NSW Mac/Kings

[macguru]

re Macintosh

What happened to the other 2 ranges today ? were they cancelled because of the wind ? .. must have been brutal.

[Chopper]

Brutal alright by the look of the scores

[Guy]

Brutal for the shooters given a miss for shots the targets did not register

[macguru]

I think Hexta is a lot better. If they updated the system a little (lighter targets !) it would be a no brainer ....

[Tim L]

I think Hexta is a lot better. If they updated the system a little (lighter targets !) it would be a no brainer ....

Were you at the NQRA Kings?

[Guy]

It's not that any target system is to blame , the SSRs need updating to reflect that ETs are not 100% right all the time and the shooter should be given the benefit of the doubt 4.5.15.1 sort of says this but it says the RO MAY use discretion not that they WILL often leaving the decision to the Match director who often gets it wrong 6xxx6xxxoxx no shots on any other targets should not be given as a miss

[PeteFox]

A shot not recorded by an ET, is not a miss. The ET doesn't come back with a 0, it just sits there silent and dumb. It takes human intervention to put a 0 into the score.
This is not information, it is lack of information. In other words, the actual outcome is unknown. Information is when there is an impact on another target etc., information like this gives a basis for a decision. Lack of information gives nothing.
If an extra shot is not recorded by an adjacent target, or a bullet is not seen blowing up in flight, then the information blackout is just that. Nothing.
It's not the same as a miss and the rules need to be rewritten to force the RO to make a there and then decision, giving the shooter the benefit of the doubt.
It shouldn't be decided hours after by a shiny arse " interrogating " the target who doesn't understand what he is going, doesn't document the procedure and won't give a definitive explanation. Interrogating a target that is suspected of being at fault, finding nothing and turning that into something (a miss)- it defies intelligent analysis.

ETs are not God. A quick look at recent failures and slow scoring at recent Kings shows that.
So ETs can have faults, but they can't miss shots? WTF

Pete

[AlanF]

On the subject of misses at the NSW Kings, I was keeping an eye on it last weekend, and was disappointed to see that John Peters was given a miss in F-Open, and thought if not for that he would have been right up there. Looking back at the NRAA results today he won F-Open!!! And no sign of the miss any more. Well done someone.

[macguru]

John won his appeal. Not everyone was so fortunate. Unless they fix this many will not return. I was lucky, I had one 'phantom' shot that was not counted after an ammo check.

[Martin]

Had a look at the new draft rules to see what changes have been made in relation to misses on e-targets. Just looks like a direct lift from the current rules.

Except if the shoot is delayed by a e-target problem and an extra shot is awarded, the time limit to receive an optional sighter following the delay in the current rules is 3 minutes whereas in the new draft rules it is 5 minutes and a non-convertible rather than an optional.

[Benji]

We had some sensor issues a month or two back with our hexta went X66MM66X15 the 5 was me but the m’s and 1 were same hold same wind. It would be harder to spot in a wildly changing wind. Just my novice experience so far.

[Daveh]

I agree with Pete that a shot not recorded on an electronic target is due a lack of information. The target is waiting for a projectile to pass through no different to the markers sweating in the pit waiting for a shot to go through. If a shot was fired both the et and the manual markers can only give a score if the bullet passes through the target.

Both manual markers and ET systems can not give a score if the projectile passes over, beside or drops low into the mantlet. So either way the decision is made by the RO/Scorer to record the miss. The ET doesn't make this decision if the shot is outside it's frame!

So in the case of manual markers the decision there is final. In the case of ETs the shot logs can be investigated after the shoot and if there is any evidence of one of the sensors (8 in some systems) has detected anything in the time between the last shot and the next, the shooter can be given the benefit of doubt and the protest shot counted.
In the case of a loss of communication between a target and the server a shot can fail to register, but the log file will show the exact time the target reconnected to the server. Again if the log showed a reconnection event then the shooter get the benefit of doubt again.

To me that is two situations where the ET system is more in favour of the shooter and the shooter as two more chances of a better outcome than using manual markers.

The key is that in the situation of a shot not appearing on any target, the RO allowing the shooter an extra shot in protest. Then once the logs are checked if either of the two situations are logged the protest shot is counted.

You don't get two extra chances when marked manually.

This same subject came up last year where probability and possibilities where brought up regarding a shooter hitting 6's and X's not being able to have a miss.

What's the probability of the same shooter having the same problem over 12 months later in a different State on a different ET system?
viewtopic.php?t=17086&start=36

Same name in the NRAA scores, different user names on here.

Dave

[Guy]

Wrong again Dave you say that manual and ETs can only give a score if a projectile passes through it , yes this is the case on manual targets then why at Sydney were shots cumming up when no shot had been fired on that target ,this was happening often on all different targets and then being removed from the shooters score being referred to as Ghost shots and yes in my case what are the odds yet top knotch F class shooters like Mat Foster David Mcdonald Brendan rice and many others shooting 60s and 90s get a miss mid string with no shots found on other targets WTF

Guy

[Martin]

The presumption should be innocent until proven guilty when a shot is lost mid-string on an electronic target. If available target sensor data does not indicate an off-target miss, and there are no stray shots recorded on adjacent targets, the competitor should be allowed to fire an additional shot and continue their string without penalty.

The ICFRA rules appear to handle these situations more effectively than the current Standard Shooting Rules (SSRs), and it's surprising that this wasn't taken into consideration during recent revisions.

On a related note, as a scorer, I admit that I'm often guilty of "screen-watching." This makes it easy to miss the arrival of an extra shot—such as a cross-fire—on my target. If the timing fits and the shot is an “X”, the shooter might not notice or may prefer not to raise an objection, opting to avoid the delay and disruption of disclaiming the shot. As a result, the cross-fired shot is simply absorbed into the neighbouring competitor's scorecard.

[Daveh]

I apologise Guy,.
I thought the discussion was about missed shots on electronic targets. My reply was regarding missed shots that do not pass through the sensor area of the target.

I didn't realise the subject had changed to extra shots appearing.

Dave