Virginia count question

[jmac2112]

I shot a USPSA match yesterday which included Classifier 18-04, "Didn't You Send the Mailman" (http://www.amshooters.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/18-04.pdf).  Two open targets on either side, one target in the middle with the lower half of the A zone covered by a NS.  I've got one straightforward question, and one question that might be more complicated.  Here's the straightforward question:

 

If a shooter shoots two alphas on each target plus one NS, that's a total of seven shots.  Is that one procedural for the extra shot, while the NS simply counts as a NS?  I'm new to this, but that's how I read rule 9.4.5.    

 

OK, here's where things get more complicated, at least to my mind.  The scenario above is NOT what happened yesterday, although Practiscore seems to indicate that it did.  THIS is what actually happened: I fired two shots on each target for a total of six shots.  When we inspected the targets, the one in the middle showed one A and two NS, all in a pretty tight group.  The RO knew that I had only fired two shots on that target, so he determined that one NS was due to a paster getting blown off.   I expected when I went on Practiscore that this would show up as five As, one NS and/or a mike (I don't know if you get penalized twice in this situation), but instead it shows up as six As and one NS.  Can someone please explain to me whether this is a mistake in scoring, or maybe I just don't know how the scoring works?  How should it have been scored?  

 

On a related note, the Practiscore page I'm looking at doesn't have a column for procedurals.  I thought maybe I needed to scroll horizontally to see more columns, but the "Horizontal Scroll" function doesn't do anything.  I know there was one shooter who got a procedural on that stage, but it doesn't show up on Practiscore.   Any ideas?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

John

[RJH]

First scenario would be extra shot, extra hit, and a no shoot, so plenty of penalties  to go around

Second scenario you probably cut the perf so you got the A on the shoot target, but also got the no shoot.  So you get the points and the penalty 

[BZ919]

9.4.5.2 Extra hits (i.e. hits on the scoring area of scoring cardboard targets in excess of the total number specified in the stage), will each incur one procedural penalty. Note that hits on hard cover and/or no-shoots are not treated as Extra Hits.

 

So, first scenario would be 6 Alphas (+30), extra shot (-10), and no-shoot (-10).

 

PractiScore doesn't have a column for procedurals .  Even more confusingly, the score column is the sum of all hits.  Mikes, No-shoots, and procedurals are deducted before Hit Factor is calculated, but not reflected in the points column. Divide that shooter's score in the points column for that stage by his/her time.  If that is higher than the reported HF, the shooter was in fact assessed a procedural.

[RJH]

6 minutes ago, BZ919 said:

9.4.5.2 Extra hits (i.e. hits on the scoring area of scoring cardboard targets in excess of the total number specified in the stage), will each incur one procedural penalty. Note that hits on hard cover and/or no-shoots are not treated as Extra Hits.

 

So, first scenario would be 6 Alphas (+30), extra shot (-10), and no-shoot (-10).

 

PractiScore doesn't have a column for procedurals .  Even more confusingly, the score column is the sum of all hits.  Mikes, No-shoots, and procedurals are deducted before Hit Factor is calculated, but not reflected in the points column. Divide that shooter's score in the points column for that stage by his/her time.  If that is higher than the reported HF, the shooter was in fact assessed a procedural.

 

Good catch, i was trying to give an extra penalty in that first scenario

[amokscience]

You probably hit both the a zone and the no shoot with one of your shots so 6A 1NS. No additional penalty. 

[DKorn]

Extra shots are determined based off of the actual number of shots fired. 

 

Extra hits are determined based on the actual number of hits on scoring targets- hard cover and no shoots don’t count. 

 

In your scenario, you probably touched the perf on the edge of the no shoot, giving you the A and the NS for that hit. However, the RO has no way to actually confirm that the second NS hit is from a paster being blown off (unless there’s other evidence on the target, like you were shooting 9mm and the extra hole is .40), so he is unable to determine an accurate score. You should’ve had to reshoot the stage.

 

If he had been able to determine that one NS wasn’t yours, your score would be 2A 1NS for that target, assuming that your shot touched the perf. If it didn’t touch the perf, it would be 1A 1M 1NS. An easy way to remember it is that your number of scoring hits (A/C/D) and misses always adds up to the number of hits required on the target, and then any no shoots are separate from that. 

 

Take a look at 9.1.4, 9.4.5.1, and 9.4.5.2. 

[jmac2112]

OP here.  RJH and amokscience appear to have summed up the situation nicely.  If I do the math with 30 points for the As minus 10 points for the NS, then divide by my time, I get the hit factor as reported on Practiscore.    

 

Just for learning purposes....   If I had actually shot 5A and 1NS, I would be assessed 1M and 1NS, right?   Sorry if that seems really obvious, but sometimes the rules surprise me.

 

Thanks!
 

John

[jmac2112]

DKorn: I think our posts crossed in cyberspace.  I wasn't ignoring your post, you just anticipated my question!

 

Thanks,

 

John

Edited February 20, 2019 by jmac2112

[DKorn]

15 minutes ago, jmac2112 said:

DKorn: I think our posts crossed in cyberspace.  I wasn't ignoring your post, you just anticipated my question!

 

Thanks,

 

John

 

No problem, glad I could somehow anticipate it. 

 

To me the biggest takeaway here is still that the RO shouldn’t have assumed that one of the NS’s was from a paster falling off unless they had another way of knowing for sure which hits were yours and which were from pasters falling off (9.1.4). 

[HCH]

1 hour ago, BZ919 said:

9.4.5.2 Extra hits (i.e. hits on the scoring area of scoring cardboard targets in excess of the total number specified in the stage), will each incur one procedural penalty. Note that hits on hard cover and/or no-shoots are not treated as Extra Hits.

 

So, first scenario would be 6 Alphas (+30), extra shot (-10), and no-shoot (-10).

 

PractiScore doesn't have a column for procedurals .  Even more confusingly, the score column is the sum of all hits.  Mikes, No-shoots, and procedurals are deducted before Hit Factor is calculated, but not reflected in the points column. Divide that shooter's score in the points column for that stage by his/her time.  If that is higher than the reported HF, the shooter was in fact assessed a procedural.

 

I never noticed that about Practiscore, and that pretty much sucks. I looked up the results from a match this weekend and started doing the math on a stage that I know a shooter had 2 mike 1 FTE on. The HF is correct, but I had to do some figuring to get to it. 

 

There should at at least be a spot for  penalties, or the “points” should reflect the net score. We should send an email. 

[jmac2112]

As to the issue of a reshoot, the RO was paying attention and knew that I had only shot twice on that target.  It stands to reason that only two of the three holes could be mine.  Was the RO within his rights to assume that the targets had been pasted correctly, and to further assume that my two shots were the A and the NS that broke the edge?  As I ask the question, I can see that there is a lot of assuming going on here.  For all he knew, I could have shot an A and a mike, and the two NS could have been due to a lack of pasting, or pasters falling off.  Or I could have shot two mikes, etc.    

 

Well, it's too late now, but I can apply this knowledge in the future.  For now, I'm just trying not to beat myself up for shooting so close to the NS in the first place!

 

John

[RJH]

9 minutes ago, jmac2112 said:

As to the issue of a reshoot, the RO was paying attention and knew that I had only shot twice on that target.  It stands to reason that only two of the three holes could be mine.  Was the RO within his rights to assume that the targets had been pasted correctly, and to further assume that my two shots were the A and the NS that broke the edge?  As I ask the question, I can see that there is a lot of assuming going on here.  For all he knew, I could have shot an A and a mike, and the two NS could have been due to a lack of pasting, or pasters falling off.  Or I could have shot two mikes, etc.    

 

Well, it's too late now, but I can apply this knowledge in the future.  For now, I'm just trying not to beat myself up for shooting so close to the NS in the first place!

 

John

If the ro can determine the correct score the extra hole doesn't matter.  As someone mentioned above maybe one hole was a 9 and the other was a 45. If he can't determine which shots are  yours,  then reshoot 

[DKorn]

2 hours ago, jmac2112 said:

As to the issue of a reshoot, the RO was paying attention and knew that I had only shot twice on that target.  It stands to reason that only two of the three holes could be mine.  Was the RO within his rights to assume that the targets had been pasted correctly, and to further assume that my two shots were the A and the NS that broke the edge?  As I ask the question, I can see that there is a lot of assuming going on here.  For all he knew, I could have shot an A and a mike, and the two NS could have been due to a lack of pasting, or pasters falling off.  Or I could have shot two mikes, etc.    

 

Well, it's too late now, but I can apply this knowledge in the future.  For now, I'm just trying not to beat myself up for shooting so close to the NS in the first place!

 

John

 

Per rule 9.1.4: “If, following completion of a course of fire by a previous competitor, one or more targets have not been properly patched or taped or if previously applied pasters have fallen off the target for the competitor being scored, the Range Officer must judge whether or not an accurate score can be determined. If there are extra hits or questionable penalty hits thereon, and it is not obvious which hits were made by the competitor being scored, the affected competitor must be ordered to reshoot the course of fire. Reviewing previous score sheets is forbidden; targets must be scored as is, using the actual target as the basis for the scoring call.”

 

In other words, if a target isn’t pasted or if a paster falls off, then:

-if the RO can determine an accurate score, they score the target. 

-If it is “not obvious” which hits are yours and which are not, you must reshoot the stage. 

 

What do you think? Would you have been able to determine which hits were yours, or do you think he just gave you the benefit of the doubt and scored the best 2 shots? Not saying you did anything wrong, but I like to think about these scenarios in terms of “what should i do if I’m the RO and the same situation comes up?”

[jmac2112]

Hmmm....  I did not inspect the bullet holes extremely closely, but they all looked the same size to me.  I think the RO just scored the two best shots.  It certainly wan't obvious which of the NS holes was mine, so it sounds like he should have ordered a reshoot according to the rules.  I would have aimed higher the second time if he had!

 

Thanks,

 

John

[waktasz]

They are only 10 yards away. I can see hits at that distance, especially hits in a white target. Not saying that's what happened, but that could be how he "knew" it was a paster falling off

 

[DKorn]

16 minutes ago, waktasz said:

They are only 10 yards away. I can see hits at that distance, especially hits in a white target. Not saying that's what happened, but that could be how he "knew" it was a paster falling off

 

 

That’s definitely possible, so if you could tell which paster fell off then you might be able to score it. I’d still err on the side of a reshoot unless I was 100% sure. 

[euxx]

9 hours ago, HCH said:

 

I never noticed that about Practiscore, and that pretty much sucks. I looked up the results from a match this weekend and started doing the math on a stage that I know a shooter had 2 mike 1 FTE on. The HF is correct, but I had to do some figuring to get to it. 

 

There should at at least be a spot for  penalties, or the “points” should reflect the net score. We should send an email. 

 

You can just get the PractiScore Competitor app. It shows everything - down to the hits scored on targets, individual NS and procedural penalties. And then more...

 

[jmac2112]

When I search I come up with apps named PractiScore Competitor ($9.99), PractiScore (free), and Pract - Competition Management App (free).  Something tells me the one you're referring to is probably the first one.  Can you elaborate?

 

Thanks,

 

John

[ChuckS]

Practiscore Competitor is the app you want to compare competitors, diddle scores and time to do what if's. You can even do the evil cross-divison comparisons. It is a great app.

[HCH]

10 hours ago, euxx said:

 

You can just get the PractiScore Competitor app. It shows everything - down to the hits scored on targets, individual NS and procedural penalties. And then more...

 

 

Or they could add a column to show penalties... I mean, EZwinscore had that, so it can’t be that hard. And the penalties show up on the USPSA results. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by HCH

[euxx]

12 minutes ago, HCH said:

Or they could add a column to show penalties... I mean, EZwinscore had that, so it can’t be that hard. And the penalties show up on the USPSA results. 

 

Yes they could and you also can see that column in old-style html results. Button is at the bottom.

 

But, seriously, get the PractiScore Competitor app...

[teros135]

1 hour ago, ChuckS said:

Practiscore Competitor is the app you want to compare competitors, diddle scores and time to do what if's. You can even do the evil cross-divison comparisons. It is a great app.

 

And WELL worth the price