Question on stacking in 03-18

[JAFO]

We shot CM 03-18, High Standards, yesterday.  The stage description for String 1 reads:

 

String 1. On signal, from behind 15-yard fault line, engage T1-T3 with only two rounds each freestyle, perform a mandatory reload and re-engage T1-T3 with only two rounds each, strong hand only.

 

A PCC shooter puts two rounds into T1 and T2, then accidently fires three into T3.  He made the reload, and then fired two rounds into T1 and T2, followed by 1 round into T3.  The shooter was assessed one procedural penalty for an extra shot.  Should there have also been a stacking penalty?  The NROI ruling for Stacking Clarification states:

 

9.4.5.3 Stacked shots (i.e. shooting more than the specified shots at a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in the stage briefing) will incur one procedural penalty per target incorrectly engaged in the string or stage. This penalty will not be applied if the written stage briefing specifically authorizes stacked shots.

 

The text in red above is the question.  He shot more than required (by accident) on T3, but he also shot less than required on T3, not on another target.

[teros135]

I'd say just one procedural.  He fired an extra shot during the pre-reload pass, then corrected it on the second pass. Stacking would be like four shots on T1 and two on T2, reload, two more on T2 and four on T3.  

 

So, one penalty for the extra shot before the reload.  There's no provision for penaltes for too few shots.  And from what you wrote, there were no extra hits, so no penalty there.

[motosapiens]

hmm. so fired too many shots freestyle, and not enough shots strong-hand only? Of course freestyle and strong-hand are the same for pcc, but i think that is not relevant, since we shouldn't score pcc differently than pistols......

 

it seems to me like it should be two procedurals, one for firing too many shots before the reload, and one for not firing enough shots after the reload, but I welcome a better explanation.

[motosapiens]

10 minutes ago, teros135 said:

I'd say just one procedural.  He fired an extra shot during the pre-reload pass, then corrected it on the second pass.

 

you can't correct it. 10.1.4 says procedurals can't be nullified by further competitor action. I think that means that if he's got an extra shot (and presumably extra hit) before the reload, he can't nullify the extra hit by taking fewer shots after the reload.

[teros135]

5 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

you can't correct it. 10.1.4 says procedurals can't be nullified by further competitor action. I think that means that if he's got an extra shot (and presumably extra hit) before the reload, he can't nullify the extra hit by taking fewer shots after the reload.

 

Sorry, shouldn't have said "corrected" by itself.  I meant he fixed his error by firing only one shot.  He didn't nullify the "extra shot" error. 

 

My recollection is that we count extra shots at the firing line and extra hits at the target.  He had an extra shot at T3 in the first part of the string, before the reload; that's a penalty.  However, when inspecting the targets after ULSC if there isn't an extra hit on any target (e.g., 4 hits per target) there's no "extra hit" and thus no second penalty.  Make sense? 

Edited September 18, 2017 by teros135

[motosapiens]

But he still can't correct his error. He can only commit another different error. 2 errors = 2 procedurals, I think.

[motosapiens]

fwiw, very similar discussion a few months ago, with same differences of opinion, and no clear ruling from the powers that wanna-be.

 

 

[teros135]

2 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

But he still can't correct his error. He can only commit another different error. 2 errors = 2 procedurals, I think.

 

Moto, what would the second procedural be for?  The first error was an extra shot.  What is the second error - only one shot on T3?  There isn't a procedural for that, I don't think, unless we want to get real funky and argue that it's a violation of the WSB, but he already did that and was penalized for it.  To force him to fire two shots at T3 on the second pass (as required by the WSB) after already having overshot it on the first pass would be to force him to make another (unintended) error of an "extra hit", which he didn't do, and to accumulate even more penalties for actions he didn't do in the first place. 

 

[teros135]

8 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

fwiw, very similar discussion a few months ago, with same differences of opinion, and no clear ruling from the powers that wanna-be.

 

 

 

Yeah, I remember.  Seems we over-thought that one until it was moaning on the floor in pain, although it was a good exercise in ... overthinking! 

Edited September 18, 2017 by teros135

[motosapiens]

10 minutes ago, teros135 said:

 

Moto, what would the second procedural be for?  The first error was an extra shot.  What is the second error - only one shot on T3?  

 

 

Reading the example associated with this ruling:  https://www.uspsa.org/uspsa-NROI-ruling-details.php?indx=73

i'm not sure. This happens often enough that it would give me warm fuzzies to have troy clarify it. It *feels* to me like 2 separate instances of not following the wsb, once before the reload and once after the reload. All other things being equal, if you just fire the extra shot before the reload and then do everything correctly afterwards, you will get 2 penalties, one for extra shot, one for extra hit. It doesn't seem to me you should be able to do anything afterwards to reduce the number of penalties (10.1.4).

[JAFO]

I read through the other thread again before I posted this.  In that thread, there seemed to be agreement that you couldn't penalize the shooter for failure to follow the WSB under 10.2.2 because 10.2.2.1 specifically exempts that procedural in regards to the number of shots fired.  But I couldn't pull a clear answer out of the discussion on whether it should be a stacking call or not.

 

I have emailed Troy to get his input.

 

 

[waktasz]

It's not an extra shot because he still only shot 6. There's never a penalty for not shooting enough shots, as long as you engage all the targets.

 

and 

 

10.2.2.1 Procedural  penalties  for  failure  to  comply  with  stage 
procedures do not apply to the number of shots fired. Penalties 
for firing insufficient or additional shots are addressed in other 
rules and must not be penalized under the provisions of 10.2.2. 

 

Maybe there's no penalty, which seems wrong, but I can't find a rule to back it up at the moment. It's definitely an advantage to shoot more shots freestyle and less weak hand, obviously. 

 

The WSB does say fire ONLY two on each, but 10.2.2.1 says you can't penalize for that. Seems weird.

Edited September 18, 2017 by waktasz

[waktasz]

Oh, here's the answer.

 

10.2.4   A competitor who fails to comply with a mandatory reload will incur 
one  procedural  penalty  for  each  shot  fired  after  the  point  where  the 
reload was required until a reload is performed. 

 

 

The WSB says ONLY shoot 6. So if you shoot 7, that extra one falls under 10.2.4. 

[Gary Stevens]

You can't be penalized for firing too few shots procedurally. The shooter screwed up on the first pass, therefore one procedural for not following the course description.

[waktasz]

1 minute ago, Gary Stevens said:

You can't be penalized for firing too few shots procedurally. The shooter screwed up on the first pass, therefore one procedural for not following the course description.

 

10.2.2.1 Procedural  penalties  for  failure  to  comply  with  stage 
procedures do not apply to the number of shots fired. Penalties 
for firing insufficient or additional shots are addressed in other 
rules and must not be penalized under the provisions of 10.2.2. 

[JAFO]

You're right about it not qualifying as an extra shot.  It was marked down that way on the scorepad, but per 9.5.4.1, that can only be invoked if the number of shots for the string is exceeded.  The string called for 12, and he only fired 12.  I guess it should have been a failure to perform the mandatory reload.

 

9.4.5.1 Extra shots (i.e. shots fired in excess of the number specified in a component string or stage), will each incur one procedural penalty. Additionally, during scoring, no more than the specified number and highest scoring hits will be awarded.

[Gary Stevens]

Well I see that (now) but I am at a loss to know what other rules apply. The sub-section seems to run contrary to the superior rule.

 

Oh well, back to school I guess .

[Gary Stevens]

Ok after much thought and consideration, I've reached the conclusion you might be able to assess a failure to reload penalty (procedural) for not reloading after the 6th round. This still gives me some concern because the WSB did not say reload between shot 6 and 7. It's implied, but not clearly stated.

 

You might just say no harm, no foul, which also gives me some concern.

[Nik Habicht]

48 minutes ago, Gary Stevens said:

Ok after much thought and consideration, I've reached the conclusion you might be able to assess a failure to reload penalty (procedural) for not reloading after the 6th round. This still gives me some concern because the WSB did not say reload between shot 6 and 7. It's implied, but not clearly stated.

 

You might just say no harm, no foul, which also gives me some concern.

I think the reload point is pretty clear, though one or two instances of "then" inserted into the sequence could get it closer to your level of happiness......  

 

I read this as a 10.2.4 situation from the get go.  There's 12 shots required in the string, the shooter fired 12, makes it hard to argue for an "extra shot."  There were however 7 fired before the reload (and the reload was called for after 6) so I'd assess one under 10.2.4 comfortably.

 

Extra hits are a non-starter, as only 12 rounds were fired.  If there's 13 holes in the targets, that could conceivably lead to a reshoot.  Absent the 13th hole, score the targets as shot, paste, and call the next shooter....

[Southpaw]

Two procedurals.  One for 10.2.4 - failure to comply with a mandatory reload and one for 9.4.5.3 - stacking, as T3 was incorrectly engaged as compared to the stage briefing.  There's no extra shots as the shooter fired the correct 12 total rounds for this stage/string.

[ChuckS]

2 hours ago, Southpaw said:

Two procedurals.  One for 10.2.4 - failure to comply with a mandatory reload and one for 9.4.5.3 - stacking, as T3 was incorrectly engaged as compared to the stage briefing.  There's no extra shots as the shooter fired the correct 12 total rounds for this stage/string.

One procedural since 9.4.5.3  defines stacking as incorrect engagement of multiple targets. Our example here only concerned one target.

 

9.4.5.3Stacked shots (i.e. obviously shooting more than the required rounds on a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in any string), will incur one procedural penalty per target insufficiently engaged in any string. This penalty will not be applied if the written stage briefing specifi-cally authorizes stacked shots.

 

Or that's how I read it this evening.

[Nik Habicht]

2 hours ago, Southpaw said:

Two procedurals.  One for 10.2.4 - failure to comply with a mandatory reload and one for 9.4.5.3 - stacking, as T3 was incorrectly engaged as compared to the stage briefing.  There's no extra shots as the shooter fired the correct 12 total rounds for this stage/string.

Can't assess under 9.4.5.3:

Quote

9.4.5.3 Stacked shots (i.e. obviously shooting more than the required rounds on a target(s) while shooting other target(s) with fewer shots than specified in any string), will incur one procedural penalty per target insufficiently engaged in any string. This penalty will not be applied if the written stage briefing specifi-cally authorizes stacked shots.

Targets 1, 2, and 3 were each engaged 4 times during the string -- exactly as required.  No individual target was engaged more than required, and no individual target was engaged less than required; so the offense as described does not meet the definition of stacking.

[Southpaw]

Chuck and Nik, yeah I was reading the wording of that ruling before I posted and thinking about how poorly worded it is

 

Basically if you just read the example from that ruling then it actually makes sense.  The example involves two targets that should each be shot 4 times.  In the example they were each shot 4 times, but not in the correct way/sequence as specified in the stage briefing and therefore both targets were stacked.  It's two procedurals in that example, but only one in what we're discussing in this thread as only 1 target was stacked.

[ChuckS]

5 minutes ago, Southpaw said:

Chuck and Nik, yeah I was reading the wording of that ruling before I posted and thinking about how poorly worded it is

 

Basically if you just read the example from that ruling then it actually makes sense.  The example involves two targets that should each be shot 4 times.  In the example they were each shot 4 times, but not in the correct way/sequence as specified in the stage briefing and therefore both targets were stacked.  It's two procedurals in that example, but only one in what we're discussing in this thread as only 1 target was stacked.

 

But this part is clear: " will incur one procedural penalty per target insufficiently engaged in any string " In our example, all the targets were sufficiently engaged for that string. 

[Southpaw]

1 minute ago, ChuckS said:

But this part is clear: " will incur one procedural penalty per target insufficiently engaged in any string " In our example, all the targets were sufficiently engaged for that string. 

That's the language from the rulebook, not the updated ruling.  The ruling changed it from insufficiently engaged to incorrectly engaged.  So if you engage targets in the incorrect sequence as specified in the stage briefing then it's stacking, even if they're still sufficiently engaged (correctly total number of rounds).