Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Interesting call opinions on this


Ace_of_Hearts

Recommended Posts

This may be the thread I was thinking about. The situation is similar. http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=218865&page=1

So the miss (standing KD ) and the P ( going to dump plate early ) are a for sure. To me that's all there is and I will take PWB's advice and call it the way I feel like. Then the MD and shooter can talk all night if needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I like how PWB was at winter range when that last one came up. I guess these questions only come up when he's at a big match.

 

In my best Dirty Harry from Magnum Force voice: "A man's got to know when to go on vacation." :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the miss (standing KD ) and the P ( going to dump plate early ) are a for sure. To me that's all there is and I will take PWB's advice and call it the way I feel like. Then the MD and shooter can talk all night if needed.

That's how I interpret PWB's response to the other one (Post #136 if anyone else wants to read the detailed explanation). The big difference between the 2 scenarios was whether the final shot took down the final KD. He just called it a P when it did, so it must be a P and a miss when it doesn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm convinced that the most screwed up calls and confusion result from situations where every shot doesn't have to hit a target. These are always the longest wtc threads. Stage writers need to be very clear with their instructions and put some forethought into potential outcomes like this one.

Do ya reckon folks that write stages that create P traps in conjunction with KD targets also pulled the wings off of flies?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the P assessed...................

 

1. When the shooter transitions from the KD's to the dump plate?

 

2. When the shooter transitions from the dump plate back to the KD?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the P assessed...................

 

1. When the shooter transitions from the KD's to the dump plate?

 

2. When the shooter transitions from the dump plate back to the KD?

I'da thunk it is when the shooter transitioned from the KD to the dump plate when there was still a KD left up. Stage instructions from the OP said that "Engage the KD targets left to right until down." As soon as the shot was fired at the dump plate the sequence was no longer being followed.

 

Now with that said I've been noodling on this and now question my call. How do we know that the shooter was not aiming at the remaining KD target when shooting shots 6-9 and just missed the KD and accidentally his the dump plate 4 times in a row....how do we know for SURE the shooter's intent? :D :D

 

Kajun

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the P assessed...................

 

1. When the shooter transitions from the KD's to the dump plate?

 

2. When the shooter transitions from the dump plate back to the KD?

 

I pick door #1

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the plates were calibrated this might not be a problem

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the P assessed...................

 

1. When the shooter transitions from the KD's to the dump plate?

 

2. When the shooter transitions from the dump plate back to the KD?

I pick door #1

 

I'd ask that you query the ROC on that... My reasoning is that once the target is "engaged" the shooter should be free to accept that a plate still standing will be scored as a miss, and move along. Especially in a case where the stage writer includes the instruction, from left to right... With the interpretation that is provided "behind Door #1", shooting plate 2 before plate 1 falls will also be a "P". (Re-thinking my position from last year...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So.............the shooter can't take/accept a miss/misses on the KD's, even if they engage a target, as long as they have rounds to expend without leading to a P

 

<_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd ask that you query the ROC on that... My reasoning is that once the target is "engaged" the shooter should be free to accept that a plate still standing will be scored as a miss, and move along. Especially in a case where the stage writer includes the instruction, from left to right... With the interpretation that is provided "behind Door #1", shooting plate 2 before plate 1 falls will also be a "P". (Re-thinking my position from last year...)

 

What is there to ask?

The shooter engaged & HIT (removing any doubt as to where the muzzle was pointed) the dump target before the KDs were all down...contrary to stage instructions. Therein lies the "P".

 

At issue is whether the remaining KD is an unrecoverable MISS at that point or is it "re-engageable" to knock it down (but, in the OP, it was still standing, therefore it would STILL be a MISS)

 

Secondary consideration is whether once having moved to the dump plate, are ALL SHOTS required to be on that target?...giving the shooter an additional MISS for failure to HIT it with all rounds once the plate rack sequence had been left behind.

 

REF: post #88...I think I said basically the same thing there...maybe if I write it again 2 or 3 different ways, it might begin to make sense.

 

:P

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO:

If the stage instructions also demand that rifle/pistol KDs FALL "in order" (e.g L to R), it would be just as much a "P" trap as requiring the same for SG KDs...which, as noted previously, severely (and unnecessarily) handicaps a BP SxS shooter.

 

Especially on a defective array (again, IMO...based on the "slow falling" nature of the OP's rack).

 

 

<_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best argument for assessing P is when the shooter went back to the knockdown target with shot #10. Clearly out of order with the stage instructions. Since that shot impacted a rifle target it would not be a miss.(except for the fact it didn't fall)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best argument for assessing P is when the shooter went back to the knockdown target with shot #10. Clearly out of order with the stage instructions. Since that shot impacted a rifle target it would not be a miss.(except for the fact it didn't fall)

But going to the dump plate early wasn't ?
Link to post
Share on other sites

The best argument for assessing P is when the shooter went back to the knockdown target with shot #10. Clearly out of order with the stage instructions. Since that shot impacted a rifle target it would not be a miss.(except for the fact it didn't fall)

The "logic" of this statement evades me...the shooter already had a "P"...& can only be charged with the FIRST one.

Back to option #2...if it can't (won't) be scored correctly according to stage instructions, throw the stage out of the match.

 

But going to the dump plate early wasn't ?

 

My point exactly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Senario 1 - If the shooter shoots the targets in the correct order and attempts to knock all the targets down in the correct order with the first 5 shots, then the shooter has completed that part of the stage and can proceed to the next target taking a miss for any targets standing.

 

Senario 2 - The shooter MUST knock down all the targets in order before proceeding to the next target.

 

No where does the stage instruction indicate that the shooter can go back and "make up" a missed/standing knock down target. (There are no stage convention for rifle/pistol knockdowns)

 

Don't shoot the messenger here.... I didn't write stage, it wasn't my range, I was not the TO or a spotter. The target adjustment was fine if you hit the target square with a minimum load.

 

What happened in real time is exactly what happened here....... confusion on what the call should be. Calls varied from 1 miss to a P and 2 misses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Senario 1 - If the shooter shoots the targets in the correct order and attempts to knock all the targets down in the correct order with the first 5 shots, then the shooter has completed that part of the stage and can proceed to the next target taking a miss for any targets standing.

He hasn't completed that part if there are KDs still standing when he goes to the dump plate...the "rounds remaining after the KDs are down" does't apply until they are.

 

Senario 2 - The shooter MUST knock down all the targets in order before proceeding to the next target.

What if he had shot at KD #1 (first on the left) & it failed to fall before moving to the next one?

As I mentioned, this is a BS "P" trap set up to "slow down" fast shooters.

I still suggest getting a qualified mechanic to adjust the KDs to SASS standards.

 

No where does the stage instruction indicate that the shooter can go back and "make up" a missed/standing knock down target.

(There are no stage convention for rifle/pistol knockdowns)

Did you bother to read post #88 and the REF to the Stage Convention #2?

I was assuming that, as an RO Instructor, you should KNOW the Conventions? (also listed in the RO1)

 

 

Don't shoot the messenger here.... I didn't write stage, it wasn't my range, I was not the TO or a spotter. The target adjustment was fine if you hit the target square with a minimum load.

Then leave out your comment about ".50cal" if is not relevant to the discussion.

 

What happened in real time is exactly what happened here....... confusion on what the call should be. Calls varied from 1 miss to a P and 2 misses.

 

So...which scenario is the OP referring to?

 

Stage has 5 knock down plates for rifle and a dump target.

Instructions - Engage knock down targets left to right till down. Knock down targets still standing at end of string count as one miss each.

(Misses on the knock down do not count as misses. Misses on the dump plate do count as misses). Place any remaining rounds on dump target.

 

Don't come on here asking questions if you are going to argue about whether the answer(s) are correct or not.

 

I'm done playing the game on this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say............Let's play hang the dang stage writer!

 

<_<:lol:

What' the call if the rope breaks? ;)
Link to post
Share on other sites

What' the call if the rope breaks? ;)

 

T & F

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tar & Feathers

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Post #88 PWB stated: "The question is whether the engagement of the KD rack is a separate "sequence" (even though it is part of the same shooting string on the same TYPE of target) than that of the "dump target" engagement." I agree that was the question to be answered.

 

PWB has answered this question as "YES". Hence, the "P".

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So...which scenario is the OP referring to?

 

 

Don't come on here asking questions if you are going to argue about whether the answer(s) are correct or not.

 

I'm done playing the game on this one.

Right on PWB!!!!!

 

Don't blame ya!

 

Phantom

Link to post
Share on other sites

A serious question about this type of scenario. How would be the best way to write a stage with with knockdowns and a dump to prevent this type of argument? "Engage the 5 knock downs and the dump plate, in any order. Knockdowns left standing and misses on the dump are called misses". As I write a lot of stages with knockdowns, I would like to learn the best wording for the stage description.

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One suggestion was to allow only one shot per knockdown target and then allow makeups with the shotgun if the shooter chooses.

Works with many knockdowns but not all, and it is still a disadvantage to shooters that hit the target low and don't knock it over.

 

A second method would be to only allow one round per knockdown ( they are ligit targets, we should have to hit them) with a special prize/raffle ticket for shooter that "clears the rack".

 

I do not favor dump targets. It seems almost as silly as firing the extra rounds into the back berm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A serious question about this type of scenario. How would be the best way to write a stage with with knockdowns and a dump to prevent this type of argument? "Engage the 5 knock downs and the dump plate, in any order. Knockdowns left standing and misses on the dump are called misses". As I write a lot of stages with knockdowns, I would like to learn the best wording for the stage description.

Thanks in advance.

KDs and dump plate any order only misses assessed will be plates left standing. One second bonus for each hit on the dump plate.

 

Or

 

Two static targets and six plates. In any combination put two shots on each static target and KD plates. Offer a bonus target (static) at the shotgun for make ups of any plates left standing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One suggestion was to allow only one shot per knockdown target and then allow makeups with the shotgun if the shooter chooses.

Works with many knockdowns but not all, and it is still a disadvantage to shooters that hit the target low and don't knock it over.

 

A second method would be to only allow one round per knockdown ( they are ligit targets, we should have to hit them) with a special prize/raffle ticket for shooter that "clears the rack".

 

I do not favor dump targets. It seems almost as silly as firing the extra rounds into the back berm.

If I use a "dump target" it's the same size/distance as typical rifle target.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My head hurts! And it ain't from the Whiskey!

 

Note to self, don't assign order to knockdown targets if a dump plate is involved when writing a stage! (not that I would assign order on falling targets of any kind)

 

Moving on,

Whiskey Kid

Link to post
Share on other sites

Engage the five KD at any time till down, no double taps, misses on KD do not count, Remaining rounds will be place on dump target.

That won't work on a tombstone rack in graduated sizes with the smallest in the back. I see no need for it on a horizontal array either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I like scenarios that have the shooter alternating between a static target(s) and the KDs... Any sequence that penalizes a shooter for having shot at a target (engaged) and proceeding (beyond a miss if such is the case), is an artifice to slow down the speedier shooters amongst us and is a form of gamesmanship that hints of low character and morals. Said by a guy that could care less how fast others shoot... other'n than gaze upon such in awe and admiration.

 

A serious question about this type of scenario. How would be the best way to write a stage with with knockdowns and a dump to prevent this type of argument? "Engage the 5 knock downs and the dump plate, in any order. Knockdowns left standing and misses on the dump are called misses". As I write a lot of stages with knockdowns, I would like to learn the best wording for the stage description.

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How about:

 

"Non-SASS standard" target failure = RESHOOT

 

or

 

remove the stage from the match altogether...then no one has to worry about it.

 

 

Every time this KD problem comes up there is an ongoing discussion of mostly ambiguous opinions of how it should be scored. PWB's post above is the only one that even comes close to being fair for all.

 

Again, the easiest way to fix the problem of KD's that won't stay calibrated, that will work with the SASS power factor as it is, and still be fair to all shooters like the ladies that don't shoot heavy loads is to call it," a hit is a hit whether the KD goes down or not"

 

As it is now it is no different than adding a chance element like drawing a playing card to determine what card suit target shape or sequence to shoot first.

 

Blackey Cole, on 30 Jun 2015 - 7:40 PM, said:

If the plates were calibrated this might not be a problem

 

 

The only fair way to do that is to calibrate after each shooter!!!

I have yet to see KD's stay calibrated thoughout a match. They would have to be permanently mounted on a concrete pad and even then you have the problem of the mechanism fouling with lead splatter.

 

Oh, and Fantom, you are probably right about Allie Mo's tone. After all you are the master of condescension. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that most if not ALL of the rest of the shooters didn't have a problem with that same rack,,,,,,,,So maybe shooter error ???

 

We shot our new plate rack this week-end, using pistols I could knock them down with rounds (SASS legal) hitting an inch above the hinge ... I was using full case loads of Blackpowder in my Open-Tops and the buckeroos took them down with center hits with their .22s.

But one feller said the targets were "A little iffy " and fell too slowly, I think perhaps his guns were a "little bit under-loaded or he was shooting poorly....

And one he missed the plate and hit the stand twice,,, very quickly,,, but since the plate didn't fall IT MUST BE A FAULT OF THE CALIBRATION OF THE SYSTEM !!! But where both rounds struck was clearly seen on the paint of our NEW plate rack...

 

But it just couldn't be "the shooters fault" now could it ???

Push the bottom of the load floor and shoot faster than you can aim right and maybe ,,,,,, the fault that the target falls slowly or not at ALL just might be YOU ...

 

 

Jabez Cowboy

Link to post
Share on other sites

A serious question about this type of scenario. How would be the best way to write a stage with with knockdowns and a dump to prevent this type of argument? "Engage the 5 knock downs and the dump plate, in any order. Knockdowns left standing and misses on the dump are called misses".

 

That would suit me just fine. And if you would separate the dump target far enough from the closest KD so that you NEVER have to try to read the intent of the shooter if they shoot "between" a KD and the dump target, you get pretty close to a stage that prevents most arguments.

 

Might even go so far as to set a post or a sheet of drywall (edge facing shooter) between KD rack and the dump. A miss showing in the dirt on the dump target side of barrier - is a miss. A miss splashing dirt on the KD side - is "no call" (because the KD registers the hit or miss by it's fallen or standing position).

 

Then to add to clarity, we probably could use a stage convention so we all handle these odd-ball cases for moving targets the same:

* partially turned/knocked down targets caused by light loads or equipment failure or even edge hits

* movers that run at a variety of speeds for different shooters or occasionally jam or stop part of way through range of movement

* targets jammed by lead deposits

* slow falling or reacting targets

* targets that become partially or fully obscured by another moving target due to just hitting that other target

 

Reactive targets are much harder to set properly, to maintain in good operational order, and much harder to always score consistently (especially for the odd-ball things that occur). But I still like 'em!

 

Good luck, GJ

Link to post
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.