Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I think Cypress Sun is making the point that we don't make rules based on how cowboys would have really done things.  We're a fantasy sport, we're not reenacting. 

Yep;), and when in doubt just ask yourself WWWD ??:huh:

 

 

 

 

What Would Wyatt Do??:D:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BootStrap Phil said:

That was the best call ever, and going to test it this year and see how it goes with the elite crowd....yup best call ever!  

 

Darn right it was:D

AA803E41-00A5-4690-BE49-5F9FF28BB973.jpeg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that Creeker is asking for a simple explanation when a ruling is made.  Creeker is a former match director. shooter and former president of a very successful club.   He is just asking for a justification or clarification when a ruling is made. .  I also would like a justification even if it was as simple as;   the brand dominates the style of the shoe or the sole lugs are too deep.  I am not saying I would agree or disagree with that ruling, but I would want to know.  Even though  subjective, it would clarify the reason for the ruling.   Our sport is not black and white.  If it was, it would sure take a great deal more than the RO course's and shooters rule books provided.  While I don't always agree with every ruling, I sure appreciate a justification.  Keep it simple and just let us know.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2020 at 2:19 PM, Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 said:

We have subjectivity in our rules now...Just look at the BP smoke standard.

 

I respectfully disagree.  The BP smoke standard is quite specific.  Page 27 of the Shooter's Handbook:

 

  • -  Standard .38 Special case.

  • -  1 cc GOEX 2F powder.

  • -  Federal Standard primer.

  • -  145 grain bullet lubed with SPG.

  • -  Powder lightly compressed with a medium roll crimp.

    Failure of the shooter’s rounds to produce the same level of smoke as the standard rounds will result in a penalty for not adhering to the category requirements.

In July, 2017 I made a video and posted it to YouTube, in which I compared the amount of smoke produced by 1cc of several different brands of real black powder and several substitutes.  I concluded one cannot reasonably tell the difference from one brand to another.

 

If any competitor loads at least 1cc of any blackpowder or substitute per shot, he has met the standard and can be confident that he will  overcome any challenge on smoke volume.  If a competitor tries to fudge a little and does not respect the standard, they put themselves at risk for a challenge.

 

How is that subjective?

 

Link to the video:

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

53 minutes ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

 

I respectfully disagree.  The BP smoke standard is quite specific.  Page 27 of the Shooter's Handbook:

 

  • -  Standard .38 Special case.

  • -  1 cc GOEX 2F powder.

  • -  Federal Standard primer.

  • -  145 grain bullet lubed with SPG.

  • -  Powder lightly compressed with a medium roll crimp.

    Failure of the shooter’s rounds to produce the same level of smoke as the standard rounds will result in a penalty for not adhering to the category requirements.

In July, 2017 I made a video and posted it to YouTube, in which I compared the amount of smoke produced by 1cc of several different brands of real black powder and several substitutes.  I concluded one cannot reasonably tell the difference from one brand to another.

 

If any competitor loads at least 1cc of any blackpowder or substitute per shot, he has met the standard and can be confident that he will  overcome any challenge on smoke volume.  If a competitor tries to fudge a little and does not respect the standard, they put themselves at risk for a challenge.

 

How is that subjective?

 

Link to the video:

 

 

 

 

 

But a competitor may not have to load 1cc of powder. Their powder of choice, at a lower volume of powder, may produce the equivalent amount of smoke as the standard.

 

Quote

Through  testing  it  has  been  determined  1cc  of  blackpowder,  in  either  a  .32,  .38,  .44, or  .45  case,  all  produce  approximately  the  same  amount  of  smoke.    Some  types  of blackpowder,  or  blackpowder  substitutes,  may  produce  this  amount  of  smoke  with  less volume  of  powder.    For  example,  a  competitor  may  find  9  grains  of  one  product  produces the  same  amount  of  smoke  as  15  grains  of  another. 

 

What you quoted was how to make a standard round for testing. And, I agree, that is quite specific.

 

However...the testing procedures are quite subjective.

 

Power factor can easily be tested, repeatedly, and always come back to the same results.

 

You cannot do that with BP smoke testing. The testing for BP is completely subjective if not only by those observing the test.

 

Quote

Ammunition  velocities  in question  should  be  measured  easily  via  chronograph.    Adequate  amounts  of  blackpowder smoke  should  be  measured  by  firing  the  shooter‘s  rounds  along  with  match  supplied ―standard  rounds  in  alternating  sequences  under  the  same  conditions  in  order  to  make  a fair  comparison.   

 

So, the way we test BP rounds is you get three bubbas standing around watching the fireworks go off, oohing and ahhing going, "yup. Looks good to me!"

 

You can then call in three other blind old farts and run the test again and come up with a completely different result.

 

The testers may even have a predisposition to bias.

 

How is that not subjective?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah ... but when you shoot BP you only load every "other" round w/ BP ... right?? You don't put BP in every round do you?? :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Branchwater Jack:

 

Thank you for making my point.

 

We agree that the standard recipe is not subjective.

 

If an equivalent load produces the same amount of smoke as the standard, it will not be challenged.

 

If a shooter is challenged for not making enough smoke, the Shooter's Handbook outlines a very specific (read non-subjective) procedure for making a determination.  If I am the match director at a black powder match, I will follow the procedure as outlined; I will gather samples of the shooter's ammo at the loading table and gather my bubbas and blind old farts to make a decision.  The standard and the procedures for making a determination are outlined in the rules, not subjective.

 

By contrast, where in the rules is the procedure for determining if foot gear is legal?

 

By the way, I will be the match director for the Missouri State Blackpowder Championship that will hopefully be held in September.  As part of my welcoming speech to the competitors, I will fire off a few rounds of standard black powder loads.  It will serve two purposes; it will demonstrate that we are prepared to enforce the SASS standard, and it should help calibrate the spotters for what the standard smoke cloud looks like under range conditions for the day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

The standard and the procedures for making a determination are outlined in the rules, not subjective.

 

By contrast, where in the rules is the procedure for determining if foot gear is legal?

 

I don't think that you are grasping the point. If there were no subjectivity to the test, how is it that I have been witness to a test where 1 person was sure the rounds were good, 1 was sure that it wasn't, and the last person wasn't real sure.  

 

I swear, it was like a trip to the eye doctor. Which is better? One or two? About the same?

 

Yes, there are procedures on how to do the test, but the test itself is subject to subjectivity. And, the results of test itself, may not be repeatable based on the eyeballs and perceptions of the testers.

 

The test for footwear, as it has been explained is just like the BP test. Either it looks good to you, or not. And that is subjective

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with a defined standard for bp smoke the actual testing is far more subjective then objective. Testing power factor ,weighing bullets and measuring velocity with a chrono is far more objective. How is that difficult to understand? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the OP

 

It has a number of "non-period" features which are precluded under the rule:

  Quote

...all clothing must be typical of the late 19th century, a B-Western movie, or Western television series.

SHB p.2

I am not an expert at the period features of 19th century footwear, or those used on western television series, or B-Western movies.

 

I am not a gunsmith, either, but in the SHB, I have a list of things that are allowed on each of my firearms. I can go there to figure out if a particular firearm is legal or not.

 

We can all agree that the requirements for shoes are not as well defined in the SHB as those for firearms.

 

That is the point that @Creeker, SASS #43022 is making. As a match official, it is an area that I might not be able to point to book, chapter, and verse when we make a determination and ruling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So while we are on subjective, be it shoes or pants or even shirts like this daniel-whitney-edu.jpg

How does a match director make a call on these things.

 

Share this post


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

So while we are on subjective, be it shoes or pants or even shirts like this daniel-whitney-edu.jpg

How does a match director make a call on these things.

 

That's a vest.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

So while we are on subjective, be it shoes or pants or even shirts like this daniel-whitney-edu.jpg

How does a match director make a call on these things.

 

Outlawed items

 

Ball  caps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Moccasins with cactus kicker

47822_1.jpg

 

I would rule these illegal do to the modern material insert   BUT  I doubt I would ever notice them unless someone questioned them.

Sperry-8-Toddler-Tan_TQ5KB_640_640_crop.

Edited by Ace_of_Hearts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

If any competitor loads at least 1cc of any blackpowder or substitute per shot, he has met the standard and can be confident that he will  overcome any challenge on smoke volume.

 

Captain George Baylor's testing from 2011 disagrees with your blanket statement, or at least reaffirms the subjectivity of BP standard testing 

 

http://www.curtrich.com/0811SmokeStandard.html

 

Black Powder Smoke Standard Ammunition Test
Location; Founders Ranch
Date: 8/22/2011
Ammo Maker, Operator: Captain George Baylor
Judges: Shirley Shooter, Shaky Shooter
Conditions: 75-80°F, 0-5 mph wind, humid, just after rain
Procedure: Load Smoke Standard and test round alternately in Ruger NM Vaquero, 4-3/4" barrel, .38 Spcl.
Judges did not know which round was smoke standard, and which was test.
Fire rounds alternately. Judges were told to choose which round smoked more, or if they were the same.
Test was repeated until consensus developed.
One Judge stood approximately 6 feet behind shooter, the other 5 ft. to left of shooter and 6 ft. to rear

 

Elephant 2F 1.0 147 SPG   Fail  
Cowboy 1.0 147 SPG   Fail

Old Std

 

DISCLAIMER:
Due to the subjectivity of the test, the inability to calibrate absolutely, and the variations due to weather, light, and conditions, no guarantees are offered or implied that any marginal load (the one below which failure occurred) will pass at any given time.

 

And, as he rightfully points out, how you do the test can also introduce bias into the results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I eagerly await the results of your efforts to change the present standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

I eagerly await the results of your efforts to change the present standard.

 

Maybe we ought to start randomly disassembling BP cartridges and measuring how much powders in them.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tyrel Cody said:

 

Maybe we ought to start randomly disassembling BP cartridges and measuring how much powders in them.

 

Your suggestion, not mine.  Hopefully it will never come to that!  :unsure:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

 

Your suggestion, not mine.  Hopefully it will never come to that!  :unsure:

Strongly agreed - but having said that, any Match Director anywhere is welcome to pull apart a random round from my supply...Long Live the Pale Rider Categories!

 

CS

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

 

I respectfully disagree.  The BP smoke standard is quite specific.  Page 27 of the Shooter's Handbook:

 

  • -  Standard .38 Special case.

  • -  1 cc GOEX 2F powder.

  • -  Federal Standard primer.

  • -  145 grain bullet lubed with SPG.

  • -  Powder lightly compressed with a medium roll crimp.

    Failure of the shooter’s rounds to produce the same level of smoke as the standard rounds will result in a penalty for not adhering to the category requirements.

In July, 2017 I made a video and posted it to YouTube, in which I compared the amount of smoke produced by 1cc of several different brands of real black powder and several substitutes.  I concluded one cannot reasonably tell the difference from one brand to another.

 

If any competitor loads at least 1cc of any blackpowder or substitute per shot, he has met the standard and can be confident that he will  overcome any challenge on smoke volume.  If a competitor tries to fudge a little and does not respect the standard, they put themselves at risk for a challenge.

 

How is that subjective?

 

Link to the video:

 

 

 

 

 

Well made video! 

TNX for the time it took.

Was that filmed at the Bear Creek Volunteers range? 

OLG 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said:

 

Well made video! 

TNX for the time it took.

Was that filmed at the Bear Creek Volunteers range? 

OLG 

 

Thank you.  I made it on land owned by an elderly friend near Pleasant Hope, MO.  Unfortunately she has passed and I no longer have access.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

I eagerly await the results of your efforts to change the present standard.

 

Who said there was any reason to change the BP smoke standard or the subjective way that it is tested?

 

I would much rather have a test that is Subjective rather than an Arbitrary one.

 

And some would even argue that the shoe decision from the OP balances the fine line between being subjective and arbitrary.

Edited by Branchwater Jack SASS #88854
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So footwear rulings will be based on how much BP they hold from here on out?

 

 

:ph34r:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hendo said:

So footwear rulings will be based on how much BP they hold from here on out?

 

 

:ph34r:

That would be fun.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

That would be fun.

Ya just gotta watch out for that footstompin music. :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 said:

Back to the OP

 

It has a number of "non-period" features which are precluded under the rule:

  Quote

...all clothing must be typical of the late 19th century, a B-Western movie, or Western television series.

SHB p.2

I am not an expert at the period features of 19th century footwear, or those used on western television series, or B-Western movies.

 

I am not a gunsmith, either, but in the SHB, I have a list of things that are allowed on each of my firearms. I can go there to figure out if a particular firearm is legal or not.

 

We can all agree that the requirements for shoes are not as well defined in the SHB as those for firearms.

 

That is the point that @Creeker, SASS #43022 is making. As a match official, it is an area that I might not be able to point to book, chapter, and verse when we make a determination and ruling.

PWB is remaining silent--wisely. 

I think this is one of those cases where not saying anything IS saying something.  I think we just need to accept the umpire call, based on the existing language.   If someone wants to propose a rule change, there is a separate process for doing that via our TGs.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patagonia Pete said:

You can get 15gr (volume) 1cc BP in a 32H&R??

 

.32 H&R - enough smoke ?

 

 

Hanna Ft Parker.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Yusta B. said:

.32 H&R - enough smoke ?

> snip <

Looks good ... no contest ... but ... "a previous post" was referring to a very specific standard quoted in the SHB ...

"The BP smoke standard is quite specific.  Page 27 of the Shooter's Handbook" which goes on of course to mention something about 38 special .. etc etc ...

 

Actually ... IMHO ... no one should have ever even asked about the shoes. They should have (IMHO) simply worn them and not given it another thought. 

I can't imagine any MD banning the shoe as there is nothing in the SHB to support such a ruling. By asking about "this specific product" they have doomed it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Patagonia Pete said:

You can get 15gr (volume) 1cc BP in a 32H&R??

 

9 minutes ago, Patagonia Pete said:

"a previous post" was referring to a very specific standard quoted in the SHB ...

"The BP smoke standard is quite specific.  Page 27 of the Shooter's Handbook" which goes on of course to mention something about 38 special .. etc etc ...

 

You don't have to get 15 gr volume of powder into the round to meet the smoke standard.  You just have to make as much smoke as the standard round. 

 

You can see Captain George Baylor did some testing on the 32 round back in 2013.

 

His testing showed that you could pass the smoke test with a .32 H & R Mag loaded with 0.7 grains of Goex 3FFFg when comparing against the standard round.

 

but, as he said...

 

Quote

The usual disclaimers apply since the smoke standard is a subjective one, like gymnastics judging or costume contests, not something measurable with equipment like power factors or stage times. The disclaimer is: If your load fails a Smoke Standard Test, you can't blame the article. You get the penalty.

 

 

http://www.curtrich.com/201310smokestandardtest.htm

 

             
.32 H & R Mag Smoke Standard Test        
Founders Ranch, 10-06-13          
Captain George Baylor & Edward R. S. Canby      
SMOKE STANDARD TEST AMMUNITION        
.38 SPECIAL 1.0 cc GOEX FFg          
Federal Standard Primer          
145 gr, Black Dawge Bullet lubed with SPG        
Per SASS ROII Handbook, September 2012        
 
All .32 H & R Test Loads used 100 gr. bullet, case mouth crimped in    
crimp groove, Federal SP Primer, Starline or Federal brass    
Powder load, CCs. Result Comments      
APP 3F 0.7 Fail Marginal      
APP 3F Note 1 Pass Note 1      
777 3F 0.7 Fail Note 2      
Black MZ 0.7 Marginal        
Black MZ 1.0 Pass        
Pyrodex P 0.7 Fail        
Pyrodex P 1.0 Pass        
Swiss 3F 0.7 Pass Marginal      
Swiss 3F 1.0 Pass Exceeds      
Goex 3F 0.7 Pass        
Goex 3F 1.0 Pass        
Ten-X .32 S&W Long BPC Fail        
 
Note 1-This is Doc Barium's match load. A 9 MM case on a stick is dipped. Full case used.
Fills case to bullet base, no comression. This is less than 1cc, more than .7cc.  
Note 2-Edward R. S. Canby was unwilling to load 1.0 cc of      
777 3F due to the fact that required compression in excess of    
Hodgdon recommendations. 3F was used in violation of Hodgdon    
recommendations because a poll of .32 H & R Frontier Cartridge    
shooters indicated a lot of them are using it. 777 2F was not tested.

 

 

 

Edited by Branchwater Jack SASS #88854

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Ace_of_Hearts said:

So while we are on subjective, be it shoes or pants or even shirts like this daniel-whitney-edu.jpg

How does a match director make a call on these things.

 

That shirt is legit now, thanks mongol!!

Edited by BootStrap Phil
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Patagonia Pete said:

I can't imagine any MD banning the shoe as there is nothing in the SHB to support such a ruling

How many times has the SHB reference been quoted so far in this thread "all clothes must be...." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Equanimous Phil said:

How many times has the SHB reference been quoted so far in this thread "all clothes must be...." 

Well OK ... I suppose that is a problem ...

Assuming you are referring to ... (from your post) ...

> snip <

The clause "All clothing and equipment must be worn appropriately and how it was intended, or how it would have been in the Old West or as seen on B-Western movies and television" 

> snip <

I am paying atttention to the part that says ... "worn appropriately" ... and I am assuming they would have been wearing these shoes on their feet.

IMHO there is nothing in that quote about how it actually looks ... does it say that??   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rather was referring to "all clothing must be typical of the late 19th century, a B-Western movie, or Western television
series." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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