Perforation Scoring

[shred]

Did the OP's shot as would-be scored by an overlay actually touch the line, or was the perf 'broken' by a piece snapping off outside of that area?  If the first, then the responses in the thread are correct, but I have seen radial tears chip parts off targets that shouldn't count.

 

[Derrick-508]

On ‎12‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 8:04 AM, RadarTech said:

One more thing... the perf does not have to be broken...
It only has to be touched...

9.5.2 If the bullet diameter of a hit on a scoring target touches the scoring line between two scoring areas, or the line between the non-scoring border and a scoring area, or if it crosses multiple scoring areas, it will be scored the higher value

Yep! need more ROs to understand this rule, I hate the term "Broke the Perf"

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, Derrick-508 said:

Yep! need more ROs to understand this rule, I hate the term "Broke the Perf"

Yep. I have sat in on several seminars. RMI’s even go out of there way to say it’s a common misunderstanding to say “break” the perf. Yet, here we are.

[gmantwo]

On 12/22/2018 at 8:01 AM, Joe4d said:

"just a local match"
Sorry but that is just a lame excuse, and exactly the kinda excuse that creates RO's  AND competitors that dont know the rules at bigger matches.
Id rather take a few minutes at a local, than have some huge problem at Nationals. 

x2

[IVC]

Just a quick add-on on "radial tears." Those are not bullet holes, but any damage that starts from the bullet hole and extends into the target - the idea is not that "damage" to the higher scoring zone determines the score, but that the edge of the bullet impact (based on the overlay, not just the hole) is touching the higher scoring zone. 

 

As described in OP, it was a wrong call since it wasn't justified as "having gone through hard cover." In addition, a bullet that goes partially through hard cover counts for score (9.1.6.3), so to determine that a shot shouldn't count, the RO had to identify the hit on hard target and confirm the bullet went fully through it. The lack of grease ring (which is just one of the ways to determine hits, but not the only one and not a required one) on the final target cannot be used to claim, e..g, "portion of the bullet that hit the target is the portion that went through hard cover" - there is no such rule that would differentiate between which part of the bullet did what. If it's partial on the hard cover, the whole bullet counts. 

[Sarge]

6 minutes ago, IVC said:

Just a quick add-on on "radial tears." Those are not bullet holes, but any damage that starts from the bullet hole and extends into the target - the idea is not that "damage" to the higher scoring zone determines the score, but that the edge of the bullet impact (based on the overlay, not just the hole) is touching the higher scoring zone. 

 

As described in OP, it was a wrong call since it wasn't justified as "having gone through hard cover." In addition, a bullet that goes partially through hard cover counts for score (9.1.6.3), so to determine that a shot shouldn't count, the RO had to identify the hit on hard target and confirm the bullet went fully through it. The lack of grease ring (which is just one of the ways to determine hits, but not the only one and not a required one) on the final target cannot be used to claim, e..g, "portion of the bullet that hit the target is the portion that went through hard cover" - there is no such rule that would differentiate between which part of the bullet did what. If it's partial on the hard cover, the whole bullet counts. 

Literally preaching to the choir. 

[mont1120]

On 1/2/2019 at 1:06 PM, shred said:

Did the OP's shot as would-be scored by an overlay actually touch the line, or was the perf 'broken' by a piece snapping off outside of that area?  If the first, then the responses in the thread are correct, but I have seen radial tears chip parts off targets that shouldn't count.

 

 

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by mont1120
wrong thread, sorry

[bret]

On 12/22/2018 at 11:28 AM, IHAVEGAS said:

 

Agreed, "depends on circumstances," was a key point in my statement.

 

I think it was you (may be wrong) that was running the timed moving targets stage at the single stack nationals when my squad came through a few years back. Last squad of the day and targets were overshot and soggy and it was drizzling and it looked like it would soon be blowing and pouring down. So we shot wet targets that could not be scored accurately (besides being shot to heck with a lot of long tears the pasters were falling off) and everybody went along with it under those circumstances. 

 

If it was not you mea culpa, I didn't have a problem with it regardless (and probably picked up a couple free alphas instead of NPM's). 

Who was the CRO of the stage that allowed that to happen?

 

Was the RM or MD aware of this?

[IHAVEGAS]

3 hours ago, bret said:

Who was the CRO of the stage that allowed that to happen?

 

Was the RM or MD aware of this?

 

Do not know about either. Doubt that the RM knew what was going on as all were battening down the hatches for the nasty looking weather coming in. 

 

That is just one example though, real world things happen at matches and folks react to circumstances as best they can.