Jesse Tischauser Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 (edited) I have used video evidence multiple times in matches. Why not really? It takes less time to peak at the camera than for them to pick me up off tbe ground and get me to stop kicking and screaming. Sounds like its time for another thread on video review. Edited November 19, 2011 by Jesse Tischauser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.E. Kelley Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 I am not opposed to video review, just would like it to be used only when truly called for. With $$$ now on the line things could get messy. Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stlhead Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 (edited) I am so excited that we no longer need RO's. Now that we can rely on video review to determine the winners it will be so cool. Reviewing every run to look for possible foot faults, analyzing every run from multiple angles to be sure that every detail has been scrutinized. Matches will move so much faster! Edited November 20, 2011 by Stlhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Tischauser Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 (edited) I am so excited that we no longer need RO's. Now that we can rely on video review to determine the winners it will be so cool. Reviewing every run to look for possible foot faults, analyzing every run from multiple angles to be sure that every detail has beef scrutinized. Matches will move so much faster! Yeah I want a fast match. I could care less that we have the incorrect winner. I just want to get it over with as fast as possible. Edited November 19, 2011 by Jesse Tischauser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 One if the issues surrounding officiating with video is fairness and consistency. Tell me how that can be accomplished for the rank and file shooter and I would be interested, otherwise, no thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Tischauser Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 (edited) One if the issues surrounding officiating with video is fairness and consistency. Tell me how that can be accomplished for the rank and file shooter and I would be interested, otherwise, no thanks. You mean its not fair for one guy to get the correct call because he brought his camera along but not fair to the guy that doesn't have one? I am not sure what is fair or unfair about making the right call no matter how it gets made. When I RO a stage and I make a mistake I don't care if a talking bear walks out of the woods and tells me "hey jesse his foot wasn't on the foot fault" or if I get to see it on somebodys handycam. If its a relaible source why not take the information and use it. p.s. a talking bear would be a very reliable source IMHO unless it was just some lost bear from a psychedelic Furry Party Edited November 19, 2011 by Jesse Tischauser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbmd Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Simple fix for the shootoffs, everything falls down. Plate racks for rifle, clays and poppers for shotgun and poppers or plate rack for handgun if it ain't down you don't win......use the KISS principle. Just want a simple life, Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Sierpina Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Simple fix for the shootoffs, everything falls down. Plate racks for rifle, clays and poppers for shotgun and poppers or plate rack for handgun if it ain't down you don't win......use the KISS principle. Just want a simple life, Larry Larry, That makes too much sense. The only target that would matter would be the final popper, winner's side is on the bottom, if all other targets are down. The issue then would be clays launched by a popper. Also, no stationary clays with the "one pellet hole" in them. The clays must be broken, or eliminated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Tischauser Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Simple fix for the shootoffs, everything falls down. Plate racks for rifle, clays and poppers for shotgun and poppers or plate rack for handgun if it ain't down you don't win......use the KISS principle. Just want a simple life, Larry Larry, That makes too much sense. The only target that would matter would be the final popper, winner's side is on the bottom, if all other targets are down. The issue then would be clays launched by a popper. Also, no stationary clays with the "one pellet hole" in them. The clays must be broken, or eliminated. What if a chip of the clay stays on the stand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack T Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 (edited) +1 for falling steel/plate racks. Utilize a system similar to the Steel Challenge for the main match: Top shooters will squad together with a senior official to accompany each squad to observe and make decisions as necessary. Nothing like peer pressure to keep everything above board and prevent the negative controversy we have had in the past. Too much at stake these days and the negative controversy/accusations have got to stop. Edited November 19, 2011 by Jack T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan 45 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I think Larry hit the railroad spike on the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
springy Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I have used video evidence multiple times in matches. Why not really? It takes less time to peak at the camera than for them to pick me up off tbe ground and get me to stop kicking and screaming. :roflol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokshwn Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I have used video evidence multiple times in matches. Why not really? It takes less time to peak at the camera than for them to pick me up off tbe ground and get me to stop kicking and screaming. Sounds like its time for another thread on video review. Why not? because the angle can never really be assured to make the correct call. There have been countless "you make the call " threads and they generally result in the same conclusion, depending on the angle the call can be argued either way....ergo what does it gain you other than just a different argument. The shootoffs with consistent camera angles and fixed targets are a different story, but sure as frozen snot is slick, allow video review and the 3GN production crew will have to elbow four "camera buddies" out of the way anytime they want to film a stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outerlimits Posted November 20, 2011 Author Share Posted November 20, 2011 Lets face it-the shoot offs are boring unless yer in them. Lemme design the shoot-off course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stlhead Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 (edited) This whole thing is a giant goat rodeo. Whoever was officiating the original shoot off may have made a mistake, I don't know, I was not there, and honestly I don't even care. But now that we have had an internet hubaloo and are talking about video review. After some careful thought I have changed my opinion on the use of video review. I say that all of the 3 gun nation shoot offs should be subject to intense video review. No matter how much it costs, or how long it takes what matters most is that the winner of each of the shoot offs is actualy the winner. The TV viewing public deserve only the finest in sports entertainment. Just don't mess up the actual matches that I enjoy shooting, muck up the circus side show any way you like. Jessie, I do care how long it takes to play the 3 gun game. Time is the most valuable commodity we have, and it would be tough for many of us to go to big matches if we had to give up 2 weeks to shoot them. Edited November 20, 2011 by Stlhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lead-Head Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 There were several times that afternoon when it took more than one round on those falling targets to make them fall. Looked like good hits to me, but sometimes the thing would decide to drop, sometimes if would require some stacking. How is this fair to anyone? It is not. In these types of events, it would seem calibration should be without question. If you agree that one good hit on target should make it fall in order for the shootoffs to be fair, then I would submit that Horner got screwed as much as anybody in this deal. I understand that the instructions were "all steel must fall" but saying that with no expectation of consistency for how many rounds that will take makes it more of a stake shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Tischauser Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Everythime I have had video evidence that a plate was engaged or a hit wasn't called the video was never even reviewed by an RO or MD. Hearing thatvtherexwas visual evidence on both occasions was enough to give me or the squad mate that was shooting the 5 or 10 seconds back based of my or the shooters word. It's really a matter of trust, ethics, and honor just like Daniel stepping down in the shoot off. If someone or something (video) observed something that was or wasn't called in error then I hope all of us at honorable to make, change, and accept the right call no matter how it arrived at. Heck sometimes it's as simple as a scorekeeper righting the wrong penalty or bonus down because they got distracted. If its in video that the targets are all hit why give a shooter the wrong score? It takes no time for the RO or scorekeeper to review it between squads it during reset. Or the MD or RM can look at over a beer in the evening. It's not the NFL you don't have TO go to commercial and look under the hood for 10 minutes. Now the shoot offs are a different story. If a hit is questionable and $50,000 is in the line I don't care if it takes an extra day to get it right and they gotta call NASA for satellite photos. It's gotta be right, period!!! The one time that the RO's, MD's or RM's didn't trust me, the squad behind mine and wouldn't look at video evidene it cost me a DQ, $500 plus and anyone waiting to shoot the stage about 20 minutes of waiting to DQ me even though there were multiple accounts that I didn't shoot a round over a berm like The RO and CRO thought I might have. Oh and as I'm sure you guessed by now that this was at a USPSA pistol match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtm Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I really told myself I would stay out of this whole thing, but the hypocracy of it all is just tooooooo much for me not to join in!! "I think Larry hit the railroad spike on the head." Yeah??? and maybe around 10 years too late? This is the funny part, do his matches meet that criteria? does anyones any longer? Skinny spring loaded poppers DON'T fall down, Flash targets don't fall down, Strobe targets with the cables intack t or cut don't fall down, and yet all the folks here are saying that "in a shoot off" all targets should fall. If it is only for a 6 pack between friends it should all fall down. There is NEVER any question that it is down or not. You don't need anyone to rightly or wrongly call any hit. Everything should fall and there should NEVER be any target that can't be arbitrated, but in reading all these posts it seem that it is OK to be hosed in a lowly match, like the Nationals, Ozark, FNH, but it is "terrible" to get it at a shoot off The things I have gleened from watching my "fellow" shooters argue about this is that the "self-resetting" steel used reset so fast that if you ran through your array and came back to double check if you got them all, there was NO WAY to tell if you had or not because it was already re-set. Tommy shot a hell of a match in the 4 stage match and was one of the top 16, to say he could or couldn't really disparages his skill. To say Horner KNOWINGLY lost would be just as wrong. R.O.s are people and falible. The guy calling the win, if he wasn't watching Horners target closely and ONLY would never have known that he did/didn't hit them all because in the end it all wasn't laying on the ground. This has been a soap box subject for Trapr and I for going on 8 years, and we are told It can't be done. We can't put quick Limie behind target for visibility like we used to do back in the late 90s and early 2000s, we can't paint targets for every shooter, it would take too long to reset....etc. and then we whine when these criteria aren't met for a shoot off. Oh the humanity! and yet over seas that is exactly what happens for 200-300 shooters at a time, and it never runs late and ALL fo it falls or is taped even out to 350 Meters. Kurt Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling White Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Money and sponsorship are the two greatest influences which can change a sport and the people within the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan 45 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Kurt, you're right, it's about 10 years late, but better late than never! Maybe this is just the type of event that makes the little light bulb go on in some heads. It took Trapr all of about 10 minutes to mention in the thread that got locked that falling targets (which don't automatically reset) would have prevented this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling White Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 (edited) Should a hit an inch or two above the bottom plate cause it to go over? Where do we draw the line on calibration? edited to include: Is this range failure subject to arbitration? Edited November 20, 2011 by Sterling White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Sierpina Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Should a hit an inch or two above the bottom plate cause it to go over? Where do we draw the line on calibration? edited to include: Is this range failure subject to arbitration? There are normaly calibration dimensions on targets in matches. A hit on a Pepper Popper just above the hinge with a 9MM doesn't get a reshoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outerlimits Posted November 21, 2011 Author Share Posted November 21, 2011 Can't calibrate a larue or a recon target. Two years ago in vegas, we all learned from uspsa that they are considered plates, therefore, no calibration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Sierpina Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Can't calibrate a larue or a recon target. Two years ago in vegas, we all learned from uspsa that they are considered plates, therefore, no calibration. Thank you. I'm not familiar with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 That USPSA considers them "plates" has no bearing. Of course they can be calibrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts