Partial Hits on Hard Cover

[sfchorn]

I have a question about reconciling the following rules:

9.5.5 Enlarged holes in paper targets which exceed the competitor’s bullet diameter will not count for score or penalty unless there is visible evidence

within the remnants of the hole (e.g. a grease mark or a “crown” etc.), to eliminate a presumption that the hole was caused by a ricochet or splatter.

and

9.1.6.3 If a bullet strikes partially within hard cover, and continues on to strike the scoring area of a paper target, the hit on that paper target will count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

I have seen cases where bullets partially strike a wall support or barrel (not a full diameter hit) and continue on to strike a paper target. It is not uncommon for the bullet to deform, tumble or keyhole and leave an irregular shaped hole with no grease ring. I've seen ROs call these both ways. Some have called it a hit (based on 9.1.6.3) and others a miss (based upon 9.5.5 above).

Any thoughts on how to make consistent calls on these? Does it make a difference if the partial hit on the prop slightly changes the bullet's path, in essence making it a ricochet? Does the ricochet presumption assume the ricochet came from a steel target or another target array?

Please be civil. And please no posts explaining why the rule is wrong and should be changed. I simply want to follow the rules we have.

[juan]

Im interested to know myself

If I have partial hit on hard cover, i have been scoring the wierd looking hole as a hit.

Edited May 22, 2011 by juan

[Schutzenmeister]

I'm not sure this addresses your question, but here goes:

In a situation such as you describe, I look for evidence that a bullet penetrated the scoring portion of a target. I look for a round hole, or portion thereof ... I look for a grease mark ... I look for ANY evidence that there is a scoring hit on the target. I ignore anything in the hard cover as for scoring purposes, it dosen't exist ... so to speak.

In the case of soft-cover in front of targets ... You need to be able to expect the bullet may not fly true and straight after the soft cover and before the target. Just score what you see on the target, however the soft cover may have diverted it.

If this does not address your question, then perhaps I misunderstand it.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Schutzenmeister

[aztecdriver]

No presumption - score what you see. Look at the target, is there a crown or some evidence a bullet passed through it. If not, it's not a hit. If there is, you still need to determine if it was a full or partial diameter hit on hardcover. If it was a full diameter hit - mike. It it wasn't the hit is awarded.

If you can't tell - (ie., the barrel has so many holes in it you could use it as a big cheese grater?) you have another problem to fix. Paint the barrels so that a new hole is evident (works), tape the barrels, ( sort of works). Wood is replaceable, better yet, put a noshoot on it and you'll see the holes real quick.

This is the way I have done it - and I've had it done to me for the last two years. If it's wrong - well, someone better than I will tell us Good Luck!

[Poppa Bear]

It comes down to what is hardcover? If it is the cardboard variety, it is easily passed through and easily determined if it is a partial hit. The real question here is how do you treat a possible partial hit on a more solid object? Our policy is that any hit that takes out a portion of the wall support in a violent manner passed fully through the hardcover and any hit on a scoring target is a miss. Even if there is a round hole there generally is not a grease mark. A hit that glanced off the hardcover or left a groove through the edge of the hardcover will be scored as a valid hit on any scoring or penalty target because it usually leaves a grease mark. If the debris from the hit is such that we cannot determine what caused the holes then it is a miss.

We have had a couple that were argued, but between several RO's and the shooter a determination was reached that everyone could agree with and usually it cam down to how much damage to the HC prop.

[George Jones]

Our policy is

Is that policy mentioned in the rulebook?

[Schutzenmeister]

Our policy is

Is that policy mentioned in the rulebook?

I think so, George. Under 3.3 ...

[Poppa Bear]

Our policy is

Is that policy mentioned in the rulebook?

9.1.6.1 If a bullet strikes wholly within hard cover, and continues on to

strike any scoring paper target or no-shoot, that shot will not

count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

When a chunk of the support for the wall disappears, usually because the bullet caught a knot making it impossible to determine the bullets exact path there is generally other evidence that supports either a grazing hit or a full hit. Sometimes you just have to make your best educated guess the difference between a full hit and a 75% hit on a wall which then sends all the evidence downrange with the bullet is a discretionary call.

Edited to add; We would love it if all of our 2x2's were knot free but that grade of pine lumber is well outside our budget.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Poppa Bear

[Nik Habicht]

When a chunk of the support for the wall disappears, usually because the bullet caught a knot making it impossible to determine the bullets exact path there is generally other evidence that supports either a grazing hit or a full hit. Sometimes you just have to make your best educated guess the difference between a full hit and a 75% hit on a wall which then sends all the evidence downrange with the bullet is a discretionary call.

I might look to 9.1.4 -- which includes language on how to approach a target that cannot be scored decisively for lack of evidence....

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.

I find it tough to assess a mike on a target where I have two identical looking hits.....

One local remedy is to hang a penalty target or two, on the edge of the wall, at an appropriate height for target in question. The penalty target will hopefully provide the evidence needed, to determine an accurate score, even for those shots that send wood flying. (Additional advantage -- the walls tend to get hit less....)

[Poppa Bear]

This is true and we frequently do apply NS to walls that might be in the line of fire. But sometimes someone still tags a wall because they shot before they got fully into the shooting area. ie their dot may have a clear shot but their muzzle is still behind the wall as they step around to engage the targets or their eyes are on the target but they touched off a round before they get the gun fully past the wall.

[sdm74]

I barley grazed a barrel once got a "Alpha" and was scored a mike.

[JAFO]

I had one of each of these today. In both cases, the hardcover was a barrel of the "cheese grater" variety. There was no way to tell what holes the shooter had made. In the first instance, the hole was clearly bigger than the shooter's .38 Super, and there was no grease mark - scored it a mike. In the second, the hole looked to be made by a tumbling bullet (elongated hole about the right height for the caliber), but there was a grease mark - scored it a hit.

[Singlestack]

I had one of each of these today. In both cases, the hardcover was a barrel of the "cheese grater" variety. There was no way to tell what holes the shooter had made. In the first instance, the hole was clearly bigger than the shooter's .38 Super, and there was no grease mark - scored it a mike. In the second, the hole looked to be made by a tumbling bullet (elongated hole about the right height for the caliber), but there was a grease mark - scored it a hit.

The hole does not have to have a grease mark to be scored a hit.

9.5.5 Enlarged holes in paper targets which exceed the competitors bullet

diameter will not count for score or penalty unless there is visible evidence

within the remnants of the hole (e.g. a grease mark or a crown

etc.), to eliminate a presumption that the hole was caused by a ricochet

or splatter

[JAFO]

I had one of each of these today. In both cases, the hardcover was a barrel of the "cheese grater" variety. There was no way to tell what holes the shooter had made. In the first instance, the hole was clearly bigger than the shooter's .38 Super, and there was no grease mark - scored it a mike. In the second, the hole looked to be made by a tumbling bullet (elongated hole about the right height for the caliber), but there was a grease mark - scored it a hit.

The hole does not have to have a grease mark to be scored a hit.

9.5.5 Enlarged holes in paper targets which exceed the competitor’s bullet

diameter will not count for score or penalty unless there is visible evidence

within the remnants of the hole (e.g. a grease mark or a “crown”

etc.), to eliminate a presumption that the hole was caused by a ricochet

or splatter

What is the definition of a "crown"? It's not in the glossary, and I honestly don't know. This particular hole was big enough to fit a .45 case through, so it appeared as if the bullet possibly expanded/deformed going through the barrel.

[Flexmoney]

I believe it means the partial diameter of the bullet hole...an arc.

I had one at the Nationals...in the dark house (bullet-resistant walls).

Part of my bullet hit the wall and this was clear (I don't ignore that, I consider it important evidence). It wasn't a full diameter hit on the wall. The rest of the bullet splattered all over the target face...a few inches away. The RMI running the stage called a mike. I asked for the target to be pulled. The RM got a chance to closely examine the target in good light and found a radius in all the mess that was on the target.

Hit count.

[Schutzenmeister]

What is the definition of a "crown"? It's not in the glossary, and I honestly don't know. This particular hole was big enough to fit a .45 case through, so it appeared as if the bullet possibly expanded/deformed going through the barrel.

Think of a bullet that is flying true and straight as it goes through the target. It leaves a round hole. This we generally refer to this as a "radius."

Now think of a bullet that has, or is tumbling and strikes the target broadside. The portion of the hole you would think of as the "nose" of the bullet is generally referred to as a "crown."

Or at least, that is how I've always understood the two terms!

Edited May 23, 2011 by Schutzenmeister

[JAFO]

Think of a bullet that is flying true and straight as it goes through the target. It leaves a round hole. This we generally refer to this as a "radius."

Now think of a bullet that has, or is tumbling and strikes the target broadside. The portion of the hole you would think of as the "nose" of the bullet is generally referred to as a "crown."

Or at least, that is how I've always understood the two terms!

OK, that's what I saw on the second target that I scored as a hit. I did it because there was grease present, but by that rule, it would count even without the grease mark. So I can say I learned something today.

Thanks!

[ima45dv8]

....but by that rule, it would count even without the grease mark.

Correct. A grease ring is handy, but an arc of the bullet's impact is good, too.

You don't have to have both.

[pjb45]

I have seen too many RO rely solely on the greese mark. I think this is unfortunate.

We have had some serious discussion about partial and full hits on hard cover that proceed to the targets. Our club uses a lot of plastic barrels so a full hit through the barrel onto the target gets a miss. A partial hit on the barrel and onto the target gets a hit. (I think the barrels came from a car wash, so it scrubs the bullet of the greese)

When I am RO and the barrel hard cover hit happens I usually paint the hole(s). It make it pretty clear for the next shooter if the is a full or partial hit.

At SSN this year on the stage with the popper and two drop turners, one of the M class shooters, blasted the wood which created a huge gash in the target (sideways presentation to the shooter), he did not get the hit.

[ima45dv8]

One of our local matches has a standing rule -- barrels are barrels and are not considered hard cover.

Even so, I've seen large holes on targets that seem to have been made by bullets that went sideways inside the barrel, tore out a large chuck of plastic, and ripped a half dollar-sized hole through the target. The bullet didn't touch the target, but the big piece of plastic in front of it did.

Absent any evidence of a grease ring or the arc of a bullet impact, it gets scored a Mike.