WTC: Painted Targets

[Chicken George*]

At the match, targets are painted between every shooter. 

 

Shooter finishes the stage. Two spotters call 1 miss, the other calls it clean. TO takes the spotters down range to look at the targets. Upon return, shooter gets 2 misses. Was that the correct call? What are your thoughts on this process? 

[Griff]

Unless otherwise designated, the TO is the Chief Range Officer on the stage.  It is perfectly acceptable for the TO to point out things like edge hits, etc. to the spotters, allowing them to adjust their call.  If two of the spotters agree on two misses... that's the call.  The TO cannot overrule their call.

[wyliefoxEsquire]

The OP assumes they went down range and only saw one hit on the target.  

What about the possibility that multiple rounds hit the same place on the target.

Maybe an edge

It appears that the original call took into account benefit of any doubt.  

Going down range to inspect a target clearly indicated doubt.

Call it as you see it

 

1 miss

 

From the ROI course

Spotters

- Spotters have the responsibility to count shots and misses and to verify the targets were engaged in the correct order for the required number of shots.

- Spotters assist the TO by watching for violations when the competitor retrieves staged firearms and draws revolvers since it is impossible for the TO to have an unobstructed view of both sides of the competitor’s body.

- Spotters are obligated to stop a shooter from attempting an unsafe action if the TO is not in position to see it or react quickly enough.

- Determine misses by both visual and audible means, when possible.

- Should always be in a position to see all the targets in the course of fire. At least one spotter should be positioned on each side of the competitor.

- There should always be 3 spotters. The majority (2 out of 3) breaks the tie in regard to misses.

- Spotters should be easily identifiable by holding a baton, wearing a bandana, etc.

- The TO is not relied upon to count shots and misses.

- Spotters declare any misses and procedurals at the conclusion of the stage

- Spotters never spot for a family member.

- Always give the shooter the benefit of any doubt.

If you know it’s a HIT….. IT’S a HIT!

If you think it’s a HIT….. IT’S a HIT!

If you think it’s a MISS…. IT’s a HIT!

If you know it’s a MISS…. IT’s a MISS!

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

You sure the targets were painted...completely?

 

If a spotter thinks they saw an edge hit...or if the TO with their vantage point says there might have been an edge hit...asked if a target was one that was missed. By all means, let the spotters look...and maybe adjust their call.

 

I wouldn't add a miss since (unless the spotters flat out insisted), the target painting could have been...spotty.

 

Phantom

[Eyesa Horg]

Could be a long day if the TO and 3 spotters keep running down range to verify what 2 spotters called. 2 spotters called 1 miss, the other clean. Shooter gets one miss, next shooter.

[Stump Water]

1 hour ago, wyliefoxEsquire said:

What about the possibility that multiple rounds hit the same place on the target.

 

5 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

You sure the targets were painted...completely?

 

These ^

 

Paint, or the disturbance thereof, shouldn't be considered undisputable truth.

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

2 minutes ago, Eyesa Horg said:

Could be a long day if the TO and 3 spotters keep running down range to verify what 2 spotters called. 2 spotters called 1 miss, the other clean. Shooter gets one miss, next shooter.

This is...bad.

 

If a spotter says a target was an "edger", let 'em look. Not like this happens with anywhere near the majority of the shooters.

 

Phantom

[John Kloehr]

Would have been much simpler to not paint targets and rely on the spotters. While the rules say nothing about painting, they do specify spotters.

 

Should have been 1 miss, next shooter. Even if paint did show two misses.

[Eyesa Horg]

2 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

This is...bad.

 

If a spotter says a target was an "edger", let 'em look. Not like this happens with anywhere near the majority of the shooters.

 

Phantom

Agreed, but in this case we added a miss based on the TO taking the spotters downrange. Giving the shooter BOD, seems to me the TO should've taken the count of the majority which was one miss, the other spotter said clean. I guess to me I'd be different if  the spotters said 2 and the TO took them down to point out an edger and thus reduce the misses to 1. We call it a "Happy Birthday" when the spotters miss one.

However any match I have shot has not had targets repainted for each shooter so the first is the only one with painted targets. We often paint between Posses though.

[John Kloehr]

The only thing I could see paint introducing is opportunity for the shooter to call for a review. Flip it around, all spotters call 3 misses. Targets are reviewed, now 2 misses.

 

This is how paint is used in other sports, an opportunity for the shooter to question a miss. And even then, the hit has to at least have some indication of a mark on the face, not just a graze on the edge.

[Eyesa Horg]

Just now, John Kloehr said:

The only thing I could see paint introducing is opportunity for the shooter to call for a review. Flip it around, all spotters call 3 misses. Targets are reviewed, now 2 misses.

 

This is how paint is used in other sports, an opportunity for the shooter to question a miss. And even then, the hit has to at least have some indication of a mark on the face, not just a graze on the edge.

Absolutely. But I don't agree with the TO overriding the majority of spotters to ADD a miss. To point out an edger to benefit the shooter is I guess what I'd hope the TO would do.

[Hoss]

As a TO I’d never say let’s go look at targets to find another miss. If I thought there was an edger that spotters had called a miss I would point that out. 
 

as a counter, I never take another spotters word on a miss. If I’m not sure, it’s a hit.  If another spotter or TO points TD out an edger and it’s on the target I had the miss, I’ll change my call. 
 

in short, I’ll change from a miss to a hit, but I don’t think I’ve ever changed a hit  to a miss
 

 

[Texas Maverick]

Not sure how a spotter can call a miss that they didn't see. I know you can't watch a video of a stage and make a decision from it and I would think this falls into that same scenario. Spotter can only call what he sees. 

 

TM

Edited September 20 by Texas Maverick

[Eyesa Horg]

3 minutes ago, Hoss said:

As a TO I’d never say let’s go look at targets to find another miss. If I thought there was an edger that spotters had called a miss I would point that out. 
 

as a counter, I never take another spotters word on a miss. If I’m not sure, it’s a hit.  If another spotter or TO points TD out an edger and it’s on the target I had the miss, I’ll change my call. 
 

in short, I’ll change from a miss to a hit, but I don’t think I’ve ever changed a hit  to a miss
 

 

This is what my experience has been with TOs I've shot with.

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

 

Going for TWO pages!!  Peanuts!  Popcorn!  Crackerjacks!

[Eyesa Horg]

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

Well...there are good TO's and then there are bad TO's...

 

Phantom

[John Kloehr]

Just now, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

 

Going for TWO pages!!  Peanuts!  Popcorn!  Crackerjacks!

Well sure,  Why not. I'll add in that even though I gave a trophy for @Hoss's post, it is for spirit and philosophy. I will have to dig into the rules again to see if the TO even has any power to review spotter calls. Not questioning, just expressing my ignorance on the question.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

44 minutes ago, Texas Maverick said:

Not sure how a spotter can call a miss that they didn't see. I know you an watch a video of a stage and make a decision from it and I would think this falls into that same scenario. Spotter can only call what he sees. 

 

"Recorded video/audio or photographic data will never be allowed to be presented as evidence in either regard."

SHB p.24 -  ASSESSING PENALTIES AND PROTESTS 

RO2 p.14 - Appeals, Challenges, and Protests 

 

 

Edited September 19 by PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L
add reference

[Leroy Luck]

35 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

the TO even has any power to review spotter calls.

- The TO polls the 3 spotters to determine the number of misses and can consider their
input regarding any penalties, as well as any personal observations during the stage.

- The TO does not have the authority to overrule the spotters regarding misses but can
question spotters as to the location of misses. (The TO is often in the best position to see
the direction of the muzzle, which is helpful in determining edge hits.

- Final assessment of penalties (not misses) is made by the TO.

 

RO 1 handbook, pg 25

[John Kloehr]

9 minutes ago, Leroy Luck said:

- The TO polls the 3 spotters to determine the number of misses and can consider their
input regarding any penalties, as well as any personal observations during the stage.

- The TO does not have the authority to overrule the spotters regarding misses but can
question spotters as to the location of misses. (The TO is often in the best position to see
the direction of the muzzle, which is helpful in determining edge hits.

- Final assessment of penalties (not misses) is made by the TO.

 

RO 1 handbook, pg 25

Agree, just looked it up:

 

"Assessing misses is purely in the purview of the spotters."

 

Top of page 24 in the handbook. So as I said above, 1 miss, next shooter.

[Widder, SASS #59054]

1 hour ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

You sure the targets were painted...completely?

 

If a spotter thinks they saw an edge hit...or if the TO with their vantage point says there might have been an edge hit...asked if a target was one that was missed. By all means, let the spotters look...and maybe adjust their call.

 

I wouldn't add a miss since (unless the spotters flat out insisted), the target painting could have been...spotty.

 

Phantom

 

HOWDY Chicken George.  Hope everyone is doing well.

 

What Phantom stated is what I was thinking.   

 

Basically, ya gotta go with the call of the spotters, who were probably more observant in their duties then the painters.....

 

..........Widder

 

[Widder, SASS #59054]

1 hour ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Well...there are good TO's and then there are bad TO's...

 

Phantom

 

AND..... there are good painters and bad painters.....

 

(and there are good Phantom's, bad Phantom's, good Widder's and bad Widder's)

 

..........Widder

 

 

[Griff]

3 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

So one miss or two?

Whatever the spotter's final report to the TO sez.  If after looking at the targets, the spotters say two... two it is.  If they stick to their initial calls, it's one.  I weren't there and can't begin to guess what the spotters saw.

[Rance - SASS # 54090]

Majority of spotters called 1 miss.. done.. next shooter..

[Krazy Kajun]

24 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

AND..... there are good painters and bad painters.....

 

(and there are good Phantom's, bad Phantom's, good Widder's and bad Widder's)

 

..........Widder

 

 

There's lies, damn lies and statisticians. 🤠

 

Kajun

[Widder, SASS #59054]

OOPS.   didn't mean to comment.

 

..........Widder

 

 

Edited September 20 by Widder, SASS #59054

[Shawnee Hills]

As I learned it, the TO’s job is to safely assist the shooter through the course of fire.  In that case, the TO should be watching the shooter and his or her firearms, not the targets.  Spotter majority rules.  Next shooter. 

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

Spotters count was ONE miss.

 

AFTER providing their initial count;  if there was any doubt in the spotting that would go to the BENEFIT of the shooter - spotters may confer or request a closer examination of the target.

 

But as the TO/ Posse Leader - I will NOT accept any conference between spotters/  examination of targets that leads to increased penalty over the initial count.

 

And IF I have any such situation where spotters are attempting to conference or change miss counts adversely - I will quickly have new spotters in place for the next shooter.

[Fretless]

1 hour ago, Krazy Kajun said:

There's lies, damn lies and statisticians. 🤠

 

Kajun

 

 

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

24 minutes ago, Shawnee Hills said:

As I learned it, the TO’s job is to safely assist the shooter through the course of fire.  In that case, the TO should be watching the shooter and his or her firearms, not the targets.  Spotter majority rules.  Next shooter. 

This is what a bad TO would do.

 

Yes, TO watches the shooter. But they are also in the perfect position at times to catch an edge shot via seeing it impact the target or impact the ground / berm where the shooter wasn't even close to aiming.

 

A good TO will look to see the count...see if any of the spotters makes a "edger" call. The TO will then say "talk to each other". Afterwards, polls spotters and assigns misses.

 

To imply that the TO's job is to just safely assist...would then cancel out all non-safety related "coaching"...which frankly I'm all for...no more "UP!" calls on Shotguns, no more helping a shooter that gets "lost" on a sequence...etc, etc. After all, there are not "safety" issues.

 

...Next Shooter...🤨

 

Phantom

[Assassin]

Good counters don't sit on their butts and attempt to count misses. With this trend of little to no movement and no props I reckon they don't have to actually get up and follow the shooter. The TO has the best vantage point to see the targets.

[Texas Maverick]

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

 

"Recorded video/audio or photographic data will never be allowed to be presented as evidence in either regard."

SHB p.24 -  ASSESSING PENALTIES AND PROTESTS 

RO2 p.14 - Appeals, Challenges, and Protests 

 

 

that should have said can't. I have corrected it.

 

TM

[Captain Bill Burt]

18 hours ago, Chicken George* said:

At the match, targets are painted between every shooter. 

 

Shooter finishes the stage. Two spotters call 1 miss, the other calls it clean. TO takes the spotters down range to look at the targets. Upon return, shooter gets 2 misses. Was that the correct call? What are your thoughts on this process? 

My thoughts?  If two spotters call a miss and one spotter calls two misses, it's one miss period.  I don't really care what inspection of the targets yields, it's one miss unless the spotters change it to clean.  If two spotters call two misses one spotter calls a single miss and after examining the targets I get two spotters saying one miss, then it's one miss.

 

As TO I will never try to change a spotter's mind to increase the called penalties, but if I'm sure the shooter got a hit, but isn't getting credit for it, I'm going to point out what I saw, and then live with whatever the spotters report after that. 

 

Essentially, if examination of the target introduces doubt, then the shooter gets the benefit.  I will not accept examination of the target removing doubt.

[Shooting Bull]

14 hours ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

 

But as the TO/ Posse Leader - I will NOT accept any conference between spotters/  examination of targets that leads to increased penalty over the initial count.

 

 

This is my thinking exactly. You want to discuss in order to reduce penalties? Have at it. But don’t ever come to me after a conference to tell me you’re increasing penalties.

 

(With the understanding that I’m exaggerating a bit when I say “ever”.)