A small event, relegated to the back page . . .

[R.G. Robinett]

A small event, relegated to the back page . . . Charlie Hood, take a bow!

Way down on the last [BrC] forum (Match Information & Results), I just observed the accompanying match report, from River Bend, GA :
Congratulations, Charlie, on a GREAT 100 Yd. AGG, and very respectable Grand - I knowed you could do it! The 200 appears to have been a real nipper - I see ya lost by 0.0002MOA - looks like ya need more BC! RG


"Charlie Hood won four of the matches, Joe Bougard won three, and Scott Dittman, Miles Gibby and Bill Griffith each won match. Charlie and Scott both had screamers at 100 yds; Charlie had a .055 and a .090, and Scott had a .088. Joe Bougard had the small group at 200 yds with a .301."

The top agg finishers were:

100 yds
Charlie Hood -- .1444 (shooting a 30BR)
Scott Dittman -- .1502
Roger Avery -- .2466

200 yds
Joe Bougard -- .3189
Charlie Hood -- .3191
Scott Dittman -- .3593

Grand Agg
Charlie Hood -- .2318
Scott Dittman -- .2548
Joe Bougard -- .2846

 

[txdan]

30 br ?

Way down on the last [BrC] forum (Match Information & Results), I just observed the accompanying match report, from River Bend, GA :
Congratulations, Charlie, on a GREAT 100 Yd. AGG, and very respectable Grand - I knowed you could do it! The 200 appears to have been a real nipper - I see ya lost by 0.0002MOA - looks like ya need more BC! RG


"Charlie Hood won four of the matches, Joe Bougard won three, and Scott Dittman, Miles Gibby and Bill Griffith each won match. Charlie and Scott both had screamers at 100 yds; Charlie had a .055 and a .090, and Scott had a .088. Joe Bougard had the small group at 200 yds with a .301."

The top agg finishers were:

100 yds
Charlie Hood -- .1444 (shooting a 30BR)
Scott Dittman -- .1502
Roger Avery -- .2466

200 yds
Joe Bougard -- .3189
Charlie Hood -- .3191
Scott Dittman -- .3593

Grand Agg
Charlie Hood -- .2318
Scott Dittman -- .2548
Joe Bougard -- .2846

Randy, You know "ya can't do that"

 

[JerrySharrett]

Way down on the last [BrC] forum (Match Information & Results), I just observed the accompanying match report, from River Bend, GA :
Congratulations, Charlie, on a GREAT 100 Yd. AGG, and very respectable Grand - I knowed you could do it! The 200 appears to have been a real nipper - I see ya lost by 0.0002MOA - looks like ya need more BC! RG


"Charlie Hood won four of the matches, Joe Bougard won three, and Scott Dittman, Miles Gibby and Bill Griffith each won match. Charlie and Scott both had screamers at 100 yds; Charlie had a .055 and a .090, and Scott had a .088. Joe Bougard had the small group at 200 yds with a .301."

The top agg finishers were:

100 yds
Charlie Hood -- .1444 (shooting a 30BR)
Scott Dittman -- .1502
Roger Avery -- .2466

200 yds
Joe Bougard -- .3189
Charlie Hood -- .3191
Scott Dittman -- .3593

Grand Agg
Charlie Hood -- .2318
Scott Dittman -- .2548
Joe Bougard -- .2846

An 0.055" from a 30BR. Way to go Charles.

.

 

[R.G. Robinett]

An 0.055" from a 30BR. Way to go Charles.

.

And that doesn't include the 0.027 he shot about a month ago! That target should have been submitted to the [NBRSA] records committee for perusal . . . regrettably, though measured 'small' several people thought it , "looks bigger" . . . so, it wan't submitted! Any time the range measurement(s) are within 0.009 of an existing record - be it group, or, Agg. - the targets and shooter deserve consideration by the committee!! Keep em' ON the X! RG

 

[jackie schmidt]

And that doesn't include the 0.027 he shot about a month ago! That target should have been submitted to the [NBRSA] records committee for perusal . . . regrettably, though measured 'small' several people thought it , "looks bigger" . . . so, it wan't submitted! Any time the range measurement(s) are within 0.009 of an existing record - be it group, or, Agg. - the targets and shooter deserve consideration by the committee!! Keep em' ON the X! RG

I can only hope that those who thought it "looked bigger" actually looked at it with a measuring device.

Records are extremely difficult to come by. Anybody so fortunate enough to get within the required tolerance should at the very least get the benefit of the doubt by following the NBRSA procedures and have the target, or targets submitted for consideration by the Records Committee.

 

[Mike Bryant]

I can only hope that those who thought it "looked bigger" actually looked at it with a measuring device.

Records are extremely difficult to come by. Anybody so fortunate enough to get within the required tolerance should at the very least get the benefit of the doubt by following the NBRSA procedures and have the target, or targets submitted for consideration by the Records Committee.

Any group shot with a .30 looks bigger than one shot with a 6mm. That's a fact the same as a single .30 caliber hole looks bigger than a 6mm. It is. Then you add in the new white target paper and that just adds to the problems with getting good measurements. For the most part, it doesn't make much difference in an agg as they are all measured the same way by the same person doing the measuring. However, when someone is shooting a .30 and everyone else is shooting a 6mm, its real easy for the scorer to use a 6mm reticle instead of the correct .30 caliber reticle. Unless that target is marked as a .30 in the corner or a .22, its real easy for the scorer to miss that it's not a 6mm. Any potential record needs to go to the records committee and let them decide whether it is or not.

 

[Wilbur]

Those groups Charlie shot at Riverbend may have been during a non-registered club match....I lost track about 15 years ago.....

 

[Hunter]

I can only hope that those who thought it "looked bigger" actually looked at it with a measuring device.

... Anybody so fortunate enough to get within the required tolerance should at the very least get the benefit of the doubt by following the NBRSA procedures and have the target, or targets submitted for consideration by the Records Committee.

Those groups Charlie shot at Riverbend may have been during a non-registered club match.

The group in question was shot at the registered match in March, 2017. After it was measured by the "official" scorer, the SER Director looked at it closely, "with a measuring device," after the agg was completed and he thought the initial measurement was within the range for submission to the Records Committee. The match director then looked at it closely, with a measuring device, and he thought the group was too large for submission, saying something to the effect that a "little tear" opened the group too much; the SER Director looked at it closely again and agreed with the match director. The SER Director looked at it closely again the next morning and concluded that the group didn't qualify for submission -- so, I guess the "official" scorer didn't know what he was doing.

Charlie suggested that it be submitted anyway, but, since the NBRSA procedures require the regional director to approve the range score and since he had already nixed that score, I guess it didn't get sent to the Committee.

 

[jackie schmidt]

The group in question was shot at the registered match in March, 2017. After it was measured by the "official" scorer, the SER Director looked at it closely, "with a measuring device," after the agg was completed and he thought the initial measurement was within the range for submission to the Records Committee. The match director then looked at it closely, with a measuring device, and he thought the group was too large for submission, saying something to the effect that a "little tear" opened the group too much; the SER Director looked at it closely again and agreed with the match director. The SER Director looked at it closely again the next morning and concluded that the group didn't qualify for submission -- so, I guess the "official" scorer didn't know what he was doing.

Charlie suggested that it be submitted anyway, but, since the NBRSA procedures require the regional director to approve the range score and since he had already nixed that score, I guess it didn't get sent to the Committee.

With all due respect, the proper procedures were not followed. The "Match Director" had no business remeasuring the target.Two Match Officials sign the target, but do not measure it. Since the Region director was present, he was the only person who legally remeasures targets, and makes a decision whether to pass it or them and the backer card on to the Records Committee Chair. If the Region Director is not present, the target is secured and handed over to the Host Club and mailed to the Region Director.

No where in the official procedure does it allow for any other on site person's opinion except the official scorer and the Region Director. it's the responsibility of the Records Committee to dertermine whether any targets meet the requirements of a new record.

 

[CharlieH]

The group in question was shot at the registered match in March, 2017. After it was measured by the "official" scorer, the SER Director looked at it closely, "with a measuring device," after the agg was completed and he thought the initial measurement was within the range for submission to the Records Committee. The match director then looked at it closely, with a measuring device, and he thought the group was too large for submission, saying something to the effect that a "little tear" opened the group too much; the SER Director looked at it closely again and agreed with the match director. The SER Director looked at it closely again the next morning and concluded that the group didn't qualify for submission -- so, I guess the "official" scorer didn't know what he was doing.

Charlie suggested that it be submitted anyway, but, since the NBRSA procedures require the regional director to approve the range score and since he had already nixed that score, I guess it didn't get sent to the Committee.

I realize this has now come to proper rule procedure as to records, a place where I'm not qualified to comment, y'all will sort that out, but as to me, it was my decision to withdraw the submission. Everything in fine and the gun is still shooting like it wants another chance.
Charlie Hood

 

[jackie schmidt]

I realize this has now come to proper rule procedure as to records, a place where I'm not qualified to comment, y'all will sort that out, but as to me, it was my decision to withdraw the submission. Everything in fine and the gun is still shooting like it wants another chance.
Charlie Hood

Charlie, first, congratulations on some fantastic shooting.

Your case in point should remind us all in the NBRSA that we have a Rule Book that lays out very exacting procedures to be followed in cases such as yours. Persons who are officiating Matches should be aware of these procedures and be willing to follow them.