texas star question

[JAFO]

Negative, ghostrider.

Any hit on the plate, anywhere, and it doesn't fall, it's a reshoot. Doesn't have to be a full diameter, or hit the circle. 4.3.1.5 and 4.3.1.6 make no mention of any part of a plate--they cover either the entire plate, or the support apparatus. The "neck" is part of the plate, therefore if it's struck by any part of a bullet and doesn't fall, it's a REF reshoot.

Outlaw matches are not relevant to this forum. Nothing against them, but it's of no help to mention what would happen there--not using USPSA rules takes them out of these discussions.

Troy

Troy,

We had a question about hits on the stem of a star plate submitted to John Amidon by one of our members earlier this month. John's reply stated that the stem is considered part of the supporting apparatus, not part of the plate, and he quoted 4.3.1.5 as the relevant rule.

Perhaps we could get a clarification of which is correct?

[ChuckS]

Negative, ghostrider.

Any hit on the plate, anywhere, and it doesn't fall, it's a reshoot. Doesn't have to be a full diameter, or hit the circle. 4.3.1.5 and 4.3.1.6 make no mention of any part of a plate--they cover either the entire plate, or the support apparatus. The "neck" is part of the plate, therefore if it's struck by any part of a bullet and doesn't fall, it's a REF reshoot.

Outlaw matches are not relevant to this forum. Nothing against them, but it's of no help to mention what would happen there--not using USPSA rules takes them out of these discussions.

Troy

Troy,

We had a question about hits on the stem of a star plate submitted to John Amidon by one of our members earlier this month. John's reply stated that the stem is considered part of the supporting apparatus, not part of the plate, and he quoted 4.3.1.5 as the relevant rule.

Perhaps we could get a clarification of which is correct?

Interesting. So, if you get a hit on the "stem" and the plate falls, that is REF and you get a mandatory re-shoot. (4.3.1.5)

Later,

Chuck

[Bunchies95]

Here is the question and response that JAFO brought up:

John,

Appendix B5 clearly defines the shapes and sizes metal plates can be (Round or rectangular). On target arrays such as a Texas Star or Polish Plate rack, it is necessary to have a stem on the plate in order to attach to the moving mechanism. If a competitor strikes the stem of the plate, is this grounds for a REF under 4.3.1.6? I believe it should be, but I cannot justify it using the rule book as B5 and 4.3.1.6 are somewhat conflicting. The stem is clearly part of the falling portion of the plate, but not in the authorized shape of a plate.

Amidon's Response:

See rule 4.3.1.5 as the stem would be considered the supporting apparatus. Just striking the apparatus itself is not grounds for a reshoot unless the plate falls as a result.

John

Rules:

4.3.1.5 Scoring metal targets must be shot and fall or overturn to score. Scoring poppers which fail to fall when hit are subject to the provisions of Appendix C1, 6 & 7. Scoring metal targets which a Range Officer deems to have fallen or overturned due to a shot on the supporting apparatus or prematurely fallen or moved for any reason will be treated as range equipment failure. (See Rule 4.6.1). All Poppers shall follow the guidelines below:

1. That a minimum of 50% of the calibration zone be
available at some point in the COF.
2. That the calibration will be done from a point on the
COF where the calibration zone is available, closest to
where the contested shot was fired.

4.3.1.6 Unlike Poppers, metal plates are not subject to calibration or calibration challenges. If a scoring metal plate has been hit but fails to fall or overturn, the Range Officer shall declare range equipment failure and order the competitor to reshoot the course of fire, after the faulty plate has been rectified.

[Sarge]

Apparently there is "discussion" taking place currently among the RM Corps. I HAVE ALWAYS been taught that the stem is not part of the plate.

[ChuckS]

Apparently there is "discussion" taking place currently among the RM Corps. I HAVE ALWAYS been taught that the stem is not part of the plate.

Have you ever called a REF on a stem hit if the plate (and stem ) fall?

ETA: Oh crap, now we are going to have to get a 8" overlay...

Edited July 30, 2013 by ChuckS

[Sarge]

I have never personally made the call or had it made against me but I have seen shooters stropped more than once for hitting the stem and knocking a plate off.

I have also seen a shooter hit the stem and not knock the plate off, try to argue it and still get a MIKE called once the hit was found to be NOT inside the circle.

[Sarge]

Even though I used a star in our state match this year I never will again. They are unreliable, need a ton of maintenance, and they are hard to score because of stem hits.

[Sarge]

Apparently there is "discussion" taking place currently among the RM Corps. I HAVE ALWAYS been taught that the stem is not part of the plate.

Have you ever called a REF on a stem hit if the plate (and stem ) fall?

ETA: Oh crap, now we are going to have to get a 8" overlay...

Just hold up one of the plates from the star to use as a template.

[ChuckS]

Even though I used a star in our state match this year I never will again. They are unreliable, need a ton of maintenance, and they are hard to score because of stem hits.

As the kids say "this". Actually, the end of the arms could be designed to cover the stem and just expose the 8" plate. It may help since there would be less chance of dissipating energy by rocking forward. There will still be reliability and maintenance issues.

[ChuckS]

Apparently there is "discussion" taking place currently among the RM Corps. I HAVE ALWAYS been taught that the stem is not part of the plate.

Have you ever called a REF on a stem hit if the plate (and stem ) fall?

ETA: Oh crap, now we are going to have to get a 8" overlay...

Just hold up one of the plates from the star to use as a template.

Sorry, but it has to be an official NROI overlay. Keeping one of those in the wallet will be an issue...

[GuildSF4]

ETA: Oh crap, now we are going to have to get a 8" overlay...

Yeah try fitting that in your pocket.

Note on the stem, some designs cover the stem very effectively. Some others could be armored to prevent hitting the stem.

(Darn it you beat my post... )

Edited July 30, 2013 by GuildSF4

[Poppa Bear]

One of our guys just rebuilt our star. Heavier bolts, better bearings, proper spacers to stop end play. In short make it much more solid so that less shock can be transferred to the plates if the shooter hit the arm rather than the plate itself. They are great for a small match because they only need to survive 80 to 100 shooters at the most. They can then be checked over for for damaged nuts, bolts and springs. They are not a wise choice for something larger than that. It might survive, it might fail and get the entire stage thrown out.

[Nimitz]

Wow, there are going to be a lot of reshoots in our local matches in the futures ...

[Dragon11]

Despite the issue of whether its a reshoot or not, I have to admit that every match I have been to where a stage has a texas star, there always seems to be a back up of some sort on that stage. It seems to take two or three guys to put all the plates back on, if you want it done in a timely manner. I know you won't get the cool spinning effect, but you could make a stage equally challenging and interesting, in my opinion, if you just move poppers or fall over plates farther back, or put them in positions where they are harder shoot.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Dragon11

[remoandiris]

This "stem" business is strange to me. IMO, if it is designed to come off the star or stand when hit with a bullet, it is the plate. If it is not designed to come off the star or stand with hit with a bullet, it is the apparatus. Yes, IMO that includes a hit on the metal "lip" some plates have to prevent their turning sideways on the stand. If you hit the lip and the plate falls, it scores. But that is just me.

[sperman]

IMO, you can't say "this part of the plate is the target, and this part isn't." If you want to use that kind of logic, then you would have to rule that any plate used on a star that isn't round or square is an illegal target. I don't think we need to go there, but what Amidon said makes no sense.

I used to think Texas Stars were cool targets. Now I just think they are not worth the hassle. If administered properly, they would require lots of reshoots. At local matches, if all 5 plates end up on the ground, we don't seem to worry about how they got there. If we stopped every shooter who hit a plate and it didn't fall, or every shooter who had a plate knocked off by another plate, we would add over an hour to the match and create a huge backup on the stage that used the star.

[mpeltier]

So is the portion of a popper below the calibration zone considered its stem? Why is a low hit on a popper that falls ok but a stem hit on a star not? Seems like a goofy rule to me. I've seen hits pretty low on a popper fall it. Pretty sloppy shooting but its ok?

[Sarge]

So is the portion of a popper below the calibration zone considered its stem? Why is a low hit on a popper that falls ok but a stem hit on a star not? Seems like a goofy rule to me. I've seen hits pretty low on a popper fall it. Pretty sloppy shooting but its ok?

because all of a popper is a valid target.

Plates are supposed to be round and that round part is the target. To me it's the same as hanging a plate in a rope. If you hit the rope a foot above the plate and the plate falls that is not a hit

[Bunchies95]

So is the portion of a popper below the calibration zone considered its stem? Why is a low hit on a popper that falls ok but a stem hit on a star not? Seems like a goofy rule to me. I've seen hits pretty low on a popper fall it. Pretty sloppy shooting but its ok?

because all of a popper is a valid target.

Plates are supposed to be round and that round part is the target. To me it's the same as hanging a plate in a rope. If you hit the rope a foot above the plate and the plate falls that is not a hit

Hmmm....How can I make a stage utilizing these dangling plates?

[GuildSF4]

Hmmm....How can I make a stage utilizing these dangling plates?

Do you want them to fall when hit .

[mpeltier]

So is the portion of a popper below the calibration zone considered its stem? Why is a low hit on a popper that falls ok but a stem hit on a star not? Seems like a goofy rule to me. I've seen hits pretty low on a popper fall it. Pretty sloppy shooting but its ok?

because all of a popper is a valid target.

Plates are supposed to be round and that round part is the target. To me it's the same as hanging a plate in a rope. If you hit the rope a foot above the plate and the plate falls that is not a hit

Wouldn't the rope be more like the arm that holds the plate? Of course it would. The shape of the plate on a star should be looked at no differently than a popper in my opinion. Is the RO able to see each hit on a star to ensure a rule like that were enforced evenly and fairly? Hardly.

[Sarge]

No. The limb would be the arm. All you have to do is read the rule book regarding plates. They are round. The scorekeeper should be watching for the hits.

If you shoot two inches around a plate on a plate rack then you miss it. It's the same for plates on a star

[remoandiris]

IMO, you can't say "this part of the plate is the target, and that plate isn't."

+1.

[remoandiris]

No. The limb would be the arm. All you have to do is read the rule book regarding plates. They are round.

They can also be square or a rectangle, but I understand your point on star plates.

[mpeltier]

No. The limb would be the arm. All you have to do is read the rule book regarding plates. They are round. The scorekeeper should be watching for the hits.

If you shoot two inches around a plate on a plate rack then you miss it. It's the same for plates on a star

We will just have to settle on differing opinions. I'm not challenging something that's directly addressed in the rule book. I do not agree with Johns ruling that the plates shape in anyway can be considered part of the supporting apparatus. And we do agree on the difficulty of an RO monitoring the hits, by your own admission a few posts back you said so. Edited July 31, 2013 by mpeltier