We Never Make Mistakes

[PeteFox]

Well there are how many targets/shooters are there on the range?
It obviously can't come from a place where the mechanics of the rest don't allow aiming four targets across.
to claim otherwise is an exercise in absurdity

[Rogue22]

Well there are how many targets/shooters are there on the range?
It obviously can't come from a place where the mechanics of the rest don't allow aiming four targets across.
to claim otherwise is an exercise in absurdity

I’ve just been through the scores from last years NQRA Kings, before the target numbering was changed (A 1-7 & B 1-7, was changed to 1-14 this year) and I can count 8 missed shots in the 3 grades which use a pedestal front rest. From being there and witnessing it, a common cause for example was shooters putting a shot on A3, when they should have shot on B3. A full 7 targets across. Hence why the numbering system was changed.

So I believe your logic is flawed that it “can’t happen”. How else do you explain 8 missed shots? Are rear bags in f open solidly attached to the mound and can’t move sideways?

Once again, not saying that ET’s are infallible. But maybe lay off the organising committees a bit when they have made the best decision possible with the available information.

[Lachlan]

Having personally had shots go ‘missing’ at the QRA Kings, their sentiment is most definitely “Hexta’s don’t drop shots”…

One time I was about 8x’s into a 10 shot string, then my 9th went missing. Not showing up on any other target. ET and CRO called. Had an optional sighted just incase, which was an X, and finished my string. Afterwards was the most frustrating encounter I’ve had with RO’s to date. They had the stance that I must have shot it into the dirt, as Hexta’s “just don’t miss shots”.

Discounting the fact that the ONLY other misses on that range, were on our target. All unaccounted for shots. You’d think I would be offered the benefit of the doubt, but it was ultimately marked as a miss. No amount of protesting or taking it further worked, with everyone I encountered blurting out the “Hexta’s don’t drop shots” as a first and final remark.

[Steve N]

Having personally had shots go ‘missing’ at the QRA Kings, their sentiment is most definitely “Hexta’s don’t drop shots”…

One time I was about 8x’s into a 10 shot string, then my 9th went missing. Not showing up on any other target. ET and CRO called. Had an optional sighted just incase, which was an X, and finished my string. Afterwards was the most frustrating encounter I’ve had with RO’s to date. They had the stance that I must have shot it into the dirt, as Hexta’s “just don’t miss shots”.

Discounting the fact that the ONLY other misses on that range, were on our target. All unaccounted for shots. You’d think I would be offered the benefit of the doubt, but it was ultimately marked as a miss. No amount of protesting or taking it further worked, with everyone I encountered blurting out the “Hexta’s don’t drop shots” as a first and final remark.

Doesn't sound like Rule 4.5.1.15.2 Electronic Targets - Misses On The Target gets taken very seriously and sort of implies that shooters that dispute a miss are always being dishonest.
If the rules are followed as written then this shouldn't happen and a shooter's entire event shouldn't be ruined because of a technical failure.
Years of experience working in the fields of electronics and communications have taught me that no system is ever 100% absolutely without risk of some failures and the best we can do is have procedures to rectify things when these failures do happen.

[jasmay]

So who has lodged a formal protest, paid the money, put it in writing then taken it to the NRAA for resolution.

No offense intended, but having these big long rants on a forum which isn’t well followed by our board members gets us no where except wound up.

Those members that have had this experience need to put complaints in worrying to the host club/association and national body.

[PeteFox]

So who has lodged a formal protest, paid the money, put it in writing then taken it to the NRAA for resolution.

Yes, well that’s part of the problem. No mechanism for an appeal advised. No $ cost quoted for an appeal. No match committee?
The “ the ET decision is final” statement is pretty final.


Pete

[PeteFox]

Well there are how many targets/shooters are there on the range?
It obviously can't come from a place where the mechanics of the rest don't allow aiming four targets across.
to claim otherwise is an exercise in absurdity

?

Once again, not saying that ET’s are infallible. But maybe lay off the organising committees a bit when they have made the best decision possible with the available information.

Well maybe the best decision possible would have been to stick to the SSRs

[Daveh]

Just a comment with no intention of arguing or offending anyone.

I agree that anything electronic or electrical can fail. I work with failed components daily and would be out of a job if nothing failed.

The assumption is that because the shooter fired a number of 6's and X's then the possibility of a "miss" is unlikely.. If he was shooting 5's and 4's then would it be assumed it more than likely was a miss?

I would like to know at what score would you need to be getting where it would be assumed you could not miss.

During the lead up to the NQ Kings a shooter fired a string.. X 6 Miss X X.. The target logs were checked and it was determined that no projectile impacted the target. A number of shooters called bs on the decision. That particular target did not register a miss for any other shooter during the 9 days of shooting.
Yes I will agree the target itself may have "missed" a shot passing through it.

The funny thing was that 4 days later during the Kings the same shooter registered a miss on a different target. Once again the only miss on that target during the 9 days of shooting.

Again it might have been the target but probability of multiple target failures for the same shooter becomes extreme.
In this case it was found the projectile had not made it to the target. It had been pushed past it's limit and disintegrated during flight to the target.

How does logic and the balance of probabilities work in this case.

We all do our best to check components and I am sure everyone has come across some weird looking projectiles. But we can't do much more than a visual of the outside, length checking and weighing. At the rpm they are doing it's a wonder we don't see more projectile failures with F-Open projectiles being pushed to their limits.

What happened when manual targets were used and the projectile did not make it to the target? Was the shooter given an extra shot because he was shooting 6's and X's.

Dave

[Tim L]

In this case it was found the projectile had not made it to the target. It had been pushed past it's limit and disintegrated during flight to the target.

How was this found?

I'm not say it can't happen, but how was it determined that this is what had happened?

[Tim L]

What happened when manual targets were used and the projectile did not make it to the target? Was the shooter given an extra shot because he was shooting 6's and X's.

Dave

On manuals, gun goes bang, target gets lowered, scored and raised.
If the gun goes bang and the target doesn't go down, the scorer gets the RO to call the butts. The target is lowered and checked. No hole = miss.

Shoot the wrong target, that target goes down, which is a bit of a giveaway.

[Rogue22]

In this case it was found the projectile had not made it to the target. It had been pushed past it's limit and disintegrated during flight to the target.

How was this found?

I'm not say it can't happen, but how was it determined that this is what had happened?

I believe the competitor in question admitted that they had projectile failures previously with that rifle/ammo combination.

[jasmay]

Some items I have witnessed in my time.

* F-class shooter shanked trigger when speed shooting whilst rifle was not aimed at target, shooter was in contention for a high placing at comp and argued that ET failed…. (Who would’nt see if they could get away with it).

* F-Open shooter shooting quick at world championship event (manual targets) shoots wrong target several lanes away (it happens, even at the big events).

* Speed shooter shoots wrong target several lanes away but check scorer isn’t keeping up and doesn’t notice the occurrence, shooter puts extra shot down and gets away with it.

* Cross fire detected on target I am on, but source of shot not found (So a cheater & an inattentive check scorer)

In my experience shooting on ET’s every week for close to 10 years, we make mistakes far more often than an ET fails.

APPEALS/PROTESTS

It is the written right within the SSR’s that any shooter can protest/appeal a decision of the RO’s (this would include ET staff in my opinion) to the match committee, if these complaints are legitimate, these appeals need to be lodged/recorded and dealt with.

I don’t believe an RO, even one that has stated “ET team decision is final” would not allow an appeal, because if he did he would be in breach of the rules laid down by the NRAA, and I’m that case should likely be disciplined accordingly, and again, the only way to ensure that happens is make noise and lodge an appeal.

Now, the big question is, if people are so vehement that they are correct, why are they not appealing & getting to the bottom of the issue, what is holding them back? I know I would be.

[PeteFox]

.

APPEALS/PROTESTS

It is the written right within the SSR’s that any shooter can protest/appeal a decision of the RO’s (this would include ET staff in my opinion) to the match committee, if these complaints are legitimate, these appeals need to be lodged/recorded and dealt with.

I don’t believe an RO, even one that has stated “ET team decision is final” would not allow an appeal, because if he did he would be in breach of the rules laid down by the NRAA, and I’m that case should likely be disciplined accordingly, and again, the only way to ensure that happens is make noise and lodge an appeal.

Now, the big question is, if people are so vehement that they are correct, why are they not appealing & getting to the bottom of the issue, what is holding them back? I know I would be.

Jason
I agree with your sentiments however:
- As I understand it, the Associations (STA's) are not under the authority of the NRAA, so they can run their own show. I doubt the NRAA could or would do anything. I can find nothing in the rules about this. The only real way to appeal this is to the courts, costs of this would be north of $150K. A win would be almost a certainty, but getting costs is another matter entirely. It would divide the movement.

- If the STA doesn't provide a mechanism for an appeal, (nobody's listening) then that pretty much kills that avenue. The argument 2 targets away from me over a "miss" at the QRA Kings went nowhere. The right to a provisional shot is also at the mercy of the RO. "we may ask you to fire a provisional shot"

- Any other action therefore will be taken/heard well after the event. Even if that happens, this is not the Olympics, where awards can be recalled. If the corrected "miss" involes a badge, are we going to have wholesale renumbering of badges and the last badge missing out?

- Under the rules ( Rule 4.5.1.15.2 Electronic Targets - Misses On The Target) , the RO is empowered to make the call on the spot, and the criteria to reverse a "miss" are set out. The problem is the STA's are overriding the RO's authority to make the call, and the RO is forced to make the call according to the STA's directive.

Pete

[PeteFox]

.

There were approx 60,000 shots put into the backstop at NQRA Kings this year, and on the first day of the TR teams event prior to the king’s there was a lot of connectivity issues due to a combination of the new system and inexperienced ET’s. But…. All shots showed up once the connection was restored.

And aside from literally one shot (where an extra shot was found 4 targets up) there was not a single other issue.

.

60,000 shots (with one issue) certianly does attest to the accuracy and reliability of the target system, but is not evidence that gives it supremacy over the shooter.
because
60,000 shots (with one issue) also attests to the accuracy and skill of the shooters on the mound, which gives shooters at least an equal footing with the ET.

so why is one deemed to be more at risk of error than the other?
Pete

[AlanF]

I'd like to suggest a different way of penalising misses. Instead of awarding zero points for what is deemed by the RO and match committee to be a miss, you could award a reduced points amount e.g. Take the median score of all counting shots of that application, subtract say 2 points from it, and award that for the miss. This would mean that the worst outcome for a miss may still allow the shooter a chance of catching up. The way it is now, being awarded a miss virtually rules you out of the competition. For high level competition such as Kings Prize, some competitors make a huge effort in terms of preparation and travel time, plus all associated costs. To have all that come to nothing because of a single innocent mistake is way too harsh in my opinion. Of course if the miss is obviously deliberate or due to an unacceptable level of carelessness, then let the RO and match committee rule on that and disqualify the shooter completely if necessary.