1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Rule question - Hindsight is 20/20

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by tumbleweed, May 17, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tumbleweed

    tumbleweed Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    273
    I was shooting handicap from post 3 at the 21 yard line, called for a target, target was whole and flying in an exact straight-away and I never saw it. I let my gun down without firing and only then did I see a target just about to hit the ground at the 50 yrd stake.

    I shoot right handed, one eyed with a BT-100 and normally I can use a slight high hold and pick the target up very well. In hindsight I believe that I was raising my hold a bit to much and the straight-away lined up perfectly with my rib and blocked my view completely. I first thought it was a voice call problem and the trap did not release a target.

    I turned to the score keeper and asked, "Was that a lost target?" and he instructed me to continue and call for a target so I remounted my gun, called and broke it.

    As I look back on it, I wish I would have said to the score keeper, "Please mark that as lost."

    Is it proper to give a score keeper an instruction like this or should the shooter defer to the official's decision? Should the squad leader or other on the squad offer their input?

    I was not in contention to win anything and the target did not change the outcome of the event but in hindsight I do not think I should have accepted it as a broken target.

    I would appreciate your thoughts.
     
  2. colobiggun

    colobiggun Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    286
    I think it is simply a Failure to Fire, which you are allowed two per event. With it being an honest mistake and not intentionally not fired upon, I don't feel there is anything wrong here. It would be hard for the scorekeeper to call it "Lost" when you did not fire. In my opinion, the scorekeeper should have wrote "FTF" on the scorecard, using one of your Failure to Fire, and carried on exactly as you did.
     
  3. Barry C. Roach

    Barry C. Roach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,209
    Location:
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Always defer to the official if you don't know the rule. Unfortunately, I think your instincts are right on this one if you think you're at fault.

    It may be a bit gray though since you can't really say that the target came out on time or not. Not a real big deal since there was nothing at stake. You'll do the right thing next time, i'm sure.
     
  4. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,845
    Lost, T-weed. When you finally saw the target near the stake, you voluntarily did not fire so it's not a failure-to-fire; it;'s just a lost target.

    Neil
     
  5. Dr.Longshot

    Dr.Longshot Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,722
    I dis-agree Neil Colobigun has it right. With 2 FTF per 25 and no shell was fired for whatever reason, the FTF rule would apply.


    Gary Bryant
    Dr.longshot
     
  6. Ahab

    Ahab Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,650
    GB you get ONE FF per 25 targets, except in Doubles, then you get 2 FFs before a lost target is cal;led. 2nd FF is a lost target!
     
  7. scott calhoun

    scott calhoun Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,413
    Location:
    Chicago area
    Ahab -

    Not even close!

    Scott
     
  8. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,845
    Nonsense, Dr. Longshot. Maybe you should read the rulebook just one time.

    Neil
     
  9. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,538
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Let see FTF rule,

    "1. A contestant shall be allowed two (2) failures to fire in Singles and
    Handicap events, for any reason other than stated in Paragraph C.,2.
    above, during each sub-event regardless of the length of the sub-event.
    When the first or second allowable Failure to Fire in any sub-event
    occurs, the contestant shall be allowed to call for and fire at another
    target, and the result of the shot will be scored in accordance with
    these Official Rules"

    Now a sub event,

    "A sub-event is any number of targets shot on any one field at one time,
    with one full rotation on all five (5) posts by each shooter, such as 25 or
    50 Singles or Handicap targets or 10 pairs, 15 pairs, 25 pairs of Doubles."

    Hopefully that clears up FTF and how many you are allowed.

    Bob Lawless
     
  10. Dr.Longshot

    Dr.Longshot Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,722
    I think the wording "APPEARED PROMPTLY" is where the debate would be, he did not see target until he put his gun down and then it was almost on the ground.

    I believe the FTF would apply in this instance, and another bird called and shot, the SCORER made his decision, thats final.

    I read, read and re-read the FTF rule including 2C.

    If I were the SCORER I would have made the same decision he did.

    If you don't see a target the shooter does not know if it was fast, slow or no target was thrown, This very rarely happens, and that is the reason for the rules and FTF rule.

    Gary Bryant
    Dr.longshot

    Gary Bryant
    Dr.longshot
     
  11. Old Cowboy

    Old Cowboy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,988
    If you're shooting one-eyed you should hold lower on the house so that don't happen. If you're shooting two-eyed you should'a seen it.

    As to the rule.......I've seen people get away with FTF (and even "no target-slow pull") on worse deals than this, if it was me I'd go with however the scorer called it.

    John C. Saubak
     
  12. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Gary- I would distinguish between a legal target appearing promptly and a shooter seeing the target promptly. If I were scoring, I would have to call lost in this case.

    tumbleweed- You clearly have the right, and possibly the duty, to question a call by the scorer, either lost or dead. The scorer has the final decision but it is common to politely question the scorer. We want credit for every bird we break and we want every bird we miss to be scored lost.

    Pat Ireland
     
  13. grnberetcj

    grnberetcj Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,680
    This is exactly why there should be "No Failure to Fire" whatsoever.

    No matter the problem, if a target is called for and it appears "legal" and is not shot at and broken, then it should be scored as Lost.

    No mulligans, no second chances, no gimme's, no nothing, period.

    Curt
     
  14. Barry C. Roach

    Barry C. Roach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,209
    Location:
    Scottsdale, AZ
    With inexperienced scorers you have a duty to uphold the rules yourself. Be honest.
     
  15. hmb

    hmb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,412
    I believe it is possible that he didn't see the target because he unknowingly flinched when the target was released. Since a flinch is involuntary, the FTF rule would apply. What do you think Neil? HMB
     
  16. pheasantmaster

    pheasantmaster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,039
    In the land of cheats, rule manipulaters and the uninformed, you shoot the target over.

    TW, I do not believe you to be one of the first two as you stated as being the latter.

    Dr. L, which one are you?
     
  17. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Curt- Would you feel the same way if you were in the $100,000 shoot off at the Grand and your hammer spring broke. You would not know that until you tried to shoot the next target. The F to F rule has been criticized by many but to my knowledge, abused by none.

    Pat Ireland
     
  18. Old Cowboy

    Old Cowboy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,988
    Pat,

    I shot with a guy once who'd re-shoot one or two every round, I'm pretty sure he was flinching and then holding fire and taking another one......wouldn't you call that "abusing" the F to F rule?

    John C. Saubak
     
  19. grnberetcj

    grnberetcj Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,680
    Pat, I'll disagree about the abuse by none statement. Anytime a shooter calls for a target which comes out legal and the shooter fails to shoot because he/she hesitates, burps, brain fails to function, etc., then that is "abuse" when the shooter is allowed to shoot again.

    Looking at the millions of targets shot at throughout a year, I believe there is probably only a very, very minute number that are truly a failure to fire because of a shell fault and/or mechanical problem. The rest are shooter faults and should be scored as lost.

    Anyway, I stand by my statement even if I was to be a recipient of a bad shell and/or gun failure. The actual liklihood of that happening is so remote that I would not consider it a problem.

    As the rule is presently written, it can and is abused.

    Curt
     
  20. 870

    870 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,390
    The rules aren't really that complicated, it just seems some people want to make it that way. The OP is correct, it should have been lost. He never attempted to shoot; nothing happened to prevent him from shooting - i.e a flinch, safety on, etc.

    I just hope we never get into a situation where LS is responsible for writing rules for us.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.