Confused People, Score Sheets, And Post Match Scoring

[Vlad]

I posted this to the USPSA forum as well, but I'm curious to see also what you guys think.

We had a strange thing happen our latest match and it raised some questions about what was the right thing to do. I have my opinions (and the rules which I think back them up) but I would like to see what you think.

The match had 7 stages, 7 squads, each squads self-RO's. We try to make sure that each squad has a list a couple of people who can handle a score board and timer, even if they are not always certified RO's. We make sure to remind everyone at the start of each match that if there are ANY questions about a stage they should look up the match director and get it solved before they start shooting the stage.

One of the stages required 3 shots per target. This was indicated on the course description in 3 places, on the score sheet in 4 places, and mentioned during the shooter meeting. It was also read by one of the squad members out loud to the entire squad when they arrived at that stage. You see where I'm going with this, right? One squad managed to ignore all the obvious signs and the first 7 of the 9 shooters only shot 2 shots per target. Even after they read it out loud. Don't ask me why they have done this. I can not even imagine it.

As soon as they figure out they screwed up, they went and grabed the match director.

I have two questions:

1) What is the correct thing to do DURING the match when something like this happens? I think if there was a dedicated RO that screwed up, the shooters should have gotten a reshoot. However with the shooters themselves being the RO's, and likely 2 or 3 different RO's having screwed up and 9 people not noticing it, the question of fairness to the rest of the shooters on other squads (who all got it right) came up. What is the call?

2) Assuming that no one notices, and the first person to notice the problem is the stats person after the match is over. How do you score missing shots?

Vlad

[bgary]

How do you score missing shots?

9.7.5 says that if they *can* reshoot, they are *required* to reshoot. If a reshoot is not possible, then 9.7.6 comes into play...

9.7.6.2 - if insufficient hits or misses have been recorded on the scoresheet, those which have been recorded will be deemed complete and conclusive.

loosely translated, that means you give the shooter credit for the hits on the scorecard, and you give them "no penalty mikes" for the missing hits.

B

[ima45dv8]

1) What is the correct thing to do DURING the match when something like this happens? I think if there was a dedicated RO that screwed up, the shooters should have gotten a reshoot. However with the shooters themselves being the RO's, and likely 2 or 3 different RO's having screwed up and 9 people not noticing it, the question of fairness to the rest of the shooters on other squads (who all got it right) came up. What is the call?

I would have to view this in the same light as someone blowing past a target and forgetting to engage it. "Sorry, you had the same walkthrough as everyone else. No reshoot for brainfarts."

I would say in this case, no reshoots.

2) Assuming that no one notices, and the first person to notice the problem is the stats person after the match is over. How do you score missing shots?

As Misses.

[Vlad]

9.7.5 says that if they *can* reshoot, they are *required* to reshoot. If a reshoot is not possible, then 9.7.6 comes into play...

I would have to view this in the same light as someone blowing past a target and forgetting to engage it. "Sorry, you had the same walkthrough as everyone else. No reshoot for brainfarts."

Well .. thats the problem isn't it? What do I tell a shooter who had a brain fart on a different squad and shot only 2 per target? He has the same brain fart as the other entire squad, but he had it all by his lonesome. Does he get a reshoot for being a dummy?

As for after the fact, no penalty mike happens to be what I also think is the right answer. BUT, how do you score them if you know what happened and no re-shoot was granted? Should the score sheets have been fixed with misses during the match if a reshoot was not granted?

Edited November 28, 2006 by Vlad

[ima45dv8]

As for after the fact, no penalty mike happens to be what I also think is the right answer. BUT, how do you score them if you know what happened and no re-shoot was granted? Should the score sheets have been fixed with misses during the match if a reshoot was not granted?

I see them as penalty Mikes, the same as I would in the example of a shooter blowing past a target. The 2 Mikes and the FTE are penalties in that instance. I think these Mikes should be penalties also.

If I have one scoresheet on one stage for one shooter in a squad that doesn't have the correct number of hits recorded, I tend to enter those as NPMs since it was the scorekeepers error.

**All of the above based on the original premise that the errors weren't discovered by stats until after the match.

[bgary]

I see them as penalty Mikes, the same as I would in the example of a shooter blowing past a target

If the RO on the stage catches it, you're right. Mikes would be penalized.

But the question was about what to do if the problem is not caught until the scorecard arrives in stats, after the match is over.

According to the rules, you can't give the shooter points that don't appear on the scorecard. You also can't give the shooter *penalties* that don't appear on the scorecard. The only thing you can do is to enter the scorecard - as it is recorded on paper - into EZWS, and basically "zero" any missing hits. No points, but no penalties either. Those hits just "don't exist".

Bruce

[ima45dv8]

I see them as penalty Mikes, the same as I would in the example of a shooter blowing past a target

If the RO on the stage catches it, you're right. Mikes would be penalized.

But the question was about what to do if the problem is not caught until the scorecard arrives in stats, after the match is over.

According to the rules, you can't give the shooter points that don't appear on the scorecard. You also can't give the shooter *penalties* that don't appear on the scorecard. The only thing you can do is to enter the scorecard - as it is recorded on paper - into EZWS, and basically "zero" any missing hits. No points, but no penalties either. Those hits just "don't exist".

Bruce

Ummmm....I see your (and Mr. Gary's) point. Unless the scoresheets are amended at the match to reflect the misses, whether the stats people *know* what happened ot not, they would be NPMs.

Thanks to you both for setting me straight on that.

[bgary]

Should the score sheets have been fixed with misses during the match if a reshoot was not granted?

Just to complete the scenario...

*During* the match, there's no provision in the rules for "fixing" a scoresheet, after it has been signed by the RO it is considered a definitive document so you can't simply "add" missing hits or misses. If the scoresheet is found to be incomplete during the match, the only recourse provided by the rules is to *require* the shooter to re-shoot the stage.

Note that if a shooter is required to reshoot a stage and refuses, his score is *zero* for the stage....

B

Edited November 28, 2006 by bgary

[John Heiter]

If there are assigned RO's reading the description the same way every time and a bunch of people blow it I score them as penalty mikes but

* if there is no way to guarantee that everyone got the same reading, the same walkthrough, etc.

* two squads obviously shot the stage differently, and

* it is too late to have one of them reshoot it

then I toss the stage.

[Vlad]

Should the score sheets have been fixed with misses during the match if a reshoot was not granted?

Just to complete the scenario...

*During* the match, there's no provision in the rules for "fixing" a scoresheet, after it has been signed by the RO it is considered a definitive document so you can't simply "add" missing hits or misses. If the scoresheet is found to be incomplete during the match, the only recourse provided by the rules is to *require* the shooter to re-shoot the stage.

What about

9.7.2 If corrections to the score sheet are required, these will be clearly

entered onto the original and other copies of the competitor’s

score sheets. The competitor and the Range Officer should initial

any corrections.

This reads to me like you can make corrections to a scoresheet after it has been signed.

Over all I'm inclined to say that the correct solution would be to toss out the stage, though it irks me because in some ways it punishes the rest of the shooters for one squads mistake. For the same reason, a re-shoot seems to be against the spirit of the game as it gives shooters a second change at a stage they screwed up by their own lack of attention. In this particular case a reshoot for a whole squad would have backed up the match past sunset in any case.

Edited November 28, 2006 by Vlad

[Flexmoney]

1. It sure sounds like EVERYBODY got the same walk-thru.

The stage should stay, then.

[George Post]

Vlad,

What would you do if those 7 shooters were not on the same squad?

How would handle the score sheets if there was a stage with ten targets (requiring 20 hits) and there were only 10 hits (one on each) and no misses recorded?

George

[wgnoyes]

My answer over on USPSA based on 9.7.6.2 was:

To deal with the last question, if the match is over, there's nothing to be done for it in the way of reshoots, obviously. You have to score what you have. So with any of these given competitors scoresheets, you would score the 2 indicated hits on a target and a no-penalty-mike for the miss. The reason is, you don't KNOW that the competitor missed the target so you can't ding him with a penalty mike, but you can't give him hits that you cannot verify he actually got, either.

In other words, if the stage is going to stand, then you work with what you've got.

[Vlad]

Just as an update, I ran this by John Amidon, and his take is that no reshoot needs to be granted and the stage stays. If the problem is discovered during the match and all parties agree, then the score sheets can be modified as per 9.7.2 and the missing shots marked as misses. If they don't agree, or the problem is found after the match then 9.7.6 and 9.7.6.2 come into play and NPM's are the answer.

Thanx all.

[Flexmoney]

Sounds like all the bases are covered.

[richardschennberg]

Although probably not quite equitable, the shooters with no Mikes market on the score sheet got lucky. They are REQUIRED to reshoot the stage. If not possible, they still get the points they shot but not the Mikes. A shooter with one Mike per target on his score sheet gets a zero on the stage (do the math) and no reshoot.

[nmipsc]

EZ win score you have to go back and Modify the stage discription to have no penality mikes. I give them ALL the MIKES or ALL the PROCEDURALS for not shooting the Correct amount. After the match, No way to Have them reshoot it, I'd throw out the stage. score everyone on the remaining stages. It is an advantage, big time, not to get the Mikes much less faster time on top of it. seen this a million times, it was follow the leader. he shot two so that must be the way to do it.

[bgary]

EZ win score you have to go back and Modify the stage discription to have no penality mikes.

You may want to update your copy of EZWS. That changed several versions ago, and you no longer have to change the stage definition - all stages have a place for "no penalty mikes" by default.

I give them ALL the MIKES or ALL the PROCEDURALS for not shooting the Correct amount.

That's great... if you're the RO, and the shooter did not shoot the required number of rounds at each target, dinging him/her for the Mikes is the right thing to do.

But the question was about "what do we do if we don't catch this until stats processes the scorecards after the match is over?"

The rules say that if a scorecard is incomplete, and it is possible for the shooter to reshoot the stage, they *must* reshoot the stage. If it is not possible to reshoot the stage, the hits and misses are entered into EZWS the way they appear on the scorecard... you can't just "give them" Mikes and PEs. It is not the job of stats to decide how many hits or misses the shooter "must have gotten" - stat's job is to enter into the computer the hits and misses that are recorded on the scorecard. No more, no less.

There are rules to cover situations like these. We should follow them.

Bruce

[Scott R]

Bruce,

The rules don't spell out the method of getting the correct number of rounds entered when there are insufficient hits or misses recorded.

9.7.6.2 If insufficient hits or misses have been recorded on the

score sheet, those which have been recorded will be

deemed complete and conclusive.

Now unless there is something I missed (entirely possible), it looks like you made an assumption that it was proper to add the missing rounds as NPMs. Assuming that reshoots are not possible, I would lean towards recording them as misses. After all that is what they are. There is no need for PEs as they did engage the targets at least once each. In my opinion the shooter/s in question had the brain fart and their scores should reflect it in full, giving them NPMs does not do that and is not fair to those who read and understood the course description.

Understand I am not trying to be argumentative, only looking for a fair method to apply a rule which appears to be incomplete in direction.

[Vlad]

Well, what happens AFTER the match is pretty clear, they get No Penalty Mikes. Thats very clear in the rules. What happens during the match is a bit more confusing to me. Bruce thinks they should get reshoots, John Amidon thinks they should not.

After sending him the very same description of the events I have included in this thread (I cut and pasted it) he replied:

Its not unusual with the system used, that something along the way gets messed up, however, per rule 3.1, it is the competitors responsibility to safely fulfill the requirements of a course of fire and it is the matches responsibility to provide a written stage briefing which must explain the requirements.

They should not be allowed a re-shoot based on the facts you presented(the WSB was provided for all with the requirements of 3 rounds per target indicated on the WSB as well as the score sheets.

At this point I can see both sides. I think that considering the totality of USPSA rules and their intent, granting a reshoot would be unfair to all other shooters in the match. We would be rewarding a shooters brain fart. On the other hand, the rules do say that a incorrect score sheet requires a reshoot because of 9.7.5. On the other other hand a score shee CAN be corrected as oer 9.7.2.

To me the logic of those two rules is that if a score sheet can be corrected, with both shooter and RO agreeing, then you correct the score sheet. If the match ends without anyone noticing. 9.7.6.2 takes over. The real problem shows up when you discover the problem during the match and the shooter and RO do not agree on correcting the score sheet. I guess at that point a reshoot become needed, unless for some reason you can't have on (like getting dark outside) in which case we get back to 9.7.6 and 9.7.6.2.

It is an advantage, big time, not to get the Mikes much less faster time on top of it. seen this a million times, it was follow the leader. he shot two so that must be the way to do it.

I doubt this is true for most cases. In this case, the shooters would drop 10 rounds, thats 50 points from the maximum. Thats no way to make that up with time, specially when it would have only cost you an extra split per target to get there.

I give them ALL the MIKES or ALL the PROCEDURALS for not shooting the Correct amount

What procedurals? They enagaged the target and the course was scored Comstock.

Edited December 2, 2006 by Vlad

[Nik Habicht]

To me the logic of those two rules is that if a score sheet can be corrected, with both shooter and RO agreeing, then you correct the score sheet. If the match ends without anyone noticing. 9.7.6.2 takes over. The real problem shows up when you discover the problem during the match and the shooter and RO do not agree on correcting the score sheet. I guess at that point a reshoot become needed, unless for some reason you can't have on (like getting dark outside) in which case we get back to 9.7.6 and 9.7.6.2.

Vlad,

all the shooter and RO need to agree on is that the shooter fired two rounds, not three, and that the misses are a clerical error. If the RO decides to correct the scoresheet ---- the shooter can't object if the facts are not in dispute. I suppose 10.6.1 could apply here --- but every time I've had to discuss a scoring dispute with a shooter, I've had the shooter tell me the truth. That occasionally ended with an amended score sheet ---- but hey, that's life......

I suspect we had RM error here as well ---- since I know he at least had a conversation with the squad while this was going on......

[bgary]

Bruce,

The rules don't spell out the method of getting the correct number of rounds entered when there are insufficient hits or misses recorded.

9.7.6.2 If insufficient hits or misses have been recorded on the

score sheet, those which have been recorded will be

deemed complete and conclusive.

Let's separate two topics - the "score", from "the way the score is entered into the computer".

The rule quite clearly and completely states that, if there are not enough hits or misses on the scoresheet, then only those "recorded" will be used. So... if there are 30 rounds required, and only 20 hits (and no Mikes) on the scoresheet, and it is not possible to have the competitor re-shoot, then.... those 20 hits are deemed "complete". If they are all A's, the shooter gets 100 points. Period.

The second issue is "how do you get those 20 hits into the computer". If you put 20 A's into EZWS on a 30-round stage, it is going to [correctly] beep at you and tell you that there are not enough hits. The rules do *not* allow stats to "decide" what those missing hits should be - the score has to be based *only* on the fact that the scoresheet shows 20 hits and no mikes. The only way you can accomplish that in EZWS is to put 10 hits into the "no penalty Mike" box.

That's how you get the "correct score" (according to 9.7.6.2) into the computer.

Now unless there is something I missed (entirely possible), it looks like you made an assumption that it was proper to add the missing rounds as NPMs. Assuming that reshoots are not possible,

I'm saying that, from an EZWS perspective, that's the only way you can enter the score and have it *not* be different from what 9.7.6.2 requires. You can't add scoring hits that aren't on the scoresheet; and you can't add scoring *mikes* that aren't on the scoresheet. The score has to be based on only those hits that are recorded, so the rest have to be entered into EZWS as "nothing".

I would lean towards recording them as misses. After all that is what they are.

Ahhh.... but you don't really know that. All you know is that the hits are missing. They were not recorded as Mikes on the scoresheet, so you don't really know if they were A's that the RO forgot to write down, or M's that the RO forgot to write down, or shots that the shooter forgot to shoot. That's the point of 9.7.6.2 - in the lack of *fact*, you have to go with what is written on the scorecard... and nothing else.

Bruce

[bgary]

To me the logic of those two rules is that if a score sheet can be corrected, with both shooter and RO agreeing, then you correct the score sheet.

Ummm.... yeah. In theory.

I'll preface this by saying (from the perspective of running stats at something like 10 Nationals and a whole bunch of Area and other big matches), I am *really* black-and-white about stats. I firmly believe that what goes into the computer has to be *exactly* supported by what is on the scorecard. In other words, if a shooter comes to my door and has a question about what I've posted, the *only* acceptable scenario is where I can pull the physical scorecard and show that what is in the computer is what the RO wrote down (and the shooter signed). That's a "definitive document", and no assumptions can be valid if they aren't supported by the marks on the paper.

Having said that, there *are* situations where a scorecard can be corrected. Take two very common situations

1) Shooter gets 2-Alpha, Charlie-Mike. RO writes down 2-Alpha on T-1, then inadvertantly writes Charlie-Mike*also* on T-1. So, now T-1 is on the scorecard with 4 scoring hits, and T-2 has no hits (and no Mikes). This is a fairly simple mistake, and when these happen I generally chase down the shooter and the RO, tell them both what is going on, have them both initial it, and move along.

That's a *correction*. I can fix that under the rules, as long as I get both the shooter and RO to initial it, and I can authoritatively *defend* it because it doesn't materially change the information on the scorecard, it just puts the right numbers (which are already there) into the right places). I've never had a shooter decline a change like this.

2) RO puts a "tick-mark" next to the Procedural or No-Shoot box, but forgets to put a "real" number into the box. I canNOT assume that that little tick-mark outside the box is supposed to be a real number inside the box. If I can get the shooter to agree that they earned that penalty, then he and the RO initial the change, as above, and we're good to go. If he refuses to initial a change, I CANNOT MAKE THE CHANGE - I can't arbitrarily decide that the little pencil mark in a blank space means a penalty - I can only enter the number of penalties that are written in the penalty box... which is ZERO. No matter how much I *believe* that shooter earned a penalty, if I cannot support it with objective evidence on the scoresheet, I can't put it in the computer.

Note that this is *not* an "incomplete scoresheet", so 9.7.x does not come into play. Oh, and in 13 years of doing big-match stats, I've only had one shooter refuse to accept that change. I think of that every time I see him.

The scenario we're talking about *here*, though, is not a "correction" to an otherwise valid scoresheet. It is about dealing with an *incomplete* scoresheet. There are, simply, not enough hits recorded on the paper to make a complete score. In other words, you can't "correct" that without adding something to the scorecard that wasn't there when it was signed. And, once the targets are taped, there's no way to "prove" that the additions to the scorecard are "right". Hence, the requirement a reshoot - it falls under the umbrella of "if you can't determine a *definitive* score, then the shooter has to do it again".

let's put this in a different perspective. Rather than a shooter making the mistake, lets say the RO did. Lets say that on a 15-target stage, the RO filled in 14 targets, and forgot one, leaving it blank. He signs, the shooter signs, the scorecard comes into stats a couple hours later, and we catch it there.

The rules don't allow stats to arbitrarily decide what those missing hits should be. Nor do they allow the RO (or even the RM) to decide what those missing hits should be. I'd argue that - even if the RO "remembers" what those missing hits are, they cannot be added to the scoresheet as "corrections" - there is no way for the shooter or RO to verify that it is the definitive and correct score, and so the rules require that the competitor re-shoot the stage. In *rare* circumstances, a shooter or RO may be able to definitively resolve the issue (for example, the shooter may have his own stage notes, and sufficient honor to provide them for the record), but that's rare. In general, at a big match, if there is "missing stuff" on a scoresheet, and the correct score can't be derived from the actual marks on the paper, it's a reshoot.

Longwinded way of saying... in my opinion, there is a big difference between "correcting" a scorecard, when things were put in the wrong places, and "augmenting" a scorecard by adding information that wasn't there when it was signed. If there are insufficient hits or misses on a scorecard, the *only* recourse, in my opinion, is for the RM to order the competitor to reshoot the stage.

$.02

Bruce

Edited December 2, 2006 by bgary

[Vlad]

Bruce, please understand that in no way am I denying your greater experience or authority on the issue, but where does that leave me with an experienced stats person like yourself and John Amidon disagreeing? Perhaps this is an area in which the new rule book could be a bit more helpfull?

The rub is that the word correction is kinda broader then your description of acceptable changes. In fact your description comes closer to that of items listed in 9.7.4, which are changes which don't even require the shooter present. If this is what USPSA actually wants, so be it, I have no problem with it, but I think if that is case the current wording is flawed and BOD and NROI should clarify what types of corrections are permissible and what type are not.

I agree with trying to remember what hits were not scored on the 14th taped target is a bad idea and a reshoot should be required, but adding misses to targets to which both shooter and RO KNOW that only 2 shots were taken, is a different issue. We don't have to worry if those third shots were hits or misses. They just weren't there and short of some time/space discontinuity those shots were did not put holes in the paper.

Edited December 2, 2006 by Vlad

[bgary]

where does that leave me with an experienced stats person like yourself and John Amidon disagreeing?

Heh-heh-heh.... that's why, whenever an incomplete scoresheet comes into the stats shack, *my* job is to call the RM and hand it to him.

If he can solve it with the RO and shooter agreeing to a correction, all's good. If not, it is a reshoot. Either way, the *stats* operation has no place in adding things to a scoresheet. My goal, whether at a club match or a Nationals, is to be able to "prove" that the computer matches what was on the scoresheet and, in doing so, have stats never be a factor in the outcome of the match.

Notably, that's why I answered only the 2nd part of the original question, from the stats perspective the problem is very black-and-white easy to solve, after the match is over. *During* the match, it is an RM call

Bruce