Stacked target hit on T2

[9x45]

Wak, uh, what country do you think I'm from? California is in the US, just like Georgia is in Florida. PA is east of Phoenix?, but I'm not really sure.  Also it was not a USPSA match, it was a local action pistol match scored time plus points, no written rules, only stage briefs. Sarge, I'm not a USPSA RO, and have never read past the definitions section of the rule book, first time I ever saw that graphic.....

 

And it's on page 110.....

 

[PatJones]

...Also it was not a USPSA match, it was a local action pistol match scored time plus points, no written rules, only stage briefs. Sarge, I'm not a USPSA RO, and have never read past the definitions section of the rule book, first time I ever saw that graphic.....
 
And it's on page 110.....
 

You posted in the USPSA rules forum of Benos. If it's an outlaw match, the ruling is whatever they say it is. The rule book is there to protect the shooter.

[PatJones]

If it touched the perf on T2 then it also counts as a hit on T1.  If T1 had been a NS he would have been given a NS penalty.  It is usually a good idea to put some form of a hard cover or a No Shoot between the targets to separate the scoring areas.

I don't see the need for hardcover or a no shoot. I don't have a problem with a shot scoring on two targets.

The difficulty with scoring a single shot on two targets comes when the scoring zones are imperfectly lined up between the two targets. For example, if you put a put the head of a front target over the lower A zone of another target, the A zone of the rear target shouldn't be available when a shot touches the perf on the left or right side of the front target. But what if the perfs don't _exactly_ line up? What if they did, but something moved during the match? Is the A zone on the rear target available or not? All of this can be avoided if you move the front target a half inch to one side so none of the perfs lie over each other. This eliminates the need for a piece of black tape acting as hard cover.

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, PatJones said:

I don't see the need for hardcover or a no shoot. I don't have a problem with a shot scoring on two targets.

The difficulty with scoring a single shot on two targets comes when the scoring zones are imperfectly lined up between the two targets. For example, if you put a put the head of a front target over the lower A zone of another target, the A zone of the rear target shouldn't be available when a shot touches the perf on the left or right side of the front target. But what if the perfs don't _exactly_ line up? What if they did, but something moved during the match? Is the A zone on the rear target available or not? All of this can be avoided if you move the front target a half inch to one side so none of the perfs lie over each other. This eliminates the need for a piece of black tape acting as hard cover.

True but I like to use the KISS principle whenever possible.

[Southpaw]

This sort of thing is addressed in the RO and CRO courses and it's strongly encouraged not to have touching scoring targets for this very reason (one shot counting as two hits). It's recommended, as previously said, to separate scoring targets by a no shoot or hard cover.

[waktasz]

8 hours ago, 9x45 said:

Wak, uh, what country do you think I'm from? California is in the US, just like Georgia is in Florida. PA is east of Phoenix?, but I'm not really sure.  Also it was not a USPSA match, it was a local action pistol match scored time plus points, no written rules, only stage briefs. Sarge, I'm not a USPSA RO, and have never read past the definitions section of the rule book, first time I ever saw that graphic.....

 

 

 

This post explains A LOT. I understand everything now.

[Norther]

I once had a single shot score on three targets...on a Virginia Count stage. Two extra hit penalties, no extra shots.  

[Hammer002]

16 hours ago, six-gun shooter said:

I once had a single shot score on three targets...on a Virginia Count stage. Two extra hit penalties, no extra shots.  

Dont think it works that way.  penalties are for extra shots or holes, not scorable touches of one hole.  Think you got hosed and should have debated/argued that one for sure.

[Sarge]

4 hours ago, Hammer002 said:

Dont think it works that way.  penalties are for extra shots or holes, not scorable touches of one hole.  Think you got hosed and should have debated/argued that one for sure.

Shots and hits.

[MemphisMechanic]

On 10/1/2018 at 10:02 AM, 9x45 said:

Wak, uh, what country do you think I'm from?

 

If you speak fluent American, why did absolutely no one understand your convoluted first post until they had asked a full page of questions?

 

That’s a sign that you explained things horribly.  

 

A better version:

 

”We had two targets on the same stand, one vertically above the other. The targets overlapped, and a shot broke the perforation on the lower head box. Does he also get credit for the hit on the target behind it?”

[Sarge]

2 hours ago, MemphisMechanic said:

 

If you speak fluent American, why did absolutely no one understand your convoluted first post until they had asked a full page of questions?

 

That’s a sign that you explained things horribly.  

 

A better version:

 

”We had two targets on the same stand, one vertically above the other. The targets overlapped, and a shot broke the perforation on the lower head box. Does he also get credit for the hit on the target behind it?”

Not to mention perfs only need touched, not broken.

[ATLDave]

On 10/9/2018 at 9:34 AM, six-gun shooter said:

I once had a single shot score on three targets...on a Virginia Count stage. Two extra hit penalties, no extra shots.  

That happened to me in one of my first 4 or 5 USPSA matches.  I knew I didn't know the rules well enough to argue, but it sure made me wonder if I was being screwed. 

 

Later I learned that I was being screwed, but that the screwing was perfectly in accordance with the rules!  

[Sarge]

2 hours ago, ATLDave said:

That happened to me in one of my first 4 or 5 USPSA matches.  I knew I didn't know the rules well enough to argue, but it sure made me wonder if I was being screwed. 

 

Later I learned that I was being screwed, but that the screwing was perfectly in accordance with the rules!  

If a single bullet can score a hit on two targets then it stands to reason you would get any extra hit penalties as well. A hole is a hole is a hole. You can’t have it both ways.

[Norther]

1 hour ago, Sarge said:

If a single bullet can score a hit on two targets then it stands to reason you would get any extra hit penalties as well. A hole is a hole is a hole. You can’t have it both ways.

IIRC, this is what Kevin Imel taught in my RO class. It was a while back. 

[ATLDave]

20 hours ago, Sarge said:

If a single bullet can score a hit on two targets then it stands to reason you would get any extra hit penalties as well. A hole is a hole is a hole. You can’t have it both ways.

We can have it any way the rules are written.  The rules are currently written to ding you for the extra hit. We (USPSA) could change that.  USPSA could ditch Virginia-count altogether.  We could have a robust discussion about what the value of having VA count even is (or Comstock, for that matter).  

 

But mostly I was joking.  The rules are what they are.  And they're pretty clear.