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

Scoring question


Fireant

Recommended Posts

OK here is the situation: say a shooter shoots a target with a NS on it like we just had at the O/L10 nationals. The shooter clips the top of the NS and it does touch the perf. No questions there. it is scored an alpha. Now lets say the shooter clips the left side of the head of the NS. The bullet diameter is evenly split on the left and right of the perf. of the NS. Is this an alpha or a charlie? The perf lines are close to being lined up (the head perf. of the NS with the A zone perf. of the shoot)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 205
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

OK, I buy the impenetrable part, but wouldn't the bullet still touch the scoring perf of the shoot target. The scoring zone is still there, it didn't just dissapear.

Not if the perfs are aligned... since the A zone and the head are the same size there is no A to score. In theory half the bullet was sheared off and only the C part struck the target.

Edited by JThompson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the scoring part is the only part that is inpenetrable, the shaved half of the bullet would touch he scoring perf, right? Just because the NS is there does not make it impossible to shoot it, just very hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I buy the impenetrable part, but wouldn't the bullet still touch the scoring perf of the shoot target. The scoring zone is still there, it didn't just dissapear.

We probably have an old thread on this.

The rule says "touch the line", IIRC.

I saw this wanting to be called a Charlie at a past Nationals. When the RM came in, it didn't matter. The target was found to be slightly askew. And a portion of the A-zone was easily visible. So, it was an Alpha on that alone.

I talked with the RM on that. He was of the opinion at the time that...had the NS been perfectly aligned...then the A-zone wasn't available to be hit. I further referred to the rule book.

The RM looked me up the next day and, after talking it over with the staff at the Ritz, he said they all agreed that if it touches the line then it scores the high value.

So, in your example...it would score the Alpha. (unless that wording was changed in the last rule book)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flex... if they are aligned it can't be hit....

So what, if you want to have the head covering the A zone you most do it with a pair of calipers? What if the perfs on the targets are slight dif size? Then you may as well throw this out all together and say if it is anywhere on the perf then they get the high hit... which I think is completely wrong.

Edited by JThompson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9.5.2 If the bullet diameter of a hit on a scoring target touches the scoring line

between two scoring areas, or the line between the non-scoring border

and a scoring area, or if it crosses multiple scoring areas, it will be

scored the higher value.

9.5.3 If a bullet diameter touches the scoring area of both a scoring target and

a no-shoot, it will earn the score and incur the penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9.5.2 If the bullet diameter of a hit on a scoring target touches the scoring line

between two scoring areas, or the line between the non-scoring border

and a scoring area, or if it crosses multiple scoring areas, it will be

scored the higher value.

9.5.3 If a bullet diameter touches the scoring area of both a scoring target and

a no-shoot, it will earn the score and incur the penalty.

That's how I read it also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9.5.2 If the bullet diameter of a hit on a scoring target touches the scoring line

between two scoring areas, or the line between the non-scoring border

and a scoring area, or if it crosses multiple scoring areas, it will be

scored the higher value.

9.5.3 If a bullet diameter touches the scoring area of both a scoring target and

a no-shoot, it will earn the score and incur the penalty.

The first part is obviously for something like a C that touched the A so it;s an A.

The second part doesn't wash for me... that's like you shot the perf on top of the head and there was A zone showing there... there is no A zone showing on the sides.

I strongly disagree with the interpretation you guys have here and will score it as a C unless we have a ruling from John. We covered the specific example, in depth in class, and I was told it's a C.

Edited by JThompson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Showing or not it is there. What if that target was parallel to the back berm and I run up to the 179.5 degree line and blast a shot that does not crease the white side of that NS, but does hit the perf of the A zone it covers? That would also be an alpha. Just because it is covered does not mean it does not exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree with the interpretation you guys have here and will score it as a C unless we have a ruling from John. We covered the specific example, in depth in class, and I was told it's a C.

That is what the Range Master told me too... that that is how it was first taught to him. But, after conference with the rest of the staff, he came back and said it should be called the other way.

FWIW, the CRO on that stage back then...is now a RMI...and he may be teaching it how to was taught to him.

Look first to the rule book. The one that teaches us...is just one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it washed for the Range Master at the Nationals, who made it a point to look me up the next day and tell me more about it.

And, it is how the rule reads.

It is really the definition of tangent. (touching)

In that example you said the perfs were not aligned correct? "Slightly askew"

Edited by JThompson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This scenario was recently discussed by the instructors.

In the scenario described, the hit on the left side of the NS head can only be scored a C. The A zone which is under the scoring area of the NS (which includes the NS perfs) is not available for the simple reason that (if the perfs are correctly aligned) as soon as the bullet touches the perf of the NS that part of the bullet cannot continue to strike the underlying A perf.

The same rule would apply for a hit down on the long side of the NS. It could not score the underlying D.

The final opinion of the instructors was that the portion of a scoring target which underlies a no-shoot (including the NS perfs) for all practical purposes simply does not exist.

Rule 9.5.2 applies to a scoring target (a single target) and it's individual scoring zones. It has nothing to do with an overlying NS.

Rule 9.5.3 does not support scoring the underlying A.

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree with the interpretation you guys have here and will score it as a C unless we have a ruling from John. We covered the specific example, in depth in class, and I was told it's a C.

That is what the Range Master told me too... that that is how it was first taught to him. But, after conference with the rest of the staff, he came back and said it should be called the other way.

FWIW, the CRO on that stage back then...is now a RMI...and he may be teaching it how to was taught to him.

Look first to the rule book. The one that teaches us...is just one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, it would be the same if, instead of a no shoot, it was hard cover then right? Under this interpretation, there is no such thing as a scoring border unless it is more that one bullet diameter from what the desired edge should be?

Doesn't make much practical sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, it would be the same if, instead of a no shoot, it was hard cover then right? Under this interpretation, there is no such thing as a scoring border unless it is more that one bullet diameter from what the desired edge should be?

Doesn't make much practical sense to me.

No. Not if I get what you are saying... What I'm saying it that if you put a NS target exactly over a shoot target, so that the whole target was nothing, but NS... it would be impossible to hit the scoring target directly behind the NS. It's the same for the sides of the A zone when a NS head is covering the A zone... that part of the target that is covered by the NS head is not capable of being hit and those can only be scored as the C that the bullet also touched. This does not apply on top if there is still some A zone showing on the target behind. I wish I had a scanner... the example is in the NEW course book for ROs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it washed for the Range Master at the Nationals, who made it a point to look me up the next day and tell me more about it.

And, it is how the rule reads.

It is really the definition of tangent. (touching)

In that example you said the perfs were not aligned correct? "Slightly askew"

No. That isn't what I said. Perhaps I didn't communicate that well. The "slightly askew" meant that the call didn't have to be made.

Yet, the RM and I discussed the what if further. The next day he made a point to look me up and share the outcome of further discussion with the Nationals staff (at their staff meeting at the Ritz :) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a target is impenetrable, how does the bullet touch the scoring line?

Here is the rub. The target is impenetrable...only if...a bullet strikes wholly within the scoring area of a paper target.

There's no rub... the part that didn't hit the NS continued on to hit the C and thus you have a C instead of an A.

I'm not going to keep going on this through example after example... I sent it of to John for review and one of the other NROI has ruled the same way and said he spoke with more and they see it the same as I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...