REF... When shooting a popper?

[Schutzenmeister]

The shooter failed to activate the mechanism which initiates target movement. (9.9.3) His only hope is to win the calibration challenge on the popper.

For a twist...

Instead of a swinger, have it be a non-moving, appearing target (activator opens a port).

Uhhh ... Sorry. Maybe I'm dense. What's the question? (Seriously ... It's late. I'm not sure what you're getting at.)

[Ben Stoeger]

For an interesting and related question.. under this rule :

9.9.4 Level I matches only - If the written stage briefing prohibits the

engagement of certain targets prior to activation, the competitor will

incur one procedural penalty per shot fired at such targets prior to operating

the activating mechanism, up to the maximum number of available

hits (see Rule 2.1.8.5.1).

If I shoot the activating popper for a swinger, then shoot the head of the swinger I can see from around the wall, prior to it beginning to move (but after shooting the popper).. would you penalize me?

[ima45dv8]

Instead of a swinger, have it be a non-moving, appearing target (activator opens a port).

(OK folks. This is bait. There's a hook in it, and that hook has a barb. He's very tricky like that. )

Just to set the stage...

Shooter has a popper that opens a port, behind which is a static target that appears only if the port is opened, shoots the popper and it doesn't fall/doesn't open the port.

I'm thinking that if the competitor won a challenge on the popper, reshoot. If not, 2Mikes + 1FTE.

Edited August 5, 2011 by ima45dv8

[Nik Habicht]

I am not really curious about the popper its self. I am asking if one could call REF for the prop ATTACHED to the popper not functioning when the popper is struck with a bullet. There is no calibration procedure for a swinger.

Depends. What has to happen for the swinger to be activated? Is there a vibration sensing switch that electronically activates the popper? If so, I could see 4.6.1.

If however the swinger is activated by the popper falling, then I'd argue we're back to following Appendix C1 -- and the competitor needs to live with the result. That said, I'll drive an activating popper down, rather than run the risk.....

[scooterj]

The shooter failed to activate the mechanism which initiates target movement. (9.9.3) His only hope is to win the calibration challenge on the popper.

For a twist...

Instead of a swinger, have it be a non-moving, appearing target (activator opens a port).

What equipment failed in the OP? None. The popper is just that, a popper. It's falling triggers something else. If the shooter doesn't ask for calibration, the stage must be scored with applicable "mikes" and "FTE's". If it doesn't fall when checked--reshoot.

[Schutzenmeister]

For an interesting and related question.. under this rule :

9.9.4 Level I matches only - If the written stage briefing prohibits the

engagement of certain targets prior to activation, the competitor will

incur one procedural penalty per shot fired at such targets prior to operating

the activating mechanism, up to the maximum number of available

hits (see Rule 2.1.8.5.1).

If I shoot the activating popper for a swinger, then shoot the head of the swinger I can see from around the wall, prior to it beginning to move (but after shooting the popper).. would you penalize me?

That's the folly in the Level I exemption ... You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't!

Assuming the popper fell and you just beat it to the mover, no way I'd issue a penalty. However, if the popper does not fall, then you've fired shots at the activated target WITHOUT operating the activating mechanisim ... I think I'd have to issue the appropriate penalties.

You should't HAVE to wait for the darned popper to fall if the target is plainly visible ... You're wasting valuable time ... But if it dosen't fall, well, you've run afoul of the letter of the rule.

It's better to ACTUALLY HIDE the mover prior to activation in order to avoid the problem in the first place!

[Nik Habicht]

For an interesting and related question.. under this rule :

9.9.4 Level I matches only - If the written stage briefing prohibits the

engagement of certain targets prior to activation, the competitor will

incur one procedural penalty per shot fired at such targets prior to operating

the activating mechanism, up to the maximum number of available

hits (see Rule 2.1.8.5.1).

If I shoot the activating popper for a swinger, then shoot the head of the swinger I can see from around the wall, prior to it beginning to move (but after shooting the popper).. would you penalize me?

Depends on whether or not the popper falls.....

If it falls, and you nail the swinger before it moves, I'm good with that. If however the steel is not standing, then I'd have to call procedurals.....

This could be why I hide my moving targets in stages I design and build, regardless of match level. Avoids this problem....

[Ben Stoeger]

So.. you would feel that it is activated at the moment the bullet strikes the popper, but if the popper is hit and then does not fall, you would retroactively decide that it wasnt activated?

[ihatepickles]

I think the angle here is that you can argue an REF much easier than you can a calibrate challenge.

I've lost 5 calibrates and won 2. Gambling on the calibrate seems to go against the shooter more often than is probably fair (a different debate, I'm sure).

To the original question, a popper operating a prop, I think it's inadvertent bad stage design. Stages that require an RO to interpret the precedence of rules are bad design. I think this "rules tie" should go to the shooter. There's no clear answer as to whether the REF or popper calibration is the trump card. In other words, I think both rules apply and both are valid.

[spanky]

Instead of a swinger, have it be a non-moving, appearing target (activator opens a port).

(OK folks. This is bait. There's a hook in it, and that hook has a barb. He's very tricky like that. )

Just to set the stage...

Shooter has a popper that opens a port, behind which is a static target that appears only if the port is opened, shoots the popper and it doesn't fall/doesn't open the port.

I'm thinking that if the competitor won a challenge on the popper, reshoot. If not, 2Mikes + 1FTE.

I agree.

How about this one? Shooter hits the popper and the swinger activates but the popper does not fall?

[Corey]

If the popper is struck and falls but fails to open said port, then itd be an REF and a reshoot. If the popper doesnt fall, thats the shooter's fault. Shoot it again, shoot it in a better spot, use a higher PF ammo ro call for a calibration and hope your Karma is up to par . If it comes to be that the popper is indeed out of calibration then a reshoot is in order.

[Nik Habicht]

So.. you would feel that it is activated at the moment the bullet strikes the popper, but if the popper is hit and then does not fall, you would retroactively decide that it wasnt activated?

No. I'd argue that if the popper falls, you've made a good faith attempt to activate the swinger. I don't see a reason to penalize a great shooter for being able to outrun a mechanical activation mechanism.....

I do see your point about the lack of congruence -- which is why I hide my moving and don't take the level 1 exemption. Sometimes I'm evil and leave a portion of a head visible, or a sliver of C/D, and don't take the exemption -- effectively giving shooters a choice in difficulty or scoring tradeoff....

[lcs]

So.. you would feel that it is activated at the moment the bullet strikes the popper, but if the popper is hit and then does not fall, you would retroactively decide that it wasnt activated?

Nope----"Bullet striking the popper is NOT activating the popper" Bullet striking the popper AND the popper falls is activating....

[lcs]

Instead of a swinger, have it be a non-moving, appearing target (activator opens a port).

(OK folks. This is bait. There's a hook in it, and that hook has a barb. He's very tricky like that. )

Just to set the stage...

Shooter has a popper that opens a port, behind which is a static target that appears only if the port is opened, shoots the popper and it doesn't fall/doesn't open the port.

I'm thinking that if the competitor won a challenge on the popper, reshoot. If not, 2Mikes + 1FTE.

I agree.

How about this one? Shooter hits the popper and the swinger activates but the popper does not fall?

REF

[kevin c]

I have seen REF called...at the Nationals...for poppers not falling when hit.

Was the shooter stopped, or was the REF issued after the shooter otherwise completed the COF?

[Ben Stoeger]

If the popper doesnt fall, thats the shooter's fault.

I don't really think I could possibly disagree more. I have seen more people get boned by poppers not falling to a "good" hit than I care to remember. I wish something could be done about the rule set we have now.

[Ben Stoeger]

So.. you would feel that it is activated at the moment the bullet strikes the popper, but if the popper is hit and then does not fall, you would retroactively decide that it wasnt activated?

Nope----"Bullet striking the popper is NOT activating the popper" Bullet striking the popper AND the popper falls is activating....

So, in regards to the level one exemption I have above, you feel it is appropriate to issue penalties for shooting at a moving target after shooting the activating popper, but before said popper falls?

[Corey]

If the popper doesnt fall, thats the shooter's fault.

I don't really think I could possibly disagree more. I have seen more people get boned by poppers not falling to a "good" hit than I care to remember. I wish something could be done about the rule set we have now.

You took it a bit out of context. A shooter can choose to leave a popper standing if they think they hit it solid enough and then call the RM for a calibration. They win, they get a reshoot. They don't, they get the Mike. Either way, its the shooters call whether to shoot it again or leave it go and risk it.

Now if they are set properly, this should be a non-issue.

[BayouSlide]

I have seen REF called...at the Nationals...for poppers not falling when hit.

Would make me wonder if the RO who called REF in that case also could intuit whether the shooter's ammunition was actually making PF without benefit of a chrono.

Curtis

[Ben Stoeger]

If the popper doesnt fall, thats the shooter's fault.

I don't really think I could possibly disagree more. I have seen more people get boned by poppers not falling to a "good" hit than I care to remember. I wish something could be done about the rule set we have now.

You took it a bit out of context. A shooter can choose to leave a popper standing if they think they hit it solid enough and then call the RM for a calibration. They win, they get a reshoot. They don't, they get the Mike. Either way, its the shooters call whether to shoot it again or leave it go and risk it.

Now if they are set properly, this should be a non-issue.

Having it be the shooters decision on what to do is one thing, assigning blame to the shooter is something else. Even properly set poppers can cause problems when they sink into mud,etc. It isn't the ROs fault, it isn’t the shooters fault, but it is a bad deal.

I don't really know what you meant.. but I think the context of your post was pretty clear. It is the shooters responsibility to knock down the popper or accept that they could lose a calibration challenge. I think that point of view is well within the rules but is contrary to my sense of fundamental fairness.

[Flexmoney]

If the popper doesnt fall, thats the shooter's fault.

I don't really think I could possibly disagree more. I have seen more people get boned by poppers not falling to a "good" hit than I care to remember. I wish something could be done about the rule set we have now.

I see your point.

There are some poppers out there that are...kinda crappy.

[edit to add]

I've had steel that I've worked with at Major matches that needed to be "managed" to have it work properly. I've seen it at other matches.

I can see a good argument against that steel being "fair".

[Flexmoney]

I have seen REF called...at the Nationals...for poppers not falling when hit.

Would make me wonder if the RO who called REF in that case also could intuit whether the shooter's ammunition was actually making PF without benefit of a chrono.

Curtis

The RO, the CRO, the RM, likely the other RM, the MD...dozens of GM's and a crowd of watchers... (just to point out that it did not happen in a vacuum, with one RO)

FWIW...the squad had been through Chrono, and I have good faith that they weren't using cheater ammo.)

[Nik Habicht]

Even properly set poppers can cause problems when they sink into mud,etc.

If they're sinking in the mud, they weren't set properly to begin with. If you deal with soft ground, regularly, at club matches, your life will get easier with solid plywood bases....

It is the shooters responsibility to knock down the popper or accept that they could lose a calibration challenge. I think that point of view is well within the rules but is contrary to my sense of fundamental fairness.

While I'm as fond of "fundamental fairness" as the next guy, my sense of it probably differs from yours -- which is why we have rules. I'm certain that I disagree with a number of them (and I'm probably close to your opinion, as I don't love poppers as activators) but probably not in the same way as everyone else....

So, the rules purpose, is essentially to define the playing field -- if this happens, that will be the consequence.....

So, with the current ruleset, drive that sucker down....

[Ben Stoeger]

Even properly set poppers can cause problems when they sink into mud,etc.

If they're sinking in the mud, they weren't set properly to begin with. If you deal with soft ground, regularly, at club matches, your life will get easier with solid plywood bases....

It is the shooters responsibility to knock down the popper or accept that they could lose a calibration challenge. I think that point of view is well within the rules but is contrary to my sense of fundamental fairness.

While I'm as fond of "fundamental fairness" as the next guy, my sense of it probably differs from yours -- which is why we have rules. I'm certain that I disagree with a number of them (and I'm probably close to your opinion, as I don't love poppers as activators) but probably not in the same way as everyone else....

So, the rules purpose, is essentially to define the playing field -- if this happens, that will be the consequence.....

So, with the current ruleset, drive that sucker down....

I don't disagree on any particular point. We codify fundamental fairness in our rules. I am just bummed to see that the rules on pepper poppers are a complete failure.

[BayouSlide]

I have seen REF called...at the Nationals...for poppers not falling when hit.

Would make me wonder if the RO who called REF in that case also could intuit whether the shooter's ammunition was actually making PF without benefit of a chrono.

Curtis

The RO, the CRO, the RM, likely the other RM, the MD...dozens of GM's and a crowd of watchers... (just to point out that it did not happen in a vacuum, with one RO)

FWIW...the squad had been through Chrono, and I have good faith that they weren't using cheater ammo.)

Even though someone's ammo has met declared power factor at chrono, doesn't eliminate the possibility of a weakly loaded round failing to drop a steel, hence the need for calibration per the rulebook to decide the issue...I do have problems with RO calls that go outside the rules, no matter who is making the call, no matter what their level of certification or how many people agree. I'm funny like that

Curtis

Edited: 'cause I hate tipos typos!

Edited August 6, 2011 by BayouSlide