Help me understand Rule 9.1.4

[acpie360]

The rule states:

9.1.4 - Unrestored Targets – If, following completion of a course of fire by a
previous competitor, one or more targets have not been properly
patched or taped or if previously applied pasters have fallen off the target
for the competitor being scored, the Range Officer must judge
whether or not an accurate score can be determined. If there are extra
scoring hits or questionable penalty hits thereon, and it is not obvious
which hits were made by the competitor being scored, the affected
competitor must be ordered to reshoot the course of fire. For the purpose
of this rule, B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and
the same.

I think I understand the most of it except the last sentence in blue.

[Sarge]

B&C are worth the same points. So if the RO sees 2 B's and 2C's he can determine the score. Or 3B's and 1C, etc...

[alma]

Sounds interesting guess it's saying that you are trying to determine the target score, not necessarily the exact hits.

[Poppa Bear]

Correct. One of the only times multiple holes in the same scoring zone can still require a reshoot is if you have a hit on a NS or HC target. 4 holes in the A zone but you are not sure if the current shooter hit the HC/NS or if the previous shooter did and it was not called and pasted.

[acpie360]

B&C are worth the same points. So if the RO sees 2 B's and 2C's he can determine the score. Or 3B's and 1C, etc...

I think I still need an explanation - Does it matter if the shooter shoots major or mirror then? It sounds like all C's will be marked as B's on the score sheet...no?

[Sarge]

B&C are worth the same points. So if the RO sees 2 B's and 2C's he can determine the score. Or 3B's and 1C, etc...

I think I still need an explanation - Does it matter if the shooter shoots major or mirror then? It sounds like all C's will be marked as B's on the score sheet...no?

B's would be marked as B's and C's would be marked as C's. They are worth the same amount of points in minor or MAJOR. MAJOR scoring 5-4-4-2 minor scoring 5-3-3-1

[acpie360]

B's would be marked as B's and C's would be marked as C's. They are worth the same amount of points in minor or MAJOR. MAJOR scoring 5-4-4-2 minor scoring 5-3-3-1

I might be splitting hairs - Since B and C are always worth the same, this entire last sentence "For the purpose

of this rule, B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and

the same." is completely unnecessary, unless there is a situation where B and C will be worth differently. Is there one then?

[Poppa Bear]

If the target had one B and three C's you can call out either 1 bravo, 1 charlie. Or, 2 charlie. The score is the same. That sentence is in there to stop unnecessary reshoots just because the RO cannot determine which shooter hit the B zone.

[mactiger]

If the target had one B and three C's you can call out either 1 bravo, 1 charlie. Or, 2 charlie. The score is the same. That sentence is in there to stop unnecessary reshoots just because the RO cannot determine which shooter hit the B zone.

Exactly correct.

[rvb]

now if only we could separate that last sentence currently in 9.1.4 into it's own rule and drop the leading clause.

9.x.x B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and the same.

I'd be ok w/ never seeing another scoresheet w/ a "B" column in it, and just having to explain the historic significance of the "B" on the cardboard to newbs...

-rvb

[ChuckS]

B's would be marked as B's and C's would be marked as C's. They are worth the same amount of points in minor or MAJOR. MAJOR scoring 5-4-4-2 minor scoring 5-3-3-1

I might be splitting hairs - Since B and C are always worth the same, this entire last sentence "For the purpose

of this rule, B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and

the same."

is completely unnecessary, unless there is a situation where B and C will be worth differently. Is there one then?

It's a leftover. It used to be that b and c were used for tiebreakers. B trumped c in a points tie. It is no longer true so there is no reason for a re shoot based on c vs b.

[Mark R]

now if only we could separate that last sentence currently in 9.1.4 into it's own rule and drop the leading clause.

9.x.x B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and the same.

I'd be ok w/ never seeing another scoresheet w/ a "B" column in it, and just having to explain the historic significance of the "B" on the cardboard to newbs...

-rvb

You could always use classic targets...no B zone there. Just sayin'

[Poppa Bear]

Give me a classic target with the line definition of a metric and I would use them a lot more often.

[Nik Habicht]

If the target had one B and three C's you can call out either 1 bravo, 1 charlie. Or, 2 charlie. The score is the same. That sentence is in there to stop unnecessary reshoots just because the RO cannot determine which shooter hit the B zone.

Exactly correct.

You could even go really wild and crazy and call 2 Bravo........ :D

[StealthyBlagga]

I'd be ok w/ never seeing another scoresheet w/ a "B" column in it, and just having to explain the historic significance of the "B" on the cardboard to newbs...

But what would we do for 3-Gun; in Time-Plus scoring, the B-zone is scored the same as the A-zone. You pistol boys always think the world revolves around you.

Edited January 30, 2014 by StealthyBlagga

[rvb]

I'd be ok w/ never seeing another scoresheet w/ a "B" column in it, and just having to explain the historic significance of the "B" on the cardboard to newbs...

But what would we do for 3-Gun; in Time-Plus scoring, the B-zone is scored the same as the A-zone. You pistol boys always think the world revolves around you.

Why would it make a difference? In the pistol rules say the B=C. In the MG rules say the B=A. Then score appropriately....

-rvb

[outerlimits]

Tell you what, if an RO calls out a B on a target I shot that had no hard cover or no-shoot obstructing it, then I know I screwed up that shot. Just sayin'...

[rvb]

Tell you what, if an RO calls out a B on a target I shot that had no hard cover or no-shoot obstructing it, then I know I screwed up that shot. Just sayin'...

I'd say you know you screwed it up if the RO calls out a "C", too, since neither is an A.

-rvb

[outerlimits]

Tell you what, if an RO calls out a B on a target I shot that had no hard cover or no-shoot obstructing it, then I know I screwed up that shot. Just sayin'...

I'd say you know you screwed it up if the RO calls out a "C", too, since neither is an A.

-rvb

Technically, yes...but I wouldn't have been aiming at the B

[Norther]

So, how would you know the previous shooter didn't have 3 hits, and the current one had 1 hit and a mike? I don't think you are allowed to determine target score by looking at previous score sheets.

[dskinsler83]

If the caliber of both shooters previous and current are the sane then that means you as the RO can not determine the score thus the current shooter must reshoot the stage.

[GuildSF4]

If the caliber of both shooters previous and current are the sane then that means you as the RO can not determine the score thus the current shooter must reshoot the stage.

Not always true. Determining the score can include seeing the hits, or recalling the hits from the previous shooter.

[dskinsler83]

If the caliber of both shooters previous and current are the sane then that means you as the RO can not determine the score thus the current shooter must reshoot the stage.

Not always true. Determining the score can include seeing the hits, or recalling the hits from the previous shooter.

Not the best practice as you can have someone challenge you as an RO on your calls and bring that back up in possible arbitration or any other issue. Call it as the book calls it and go on that way you have a solid work record and can be relied upon when MDs are looking for Staff

[Sarge]

The rule just says if the score can not be determined then a reshoot is ordered. If I am running a shooter and he pops around a corner to shoot a target and I see 2 headshots before he squeezes the trigger and gets 2 Delta's on the bottom of the target I am confident in giving him the delta's. Those are extreme examples but i think you get the idea. It is often quite easy to tell which hits belong to the shooter. BUT if I have any doubt, for any reason, he gets a reshoot.

[GuildSF4]

If the caliber of both shooters previous and current are the sane then that means you as the RO can not determine the score thus the current shooter must reshoot the stage.

Not always true. Determining the score can include seeing the hits, or recalling the hits from the previous shooter.

Not the best practice as you can have someone challenge you as an RO on your calls and bring that back up in possible arbitration or any other issue. Call it as the book calls it and go on that way you have a solid work record and can be relied upon when MDs are looking for Staff

I was pointing out that there are methods of determining the hits even when the same caliber is shot, I was not implying that I score without knowing the score, as Sarge said if there is any question then the shooter must re-shoot.