Do you get a “reshoot” for untapped targets?

[Fireant]

There is nothing in the rule book allowing the shooter to just stop and point at the target. The RO is not allowed to talk to you during the COF, except to give safety warnings, without opening themselves up to coaching or interference claims. We teach them that other than safety warnings, or STOP, the only thing they are allowed to say is "If you are finished, unload and show clear".

I have faced this as RM on several occasions and I know other RM's have also. My normal response is to grant a reshoot, not because the shooter stopped, but because the RO crew failed to assure that the stage had been properly reset.

The shooter should not be penalized because of the failure of the RO crew. With that being said though, the best action is to keep on shooting like nothing happened.

The key to me would be if it actually interfered with the shooter. If they shot it normally, with no more than a very slight hesitation, I might look at it differently. However, if the shooter stops, or dramatically slows down, then I'll go the other way.

Agreed that a reshoot is not specifically called for within the rulebook, but to me it falls close enough to REF to normally grant the reshoot.

I don't think we should be trying to judge the degree it effected the shooter to decide a reshoot or not. Just use the rule book. If you can determine the hits, score it, if not reshoot. No personal judgement involved as it should be. I have worked hard to shoot unpasted targets in practice so seeing one during a COF will not slow me down. I also do not think an unrestored target is REF either. The holes in no way presents a different shooting challenge to the shooter. After the buzzer shoot until you are finished or hear a stop command. Know the rules of the game before playing, or deal with the outcome.

[Gary Stevens]

There is nothing in the rule book allowing the shooter to just stop and point at the target. The RO is not allowed to talk to you during the COF, except to give safety warnings, without opening themselves up to coaching or interference claims. We teach them that other than safety warnings, or STOP, the only thing they are allowed to say is "If you are finished, unload and show clear".

I have faced this as RM on several occasions and I know other RM's have also. My normal response is to grant a reshoot, not because the shooter stopped, but because the RO crew failed to assure that the stage had been properly reset.

The shooter should not be penalized because of the failure of the RO crew. With that being said though, the best action is to keep on shooting like nothing happened.

The key to me would be if it actually interfered with the shooter. If they shot it normally, with no more than a very slight hesitation, I might look at it differently. However, if the shooter stops, or dramatically slows down, then I'll go the other way.

Agreed that a reshoot is not specifically called for within the rulebook, but to me it falls close enough to REF to normally grant the reshoot.

I don't think we should be trying to judge the degree it effected the shooter to decide a reshoot or not. Just use the rule book. If you can determine the hits, score it, if not reshoot. No personal judgement involved as it should be. I have worked hard to shoot unpasted targets in practice so seeing one during a COF will not slow me down. I also do not think an unrestored target is REF either. The holes in no way presents a different shooting challenge to the shooter. After the buzzer shoot until you are finished or hear a stop command. Know the rules of the game before playing, or deal with the outcome.

Either way, I have to make the call. Whatever I call, I can live with it.

Gary

[joecichlid]

Had this happen to me last Friday night. Loaded gun on a barrel for the start and when I got to the first target, close in 10 foot zebra target, so I could see it clear as day and as I broke my second shot I see four holes. For about half a second I am waiting for the RO to stop me and call for stuff to get pasted and reset. THEN my brain kicked in and said stop thinking and finish shooting the rest of the stage THEN worry about the two extra holes. Well needless to say my plan on that stage went out the window and I tanked HARD. Walked past a target picking up to two mikes and an FTE. A hard lesson learned, just focus on my dot and trigger control and break MY shots where they need to be and not worry about anything (well aside from safety). Know what I mean?

Joe W.

[JThompson]

There is nothing in the rule book allowing the shooter to just stop and point at the target. The RO is not allowed to talk to you during the COF, except to give safety warnings, without opening themselves up to coaching or interference claims. We teach them that other than safety warnings, or STOP, the only thing they are allowed to say is "If you are finished, unload and show clear".

I have faced this as RM on several occasions and I know other RM's have also. My normal response is to grant a reshoot, not because the shooter stopped, but because the RO crew failed to assure that the stage had been properly reset.

The shooter should not be penalized because of the failure of the RO crew. With that being said though, the best action is to keep on shooting like nothing happened.

The key to me would be if it actually interfered with the shooter. If they shot it normally, with no more than a very slight hesitation, I might look at it differently. However, if the shooter stops, or dramatically slows down, then I'll go the other way.

Agreed that a reshoot is not specifically called for within the rulebook, but to me it falls close enough to REF to normally grant the reshoot.

I don't think we should be trying to judge the degree it effected the shooter to decide a reshoot or not. Just use the rule book. If you can determine the hits, score it, if not reshoot. No personal judgement involved as it should be. I have worked hard to shoot unpasted targets in practice so seeing one during a COF will not slow me down. I also do not think an unrestored target is REF either. The holes in no way presents a different shooting challenge to the shooter. After the buzzer shoot until you are finished or hear a stop command. Know the rules of the game before playing, or deal with the outcome.

Either way, I have to make the call. Whatever I call, I can live with it.

Gary

This is a sticky wicket... As a shooter I like to see things as fair as possible, but as an CRO/RO there could be consistency issues in making this call. Also, what if the guy had a lousy run and this gives him/her another bite at the apple? What if they get another shot and really improve their run beyond the target pause? How about the guy/lady that had them covered... this could perhaps change the course of the match.

As an CRO I think I would have to go by the letter of the book and say, if it's scorable, there are no reshoots. While I may tend to agree that an unrestored target might not present and even COF to this shooter, in stretching the rules for this one shooter, have I created a larger inequity for other shooters in the match? As an official we have to use the book to make our decisions... if we can ignore a rule then we are opening ourselves to all sorts of feeling of unfairness. The shooter "paused" at the unrestored target... how long of a pause does it take to create a reshoot? Another shooter has an unrestored target, but doesn't pause, but has been put off his/her run by it. The RO scored the target, because an accurate score could be determined. Now does this shooter have grounds to arb because he/she was not given the opportunity to reshoot the COF. I would have to say yes... This could perhaps even get a stage tossed if previous shooters were not given the reshoot. Since the pause, or length thereof is an arbitrary thing, I do not see how you can be consistent making this call.

JT

[Rob Boudrie]

The RO is not allowed to talk to you during the COF, except to give safety warnings,

Not entirely true. If the RO notices that a mover is not set, a popper not yet engaged was never set, or some other range equipment failure, it is appropriate for the RO to stop the shooter to save time, target holes, primers and ammo. If the untaped targets were to rise to the level of "range equipment failure", it would be acceptable for the RO to speak up and stop the shooter. Under the rules, untaped targets are not necessarily a re-shoot.

But, the procedure of "if a score can accurately be determined" presents this interesting scenario to consider:

A 9mm or 38 super shooter fires a stage with untaped targets from a 45 shooter. If there are no M's with the smaller caliber, a score can be accurately determined and the score stands under the rules. If there are any misses with the smaller caliber, it is not possible to determine if one went through a pre-existing 45 hole, therefore, determining an accurate score is impossible and a re-shoot is mandated.

So, if an entire stage consists of untaped larger holes, the competitor gets a "reshoot if miss, score stands if his/her run is clean".

I'll try to remember bringing this up the next time the rules are up for revision, so that a re-shoot is mandated if an accurate score cannot be determined even in the event of one or more misses, so that this "re-shoot conditional on how the competitor shot the stage" loophole is removed.

[Gary Stevens]

There is nothing in the rule book allowing the shooter to just stop and point at the target. The RO is not allowed to talk to you during the COF, except to give safety warnings, without opening themselves up to coaching or interference claims. We teach them that other than safety warnings, or STOP, the only thing they are allowed to say is "If you are finished, unload and show clear".

I have faced this as RM on several occasions and I know other RM's have also. My normal response is to grant a reshoot, not because the shooter stopped, but because the RO crew failed to assure that the stage had been properly reset.

The shooter should not be penalized because of the failure of the RO crew. With that being said though, the best action is to keep on shooting like nothing happened.

I thought I said that. Stop being one of the appropriate things the RO can say.

[Bergie]

If there are untaped targets and you cannot determine which holes were from the previous shooter you can go back to the score sheet of the previous shooter to determine which holes belong to which shooter. If there are 2 alphas, 1 charlie and a delta and the previous shooter had a alpha delta on that target then you know for sure that this shooter has a alpha, charlie...

This is one of the reasons why we should score the stage the same way each time. Then you know that T1 on the score sheet is always the same particular target and so on.

[Flexmoney]

Drift for the land mine (clays) as props moved to it's own thread: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=87732

[al503]

After I had the this happen to me as a shooter, I am much more diligent in making sure all of the targets are taped when I'm RO'ing.

[Flexmoney]

We sure are packing a lot of various issues into this one thread:

- Without the stage being properly reset, was the shooting challenge presented the same for every shooter ?

- RO interference ?

- Scoring, when the run was not impacted ?

- Shooter experience (suggestions to keep shooting)

What did I miss?

[SharonAnne9x23]

I was ROing a stage. As soon as the shooter finished and saw 4 holes in a target he demanded a reshoot. He was informed that 2 ROs had seen him engage the target from two different windows. All shooters were warned in the walk through that several targets could be seen from more than one window. It was up to the shooter to decide where to engage the targets from.

The shooter claimed it was an illegal stage. After his buddies ridiculed him for being a whiner and using bad judgement he meekly walked away.

Too many shooters have been 'raised' on 'shoot from here' stages and matches. One of the tenents of IPSC is that it is freestyle and stages are up to the shooter to decide the best way to shoot them.

[CHA-LEE]

From a shooters perspective when you run into an untapped target there is almost always some level of hesitation and “WTF!!??” mental process that happens when you encounter it. The magnitude at which this affects the rest of your stage run can vary greatly. For some it is just a slight blip of hesitation and the rest of the stage run is fine. For others it completely derails the rest of the stage run and it ends up being a train wreck. Facing an unexpected untapped target is not the same stage experience that every other shooter gets to experience. But then again, you could argue the same for the very first shooter on a stage that gets to make the first shots on the targets, verses being the last guy to shoot the stage for the day and the targets are tapped to the point where its hard to determine where the perforations of the different scoring zones are. The same could be said for freshly painted steel verses being the 20th person to shoot it. It’s a different visual experience.

I understand why the rules are written the way they are. If they were not written that way then you would have shooters stopping themselves all the time to whine about this or that taking it to the extreme. Plus, getting to reshoot a stage, even if only a portion of the stage was shot, is an unfair advantage.

[Skizeks]

Just one more issue to add to the list.

4.6.1 Range Equipment Failure

This is why I often give a reshot for unrestored targets.

Let the bashing begin!

Duane

[LPatterson]

Just one more issue to add to the list.

4.6.1 Range Equipment Failure

This is why I often give a reshot for unrestored targets.

Let the bashing begin!

Duane

You are hereby bashed!!!!!! After the shooting stops I get to start scoring, do you want to take a chance that I can't score it correctly?

[Lee King]

Just one more issue to add to the list.

4.6.1 Range Equipment Failure

This is why I often give a reshot for unrestored targets.

Let the bashing begin!

Duane

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.

No mention of untaped on unrestored targets. One can argue the "fair and equitable" portion of this. Personally I think it's a stretch to apply it to perfectly functioning, non-moving, "normal" in all other respects except for the hole, target. But how is this different than looking at a target WITH pasters where you can see the light shining through? How many times have you looked at a target and thought "it's unpasted". Then when you go to paste it realize there IS a paster and you are just seeing light through it? Should a shooter be given a reshoot because he THINKS there's a hole and pauses or stops?

The SPECIFIC rule addressing this situation is 9.1.4 and to me, trumps any other rules that COULD be applied in a stretch. If 9.1.4 didn't exist then sure, perhaps the "fair and equitable" portion of 4.6.1 applies. But it does and it's clear as to how to proceed.

Shooter's are just as responsible to know the rules as RO's are. If a shooter chooses to pause at an untaped target he should do so knowing 9.1.4 exists. As an RO, if I can make the call I will. If I can't I can't. If the shooter is insistent, then I call the Range Master. It's within the shooter's right. The Range Master may overturn my decision and that's ok with me.

As a side story, I watched a shooter argue about WHICH two A hits (of the 4 A hits on the target) were his on an untaped target because he threw 2 other M elsewhere in the COF. He claimed the RO couldn't score the target because he didn't know EXACTLY which two were his and therefore should get a reshoot.

[John Baier]

If there are untaped targets and you cannot determine which holes were from the previous shooter you can go back to the score sheet of the previous shooter to determine which holes belong to which shooter. If there are 2 alphas, 1 charlie and a delta and the previous shooter had a alpha delta on that target then you know for sure that this shooter has a alpha, charlie...

This is one of the reasons why we should score the stage the same way each time. Then you know that T1 on the score sheet is always the same particular target and so on.

This happened to me a few years ago. I was CROing a long COF. we had two RO's calling out targets. I was responsible for scoring 3 targets and then I would head off to set activators. Well the competitor wanted a re-shoot because the first target that was called (which was always the first target called in the match) was not previously pasted. He claimed that the four holes in the the target were the same caliber. Which they were. I didn't issue a reshoot based on the fact that I knew what the score was from the previous shooter and I also used the previous score sheet as back up. The RM also backed up my call. If I'm CROing a stage I will always have my crew score the targets the same way through out the match.

[PJ BAD]

From a shooters perspective when you run into an untapped target there is almost always some level of hesitation and “WTF!!??” mental process that happens when you encounter it. The magnitude at which this affects the rest of your stage run can vary greatly. For some it is just a slight blip of hesitation and the rest of the stage run is fine. For others it completely derails the rest of the stage run and it ends up being a train wreck. Facing an unexpected untapped target is not the same stage experience that every other shooter gets to experience. But then again, you could argue the same for the very first shooter on a stage that gets to make the first shots on the targets, verses being the last guy to shoot the stage for the day and the targets are tapped to the point where its hard to determine where the perforations of the different scoring zones are. The same could be said for freshly painted steel verses being the 20th person to shoot it. It’s a different visual experience.

I understand why the rules are written the way they are. If they were not written that way then you would have shooters stopping themselves all the time to whine about this or that taking it to the extreme. Plus, getting to reshoot a stage, even if only a portion of the stage was shot, is an unfair advantage.

Well said.

[Chuck Anderson]

Wow, Gary, I really don't see how that interpretation is supported by the rules. There is a very specific rule that covers unpasted targets, yet you would disregard it? If the score can be determined the rule specifically says, no reshoot. If the shooter was messed up by it, that's kind of the way things go. If you don't like the rule, you're certainly one of the few people in a position to change it. But acting as an RM and arbitrarily changing it for one shooter, in one match is not the way to go. It's certainly not fair to the other shooters who had an untaped target who didn't realize the RM wasn't going to follow the rule for the untaped targets and ask for a re-shoot. What about a Nationals scenario with two RM's. I know John is not going to grant a re-shoot for an unpasted target where the score can be determined. So what happens to the shooter who gets a reshoot on the first 9 and is denied on the second 9?

That said, I wouldn't be specifically opposed to a rule change allowing a reshoot in this case. But it would have to be one very specifically worded.

[Gary Stevens]

As I see it, there are two issues.

The first one is, Yes, I have a procedure to attempt to score the target. If I can, then I can, if I can't then there is no reshoot.

The second one is an equity issue and a fairness issue. The shooter who shot on a target or target's that were not pasted was presented a different problem due to the failure of the RO crew. The CRO is in charge of that stage, and that includes assuring that the stage is reset for the next shooter. He/she failed, not the shooter.

The first problem is addressed by the rulebook, the second one is not.

As I said before, when I have to make the calls, I can live with the one's I make. Arbitration is always available for any who disagree with them including third parties.

[Skizeks]

Just one more issue to add to the list.

4.6.1 Range Equipment Failure

This is why I often give a reshot for unrestored targets.

Let the bashing begin!

Duane

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.

No mention of untaped on unrestored targets. One can argue the "fair and equitable" portion of this. Personally I think it's a stretch to apply it to perfectly functioning, non-moving, "normal" in all other respects except for the hole, target. But how is this different than looking at a target WITH pasters where you can see the light shining through? How many times have you looked at a target and thought "it's unpasted". Then when you go to paste it realize there IS a paster and you are just seeing light through it? Should a shooter be given a reshoot because he THINKS there's a hole and pauses or stops?

The SPECIFIC rule addressing this situation is 9.1.4 and to me, trumps any other rules that COULD be applied in a stretch. If 9.1.4 didn't exist then sure, perhaps the "fair and equitable" portion of 4.6.1 applies. But it does and it's clear as to how to proceed.

Shooter's are just as responsible to know the rules as RO's are. If a shooter chooses to pause at an untaped target he should do so knowing 9.1.4 exists. As an RO, if I can make the call I will. If I can't I can't. If the shooter is insistent, then I call the Range Master. It's within the shooter's right. The Range Master may overturn my decision and that's ok with me.

As a side story, I watched a shooter argue about WHICH two A hits (of the 4 A hits on the target) were his on an untaped target because he threw 2 other M elsewhere in the COF. He claimed the RO couldn't score the target because he didn't know EXACTLY which two were his and therefore should get a reshoot.

As I see it, there are two issues.

The first one is, Yes, I have a procedure to attempt to score the target. If I can, then I can, if I can't then there is no reshoot.

The second one is an equity issue and a fairness issue. The shooter who shot on a target or target's that were not pasted was presented a different problem due to the failure of the RO crew. The CRO is in charge of that stage, and that includes assuring that the stage is reset for the next shooter. He/she failed, not the shooter.

The first problem is addressed by the rulebook, the second one is not.

As I said before, when I have to make the calls, I can live with the one's I make. Arbitration is always available for any who disagree with them including third parties.

To apply the rules you have to apply all the rules, not just the ones you might think fit.

When I CRO or even RO a stage I want every shooter to have the same chance to either succeed or fail based on their ability to shoot the stage and solve the shooting problem. I do not want them to fail because the crew running the stage missed something on the stage and din't return the stage to it's former condition.

Duane

[Gary Stevens]

Because I want to always do the right thing, I am making an effort to poll my RM brotherhood/sisterhood to better understand this situation. Consistency is important in our sport, and if I am out of step, I'll get back in step. While I feel comfortable with my decisions on this, that is not enough. They also need to be correct.

Time will tell.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Gary Stevens

[Flexmoney]

As mentioned, I think there are a few issues that come into play.

If it was just targets that were untapped...then it would be easy enough to address this in the rules...unrestored targets = reshoot (or = no reshoot).

As it is, we have targets that loose pasters, targets that are too far away for the holes to be seen by the shooter, and (I'm sure) other issues.

I know that, at one Nationals, I ended up with a target that had 4 holes in it when it should have only had 2. There were the hits from the previous shooter, along with my hits. The target was far enough away that my run was not...in any way...impacted. But, the RO's weren't able to make a solid determination on which hits were mine, so I was issued a reshoot. If I had been shooting 9mm and the other guy had been shooting 45...it likely would have been easy to figure out which hits were mine.

So, I am with Gary. If the shooters run is impacted, then I will issue a reshoot. If not, and I can determine the proper score...then they will get the run they first earned.

[dqshooter]

You've gotta love this thread..all in all it shows me why we don't talk to a shooter after the "stand by" is given. Also, not to be argumentative, I don't think it wise to make a differeation between a local match and a major one. What you do at one, sooner or later you'll do at the other. We have a rule book for a reason. That sounds kinda harsh but we have rules for a reason. Making the rules up as we go as to what we'll allow a reshoot over is stepping on a slippery slope.

Agree 100%, you must Run every shooter the same. It doesn't matter if it is a GM or a U class shooter. You must score the same and treat all competitors the same. Rules are rules, some shooters may try to bully you into making a call. Make the call by the rule book and stick to it. It has been my experience that once you set the tone as a RO you should not have any more issues.

[lim10]

NROI Ruling

Does this help?

Edited July 22, 2009 by lim10

[Cy Soto]

NROI Ruling

Does this help?

The link is not working.