To Reshoot or Not to Reshoot

[double_pedro]

Shooter A, 9mm, has a range failure halfway through COF. RO stops Shooter A, says tape 'em up. Move them down 2 spots. Black tape is not placed over hole in hard cover.

Shooter B, 40 cal, begins COF, after engaging targets with untaped hardcover, sees hits in the hardcover after leaving that port. He decides to re-engage that target, adding several seconds to his time. RO says "... range is clear. Why did you go back to that target, you already had 2 A's?"

Shooter B asks for a reshoot because the untaped target caused him to do something that he would not have done otherwise.

RO says no reshoot.

To the RM we go.

9.1.4 - RO judged that an accurate score could be determined.

Shooter B quotes 4.6.1 "Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors."

As RM, I allowed a reshoot.

Is it better to give a reshoot and regret it, or not allow a reshoot and regret it?

Would it be different if the paster fell off of the hardcover rather than being left untaped? I don't think so. In either case, no automatic reshoot is required by 9.1.4 because the target can be scored.

The question is whether the RO, in his judgement even after the fact, has the leeway to grant a re-shoot. In the scenario described, the shooter clearly did something unusual in regards to the target in question ("sees hits in the hardcover after leaving that port. He decides to re-engage that target, adding several seconds to his time"). Therefore I think the RO would be justified to conclude that the missing paster caused the course to be unfair for that shooter and therefore grant a re-shoot. If the shooter did not re-engage the target and showed no obvious issue with the target, I feel the RO would be justified not to grant a re-shoot.

My question is this....should the RO demand the reshoot, offer a reshoot, or wait to be asked by the shooter? Any or all of the above?

Edited January 19, 2009 by double_pedro

[George Jones]

My question is this....should the RO demand the reshoot, offer a reshoot, or wait to be asked by the shooter? Any or all of the above?

This is basic Level I RO seminar stuff.

There is only one reshoot which is offered to the shooter - 8.6.4

All other reshoots are mandatory. The shooter does not have to ask. The shooter can ask all he wants, but the RO is limited to what the rules provide.

The answer to the scenario remains NO Reshoot.

[Nik Habicht]

Not being a RO or anything near an "A" shooter, I hesitate to comment on this, but I think too many people look at this from the RO perspective rather than the shooter perspective.

If the second shooter was an "A" class shooter, one might reasonably say that they should have known where their shots went and not gone back to the target and shot it again. But somehow I don't think that was the case. Consider this from the perspective of any shooter class "C" or lower. If they were in the same situation, they would be far less sure of their shots and would be much more likely to go back and shoot the target again. What if the shooter were new, at their first match?

If the shooter is at their first match we're happy if they finish safely ---- and typically scoring is the last thing they care about.....

The rules need to work the same for everyone --- ability level doesn't enter into it. If a C class shooter is still looking at targets, he should learn to stop doing that.....

Dave Re makes an excellent point about what used to happen when this rule was different. Read it HERE

[kgunz11]

Not to throw a curve, but in order to learn something new.

What if both shooters were shooting 9mm and the score on the target was 1 Alpha, 1 Bravo, 1 Charlie, and 1 hard cover no score hit. What would the RO do in this case? I mean you can look at the previous shooter's score card and see what hits he had and then the RO could determine the hits of the current shooter and no re-shoot would be in order. What if the score keeper was not sure how he scored the targets and the previous shooters hits could not be determined. Does the current shooter get a mandatory re-shoot?

Edited January 19, 2009 by kgunz11

[JThompson]

Not to throw a curve, but in order to learn something new.

What if both shooters were shooting 9mm and the score on the target was 1 Alpha, 1 Bravo, 1 Charlie, and 1 hard cover no score hit. What would the RO do in this case? I mean you can look at the previous shooter's score card and see what hits he had and then the RO could determine the hits of the current shooter and no re-shoot would be in order. What if the score keeper was not sure how he scored the targets and the previous shooters hits could not be determined. Does the current shooter get a mandatory re-shoot?

You don't go back to the previous shooter's card. The RO must determine the score by what's on the target/s. If he can not do that, it's a reshoot and it's not offered it's mandatory.

Edited January 19, 2009 by JThompson

[Jake Di Vita]

Here's another one for ya... I want reshoots on my entire first day at the Open Nationals this year. Why? I had to shoot with bags on the targets. 4.6.1 says that I get to have the exact same course of fire as everyone else, right?

Act of nature is different than neglecting to paste targets brother.

[double_pedro]

My question is this....should the RO demand the reshoot, offer a reshoot, or wait to be asked by the shooter? Any or all of the above?

This is basic Level I RO seminar stuff.

There is only one reshoot which is offered to the shooter - 8.6.4

All other reshoots are mandatory. The shooter does not have to ask. The shooter can ask all he wants, but the RO is limited to what the rules provide.

The answer to the scenario remains NO Reshoot.

Thanks for the response but....the heart of my question is along the following lines: What if there is a range equipment failure? The RO should stop the shooter and the shooter must re-shoot, right? OK. What if there is a range equipment failure and the RO doesn't stop the shooter. For example, suppose the RO is not aware of the failure until the shooter finishes the COF and who then points it out to the RO. Is there a mandatory re-shoot? I would think the answer is "yes" since it is range equipment failure.

Now as this relates to the orignial question, is a missing paster (or one that falls off during the COF) that causes the shooter to re-engage a target a range equipment failure? I believe the rulebook gives a list of examples of range equipment failures, but not an exhaustive list.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

[JThompson]

My question is this....should the RO demand the reshoot, offer a reshoot, or wait to be asked by the shooter? Any or all of the above?

This is basic Level I RO seminar stuff.

There is only one reshoot which is offered to the shooter - 8.6.4

All other reshoots are mandatory. The shooter does not have to ask. The shooter can ask all he wants, but the RO is limited to what the rules provide.

The answer to the scenario remains NO Reshoot.

Thanks for the response but....the heart of my question is along the following lines: What if there is a range equipment failure? The RO should stop the shooter and the shooter must re-shoot, right? OK. What if there is a range equipment failure and the RO doesn't stop the shooter. For example, suppose the RO is not aware of the failure until the shooter finishes the COF and who then points it out to the RO. Is there a mandatory re-shoot? I would think the answer is "yes" since it is range equipment failure.

Now as this relates to the orignial question, is a missing paster (or one that falls off during the COF) that causes the shooter to re-engage a target a range equipment failure? I believe the rulebook gives a list of examples of range equipment failures, but not an exhaustive list.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Pedro,

I understand your question, but here's the deal. According to the rules, a paster falling off or an unpasted target is not considered a range failure. It becomes a reshoot only if the RO can not determin an accurate score.

Rule 9.1.4

Edited January 19, 2009 by JThompson

[kgunz11]

Not to throw a curve, but in order to learn something new.

What if both shooters were shooting 9mm and the score on the target was 1 Alpha, 1 Bravo, 1 Charlie, and 1 hard cover no score hit. What would the RO do in this case? I mean you can look at the previous shooter's score card and see what hits he had and then the RO could determine the hits of the current shooter and no re-shoot would be in order. What if the score keeper was not sure how he scored the targets and the previous shooters hits could not be determined. Does the current shooter get a mandatory re-shoot?

You don't go back to the previous shooter's card. The RO must determine the score by what's on the target/s. If he can not do that, it's a reshoot and it's not offered it's mandatory.

Does it say in the rule book that the RO can't go back to the previous shooters score card? I mean, if the RO is confident that he can confirm his memory from the previous shooters score, then that is an aid in which he can confidently determine the score for the current shooter.

[vluc]

Not being a RO or anything near an "A" shooter, I hesitate to comment on this, but I think too many people look at this from the RO perspective rather than the shooter perspective.

Has to be from the RO/CRO perspective.

Range Officer (“RO”) – issues range commands, oversees competitor

compliance with the written stage briefing and closely monitors safe

competitor action. He also declares the time, scores and penalties

achieved by each competitor and verifies that these are correctly

recorded on the competitor’s score sheet (under the authority of a Chief

Range Officer and Range Master).

Chief Range Officer (“CRO”) – is the primary authority over all persons

and activities in the courses of fire under his control, and oversees

the fair, correct and consistent application of these rules (under the

authority of the Range Master).

[double_pedro]

According to the rules, a paster falling off or an unpasted target is not considered a range failure.

Not trying to be smart a**, but can you reference a rule to support that? Does 9.1.4 imply it is an REF in the event that hits cannot be accurately established? Or does 9.1.4 simply say what to do if hits cannot be accurately established? Not sure how much to read into 9.1.4, that's all.

Thanks.

[vluc]

According to the rules, a paster falling off or an unpasted target is not considered a range failure.

Not trying to be smart a**, but can you reference a rule to support that? Does 9.1.4 imply it is an REF in the event that hits cannot be accurately established? Or does 9.1.4 simply say what to do if hits cannot be accurately established? Not sure how much to read into 9.1.4, that's all.

Thanks.

Well let's take a look at the rules in question so we all don't go back and forth looking at our rule book....

9.1.4 Unrestored Targets – If, following completion of a course of fire by a

previous competitor, one or more targets have not been properly

patched or taped or if previously applied pasters have fallen off the target

for the competitor being scored, the Range Officer must judge

whether or not an accurate score can be determined. If there are extra

scoring hits or questionable penalty hits thereon, and it is not obvious

which hits were made by the competitor being scored, the affected

competitor must be ordered to reshoot the course of fire. For the purpose

of this rule, B-zone and C-zone hits shall be considered one and

the same.

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all

competitors. Range equipment failure includes, the displacement of

paper targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the

failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of

mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of

props such as openings, ports, and barriers.

Looks like the answer to your question is there - it defines what is to be done when the score cannot be accurately determined.

Also seems that REF and re-shoots are getting confused. Not every re-shoot is REF.

Edited January 19, 2009 by vluc

[Flexmoney]

I used to assume this wasn't a reshoot. I then watched a member of my squad...at the Nationals...open a door to some targets that weren't pasted. He paused and pointed this out to the RO during his run. The RO didn't stop him, so the shooter then continued. After the cof, the Range Master was called. Troy granted a reshoot.

It is crystal clear that the cof was not presented to the shooter in the same manner as everyone else. It is also crystal clear that the presentation disrupted how the shooter shot. This wasn't an act of Mother Nature, it was a failure to ensure an equitable presentation of the cof to the shooter. That isn't under the shooter's influence.

Reshoot.

[kgunz11]

So Troy has an interpretation of the rule that differs. Looks like more than one of the USPSA rules leaves some wiggle room, although a specific rule was written to address this one. RM has final call, rather it is correct or not. I learned that the hard way once at a level II match.

edited because my mind works faster than my hands

Edited January 19, 2009 by kgunz11

[Scott R]

I used to assume this wasn't a reshoot. I then watched a member of my squad...at the Nationals...open a door to some targets that weren't pasted. He paused and pointed this out to the RO during his run. The RO didn't stop him, so the shooter then continued. After the cof, the Range Master was called. Troy granted a reshoot.

It is crystal clear that the cof was not presented to the shooter in the same manner as everyone else. It is also crystal clear that the presentation disrupted how the shooter shot. This wasn't an act of Mother Nature, it was a failure to ensure an equitable presentation of the cof to the shooter. That isn't under the shooter's influence.

Reshoot.

I am not smart enough to quote 2 posts at the same time, but if you read post #5 and this post from Flex it would appear that even at the Nationals this situation is not handled consistantly. Has anyone posed this to NROI for a ruling?

[XRe]

Here's another one for ya... I want reshoots on my entire first day at the Open Nationals this year. Why? I had to shoot with bags on the targets. 4.6.1 says that I get to have the exact same course of fire as everyone else, right?

Act of nature is different than neglecting to paste targets brother.

No, its not. This is a rules question, not a semantic difference between why you'd consult one or the other. Both situations have a specific rule to cover them. If 4.6.1 allows you to circumvent one of those rules, it allows you to circumvent both. You can't have it both ways.

No reshoot.

[XRe]

Not trying to be smart a**, but can you reference a rule to support that?

9.1.4

Does 9.1.4 imply it is an REF in the event that hits cannot be accurately established? Or does 9.1.4 simply say what to do if hits cannot be accurately established? Not sure how much to read into 9.1.4, that's all.

9.1.4 calls it an Unrestored Target - not a Range Equipment Failure. 9.1.4 stipulates how to handle an unrestored target - including how to handle it if you can't accurately determine a score.

[XRe]

Troy granted a reshoot.

Troy quite clearly took the wrong action.

[XRe]

I mean you can look at the previous shooter's score card and see what hits he had and then the RO could determine the hits of the current shooter and no re-shoot would be in order.

You don't go back to the previous shooter's card. The RO must determine the score by what's on the target/s. If he can not do that, it's a reshoot and it's not offered it's mandatory.

Got a rule for that, Jim? If the ROs are consistently scoring the stage a certain way - ie, T1 is always the same target, etc - they can use the previous shooter's scoresheet to determine score. 9.1.4 does not preclude this. However, its a rare stage where the ROs are running things that consistently (particularly over a long weekend of shooting) where they can guarantee this to be the case - I've seen it in practice, though.

[Jake Di Vita]

No, its not. This is a rules question, not a semantic difference between why you'd consult one or the other. Both situations have a specific rule to cover them. If 4.6.1 allows you to circumvent one of those rules, it allows you to circumvent both. You can't have it both ways.

Yes...it is. This is an outdoor sport and weather can't be controlled. But if I am shooting a stage and see holes in a target that makes me hesitate - I didn't shoot the same course of fire as everyone else. Weather is one thing. Not pasting a target is a totally seperate issue because that can and is controlled by the people on the range. Rule 4.5.2 also states that match officials must take corrective action to ensure consistency in respect of the range surface, the presentation of targets and/or any other matter.

Another example of this....on a gravel range, fault lines tend to get covered. If I get a foot fault because the fault line was covered and I couldn't feel it, you can bet your ass I'm going to argue it.

This wasn't an act of Mother Nature, it was a failure to ensure an equitable presentation of the cof to the shooter. That isn't under the shooter's influence.

Bingo.

Dave, I really agree with you on the vast majority of issues we discuss, but you got this one flat wrong brother.

[Flexmoney]

Troy granted a reshoot.

Troy quite clearly took the wrong action.

I disagree.

I believe his call was based on the rule book. And, it was...absolutely...the equitable (right) thing to do as well.

I can...and would...make the call under 8.6.4 or 4.6.1

8.6.4 In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing either the time or the score from the initial attempt. However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

4.6 Range Equipment Failure and Other Issues

4.6.1 Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props such as openings, ports, and barriers.

[XRe]

Yes...it is.

No - its not. You're stuck in the semantics of how the rule is invoked - those are definitely different. If unrestored targets were meant to be considered a range equipment failure, we would not have 9.4.1 at all. Because we have 9.4.1 - a rule that covers a very specific set of cirumstances (the various permutations of targets left unpasted), we have a rule that declares specifically what to do in that situation. That rule doesn't say anything about distraction to the shooter, and it doesn't say that the shooter gets an automatic reshoot. It says - quite clearly - that the shooter gets a reshoot in that situation IF and ONLY IF the shooter's score cannot be accurately determined.

By the same taken, if 4.6.1 is taken to override 9.4.1, 4.6.1 must also be taken to override all other rules that cover specific situations where the equitable presentation of challenge to each and every shooter in the match is not the same. You cannot have this both ways. If the rules intended to have bagged targets be a specific exception, but not unrestored targets, we wouldn't have a rule for unrestored targets. You cannot turn 4.6.1 into a "shooter gets a free pass when its convenient" rule.

By the way, you'll also need to reshoot competitors who shoot stages with swingers and such when its cold if someone shoots when its warmer. That swinger moves differently in different temperatures. That presents a different, and unequitable challenge...

Quite simply, you guys are making stuff up to suit you And, hey... I'm sorry even our own NROI certified RMs don't know how to apply this rule...

Dave, I really agree with you on the vast majority of issues we discuss, but you got this one flat wrong brother.

How much money you wanna put on getting a decision out of Amidon?

[Jake Di Vita]

How much money you wanna put on getting a decision out of Amidon?

I'll bet you a full set of bumpers and a bar.

Go back and read Flex's post closely...that counts as "another external influence."

By the way, you'll also need to reshoot competitors who shoot stages with swingers and such when its cold if someone shoots when its warmer. That swinger moves differently in different temperatures. That presents a different, and unequitable challenge...

As far as I know...temperature counts as controlled by Mother Nature???

[XRe]

I believe his call was based on the rule book. And, it was...absolutely...the equitable (right) thing to do as well.

I can...and would...make the call under 8.6.4 or 4.6.1

You can keep saying that all you want, but that's not going to make it true

Perhaps, then, you can elucidate on the purpose of 9.1.4? Let's assume you're correct for a moment. 9.1.4. will never be invoked - the shooter will always be given a reshoot under 8.6.4 (remember, shooter has no choice in a REF, he must reshoot). So, what's 9.1.4 there for?

Edit to fix rule number quoted above...

Edited January 20, 2009 by XRe

[Flexmoney]

Dave,

It is absolutely true. Because that is how I have, and will, call it. Nothing short of a BOD ruling or rulebook change is going to change that.

I can't look myself in the mirror and call it your way. I know the shooter got screwed. That is wrong. If I am running the stage...it is my fault they got screwed (because I didn't ensure the stage was properly reset). If we don't have a rulebook that allows them to reshoot, then I don't wanna play.

It's the right thing to do.

I've given the supporting rules.