Un-restored Targets 9.1.4

[lcs]

(You are the RO for both shooters) Your stage has 4 paper targets and 4 steel. Last shooter has ALL Alphas and is shooting a 9MM. The next shooter completes the COF and you begin to score the targets.

One target has 4 untaped 9 MM holes. There are 3 Alphas and 1 Bravo. What is your call?

Ouch. According to the letter of the rule, since you can't use the previous shooter's score, and if there is no other way to differentiate between hits, it is a re-shoot. (And with most 9mm, there isn't much difference between guns/bullets, unlike the .45 example I gave above.)

So even though the RO unofficially knows that the target should be scored Alpha/Bravo, the RO should officially call for a re-shoot. Even if the shooter says they are all right with it.

Hm. Brings up a question---can you call the RM and ask for a scoring call override? (Would it make a difference? The RM should make the call based on the rules, too...)

The rule says you can't review previous scoresheets. It doesn't appear to say you can't use your own knowledge of previous scores, although I know some people who consider themselves hard core literal rule-followers like to treat it that way.

I have to say tho, that if I *know* the previous hits, but they are the same caliber, I would treat that in a way that the shooter wouldn't feel screwed over. If he didn't believe I could make the call, I would probably go for the reshoot. If he was satisfied, I would probably call what I know is right. That's an unpleasantly gray area. No one wants to force a shooter to reshoot when he has a really good run. there's just not much excuse at a big match for not taping all the targets, even tho it always seems to happen a couple times.

Yes, you can call the RM (he is the final decision maker on all scoring problems.)

[motosapiens]

Hits were 2 Alpha, 1 Charlie 1 delta. All .40 cal. It was obvious that 2 alpha had 1 color of grease ring, while the other 2 matched each other. As the shooter, I want the RO to use his overlay and prove which shots were fired from me, and don't think you can based on the above.

For those of you saying you can use multiple targets as evidence, what happens when competitor asks to pull question target and get RM involved? Do you pull the other targets for evidence? Seems to violate last sentence of rule.

Now you are beginning to see our fun, except this started to happen on a stage during Nationals.

If the caliber is the same, and the holes appear different, and you don't think the RO can tell the difference (i.e., you had a crappy run and want to weasel for a reshoot), then you should speak up right away to the RO, and ask for the rangemaster if necessary. I feel pretty confident you would get that reshoot.

[Thomas H]

Hits were 2 Alpha, 1 Charlie 1 delta. All .40 cal. It was obvious that 2 alpha had 1 color of grease ring, while the other 2 matched each other. As the shooter, I want the RO to use his overlay and prove which shots were fired from me, and don't think you can based on the above.

For those of you saying you can use multiple targets as evidence, what happens when competitor asks to pull question target and get RM involved? Do you pull the other targets for evidence? Seems to violate last sentence of rule.

Now you are beginning to see our fun, except this started to happen on a stage during Nationals.

If the caliber is the same, and the holes appear different, and you don't think the RO can tell the difference (i.e., you had a crappy run and want to weasel for a reshoot), then you should speak up right away to the RO, and ask for the rangemaster if necessary. I feel pretty confident you would get that reshoot.

Hm. I don't know if I'd be that confident. There is nothing that says you HAVE to pull that target. You can leave the entire stage unrestored, and when the RM shows up, you explain your reasoning---which you can do without actually saying what the call was, right? (That way the shooter can't even argue that you influenced the RM's decision.) If there is an obvious difference in hits on the disputed target (for example, my .45 hits mentioned in a prior post), and there is an obvious match between one set on the disputed target and the rest of the stage, doesn't that mean that we can indeed use that disputed target to make the correct call?

Bishop said: "As the shooter, I want the RO to use his overlay and prove which shots were fired from me,"

....there is no requirement that the RO has to use an overlay to provide proof. The rule says if that RO can determine the hits, than there you go. Now, if you don't like their call, you can always call the RM, of course, but I'm pretty sure he won't agree that the overlay must be used to for proof.

[motosapiens]

I feel pretty confident you would get that reshoot.

Hm. I don't know if I'd be that confident.

Having worked the last 3 nats, I would be pretty confident. They were pretty reasonable with that stuff imho, especially when it came to calls that had the potential to adversely affect a competitor.

Edited October 2, 2014 by motosapiens

[Thomas H]

I feel pretty confident you would get that reshoot.

Hm. I don't know if I'd be that confident.

Having worked the last 3 nats, I would be pretty confident. They were pretty reasonable with that stuff imho, especially when it came to calls that had the potential to adversely affect a competitor.

So if you can see a clear difference between the two types of shots on the disputed target, and one of those types matches the rest of the stage, and one doesn't, you think the RM will still rule for a reshoot?

[motosapiens]

I feel pretty confident you would get that reshoot.

Hm. I don't know if I'd be that confident.

Having worked the last 3 nats, I would be pretty confident. They were pretty reasonable with that stuff imho, especially when it came to calls that had the potential to adversely affect a competitor.

So if you can see a clear difference between the two types of shots on the disputed target, and one of those types matches the rest of the stage, and one doesn't, you think the RM will still rule for a reshoot?

Unless it's a difference like semi-wadcutters vs RN, yeah, I think the RM would probably call for a reshoot if the shooter wanted it.

Nobody wants the shooter to feel like he got screwed over due to someone else's mistakes.

[Sarge]

"If the shooter wanted it?" What if he didn't?

[Thomas H]

I feel pretty confident you would get that reshoot.

Hm. I don't know if I'd be that confident.

Having worked the last 3 nats, I would be pretty confident. They were pretty reasonable with that stuff imho, especially when it came to calls that had the potential to adversely affect a competitor.

So if you can see a clear difference between the two types of shots on the disputed target, and one of those types matches the rest of the stage, and one doesn't, you think the RM will still rule for a reshoot?

Unless it's a difference like semi-wadcutters vs RN, yeah, I think the RM would probably call for a reshoot if the shooter wanted it.

Nobody wants the shooter to feel like he got screwed over due to someone else's mistakes.

If there is a clear difference between the two types of shots, and it can be seen which type is the shooter's, I'm not sure how what the shooter wants have anything to do with it...

[acpie360]

The entire sentence makes it clear. "Reviewing previous score sheets is prohibited; targets must be scored as is, using the actual target as the basis for the scoring call". I believe this means that previous score sheets cannot be used, just the hits on the target.

Right. Got that. Can't look at the previous shooter's hits on the target to see what the unpatched holes were. I want to understand Poppa saying it is o.k. to use other targets to help with the call.

I think It would be silly not to allow the use "other targets" as a reference. Here is a scenario - There is a no-shoot in front of a target. There are two head shots on the target. However, there is also a partial shot on the edge of the NS. From the location of the head shots in reference to the location of the NS hit, you can be sure that this shooter did not hit the NS. The hit on the NS must come from the previous shooter. In this case, we are using "other targets" to determine the target in question, aren't we?

Actually, no, you're not using other targets. If the RO "knows" the shooter fired only 2 rds and "knows" the NS is not from that shooter, the RO is basing his call on the target. If the RO can't determine the score, it is a reshoot. Of course the clipboard RO may help in scoring, too.

The scoring RO looks the two holes on the target in relation to the partial hit on the NS and decides the NS hit is an un-restored hit from the previous shooter. So you are saying in this case, the RO is NOT using "other targets" for reference?

[frag316]

No, because the no-shoot is a target in its own right.

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 pur-pose of this rule, B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and the same. Reviewing previous score sheets is prohibited; targets must be scored as is, using the actual target as the basis for the scoring call.

(Emphasis mine.)

If the RO feels he/she can score the no-shoot properly, then it stands as scored. If not, then the competitor reshoots the COF.

[motosapiens]

If there is a clear difference between the two types of shots, and it can be seen which type is the shooter's, I'm not sure how what the shooter wants have anything to do with it...

Whether the shooter wants it or not has a LOT to do with whether the shooter calls the rangemaster or not. While you as an RO may believe you can see a clear difference, the shooter and rangemaster may not agree with you. If the shooter accepts your decision, then no problem.

Edited October 2, 2014 by motosapiens

[remoandiris]

The entire sentence makes it clear. "Reviewing previous score sheets is prohibited; targets must be scored as is, using the actual target as the basis for the scoring call". I believe this means that previous score sheets cannot be used, just the hits on the target.

Right. Got that. Can't look at the previous shooter's hits on the target to see what the unpatched holes were. I want to understand Poppa saying it is o.k. to use other targets to help with the call.

I think It would be silly not to allow the use "other targets" as a reference. Here is a scenario - There is a no-shoot in front of a target. There are two head shots on the target. However, there is also a partial shot on the edge of the NS. From the location of the head shots in reference to the location of the NS hit, you can be sure that this shooter did not hit the NS. The hit on the NS must come from the previous shooter. In this case, we are using "other targets" to determine the target in question, aren't we?

Actually, no, you're not using other targets. If the RO "knows" the shooter fired only 2 rds and "knows" the NS is not from that shooter, the RO is basing his call on the target. If the RO can't determine the score, it is a reshoot. Of course the clipboard RO may help in scoring, too.

The scoring RO looks the two holes on the target in relation to the partial hit on the NS and decides the NS hit is an un-restored hit from the previous shooter. So you are saying in this case, the RO is NOT using "other targets" for reference?

What did the scoring RO use from the other target to determine it is an unrestored hit on the NS?

[Thomas H]

If there is a clear difference between the two types of shots, and it can be seen which type is the shooter's, I'm not sure how what the shooter wants have anything to do with it...

Whether the shooter wants it or not has a LOT to do with whether the shooter calls the rangemaster or not. While you as an RO may believe you can see a clear difference, the shooter and rangemaster may not agree with you. If the shooter accepts your decision, then no problem.

That isn't what you said originally. You said:

I think the RM would probably call for a reshoot if the shooter wanted it.

Hence my comment---I'm not sure how what the shooter "wants" has anything to do with the RM's call.

The shooter doesn't have to agree with me---they can call the RM at any time. And the RM can overrule me if they feel I am incorrect. I'm just curious why you said the what the shooter wants will make a difference to the RM's call.

[motosapiens]

If there is a clear difference between the two types of shots, and it can be seen which type is the shooter's, I'm not sure how what the shooter wants have anything to do with it...

Whether the shooter wants it or not has a LOT to do with whether the shooter calls the rangemaster or not. While you as an RO may believe you can see a clear difference, the shooter and rangemaster may not agree with you. If the shooter accepts your decision, then no problem.

That isn't what you said originally. You said:

I think the RM would probably call for a reshoot if the shooter wanted it.

Hence my comment---I'm not sure how what the shooter "wants" has anything to do with the RM's call.

The shooter doesn't have to agree with me---they can call the RM at any time. And the RM can overrule me if they feel I am incorrect. I'm just curious why you said the what the shooter wants will make a difference to the RM's call.

English is a difficult language, especially when people type fast and think all the information has been implied already. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

*if* the shooter thinks a reshoot is warranted and the RO doesn't, the shooter may ask for the RM. The RM may rule that a reshoot is warranted.

I thought the bolded was implied. Go figger.

Edited October 2, 2014 by motosapiens

[Thomas H]

If there is a clear difference between the two types of shots, and it can be seen which type is the shooter's, I'm not sure how what the shooter wants have anything to do with it...

Whether the shooter wants it or not has a LOT to do with whether the shooter calls the rangemaster or not. While you as an RO may believe you can see a clear difference, the shooter and rangemaster may not agree with you. If the shooter accepts your decision, then no problem.

That isn't what you said originally. You said:

I think the RM would probably call for a reshoot if the shooter wanted it.

Hence my comment---I'm not sure how what the shooter "wants" has anything to do with the RM's call.

The shooter doesn't have to agree with me---they can call the RM at any time. And the RM can overrule me if they feel I am incorrect. I'm just curious why you said the what the shooter wants will make a difference to the RM's call.

English is a difficult language, especially when people type fast and think all the information has been implied already. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

*if* the shooter thinks a reshoot is warranted and the RO doesn't, the shooter may ask for the RM. The RM may rule that a reshoot is warranted.

I thought the bolded was implied. Go figger.

Hm. Well, considering that you originally said: "Unless it's a difference like semi-wadcutters vs RN, yeah, I think the RM would probably call for a reshoot if the shooter wanted it."

...it certainly didn't look like that to me.

Of course anyone can call the RM. And the RM can rule however they like. I'd like to think they'd rule based on whether or not any differentiation can be made, as opposed to "if the shooter wanted it," which is what the above statement looks like.

And again, if there is "a clear difference between the two types of shots, and it can be seen which type is the shooter's" I'm not sure why a reshoot would be given, or why an RM would think so. But it is up the RM, if they are called.

[jester121]

Based on the original text, I wonder if this conversation came about from looking at a really dark grease ring to determine a perfect double, and comparing it with the lighter grey grease ring on all the shooter's other targets? I've heard of this happening and I'm not sure what I think about it.

No, and no doubles. Hits were 2 Alpha, 1 Charlie 1 delta. All .40 cal. It was obvious that 2 alpha had 1 color of grease ring, while the other 2 matched each other. As the shooter, I want the RO to use his overlay and prove which shots were fired from me, and don't think you can based on the above.

For those of you saying you can use multiple targets as evidence, what happens when competitor asks to pull question target and get RM involved? Do you pull the other targets for evidence? Seems to violate last sentence of rule.

Now you are beginning to see our fun, except this started to happen on a stage during Nationals.

So did my scenario.

[motosapiens]

Of course anyone can call the RM. And the RM can rule however they like. I'd like to think they'd rule based on whether or not any differentiation can be made, as opposed to "if the shooter wanted it," which is what the above statement looks like.

And again, if there is "a clear difference between the two types of shots, and it can be seen which type is the shooter's" I'm not sure why a reshoot would be given, or why an RM would think so. But it is up the RM, if they are called.

Sigh, it's not interesting to have a semantic contest and play gotcha. Just imagine 2 scenarios where the RO 'thinks' he can tell a difference between bullet holes from the same caliber:

1. shooter is very happy with his run, bullet holes look the same to him, but he'll take the score.

2. Shooter is not happy with his run, or the RO thinks he has a mike on the unrestored target, shooter calls the RM.

In my limited experience, the RM's at big matches have been a bit more lenient in favor of the shooter than the RO's regarding scoring and reshoot decisions. Of course that may just be because when the RO is MORE lenient, the RM never gets called because the shooter takes the score happily and goes off to clean mags and reload. If the shooter didn't want a reshoot, then we have scenario 1, so the RM would never get called. In this sense, whether the shooter wants a reshoot or not is pretty critical to the RM's decision.

Bottom line is that an unrestored target is a failure on the part of the squad but especially on the part of the RO.

Edited October 2, 2014 by motosapiens

[Nik Habicht]

(You are the RO for both shooters) Your stage has 4 paper targets and 4 steel. Last shooter has ALL Alphas and is shooting a 9MM. The next shooter completes the COF and you begin to score the targets.

One target has 4 untaped 9 MM holes. There are 3 Alphas and 1 Bravo. What is your call?

Not enough information. How many rounds did the shooter fire at that target, and how many hits per target are we scoring?

[Nik Habicht]

(You are the RO for both shooters) Your stage has 4 paper targets and 4 steel. Last shooter has ALL Alphas and is shooting a 9MM. The next shooter completes the COF and you begin to score the targets.

One target has 4 untaped 9 MM holes. There are 3 Alphas and 1 Bravo. What is your call?

Ouch. According to the letter of the rule, since you can't use the previous shooter's score, and if there is no other way to differentiate between hits, it is a re-shoot. (And with most 9mm, there isn't much difference between guns/bullets, unlike the .45 example I gave above.)

So even though the RO unofficially knows that the target should be scored Alpha/Bravo, the RO should officially call for a re-shoot. Even if the shooter says they are all right with it.

Hm. Brings up a question---can you call the RM and ask for a scoring call override? (Would it make a difference? The RM should make the call based on the rules, too...)

So, assuming that the stage calls for best two hits, and that the competitor only fired two rounds, I'd order a reshoot -- unless I could differentiate between the pairs of hits in a way that I could confirm on the other targets. If I can't tell which two are from the current competitor, I have to order the reshoot.....

[lcs]

(You are the RO for both shooters) Your stage has 4 paper targets and 4 steel. Last shooter has ALL Alphas and is shooting a 9MM. The next shooter completes the COF and you begin to score the targets.

One target has 4 untaped 9 MM holes. There are 3 Alphas and 1 Bravo. What is your call?

Not enough information. How many rounds did the shooter fire at that target, and how many hits per target are we scoring?

1st or 2nd shooter? Both fired 2 shots. 2 hits per target.

[Nik Habicht]

My call is a reshoot......

....memory is fallible......

[Fuelie777]

I find this post also interesting. It is very clear, via the rules, scoring on the target in question. Can the RO make a valid call? What if the pasters fell off (yes it does happen)? If by looking at the target, you cannot decide the shooters score than it is clearly a re-shoot. I have had it both ways, the shooter wanted the re-shoot and the shooter did not, but if the RO cannot accurately score the target, then it is a re-shoot. All the range masters I have talked to have indicated the same. If there is doubt, re-shoot.