Scoring question

[ima45dv8]

When I was first approached with this question last week I answered without hesitation, "Alpha/NoShoot". The counter position was offered that since the surface is defined as impenatrable in 9.1.5 the portion of the bullet within the scoring border could not go forward to contact the A zone.

Asked to offer an impartial and emotionless ruling, much like a judge in a courtroom or a Range Master, I found that the argument had enough merit to at least justify a ruling/clarification from DNROI (PRH is very compelling and the beer was flowing). After reading the applicable rules and reading the well-reasoned responses presented here, I don't agree with the "Charlie/NS" position but I still think it deserves to be clarified. My earlier posts were intended to show that an argument exists that merits an answer, whether we agree with that argument or not.

So what should be done? 9.1.5 could easily be modified slightly to remove the "Charlie/NS" position.

If I were King (or DNROI) for a day I would add "...if a full-diameter hit" to 9.1.5 and remove the colon at the end.

"9.1.5 Impenetrable – The scoring area of USPSA scoring targets and noshoots is deemed to be impenetrable if a full-diameter hit." The matter of scoring an Alpha on the back target would be confirmed and 9.1.5.1 through 4 would remain to instruct the proper scoring of full- and partial-diameter hits.

I'd guess that an official ruling by DNROI will unfortunately result in "Charlie/NS" based on the assumption that the two targets are touching and the perfs are perfectly aligned (and the fact that this is what is already being taught by the Instructor Corp).

[John Baier]

Flex, I was part of the discussion at nationals this year and I was a "A zone believer" until I saw the light. We are clear that targets and No-shoots are impenetrable, right?

What NROI is trying to say is that if you have a no-shoot target that is stapled directly on top of a scoring target (no gaps) and the perfs are lined up, than any part of the bottom target that is covered by the no-shoot is no longer available for score including the perfs. I always make sure that perfs are lined up and that the head of the no-shoot is stapled to the scoring target. Now if the the perfs are not lined correctly than your argument would hold water.

~John

[JThompson]

Thing is none of what we say matters... we are just going around in circles and won't change the way they rule... We have all made our points and we're beating a dead horse now... I suggest we wait for the ruling and then deal with it.

[Flexmoney]

I get what they want it to say, John.

Here is the disconnect.

We are clear that targets and No-shoots are impenetrable, right?

That is only right in the case of a bullet that is wholly contained in the no-shoot.

And, that just isn't what is being talked about here. Right? If it was, we'd have no discussion.

Every rule in the rule book that has sub-sets of that rule below it...we must read those in their entirety. That is why they are there. They further define the parameters of the rule.

All we need to do is read the rules and site them.

Here we go:

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.

Looking at 9.1.5.3, a bullet can go on to score, right?

[John Baier]

I agree with that Flex. What I thought was being discussed is a no-shoot attached to a target. If you can't see the scoring area of the underlying target you can't score it.

Edited September 19, 2008 by John Baier

[AZ38super]

4.2.4 When the scoring area of a paper target is to be partially hidden, course

designers must simulate hard cover in one of the following ways:

4.2.4.1 By actually hiding a portion of the target (see Rule 4.1.4.1). This is what the no shoot does.

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

4.2.4.2 By physically cutting targets to remove the portion deemed to be

hidden by hard cover. Such targets must be fitted with a

replacement non-scoring border, which must extend the full

width of the cut scoring area (see Rule 4.2.2).

4.2.4.3 By painting or taping the portion of the target deemed to be hidden

by hard cover a single and visibly contrasting color.

4.2.5 Hard Cover (and overlapping no-shoots) must not completely hide the

highest scoring zone on a partially hidden paper target. The minimum

requirements are specified in Appendix B.

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

is deemed to be impenetrable:

Thus the scoring zone no longer exists under the no shoot as as Mac had explained and as it has always been since I started shooting USPSA 6 years ago at least everywhere I have shot.

[JThompson]

I agree with that Flex. What I thought was being discussed is a no-shoot attached to a target. If you can't see the scoring area of the underlying target you can't score it.

That is what is being discussed.... Look at the original post. It seems to be changing to further a point of view.

[Flexmoney]

I agree with that Flex. What I thought was being discussed is a no-shoot attached to a target. If you can't see the scoring area of the underlying target you can't score it.

OK...we agree on the first point. The bullet can go on to score. It hasn't been stopped. It has...for real and and scoring words...penetrated on.

That is fine. Then we need to see the rule that addresses how a target or target area disappears and becomes unavailable.

?

And, how could any arguement for such have any weight, since the bullet penetrated on?

[John Baier]

I have a feeling that this question will be on my RM oral review

[John Baier]

Flex, you're killing me . the scoring area becomes unavailable when it is directly covered by the no-shoot which is deemed impenetrable.

[HoMiE]

Rule 4.1.4.1 makes noshoots be treated the same as hardcover when they are used to cover a target. Unless otherwise specified as "soft cover", everything else is considered impenetrable hardcover. (Except for target sticks, those don't exist either.)

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard cover, I read that as don't make a big wall solely out of noshoot targets or simulated hardcover targets, not placing a noshoot on a scoring target.

[John Baier]

Rule 4.1.4.1 makes noshoots be treated the same as hardcover when they are used to cover a target. Unless otherwise specified as "soft cover", everything else is considered impenetrable hardcover. (Except for target sticks, those don't exist either.)

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard cover, I read that as don't make a big wall solely out of noshoot targets or simulated hardcover targets, not placing a noshoot on a scoring target.

No-shoots are not hard cover, No-shoots are score-able targets and hard cover are not score-able. Tell me where in 4.1 are you getting that No-shoots are treated as hard cover?

[Fireant]

4.2.4 When the scoring area of a paper target is to be partially hidden, course

designers must simulate hard cover in one of the following ways:

4.2.4.1 By actually hiding a portion of the target (see Rule 4.1.4.1). This is what the no shoot does.

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

4.2.4.2 By physically cutting targets to remove the portion deemed to be

hidden by hard cover. Such targets must be fitted with a

replacement non-scoring border, which must extend the full

width of the cut scoring area (see Rule 4.2.2).

4.2.4.3 By painting or taping the portion of the target deemed to be hidden

by hard cover a single and visibly contrasting color.

4.2.5 Hard Cover (and overlapping no-shoots) must not completely hide the

highest scoring zone on a partially hidden paper target. The minimum

requirements are specified in Appendix B.

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

is deemed to be impenetrable:

Thus the scoring zone no longer exists under the no shoot as as Mac had explained and as it has always been since I started shooting USPSA 6 years ago at least everywhere I have shot.

A NS can not be hard cover, because a hard cover hit is not a penalty right? That is in the rule book also(I don't have it handy at the moment) So saying that the NS makes the scoring area dissapear does not fly.

John and I were typing at the same time.

Edited September 19, 2008 by Fireant

[AZ38super]

Rule 4.1.4.1 makes noshoots be treated the same as hardcover when they are used to cover a target. Unless otherwise specified as "soft cover", everything else is considered impenetrable hardcover. (Except for target sticks, those don't exist either.)

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard cover, I read that as don't make a big wall solely out of noshoot targets or simulated hardcover targets, not placing a noshoot on a scoring target.

No-shoots are not hard cover, No-shoots are score-able targets and hard cover are not score-able. Tell me where in 4.1 are you getting that No-shoots are treated as hard cover?

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

[Fireant]

Rule 4.1.4.1 makes noshoots be treated the same as hardcover when they are used to cover a target. Unless otherwise specified as "soft cover", everything else is considered impenetrable hardcover. (Except for target sticks, those don't exist either.)

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard cover, I read that as don't make a big wall solely out of noshoot targets or simulated hardcover targets, not placing a noshoot on a scoring target.

No-shoots are not hard cover, No-shoots are score-able targets and hard cover are not score-able. Tell me where in 4.1 are you getting that No-shoots are treated as hard cover?

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered

hard cover. When possible hard cover should not be simulated

but constructed using impenetrable materials (see Rule

2.1.3). Whole paper targets must not be used solely as hard

cover.

Nope, using a NS for hard cover is not covered under this one. You can not use a scoring target(or penalty) for hard cover that does not have a penalty. If you use this rule then the correct call would be Alpha no NS. Now go think about that one.

[John Baier]

Fireant,

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

is deemed to be impenetrable:

[Fireant]

keep reading: if the bullet is wholly in the scoring area. Remember we are talking about the shot that breaks the line here.

Edited September 19, 2008 by Fireant

[JThompson]

keep reading: if the bullet is wholly in the scoring area. Remember we are talking about the shot that breaks the line here.

Yup. And the part thst doesn't break the lines continues on and hits the C. If they hadn't written it that way bullets that were outside the perf, but not off the NS would not be able to score a hit at all. Since the boarder of the target is there to help us score it is not considered imp. What they should have said was any part of the bullet inside the perf wil not score past the ns. In other words the scoring surface and perf are imp the boarder is not.

Edited September 19, 2008 by JThompson

[mactiger]

The part of the no-shoot that the bullet strikes is still impenetrable--only the portion of the bullet that strikes outside the no-shoot can be counted for score. Since the no-shoot is impenetrable, the target beneath it is not "hittable", therefore, it is treated like it isn't there. So, on a perfectly aligned target, (NS over part of the A zone), the only scoring zone available is the C zone. Therefore, the hit scores both the no-shoot and the C.

Troy

[Fireant]

The part of the no-shoot that the bullet strikes is still impenetrable--only the portion of the bullet that strikes outside the no-shoot can be counted for score. Since the no-shoot is impenetrable, the target beneath it is not "hittable", therefore, it is treated like it isn't there. So, on a perfectly aligned target, (NS over part of the A zone), the only scoring zone available is the C zone. Therefore, the hit scores both the no-shoot and the C.

Troy

But the rule book says it is impeneterable IF the bullet strike is wholly in the scoring area, does it not?

[moverfive]

The part of the no-shoot that the bullet strikes is still impenetrable--only the portion of the bullet that strikes outside the no-shoot can be counted for score. Since the no-shoot is impenetrable, the target beneath it is not "hittable", therefore, it is treated like it isn't there. So, on a perfectly aligned target, (NS over part of the A zone), the only scoring zone available is the C zone. Therefore, the hit scores both the no-shoot and the C.

Troy

As earlier commented on and questioned earlier - is anything going to be done to make this ruling official as opposed to opinion?

Because using Flex's previous example with the two pennies AND the rules as they are currently written within the rule book, this scenario would be scored Alpha/No shoot.

[HoMiE]

4.1.4.1 Cover provided to hide all or a portion of a target will be considered hard cover.

My interpretation of that is, the area directly behind the "cover" is considered hard cover. That would make the hidden A zone in essence a black hard cover area. If the targets are setup properly, there is no area to hit.

[JThompson]

Where's a "scanner" when ya need one?

Edited September 19, 2008 by JThompson

[AZ38super]

It is already official and written in the rule book.

I am not going to paste the rules over again, you can go back and look at them.

You people are confusing parts of rules and not the whole rule to make your point.

[George Jones]

But the rule book says it is impeneterable IF the bullet strike is wholly in the scoring area, does it not?

The "IF" does not apply to "impenetrable".... It applies to the scoring scenario presented in the subrule.

IF you (and Flex) were correct, the rule would be written this way:

9.1.5 Impenetrable - The scoring area of USPSA scoring targets and no-shoots is deemed to be impenatrable if:

But, that is not where the "IF" is located.

The "If" applies to each of the conditions in 9.1.5.1 thru 9.1.5.4