Tennessee williams Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 47 minutes ago, MBFields said: So 6 targets, 6+ shots if "needed". Shoots at first target and misses as has been stated. This is conjecture. For example: When Widder misses, he misses by a mile and a half. Can't say he wasn't "shooting where the target was" which is what the conventions call for on a malfunctioned or downed target. It doesn't say to HIT the downed target. You can't assume he was shooting at the target that was not down, that is guessing intent. 47 minutes ago, MBFields said: So target engaged but missed. So still needs to shoot at six targets to not have a miss. 6 shots called for, 6 shots fired. 47 minutes ago, MBFields said: Is the consensus that with the first shot the "intent" applies to the already down target? The engagement of the already downed target. 47 minutes ago, MBFields said: According to description they were aiming at first target so not possible. The TO would have been able to see that hopefully. The description is null and irrelevant because the TO cannot say what he or she was aiming at. If we make that the TO's job then the next time I miss a pistol target in a set sequence and hit the wrong one, they would then be able to award me a miss instead of a procedural because the TO "could tell I was aiming" at the correct one. That is what will happen if we have to resort to guessing intent. The proof is in the nanner pudding. Did 6 shots go down range? Yes. Could one of those shots have been at the downed target? Yes. Is there proof without guessing otherwise? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 5 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said: When Widder misses, he misses by a mile and a half. But he does it really fast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBFields Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 12 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said: This is conjecture. For example: When Widder misses, he misses by a mile and a half. Can't say he wasn't "shooting where the target was" which is what the conventions call for on a malfunctioned or downed target. It doesn't say to HIT the downed target. You can't assume he was shooting at the target that was not down, that is guessing intent. 6 shots called for, 6 shots fired. The engagement of the already downed target. The description is null and irrelevant because the TO cannot say what he or she was aiming at. If we make that the TO's job then the next time I miss a pistol target in a set sequence and hit the wrong one, they would then be able to award me a miss instead of a procedural because the TO "could tell I was aiming" at the correct one. That is what will happen if we have to resort to guessing intent. The proof is in the nanner pudding. Did 6 shots go down range? Yes. Could one of those shots have been at the downed target? Yes. Is there proof without guessing otherwise? No. Understood. But when have been a TO I do not call misses, up to spotters. But generally when shooter shoots at target and still standing will yell up and all spotters have done same when I have been a TO. Pretty obvious there was a miss at that point. So that is why hard to grasp the concept of different down target engaged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 5 minutes ago, MBFields said: Understood. But when have been a TO I do not call misses, up to spotters. But generally when shooter shoots at target and still standing will yell up and all spotters have done same when I have been a TO. Pretty obvious there was a miss at that point. So that is why hard to grasp the concept of different down target engaged. Why not make a decision without invoking "intent" into your decision...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tennessee williams Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 1 minute ago, MBFields said: Understood. But when have been a TO I do not call misses, up to spotters. But generally when shooter shoots at target and still standing will yell up and all spotters have done same when I have been a TO. Pretty obvious there was a miss at that point. Yes, and I yell "up" as well. . The difference in the above scenario is the "proof" is the target is still standing when we yell up. In the OP, there is no "proof" the shooter was not shooting where the target was because they missed all other targets. 1 minute ago, MBFields said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBFields Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 Do not feel invoking intent when am behind shooter looking down barrel at where they are pointing it. You are correct about the OP and proof. Point taken. I see that. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Widder, SASS #59054 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 PWB is saving his blue ink until the ROC put out a word..... or clarifies any misunderstanding that some may have. No need discussing anything with TN Williams right now because he's having Nanner Pudding and Nanner Split redrawals..... Ya'll have a good day while I watch it rain. Think I'll go prime a few hundred pieces of brass. ...... after lunch. ..........Widder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krazy Kajun Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 11 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said: PWB is saving his blue ink until the ROC put out a word..... or clarifies any misunderstanding that some may have. No need discussing anything with TN Williams right now because he's having Nanner Pudding and Nanner Split redrawals..... Ya'll have a good day while I watch it rain. Think I'll go prime a few hundred pieces of brass. ...... after lunch. ..........Widder Widder, if those primers you're fittintause have a smell of nanners I'd be a little suspicious! Kajun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying W Ramrod Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 Thinking the "shoot where it was" is because you shouldn't shoot at a down shotgun target. You don't know where the splatter will be heading, i.e. don't hit the pile of steel out there. Not hitting it, either high or low, should not be a concern. There is no speed difference between a shot that hit on, low, or high, the time spent is the same. The required number of shots were fired. All the targets are down. Merry Christmas. Next shooter please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Iron Patnode SASS 60632 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 Come on folks, if you shot where the target "was" please do not expect the downed target to get hit. If I hit a SG target high and it goes down, that same exact shot may not touch the downed target at all. I shot where it "was" not "is".... 6 shots fired, 6 targets down, done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 5 hours ago, MBFields said: Do not feel invoking intent when am behind shooter looking down barrel at where they are pointing it. You are correct about the OP and proof. Point taken. I see that. Thanks. Oh really...so you know he didn't have an AD???? whatever...glad some of you can do the Vulcan Mind Meld trick without all the touching of the face... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade Plowboy Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 It would depend on some more details, certainly which target is malfunctioning and where the miss was seen to be, in my opinion. Hits and misses are generally pretty easy to see with a scattergun especially at close range. If you see it’s a hit, it’s a hit, if you see it’s a miss it’s a miss, when in doubt benefit goes to the shooter. If the shot pattern of the suspected miss was in the vicinity of the malfunctioning target ( targets side by side) than no call. If the shot pattern of the suspected miss is multiple targets away from the malfunctioning target than you still have to engage the malfunctioning target. Just my opinion, awaiting for the blue ink official ROC ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 3 minutes ago, Renegade Plowboy said: It would depend on some more details, certainly which target is malfunctioning and where the miss was seen to be, in my opinion. Hits and misses are generally pretty easy to see with a scattergun especially at close range. If you see it’s a hit, it’s a hit, if you see it’s a miss it’s a miss, when in doubt benefit goes to the shooter. If the shot pattern of the suspected miss was in the vicinity of the malfunctioning target ( targets side by side) than no call. If the shot pattern of the suspected miss is multiple targets away from the malfunctioning target than you still have to engage the malfunctioning target. Just my opinion, awaiting for the blue ink official ROC ruling. Yer inserting intent into the call... Again, engaging a target and where the round hits are two entirely different things. Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sloe Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 8 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said: So...you measure the intent of the shooter...since engaging has nothing to do with where the shot goes. Phantom If engaging has nothing to do with shooting AT a target, then maybe you have a point. If the shooter had intended to engage the KD, then the SG would have been pointed in that direction. But, your arguments are usually just to argue or stir the pot. BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 SHB of 43 Quote Engaged – attempting to fire a round at the target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 6 minutes ago, Barry Sloe said: If engaging has nothing to do with shooting AT a target, then maybe you have a point. If the shooter had intended to engage the KD, then the SG would have been pointed in that direction. But, your arguments are usually just to argue or stir the pot. BS First, knock off the silly personal attacks...if you want to counter my opinion, go for it! You might be right... Not if the shot was an AD. Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 Just now, Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 said: SHB of 43 Yep - and and AD is an engagement that may be way off target...having a SG "double" can put the intended shot way off... Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 If we're trying to be pedantic, Who gets the call on if the shooter shot where it was? Is that the TO's job? Is it the spotters job? If it's the spotters who get the call, is it the best two out of three? And, how do we get that information to the shooter in a timely manner in the event that they decide that the shooter missed where it was, put it into the berm, or just generally didn't shoot where it was? How close must it be to where it was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 2 minutes ago, Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 said: If we're trying to be pedantic, Who gets the call on if the shooter shot where it was? Is that the TO's job? Is it the spotters job? If it's the spotters who get the call, is it the best two out of three? And, how do we get that information to the shooter in a timely manner in the event that they decide that the shooter missed where it was, put it into the berm, or just generally didn't shoot where it was? Eggzackly my point...or...at least one of them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Widder, SASS #59054 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 57 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said: Yep - and and AD is an engagement that may be way off target...having a SG "double" can put the intended shot way off... Phantom I'll bet some folks have not considered the situation where a SxS might "double" on a shooter. I surely wouldn't want to be held liable to make a judgement call based on 'intent' just because my angle of view was misleading, etc..... ..........Widder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Final Score Same as Always Results - 100 Intent - 0 good luck, GJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sloe Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said: First, knock off the silly personal attacks...if you want to counter my opinion, go for it! You might be right... Not if the shot was an AD. Phantom No silly personal attack. Just stating the obvious. BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 17 minutes ago, Barry Sloe said: No silly personal attack. Just stating the obvious. BS Stating that I like to debate...rather than just sit around and agree with everything. I'm sorry that you are so apathetic that you see others as "Pot Stirring"...if you have an argument, make it! Otherwise stop with the Personal Attacks. I'll reserve my other comments for a time when perhaps we could meet. And Hoss, same goes for you. Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBFields Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Sorry for all the long posts. Simply my answer was B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe LaFives #5481 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 I believe that there are instances where intent is rather easy to see. Suppose two shotgun targets are 30 feet apart. Both are standing, The shooter shoots the one on the left and misses, he then turns and aims at the second shotgun target which in the meantime falls. So does the shooter aim at the target (where it was) or can he then turn back to the one he missed and engage and hit it. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 9 minutes ago, Joe LaFives #5481 said: I believe that there are instances where intent is rather easy to see. Suppose two shotgun targets are 30 feet apart. Both are standing, The shooter shoots the one on the left and misses, he then turns and aims at the second shotgun target which in the meantime falls. So does the shooter aim at the target (where it was) or can he then turn back to the one he missed and engage and hit it. Thoughts? My thoughts are that subjecting the "Game" to more subjective calls...just makes the matter worse. Either we accept Intent as a determining component in making calls or we don't. God help us if we now have to decide if it's a acceptable Intent call. Wouldn't it be easier and more consistent to simply fix the faulty target and give the shooter another run at the Stage? Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe LaFives #5481 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 3 Spotters calling misses is subjective. It's been part of the game since the beginning. We could use paper targets which would be less subjective but who wants to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 9 hours ago, Joe LaFives #5481 said: 3 Spotters calling misses is subjective. It's been part of the game since the beginning. We could use paper targets which would be less subjective but who wants to do that. Just because one cannot eliminate all subjectivity doesn't mean we shouldn't eliminate all subjectivity possible...paper targets wouldn't work for many clubs since they don't have berms. Painting targets is just as impractical since again, you have to go down range. Western 3 Gun painted targets since movement was down range and it was wonderful at eliminating the spotter issue. So some things are practical...some things are not. Or do we just leave things the way they are because that's the way we've always done it? Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Either we judge the shooter’s intent or we don’t. Otherwise we are in a place where “we don’t judge intent, unless it’s obvious which target the shooter is attempting to hit”. I think we make that “policy choice” and then live with the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace_of_Hearts Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Simple scenario - Two shotgun targets - 1 is 10' right of center line of the stage the other is 10' to the left of the center line of the stage. Stage round count for shotgun is 2+ Before the shooter gets to the shotgun portion of the stage the wind blows one of them down. Shooter engages the standing target and misses. The shooter then reengages the standing target and knocks it down. 1 - Shooter is done and clean? 2 - Shooter must engage the unengaged target where it was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Equanimous Phil Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Ruling must be the same whether the two targets are 20' or 2' apart. Else, there had to be a critical (and in the SHB determined) distance where it changes. Two shells shot, two targets down -> clean Edit: I think it would make a difference if there are two different shooting positions for those two targets. Then shooter must change the position and engage the taget where it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace_of_Hearts Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 10 minutes ago, Equanimous Phil said: Ruling must be the same whether the two targets are 20' or 2' apart. Else, there had to be a critical (and in the SHB determined) distance where it changes. Two shells shot, two targets down -> clean Edit: I think it would make a difference if there are two different shooting positions for those two targets. Then shooter must change the position and engage the taget where it was It is very unlikely that someone could claim that the first shot could have hit the downed target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Equanimous Phil Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Ace_of_Hearts said: It is very unlikely that someone could claim that the first shot could have hit the downed target. Although it may look obvious in that case, the rules must also cover the "not so obvious" cases in a objective way. So, move those targets closer together step by step. Do you change your ruling at some point? When? And who judges whether the shot was placed where the target was or not, the spotters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Dan Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Here is how I see it: SHB STAGE CONVENTIONS "In the event a target fails or is downed, the shooter SHOULD “shoot where it was.” For safety reasons a target on the ground should never be engaged." Doesn't say must shoot where it was or will shoot where it was.... so it really doesn't matter where the shooter put that shot, so long as it was safe to shoot there. "All knockdown targets (shotgun, rifle, or revolver) must go down to count. o Any knockdown target still standing once the shooter has engaged the next sequence of the stage will be counted as a miss." Making the opposite also true. Any knockdown target not standing will be counted as a hit. So spotters can't call a miss, since all knockdowns are down. TO can't call a P because their is no specific order the knockdowns are to be engaged. SOG penalty because the shooter didn't do what s/he "should" have done? I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Equanimous Phil Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 I agree with Ranger Dan! Maybe one could add 9 minutes ago, Ranger Dan said: so it really doesn't matter where the shooter put that shot, so long as it was safe to shoot there ...and does not hit another target Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.