Scoring question. Bounce one off the barrel

[Climbhard]

Does the hit count in this situation. Two holes in the target.  A perfectly round Alpha and another hole you can put your thumb through. No sign of a grease ring. Shot clearly skipped off a barrel and tumbled through the target.  Barrels are painted so we can determine it did not pass through the barrel but skimmed off. RO says “ that’s off the barrel. No grease ring. Mike”. I say “show me grease ring in the rule book. It’s not through the barrel and there’s two holes in the A zone.”   So does this score as two Alpha or Alpha Mike?

[RadarTech]

The rule is-

9.5.5 Enlarged holes in paper targets which exceed the competitor’s bullet diameter will not count for score or penalty unless there is visible evi- dence within the remnants of the hole (e.g. a grease mark or a “crown” etc.), to eliminate a presumption that the hole was caused by a ricochet or splatter.

So it would be a Mike.

[Climbhard]

We’ll blow me down. I missed that the first time I read through the rules. Don’t know how. 

[motosapiens]

it is in my experience pretty unusual to have a hole that has NO grease ring at all. What I think you are trying to avoid is the situation where a piece of the jacket (or barrel) came off and went through the target but the rest of the bullet went elsewhere. Most times, when  bullet deflects off a barrel, and you can prove it deflected, you're going to get the hit. I would likely as for the RM on that one, at least if it's anything like the hits I see routinely.

[MemphisMechanic]

@motosapiens he did say “could put your thumb through” and “no grease ring” quite clearly.

 

I can’t see how that would happen without the bullet gouging some plastic off the side of the barrel and taking it through the same hole in the target. I’ve seen that many times and it’s always been a Mike.

[rowdyb]

greater than diameter, no evidence of hit. it's a mike.

 

i like to flip the question around and have the shooter answer it, "if this was a no shoot, would you think that's a scoreable hit?"  that's not the official way but it is a good psychological gut check.

[Sarge]

There are faults with the rules though. We talked about here last year. I had a shooter with some horrible reloads that were tumbling to extreme levels. He shot targets 7 yards in front of him and many holes looked like a rock hit the target. No crown, no grease, nothing but a jagged hole. I gave him those hits which is technically contradictory to the rules but I watched the rounds impact the target.

[motosapiens]

9 hours ago, MemphisMechanic said:

@motosapiens he did say “could put your thumb through” and “no grease ring” quite clearly.

 

 

sometimes there's a partial grease ring if you look closely, even when someone says 'no grease ring'. I've been fortunate to work a number of area and nationals stages with barrels, so I've been able to look at a crap ton of various sorts of barrel hits.

[pjb45]

A grease mark is not mandatory.  e.g. means for example.  The key word is evidence. 

Define all examples of what could constitute evidence. 

I concur with Sarge and Moto...

Personally, I'll give the shooter the benefit of the doubt in most cases in my experience.  Too often ROs give it a passing glance.

[PatJones]

In my ro class we discussed using an overlay to look for a radius. If you can make out a radius on the hole made by the ogive or base, it's not splatter, it's a hit.

2 alpha.