IBS score question 49-5x target

facts of life in the score game you drop a point your done for that distance and the grand agg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, so who cares if you lose the X,,,, ya done lost the match,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and the grand,,,,,,,,,,,,

tha wind is my friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

DD
 
Jim Borden said:
Mike

we differ -it is obvious to me that there is no 9X--it is not obvious to you--that does not make me wrong and the rule book wrong--it makes it that we read and interpret different.

bringing up things like the gunsmith thing and the tax thing have absolutely nothing to do with this--both cases you have presented information of something that is wrong--in this case you have expressed your opinion of what may be wrong-----

Jim
Click to expand...
jim, this is not meant to be a slam at you, please do not take it that way.

the PROBLEM is people interpreting...instead of reading what is printed in black and white.

can anyone tell me where in the rules it says "local interpetation allowed".

the intend of rules is to know when one is not in compliance, not to work around the words.

respectfully
mike in co
 
We differ on what is black and white

Mike

where we differ is what is black and white--you believe that 10x -1 is 9x--I believe 10x-1 is 9----because of the rest of the data and information on scores---so it is not as plain and simple as you see it.

I trust that maybe some one will have enough interest and energy to change it in the rules next year through the change process.

This is one of those things where it is ok to disagree--we just need to see each other's side of thinking.

Kind of like debating "militia" in the second amendment--without taking into context the environment in which it was written.

Jim
 
david dumas said:
facts of life in the score game you drop a point your done for that distance and the grand agg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, so who cares if you lose the X,,,, ya done lost the match,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and the grand,,,,,,,,,,,,

tha wind is my friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

DD
Click to expand...

True at 100 yards nearly all of the time. Not true at 200 unless you're shooting in a honey hole. Untrue at 300.

-Dave-:)
 
The different strategy at 100-200-300

At 100 yards you strife to get as many X´s as you can (obviously staying inside the 10 ring meanwhile and staying "clean") At 200 yards your main concern is to stay inside the 10 ring and try to stay "clean" the X´s beeing a bonus. At 300 you try to get as many 10´s as you can X´s beeing more like a nice surprice when they happen.

BA
 
I think

.25shooter said:
At 100 yards you strife to get as many X´s as you can (obviously staying inside the 10 ring meanwhile and staying "clean") At 200 yards your main concern is to stay inside the 10 ring and try to stay "clean" the X´s beeing a bonus. At 300 you try to get as many 10´s as you can X´s beeing more like a nice surprice when they happen.

BA
Click to expand...

You have over-stated the 300 Yd part. :eek:
 
Ba

.25shooter said:
At 100 yards you strife to get as many X´s as you can (obviously staying inside the 10 ring meanwhile and staying "clean") At 200 yards your main concern is to stay inside the 10 ring and try to stay "clean" the X´s beeing a bonus. At 300 you try to get as many 10´s as you can X´s beeing more like a nice surprice when they happen.

BA
Click to expand...

I think if you talk to most of the regular score BR shooters they will tell you they most always strive for the X. Competition is just way too stiff not to. --Greg
 
Dick ...

Dick Grosbier said:
Scott,
There is no such score as 49-5x in IBS scoring.

In 38 years it actually has come up several times and it has always been explained to the person asking the question an x is a tie breaking device that is earned when a very good ten is shot and it cannot be attached to a 9, thats not how it works Not in IBS. in canada I am told they use it differently . In club matches it may be used differently.

It is not a complicated concept, it has never in my memory of 25 years of attending IBS annual meetings ever been brought up as a concept people are having difficulty with. What is unclear to me is how people can have such difficulty grasping this simple concept.
Click to expand...

I'll second that thought in bold. No, I'll also third it !!! Art
 
This thread has long since passed usefulness and is fast leaving absurd. I think in this instance 38 years of precedent should be good enough. Steve
 
Jim Borden said:
Mike

where we differ is what is black and white--you believe that 10x -1 is 9x--I believe 10x-1 is 9----because of the rest of the data and information on scores---so it is not as plain and simple as you see it.

Jim
Click to expand...

Actually, the correct algebraic calculation for 10x - 1 equals 9x, not 9.

The 50 and 5x target minus 1 point for crossfire would mathematically be 49 and 5x, as well. And of course, the IBS rules which do not explicitly address the x-count, must be considered, regardless of the past precedence. Rules dictate, not opinion, in this example.
 
Score for crossfire

This is not algebra it is common sense. The penalty is not taken from the final score it is taken from the individual target. When the bullet went on another shooter's target it may look like a 10x but removing a point makes that individual target a 9 not a 10, and there is no x associated with a 9. You can argue all day long but nothing will change because it is what it is-- a big old 9.

As I said earlier if you don't like the way it is written then propose an agenda item for 2010. However, it still always be a NINE.
 
Lynn-this not algebra

lws said:
Actually, the correct algebraic calculation for 10x - 1 equals 9x, not 9.

The 50 and 5x target minus 1 point for crossfire would mathematically be 49 and 5x, as well. And of course, the IBS rules which do not explicitly address the x-count, must be considered, regardless of the past precedence. Rules dictate, not opinion, in this example.
Click to expand...

Lynn

Not opinion, it is not algebra--it is scoring. there is no 9X.
Simple-straightforward--
done
 
are we having fun now ??

i do understand that one cannot SHOOT A 49-5X, but this is not about what was shot, it is about applying a penalty after shooting. a one point penalty.
the math says the results is a 49-5x. it is the way it is written PERIOD.
without being rude, YOUR OPINIONS DO NOT COUNT. the rule is plain, it says to remove one point, there is not discussion of x's. yes it is poorly worded, yes it has been applied one way for x number of years, but since someone brought it up, identified and error, why the big deal about fixing it ? we spend hours on hours, hundreds on top of hundreds of dollars on our sport, but not willing to put forward the effort to correct the wording of a simple rule ?

winter has not even started....

what i like about the thread is everyone is being a gentleman....

hope we can maintain ourselves thru the winter.

i have made my case and will now cease and desist....


mike in co
 
Not an opinion

Mike

Not an opinion--statement from a writer of the rules...................wording might not make sense in math and algebra but it sure made sense to those that wrote them when they were considering "scoring". Guess that is not valued and so that is the way it is.

It has been thing such as this that has dampened the enthusiasm to continue the thankless tasks of the administration of such a system.


And Mike --if you or others want to change how it is written--there is a process to do that and all IBS members are welcome to initiate that process.


Jim
 
Hmmmm........

A 9 can never be an X:cool: End of story.
Shoot NRA Long Range or High Power and crossfire you get a big FAT ZERO.... -10 points go home feeling stupid. I'll take a nine and run.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mike, you are right, yet as some of us have learned, opinions tend to supercede the rules. :rolleyes:

Jim, Debate and discussion over unclear issues are productive. It's sad to see you so negative and disenchanted when it is this type of a scenario that could actually tighten the rules making the game less "interpretative" and more precise.

(Gary/Cassidy....No time will be wasted trying to argue this. An Agenda item will take care of yet another issue.)
 
Scoring

Jim Borden wrote the rule book along with others many years ago.
For Score Shooting Gary Long handles the all of the points for Score Shooter of the Year.
I run the Precision Rifleman Points which include Score Group and 600yd Points.
All three of us have been doing this over 25 years and we all agree! There is no 9x and there never will be. If you think that after all these years the wording of the rule needs enhancement or clarification then follow the process that the IBS has.
After all is done and the agenda item submitted there still will be no way for anyone to earn a 9x on any target. And that is because it would have to be voted on and reasonable people with normal intellegence will see how a 9x can never exist in real life.

Talking about the possibility of a 9x makes the same sense as Bill Clinton saying he never had SEX with that women.
Paul Ryan
 
Whoosh! Duck! Common sense just flew out the window, as did 38 years of scoring precedence. Paul, glad you mentioned Bill Clinton. I fondly remember him saying to one of his interrogators, "it all depends on what the definition of 'is' is".

I was determined to sit this thread out, but lws' comment about Jim Borden being negative caused me to NOT sit it out. Jim was just showing a growing frustration with some of the posts on this thread. If, yet again, we need an agenda item for another rule clarification, then so be it. The IBS system is well-established to do so.

Gentlemen, I think our efforts and keystrokes are better spent figuring out ways to grow benchrest shooting rather than debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. You have to realize there are only so active sport shooters; in recent decades benchrest has had a declining share of the total number of competitive shooters. Yes, we will always be a niche shooting sport, albeit an important one. But look at the growth of cowboy action shooting (75,000 SASS members) and action pistol (USPS and IDPA together have tens of thousands of members and 400 active ranges) and you can see why. I am not foolish enough to think benchrest will (or should) have many thousands of competitors, but we do need to reverse the trend. As I said in my IBS Group Committee report at last year's Winter Meeting, the BENCHREST "brand" is well-known-and respected-in the shooting and firearms universe. We need to capitalize on our discipline's reputation, which has been collectively earned by the shooters, gunsmiths and benchrest cottage industry. The latter produces the components to build the finest, and most accurate, rifles in the world-bar none.

Jeff Stover
 
Last edited:
Take a step backwards. The original post took the way the rule IS WRITTEN, and presented it in a way which makes it not-so-logical. However, it is written that way.

Now, as we have been doing for the past couple of years, there will be an agenda item submitted next year to clarify this, to take "opinion" and "interpretation" out of the equation. You all know the old saying with regards to "opinions"!

Let's let it go.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top