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

it ain't broke, just don't fire them at the same time... if you do well then suffer the consequences....

 

and it ain't even winter!

 

pb

yupp, I agree :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost simutanious MEANS TWO SHOTS

No call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The solution is simple......do away with the rule BUT the gunfighter that CHOOSES to fire both guns at the same time or so near the same time that it is indistinguishable as two distinct shots would HAVE to live with the possibility of BAD CALLS.

 

 

If the spotters only count 9 shots when there is supposed to be 10 what do you expect them to do? Around here they yell out "one more". No reshoot for interference.

 

If the spotters here only 1 shot and don't see both targets get HIT what do you expect them to call? I was looking and listening. Saw 9 hits and heard 9 hits must be 1 miss. How can you argue when your chosen shooting style makes it difficult if not impossible to know what happened.

 

For me......Roll the Dice and see how it comes out for you if you want to fire both guns at the same time. You put your big girl panties on to shoot that way then keep'em on when the time and penalties are called out.

 

Stan

+2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost simutanious MEANS TWO SHOTS

No call.

 

 

That's his side of the story. I would like to hear from the other side. If I was gonna politic for the wire to be on my side I would say almost also.

 

My favorite pet peeve statement people use that I have never meet is........"I'm OK you can trust me"........followed by........"I know what I'm doing"

 

To many times important facts are omitted in WTC threads

 

Trust me I know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stan, I have a follow up question.

 

If they shoot both at the same time or sounds like at the same time, what about the "benefit of the doubt?"

 

Many, if not most of the proponents of the shooting two at once bring this up and expect to get credit it both hits whether there is observable evidence or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy Marauder.

 

I won't answer for Stan but this thought crossed my mind.

 

If a GF discharges 2 at the same time, my guess is that each spotter will handle it just like they would for everyone. If they 'THINK' it was a hit/miss.....then its a hit.

 

Its about the same judgement calls that spotters seem to make all the time anyhow.

 

Some spotters require HEARING the ding although there might be a dead spot on the target. If they don't HEAR the hit, then some of them call it a miss.

 

And there are some spotters who have to actually SEE the miss before declaring a miss.

 

My guess is that it will still be the same and it all goes back to the spotters and how each of them handles their individual responsibilities.

 

Best regards

 

 

..........Widder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't see 10 hits and don't hear 10 hits.......where's the doubt?

 

Stan

 

Sources of doubt:

 

1. Sound of report could have obscured the sound of the hit.

2. There may be no sound on an edger

3. Reports from next stage may have obscured the sound of the hit

4. BP smoke may obscure seeing a hit and hearing a hit.

5. Rifle target at a distance the hit can not be seen

6. Heard a ding but did not see a hit, did it hit the wrong target?

 

There are many more. Which is why, if you do not know it is a miss, it is a hit.

 

Earlier, I posted a couple of videos on this thread. I said I thought one was clearly out of category and one was clearly in category. Any disagreements?

 

Cheers,

BJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By shooting two at the same time, you significantly increase the difficulty of spotting. One a double tap, it is one thing, but on two different targets, how many people can watch two spots at the same time.

 

Plus at many ranges, there is no "dirt". When you miss, the bullet may go into the grass or off in the distance. At most of those ranges, they want to have some evidence of a hit.

 

I know some can shoot really fast with traditional style and that cannot be "helped."

 

To me, allowing gunfighters to shoot two at once is stretching rule on doubt a little too far.

 

The gunfighter category has done well and is fun.

 

Only recently have a few folks decided to "push the limit" of the rules and now want such a change. I don't think a rule change is needed. And if it is changed, I think we would have to take a look at the rule of doubt - and I certainly don't want to go there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Texican Bounty Hunter

On a stage with 5 pistol targets calling for 2 identical sweeps the counters would have to

watch target 5and target 1 at the same time for a double cocker who pulls the triggers at the same time.

Not too easy to watch both sometimes....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it seems to be the prevailing attitude of some that GF'ers should throttle back to the human capabilities of the spotters/TO. But that expectation is not placed on any other shooting style. Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goody, in the past, it was called following the rules...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a stage with 5 pistol targets calling for 2 identical sweeps the counters would have to

watch target 5and target 1 at the same time for a double cocker who pulls the triggers at the same time.

Not too easy to watch both sometimes....

 

I can't believe this has made it to 4 pages, or that I am now commenting on it, but here it goes...

 

I used to umpire a lot of ball games. Much the stuff that we were taught at umpire school (yes there is such a thing) also holds true with spotting for CAS.

 

Never focus on any one thing because you will miss it all.

 

I am going to simplify our instruction a bit, but here it goes...

 

As a first base umpire, for instance, we were taught you don't focus on the ball, the fielder, or the runner. What you do is look toward first base. Put that center of your field of view, but do not focus on the base. Your field of view should now include the fielder, his glove, and the bag. Continue to keep a wild field of view. As the play gets close, you should see either the ball, the runner, or both come into your peripheral vision. As you continue to keep a wild field of view, you should easily see where the ball, fielder, and runner are when you need to make the call. Where were the fielder's and runner's feet at when the ball was caught? If I were to focus on the base, the runner running, the fielder standing there, or even worse, focus on and watch the ball as it is coming toward the fielder, you miss out any all the information that you need to make the correct call.

 

The anecdote also holds true for spotting. If you are settled in on any one target, you are not getting the information that you need in order to make the right call.

 

You need a wide field of view in order to clearly see misses, and in this case, not miss what target the shooter is starting on.

 

Some times, especially on some stages because of their design, it is hard to get that good field of view, as an umpire or a spotter, but you first have to ensure that you are in the correct position that you can make the right call to ensure that you can actually make it. Will the fielder block your view of the runner as he approaches the bag? Does this signpost block my view of target 3?

 

Widen out your field of view and put yourself in a position where you can make the call. And, when timing, ensure that spotters are in the right position to make the call before the beep...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a stage with 5 pistol targets calling for 2 identical sweeps the counters would have to

watch target 5and target 1 at the same time for a double cocker who pulls the triggers at the same time.

Not too easy to watch both sometimes....

 

If it is 2 identical sweeps and the GF shot at target 1 and 5 at the same time (and assuming both targets were hit), it is a 'P' because that isn't a 'sweep'.

 

BUT, if the instructions allow for 2 'simutaneous' sweeps that allowed this type of engagement, then yes, that would be difficult to spot.

 

 

..........Widder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all, for now, I like the rule as it is written.

 

But, in my opinion, there is not anything more difficult in spotting for than someone who uses good ole heavy BP loads. We don't seem to worry about those and in ALOT of cases, the spotters 'guess' and from my limited experience in SASS/CAS, the BP shooters get alot of calls in their favor because of 'BOD'.

 

Thats just how it is.....or atleast how I've seen it.

 

 

..........Widder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sources of doubt:

 

1. Sound of report could have obscured the sound of the hit.

2. There may be no sound on an edger

3. Reports from next stage may have obscured the sound of the hit

4. BP smoke may obscure seeing a hit and hearing a hit.

5. Rifle target at a distance the hit can not be seen

6. Heard a ding but did not see a hit, did it hit the wrong target?

 

There are many more. Which is why, if you do not know it is a miss, it is a hit.

 

Earlier, I posted a couple of videos on this thread. I said I thought one was clearly out of category and one was clearly in category. Any disagreements?

 

Cheers,

BJT

I'm so over "benefit of the doubt" it's not even funny.......I'm looking down range.......count 9 shots and hear 9 dings. I watched and looked as best I can. There is NO DOUBT what I know to this point........1 MISS.....I have no input to contradict it.

 

If one of the two simulataneous shots fired was an edger and I did't see it because I was more focused on the other target that was hit and I call a miss then that's where the big girl panties come into play........you rolled the diced to gain a fraction of a second and THIS time it didn't work out for you....Live with it. Your not the first person to suffer an injustice in this game and you won't be the last.

 

Stan

 

PS. Branchwater.....your LOOKING at ONE PLACE to make that call at first......Try making a call at First and Second at the same time......I know it's a little extreme for distance but I've shot sequences that have had 15 feet between potential pistol targets. If the shooter can hit target 1 and 5 at the same time looking at both for detail would be IMPOSSIBLE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so over "benefit of the doubt" it's not even funny.......I'm looking down range.......count 9 shots and hear 9 dings. I watched and looked as best I can. There is NO DOUBT what I know to this point........1 MISS.....I have no input to contradict it.

 

If one of the two simulataneous shots fired was an edger and I did't see it because I was more focused on the other target that was hit and I call a miss then that's where the big girl panties come into play........you rolled the diced to gain a fraction of a second and THIS time it didn't work out for you....Live with it. Your not the first person to suffer an injustice in this game and you won't be the last.

 

Stan

 

PS. Branchwater.....your LOOKING at ONE PLACE to make that call at first......Try making a call at First and Second at the same time......I know it's a little extreme for distance but I've shot sequences that have had 15 feet between potential pistol targets. If the shooter can hit target 1 and 5 at the same time looking at both for detail would be IMPOSSIBLE

 

 

In the case that the GF is operating outside the rules (firing both revolvers with no discernable difference in time), I am in complete agreement but

if the target sequence is alternating for ten between two targets 15 feet apart and there are ten discernable discharges, even five babangs, then doubt should absolutely go to the shooter even if that gap between shots is faster than a spotter can refocus.

 

Best Regards,

BJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the case that the GF is operating outside the rules (firing both revolvers with no discernable difference in time), I am in complete agreement but

if the target sequence is alternating for ten between two targets 15 feet apart and there are ten discernable discharges, even five babangs, then doubt should absolutely go to the shooter even if that gap between shots is faster than a spotter can refocus.

 

Best Regards,

BJT

 

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sources of doubt:

 

Earlier, I posted a couple of videos on this thread. I said I thought one was clearly out of category and one was clearly in category. Any disagreements?

 

Cheers,

BJT

 

 

Nope. One was clearly out of category. The others you could count all shots. Well. Deuce's is a blur but can pretty well count 10 shots.

 

I will say. In the one vid that was out of category.

That was not a regular SASS match.

It was a all out, go for fun, Outlaw match. And they had there own rules.

 

Regular SASS match? Should be called for it.

Even if he is a friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS. Branchwater.....your LOOKING at ONE PLACE to make that call at first......Try making a call at First and Second at the same time......I know it's a little extreme for distance but I've shot sequences that have had 15 feet between potential pistol targets. If the shooter can hit target 1 and 5 at the same time looking at both for detail would be IMPOSSIBLE

 

The average human's field of view is between 100 and 120 degrees. The last 10 degrees on either side would be that fuzzy peripheral.

 

Let's do the hypothetical alternating single taps on targets 15 feet apart for 10 rounds. Let's put the pistol targets way out there at a distance of 2 yards.

 

If you are standing dead center of the target spread, on the firing line, your field of view would need to be 102 degrees to see both targets. I would agree, it might be a bit hard to see both the targets at the same time because they would both be in that fuzzy area, between 100 and 120 degrees. At this point, to see both targets, the center of your field of view is the dead space between the targets. However, if you kept both targets in your peripheral vision, it might be possible to see both move. Seeing both miss would be a lot harder. I agree, though, from that spot, it might be tough to make the right call.

 

If, however, you move yourself 3 feet behind the firing line and 3 feet to the outside of either target, the field of view to see both targets is now 45 degrees. I am still looking at one place, but I can see both targets. But now, you have put both targets well within your field of view where you could now see both targets at the same time and should be able to get enough detail with your other senses in order to make the correct call with a lot more certainty than you could standing in the first spot.

 

I've seen some spotters that all want to crowd around the TO and the shooter. That just might be a bad place to be. I have also seen spotters herd. Again, not a great thing to have happen. Get 'em spread out and in a position to make good calls.

 

I don't want to get into the what if's on this like "Well, there is a stump there and I cannot stand three feet back." I know, some stages are better set up to get a good field of view than others. All I am saying is that some people can stand to put themselves in a better position to make the call, that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Texican Bounty Hunter

If it is 2 identical sweeps and the GF shot at target 1 and 5 at the same time (and assuming both targets were hit), it is a 'P' because that isn't a 'sweep'.

 

BUT, if the instructions allow for 2 'simutaneous' sweeps that allowed this type of engagement, then yes, that would be difficult to spot.

 

 

..........Widder

What I meant to say was shot 5 & shot six are at different ends of the target placement...If you are focused

on 5 you will miss seeing #6 on target one starting the second sweep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "rule" says that you SHOULD not, rather than MAY not. This implies to me that it is not forbidden, but maybe is not the best idea. There is also no penalty applied to the action. To me it reads as an instruction, nt a rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not broke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Texican Bounty Hunter

I can't believe this has made it to 4 pages, or that I am now commenting on it, but here it goes...

 

I used to umpire a lot of ball games. Much the stuff that we were taught at umpire school (yes there is such a thing) also holds true with spotting for CAS.

 

Never focus on any one thing because you will miss it all.

 

I am going to simplify our instruction a bit, but here it goes...

 

As a first base umpire, for instance, we were taught you don't focus on the ball, the fielder, or the runner. What you do is look toward first base. Put that center of your field of view, but do not focus on the base. Your field of view should now include the fielder, his glove, and the bag. Continue to keep a wild field of view. As the play gets close, you should see either the ball, the runner, or both come into your peripheral vision. As you continue to keep a wild field of view, you should easily see where the ball, fielder, and runner are when you need to make the call. Where were the fielder's and runner's feet at when the ball was caught? If I were to focus on the base, the runner running, the fielder standing there, or even worse, focus on and watch the ball as it is coming toward the fielder, you miss out any all the information that you need to make the correct call.

 

The anecdote also holds true for spotting. If you are settled in on any one target, you are not getting the information that you need in order to make the right call.

 

You need a wide field of view in order to clearly see misses, and in this case, not miss what target the shooter is starting on.

 

Some times, especially on some stages because of their design, it is hard to get that good field of view, as an umpire or a spotter, but you first have to ensure that you are in the correct position that you can make the right call to ensure that you can actually make it. Will the fielder block your view of the runner as he approaches the bag? Does this signpost block my view of target 3?

 

Widen out your field of view and put yourself in a position where you can make the call. And, when timing, ensure that spotters are in the right position to make the call before the beep...

Sounds good but can newbie spotters do this ...No probably not..they can hardly keep up with fast shooters

or the right target order...throw in a double cocker and they will just have to call it "CLEAN".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "rule" says that you SHOULD not, rather than MAY not. This implies to me that it is not forbidden, but maybe is not the best idea. There is also no penalty applied to the action. To me it reads as an instruction, nt a rule.

Cut and paste from ROII:

 

"When shooting with two guns, both revolvers may be cocked at the same time, but must be shot one at a time to facilitate scoring"
Note the word "must".
Made me look.
Cheers,
BJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good but can newbie spotters do this ...No probably not..they can hardly keep up with fast shooters

or the right target order...throw in a double cocker and they will just have to call it "CLEAN".

As a GF, what I am doing with my pistols with regard to cocking them should be of no concern to spotters - their vision and focus should be on targets. The GF has to shoot the targets in the same manner as everyone else. The time separation between shots is the challenge for spotters. As a TO, I see far more spotter issues around the very fast two handed shooters then I do with GF (and I am not even going to get into the smoky shooters) - mainly due to sheer numbers in those categories. As a number have indicated, the current rules are well defined and if nothing else this discussion has hopefully made more folks aware of the rules that apply. We do not need anymore rules regarding this issue - we cannot legislate our way out of the challenges of faster shooters. just my two cents.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Cut and paste from ROII:

 

"When shooting with two guns, both revolvers may be cocked at the same time, but must be shot one at a time to facilitate scoring"
Note the word "must".
Made me look.
Cheers,
BJT

 

Damn. Double damn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still goin' guys? Ya'll figger out how ya wanna do it, but I'm tellin' ya: When the spotting stick is in my hand, and I believe a simultaneous discharge occurs, I will be calling a Procedural for shooting out of category. Do it a repeatedly and that shooter will earn a MDQ. It's the rules. I follow them. You can make up as many abstract "what ifs" that you want, but on the range in a real scenario, I will make the call.

 

I still have not run into this situation in a match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "rule" says that you SHOULD not, rather than MAY not. This implies to me that it is not forbidden, but maybe is not the best idea. There is also no penalty applied to the action. To me it reads as an instruction, nt a rule.

so wee need a lawyer

I say it is shooting out of category

have yer lawyer call mine

that is where CAS is heading

geeeeeeese

demishing returns is where CAS is headed

silly fighting within the ranks, for NOThing more than bragging rights

perhaps, driving some new potential shooters away from our game

just an idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so wee need a lawyer

I say it is shooting out of category

have yer lawyer call mine

that is where CAS is heading

geeeeeeese

demishing returns is where CAS is headed

silly fighting within the ranks, for NOThing more than bragging rights

perhaps, driving some new potential shooters away from our game

just an idea

So MM - you point to an interesting issue here . . . .Like the tax code our rules keep getting harder and harder to understand and to parse.

It takes pages of discussion arguing the meaning of "is" or figuring out what is or isn't competitive or fair or within or without the rules.

 

I've played on and off in this game since the mid 90's, have taken RO I and RO II training, will take refresher courses in a few years, and re-read

the manuals every season to try and stay current. I find it frustrating and discouraging to have to do this - it means it's gotten too dang hard.

 

I'd hate to be in a beginners position of trying to figure this stuff out - and having tried to entice other newcomers into the game I can say that

there are aspects of this that are daunting - the equipment cost isn't near the issue that the rules and oddities are.

 

Perhaps what is really needed is a constitutional convention of sorts - a team of really smart folks (Territorial Governors) to sit down and

figure out how to simplify the game down to a set of rules that can fit in . .say 10 pages.

 

Probably going to get heaps of scorn over this - s'okay - I'm too old top lose sleep over that, but really - maybe we'd all benefit from simpler rules?

In the long run it won't change who drives home with the new Cadillac, but it might help with who shows up to play?

 

Food for thought - or maybe it's just too hard to really address anymore, we'll just sit back and watch the spiral . . . .

 

Shadow Catcher

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.