I'm missing something here . . .

[Whoops!]

Many would argue the gap in the left is also intentional, or else the area between the wall beams on both sides would have been filled in, since it is so easy to do.

You are exactly right in that it doesn't make any sense for the target to be so readily available and completely presented, unless it is able to be shot. I don't know if others were shooting it the same way or not.

Common sense does come into play here, if a target is meant to be hard covered, cover it.

All walls are naturally built from the ground to the height as constructed, as I've never seen one suspended from the sky. If a wall has a hole, don't put a wide open target in the hole and then say it can't be shot because hard cover is in the way, it's just dumb.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Whoops!

[kevin c]

My understanding and observation is that many "walls" in the sport are built the way they are with convenience, ease, speed and expense of construction and break down all in mind, and the result is a "partial wall" with a gap at the bottom. The most common example is running four foot wide snow fence between posts, saving essentially half the material used by just running one width "to the height constructed" and defining it as going to the ground, even though it doesn't.

The rules explicitly allow this. If you are really that concerned about what you see as a significant issue, perhaps a more effective venue for change is to take it up with your AC to see if he thinks it is worth addressing with NROI. Or you could take it up with NROI directly.