Scoring question

[Flexmoney]

The A zone under the NS (inside the perf line) does not exist any longer.

Site the rule.

?

[AZ38super]

Okay I am going to try this one more time.

When we lay no shoots over scoring targets it is the same as painting that area of the target white.

Laying targets over the top is easier to do and replace so it is a common practice.

The scoring area below is no longer there. If you cut the edge at the perf of a no shoot and scoring target and placed them together it would be the same thing giving you a no shoot zone and per this example a C zone.

I don't see why this is so hard to understand.

[Singlestack]

Okay I am going to try this one more time.

When we lay no shoots over scoring targets it is the same as painting that area of the target white.

Laying targets over the top is easier to do and replace so it is a common practice.

The scoring area below is no longer there. If you cut the edge at the perf of a no shoot and scoring target and placed them together it would be the same thing giving you a no shoot zone and per this example a C zone.

I don't see why this is so hard to understand.

Because you can't back it up with a rule.

[EZ Bagger]

The A zone under the NS (inside the perf line) does not exist any longer.

Site the rule.

?

9.1.5 says it's scoring zone is covered by an impenetrable target. The picture above witht the NS not stapled to the underlying target is poor stage setup.

Under your definition, even placing black tape on the target wouldn't keep it from being scored as an A unless the black tape was far enough into the C zone that no bullet diameter could touch both scoring lines.

[Fireant]

It is so hard because the rule book does not say anything about painting targets white to use as a no shoot. Please site that rule please. We have a target. One face is used as a +scoring target and the other is used as a -score or penalty. The rule book talks about painting hard cover, but not what you are refering to. We are talking USPSA here right? I don't know what is so hard to understand

[Fireant]

The A zone under the NS (inside the perf line) does not exist any longer.

Site the rule.

?

9.1.5 says it's scoring zone is covered by an impenetrable target. The picture above witht the NS not stapled to the underlying target is poor stage setup.

Under your definition, even placing black tape on the target wouldn't keep it from being scored as an A unless the black tape was far enough into the C zone that no bullet diameter could touch both scoring lines.

You have to read all of 9.1.5 not just the beginning:

9.1.5 Impenetrable – The scoring area of USPSA scoring targets and noshoots

is deemed to be impenetrable:

9.1.5.1 If a bullet strikes wholly within the scoring area of a paper target,

and continues on to strike the scoring area of another paper

target, the hit on the subsequent paper target will not count for

score or penalty, as the case may be.

9.1.5.2 If a bullet strikes wholly within the scoring area of a paper target,

and continues on to hit a plate or strike down a popper; this

will be treated as range equipment failure. The competitor will

be required to reshoot the course of fire, after it has been

restored

9.1.5.3 If a bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a paper or

metal target, and continues on to strike the scoring area of another

paper target, the hit on the subsequent paper target will also

count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

9.1.5.4 If a bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a paper or

metal target, and continues on to strike down or hit the scoring

area of another metal target, the subsequent metal target will

also count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

Don't read into the rules, just read the written word.

[Flexmoney]

9.1.5 says it's scoring zone is covered by an impenetrable target.

It says no such thing.

There is absolutely no mention of covering.

Read it. It ends in a semi-colon. That semi-colon means there are conditions that follow. Those conditions are right there... 9.1.5.x (that is the way the entire rule book is written, btw)

They give the exact examples of when a bullet can, and cannot, go on to score.

The only time a bullet cannot go on to score is if the bullet is wholly within the target's perf. Not touching.

[racerba]

You guys are trying to piece 2 different rules together.

Huh? There's only one rule we are citing that is relevance:

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.

Is the target behind the NS a scoring target? YES

Is the hole in the NS a full diameter hit? NO

Therefore the higher value is scored.

Why can't you understand that? It's backed up by a rule!!!

9.1.5.3 and 9.1.6.3 only allows the scoring target to be scored because of the partial hit on the NS and/or hard cover.

Edited September 19, 2008 by racerba

[Jim Norman]

Interesting, very interesting.

We had this very argument about 4-5 years ago at the Nationals out in Barry. a N/S perfectly aligned, edge hit on the side, Charlie-N/S, NOT Alpha N/S.

I suppose we will need a new rule added next re-write to address this. The way I seem to remember it explained was that the covered target area essentially ceased to exist. And before you get all excited, painting the A zone black up to the perf would also cause the painted area to cease to exist.

The area painted is hard cover, the edge of the target does not exist as it has been understood that only the face of the target really counts. Targets are infinitely thin as well as being impenetrable. (Maybe we should market them as the ultimate in body Armour?) Seriously. would anyone claim an A hit were 1/2 of the A-zone painted black exactly to but not overlapping the perf? I doubt it.

Now, in the picture shown, I would have to call that an A as the N/s was not hit. BUT are we talking a local match set up quickly that morning for the benefit of 20 shooters or are we talking a national grade match?

At a club match, I think we need to be mindful that sometimes we need to look at what we tried to achieve in the very short time allotted and make the best of it. Do we really need to get into a knock-down over this? Obviously the designer and builder intended to cover the A with a N/S. OK, we found a hole, call it REF, staple a block to the back of the target so that the N/S isn't gapping and issue a reshoot.

Go out after the match, chat about it, but the guy a beer and plan the next match. everyone will benifit.

Jim

[JThompson]

George Jones an instructor has answered this properly, and how you were taught is how it is taught.

9.5.3 states scoring area, as the perf for the A zone is not available it touches the C scoring portion of the target.

John

[racerba]

We had this very argument about 4-5 years ago at the Nationals out in Barry. a N/S perfectly aligned, edge hit on the side, Charlie-N/S, NOT Alpha N/S.

The original call was Charlie-N/S by the RO. It was accepted by the shooter at that time and cause the RMs to discuss it. After a while the final decision was an Alpha-N/S. George and Troy had confirmed this in their previous posts - at least that was decision to make the call back then. Somewhere between then and now, it was reversed.

[kend]

BUT are we talking a local match set up quickly that morning for the benefit of 20 shooters or are we talking a national grade match?

At a club match, .......

Jim

So....what do we do at, I don't know, say....the Nationals last week? What happens then?

[AZ38super]

JT, thanks for the better picture.

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.

No Shoots are not scoring targets

[racerba]

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.

No Shoots are not scoring targets

Agreed that NS are not scoring targets. However, the target behind it IS. And the bullet is touching the scoring line on this target, is it not?

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.

Since it will earn the score and the penalty. What score should it earn? Refer to 9.5.2.

Please refer me to the rule where the higher scoring zone no longer exist.

Edited September 19, 2008 by racerba

[Fireant]

George Jones an instructor has answered this properly, and how you were taught is how it is taught.

9.5.3 states scoring area, as the perf for the A zone is not available it touches the C scoring portion of the target.

John

here is 9.5.3

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.

How does this rule back up what you are saying?

When I look at this situation I see the following rules applying:

9.1.5 Impenetrable – The scoring area of USPSA scoring targets and noshoots

is deemed to be impenetrable:

9.1.5.1 If a bullet strikes wholly within the scoring area of a paper target,

and continues on to strike the scoring area of another paper

target, the hit on the subsequent paper target will not count for

score or penalty, as the case may be.

9.1.5.2 If a bullet strikes wholly within the scoring area of a paper target,

and continues on to hit a plate or strike down a popper; this

will be treated as range equipment failure. The competitor will

be required to reshoot the course of fire, after it has been

restored

9.1.5.3 If a bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a paper or

metal target, and continues on to strike the scoring area of another

paper target, the hit on the subsequent paper target will also

count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

9.1.5.4 If a bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a paper or

metal target, and continues on to strike down or hit the scoring

area of another metal target, the subsequent metal target will

also count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

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.

This is not a full diameter hit, so the bullet continues on to score behind it, not just the shaved off part the whole diameter. It says so in the rule. Only a full diameter hit is impeneterable. Then I see a hit in the A zone of the scoring target behind it. So the call is an Alpha/NS. Plain and simple. No rule declares that the a zone is nonexsistent, or has dissapeared or anything else.

There are the RULES supporting the alpha. Show me the RULES showing that it's a Charlie. Not someone said so, but a ruling based on the actual rules.

Edited September 19, 2008 by Fireant

[JThompson]

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.

No Shoots are not scoring targets

Agreed that NS are not scoring targets. However, the target behind it IS. And the bullet is touching the scoring line on this target, is it not?

No it is not touching it because from the perf on top of the one below is impenetrable and therefore the bullet can not touch it. Therefore, the only scoring surface the bullet touches is the C. I can see both sides of this topic and I went over it at length with my NROI to get my mind around it. In the end I knew what I "thought" was not the way the rule had been interpreted... Here's how I finally reconciled it for myself... ymmv... I looked at the NS as a piece of steel covering the entire A scoring area... this would prevent a bullet from ever reaching the perf underneath as the bullet would shear at the edge of the metal... Now I agree this needs to be set down in writing and I would bet that is in the works now. This is one of those that I feel both sides have a point, but the NROI and the board are going to have the last word, and like it or not, I think they are going to rule as taught in the new level 1 RO class. The picture above was taken from the L1 RO book. Was there a need to change this rule from what has been accepted for however long...? I don't know... I never heard the rational for the change. Like I said, I see both sides to this issue. What I'm leaning toward, and I know this will be an unpopular statement, but I think this has been scored wrong from the beginning. If the target is covered you can't hit it.

If you looked at the perf and a non scoring impenetrable line, this interpretation becomes stronger... at least it does for me.

JT

[Flexmoney]

I've never seen so many that are bent on tossing the rule book in favor of a call that a select few have heard about (and which hasn't been vetted thru channels)...in the exact opposite direction that the call has been made previously.

With no documentation to back it.

All the while, nailing a shooter...who just ate a no-shoot penalty anyway. (in every single case)

BTW, teaching like this serves to further fracture the clarity and consistency that our rule book enjoys.

[Fireant]

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.

No Shoots are not scoring targets

Agreed that NS are not scoring targets. However, the target behind it IS. And the bullet is touching the scoring line on this target, is it not?

No it is not touching it because from the perf on top of the one below is impenetrable and therefore the bullet can not touch it. Therefore, the only scoring surface the bullet touches is the C. I can see both sides of this topic and I went over it at length with my NROI to get my mind around it. In the end I knew what I "thought" was not the way the rule had been interpreted... Here's how I finally reconciled it for myself... ymmv... I looked at the NS as a piece of steel covering the entire A scoring area... this would prevent a bullet from ever reaching the perf underneath as the bullet would shear at the edge of the metal... Now I agree this needs to be set down in writing and I would bet that is in the works now. This is one of those that I feel both sides have a point, but the NROI and the board are going to have the last word, and like it or not, I think they are going to rule as taught in the new level 1 RO class. The picture above was taken from the L1 RO book. Was there a need to change this rule from what has been accepted for however long...? I don't know... I never heard the rational for the change. Like I said, I see both sides to this issue. What I'm leaning toward, and I know this will be an unpopular statement, but I think this has been scored wrong from the beginning. If the target is covered you can't hit it.

If you looked at the perf and a non scoring impenetrable line, this interpretation becomes stronger... at least it does for me.

JT

But the rule book says the scoring area only is impeneterable with a full diameter hit. The rule book also says that a partial hit will continue on to score or recieve the penalty behind it. Does it not? Why are people changing their minds when presented things that go against the written rule book?

Even if you wanted to say the scoring part of the NS was steel and would shear off the bullet, what was left would touch the scoring perf of the Azone since by the rules a metal target does not have a non scoring boarder.

[mactiger]

As you can imagine from reading these posts, the discussion among the instructors was much the same. The rules read what they read; it's a matter of interpreting what happens to the underlying scoring target when it is covered by an (by the rules) impenetrable No-shoot. If it helps, consider the area under the NS to be painted black as hard cover or actually removed from the target. Therefore, if the bullet touches the perf, the scoring zone no longer is there to score--the NS/hardcover/removal has taken it out of the picture, as long as the perfs are aligned perfectly. So, just because you want it to be an A, it can't be, because the A zone no longer exists to score. The key to this is 9.1.5, which states that NS and scoring targets are deemed to be impenetrable. If you look at 9.1.5.x, and take into account the area under the NS no longer exists, then you see why the scoring examples posted previously are "C" hits and not "A" hits--the partial bullet does strike a scoring area, but it's the C zone, not the A zone.

I know many of you won't agree, but it's not a matter of not having a rule to cite, it's a matter of how you consider the area behind the NS.

I didn't address the example of a shot taken at an angle with the NS leaning out from the target, because it shouldn't be set up that way. I know it happens, and when it does, it gets scored the way it looks, in all likelihood. I don't have a real problem with that, but we do make some effort to ensure that it doesn't happen at major matches.

Lastly, and the last I'll say on this subject--there is no backroom BS. We (the NROI Instructor corps) meets once each year in person, and we have frequent email discussions. We do this to try to maintain consistency in our teaching, and address issues just like this one. If there is a question, like this one, that requires debate, we debate it and come to a consensus. Considering the dynamic nature of our sport, there is no way that everyone will agree all the time. That's why and how rule interpretations come about. As for the clarity and consistency of the rule book, well, as this discussion illustrates, it's not always that clear, is it?

Troy

Edited September 19, 2008 by mactiger

[Fireant]

As you can imagine from reading these posts, the discussion among the instructors was much the same. The rules read what they read; it's a matter of interpreting what happens to the underlying scoring target when it is covered by an (by the rules) impenetrable No-shoot. If it helps, consider the area under the NS to be painted black as hard cover or actually removed from the target. Therefore, if the bullet touches the perf, the scoring zone no longer is there to score--the NS/hardcover/removal has taken it out of the picture, as long as the perfs are aligned perfectly. So, just because you want it to be an A, it can't be, because the A zone no longer exists to score. The key to this is 9.1.5, which states that NS and scoring targets are deemed to be impenetrable. If you look at 9.1.5.x, and take into account the area under the NS no longer exists, then you see why the scoring examples posted previously are "C" hits and not "A" hits--the partial bullet does strike a scoring area, but it's the C zone, not the A zone.

I know many of you won't agree, but it's not a matter of not having a rule to cite, it's a matter of how you consider the area behind the NS.

I didn't address the example of a shot taken at an angle with the NS leaning out from the target, because it shouldn't be set up that way. I know it happens, and when it does, it gets scored the way it looks, in all likelihood. I don't have a real problem with that, but we do make some effort to ensure that it doesn't happen at major matches.

Lastly, and the last I'll say on this subject--there is no backroom BS. We (the NROI Instructor corps) meets once each year in person, and we have frequent email discussions. We do this to try to maintain consistency in our teaching, and address issues just like this one. If there is a question, like this one, that requires debate, we debate it and come to a consensus. Considering the dynamic nature of our sport, there is no way that everyone will agree all the time. That's why and how rule interpretations come about.

Troy

I have to call more BS here again. You are stopping too soon in the reading of 9.1.5. They are inpeneterable IF the bullet strikes wholly in the SCORING area. No need for interpretation period. That is very clear. NOWHERE in the rule book says that you are to treat a scoring zone as not there unless it is painted to indicate hardcover. 9.1.5 gives the specific times when the NS is impeneterable and the example we are discussing is not one of them.

Troy,

I hope this is not he last you have to say about it, because the (unneeded) interpretation is not correct based on the rules. We really need to get this correct. While many are wondering what difference one point makes, well in a major match it could decide the difference between 1st in your class and second.

[ima45dv8]

I have to call more BS here again.

No, let's not.

A reminder that applies to ALL parties in this discussion:

No antagonistic tones will be tolerated.

Please post respectfully or don't post at all.

Please take a deep breath before hitting send and let's keep going after this without going after each other.

[Singlestack]

Ok folks, Lets stop with the BS calling and antagonistc tones here. Lets keep this Debate polite and civil. No bickering.

Due to incessant bickering typical of the Rules Forum, we've (Admin/Moderators) come close to deleting the Rules Forum altogether. (Several times.) We've decided to keep it (by a narrow margin), however, with this stipulation:

No antagonistic tones will be tolerated.

Please post respectfully or don't post at all.

Threads or posts not following this spirit will be locked or deleted, and offenders will be warned or banned from posting.

Please, for the life of the Rules Forum and the constructive input gained from it, participate appropriately.

Thank you,

benos

[HoMiE]

I had a hard time with this also when I first heard it in the RO class. From a shooter perspective, if I hit the NS, well I would want the A hit instead of the C hit. But then if I step back from it, how is that fair. There is a noshoot which completly cover the available A zone. If I go from left to right the possible scoring options are C-NS-C. Just becasue the perfs of the noshoot are the exact same perfs of the A, targets are deemed impentrable, so how would it ever hit the A perf to score? How is that fair, just becasue I hit the perf that now I earn an A hit? If the A scoring area is available, like #4 in the Scoring Targets above image, yeah you can still earn an A hit. Would you give D-NS hits to #1 & #8 in image? The target area not existing is the only logical reasoning thing that makes the rules work and be consistent.

Edited September 19, 2008 by HoMiE

[Fireant]

Fine then I call more Bullbutter

[ima45dv8]

Fine then I call more Bullbutter