Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

WTC


Three Foot Johnson

Recommended Posts

Doncha love these things... :lol:

 

Pistol instructions (5 targets): Hit each target twice, any order, no double taps. Gunfighter had a brain fart and shot 1, 5, 1, 5, 2, 4, 2, 4... uh oh... he shoots one on 3 and one into the berm to avoid a 10 sec P in favor of a 5 sec miss. OK?

 

Next - five rifle targets to shooters left, five pistol targets in the middle, and five rifle targets to the right. Instructions say to double tap the pistol targets, then sweep the ten rifle targets left to right with one shot each. Shooter double tapped the pistol targets correctly, then double tapped the five rifle targets on the right, totally forgetting about the five on the left. Since the correct targets were hit with the correct gun, we called it a P instead of five misses... correct?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, J Bar Binks, #47015 said:

Doncha love these things... :lol:

NO

 

Pistol instructions (5 targets): Hit each target twice, any order, no double taps. Gunfighter had a brain fart and shot 1, 5, 1, 5, 2, 4, 2, 4... uh oh... he then shot one on 3 and one into the berm to avoid a 10 sec P in favor of a 5 sec miss. OK?

A miss cannot cause a procedural.

 

Next - five rifle targets to shooters left, five pistol targets in the middle, and five rifle targets to the right. Instructions say to double tap the pistol targets, then sweep the ten rifle targets left to right with one shot each. Shooter double tapped the pistol targets correctly, then double tapped the five rifle targets on the right, totally forgetting about the five on the left. Since the correct targets were hit with the correct gun, we called it a P instead of five misses... correct?

YES

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st scenario:  1 miss.

2nd scenario: definitely a P and I would consider a Spirit of the Game because of the time saved by double tapping vs shooting it correctly.

 

BS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Barry Sloe said:

...

2nd scenario: definitely a P and I would consider a Spirit of the Game because of the time saved by double tapping vs shooting it correctly.

..

 

The only way to prove intent (required for SOG penalty) would be if the shooter admitted doing so intentionally in order to "save time".

The OP indicated that the shooter just forgot about the left-side rifle targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heyya PWB, wouldn't the first situation be similar to someone dumping on a target once they've already earned a P? The shooter knew that if he shot any pistol target that he'd get a "P"...so he went ahead and ditched the last round to save 5 seconds...just a point of debate?

 

The second case is easy peasy!

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Heyya PWB, wouldn't the first situation be similar to someone dumping on a target once they've already earned a P? The shooter knew that if he shot any pistol target that he'd get a "P"...so he went ahead and ditched the last round to save 5 seconds...just a point of debate?

 

The second case is easy peasy!

 

Phantom

 

That IS a consideration...again, shooter's intent would be a factor.

I expected the possibility of an SOG to be mentioned in regard to the first scenario, rather than the second one.
Intentionally taking a 5-second miss instead of hitting ANY target at that point ("P") would certainly fall within the SOG criteria.

 

Quote

A “Spirit of the Game” infraction occurs when a competitor willfully or intentionally disregards the stage instructions in order to obtain a competitive advantage (e.g., taking the penalty would result in a lower score or faster time than following the instructions). 

SHB p.12

 

...but the instructions DID say "no double taps"...so...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read this WTC many times..

Scenario one.. I have a hard time with..

They messed up the pistol sequence..

Yeah.. They bailed themselves  out but, to me, not in a respectable way..

Yeah.. They took a miss when they would of had a P but??

I guess smart thinking on their part of getting out of the

mess they got into by knowing the rules..

With tongue in cheek and a smile.. I'd be Thinkin cheater..

 

Rance ;)

Thinkin I probably should of just stayed off this thread..

Sorry :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Just my opinion, but he/she should have accepted the P... Bad form on their part!!

 

Phantom

 

I can see your point...as soon as he put 8 shots on 4 targets, he was pretty much committed to a DT on the remaining target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said:

 

I can see your point...as soon as he put 8 shots on 4 targets, he was pretty much committed to a DT on the remaining target.

Yep... No other choice.

 

Seems as deliberate as dumping on a target cuz you already earned a P. 

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Just my opinion, but he/she should have accepted the P... Bad form on their part!!

 

Phantom

 

Agree.

But the shooter used the Rules in his/her favor and saved theirowndangself 5 seconds in return for

a tainted reputation among some of their closest friends..... or ex-friends.

It is shameful when someone does these things intentionally.

 

But, it happens in various ways in our game.   Like the shooter who has a bad rifle or pistol run, maybe even

earning a 'P', then 'accidentally' moves back a step to much to 'get bumped' by the TO in order to

request a reshoot based on TO interference.

.

SAD, but it does happen..... :(

 

..........Widder

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said:

 

I can see your point...as soon as he put 8 shots on 4 targets, he was pretty much committed to a DT on the remaining target.

I could easily argue that the 8th round caused the P as it was the shot that made it impossible to fulfill the stage instructions properly.

 

Therefore a P and a miss.

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorta impressed that they were able to think fast enough to come up with that solution on the clock.  They turned a P into a miss.  They saved themselves 5 seconds in penalty.   I'd say well done and move along.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Badlands Bob #61228 said:

I'm sorta impressed that they were able to think fast enough to come up with that solution on the clock.  They turned a P into a miss.  They saved themselves 5 seconds in penalty.   I'd say well done and move along.  

Well done????

 

Making note to myself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the rifle issue if you had to double tap the pistol targets and then single tap the rifle (and there were two banks of five) I could easily see a shooter double tapping the five rifle targets as well...…..that was probably a brain fart more than anything else. I have seen people do that and then have no idea they did it until after the smokes clears and you have to tell em'. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So... when is it "intentional grounding" or an incomplete pass?  

 

Stage writer gave shooters enough rope to hang themselves... one did.  Mission accomplished! :ph34r:

 

Shooter went into pistol sequence w/HUA... realized he'd painted himself into corner... unfortunately too late to come out unscathed... chose lesser of two penalties... and that's "less than honorable?"    Less than honorable would trying to talk spotters, TO,  into "no penalty".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm probably going to be the only one thinking this way, but I'm saying a P for both. What target was he planning to put that 10th shot on? Cowboy up! take the penalty you earned. I'd respect you more for that than trying to "game" your way out of a penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

I could easily argue that the 8th round caused the P as it was the shot that made it impossible to fulfill the stage instructions properly.

 

Therefore a P and a miss.

 

Phantom

 

This would be a very easy argument.  Once that 8th round struck the target, there was no way to fulfill the stage instructions without a P.  Just because the shooter took the miss, a P would be an easy argument to make.  I'd also argue that if it were known for a fact that the shooter missed to avoid the P, then an SOG could be in order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Doc Shapiro said:

 

This would be a very easy argument.  Once that 8th round struck the target, there was no way to fulfill the stage instructions without a P.  Just because the shooter took the miss, a P would be an easy argument to make.  I'd also argue that if it were known for a fact that the shooter missed to avoid the P, then an SOG could be in order.

I respectfully disagree, I don't think it's an easy argument at all.  What stage instruction did the shooter violate?

 

Pistol instructions (5 targets): Hit each target twice, any order, no double taps.

 

Did he hit each target twice, no, but he has a miss, which means one target is going to come up short.  We don't award Ps for misses.  Did he double tap a target, no.  So based on the SHB, where is the P?

 

I do agree that if it were known that he did it deliberately a SOG might apply, but short of him stating that how would you know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So? If he had shot the last round and HIT a rifle target everyone would be happy with the miss?????????

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capt. Bill, ol' buddy. There is the letter of the law, and the intent of the law. Did he follow the letter of the law? Yes. Did he follow the intent of the law? I'd say no. I'd like to say we all agree that whether it was a P or just a miss, it was not what he should have done, but.....

 

And would I spot for him? No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ace_of_Hearts said:

So? If he had shot the last round and HIT a rifle target everyone would be happy with the miss?????????

 

 

Howdy ACE.

I'm thinking that if the rifle targets were on the other side of the berm or at a reasonable distance from the

pistol targets, and the shooter put a round on a 'R' target to avoid the 'P', then a SOG would probably

be easier to award.

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silly me...

I thought we assigned penalties based on the verifiable result of the shooter actions.

Not intent, not opinion, not conjecture.

 

The RESULT of the shooters stage is 

ONE miss - nothing more, nothing less.

 

Yes, you are correct - it certainly appears that the shooter painted themselves right into a corner; with no way to save themselves from a P...

Right up until the moment they figured a way out.

 

You MAY not like what the shooter did - you MAY consider it gamey, even maybe cheating...  

But at the end of the stage, it doesn't matter what you like; you still have to follow the rules and scoring methodology.

 

Until their verifiable action is in violation of the stage instruction they have not EARNED the penalty and we cannot assign it.

Instruction said no double taps...

They DIDN'T double tap.  They missed.

Deliberate or accident - doesn't matter.

The verifiable result of the shooters ACTIONS are one miss.

 

Have a heartfelt talk about the cowboy way.

Waggle your finger at them.

Ostracize or condemn them to wear the Scarlet letter; if you are so inclined.

 

But the only result that may be correctly recorded for the shooter is a miss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Marshal Chance Morgun said:

Capt. Bill, ol' buddy. There is the letter of the law, and the intent of the law. Did he follow the letter of the law? Yes. Did he follow the intent of the law? I'd say no. I'd like to say we all agree that whether it was a P or just a miss, it was not what he should have done, but.....

 

And would I spot for him? No.

I agree Marshal, but as TOs we’re supposed to enforce the rules as written, not the intent of the writers or in this case the shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said, Creeker. I agree totally. You can only judge on what happened, not what he was thinking. Of course, if he fessed up and admitted the error of his ways, then you know for sure... otherwise, Miss. Did he game it, most likely. Do you know that, no. Look out the side of your eye at him, make a mental note of it, but its a Miss.

I view that the same as "jumping the timer"; your hand starts moving before the beep, yer cheatin'... sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

miss and P,, he engaged the last target with a dbl tap,,, he had left himself no other viable option

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

There is no judging of intent when arguing that he/she P'd after the eighth shot. Quite a verifiable action on the part of the shooter.

 

Phantom

I disagree on the verifiable part.

Regardless of you viewing something as having an inevitable outcome - until it happens; it didn't happen. 

And you cannot assign a penalty until the penalty actually occurs.

 

Or look at it another way...

You're a police officer and you see a car flying down the road toward a stop sign at a rate of speed that absolutely guarantees the driver cannot stop on the road before running the stop sign.

 

But at the last moment the driver puts their car into a spin and slides it off the road into a ditch - without going thru the stop sign.

 

Perhaps you can penalize them for speeding or reckless driving or a myriad of other offenses.  

All things that are verifiable from their actions.

What you CANNOT do is cite them for running a stop sign as that is the one thing that actually did not occur.

 

Just like the offense for running the stop sign does not occur until the driver passes the stop sign - The Procedural does not exist UNTIL after the shooter double taps.

 

No double tap - No procedural

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

I disagree on the verifiable part.

Regardless of you viewing something as having an inevitable outcome - until it happens; it didn't happen. 

And you cannot assign a penalty until the penalty actually occurs.

 

Or look at it another way...

You're a police officer and you see a car flying down the road toward a stop sign at a rate of speed that absolutely guarantees the driver cannot stop on the road before running the stop sign.

 

But at the last moment the driver puts their car into a spin and slides it off the road into a ditch - without going thru the stop sign.

 

Perhaps you can penalize them for speeding or reckless driving or a myriad of other offenses.  

All things that are verifiable from their actions.

What you CANNOT do is cite them for running a stop sign as that is the one thing that actually did not occur.

 

Just like the offense for running the stop sign does not occur until the driver passes the stop sign - The Procedural does not exist UNTIL after the shooter double taps.

 

No double tap - No procedural

Faulty analogy.

 

But I understand your position. 

 

The stage instructions could not be complied with after the shooter shot the eighth shot.

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't we use the word "engage" and not hit?  he engaged the last target twice, no other option except to engage any other target, which would still earn the P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Addressing the call of a P after shot #8, what if shot #10 was a squib? Or a dead cap on a percussion pistol on shot #9 or #10? Or the shooter screwed up and only loaded 4 in one gun. Or a broken gun after shot #8?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, J Bar Binks, #47015 said:

Addressing the call of a P after shot #8, what if shot #10 was a squib? Or a dead cap on a percussion pistol on shot #9 or #10? Or the shooter screwed up and only loaded 4 in one gun. Or a broken gun after shot #8?

in all cases still a P   didn't shoot the first 8 correctly

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.