The SASS Wild Bunch Forum

Wild Bunch Boards => Wild Bunch Rules Forum => Topic started by: Blackfoot on November 15, 2016, 06:05:57 PM

Title: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Blackfoot on November 15, 2016, 06:05:57 PM
The stage had 4 black targets and 4 white targets for the pistol.  Instructions said to shoot the black targets in a continuous Nevada sweep for 10 rounds, then shoot the white targets in a continuous Nevada sweep for 10 rounds.  The shooter drew his pistol, racked the slide, pointed the pistol at the first black target on the left (we'll call it #1) and pulled the trigger.  No fire because the slide was not in battery.  He bumped the back of the slide and addressed the target again, still no fire.  He then ejected the round and started shooting on target 1,  continued with the Nevada sweep with the 4 remaining rounds, inserted a new magazine of 5 rounds and continued.  After the new magazine was empty (only 9 rounds had been fired), he loaded a new magazine of 5 rounds and proceeded with a continuous Nevada sweep on the WHITE targets changing the magazine as needed.  What penalties should be awarded?  (the pistol was the last gun used on the stage)

Thanks,
Blackfoot
Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: Grouchy Spike on November 15, 2016, 08:57:16 PM
The shooter didn't complete the Nevada Sweep on the black targets before addressing the white targets, and his target sequence is incorrect, seems to be a Procedural penalty here.  The shooter has one unfired round when the pistol sequence is completed, fired nine shots instead of ten, and the unfired round is counted as a miss.

The miss did not cause a P as the P was earned on the 10th shot.  The miss was earned after the 19th shot when the 20th shot was not fired.  P and a miss. 
Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: August West on November 16, 2016, 04:03:31 PM
Your description states he engaged the black targets only.  Is that what you meant to say?
Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: Kid Rich on November 16, 2016, 04:19:05 PM
If that's the case it would be a p and 10 misses. kR
Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: Blackfoot on November 16, 2016, 04:26:39 PM
Your description states he engaged the black targets only.  Is that what you meant to say?

Oops,  I have made a correction, he engaged the white targets after the black targets. 
Thanks for pointing that out.
Blackfoot
Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: Garrison Joe on November 16, 2016, 04:42:37 PM
Yep a P and a Miss (round not fired).

Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: August West on November 17, 2016, 07:14:37 AM
Well, it depends on what -- exactly -- this means: "The shooter had one round that would not chamber so he ejected it and shot the black targets with 9 rounds (didn't shoot the last target)."

If the shooter discovered the "*round that would not chamber*" in the process of pointing the pistol at the target and pulling the trigger, then he ENGAGED all twenty targets in the correct order -- one miss for unfired round.

If, however, he discovered the "*round that would not chamber*"  before bringing the pistol to the target and pulling the trigger, then he did not ENGAGE the targets correctly, and has a miss for the unfired round -- miss and a "P".

Yet, other matters may be important.  Where in the shot string did the stoppage occur?  For each of the first ten engagements (not fired rounds), which target was he aiming at?  Did he engage (not shoot) each target but once?  What was the shooter trying to do -- if anything -- to recover? 

In other words, we don't have enough information about what happened to make a decision.
Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: Garrison Joe on November 17, 2016, 07:44:18 AM
And that almost impossible to make decision (did shooter engage the target but not fire a round) is why I continue to lobby to replace"engage" with an act that really can be seen or otherwise measured.   I will continue to suggest that we need some other, more visible, part of the act of firing at a target to decide if a target no longer needs "another shot attempt" on it.   I really like condition of  "a bullet has left barrel" as a sufficient condition to have "engaged" a target.   We already use that act (for first round has gone downrange) for similar purpose - it marks the time that a shooter is committed to the stage.   And it has turned out to be a much clearer and not-easily-argued condition on which to make a call.

Then with that definition, squibs would not satisfy "engaged".  Failures to chamber - would not be "engaged"   Failures to fire would not be "engaged".    Empty chamber with trigger pulled - would not be "engaged".    Spotters cannot see "engaged" very accurately.  Most can usually see "bullet fired at target or somewhere down range."   

Until we make the conditions upon which we judge Procedural errors be something that most folks can see or otherwise sense with their other senses, we will continue to have these "hard to make" calls.  And that degrades our ability to convince shooters we are scoring them "fairly" in comparison to other shooters.

Good luck, GJ
Title: Re: Miss or procedural
Post by: Happy Jack on November 17, 2016, 11:58:09 AM
I agree with August West. Not enough information to make a definitive call. You had to be there to know what happened and sometimes the call made by the CRO/TO is correct and sometimes it isn't in this type of case. The shooter can always appeal. Remember :   The benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter !!!!

As for the "engaged" definition, it has been in the SASS handbooks for many years, and changing it doesn't seem to have much support. I am not really pleased with the current definition but can live with it.
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Blackfoot on November 18, 2016, 09:50:52 AM
I added information to the OP, maybe it will help

Thanks,
Blackfoot
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Garrison Joe on November 18, 2016, 12:10:28 PM
BF - your clarification doesn't really make much difference to the situation.   

EXCEPT - that this new description CLEARLY shows that the shooter NEVER "engaged" (using our poor long-standing definition) the tenth target in the first set.  He only pointed his piece at the first nine (by order) while "attempting" to fire at those black targets.

So, he clearly gets the P.  Because he went from the 9th (by order #) target in the black set to the #1 (by order) target of the white set.  Broke target order required for a Nevada sweep on black targets by not completing the sweep - there's the P. 

And one round was not fired, because only 19 of the required 20 pistol shots were fired for the stage.  So, a miss for round not fired.

Miss and a P, still.


And I believe you want to correct the re-written description to say that the last bank of pistol targets that he shot were the white ones (not black).
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Blackfoot on November 18, 2016, 01:16:33 PM
Thanks GJ, 

Blackfoot
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Happy Jack on November 18, 2016, 01:44:06 PM
AGREE     Miss for the round not fired and a "P". :(
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Grouchy Spike on November 18, 2016, 02:24:39 PM
Garrison Joe said: "I will continue to suggest that we need some other, more visible, part of the act of firing at a target to decide if a target no longer needs "another shot attempt" on it.   I really like condition of  "a bullet has left barrel" as a sufficient condition to have "engaged" a target.   We already use that act (for first round has gone downrange) for similar purpose - it marks the time that a shooter is committed to the stage.   And it has turned out to be a much clearer and not-easily-argued condition on which to make a call."

GJs definition of 'engaged' eliminates the subjectivity in the term.  Why not adopt it and include in the the rules? 
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Kid Rich on November 19, 2016, 05:03:08 AM
Would the call be the same if the black targets were pistol and the white targets were rifle? kR
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Blackfoot on November 19, 2016, 05:51:15 AM
Would the call be the same if the black targets were pistol and the white targets were rifle? kR

It really doesn't matter if they were black/white, round/square, near/far,  tall/short,  they were all to be shot with the pistol. 

Blackfoot
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Happy Jack on November 19, 2016, 11:10:27 AM
KR  YES. In the OP there was a 20 round shooting string. If it were two 10 round shooting strings (10 pistol, 10 rifle) there wouldn't be a "P". Just one miss for firing 9 rounds in the first 10 round string.
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Blackfoot on November 19, 2016, 03:50:49 PM
I am glad to get confirmation that the correct call was a P and a Miss.  That was my call on the line but some were very vocal about it not being the correct call. 

Blackfoot
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Garrison Joe on November 20, 2016, 11:29:06 AM
oops - double tap when none required.
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Garrison Joe on November 20, 2016, 11:48:14 AM
Yep, call would be the same.  Shooter was having problems getting his FIRST shot off.   He recovered by ejecting the faulty round and continuing with the (first) target that had not yet been shot.   But he failed to fire a 10th shot on the tenth target in the "black" bank, because he did not load a 3rd magazine, as would then be required for him to fire a 10th shot.   If he picked up a rifle and started shooting rifle targets because the instructions had called for that, he still would not have made any attempt to fire at the tenth black target.

And it SHOULD be the same call, by just pure logic and a desire to keep the rules simple and consistent.

Good luck, GJ
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Allie Mo on December 09, 2016, 10:06:08 AM
Hi,

I think PWB's instructions for a jacked out round in CAS for the rifle would apply to WBAS too. https://www.badmanbullets.com/oowss.com/SASS%20Rules%20Docs/Reload%20choices%20(edit%20Sept12).pdf (https://www.badmanbullets.com/oowss.com/SASS%20Rules%20Docs/Reload%20choices%20(edit%20Sept12).pdf)

The shooter has the option of reloading immediately, 5th shot for the mag., or at the end of the string. The Barney Fife magazine would have been helpful in either case.

If he reloads immediately, the BF round would be on the fifth shot from that mag. black target. Then proceed with the scenario. Or he could insert a full 5 round mag. and pick up the last black target with the new mag., then follow the scenario, and insert the BF round at the end of the pistol.

What he did would just be a miss, if I understand the OP.

Regards,

Allie

PS I hope that made sense, if not just look at PWB's explanation.
PPS It would be helpful to use the same ejected round logic as PWB provided for an ejected rifle round, rather than having a different call for WBAS.
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Allie Mo on December 09, 2016, 10:22:19 AM
PPS The WB RO manual, p. 20, has, under misses, "each unfired round." This shooter did not fire a round at the last black target. Otherwise, the sequence was correct.
Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Garrison Joe on December 09, 2016, 10:04:08 PM
Quote
PPS It would be helpful to use the same ejected round logic as PWB provided for an ejected rifle round, rather than having a different call for WBAS.

That's exactly what applies in WB too.  Makes it easy!   ;D


Title: Re: Miss or procedural The Whole Story
Post by: Allie Mo on December 10, 2016, 05:58:11 PM
Quote
PPS It would be helpful to use the same ejected round logic as PWB provided for an ejected rifle round, rather than having a different call for WBAS.

That's exactly what applies in WB too.  Makes it easy!   ;D

Thanks for the reply Joe!

I think I misread some of the responses!  :-[