Sarge Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OUshooter Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Was there a make up shot, or a mike? That would be a triple ouch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bikerburgess Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 yep 2x the fun there, I saw a wall at a Major "protected" with 3 overlapping classic targets that left one spot where you could get all 3 with one shot, I don't know if anybody did it but i saw one hit within 1/2" of it the first day. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitedog Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) What was the call? 2NS and a Mike? Edited October 29, 2013 by whitedog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 29, 2013 Author Share Posted October 29, 2013 What was the call? 2NS and a Mike? Yes. This was on a wall so a miss for sure. But if I recall they were overlapped in such a way that if they had been over a target you could have still gotten the hit. Thankfully not mine either! Just thought it was worthy of a snapshot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitedog Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Thanks sarge. Thought it was on a target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frag316 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Just a quick question--if that brown area in the photo had been a target, how would you say the shooter got a hit on it? From what I can see, the position of the hole would dictate "two no-shoot, mike (without a makeup shot, naturally)." The reason I say that is because, although one of the no-shoots shows the hole thru the non-scoring border of the top no-shoot, it overlaps the other no-shoot in a position where you wouldn't give the shooter a hit if the top no-shoot weren't there. Since the bottom no-shoot is impenetrable, and the hole doesn't appear to break the perf on it, it would be a miss. Thanks in advance, I look forward to the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) Just a quick question--if that brown area in the photo had been a target, how would you say the shooter got a hit on it? From what I can see, the position of the hole would dictate "two no-shoot, mike (without a makeup shot, naturally)." The reason I say that is because, although one of the no-shoots shows the hole thru the non-scoring border of the top no-shoot, it overlaps the other no-shoot in a position where you wouldn't give the shooter a hit if the top no-shoot weren't there. Since the bottom no-shoot is impenetrable, and the hole doesn't appear to break the perf on it, it would be a miss. Thanks in advance, I look forward to the conversation. As best as I can tell from the blurry photo, the hole is fully within the scoring zone of the bottom NS so Mike, 2 NS. It touched the perf of the upper NS and since the scoring zone of the bottom NS is impenetrable, Mike. Damn, -35 with one shot. Edited October 31, 2013 by ChuckS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 Like I said above, "but if I recall they were overlapped in such a way" I think I pulled the top target up to see if the bottom target hit was touching the perf. Actually don't recall now whether it did or not. BUT, IF the shot touched both perfs on the no shoots and there had been a target underneath it would have scored a hit as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 Just a quick question--if that brown area in the photo had been a target, how would you say the shooter got a hit on it? From what I can see, the position of the hole would dictate "two no-shoot, mike (without a makeup shot, naturally)." The reason I say that is because, although one of the no-shoots shows the hole thru the non-scoring border of the top no-shoot, it overlaps the other no-shoot in a position where you wouldn't give the shooter a hit if the top no-shoot weren't there. Since the bottom no-shoot is impenetrable, and the hole doesn't appear to break the perf on it, it would be a miss. Thanks in advance, I look forward to the conversation. DoublePain.JPG As best as I can tell from the blurry photo, the hole is fully within the scoring zone of the bottom NS so Mike, 2 NS. It touched the perf of the upper NS and since the scoring zone of the bottom NS is impenetrable, Mike. Damn, -35 with one shot. -35? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Just a quick question--if that brown area in the photo had been a target, how would you say the shooter got a hit on it? From what I can see, the position of the hole would dictate "two no-shoot, mike (without a makeup shot, naturally)." The reason I say that is because, although one of the no-shoots shows the hole thru the non-scoring border of the top no-shoot, it overlaps the other no-shoot in a position where you wouldn't give the shooter a hit if the top no-shoot weren't there. Since the bottom no-shoot is impenetrable, and the hole doesn't appear to break the perf on it, it would be a miss. Thanks in advance, I look forward to the conversation. DoublePain.JPG As best as I can tell from the blurry photo, the hole is fully within the scoring zone of the bottom NS so Mike, 2 NS. It touched the perf of the upper NS and since the scoring zone of the bottom NS is impenetrable, Mike. Damn, -35 with one shot. -35? Yup. -10 for each no-shoot, -10 for the mike and then there's the 5 points (max) you didn't get for the hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 Lol I was trying to figure a way to give a 5 point penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frag316 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) OK, that's what I thought. Sorry I missed the bit about checking whether it was touching the perf or not, I was going mostly off of the picture. Yeah, 35 points is a lot down, unless you made up the shot, but then you're still down 20 and have the time added for the make up shot, too. Edited October 31, 2013 by frag316 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now