Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

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

Shooting Bull

How can you shoot this?

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Griff said:

Okay, placing the same scenario in a different context, would you call a "P" on a shooter following these stage instructions?  (Same number of targets and rounds)

 

... from either direction, triple tap sweep the 3 targets, then place 10th shot on last target.

 

The question at hand is whether 4 in a row on the same target negates a triple tap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ace_of_Hearts said:

Let's see.

"Triple tap" the 3 targets in any order.......  I shoot 1 - 1 - 1 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 2 ......... This is a correct way of shooting the sequence as written..... NO PROCEDURAL AT THIS POINT.

 

NOW

 

Then place the 10th round on target 2....... According to some, I cannot complete the instruction without someone saying in is a procedural.

 

 

Good lord. Its not "according to some". It is according to all of the laws of science, any algorithm, wikipedia, and even kindergartners counting.

 If you shoot it, 111,333,222 you have already messed up because you know the 10th round has to go on target 2 and 4 shots aint a triple tap! You can't shoot it 111,333,222,2 just because its easier. Having to put the 10th round on 2 tells you you cant shoot the 2nd target last in your triple taps.

 

If it was put the 10th round on target 3 we would be arguing right now that you cant shoot it 111,222,333,3!

 

To answer your question, it doesn't matter where you put the 10th round because you peed all over everything when you shot it 111,333,222!!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Griff said:

Okay, placing the same scenario in a different context, would you call a "P" on a shooter following these stage instructions?  (Same number of targets and rounds)

 

... from either direction, triple tap sweep the 3 targets, then place 10th shot on last target.

That scenario is impossible to shoot as written, so I would call a procedural on the stage writer for writing an oxymoron stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the net effect of the two sets of instructions the same?  In the OP you could elect to shoot the sequence in such a way that you'd put 4 shots on the last target, in the last example I gave, the shooter is instructed to do just that.

 

2 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

That scenario is impossible to shoot as written, so I would call a procedural on the stage writer for writing an oxymoron stage.

I have shot stages with said instructions... not a question or peep about it.  You shoot part one, then shoot part 2.  Simple...   Doesn't require counting above 3... even as you say, kindergartners can do it.  No laws of science or universal laws broken.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Griff said:

Isn't the net effect of the two sets of instructions the same?  In the OP you could elect to shoot the sequence in such a way that you'd put 4 shots on the last target, in the last example I gave, the shooter is instructed to do just that.

 

I have shot stages with said instructions... not a question or peep about it.  You shoot part one, then shoot part 2.  Simple...   Doesn't require counting above 3... even as you say, kindergartners can do it.  No laws of science or universal laws broken.  

Geeze.

 

If you shot that exact stage than it's one of the stoopidist stage descriptions ever.

 

Again, does four shots in a row on the same target negate the triple tap?

 

We know where you stand...

 

Phantom

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Griff said:

Isn't the net effect of the two sets of instructions the same? 

No.

 

In the OP you could elect to shoot the sequence in such a way that you'd put 4 shots on the last target 

 

Not without earning a P.

 

in the last example I gave, the shooter is instructed to do just that.

Instructed to get a P.

 

I have shot stages with said instructions... not a question or peep about it. 

 

They didnt pay attention.

 

You shoot part one, then shoot part 2. 

 

Part 1 and part 2 form a whole. There is no imaginary make believe invisible line that separates your shots. If it was you could get a P for shooting 2 double taps. 4 concurrent shots do not make a triple tap.

 

Simple... 

 

Apparently not.

 

Doesn't require counting above 3... even as you say, kindergartners can do it.  No laws of science or universal laws broken.  

 

All laws broken, even down to great aunt Thelma's vase.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if I were presented with only one (1) target and a load of 4 rifle....

Scenario says triple tap the target and then then place the last round on the target, I would get a "P" for quad tapping it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ace_of_Hearts said:

So if I were presented with only one (1) target and a load of 4 rifle....

Scenario says triple tap the target and then then place the last round on the target, I would get a "P" for quad tapping it?

Again, that would be an error in writing.

 

Why keep coming up with this stuff.?? What if I said single tap one target five times??? How would that changed The real question here???

 

Good god the Wire can be truly fascinating sometimes.

 

Phantom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeepers Creepers!  What part of: "IN ANY ORDER" do you not understand?

 

Duffield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In any order" doesn't negate the triple tap.

You can shoot it in any order so long as you triple tap all three targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Duffield, SASS #23454 said:

Jeepers Creepers!  What part of: "IN ANY ORDER" do you not understand?

 

Duffield

It's one thing to disagree with the position that a quad tap negates the preceding triple tap, but to not even acknowledge that an interpretation issue exists is analogous to burying your head in the sand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from my saddle, absent the ROC interpretaion from PWB, it would seem that the MD would make the call. whatever he intended. I think the lack of an"official" answer is indicative of that stance by the ROC. Obviously should be caught at the walk thru. Obviously could be better written. But to say either side is wrong or stooopid or cant count beyond Kindergarten level is not "the cowboy way". in sort, neither side is 100% right or wrong

 

And for the record, I think 111, 333, 222 2 is following the stage as written. but its up to the MD. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, how did the stage writer intend for this stage to be shot ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

It's one thing to disagree with the position that a quad tap negates the preceding triple tap, but to not even acknowledge that an interpretation issue exists is analogous to burying your head in the sand.

Or it is related to the ability to comprehend written English.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Hoss said:

 or cant count beyond Kindergarten level is not "the cowboy way". in sort, neither side is 100% right or wrong

 

 

Hold up a second, Hoss. I'm debating a fellow cowboy and having fun trying to persuade them over to my way of thinking. They have opinions and I welcome it, but If I'm going to cut somebody down, it'll be standing in front of them. You need to go back and read my comment and do a little analyzing before you missquote me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still seems like this would need to be clarified during the reading of the stage instructions...  We shoot this type of scenario regularly, understanding that there are two parts to the scenario, the triple tap sequence and then the last shot.  Perhaps it is a regional understanding of how the stage is shot.  A few extra words in the writing of the stage would solve any misunderstandings.  For instance, if I was writing this sequence, I'd specify, "with nine rounds triple tap the rifle targets in a 1-3-2 order from either direction, then with 10th round engage any of the rifle targets."  Other folks have their own way of expressing the same intention.  Alternatively, I could also write, "with nine rounds triple tap the rifle targets in a 1-3-2 order from either direction, then with the 10th round engage targets 1 or 3".  I try to never leave shooters to guess what I intended.

 

This is not to dispute the opinions of anyone else who has replied to this thread... just that there clearer ways to write the stage.  If I were listening to the instructions of the OP, I'd have asked a question concerning putting a fourth round on the last target triple tapped and then went with whatever the posse marshal said.  If the posse marshal doesn't know, and he can't get hold of the stage writer, then he should ask the match director.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tennessee williams said:

"In any order" doesn't negate the triple tap.

You can shoot it in any order so long as you triple tap all three targets.

Triple tap.......Then place the tenth round on center target

 

the word THEN creates a SEPARATE instruction to fulfill. Once you have fulfilled the “triple tap” command, the word “THEN”

makes the last round a SEPERATE instruction from the triple tap.   You fulfilled winders “minimum and maximum” argument before the word THEN, and followed it with the NEXT, and SEPARATE command to place the 10round on the center target. The word THEN makes it a separate command.  Not a continuation of the first command.

 

if an obsurd stage writer told you to shoot the the 2 outside targets once each, then triple tap the center target with the first 5 rounds, then triple tap the center target, then place one round on each outside target with the second five rounds, would that same set of instructions create 7 pages????

 

and this isn’t a debate about “if thatbstage should have been written differently” it’s an honest question about if you guys would really try to call a “P” for following stage instructions AS WRITTEN because according to some of the “logic” I’m reading rounds 4,5,and 6 mean it’s not 2 seperate trillpe taps, and the shooter “following stage instructions” gets a p 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2018 at 9:39 PM, Shooting Bull said:

Rifle and pistol had three targets each. Both had same instructions. “Triple tap targets in any order, put tenth shot on center target.”  Stage write was unavailable for clarification. Would you as the TO allow a triple tap on targets one and three then a triple tap +1 on the center? 

 

Gawd Awful,

 

I don't recall using the word 'Then', nor did the original poster (my good wire pard Shooting Bull) , whom I quoted above.

 

 

..........Widder

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Gawd Awful said:

Triple tap.......Then place the tenth round on center target

 

the word THEN creates a SEPARATE instruction to fulfill. Once you have fulfilled the “triple tap” command, the word “THEN”

makes the last round a SEPERATE instruction from the triple tap.   You fulfilled winders “minimum and maximum” argument before the word THEN, and followed it with the NEXT, and SEPARATE command to place the 10round on the center target. The word THEN makes it a separate command.  Not a continuation of the first command.

 

I understand what you are saying here. I am saying I believe you are incorrect. It is understood by many that when the stage calls for a triple tap, it means 3 concurrent rounds, not 4. The "watch it" of this stage as I have shot it means pick your triple tap order carefully or you will p on it.

 

if an obsurd stage writer told you to shoot the the 2 outside targets once each, then triple tap the center target with the first 5 rounds, then triple tap the center target, then place one round on each outside target with the second five rounds, would that same set of instructions create 7 pages???? 

 

Maybe, maybe not. Lets look at "the way you wrote it". On the pistols, you have a separation so there are only 3 CONCURRENT shots on the center target because it is separated by the pistols with the exception of a GF. The rifle is not; however, 2 triple taps equals 6 concurrent rounds. The better way to write it would be single tap each outside target, then 6 on the center, then 2 on each outside target.

25 minutes ago, Gawd Awful said:

 

and this isn’t a debate about “if thatbstage should have been written differently” it’s an honest question about if you guys would really try to call a “P” for following stage instructions AS WRITTEN because according to some of the “logic” I’m reading rounds 4,5,and 6 mean it’s not 2 seperate trillpe taps, and the shooter “following stage instructions” gets a p 

 

 

No, I would call a p because of someones misinterpretation of the way it is written. I dont understand your question after the word WRITTEN, can you clarify for me?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

 

SEVEN PAGES???  REALLY??

Prolly nine pages now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Yul Lose said:

Prolly nine pages now.

 

Say it eight'nt so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Duffield, SASS #23454 said:

Or it is related to the ability to comprehend written English.

Oooookay:lol:

 

Please define quad tap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Oooookay:lol:

 

Please define quad tap.

 

Phantom,

you should have at least given some multiple choice selections..... ;)

 

..........Widder

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That'l run it to 10 pages!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Keystone, SASS # 47578 said:

Just out of curiosity, how did the stage writer intend for this stage to be shot ?

 

 

I finally got the chance to talk to him today. He said he specifically used the words, “in any order” instead of “sweep” so as to allow the stage to be shot 1-1-1-3-3-3-2-2-2-2 if that’s how the shooter chose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, McCandless said:

Still seems like this would need to be clarified during the reading of the stage instructions...  

 

It was. Absent the stage writer we made our decision and everybody had the same opportunity to shoot the stage either way they chose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that to me is funny!!! 7 pages, bunch of crazy comments & opinions, and definitions, etc & it comes down to poor stage writing, UNLESS the word "then" was there as part of the direction for the last shot!

DC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

Gawd Awful,

 

I don't recall using the word 'Then', nor did the original poster (my good wire pard Shooting Bull) , whom I quoted above.

 

 

..........Widder

 

 

 

 

 

When I’m making posts I tend to drop words for brevity. In all honesty I don’t remember if the word “THEN” was in the stage instructions. 

 

It’s probably stupid of me to do this but I’m going to guess the stage instructions read something like this. “Triple tap rifle targets in any order. Place 10th round on center target. Repeat rifle instructions for pistols.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Shooting Bull said:

 

I finally got the chance to talk to him today. He said he specifically used the words, “in any order” instead of “sweep” so as to allow the stage to be shot 1-1-1-3-3-3-2-2-2-2 if that’s how the shooter chose. 

Lol, I bet he doesn't use this one again soon!

 

P.S. Might want to let him know the words "in any order" doesn't turn a quad tap into a triple tap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I make it page 8?

 

If it even matters at this point, and I seriously doubt that it does, I see nothing in Shooting Bull's description that prevents a fourth round in a target negating a triple tap.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After all of this discussion the way the stage instructions were written, I still believe that the "benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter", in this instance, is a fair answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Smokin Gator SASS #29736 said:

After all of this discussion the way the stage instructions were written, I still believe that the "benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter", in this instance, is a fair answer. 

I always assumed that saying was for calling misses, but you know what they say about assuming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Shooting Bull said:

 

It was. Absent the stage writer we made our decision and everybody had the same opportunity to shoot the stage either way they chose. 

That's the main thing!

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.