Who's interested in a RO class

[Litlratt]

C1 6 says when hit. The target wasn't hit.

@mongo, I agree.

edited to add that the question is Whether the cro was correct in denying THAT challenge?

 

[HICKMAN]

Can a CRO deny a challenge to call the RM?

I would think the RM would determine if there was not evidence of a hit, as he's the one who'd do the calibration.

 

[BillD]

Can a CRO deny a challenge to call the RM?

I would think the RM would determine if there was not evidence of a hit, as he's the one who'd do the calibration.

And why would you call for a calibration on a target that wasn't hit?

I'd call the RM for sure and let him deal with it.


So what happens if the steel wasn't painted between shooters?

Reshoot?

 

[Litlratt]

If the shooter was challenging the score, I would agree. However, he is challenging the calibration without evidence of a hit.

 

[HICKMAN]

Troy would be so proud of us right now

 

[downrange72]

I guess I started all kinds of debate. Sorry...I'm going to worry about it when I get my score back. Hopefully a passing one.

 

[HICKMAN]

If the shooter was challenging the score, I would agree. However, he is challenging the calibration without evidence of a hit.

so he would...uh... be challenging the penalty and uh.. would be "dissatisfied" ...


I'm thinking there is no time that a RO can deny a challenge. You can always appeal to the CRO, then RM.

I don't want to flat out post my answer, since others are still probably taking, but this and a few other questions really make you learn the book.

 

[riverman67]

so he would...uh... be challenging the penalty and uh.. would be "dissatisfied" ...


I'm thinking there is no time that a RO can deny a challenge. You can always appeal to the CRO, then RM.

I don't want to flat out post my answer, since others are still probably taking, but this and a few other questions really make you learn the book.

I don't remember the rule number and I don't have my book
But I am pretty sure that the steel must be hit ,and not fall for the shooter to be able to call for a calibration.
If there isn't any evidence of a hit on the steel then the call for calibration is denied and the target would be scored as a miss.
I'm probably wrong

 

[HICKMAN]

I looked over the PDF all during lunch and didn't find anything on this part of the question, which is what leads me to believe it's the distraction.

Nobody would call for a calibration if they didn't think they hit it. We are assuming the steel is all painted, even though the book says for level 1 matches it doesn't have to be. Technically, they could both hear the hit and not see evidence if it wasn't painted.

The only place in the book that I see that it couldn't be challenged is metal targets.

The reason I dissagree with C1-6 is that it clearly states "if hit", that would mean both agree it was a hit and didn't fall.

If the RO calls it a miss, and the competator thinks he hit it, then we have a disagreement in scoring, which is covered in the 9.6.* area.

Never give an analyst a rule book...

I bet Soonpa could quote the answer off the top of his head.

 

[HICKMAN]

couple more hours of this thread and the workday will be over!

 

[mongo404]

This what i got from HQ
Appendix C1 item 6 states when hit, if there is no evidence of a hit, it does not full fill the calibration process.

John

HE HE HE

 

[riverman67]

This what i got from HQ
Appendix C1 item 6 states when hit, if there is no evidence of a hit, it does not full fill the calibration process.

John

HE HE HE

and that is how I answered
I got one right

 

[cschwanz]

note to self: do NOT miss that question.....

 

[HICKMAN]

This what i got from HQ
Appendix C1 item 6 states when hit, if there is no evidence of a hit, it does not full fill the calibration process.

John

HE HE HE

as deteremined by who? The RO, CRO or RM? Look at 9.6.5 for my logic.


I see NO WHERE that you can't appeal up the chain, except for metal plates.


heh, now I'm gonna have to go home, re-read the question.. .and see how I answered it.

 

[Skroggster]

as deteremined by who? The RO, CRO or RM? Look at 9.6.5 for my logic.


I see NO WHERE that you can't appeal up the chain, except for metal plates.


heh, now I'm gonna have to go home, re-read the question.. .and see how I answered it.

Does it matter now?

 

[HICKMAN]

Does it matter now?

of course it does, are you telling me a shooter can't appeal to the next higher RO?

Read 9.6.5.

now if he'd said the Range Master denied the calibration because there was no evidence of a hit, that'd make sense.

 

[mongo404]

This is going to be one of those Benifit of doubt things at a club match but on level 2 and level 3 matches the steel will be painted so there will be evidence of a hit if there has been one. Anyway how can a RO tell you wether or not for sure the shooter shot at that target hes suppose to be watching the shooter not the targets. But when In doubt call the RM thats what hes there for.
Dont tell me were going to have to start painting all the steel every shooter at the club matches. Cause It aint going to happen your lucky to get pasters up and going.. And alot of the rules are up for interpertation.............Just Saying

 

[HICKMAN]

roger that Mongo, it's just the stupid way they worded the question.

There are really two answers which we've beat to death above.

I would always expect to be able to appeal to the RM. They way they worded it says no.

 

[Barrn]

It is a simple question. The answer is yes or no and referencing the rule(s) to support your answer.

And Hickman-what are you thinking when you try to use "logic" when it comes to rules?

 

[Jimbovia]

Question #6 - 9.6.5 vs 11.1.3

With regard to #6, although 9.6.5 is specific to scoring, 11.1.3 is specific to the challenge/appeal process.

In 11.1.3:

"Appeals – the Range Officer makes decisions initially. If the appellant
disagrees with a decision, the Chief Range Officer for the stage or area
in question should be asked to rule. If a disagreement still exists, the
Range Master must be asked to rule."

Notice they use the word "must" in the last sentence.

Just my interpretation.