Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

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

Rio Grande Glenn

gun fighters you make the call please

Recommended Posts

almost simultaneous shots on the same target.

 

If the spotters heard/counted all the shots, no call, except a miss if target not hit. If they heard only one instead of two, miss. No MSV, no procedural. And a hall pass to the next RO course for the TO.

 

"Both revolvers may be cocked at the same time, but must be shot one at a time to facilitate scoring." - Shooter's Handbook, pg 13.

 

Key phrase is "to facilitate scoring".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

key word was ALMOST. Hence no call! Had they been at same time then the P.

 

TO needs to take RO classes again. for various reasons!

 

pbcc

ditto - watt this feller said

p would be for not abiding to cagegory rules, had he fired both, and counters could NOT distinguish shots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shoot "Gunfighter" and have gotten pretty good at it, especially separating my shots. Firing guns too close together makes a very distinct sound and we all know it. The rules are clear now, "MUST" separate. I have always have done my best to separate the shots as I am trying to abide by the rules and it isn't difficult at all. Those that don't make an attempt should be penalized period (whatever the rules say). It isn't fair to the folks who follow the rules if others are allowed to "game" the rules. Want to beat me....do it fair and square!!! Bring it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept as fact that two shots may be fired separately but so closely together that the timer hears them as one. But such shots will often be heard as a single report by the human ear too. The rule is not intended to promote any safety interest but merely to "facilitate scoring." But it is unlikely to further that objective because spotters will regularly hear such shots differently. We ought to do the sensible thing and simply drop the rule as in enforceable for the intended purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept as fact that two shots may be fired separately but so closely together that the timer hears them as one. But such shots will often be heard as a single report by the human ear too. The rule is not intended to promote any safety interest but merely to "facilitate scoring." But it is unlikely to further that objective because spotters will regularly hear such shots differently. We ought to do the sensible thing and simply drop the rule as in enforceable for the intended purpose.

 

 

AMEN!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept as fact that two shots may be fired separately but so closely together that the timer hears them as one. But such shots will often be heard as a single report by the human ear too. The rule is not intended to promote any safety interest but merely to "facilitate scoring." But it is unlikely to further that objective because spotters will regularly hear such shots differently. We ought to do the sensible thing and simply drop the rule as in enforceable for the intended purpose.

if you drop the rule

then you open the can of worms for

never applying a shooting out of sequence P

as the counters would not be able to tell proper shooting string

so if we do the sensible thing, and drop shooting sequence Ps'

what is next

 

 

and I am a gunfighter

I have even won my state championship overall as a gunfighter in the past

i have won overall as a BPGF at a black powder state championship

and yes, I shot by the rules,

Gunfighters do NOT have to break that rule to win, just practice, learn, then apply the needed skills when called upon

 

flame on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gunfighters must shoot the sequence the same as any other shooter.

If they shoot two at the same time then they are not shooting the sequence the same and deserves the "P" in the process.

I don't see the shooting out of category rule applying in this circumstance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gunfighters must shoot the sequence the same as any other shooter.

If they shoot two at the same time then they are not shooting the sequence the same and deserves the "P" in the process.

I don't see the shooting out of category rule applying in this circumstance.

it is a p for shooting out of cat because PWB and the ROC has declared it as such.

 

pbcc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That my friend is up to the discretion of the TO and spotters,,,

 

pbcc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it's not a rule we can expect to be uniformly or consistently applied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it's not a rule we can expect to be uniformly or consistently applied.

if you drop the rule because it can not be consistently applied

than

how will the counters consistently call pistol shoot strings are done correctly when they hit two different targets at the same time

example

sweep left to right on five targets, then repeat

the gunfighter shoots target one and two at the same time, then three and four at the same time etc

how will the counters know he did not hit target two then target one etc::::::::

the rule is to facilitate counting hits and misses, AND PROPER TARGET SEQUENCE

 

just sayin, thats all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but... how much shot separation is enough?

enough for the timer opererator two count that all shots were fired

and enough for the counters to count misses, and see target string was shot in the correct order

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gunfighters must shoot the sequence the same as any other shooter.

If they shoot two at the same time then they are not shooting the sequence the same and deserves the "P" in the process.

I don't see the shooting out of category rule applying in this circumstance.

u help me make my point in a round about way

if you change the rules to allow gunfighters to shoot two pistols at the same time

how would the counters confirm that the corrent target order was fullfilled properly

even on something as simple as a sweep left to right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you drop the rule because it can not be consistently applied

than

how will the counters consistently call pistol shoot strings are done correctly when they hit two different targets at the same time

example

sweep left to right on five targets, then repeat

the gunfighter shoots target one and two at the same time, then three and four at the same time etc

how will the counters know he did not hit target two then target one etc::::::::

the rule is to facilitate counting hits and misses, AND PROPER TARGET SEQUENCE

 

just sayin, thats all

Counters will rely on their eyes. If the gunfighter can watch two targets to shoot them, counters can do the same. I shoot GF too. I have no intention of shooting two shots simultaneously but the discussion makes it clear that this rule is not one that can be fairly and consistently enforced. It is simply an invitation for arguments. The alternative, changing the rule to specify some minimum separation, would be even worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Counters will rely on their eyes. If the gunfighter can watch two targets to shoot them, counters can do the same. I shoot GF too. I have no intention of shooting two shots simultaneously but the discussion makes it clear that this rule is not one that can be fairly and consistently enforced. It is simply an invitation for arguments. The alternative, changing the rule to specify some minimum separation, would be even worse.

The gunfighter KNOWS that he has to look at two different targets......the spotters WON'T KNOW that is the case until it happens.....and......if there is any spread between the targets it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to look for detailed information in two distinct places.

 

Stan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

u help me make my point in a round about way

if you change the rules to allow gunfighters to shoot two pistols at the same time

how would the counters confirm that the corrent target order was fullfilled properly

even on something as simple as a sweep left to right

 

 

+1 For once me and MM agree.

 

Think this happens a lot with those that like to pull both at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this happen so frequently as to be a real issue? As a GF cat shooter, I watch other GFers. I do not notice a pattern of shooting two simultaneous shots amongst this group. The occasional time it happens to me is usually a trigger pressure issue, and I take what the spotters call. I think most of us have the same feeling.

 

I think this is wasted emotional effort. It's subjective, and it's the rule. The more experienced and focused the spotters are, the faster you'll be able to connect your shots. Play with the hand you're dealt that day.

 

CR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have long ago come to the realization that I cannot count competently for a double cocker. I hand the stick to someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have long ago come to the realization that I cannot count competently for a double cocker. I hand the stick to someone else.

Noz-

 

We will all come to that point as we get along in this life, some sooner than others. Sad realization is the slower reactions. The good news - we're still on the green side of the grass!

 

CR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

 

It is very common where I shoot to have gun order be shooters' choice and shooter can start from either side. So, as a counter, you don't always know which targets to look at, especially if the shooter is inside a building and the counters are outside or both sides. Frequently, you don't even know which type of gun they are starting with. So, sometimes, you have to just give them the first shot as a hit on the correct target because you heard a clang and were not looking where it hit. So, if they shot two at once and you only heard one clang because both seemed to hit the target(s) at the same time, it gets very sticky.

 

I don't know of a perfect solution. I'm not sure I would want to count for a GF when gun order, starting side is shooters' choice, and they were allowed to fire both pistols at the same time. With the miss mantra of if you think its a...miss its a hit, you would be forced to give correctly placed (no P) hits for the first two pistol shots whether they were or not, as you wouldn't know where to look to verify a miss or a P.

 

It seems that eliminating this rule would give GFs an unfair advantage.

 

This topic "gives me a headache." ;)

 

Regards,

 

Allie Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gunfighter KNOWS that he has to look at two different targets......the spotters WON'T KNOW that is the case until it happens.....and......if there is any spread between the targets it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to look for detailed information in two distinct places.

 

Stan

So what's the solution, Stan? I agree you can't resort to the timer. Not sure I agree with you about what spotters can see (andGFs could help by declaring their intention), but accepting it for argument, you are left relying on shooters to hear two distinct reports with shots fired separately but infinitesimally close together. Following the rule affording the benefit of doubt to the shooter, spotters are obliged to assume there were two shots, unless sure they saw a miss. That approach strikes me as the equivalent of scrapping the rule. Would doing so give gun fighters an advantage? I guess but gun fighters already have a theoretical advantage with two guns in play at once. This would add to it only in the thousandths of a second presumably differentiating two really close shots from those sounding as one. And GF has some offsetting disadvantages or top gun would routinely go to gunfighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a link to the fastest Gunfighter time listed on Lead Dispenser's World Record site. The shooter is a double cocker, shooting double taps, and there is no problem distinguishing the shots. http://www.spencerhoglund.com/files/marko_1675_.wmv

 

We can sit and try to define how much is enough, but, IMO, the fact is the only time it is a problem is when a shooter is doing their dead level best to double discharge. It's not easy to double discharge. It takes practice. If someone is doing it, THEY KNOW they're doing it. I'll admit that that it's cool to watch someone who is good at it, but to me it's more in the line of exhibition shooting rather than cowboy action shooting.

 

A few years ago I was part of bringing in an western exhibition shooter to entertain folks after a match. Among other things, this fellow could draw with his right hand and taking his left hand, with his index and pinkie fingers extended, fan his Colt and make two shots sound like one shot. It was cool to watch. . .but it's not cowboy action shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this happen so frequently as to be a real issue? As a GF cat shooter, I watch other GFers. I do not notice a pattern of shooting two simultaneous shots amongst this group. The occasional time it happens to me is usually a trigger pressure issue, and I take what the spotters call. I think most of us have the same feeling.

 

I think this is wasted emotional effort. It's subjective, and it's the rule. The more experienced and focused the spotters are, the faster you'll be able to connect your shots. Play with the hand you're dealt that day.

 

CR

 

 

Have to disagree.

 

Have been seeing it more and more all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a link to the fastest Gunfighter time listed on Lead Dispenser's World Record site. The shooter is a double cocker, shooting double taps, and there is no problem distinguishing the shots. http://www.spencerhoglund.com/files/marko_1675_.wmv

 

We can sit and try to define how much is enough, but, IMO, the fact is the only time it is a problem is when a shooter is doing their dead level best to double discharge. It's not easy to double discharge. It takes practice. If someone is doing it, THEY KNOW they're doing it. I'll admit that that it's cool to watch someone who is good at it, but to me it's more in the line of exhibition shooting rather than cowboy action shooting.

 

A few years ago I was part of bringing in an western exhibition shooter to entertain folks after a match. Among other things, this fellow could draw with his right hand and taking his left hand, with his index and pinkie fingers extended, fan his Colt and make two shots sound like one shot. It was cool to watch. . .but it's not cowboy action shooting.

 

 

I agree. The ones doing it know that they are.

 

Have no problem with counting in that video. but we both know there are those

that can do that GFer a lot faster than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what's the solution, Stan? I agree you can't resort to the timer. Not sure I agree with you about what spotters can see (andGFs could help by declaring their intention), but accepting it for argument, you are left relying on shooters to hear two distinct reports with shots fired separately but infinitesimally close together. Following the rule affording the benefit of doubt to the shooter, spotters are obliged to assume there were two shots, unless sure they saw a miss. That approach strikes me as the equivalent of scrapping the rule. Would doing so give gun fighters an advantage? I guess but gun fighters already have a theoretical advantage with two guns in play at once. This would add to it only in the thousandths of a second presumably differentiating two really close shots from those sounding as one. And GF has some offsetting disadvantages or top gun would routinely go to gunfighters.

 

CH,

 

"Unless sure they saw a miss". Ok, so you are on a common firing line with NO back berm. Shooter fires two at once and one round hits and the other misses but no one sees the impact of the bullet in the dirt because it's way down range but they do hear a "clang" - how can a spotter be sure of anything at that point? Not sure how you would solve this problem.

 

Second, a gunfighter, that is to say a really good gunfighter, may be able to keep up with a really good two-handed shooter when it comes to just firing the pistols but they give up too much in transition from pistols to long guns. While a two-handed shooter can ground a rifle and draw his first pistol at the same time, a GF'r loses some of that saved time (doing two things at once). So, the best I can figure I will lose 1.5-2.0 second per stage to a guy that is my equal with a rifle and shotgun depending upon stage design and order of guns to be shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a relatively long "battle" to get the Gunfighter category approved. My pards were so eager to do it and to have the category approved.

 

So I hate to see that it has resulted in a small, but growing number of shooters who are intentionally breaking the rules, denying the rules and trying to force a situation where they gain an unfair advantage.

 

To me, when the shooter knows they are setting up a situation where it is essentially impossible to count misses, then want to use the "must give the shooter the benefit of the doubt, they are seeking and unfair advantage. And knowingly breaking the rules.

 

Is this what we want in SASS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Marauder, that's not what we want.

 

My question about how much time between shots is enough, was meant to point out the subjectivity of the rule. What if I, as an alternate cocker, get to the point of being able to shoot .1 second splits or .07 second splits or .05 second splits. While highly improbable, will I be forced to slow down to the speed of my spotters?

 

This is a subject that needs fixed, but I sure don't have an answer, but I do know I don't like subjective calls and I surely don't want to be limited by the speed of my spotters or TO.

 

Possum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about the shooter calls the penalty on himself. He/she knows if they shot both simultaneously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:FlagAm::FlagAm::FlagAm::FlagAm::FlagAm:

 

I don't know if it's been said or not...But you can look at most timers and get shot counts off of it.

 

MG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a relatively long "battle" to get the Gunfighter category approved. My pards were so eager to do it and to have the category approved.

 

So I hate to see that it has resulted in a small, but growing number of shooters who are intentionally breaking the rules, denying the rules and trying to force a situation where they gain an unfair advantage.

 

To me, when the shooter knows they are setting up a situation where it is essentially impossible to count misses, then want to use the "must give the shooter the benefit of the doubt, they are seeking and unfair advantage. And knowingly breaking the rules.

 

Is this what we want in SASS?

very well stated my friend

anyone that has been in sass long enough to know and understand how hard it was for GF to get started

would think a tadd bit different

 

time between shots, has to be an integrial part, for the timer operator to count that all shots were fires

and so that counters can watch for correct shooting string, and misses

 

how long, depends on the TO and spotters

 

for you all that disagree

please answer how

we could have GF if we allow both pistols to be fired at the same time

spotters / counters, would NOT be able to spot, therefore, all fast gunfighters would never be given a P for pistols

when you apply, the benifit of the doubt always goes to the shooter -- ideal

just saying, actually just asking, what is the fix --------------

to me it is shoot pistols at a speed that allows your specific counters to work the stage without in-tim-i-dation

its not just hard to count for GFers, its hard to count for all of these sub 20 second stage shooters.....period

 

just play by the rules, gunfighters can still win, and look great too, without double shootin

thats all I am sayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike,

 

I will disagree.

 

The standard should be the shot to shot time of the fastest two hands on one gun shooter. There is no rule needed for them so that should be good enough.

 

That time is something less than 80 milliseconds.

 

How many TOs know the difference between 70 and 40 milliseconds.

 

Happy to support a standard if it applies to all shooters.

 

Best Regards,

BJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to me it is shoot pistols at a speed that allows your specific counters to work the stage without in-tim-i-dation

its not just hard to count for GFers, its hard to count for all of these sub 20 second stage shooters.....period

 

Mike, are you serious? Shoot pistols only as fast as your spotters can keep up?!? Certainly would change the game, wouldn't it. So now do we make sub-20's illegal, too?

 

I'm NOT arguing in favor of making simultaneous shots legal, but I don't want an arbitrary line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way out of this, and it won't be popular, is to outlaw double cocking. I am not saying that I advocate this, I am only saying that is the only way I know to make it plausible for all to count and spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The part of this 'no simultaneous firing' that I ain't crazy about is that even as an alternating cocker, it is still very possible to get some of those '2 shots at the same time' and one of these days, some of us could be on a posse where Gomer Pyle is a spotter and the next thing we know, he'll start running around hollerin 'Citizens Arressstt, Citizens Arressstt. Give em a 'P' because he/she fired 2 shots at the same time'.

 

And here is the scary part that to me is VERY CONTRADICTORY.....only ONE spotter is necessary to award a 'P'.

 

Soooo, lets say 2 spotters actually count 10 shots but one of the spotters declares a double discharge at the same time. Could they not still award the 'P'?

 

 

..........Widder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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