Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Agenda Item #1


PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L

Recommended Posts

1) Should the scoring program be changed so that any shooter that does not finish TWO or more stages in a match is not eligible for any main match awards?

Voting YES would apply the same criteria currently in place for multiple SDQs & SOGs to DNFs (Did Not Finish) i.e. 2X = Match Disqualification.

A NO vote would allow a shooter who DNFs multiple stages to place ahead of competitors who actually completed all main match stages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

NO

If a shooter couldn't shoot two or more stages and still whupped me, then he deserves the win!

 

I don't want an award that bad that I gotta take it away from somebody that shot that much better than me. If you change the rules, and gave the award to me, I'd go give the plaque, ribbon, or certificate to the pard that rightfully won it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No! If a shooter has a lower total time than me then they beat me. Period.

 

Fillmore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gota say no to this one. In most sports you don't come to the line or participate to the end you have no reason to expect to place.

In 14 years I have never seen a shooter decide it's too cold, too hot,too wet etc and decide they shot so well that they could place in catagory by sitting out a couple of stages. I have seen a real crisis or two prevent a shooter from finishing a match. (such a a trip to the hospital for a percieved life threatning problem). Under our Rank point system and if the awards go deep enough yes it's possibe for a top shooter to place even with 2 stage DNF's in a small match. They Paid to play and let the chips fall...............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see both sides of this, however, it kind of seems to me that if a shooter doesn't shoot all of the stages then they didn't finish the race, so to speak.

 

I don't see how you can win the race if you don't finish it.

 

I guess it comes down to whether you consider a match as one big match, or several small matches. If you see it as one big match, then you got to shoot all of the stages to win. If it's a combination of several one stage matches, then leave it like it is.

 

Me personally? I'm not to dug in either way.

 

Boondock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. It's always seemed strange to me that someone who did not shoot all the stages could win anything. As Boondock said:"I don't see how you can win the race if you don't finish it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO

If a shooter couldn't shoot two or more stages and still whupped me, then he deserves the win!

 

I don't want an award that bad that I gotta take it away from somebody that shot that much better than me. If you change the rules, and gave the award to me, I'd go give the plaque, ribbon, or certificate to the pard that rightfully won it.

 

I fully agree with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see both sides of this, however, it kind of seems to me that if a shooter doesn't shoot all of the stages then they didn't finish the race, so to speak.

 

I don't see how you can win the race if you don't finish it.

 

I guess it comes down to whether you consider a match as one big match, or several small matches. If you see it as one big match, then you got to shoot all of the stages to win. If it's a combination of several one stage matches, then leave it like it is.

 

Me personally? I'm not to dug in either way.

 

Boondock

 

I tend to agree with Boondock on this. But if it does come down the whether you consider it one big match or a series of small matches SASS considers it a series of small matches, hence Rank Scoring.

 

It doesn't make much difference to me either way but it is just something else to consider.

 

Randy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO

If a shooter couldn't shoot two or more stages and still whupped me, then he deserves the win!

 

I don't want an award that bad that I gotta take it away from somebody that shot that much better than me. If you change the rules, and gave the award to me, I'd go give the plaque, ribbon, or certificate to the pard that rightfully won it.

 

 

I fully agree with this.

And I agree, NO!! Better yet lets not change anything for about ten years, go to Vegas, have a good time, just leave all the rules alone. :D

 

 

Jefro :ph34r: Relax-Enjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, NO. As others have said, if someone can DNF two or more stages and beat me, more power to them.

 

IMO this is an ill guided attempt to negate part of the shortcomings of rank scoring. But that is another can of worms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YES! :)

 

For Pete's sake...... :ph34r: I personally witnessed a "top shooter" who refused to shoot the 2nd half of a match because they didn't like the stages. Still placed in the top 10..... I don't know about the rest of you, but anytime I don't finish an event, I DNF! Seems clear to me. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have to say Yes and No.

Yes, if the person walked away from shooting two stages because they didn't want to shoot them.

No, if the person had a equipment issues and couldn't finish a stage or two (unless those would be ruled as misses vs DNF then I would vote Yes).

Just finished reading through the ROI Handbook and it seems like this would fall under a "Spirit of the Game" or possibly "Unsportsmanlike Conduct" penalty. Skip two stages - get two Spirit of the Game penalties = MDQ.

Definitely does not deserve to finish in the top ten.

 

Barry Sloe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YES! :)

 

For Pete's sake...... :ph34r: I personally witnessed a "top shooter" who refused to shoot the 2nd half of a match because they didn't like the stages. Still placed in the top 10..... I don't know about the rest of you, but anytime I don't finish an event, I DNF! Seems clear to me. :D

Hi Grizzly,

 

PWB posted something about a similar situation (I think it was on the TG Wire). He indicated that this could be covered by a SOG penalty. In that case 2 SOG = MDQ.

 

I am not in favor of this (and I'm not saying that just to agree with Manatee ;) ). I agree with Grizz, that "this is an ill guided attempt to negate part of the shortcomings of rank scoring." Total Time scoring pretty much negates the worst of these DNF situations.

 

I agree with the many folks who have implied that if someone is so good they can still get an award and not shoot the entire match, more power to them. That is the price you pay by allowing Rank Point Scoring.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo :ph34r:;):lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope.

 

At a recent multi-day match an individual was shooting pretty well - for themselves. That night, they slipped in the tub, cracked their head and hurt their back. I don't think they should be punished too badly due to that.

I see that a lot more than folks just getting angry, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Grizzly,

 

PWB posted something about a similar situation (I think it was on the TG Wire). He indicated that this could be covered by a SOG penalty. In that case 2 SOG = MDQ.

 

I am not in favor of this (and I'm not saying that just to agree with Manatee ;) ). I agree with Grizz, that "this is an ill guided attempt to negate part of the shortcomings of rank scoring." Total Time scoring pretty much negates the worst of these DNF situations.

 

I agree with the many folks who have implied that if someone is so good they can still get an award and not shoot the entire match, more power to them. That is the price you pay by allowing Rank Point Scoring.

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo :ph34r:;):lol:

 

Ah shucks, Allie, you know I could never disagree with you! :blush:;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah shucks, Allie, you know I could never disagree with you! :blush:;)

Dang! I like that!

 

Marauder also brought up something that was discussed on the TG wire. Do we really want to MDQ (that is what two DNF will be) someone who might have had a medical problem at the match and couldn't finish? Maybe something like an eye injury, broken bone, heat stroke... I think not!

 

When this was mentioned someone said the MDQ could be overrulled by the MD. I do not like throwing that subjectivity into a match situation like this.

 

So, I say leave it like it is or switch to Total Time Scoring. :ph34r:;)

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. For the same reasons others have stated. There is this thing called sportsmanship. In some circles it even goes so deep as to allow a player to play for the opposing team just so they don't have to forfeit. And still play as well as they would have for their own team. Some of us call it by another name...

 

The analogy about the mechanic not getting paid until he's done the entire job is not appropriately applied. Let me change that up just a little: if your mechanic's purchased all the materials to complete the job and thru no fault of their own is unable to complete it, but you use the material and have another finish the job; do you not owe the original mechanic reimbursement for those materials? If you're going to cut the shooter from the ranks of those that paid their entry, then reimburse him his entry fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this is the only gun sport I have ever participated in, I have no other frame of reference. How is this issue handled in other shooting sports? Surely we are not the first to face this moral dilemma. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order:

 

1. Yes and no. If a competitor choses not to shoot stages when they are otherwise able to shoot, then ABSOLUTELY YES, this is a SOG issue, at least to me. If they have an injury or physical or other reason beyond their control - then NO.

 

2. Better yet: All this is moot if we go to total time scoring, the only fair way for a one event match, IMHO (Please See "Can of Worms"). :lol:

 

View from my saddle, YMMV,

Harvey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.