff to cheat, then take one for him!

What is the difference between me running out and pasting a target you had a miss on to get you a reshoot compared to me running out and bumpimg a piece of steel and voiding the challenge??

This came up at a RO class recently, I didn't like the answer I got so I'm wondering if I am out in left field or not.

Mildot

[Gary Johnson]

Premature pasting means you can't score the target and the rule in that case calls for a reshoot. A popper left standing can be scored (as a miss) so that rule doesn't apply.

If someone suspects REF the RM is called to inspect the suspect target/prop or perform a calibration in the case of a popper. Disturbing the prop/target makes it impossible to inspect it as it was during the competitor's run so the RM can not establish REF. The REF rules don't allow a reshoot without evidence.

You are absolutely right "it is not automatically a sign of someone cheating", so why is the shooter penalized for something that is beyond his control?

If we are going to go on the premise that the act of pasting a target prematurely or touching a popper before calibration was purely accidental, why would we award a re-shoot in one case and penalize in another?

Just asking

Mildot

That's a good question. I don't know with any certainty, but maybe it's because in the case of the popper, the score is binary. Up or down. Hit or Miss. 5 points or a Mike. When my buddy knocked mine over it would definitely have improved my score, where in the case of a paper target the score could go up or down.

I'm just guessing. Anyone know for sure?

[mildot1]

Lets just throw this out.

Level II match or higher, targets are required to be painted after every shooter.

Shooter engages target, doesn't fall. Shooter goes on and finishes stage, calls for calibration. while rest of stage being scored some body gets to close and INADVERTENDLY causes it to fall. Popper shows a hit in the CALIBRATION area.

The way I see it there is no way the shooter could gain from this scenario, he can only lose.

Why would he not be afforded the same re-shoot he would get for a pre-mature paste??

[Nik Habicht]

Lets just throw this out.

Level II match or higher, targets are required to be painted after every shooter.

Shooter engages target, doesn't fall. Shooter goes on and finishes stage, calls for calibration. while rest of stage being scored some body gets to close and INADVERTENDLY causes it to fall. Popper shows a hit in the CALIBRATION area.

The way I see it there is no way the shooter could gain from this scenario, he can only lose.

Why would he not be afforded the same re-shoot he would get for a pre-mature paste??

Here's why: was it a marginal hit? Was it a hit with a marginally powered round? (Remember, the only rounds that are actually minor or major are the ones shot over the chrono; all others we assume will make the same AVERAGE power factor.)

But basically it comes down to what Gary explained -- there are specific requirements for reshoots. If someone disturbs a popper before calibration can be performed, then those rules can not kick in. Experienced staff will attempt to protect that popper to allow calibration to take place....

[jar]

Gary's post explains the rules. What I think the OP is really asking is, are these rules the fairest they can be?

[Skydiver]

Also consider the other sentence buried in the middle of C1.6.c. "If a Match Official violates this rule, the competitor must reshoot the course of fire." It's only if it's somebody other than a Match Official who interferes with the popper is the popper automatically treated as a miss.

[Steven Cline]

I believe it's because the presumption is that the shooter failed to shoot accurately enough with enough power to make the popper fall. This is the shooter's error. Once the popper is messed with one can no longer test to see if the shooter really was in error. The best evidence is therefor used. The shooter failed to knock over the popper which is the required element for a scoring hit.

The paper being pasted is not the shooter's error. The pasted hole prevents the ROs from scoring the target at all, no obvious score. The shooter gets the reshoot.

It is obvious that the popper did not fall.

It is not obvious what the shot in papper was.

I believe this to be the difference.

[Gary Johnson]

That explains it very nicely.

In a popper challenge it is presumed that the competitor hit the target. The question is why it didn't fall and the presumption is the competitor's hit was insufficient to knock it down. The RM's job is to look for evidence to the contrary. He does this by inspecting the target and, if necessary, checking calibration. If he finds evidence of equipment failure, he orders a reshoot. Disturbing the target invalidates any inspection or calibration check.

I believe it's because the presumption is that the shooter failed to shoot accurately enough with enough power to make the popper fall. This is the shooter's error. Once the popper is messed with one can no longer test to see if the shooter really was in error. The best evidence is therefor used. The shooter failed to knock over the popper which is the required element for a scoring hit.

The paper being pasted is not the shooter's error. The pasted hole prevents the ROs from scoring the target at all, no obvious score. The shooter gets the reshoot.

It is obvious that the popper did not fall.

It is not obvious what the shot in papper was.

I believe this to be the difference.

[Skydiver]

That explains it very nicely.

In a popper challenge it is presumed that the competitor hit the target. The question is why it didn't fall and the presumption is the competitor's hit was insufficient to knock it down. The RM's job is to look for evidence to the contrary. He does this by inspecting the target and, if necessary, checking calibration. If he finds evidence of equipment failure, he orders a reshoot. Disturbing the target invalidates any inspection or calibration check.

I believe it's because the presumption is that the shooter failed to shoot accurately enough with enough power to make the popper fall. This is the shooter's error. Once the popper is messed with one can no longer test to see if the shooter really was in error. The best evidence is therefor used. The shooter failed to knock over the popper which is the required element for a scoring hit.

The paper being pasted is not the shooter's error. The pasted hole prevents the ROs from scoring the target at all, no obvious score. The shooter gets the reshoot.

It is obvious that the popper did not fall.

It is not obvious what the shot in papper was.

I believe this to be the difference.

RE: Disturbing the target invalidates any inspection or calibration check

I agree. I think you hit the nail right on the head. But can you further explain why if a Match Official interferes with the popper, a reshoot is ordered, but if anybody else interferes with the popper, it's considered a miss? Is it because the assumption is that the Match Official should know what he/she is doing while inspecting the popper and will practice the appropriate amount of care not to disturb the popper and the surrounding ground?

[Nik Habicht]

That explains it very nicely.

In a popper challenge it is presumed that the competitor hit the target. The question is why it didn't fall and the presumption is the competitor's hit was insufficient to knock it down. The RM's job is to look for evidence to the contrary. He does this by inspecting the target and, if necessary, checking calibration. If he finds evidence of equipment failure, he orders a reshoot. Disturbing the target invalidates any inspection or calibration check.

I believe it's because the presumption is that the shooter failed to shoot accurately enough with enough power to make the popper fall. This is the shooter's error. Once the popper is messed with one can no longer test to see if the shooter really was in error. The best evidence is therefor used. The shooter failed to knock over the popper which is the required element for a scoring hit.

The paper being pasted is not the shooter's error. The pasted hole prevents the ROs from scoring the target at all, no obvious score. The shooter gets the reshoot.

It is obvious that the popper did not fall.

It is not obvious what the shot in papper was.

I believe this to be the difference.

RE: Disturbing the target invalidates any inspection or calibration check

I agree. I think you hit the nail right on the head. But can you further explain why if a Match Official interferes with the popper, a reshoot is ordered, but if anybody else interferes with the popper, it's considered a miss? Is it because the assumption is that the Match Official should know what he/she is doing while inspecting the popper and will practice the appropriate amount of care not to disturb the popper and the surrounding ground?

A match official is expected to know the calibration rules. If a match official disturbs the target, that's a form of interference, right? Therefore a reshoot is ordered....

If anyone else disturbs the target -- well, targets need to fall to score, right? And the shooter's target didn't fall, and now can't be checked -- but a score can be determined....

Reshoots are generally ordered for RO error -- be it one of omission, i.e. not verifying that the stage was properly reset, or of incorrectly stopping the shooter during an attempt at a course of fire, or even for inadvertent contact. Premature taping is different because an accurate score can't be determined....

[Steven Cline]

What nik said.