Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!
DKorn

What Information Can You Use in Scoring an Unpasted Target (9.1.4)

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, DKorn said:

So it’s pretty clear to me that we almost all agree that if the scoring RO saw the 2 unpasted holes before the shooter engaged it, and was able to see where those holes are, that you can and should score the target (Charlie-Mike, in this case). 

 

I’m still not sure if “I remember that the previous shooter had two alphas on this target” is a good enough rationale to support scoring the target - how is this any different in principle from reviewing the previous shooter’s scoresheet, which is clearly not allowed?

That came up in a between-Nationals CRO class.  Jay said "if you are 100% sure you remember the previous hits, score the new ones and drive on".

 

I have no idea why scoresheet-reviewing was disallowed, assuming the scorekeeper is sure which one is on which line-- it didn't used to be, so must have been driven by some Arb or fiasco somewhere, like most new rules.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, shred said:

That came up in a between-Nationals CRO class.  Jay said "if you are 100% sure you remember the previous hits, score the new ones and drive on".

 

I have no idea why scoresheet-reviewing was disallowed-- it didn't used to be, so must have been driven by some Arb or fiasco somewhere, like most new rules.

 

 

Interesting. That’s not what I would’ve expected - I’ve emailed the RMI local to me to get his thoughts but haven’t heard back yet. I’ll let everyone know what he thinks as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, shred said:

That came up in a between-Nationals CRO class.  Jay said "if you are 100% sure you remember the previous hits, score the new ones and drive on".

 

I have no idea why scoresheet-reviewing was disallowed, assuming the scorekeeper is sure which one is on which line-- it didn't used to be, so must have been driven by some Arb or fiasco somewhere, like most new rules.

 

It showed up in the 2014 rule book...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, DKorn said:

’m still not sure if “I remember that the previous shooter had two alphas on this target” is a good enough rationale to support scoring the target - how is this any different in principle from reviewing the previous shooter’s scoresheet, which is clearly not allowed?

Poor choice of phrase-ology is the only difference. You're latching onto a language thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2019 at 5:44 AM, Bagellord said:

 

There is no benefit to the shooter rule - that's a common misconception bred from people trying to keep local matches flowing by not having reshoots, and not knowing the rules.

I never said the was a rule. 

ROs use judgement all the time. As historically demonstrated on this site, not every situation is covered by the rule book. Hence,

The RO interprets the rules in situations all the time. It is not a common misconception it is the reality. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, shred said:

That came up in a between-Nationals CRO class.  Jay said "if you are 100% sure you remember the previous hits, score the new ones and drive on".

 

I have no idea why scoresheet-reviewing was disallowed, assuming the scorekeeper is sure which one is on which line-- it didn't used to be, so must have been driven by some Arb or fiasco somewhere, like most new rules.

 

I have heard similar thoughts from instructors of the ROI.  The job of the CRO is to ensure the stage runs smoothly and efficiently;

To the point of asking the RM to make judgements instead of holding up the squad.

 

I have been to more than a few Nats where targets were pulled , the squad continued to run and the RM eventually came and issued the judgement. 

 

Ever been to Nats in Vegas where squads were backed up? Or the afternoon shooters got back to the hotel well after sundown?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sarge said:

He said he said? If an RM sided against an RO who KNOWS what he saw in this situation, that RM should be retrained. 

That RM would get handed a timer and end up an RO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

That RM would get handed a timer and end up an RO

😂👏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, shred said:

I have no idea why scoresheet-reviewing was disallowed, assuming the scorekeeper is sure which one is on which line-- 

 

 

imho it's not 100% reliable to remember which one is on which line. Most of the time we try to score in the same order, but it is not unusual at all for small differences to creep in. You might call an array of close targets starting on one side sometimes, but you might start on the other side a different time, or call all of them except the one that needs an overlay, etc... etc....  So you could say it was probably the right one, but I would hesitate to say I was certain based solely on the scoresheet.  However, if you visually remember the exact target, then you can be sure it's the right one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use all available legal data. If one of my RO's tells me he/she is 100 percent sure of a previous score, then I am good with that.

 

Many times an RO will score the same target or targets. Remembering a non pasted no shoot hit, hard cover hit or previous hits on the scoring target is not unusual.

 

If I'm not comfortable with the process, reshoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

But it is also important to be fair; never lose sight of your job. It’s not to make shooters behave a certain way. It is to allow all the competitors to have a fun match which is scored fairly and whose rules are enforced in line with the rulebook. Even the sections you don’t personally like.
 

Sound advice. Nothing worse than an RO/CRO on a power trip or hatred towards a division you are shooting. And then top it off with not up to date with the current rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He said he said? If an RM sided against an RO who KNOWS what he saw in this situation, that RM should be retrained. 


I’ve been in this exact position more than once...
Siding with the RO IS the way to go... UNLESS another RO is EQUALLY 100% of the opposite opinion...

2 cases—
1. He shot only 2 shots at that target.. says RO 1.. RO2 yes from the position you could see from.. he fired 2 make ups towards it from this location and I don’t think you could see that because of the wall.

2. DQ 180. RO 1- I saw the muzzle and it was beyond 180. RO2- I saw that and you were running, I suspect your perspective is skewed.. I am sure he didn’t brake 180


If it was all 100% black and white, it would be easy..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RadarTech said:

 


I’ve been in this exact position more than once...
Siding with the RO IS the way to go... UNLESS another RO is EQUALLY 100% of the opposite opinion...

2 cases—
1. He shot only 2 shots at that target.. says RO 1.. RO2 yes from the position you could see from.. he fired 2 make ups towards it from this location and I don’t think you could see that because of the wall.

2. DQ 180. RO 1- I saw the muzzle and it was beyond 180. RO2- I saw that and you were running, I suspect your perspective is skewed.. I am sure he didn’t brake 180


If it was all 100% black and white, it would be easy..

 

Agreed. But the RO and CRO should have had the discussion before you were called or showed up. If two RO's have differing opinions in either of those scenarios and I'm the CRO I won't even bug the RM with it. And I won't argue or debate a call of one of my RO's unless it's clear he maybe doesn't understand a rule etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. But the RO and CRO should have had the discussion before you were called or showed up. If two RO's have differing opinions in either of those scenarios and I'm the CRO I won't even bug the RM with it. And I won't argue or debate a call of one of my RO's unless it's clear he maybe doesn't understand a rule etc.

It’s a teaching moment in rules, positional responsibility, and tact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sarge said:

Agreed. But the RO and CRO should have had the discussion before you were called or showed up. If two RO's have differing opinions in either of those scenarios and I'm the CRO I won't even bug the RM with it. And I won't argue or debate a call of one of my RO's unless it's clear he maybe doesn't understand a rule etc.

 

1 hour ago, Sarge said:

Agreed. But the RO and CRO should have had the discussion before you were called or showed up. If two RO's have differing opinions in either of those scenarios and I'm the CRO I won't even bug the RM with it. And I won't argue or debate a call of one of my RO's unless it's clear he maybe doesn't understand a rule etc.

 

Ive experienced this at the Reno Nationals. DQ situation, one RO said yes the other RO said no. After some discussion about us looking foolish to attempt to DQ someone in this scenario,, and the calling RO stating he might have not had the best angle, I awarded the shooter a re-shoot. No hurt feelings and as been stated a teaching situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2019 at 11:13 AM, pjb45 said:

I never said the was a rule. 

ROs use judgement all the time. As historically demonstrated on this site, not every situation is covered by the rule book. Hence,

The RO interprets the rules in situations all the time. It is not a common misconception it is the reality. 

 

 

When it comes to scoring there is no judgement and everything is covered in the rules.  Scoring is either correct, incorrect, or undetermined.  There is nothing else.  If it's incorrect it should be rectified and if it's undetermined it is a reshoot.  There is zero judgement in scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, theWacoKid said:

  There is zero judgement in scoring.

Other than perf calls. If there wasn’t judgement involved why would RM’s be called to confirm. I’m the shooter and looks like an alpha. You’re the RO and it looks like a Charlie. One of us will be right, the other wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, theWacoKid said:

 

When it comes to scoring there is no judgement and everything is covered in the rules.  Scoring is either correct, incorrect, or undetermined.  There is nothing else.  If it's incorrect it should be rectified and if it's undetermined it is a reshoot.  There is zero judgement in scoring.

 

When an overlay is used; 

The RO/CRO use their judgement as to center of the bullet hole and adjust the overlay to what they perceive as the center. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...