OzFclass

What they don't want is boards that have cutouts that give an advantage. For example some form of a series of cut out squares that may allow the earth to bite into the cavities giving the plate extra grip.

Its ALL about the shooter wanting to get a nice level firm setup - on what is normally a compromised surface - that's not going to move ( Why wouldn't ya ? ) and cutouts absolutely help with that !! Simple.

The rule is totally imprecise as has been mentioned OR at least it is now it appears. I never thought it was imprecise when I first read the rules and still don't. Obviously if at the worlds it was considered 'ok' then perhaps that now gives everybody permission ?

To be totally candid I reckon ruling against "spiked plates" is dumb. It's dumb in practice because every man and his dog is now employing all kinds of dodgy means to get around it. Me included.

I can remember reading somewhere a while back on this topic and it appeared to me the rationale of the rules makers re banning spiked plates went something along the lines of ...... "F Class is NOT benchrest so let's have the shooters deal with setting up on the ground they're given, WITHOUT the aid of spiked plates" .....

There should be no reason to diverge from ICFRA rules unless they contradict the safety requirements of a domestic range or event. No more of this "wouldn't it be better if we could just do this here".

we followed ICFRA rules at the world's and had no problem establishing an extremely stable rear bag on some of the lumpyest mounds I've shot on. You don't need a plate with spikes. and even if it's still wobbly . . . . guess what . . . The guy your shooting against is probably struggling with the same issue.

If the ICFRA rules aren't clear enough ask our ICFRA rep to seek clarification. If you want a rule changed submit it through your association to be reviewed by ICFRA. Don't bastardise FO and FTR.

So my plan is to get a flat steel plate with a cutout along one of the long sides so I can carry it ie just big enough to put my hand around.

My logic is if there is ever a clearer view on a larger cutout I can always make it bigger but it is bloody hard to make it smaller.

This thread has raised a few points about rules....

Crikey BATattack I hardly know where to start but do tell me this please ; presuming you have read the rules about plates/boards then does the appearance of cutouts on these not strike you as contravening those rules ? And leave aside the fact that cutouts were not ruled against in Canada the other day.

SunnyCoast 5r wrote:So my plan is to get a flat steel plate with a cutout along one of the long sides so I can carry it ie just big enough to put my hand around.

My logic is if there is ever a clearer view on a larger cutout I can always make it bigger but it is bloody hard to make it smaller.

This thread has raised a few points about rules....

Not so much about rules,more about the blatant violation of the printed rules and the unwillingness of organisers to enforce them.

Gyro wrote:Crikey BATattack I hardly know where to start but do tell me this please ; presuming you have read the rules about plates/boards then does the appearance of cutouts on these not strike you as contravening those rules ? And leave aside the fact that cutouts were not ruled against in Canada the other day.

The rules say "flat on top and bottom" " with no leveling screws or protrusions". There is nothing saying you can't have cutouts. Cutouts are accessible to all shooters so they cant be an unfair advantage. Is there something I've missed?

For what it's worth my current setup doesn't use a cut out but the rules don't exclude it so those that would like to use one, for whatever reason, should be free to do so.

BATattack wrote:

Gyro wrote:Crikey BATattack I hardly know where to start but do tell me this please ; presuming you have read the rules about plates/boards then does the appearance of cutouts on these not strike you as contravening those rules ? And leave aside the fact that cutouts were not ruled against in Canada the other day.

The rules say "flat on top and bottom" " with no leveling screws or protrusions". There is nothing saying you can't have cutouts. Cutouts are accessible to all shooters so they cant be an unfair advantage. Is there something I've missed?

For what it's worth my current setup doesn't use a cut out but the rules don't exclude it so those that would like to use one, for whatever reason, should be free to do so.

Rules are written with the proviso they contain an 'intent'. I will not now elaborate on what that means. The intent here with JUST THIS PART OF THE RULES is ultimately to rule against protusions.

A cutout very soon becomes a protusion, that's before you even take away some of the material joining the cutouts, because the material left is now a protusion.

I and others share no confusion about this. For my part I just want this tidied up because it's a joke. In the meantime I have no desire to challenge the shooters with cutouts. Same with shooters who are placing small items ( protusions ) from thier pocket under thier front plate. Same with shooters who are using a Pod Pad then forming a level slope by moving the sand, complete with channels for the bipod feet to run in. I will say nothing to them !

It's NOT about whether any of these tricks are helping that shooter. I just want it sorted because this stuff is not good for the sport which already contains a good deal of problems.

I gotta go to work.

Gyro wrote:
Rules are written with the proviso they contain an 'intent'. I will not now elaborate on what that means. The intent here with JUST THIS PART OF THE RULES is ultimately to rule against protusions.

While they are certainly written with an intent there is no way of knowing what that intent was at the time. Your statement above is probably correct but it mightn't be. The rules say what they say, nothing more and nothing less, and that's what must be complied with.

Gyro wrote:I can remember reading somewhere a while back on this topic and it appeared to me the rationale of the rules makers re banning spiked plates went something along the lines of ...... "F Class is NOT benchrest so let's have the shooters deal with setting up on the ground they're given, WITHOUT the aid of spiked plates" .....

Not hard to discern the intent there and as I mention I'm Bloody sure this statement came from the rule makers when the rules were tweaked about 4 years back to rule against protrusions. My memory of course counts for very little but I mention this anyway.

What's happening on the mound right now in FTR is a joke from where I'm standing.

Short of drawing a bunch of pictures with words attached and maybe some little arrows ....... does nobody get this ? Or is it just me that needs to see things differently ?

Either we allow protrusions or we don't. The rules clearly say we can't have them but various shooters and organizers have let the rules get watered down.

I've said enough on this topic. For now. Regards Rob Kerridge

Gyro wrote:
Not hard to discern the intent there and as I mention I'm Bloody sure this statement came from the rule makers when the rules were tweaked about 4 years back to rule against protrusions. My memory of course counts for very little but I mention this anyway.

That was my point. In a few years time someone else will be saying "Now Rob told me that he remembered somebody said......" and so it goes. You can't rely on what you think the intention was, only on what was written.

As I said, in this case I think you're correct but let me give another example. Recently there was discussion about bipods. The rule says they can have spikes or skis. I don't think the intention was to ban Harris bipods because they end in rubber knobs. Someone else thought it meant skis or spikes only. Who can tell what the rule makers were thinking?

Short of drawing a bunch of pictures with words attached and maybe some little arrows ......

Nothing wrong with that if it clarifies things.

This is what I mean. We shouldn't need to bicker about things like this. If we follow ICFRA rules for FTR and FO then any clarification can re sought through ICFRA. Whatever their decision is is what is applied here until there is a rule change. This allows our domestic competitions to be shot under the same rules as shooters would encounter at any international event rather than have "domestic" rules and "international" rules for the same discipline.

Faaaarrrrrkkkk!
How do I go about finding out what I can have / not have before I spend my coin on a piece of steel?