Calling Doubles

[beltjones]

I think there is evidence in this thread that suggests that the people calling for doubles and arguing against FTEs aren't aware that others notice them doing so.

[OUshooter]

If things are just right and a shooter is running MG bullets is sometimes possible to see the shots like tracers. If the score keeper witnessed this phenomenon would it not be 2 hits? Targets are considered impenetrable so either shot should count for score or penalty?

[sfinney]

Scoring is not done by visual recollection of shots in flight. Its hits on paper. The r.o. or scorekeeper is not supposed to be looking for hits, but rather running the shooter and keeping him safe,

Edited August 20, 2013 by sfinney

[beltjones]

I wonder if the people calling for others to be DQed for challenging an RO on things like doubles and FTEs would be so keen on getting DQed themselves for the same things? Or is it one rule for them and another for everyone else? Because after sleeping on it I've really lost some respect for some people here.

[sfinney]

Hey, near doubles happen. If an overlay or second grease ring suggests two hits, then benefit of doubt to shooter. No harm in asking if you really think you have a second hit there.

I think what is over the top and being abused is the notion that for some, ANYTIME they have a miss, its routine to ask for the "double" to be ruled on, regardless of whether there is any visual evidence at all to suggest two hits, at first inspection.

But again, if its that close, and you are so good you really are putting them through one hole...... and there's no second grease mark, etc ...... Alpha Mike.

[Seth]

If you have the skill to shoot a double, you have the skill to move them apart a little to make it easier to score. A perfect double is damn near impossible.

[beltjones]

Hey, near doubles happen. If an overlay or second grease ring suggests two hits, then benefit of doubt to shooter. No harm in asking if you really think you have a second hit there.

I think what is over the top and being abused is the notion that for some, ANYTIME they have a miss, its routine to ask for the "double" to be ruled on, regardless of whether there is any visual evidence at all to suggest two hits, at first inspection.

But again, if its that close, and you are so good you really are putting them through one hole...... and there's no second grease mark, etc ...... Alpha Mike.

Exactly. Sometimes shots land on top of each other. As an RO is your job to use overlays and look for evidence of two bullets passing through the same hole.

However, there are people here calling for others to be DQed for arguing for doubles and against FTEs who have done the same things themselves.

[Ben Stoeger]

I think near doubles happen, questionable calls happen, etc.

When you see the same person having issue after issue after issue match in and match out, then you can probably infer that there is something funky going on with that person.

[Yagi]

i've had two separate nationals that had near perfect doubles... but then again target where close 5-10 yards...now i see why i shoot slow...lol...

[motosapiens]

I wonder if the people calling for others to be DQed for challenging an RO on things like doubles and FTEs would be so keen on getting DQed themselves for the same things? Or is it one rule for them and another for everyone else? Because after sleeping on it I've really lost some respect for some people here.

Only 1 person suggested that, so maybe you should use the singular 'person'.

I think it would be tough to dq someone for that, but people that do it frequently (and run into the RO's frequently, and frequently argue other calls) imho deserve to be publicly mocked until the realize that everyone has noticed their whininess.

[EkuJustice]

I think when it gets hard to score them is in something like can you count where you have 5 shots at close range. That said a true double is extremely rare and is gonna end in a mike. I have had some that were very close but 2 grease rings were there

[Chuck Anderson]

I've had and seen several perfect/near perfect doubles. The majority at GSSF where you're putting 6 rounds into the target at 5 yards. But I've seen more than once where as I'm watching the target, one hole appears then another bullet passes through. When you watch it you can definitely see the hole move.

I've also seen dozens of, almost doubles. In most cases you can easily see the double if you look closely. Someone 5-10 feet away may not see it but the RO can. I can see where someone looking over the RO's shoulder from a ways away might not see it. I had one about a week ago. 20 yard target on a standards course. Called my shots and went down and there were only three instead of four holes. One of them was a bit oblong and there was a slight reduction where the hole came back in and started another circle. Told the RO, he called it a miss, had the target pulled and the RM saw the same thing I did. I did not point it out to him since I was running another shooter, just let him make the call. I had my four hits on the target but I can see how someone wouldn't have seen it without taking a really, really close look at the target.

I also had a shooter on the same stage claim a double and I worked my butt off to find it. Just wasn't there. Called it a miss. But he was one of those guys that had four tight alphas on every other target. He was a little fuzzed up but as soon as we got back another shooter told him he saw him pull off to the right.

Not saying people don't get hits they didn't earn. I'm sure it happens often.

As far as the argument, if you're good enough to shoot a double spread them out? I'm sorry, but that's just a smart ass response to a legitimate concern. No one shoots hoping to get a perfect double. I put the sights roughly where I want them, pull the trigger and repeat. It's just dumb luck that some of them end up touching or through the same hole. Certainly not an attempt to thread the already shot round. It's also the reason I'm not surprised when a shooter ends up with doubles on swingers or drop turners. I'm skeptical, but I've seen it happen. Figure USPSA shooters alone easily put a million rounds through the A zone a year (and I'm sure that's way, way low). Odds are some are gonna be close.

[Nik Habicht]

Hey, near doubles happen. If an overlay or second grease ring suggests two hits, then benefit of doubt to shooter. No harm in asking if you really think you have a second hit there.

I think what is over the top and being abused is the notion that for some, ANYTIME they have a miss, its routine to ask for the "double" to be ruled on, regardless of whether there is any visual evidence at all to suggest two hits, at first inspection.

But again, if its that close, and you are so good you really are putting them through one hole...... and there's no second grease mark, etc ...... Alpha Mike.

I've been through the RO course a few times, so yep, anytime there's only one apparent hole in a target, I'll ask for an overlay, especially if the target is close.....

If it's a target I called a miss on already, or one where I think it's likely I missed, I won't.....

Give me attitude about it, and I'll ask for the target to be pulled every time, so that a cooler head (RM) can verify the appropriate score.....

I'm entitled to exactly the score I shot on each target; to not make a best possible effort to determine that cheats every competitor in the division. I don't think most ROs start their day by planning to "phone it in....."

[Jukez]

I maybe see 1 or 2 a match.. sometimes I don't see any at all. But there are 6-7 other squads going though so who knows.

[hermans]

Many years ago being an IPSC RO and having many doubles called in each match, I decided to tell the detail that if anyone calls a double and I have seen him miss the target, I would DQ him for the stage as being "unsportsman like".......well that was the last of the double calling business!

In fact, as an RO you never watch the targets, you watch the pistol and the shooter....but mostly shooters do not want to take that chance?

[Gary Stevens]

What is this Alpha/Mike crap?

I shoot perfect doubles all the time and they are scored Bravo/Mike, Charlie/Mike, and sometimes Delta/Mike.

Am I getting improperly scored?

[GuildSF4]

What is this Alpha/Mike crap?

I shoot perfect doubles all the time and they are scored Bravo/Mike, Charlie/Mike, and sometimes Delta/Mike.

Am I getting improperly scored?

Yes, you should at least be getting Alpha/Mike

[spanky]

if you are good enough to put two bullets in one hole, you are good enough to spread em out abit. Seen too many people cry double every single time they miss.

So people should take extra time to aim away from their previous shot in order to consciously prevent a potential double?

[Chuck Anderson]

What is this Alpha/Mike crap?

I shoot perfect doubles all the time and they are scored Bravo/Mike, Charlie/Mike, and sometimes Delta/Mike.

Am I getting improperly scored?

Gary. I've seen you shoot. Delta/Mike sounds about right.

[Gary Stevens]

What is this Alpha/Mike crap?

I shoot perfect doubles all the time and they are scored Bravo/Mike, Charlie/Mike, and sometimes Delta/Mike.

Am I getting improperly scored?

Gary. I've seen you shoot. Delta/Mike sounds about right.

Thanks Chuck. At least now I know the score was accurate

[Cd662]

"Many years ago being an IPSC RO and having many doubles called in each match, I decided to tell the detail that if anyone calls a double and I have seen him miss the target, I would DQ him for the stage as being "unsportsman like".......well that was the last of the double calling business!

In fact, as an RO you never watch the targets, you watch the pistol and the shooter....but mostly shooters do not want to take that chance?"

So you are eager to asses a subjective penalty to discourage a competitor request that is supported by the IPSC rulebook? Can you prove that a competitor knows he missed and is trying to "cheat the system?" I can't stand this "insert our assumptions here" officiating, it's entirely unwarranted. Section 9.6 of the current IPSC rulebook supports the ability of a competitor to challenge a call. If you're saying you're threatening to DQ people for humor's sake, it's not funny. If you're actually doing it, you should have your Range Officer status revoked.

[blaster113]

Not saying we have a bunch of GMs in our little local club but it seems that the last few weeks I've been seeing more than a few targets with two shots in the same hole when R/Oing. The targets were all 10yds and in, Open and Limited shooters. Most of them were quite obvious doubles; not in the same hole though. All the doubles I've called had evidence of two grease marks, etc. if not its Alpha/Mike.... maybe we're all shooting too damn slow haha

[JakeMartens]

I havee only once seen a perfect double

Shooters ulsc, ro goes and scores the targets, pauses at one for a moment, calls back 2 alpha, and moves on

The shooter comes back and says "did he call that 2 alpha? You know I only....."

And I cut him off and reply "shot at the target once, yes I know..."

[Jasonub]

I only had a perfect double once in 15 years of shooting. I setup a target 12 meters away to check my zero.

I then benched the gun and shot a round then shot another. Both were perfect shots but I was surprised that I could not see another hole

My buddy and I checked the board and there was no other hole. The first hole was a perfect circle and unless I shot a blank there is no way I could have missed a full board using a benched gun seated.

We were both astounded.

The third shot was on the same hole but it made the hole a little larger.

Yup my pistol was zeroed

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[jrb06]

If you want to get technical about it at what point do we call it a double? When the holes touch? When they are x mm or .ooo inches away? Maybe we need to think of it as two hits or one hit. If you want you can call any two hits on the target a double, after all we use the term double tap to describe two quick shots.

This statement is intended to be somewhat sarcastic but also something to think about.