Impenetrable No Shoots

[Steve Anderson]

If a noshoot at 10 yards is struck with a full bullet, and the target behind it has two full bullet holes, what's the call?

Does the angle of the shot/position of the shooter figure in at all?

Or do we score targets only, after shooting has stopped?

I did the afore mentioned this sunday, had two Ds on the target.

The lovely and talented Brian Hanna gave me delta Mike, one no shoot.

Flex and I discussed it as a rules-analysis excercise, and the rule book seems to support his call.

IF it had been Alpha Charlie on the target, do I get the best hit?

How do we know which bullet hit the no-shoot, therefore negating the scored hit?

I tried to wiggle out of it, but gave up under the awesome presence of Darth Juniors authority.

SA

[SRT Driver]

Steve,

I'd look for a grease ring mark on the scoring target. If one hit has one and the other does not, the one that does not is PROBABLY the no shoot.

[Bill Nesbitt]

Questionable stage design in my opinion. It leaves too much up to the RO. How many shots did you fire? Did the RO know how many shots you fired at that target? Was the noshoot out by itself where it would be easy to get shoot throughs that were hard to determine what hit where?

In IDPA all shoot throughs count on both targets. There is no problem what holes to score. You score them all.

Bill Nesbitt

[TDean]

I think you get the BEST hit PULLED. NO?

[lynn jones]

yes, no shoots are impenetrable. sounds like you got the correct call. most of the time you can line the bullet holes up and tell which is which, if we're talking a swinging no shoot. static targets look for the grease mark like SRT Driver stated.

lynn jones

[Flexmoney]

Steve,

I'd look for a grease ring mark on the scoring target.  If one hit has one and the other does not, the one that does not is PROBABLY the no shoot.

SRT,

My standard (smart-assed, but serious) reply to that is always..."are we scoring grease or holes in the target?" (Sorry SRT, that is one of my pet-peeves. )

I am with Bill on this...poor stage design. Anytime you have a No-Shoot out "standing guard" by itself, you can expect to have a shoot-thru situation. I don't think, however, that you can expect the RO to catch each and every occurence...no matter how good the RO. Thus... 2.1.8

As for Steve question...

I am of the opinion that you score the targets after the shooting is over. While the shooter is shooting, you watch for procedurals (and all that safety business;)).

Maybe the force isn't with me, but I don't think I could run 200 shooters thru a match...and know where shot number ten went (random number) for each shooter. I could know that shot number ten was likely a problem...I could be keyed into watching for shot number ten. I might even get it perfect 199 times out of 200. But, the one I miss...that screws that shooter (or the other 199).

***

The question I would ask the RO is this...

How do you know ?

If the RO says that it was a 24 shot stage...and you fired 24 shots, well...that makes sense.

But, if you fired an extra shot...the RO had better be able to say with 100% certainty where that shot went (might be tough to do if the RO is watching the gun, feet, 180, trigger finger..if you are in a port, shooting on the move, etc...).

If the RO can't say for sure... ???

[SRT Driver]

Flex,

I agree but in relation to this question, I thought it relevant. Just a way to determine which shot should not score. And I have been the victim a time or two.

If the no-shoot was close to a scoring target (aren't they all!! ) And the scoring target required 2 hit then the call is good.

If the no-shoot hit was a shoot through from another scoring target, then it was not.

If it was another caliber or left from a prior victim..reshoot.

[Flexmoney]

I agree but in relation to this question, I thought it relevant. Just a way to determine which shot should not score.

(Sorry to keep beating on this. )

But this is the point I am trying to make....

There is no way to make a determination after the fact. It would only be a best guess. (And, I don't think that is good enough. )

In my mind, the RO must see the hit...during the shooting. And, the RO must be 110% certain. (Superman vision helps here. )

Again, as Bill said, this is a stage design problem.

2.1.8 Target Placement. Care must be taken with the physical placement of targets to prevent "shoot throughs".

[SteveZ]

I think you get the BEST hit PULLED. NO?

What rule number is this in the 14th edition....because I can't find anything that says the RO pulls the HIGHEST scoring hit if they can't positively identify which round went through hard-cover/no-shoot......in fact I can't find anything that address this case at all (i.e. can't identify which round in the scoring target doesn't belong). Maybe this situtation requires a reshoot????

[SRT Driver]

Flex,

Again, I agree. The RO should not see the hits on the target (should be watching the gun). I guess we would have had to have seen the course of fire. Maybe, it was obvious. If the target was 10 yards away

from the no-shoot, ...well. Steve A may have to chime in.

Steven Z,

The only thing close is US9.1.4.2, IMHO. But that deals with untaped targets. I guess we need more info.

The point here is 9.1.5, and if the hit is a full diameter hit on the no-shoot target, how do you determine which one passed through the no-shoot. It is a judgement call unless it is obvious. Again, IMHO.

Steve A said he had 2 deltas and a no shoot. If he didn't make up a shot on that target OK ( both RO should have counted.) If there were extra shots .. EHH!

[Steve Anderson]

Target

NS

Me.

Here's the placement, but at a 45 degree angle. Ten yards to no shoot, 20 yards to target. I never thought of claiming to have fired a make-up shot to get the hit. Hanna woulda caught that, though

Still, If the rule book doesn't specify which hit gets pulled, it's gotta be a reshoot IMO, if both hits weren't the same score.

SA

[SRT Driver]

Same caliber, two shots total on the array, two deltas = Delta, mike, no shoot.

If it were same as above but Alpha, Charlie and I saw the no shoot, I wouldn't argue over one point.

[Steve Anderson]

Is that suppprted by the rule book?

I basically agree with you, but I'd like to see a rule applied.

This will happen to me again, and i want to know for sure what to do...

SA

[ErikW]

R.O. gets to play god here. He determines the bullet path (after determining only two shots were fired at this target) and makes the call. If he can't figure the path with certainty, the worst hit is deemed the shoot-through Miss (benefit of doubt to the shooter). This all presupposes he is certain the shooter didn't engage the target with more than two shots, including taking another shot from another position earlier or later.

Not really bad course design. No-shoot vision barriers are a necessary part of many courses. The closer to the targets, the better. In this case, the designer should have used a steel no-shoot.

[Steve Anderson]

Erik,

I basically agree with you, too. Is that supported by a rule?

SA

[j1b]

In almost any circumstance the shooter will get the better hit, with a miss and a no-shoot. If it is even up for debate - that is how it should get scored.

The shooter should generally always get the benefit of the doubt unless it comes to a safety violation. Othewise - the shooter should get the benefit of the doubt.

I think you were scored correctly. If you'd had two hits that scored in different values I would hope the RO would score you on the better hit and take away the lesser of the two.

JB

[ErikW]

9.1.5 as previously mentioned.

[Flexmoney]

You guys are all applying logic. LOL.

What about rules???

If the RO can't say...for certain...that the shot that passed thru the NS was an Alpha or a Delta (or Bravo or Charlie), then he can't score that target.

Along the same line...if there are two Delta hits, one on each side of the target, the RO should know which one went thru the NS. If he/she doesn't, then they did NOT see, for certain, what happened.

(SRT, I am kinda cheating. Steve came by and drew that stage out for me. )

[Flexmoney]

Not really bad course design. No-shoot vision barriers are a necessary part of many courses. The closer to the targets, the better. In this case, the designer should have used a steel no-shoot.

Necessary part ???

The only time I can think of using them is to hide some angles that the shooter wouldn't like shoot from anyway?

I would never use them (with possible shoot throughs) placed in an area that will likey be a shooting lane.

(because of this very issue)

[SRT Driver]

Flex,

Cheater!!!!

11.8.2

[ErikW]

You guys are all applying logic. ... What about rules???

Logic doesn't have to enter into it, as the rule says the R.O. makes the decision; it doesn't say how he must come to his decision. He can flip a coin, consult his astrologist, or do what his neighbor's dog tells him.

[lynn jones]

steve,

if you are going to shoot a "no shoot", please in the future, try to touch the line. thanks!

[Steve Anderson]

Roger that!

SA

[Flexmoney]

You guys are all applying logic. ... What about rules???

Logic doesn't have to enter into it, as the rule says the R.O. makes the decision; it doesn't say how he must come to his decision. He can flip a coin, consult his astrologist, or do what his neighbor's dog tells him.

I'm not seeing anything that says the RO gets to make the decision? I don't see anything along that line in Section 9 (Scoring section). Am I missing something?

9.5.2 says, ...only the specified number and highest value of scoring hits shall be counted for score regardless of the actual number of hits a competitor may have on a scoring target.

But that is trumped by...

9.1.5 Inpenetrable. All IPSC paper targets are deemed to be impenetrable. A shot fired where the full bullet diameter strikes a scoring or penalty target and continues on through to strike another scoring or penalty target, shall not count for additional score or penalty....

That bullet is dead at the first target (in this case, a no-shoot). After that, it doesn't exist...no hit.

If the dead bullet goes on to make a hole in another target...THAT hole doesn't exist.

If there are two holes in a scoring target...and one of them doesn't exist...the RO has to know which one. There is no other way to score the target.

Right?

[Flexmoney]

Here is my rough graphic of the array in question.

(Please ignore the fact that there are boxes and other "required" shooting positions. )

T= paper target

S(s) = steel

NS = no shoot

= shooting box

<<sa>> = Shooting Area (or, in this case Steve Anderson )

This array had to be shot between the boxes.

.....T.....................T

................s

..........S....S....S

.......NS...........NS

... <<<sa>>>....

If you have a Master class Open shooter, shooting on the move...kinda tough on the RO.

(Bad stage design...and the reason we have 2.1.8 "...to prevent shoot throughs".)