Matt Cheely Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Take the below target array. Pefs are lined up with the no shoot completely covering the A zone behind it. What's the call? Please site all relevant rules to support your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sci Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 (edited) Take the below target array. Pefs are lined up with the no shoot completely covering the A zone behind it. What's the call? Please site all relevant rules to support your position. 2 alphas 2 no-shoot 9.1.5.3 Edited October 1, 2008 by sci Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimInFL Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 (edited) Ok Matt. The new guy is game. Although after the last thread like this, I'm a bit apprehensive. It looks like that shot on the left broke the NS perf, so Alpha - Charlie - 2 NS ? If it didn't, then Alpha - Charlie - 1 NS. Well, wait, both NS have to be counted - right ? (that is, if it broke the perf) JimInFL Edited October 1, 2008 by JimInFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Take the below target array. Pefs are lined up with the no shoot completely covering the A zone behind it. What's the call? Please site all relevant rules to support your position. 2 Alpha 2 no shoot. I'll have to get back to you with the citations later. The no shoot on the perf has a partial touching the A zone and gets both scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve J Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Take the below target array. Pefs are lined up with the no shoot completely covering the A zone behind it. What's the call? Please site all relevant rules to support your position. 2 alphas 2 no-shoot 9.1.5.3 +1 Look at the wording of 9.1.5.3. It says HIT not partial hit. The HIT goes on to score an Alpha after scoring a hit on NS. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted October 1, 2008 Author Share Posted October 1, 2008 But, if the target is impenetrable then how does the Alpha exist behind the noshoot? Is the target array considered one target as they are stacked? There is no space between them. 9.1.5 Impenetrable – The scoring area of USPSA scoring targets and noshoots is deemed to be impenetrable I have heard a VERY knowledgeable RM argue this position, and yet another make this call at the Nats. I am interested to hear both sides from the benoverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sci Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 But, if the target is impenetrable then how does the Alpha exist behind the noshoot? Is the target array considered one target as they are stacked? There is no space between them.9.1.5 Impenetrable – The scoring area of USPSA scoring targets and noshoots is deemed to be impenetrable I have heard a VERY knowledgeable RM argue this position, and yet another make this call at the Nats. I am interested to hear both sides from the benoverse. ok if the no shoot was made of steel inside the perf, the bullet would still hit the perf on the scoreing target ,hence an alpha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 1 - A 1 - C 2 - No shoots Same rule as sci listed, different take 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 (edited) 2 Alpha 2 NS As one who has seen too many holes in no shoots If they were inocent??? why were the so close to a shoot target Jim I can see the arguement here...it says the target is impenetrable..(.not the perf.)..if it cuts the perf on the NS, it must cut the perf on the back target. Edited October 2, 2008 by GentlemanJim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moverfive Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Take the below target array. Pefs are lined up with the no shoot completely covering the A zone behind it. What's the call? Please site all relevant rules to support your position. 2 Alpha 2 no shoot. I'll have to get back to you with the citations later. The no shoot on the perf has a partial touching the A zone and gets both scores. Not according to George Jones' and Troy McManus' recent conversation on this very same topic...... .....that would be 1 Alpha and 1 Charlie to go with the 2 no-shoots. They notified us via this forum that USPSA/NROI has made a change to their interpretation of rule 9.1.5.3 and are teaching something different now in RO classes (I am guessing that is the rule they are changing their interpretation as nothing official has been posted through any official NROI USPSA channels). Point being - they basically said that when you completely cover up a shoot target perf-for-perf with a no-shoot target, that the scoring zone underneath the no-shoot is unavailable. So the shot in the no-shoot cannot touch the perf between the A and C-zone and thus would have to be a C-hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sci Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 I can certainly see and understand how a reasonable and intelligent RO could make an argument for calling it either way, which is why I think it's important for NROI to issue an official ruling on how that is to be scored so that ROs are not going to be forced to make that decision at a match. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve J Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 But, if the target is impenetrable then how does the Alpha exist behind the noshoot? Is the target array considered one target as they are stacked? There is no space between them.9.1.5 Impenetrable – The scoring area of USPSA scoring targets and noshoots is deemed to be impenetrable I have heard a VERY knowledgeable RM argue this position, and yet another make this call at the Nats. I am interested to hear both sides from the benoverse. The bullet as it passes through the NS and the scoring target removes the entire perforation / border between the C zone and A zone, thus touching the A zone and getting the higher score according to: 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. 2 A, 2 NS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 (edited) Not according to George Jones' and Troy McManus' recent conversation on this very same topic...........that would be 1 Alpha and 1 Charlie to go with the 2 no-shoots. They notified us via this forum that USPSA/NROI has made a change to their interpretation of rule 9.1.5.3 and are teaching something different now in RO classes (I am guessing that is the rule they are changing their interpretation as nothing official has been posted through any official NROI USPSA channels). Point being - they basically said that when you completely cover up a shoot target perf-for-perf with a no-shoot target, that the scoring zone underneath the no-shoot is unavailable. So the shot in the no-shoot cannot touch the perf between the A and C-zone and thus would have to be a C-hit. There's what I was looking for. I was unaware that they were now teaching it that way. That's the way I want to call it. 1A 1C 2NS. However, I fail to accurately back up this call with the rulebook. If you look explicitly at 9.1.5.3 it would indicate 2A 2NS. If you think about the target presentation, logic says that it is 1 target presentation, therefore the Alpha does not exist behind the noshoot. Edited October 2, 2008 by Matt Cheely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 ..........that would be 1 Alpha and 1 Charlie to go with the 2 no-shoots. .... Yeaah!!!!!!!!!! I win! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimInFL Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Not according to George Jones' and Troy McManus' recent conversation on this very same topic...........that would be 1 Alpha and 1 Charlie to go with the 2 no-shoots. They notified us via this forum that USPSA/NROI has made a change to their interpretation of rule 9.1.5.3 and are teaching something different now in RO classes (I am guessing that is the rule they are changing their interpretation as nothing official has been posted through any official NROI USPSA channels). Point being - they basically said that when you completely cover up a shoot target perf-for-perf with a no-shoot target, that the scoring zone underneath the no-shoot is unavailable. So the shot in the no-shoot cannot touch the perf between the A and C-zone and thus would have to be a C-hit. There's what I was looking for. I was unaware that they were now teaching it that way. That's the way I want to call it. 1A 1C 1NS. However, I fail to accurately back up this call with the rulebook. If you look explicitly at 9.1.5.3 it would indicate 2A 1NS. If you think about the target presentation, logic says that it is 1 target presentation, therefore the Alpha does not exist behind the noshoot. Hey Matt. Can you please explain why only one NS is considered ? Am I looking at the picture wrong ? The shot does break the perf doesn't it ? I guess I don't understand that part. JimInFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 Hey Matt. Can you please explain why only one NS is considered ? Am I looking at the picture wrong ? The shot does break the perf doesn't it ? I guess I don't understand that part.JimInFL Whoops. I meant 2NS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootingirons45 Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 My call is 1 alpha, 1 charlie, 2 no shoots based on 9.1.5.3 My Rationale is that while you can not see, hence can not score the target covered with the NS you can see, hence score the Charlie. Even if you took the non scoring border away the targets A zone is stll not visible. Our section hosted a NROI Level I class this past spring. Mr Jones taught the class and we were all very impressed with his level and depth of knowledge. If I recall correctly we came across this very scenario that Matt posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Matt, Did you miss this conversation a week or two ago? The one that the thread was closed on? (That is why I took it over to the USPSA Forum : http://www.uspsa.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=912 ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 Matt,Did you miss this conversation a week or two ago? The one that the thread was closed on? (That is why I took it over to the USPSA Forum : http://www.uspsa.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=912 ) I don't remember seeing that one. At least we can apparently lay it to rest with the RMI's teaching it as 1A 1C 2NS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 At least we can apparently lay it to rest with the RMI's teaching it as 1A 1C 2NS. No. Not really. You missed that brew up too. That thread went multiple pages in just a few days. I'm going to go ahead and close this one here...as I have an opinion on it (and was giving it ), but our mods shut the same thread down already. There is a live thread on this on the USPSA forum: http://www.uspsa.org/forums/index.php?show...amp;#entry10267 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Of course if the no-shoot were an inch in front of the shoot, then it would be 2A 2NS, well.. just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 I just got a PM asking why this thread was closed. To clarify, we had 11 pages on this exact same topic just a week or two ago. Read about it here: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=71222 That thread was eventually closed, and we don't re-open closed threads without a change of some sort to justify it. I didn't close that thread, as I was involved in it. The mod team decided it wasn't going further. (Yes, those jack-booted mods closed a thread I was posting in. How dare they. LOL ) There is currently a live thread on this topic on the USPSA Forum: click here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts