Two bullets, one hole

[bimmer1980]

10 hours ago, njl said:

 

These were 3yd targets.  I did a bit of practice today, and and decided to focus on speed for most of the shooting.  I setup 2 targets a bit more than 6 feet apart at 3yds.  The drill was draw and fire 2 rounds into each of them.  I don't consider myself to be terribly fast.  In matches, I generally make up for lack of speed with accuracy.  In the 5x5 classifier, the past couple of times I've done it, I've landed at the faster end of SSP SS (25-25.5s).  I expect I'll eventually make it at least to EX if I can shave some time off my draws, reload, and maybe go a little faster SHO without giving up any points.

Anyway, I was able to do this drill fairly consistently in the 2.5-3s range (more often right about 2.5s), staying down-zero.  Splits on each target were generally 0.2s +- a few hundredths.  My draw was typically 1.5s or more, and transition time 0.7s +- 0.1.  This was probably about the speed at which I shot the above mentioned portion of the stage in the match.  I guess I should have tried...but I don't know that I can manipulate the trigger any faster than this (for splits on a target) without totally ignoring the sights.

 

It´s not the trigger, it´s the draw and the transitions. In USPSA/IPSC we aim for sub 2 seconds, 7 yards, 3 targets, all A´s. 

 

[gerritm]

On 8/14/2021 at 1:28 PM, Nolan said:

 

At 3 - 5 yards, depending on angles and where the RO is standing, it is very possible to see/notice the bullet strike the target in peripheral vision while still focused on the shooter and gun.

 

Nolan

This! Pretty easy if you have the right angle to see where the PCC is pointed and see the shooter when at 3-5 yards it is almost touching the targets.

 

gerritm

[njl]

8 hours ago, bimmer1980 said:

 

It´s not the trigger, it´s the draw and the transitions. In USPSA/IPSC we aim for sub 2 seconds, 7 yards, 3 targets, all A´s. 

 

Clearly, I'm not at that level.  I'd have to cut my draw and transition times in half to approach that kind of speed, and then hopefully still be accurate at that speed/distance.

[Ssanders224]

On 8/13/2021 at 9:47 AM, gerritm said:

To add I have had several times on close targets, where a sharp RO has said he saw me shoot twice and hit the same spot so no need for overlay.

 

gerritm

 

That's not a "sharp" RO, and that's not how scoring works. 

[Ssanders224]

I'll be frank. 

 

-If you are regularly shooting "true doubles" I can almost guarantee you some of them were actually misses. 

-If some of them aren't actually misses, you are spending WAY to much time trying to be precise. Even then it's pretty rare to shoot a "true" double that can't be discerned as two holes. 

-Do not, in any way, attempt to NOT shoot a "true" double. That's counter productive, and completely unnecessary. Go faster. 

-RO's score what's on the target. No what they might have seen while you were shooting. 

 

[Boomstick303]

10 minutes ago, Ssanders224 said:

That's not a "sharp" RO, and that's not how scoring works. 

 

It amazes me how this is not understood.  I have watched a PCC shooter muzzle not move, shoot a perfect double, and there was absolutely nothing I could do as RO but give the score as an Alpha - Mike.  It does not matter what I think I saw, or truly saw.  That does not matter when it comes to scoring the target.  The shooter understanding how the rules work completely understood, and did not gripe.  

Edited August 16, 2021 by Boomstick303

[Ssanders224]

7 minutes ago, Boomstick303 said:

 

It amazes me how this is not understood.  I have watched a PCC shooter muzzle not move, shoot a perfect double, and there was absolutely nothing I could do as RO but give the score as an Alpha - Mike.  It does not matter what I think I saw, or truly saw.  That does not matter when it comes to scoring the target.  The shooter understanding how the rules work completely understood, and did not gripe.  

 

You mean RO's shouldn't just do whatever "feels" right at the time? Gasp. 

[Boomstick303]

3 minutes ago, Ssanders224 said:

"feels" right

 

Feelings...........  what are those?

[Brooke]

Alpha Mike. RO's don't assume anything.  You have a vivid imagination  

[twodownzero]

On 8/10/2021 at 4:05 PM, GrumpyOne said:

If you are good enough to shoot perfect doubles, it should be no problem for you to space them out a little bit.

 

That's what I always say, too.

 

6 hours ago, Brooke said:

Alpha Mike. RO's don't assume anything.  You have a vivid imagination  

 

Well, there is an unspoken assumption either way, either that two bullets didn't pass through the same hole without leaving any evidence or that they did.  Absent the ability to determine from the target itself and your scoring RO, you're stuck with the simplest answer, which is that it's pretty rare for two bullets to go through the same hole and not leave any evidence.

[Bwenning]

On 8/15/2021 at 9:21 PM, njl said:

without totally ignoring the sights.

At 3 yards the back or slide of the gun should be good enough, no need for sights at this yardage.

[njl]

10 hours ago, Brooke said:

Alpha Mike. RO's don't assume anything.  You have a vivid imagination  

 

Not entirely true, at least in IDPA.  As mentioned above, 4.12A allows for the use of stationary targets at 3yds or closer with the down-zero cut out, and the assumption that all shots at those targets that don't leave holes outside the down-zero went through the cut out.

[njl]

3 hours ago, Bwenning said:

At 3 yards the back or slide of the gun should be good enough, no need for sights at this yardage.

 

Does anyone else LOL at the irony of this statement and the others that my double must have been an alpha - mike?  "It's so close, you don't even need sights, but you must have missed the target entirely, because perfect doubles just don't happen." 

I know I didn't miss.  Regardless, I'm pretty sure I made the right call not making a fuss about it at the match.

[Cuz]

22 minutes ago, njl said:

 

Not entirely true, at least in IDPA.  As mentioned above, 4.12A allows for the use of stationary targets at 3yds or closer with the down-zero cut out, and the assumption that all shots at those targets that don't leave holes outside the down-zero went through the cut out.

In that scenario, does the SO get to use his judgement as to whether or not he thinks your shots went through  the cutout or if you missed the target completely?

 

or do you automatically get credit for center hits if there are no bullet holes in the target?

[vluc]

How IDPA SO's score and USPSA RO's score is apparently different enough.  Without evidence, I don't assume anything on a target.  This is a rabbit hole that I would not care to go down.

[Boomstick303]

21 hours ago, Bwenning said:

At 3 yards the back or slide of the gun should be good enough, no need for sights at this yardage.

 

This has absolutely nothing to do with how the rules dictate how to score paper in either IDPA and/or USPSA.  So there is no irony in this statement.

 

17 hours ago, njl said:

I know I didn't miss.

 

I do not know how IDPA rules work, I do not play in IDPA.  Maybe someone with in depth knowledge of IDPA rules can chime in regarding IDPA rules.  In USPSA it does not matter what you know.  It does not matter what people thought, what you thought, what the RO thought.  The rules spell out how to score paper targets.  That's the point.  It is scored Alpha-Mike. 

 

How else would it make sense to score it?  You say you know you hit it twice!!  It's a double!!  I have seen plenty of people including myself think I could not miss a target at that range only to be told by others, I pulled off the target early.  The reason for the rule the way it is, provides irrefutable proof that everyone is scored by.  Unfortunately for that extremely rare perfect double, this means Alpha-Mike.  UPSPA tries not allow for speculation in the way targets are scored.  That can be seen in the way other rules are written, like for example scoring targets that already have holes.  You cannot reference the last shooters score card to distinguish hits on any target for the present shooter. If you can tell for certain as RO what holes were shot by the current shooter then you can score it like 40 vs 9mm holes, or distinguishable grease/coated bullet rings (blue bullets vs grease rings), etc.  If not it is a reshoot.  Its not left to speculation.

 

At the last Level 2 USPSA I participated in, the RO called the RM to score an almost perfect double I had on a target.  The RO didn't feel it was a double.  I disagreed, I could see two distinct grease rings that did not overlap perfectly.  The holes combined were the width of the 45 hole on the USPSA overlay.  The RM ruled a double.  He said it was the only "double" he ruled as 2 alpha out of 7 contested doubles over the weekend.  Do you think there were 6 perfect doubles shot that weekend?  All six of those shooters "KNEW they shot two in the same hole!!!"  Enough to challenge it and ask for the RM to score the target.  

 

17 hours ago, njl said:

Not entirely true, at least in IDPA.  As mentioned above, 4.12A allows for the use of stationary targets at 3yds or closer with the down-zero cut out, and the assumption that all shots at those targets that don't leave holes outside the down-zero went through the cut out.

 

Sounds awesome!!! Allowing a target to be scored upon speculation.  Another reason to never shoot IDPA.

Edited August 18, 2021 by Boomstick303

[njl]

26 minutes ago, Cuz said:

In that scenario, does the SO get to use his judgement as to whether or not he thinks your shots went through  the cutout or if you missed the target completely?

 

or do you automatically get credit for center hits if there are no bullet holes in the target?

 

That's a good question.  I'm not an SO.  In such a scenario, if you're shooting from retention and totally miss the target, and the SO sees your shot impacted the ground under the target, is that an alpha (no extra holes in the target with the down-zero cut out) or mike (because if you hit the ground under the target, you certainly didn't hit the target)?

[Ssanders224]

18 minutes ago, njl said:

 

That's a good question.  I'm not an SO.  In such a scenario, if you're shooting from retention and totally miss the target, and the SO sees your shot impacted the ground under the target, is that an alpha (no extra holes in the target with the down-zero cut out) or mike (because if you hit the ground under the target, you certainly didn't hit the target)?

 

This is exactly why the USPSA rules are written the way they are. 

 

That IDPA rule is nonsensical. 

Edited August 17, 2021 by Ssanders224

[SGT_Schultz]

1 hour ago, njl said:

 

Does anyone else LOL at the irony of this statement and the others that my double must have been an alpha - mike?  "It's so close, you don't even need sights, but you must have missed the target entirely, because perfect doubles just don't happen." 

 

 

You're conflating things to build a strawman. 

 

With a proper index and grip, it's easy enough to engage 3 yard targets and get 2A with near sub 20 splits and zero visual reference to the gun.

 

With a s#!tty index and grip it's easy enough to miss at 3 yards.  When transitioning too soon it's very easy to miss at 3 yards.

 

When I RO someone I go strictly by the visual evidence on the target.  No visual evidence of a "perfect" double = alpha, mike.  I couldn't care less what the shooter thinks he did.  I also couldn't care less what IDPA does.  They are the example of what not to do.

 

Edited August 17, 2021 by SGT_Schultz

[njl]

10 minutes ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

You're conflating things to build a strawman. 

 

With a proper index and grip, it's easy enough to engage 3 yard targets and get 2A with near sub 20 splits and zero visual reference to the gun.

 

With a s#!tty index and grip it's easy enough to miss at 3 yards.  When transitioning too soon it's very easy to miss at 3 yards.

 

When I RO someone I go strictly by the visual evidence on the target.  No visual evidence of a "perfect" double = alpha, mike.  I couldn't care less what the shooter thinks he did.  I also couldn't care less what IDPA does.  They are the example of what not to do.

 

 

And the crappy grip that caused one miss either happened .2s before or after the other shot that was a nice centered alpha and didn't affect any of the other targets?

Bottom line is, I know what I hit (at this distance...if it were much farther away, this thread wouldn't exist) and I understand that the rules are not on my side in this case.  Maybe a scoring overlay would have helped...but I've never seen one at a match, and there's no mention of them in the current IDPA rule book, so I don't know if they're even permitted.  My guess is no.

[Cuz]

30 minutes ago, Ssanders224 said:

 

This is exactly why the USPSA rules are written the way they are. 

 

That IDPA rule is nonsensical. 

I agree. On the few occasions I shot IDPA, I shot it just like USPSA and let the SO assess penalties as he felt necessary. There was nothing else going on that weekend and my kid wanted to give it a try. 
 

And, for the record, I think all my “mikes” are doubles regardless how far away the target is. One time, I shot like 8 doubles in a match and the ROs didn’t give me any of them.  Damn fool ROs. 

All kidding aside, I’ve missed very close targets at a match and I remember thinking there was no way I missed at that range, no way.  But alas, I’ve only challenged it once when it was pretty clear and the kid scoring was new and didn’t know what to look for. Every other time I took the “mike” and it came with a good deal of ribbing from all the “friendlies” I drove to the match with. Sometimes it lasted for the next few stages. 
 

All in good fun. 

[SGT_Schultz]

20 minutes ago, njl said:

Bottom line is, I know what I hit (at this distance...if it were much farther away, this thread wouldn't exist)

 

The only people that I know that are this obsessed with perfect doubles are D and low C class........

[outerlimits]

3 minutes ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

The only people that I know that are this obsessed with perfect doubles are D and low C class........

you should shoot with a super squad once in awhile...

[Ssanders224]

14 minutes ago, outerlimits said:

you should shoot with a super squad once in awhile...

Idk.

Honestly I’ve very rarely heard anyone on a super squad argue over a “double”. Have it overlaid? Sure.  Continue to go on much about it after the call? Rarely, if ever. 
 

[Cuz]

1 hour ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

The only people that I know that are this obsessed with perfect doubles are D and low C class........

ouch!