Popper Calibration Procedure

[IPSC CHIK1]

case study

the 2000 uspsa nationals, womens' super squad. the shooter hits the popper in the circle and it does not fall. RM is called for a calibration. he steps OUT of the shooting box so he is standing square to the popper, as from the shooting box the popper was on an angle. we all protested that he should be IN the position that competitors were required to use. he refused. the popper fell and the competitor was scored a miss.

two shooter later the RM is called again, same popper. this time he shoots from IN the shooting box. we call for a reshoot for the prior competitor as the calibration was not performed from the same place. again he refuses.

this RM was just plain wrong!

DVC

SharonAnne L2387

PS, i was NOT the penalized shooter

[Skywalker]

IPSC Chik1,

this sounds like real poor RM handling, at least.

Rulebook 14, Appendix C, Point 3, last sentence:

---

All challenged calibrations, must be done from the approximate point where the competitor shot at the Popper.

---

IMO the RM should have given a valid reason to conduct a different calibration verification for the two shooters.

What really puzzles me on this case study is: given the enormous amount of sentences in the whole rulebook stating that competitors shall be presented with the same challenges, grounds, targets and judgements, why did the RM choose to differently manage the two PP calibration verifications, when instead executing the same procedure for each shooter would have been easier?

Are there some other facts that should be taken into account?

How far from the box was the position the RM shot the first PP verification? A single step wouldn't allow for much different visual angle at a distance of 10-15 metres.