Reshoots At Nationals

[XRe]

For example, although an arb committee might be tempted to grant a reshoot on a popper if a competitor took 5 hits to knock it over, such a decision would be in direct contraction to the rules.

There is a difference between something not explicitly covered by the rules, and decidig that rule is to be ignored because the arb committee thinks doing so would be fairer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree that an arb committee should not be circumventing rules. There are situations where the rules have grey areas, and there are situations where the wrong call is made. This is where it comes into play.

Clearly, in this case, there was a failed piece of equipment - as evidenced by the adjustment made to the popper, and the RM's visual inspection of said popper. It would appear the right decision would have been to grant a reshoot under 4.6.1 right away. Had that not been the case, after witnessing the adjustment of said equipment, the competitor could have arbitrated on grounds of 4.6.1 and Appendix C1 7 - first sentence ("In the absence of any interference..."). Certainly, a hinge bolt backing out, and other such issues, could be argued as to be interference (especially since "interference" isn't defined)?

You drop the popper (and aren't stopped by an RO who feels the equipment isn't working), you own it - clearly. You leave it up, you can request inspection and calibration. It's up to the range staff to judge that the equipment is working, at that point. Hopefully, they're managing their steel, and look the thing over well before proceeding with calibration. If it drops under calibration - and its determined there's nothing wrong with the popper (and 4.6.1 allows tremendous leeway here...), it's a mike. If it's ruled the equipment was working fine, and then the range staff goes and rebuilds the popper after calibration........ if it was working fine, why'd it need to be rebuilt? I would contend that this presents an arbitratable case, at that point.

But.... what do I know...

[BritinUSA]

I think the problem here is that it is the rules that are at fault and not the handling of the specific situation at Nationals.

If the rules were clearer and easier to enforce then there would be no 'wiggle room'.

Wiggle room creates discrepancies in the implementation of the rules and that is the root cause of this incident.

At some point the rule book will come due for some modification. When that happens I for one will be proposing a much simpler set of rules for metal targets. Plates and poppers.

Whether they would be accepted is not up to me but by golly I shall have my 2 cents and to heck with the consequences.

This is a good thread... Lots of interesting theories and opinions and no bad feelings either....

[XRe]

If the rules were clearer and easier to enforce then there would be no 'wiggle room'.

Better yet - no *need* for wiggle room...

At some point the rule book will come due for some modification. When that happens I for one will be proposing a much simpler set of rules for metal targets. Plates and poppers.

1. Paint all steel between all shooters

2. full hits in or above the calibration circle should always drop the popper

3. edge hits, or hits below the calibration circle that don't drop the popper count as a miss if it's left standing

Something like that???

This is a good thread... Lots of interesting theories and opinions and no bad feelings either....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's really useful for me to discuss these things and hash them out. I learn a lot in the process. I suspect that we can hash out reasonable suggestions to make positive changes in the rules, too. Having discussions like this can sometimes highlight where improvements can be made.

I must say, while it's different to me still, the Green Book seems to be a lot better than the rules I used to play under in the late 90s....

[Newbie]

Here's a question for you seasoned veterans, at Nationals I was shooting the stage where your standing in front of a wall with a window you knock down with your hand then shoot the target behind it. The buzzer went off and I knocked the window down to find 2 holes in the target (obviously the RO didn't check all the targets) well I paused for a second or two before deciding what the hell and shot the stage. I asked the RO if I get a reshoot because the course of fire was not set up for me the same as it was for everyone else and he said no because he could determine which holes were mine. Is this fair? What do you do when you run into something like this? shoot away, stop and say something? any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.

Dave

[XRe]

Dave, US9.1.4 applies. If the RO can determine the which hits are yours, he can score them. Not only is this fair, but it helps speed things up, as you don't have to re-run the stage for a simple mistake. The key is, just shoot it! If the RO can't determine your hits clearly, the rule states that you get a reshoot...

[Bucky]

So if you are the RO, what do you do if the shooter stops in the middle of a stage and says the targets aren't taped?

[Alan Meek]

Tell him keep shooting

Or, "If you are finished unload and show clear"

and score appropriately

Alan

[shred]

Tell him keep shooting

Or, "If you are finished unload and show clear"

and score appropriately

Alan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yup, sad, but true.. unless the shooter wants to stop themselves and hope the RO can't tell the previous hits (IIRC they do not need to be a different caliber, they just have to be scored accurately, so if there's 4 9mm holes in the A-zone, it's "2-Alpha", not "reshoot")

[Alan Meek]

Actually if you tell him to keep shooting you are walking the slippery slope of coaching/interference and would need to make sure that everyone received the same. So the correct response by the RO is "If you are finished unload and show clear". That way there can be no interference or coaching by the RO.

Alan

[shred]

Couldn't somebody then claim that "The RO said Unload and Show Clear, I thought he stopped me" and demand a reshoot thusly?

[JayWord]

Allen is correct. "If you are finished, unload and show clear" is the only response from the RO that is correct. Nonsense like "the clock is running" get you the "joy" of rerunning them again. Been there have Shirts to prove it.

Jay

[XRe]

Only if the RO used the wrong command and said "Unload and Show Clear". Otherwise, he said "If You Are Finished...." which gives the option to the shooter

[JayWord]

Flex,

Reshoot for giving a proper by the rulebook range command?

Jay

[Alan Meek]

The wording "If the shooter is finished" actually came about because if a shooter had a bad stage they would stand there forever and when the RO issued the command to unload and show clear the shooter would then declare that he was not finished and the RO interfered with him so a reshoot was warranted.

Alan

[Flexmoney]

Flex,

Reshoot for giving a proper by the rulebook range command?

Jay

[sorry for the confusion...Jay is likely responding to a post I just made and deleted...instead of editing.]

I posted...

We had a shooter in our squad get a reshoot on Stage 15. He opened the door, and there in front of him was a target with holes in it.

Past experience (and a lot of sharing on this forum) has most of us knowing to never stop shooting.

This was a new shooter, his first time at the Nationals too. This was a case of "how we do it back home".

[edit] Further...I heard the Range Master remark that this situation wasn't really covered in the rule book. (I thought there used to be a provision about everybody getting the same COF?)

The shooter waited a good five seconds...expressing that the target wasn't pasted and such. The RO did point to the timer and say that, "the timer is running".

I was surprised that the shooter got the reshoot.

But, I like that he did. It was the right thing, since his run at the COF was influenced by things beyond his control.

Truely, he didn't have the same COF as everybody else...and it did influence his score. A reshoot was the right call. I just didn't think we could justify it under the rule book.

And, no...from what I understand, he didn't get the reshoot based on the range commands.

Oh...the reshoot was issued by the Range Master. If in doubt or if you disagree...always call for another opinion. That is why the Range Masters are there. If you don't ask, you really don't have a leg to stand on.

[Flexmoney]

Oh...I heard the Range Master say that there really isn't anything in the rule book that covers this. I thought we used to have a provision that stated all shooters got to attempt the same COF?

[shred]

Only if the RO used the wrong command and said "Unload and Show Clear". Otherwise, he said "If You Are Finished...." which gives the option to the shooter

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To which the dishonest shooter just says "I didn't hear the first part.. I had my ears on.. other people were shooting.. all I heard was Unload and Show Clear"

[XRe]

To which the dishonest shooter just says "I didn't hear the first part.. I had my ears on.. other people were shooting.. all I heard was Unload and Show Clear"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, the RO isn't responsible for the shooter being able to hear or not. He had his ears on for LAMR and Standby, too, didn't he? We trust the RO in these situations to tell things as they happened. If he claims he said "If you are finished...", then he did. It's the competitor's responsibility after that.

IOW, in the (in)famous words attributed to a previous USPSA Nationals Match Director .... "here's a quarter..." (ask Bill Noyes about *that* one ). The RO could also offer to call the "Wah-mbulance" at this point hee hee....

[Eric P.]

It's funny that you mention the wind holding the popper up.  That was the reason that one of the re-shoots was given.  But here's the rest of the situation.  The shooter is also shooting L10 nats.  His Production load was a 200 gr. 40 at about 670 fps.  He was having some accuracy problems with the load so he was setting his mags so that every time he had a long shot, he was using his 40 major ammo for the L10's.  This was really obvious by sound, pff, pff, bam, bam.  He was using the heavy stuff when he hit the popper. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you have to declare that you will be shooting multiple loads during the match. Do each of the loads you use have to go through chrono? Just curious. Never seen anyone use multiple loads before.

[Rob Boudrie]

It's funny that you mention the wind holding the popper up.  That was the reason that one of the re-shoots was given.  But here's the rest of the situation.  The shooter is also shooting L10 nats.  His Production load was a 200 gr. 40 at about 670 fps.  He was having some accuracy problems with the load so he was setting his mags so that every time he had a long shot, he was using his 40 major ammo for the L10's.  This was really obvious by sound, pff, pff, bam, bam.  He was using the heavy stuff when he hit the popper. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you have to declare that you will be shooting multiple loads during the match. Do each of the loads you use have to go through chrono? Just curious. Never seen anyone use multiple loads before.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although there is no specific requirement for declaring each ammo, the RM would have been within his rights to order rounds he picked to be chronographed, even if the shooter had previously given a chrono sample.

[BDH]

(IIRC they do not need to be a different caliber, they just have to be scored accurately, so if there's 4 9mm holes in the A-zone, it's "2-Alpha", not "reshoot")

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shred, you do remember correctly. The rule simply specifies that we must be able to determine an accurate score.

I ended up with one of these during the Open/L10 where we went to score a target that had four holes in it. Both myself and the shooter knew that he only fired two rounds at it, so it was obviously 'unrestored' from the previous competitor. Unfortunately, they were not all alphas (I think there were two alphas and two charlies on the target), and they were all the same caliber. Hmmm, could be the current competitor shot 2A, OR 1A 1C, OR 2C. What to do?

Well, I pulled the previous competitors scoresheet, explained to the current competitor how we had been scoring so I could be certain which target on the scoresheet matched the target in question on the stage. The scoresheet was clear that the previous competitor had shot 1A 1C on this target (and he had only fired twice at it), which left 1A 1C for the current competitor. Since we had determined an accurate score, the competitor agreed, and we moved on...

[Carlos]

BDH - this exact situation happened to me when I shot your stage earlier in the week. You handled it the same way & it was not only fair, but 100% within the rules. Well done!

On a slightly different note, I do recall Amidon once explaining that if the bullet holes are all the same size, then the previous competitor's scoresheet may be used to determine hits; however, where the bullet holes were different diameter, there used to be arguments.

How I wondered?

Turns out if the previous competitor shot .45 and the holes were left unpasted, the following competitor would argue that one or more of his .38 Super bullets passed right through the larger .45 holes - and they would demand a re-shoot. Hey, anything is possible.

D.

[Jim Norman]

Interesting about how we deal with an unrestored paper target.

IF there are multiple presentations of a target, that is I can see the same target from maybe three or four places and there is likely some confusion as to what is truly presented, what do we do?

I see T4 from port A, B, FFZ , and port C. I shoot at multiple targets from Port A & B, I shoot at additinal tarets from the FFZ and when I get to port C, T4 has two holes in it. I do not engage this target, it is only a couple feet in front of this port, so I can clearly see the holes. RO claims I did not engage this target from any of the earlier posible positions and I agree that I did not engage it from the last position, but not that I did not shoot at it from an earlier position. there are two A hits in my caliber on the target.

RO says that these holes are from the previous shooter, I say, I saw the holes so I didn't reengage the target, I though I shot that target earlier. Stage is large, at least 32 rounds and is a confusing set-up. What is the call?

I argue, unrestored targets should be REF because if the target is close enough for me to see the holes AND I COULD have engaged the target earlier, the holes might just be mine. Certainly, If I take time to think about it, I am losing points and if I take time to truly re-engage the target, I have lost points becuse of HF Scoring.

True that unlike steel, the target is there to shoot at, but it is not the same presentation that the earlier shooters had.

BTW, this is probably more likely to hit a C or D shooter than a A, M or G since that shooter is less likely to make this error, but it still could happen and remember, not all races are for the top spot, a lot are for 3rd D.

Jim Norman

[BDH]

BDH - this exact situation happened to me when I shot your stage earlier in the week. You handled it the same way & it was not only fair, but 100% within the rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmmm, well, maybe the heat fried part of my brain and it was during the first match. Must have been since I only remember this once during the week. Glad it worked out and you were satisfied with the result...

[JayWord]

BDH,

While I am never going to disagree with an Imperial stormtrooper, Ha!, Carlos is being a nice guy if he accepted your way of scoring using a previous scoresheet.

The rule states " and it is not obvious" which hits are whose, it is a reshoot. Now I hate to award reshoots more than you can really know. I am now up to 10 shooters who have DQ'ed on reshoots I have awarded, but using the scoresheet of the previous shooter is not a viable alternative. What if the stats lady has just come by, does that shooter get a reshoot where another would not? How fair is that? Each shooters COF is a individual event. It has to be taken on its own merit.

My feeling is you have to make the call based on what is on the target, not scoresheets, not a falible memory, but what is on the target. If I can not make a fair call based on the target, the shooter is awarded a reshoot. It's the RO responsiblity to make sure the targets are patched. the shooter should not be penalized because we or our crews failed to do our jobs.

Just my 2 pence.

Jay