USPSA rulebook discussion

[Grelber]

Having gone back and looked I cannot see where Bill's statement applies to my statement.

Could be that I am twisted on the wording & intent then, will ask the instructor at the Silver Creek class this month.

 

[Coach]

If I see the unload and show clear why should I make someone redo it because I have not gotten to say all the commands?

 

[Grelber]

If I see the unload and show clear why should I make someone redo it because I have not gotten to say all the commands?

As pertains to logic or to written procedure?

I guess on the logic side somebody could make the argument that forcing folks to follow the sequence cuts down on the number of a.d.'s .

 

[Coach]

As pertains to logic or to written procedure?

I guess on the logic side somebody could make the argument that forcing folks to follow the sequence cuts down on the number of a.d.'s .

If someone has sped through the unload and show clear it is already over. They either got it right or they did not. I just see the redo has people enforcing their power as RO for the sake of doing so. The AD is on the shooter.

Just trying to keep you off Doodie.

 

[Grelber]

If someone has sped through the unload and show clear it is already over. They either got it right or they did not. I just see the redo has people enforcing their power as RO for the sake of doing so. The AD is on the shooter.

Just trying to keep you off Doodie.

I thought it was diddily .

Really just trying to learn what I ought to do and not imply that I know how it ought to be done.

That said, I was thinking more about the next times than the this time. If I know you are going to make me follow the sequence then I'm going to do it by the numbers, which gets you involved and in a position to keep me from screwing up.

 

[Coach]

I thought it was diddily .

Really just trying to learn what I ought to do and not imply that I know how it ought to be done.

That said, I was thinking more about the next times than the this time. If I know you are going to make me follow the sequence then I'm going to do it by the numbers, which gets you involved and in a position to keep me from screwing up.

How do you and I do at following directions.

 

[Tanfodude]

I recently had this discussion about back up guns on level 2/3 matches. As long as you included the back up gun in chrono and passes the inspection for the division you're shoooting, you're good to go regardless if the gun is of different platform/make right? Example, I'm shooting production with a hammer gun, my back up is striker fired.

 

[bwframe]

Let's talk about the flip and catch

One of the best first time shooters I've ever seen, obviously well practiced and a natural talent. Three stages in, he executes a memory stage with jealous precision. Does the flip and catch at 160ish degrees, the muzzle comes down pointed at the RO's belly, which happily blocked the rest of us.

Poor gent brought his 6 year old son to see him shoot. He was devastated and not one of those who stuck around to help. 4 years ago and have not seen him at another match since. Bummer...

 

[riverman67]

I'm leaning toward the don't RO option.

 

[Cowboy1629]

I flip and catch but then I pull the slide back open again for the RO to verify an empty chamber. If I'm ROing I expect the same if I didn't get a chance to see unless they have already dropped the hammer and by that point if it wasn't empty we will both know it.

Now if if your muzzel isn't in a safe direction or you sweep yourself that's a different story.

 

[Grelber]

How do you and I do at following directions.

Probably better than we do at giving up on an argument.

I'm leaning toward the don't RO option.

If somebody gave your timer to an olympic runner you would chase him until you got it back.

 

[Coach]

Where did all this liberal bull**** come from? So many people wanting to control the every action of everyone else even if it does not violate a rule. Flip and catch is fine. If a rule gets broken it is fine as well. DQ and send home. Enforce the rules and let it go at that. We don't need more rules and we don't have to be so draconian. If you cannot flip and catch then don't. Do we have to hand blunt scissors to everyone also. HTFU USPSA. Don't be so liberal. It is ok if someone is having fun. We don't have to suck the freedom and the fun out of the sport to be safe.

Is there anyone more power hungry than a new RO?

 

[Tanfodude]

Got another one today.

A target covered by a no shoot like this

The hit was middle (I placed a tiny black dot) on no shoot, right at the edge inside the perf.

The no shoot was placed where the edge was touching the perf of A zone. The no shoot perf is basically on C zone.

The hit was on no shoot inside the perf and touching the perf. The 2 ROs scored it a C, rather than A. I thought that whatever the no shoot covers (since it's a hard cover) the area behind it doesn't exist. I wanted to say that but they both sound absolutely correct. And they're basing it on how the no shoot was placed (poorly placed since you can see the C zone).

Shouldn't the proper placing of the no shoot is the perf of the not shoot should be in line with the A zone perf?

If I RO'd, I would have called it A and a no shoot.

Discuss.

 

[blkrifle]

Got another one today.

A target covered by a no shoot like this

The hit was middle (I placed a tiny black dot) on no shoot, right at the edge inside the perf.

The no shoot was placed where the edge was touching the perf of A zone. The no shoot perf is basically on C zone.

The hit was on no shoot inside the perf and touching the perf. The 2 ROs scored it a C, rather than A. I thought that whatever the no shoot covers (since it's a hard cover) the area behind it doesn't exist. I wanted to say that but they both sound absolutely correct. And they're basing it on how the no shoot was placed (poorly placed since you can see the C zone).

Shouldn't the proper placing of the no shoot is the perf of the not shoot should be in line with the A zone perf?

If I RO'd, I would have called it A and a no shoot. why would you call an A? the hole never touched the A/C line

Discuss.

​proper shot placement would have solved this problem. shoot brown or shoot white....get off the line!

 

[blkrifle]

Got another one today.

A target covered by a no shoot like this

The hit was middle (I placed a tiny black dot) on no shoot, right at the edge inside the perf.

The no shoot was placed where the edge was touching the perf of A zone. The no shoot perf is basically on C zone.

The hit was on no shoot inside the perf and touching the perf. The 2 ROs scored it a C, rather than A. I thought that whatever the no shoot covers (since it's a hard cover) the area behind it doesn't exist. I wanted to say that but they both sound absolutely correct. And they're basing it on how the no shoot was placed (poorly placed since you can see the C zone).

Shouldn't the proper placing of the no shoot is the perf of the not shoot should be in line with the A zone perf?

If I RO'd, I would have called it A and a no shoot. why would you call an A? the hole never touched the A/C line

Discuss.

proper shot placement would have solved this problem. shoot brown or shoot white....get off the line!

 

[Tanfodude]

Steve, I mentioned that the hole was touching the NS perf inside.

This is from the rulebook. If you look at the right of the no shoot, the no shoot perf is in line with A zone perf hence the score C NS (#3), but on the left, it's the NS edge that is in line w/ A zone perf but it's still a C NS score (#6), it's the exact same example I had raised above.

During our RO class, I had called that an A NS (#6) but our instructor said that it shouldn't be because the A zone behind that NS doesn't exist, since the NS target was placed in contact with the target. And he emphasized that target placement is very important to inconsistent calls like that since ROs are gonna call it how it's placed.

Hence my resoning that would have called it an A NS during that match today.

 

[Tanfodude]

On fixed time scoring

Baseball Standards: https://www.uspsa.org/classifiers/03-14.pdf

String 3: If the shooter shot 4 times before reloading (all for were hits), would the penalty be 1 prodecural for failure to reload and an extra hit penalty since it specified 3 shots only per rule 9.4.5.2?

 

[S8MS-01904]

Hence my reasoning that would have called it an A NS during that match today.

The perf's were not lined up (bad target placement), so the call was "C", No-shoot.

 

[sporter]

Got another one today.

A target covered by a no shoot like this

The hit was middle (I placed a tiny black dot) on no shoot, right at the edge inside the perf.

The no shoot was placed where the edge was touching the perf of A zone. The no shoot perf is basically on C zone.

The hit was on no shoot inside the perf and touching the perf. The 2 ROs scored it a C, rather than A. I thought that whatever the no shoot covers (since it's a hard cover) the area behind it doesn't exist. I wanted to say that but they both sound absolutely correct. And they're basing it on how the no shoot was placed (poorly placed since you can see the C zone).

Shouldn't the proper placing of the no shoot is the perf of the not shoot should be in line with the A zone perf?

If I RO'd, I would have called it A and a no shoot.

Discuss.

To make a proper determination we need a better picture. Not one from 25 yards.

 

[S8MS-01904]

Try to visualize:

The scoring shot was a hit in the no-shoot breaking the perf and the scoring target behind the No-shoot (since the perf's were NOT lined up) was hit "completely" in the C zone and NOT touching the A zone perf or any of the A zone scoring area. The A zone perf was completely intact and untouched.

Hope that helps.