BDH Posted June 1, 2003 Share Posted June 1, 2003 I shot a great stage today that had a couple of targets that had a piece of tape run across the middle of them (either horizontally or vertically). During the shooters meeting, each of these targets were declared as 'TWO' targets, requiring two rounds each for a total of four rounds on the single paper target. I've never seen this before, and was just curious if there is a problem with doing this? If not, then I assume that there is no problem with taking a 'single' target, running a piece of tape both vertically and horizontally and making it FOUR targets? Just curious...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Hmmm...I always thought you were supposed to cut the targets. Common sense has to enter into the equation sooner or later. I recall a target painted with black stripes like a freaking zebra and it was a swinger. I asked if that was legal and sure enough it is. Now imagine dividing a target with tape into quadrants to make four targets and painting black stripes, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Sounds OK to me.. After all cutting targets to simulate hard-cover is still at least marginally legal (right, Vince?), and you could think of it as two cut targets stuck edge-to-edge with a non-scoring border. The fact it's assembled from one piece of cardboard instead of two doesn't seem relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDH Posted June 2, 2003 Author Share Posted June 2, 2003 Like both of you said, personally I can not see anything wrong with this, but figured I would seek out the opinion of those wiser than I. Anyway, let's see..... if we use tape and divide a single target into 16 sections, we can pack an entire 32 round stage on to a single target! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 it'l legal. try putting a split target on a swinger. real fun lynn fwiw, if it ain't in the rule book as illegal, then it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Those yahoos at Memphis last year at the Tennessee Sectional did what Lynn just described. Although they had two of them. Wait a minute, Lynn was one of those yahoos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 I can't see anything wrong whit this practice, at least if you are going to preserve a portion of the A zone in each "section". In any case, I doubt that, apart from those situations in which you are veeeery short of range space, shooters will find these kind of targets funnier than a bunch of "normal" ones. Besides, I don't think they are posing a more difficult shooting challenge than a bunch of targets partially covered by no-shoots (awwwp, sorry Vinnie, Penalty Targets!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 btw, those were nashville yahoos. lynn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luiz Francisco Ramos Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Of course it is ilegal! How could we simulate hard cover this way? Anyhow, a shoot missed in the left target would be good in the rigth one and vice-versa !!?? We would not be scoring good shoots! Just doing russian rolet... IMHO ... Ramos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Anyhow, a shoot missed in the left target would be good in the rigth one and vice-versa !!??We would not be scoring good shoots! Just doing russian rolet... Luiz, as Brian stated in the middle of his post: During the shooters meeting, each of these targets were declared as 'TWO' targets, requiring two rounds each for a total of four rounds on the single paper target. thus, if you are going to play "russian roulette" with these targets, you'll have to be real aware of where are you placing your shots. I can agree with you that this is no longer a hard cover simulation, but I can't recall a single rule that is violated by this practice, provided: you are going to preserve a portion of the A zone in each "section". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luiz Francisco Ramos Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Skywalker67 Sorry to desagree but remember that at more than 10 yards the zones demarkers are not to be visible by the shooter, than how could we see where are the shoots to be broke on a target that is divides by 2 or 3 or 4 by a single tape with a misscolor ? We will see a unique target, dont´we? And in the limited division where we must to look to the sigths and not to the targets, the problem increase a lot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted June 3, 2003 Share Posted June 3, 2003 Well Luis, I think that it should not be a problem if you don't see the scoring zone marking lines; what is important is that the black tape, separating the target "sections" and restoring the non-scoring border, is still visible from wherever you are shooting at the target(s), according to: 4.2.4.4 Paper targets that are physically cut or painted with a solid color shall be fitted with a replacement non-scoring border. The replacement border shall extend the full width of the scoring area and must be readily visible. Moreover, as I have already stated, I can see no rule prohibiting this practice, even if I wouldn't like to have to shoot at such targets. And in the limited division where we must to look to the sigths and not to the targets, the problem increase a lot... I know, this has been my biggest problem for the last 2 years (I too shoot Standard), and this is why I picked up the advice of some forum members (and, of course our host BE) to try to get a picture of the sights when breaking the shot, thus BEing (it will take 4 or 5 whole lives) able to tell where are my shots placed the very moment I break them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luiz Francisco Ramos Posted June 3, 2003 Share Posted June 3, 2003 Skywalker67 Now you help me: - Paper targets that are physically cut or painted with a solid color ... The target we are facing here is not cut neither painted , so it is not regulated, so it is ilegal... Now, imagine a mover target like that and we both trying to call the shoots on there !? If that target is legal so we must to call for the "buono senso" of the mens that think IPSC to be proibited urgently! But , I liked to discuss with you. thanks for read me... Ramos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 3, 2003 Share Posted June 3, 2003 Ramos, Try as I might...I can't find any rule that says that the target can't be seperated in such a manner. US 4.2.4.4 ... says that tape is recommended. IPSC 4.2.4.4 ... says the replacement border...must be readily visible. 1.1.6 ... No shooting challenge or time limit may be protested as being prohibitive. ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 DOO-DOO doo-doo, DOO-DOO doo-doo, DOO-DOO doo-doo (background music from "The Twilight Zone"). No, presently there's no rule preventing Bozo, The Course Designer From Hell, going as far as dividing a paper target into 6 sections with 2 shots required per section, or 12 sections with 1 shot required per section (the only relevant limitation is Rule 4.2.3, which limits paper targets to a maximum of receiving 12 hits before being scored and patched). Hell, Bozo could really mix it up and have some sections requiring 1 shot and others requiring 2 shots. Great way to mess with a competitor's mind. Of course since each section is deemed to be a separate target, it would really be fun for The RO From Hell during scoring when he sees a section without holes, because he must record the appropriate number of misses plus a failure to shoot at penalty for each "virgin" section. Anyway, I've never tried playing checkers with my gun but, until I can deal with yet another issue raised by the "Let's make Vince's life miserable club", I guess we'll have to live with it for the time being. Indignant cries of "Don't Limit The Creativity Of Course Designers" may now begin ............ I'll be back after I have a double espresso and some industrial strength Prozac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 (edited) Ok Luis, now that the medieval cavalry and the dark side of the force from far future have explained it, I think the whole situation should be clearer. In any case, if I was not able to completely express myself before (my fault, I know), I dare to say that I would not like to shoot or ROing this kind of stage, that looks like a real pain in the ass. I would rather prefer a group of targets with close penalty targets and/or real hard cover standing in front of them. Otherwise, as you suggested, we shall rely only on the "buono senso" of our Range Officers, or at least hope they had their daily dose of "industrial strenght valium".I wouldn't want to be ROed by Darth, after his dose of industrial strength Prozacat least not on such stages where he has already declared I'll be bringing Madam Lash from Spanky's House Of Pain as my enforcer Edited June 4, 2003 by Skywalker67 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texasag93 Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 Thanks for the idea guys. I design stages for my local club and am always looking for new ways to present targets. I am an RO and have looked the red book over and see nothing that prohibits it. My local club will love me for this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDH Posted June 4, 2003 Author Share Posted June 4, 2003 Thanks for the idea guys. I design stages for my local club and am always looking for new ways to present targets. Just don't blame it on me! Remember, I originally asked the question because I had never seen this before... couldn't find anything that that prohibited it... but wanted to double check. Not sure if anyone will see this at my club or not... I dare to say that I would not like to shoot or ROing this kind of stage, that looks like a real pain in the ass. I would rather prefer a group of targets with close penalty targets and/or real hard cover standing in front of them. I'm with you!! No, presently there's no rule preventing Bozo, The Course Designer From Hell, going as far as dividing a paper target into 6 sections with 2 shots required per section, or 12 sections with 1 shot required per section (the only relevant limitation is Rule 4.2.3, which limits paper targets to a maximum of receiving 12 hits before being scored and patched). VP, remember, the shooters meeting and the walk thru called these out as 'two targets' (even though it was a single target with tape simulating two targets). Under that thinking, then it seems that each 'section' of the target could receive 12 hits, right? I suppose that if I ever face this situation again, I could always pull out my rulebook, go to the appendix and SHOW them what a single paper target looks like. However, doing that then negates your example of the RO from Hell applying "appropriate number of misses plus a failure to shoot at penalty for each "virgin" section". In other words, if this is ONE target, then is would seem to be limited to a max 12 hits, but you would not be able to give the FTE for the section that the competitor did not shoot at, because they DID shoot at this 'target'. OTOH, if this was declared TWO targets, then each half of the target should be able to get 12 hits (for a total of 24), AND if the competitor did not shoot at one section, you should be able to give them two Mike, one FTE, right? This seems contradictory to me. The more I think about this, the less chance that I would ever design one like this! Vinny, are you having fun yet??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luiz Francisco Ramos Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 VP and BDH, and other friends: The only way to justify a target to be cut or to be painted is to SIMULATE A HARDCOVER! Where is the hard cover in the target faced here ?? So I think that, without any ofense, you are not interpreting this case clearly. BTW, Imagine that target: 2 shooters: one hit 2 deltas in the first and 2 deltas in the second; the other hit 3 alfas in the first and a alfa in the second. The second shooter have center his shoots much better then the first but have a miss and the first with poor hits don´t.. So this target penalize the better hits ?? And the case of the mover ?? We are creating a headache mountain here. Ramos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THS Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 I shot targets like this in Hawaii recently. We had 8 targets with vertical tape making 16 scoring surfaces, left and right halves, in a night shoot. They were about 9 yards downrange, in a single array that was sort of circular. Being Hawaii, 10 rounds was the legal limit, so we reloaded a lot too. I remember shooting 2 pair, reloading, 2 pair, etc until I was done. 3 reloads I think. When all was done I had a target where the left side had an A and a Mike, and the other side had 3 hits. I also remember shooting a truckload of C's and D's, as I decided any hit was better than a bunch of Mikes.....after the first reload. The stage really favored the open guns with dots as they could see and shoot make ups much more easily than the Limited and production guns did. All in all it was a vision test more than a shooting test. Just my thoughts, Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 Luis, if the stage assignment was two shots for each section of the target, the second shooter in your example hasn't "center his shoots much better then the first. He was aiming two shots to the first section and two shots to the second, but he scored three shots on the first section and one on the second. The fact that the target is a "split" one, instead of two adjacent targets (or partially overlapping ones) is incidental, and has no importance on this matter: the second shooter's bullets didn't strike where he was supposed to place them, thus he will be scored (correctly and fairly) three As and 1 Mike. Just my 2c worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luiz Francisco Ramos Posted June 5, 2003 Share Posted June 5, 2003 Ok, skywalker. Makes sense and I can agree with you, but what nobody tel-me yet is where is that hardcover in that extrange target... Ramos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now