The Last Great Hurdle

S

sgeorge

Guest
Several years ago, after being told it was not possible, the first 250 was shot, outdoors. Joe Friedrich pulled this off in HV. Dan Brown followed this up with a 250 in LV at the 2011 World Championships.

Indoors, a 750 has become what it takes to medal in the BIPM matches. X count is where the medals are separated.

We now have seen a 750, outdoors, by Paul Bendix in USA Open.

The last great hurdle, a 250-25X. We have seen 2 occasions where a 250-24X was shot indoors, Dan Brown and Ron Silveira.

So, who will shoot the first 250-25X?
 
Steve,
I bet this year 750 will be shot in HV and LV class.

250 25X most likely By Mike with a Thomas.

Paul
 
Maybe it's time

Now that electronic scoring is the new standard, maybe it's time that decimal scoring is considered! ;)
 
Garrett,

An interesting thought. Glad you brought it up, rather than me.

Are you talking about decimal scoring each bull? Might make for the outcomes of a match not coming down to a single protest.

Could you do this at your next local match and compare outcomes with scoring done with both methods?
 
Easy to see how ties and FM will become things of the past. How many protests did you have and how did you resolve them?
 
challenge

If there is a challenge, we look at the scan, use the protest algorithm, move on. Our group accepts the universality of the scoring system and how it applies its scoring to ALL shooters. We DO NOT plug, as that is a antiquated, out-of-date system.
 
Garrett,

There will be differences of opinion but we should applaud you for moving into a new era of scoring. On challenges, I agree, pick your method and continue with protests using the same method, plug or software.

Confidence and acceptance by the shooters will ultimately be the key for the success of electronic scoring.

Can you share something about the paper and its quality, that your targets are printed on?
 
Garrett and Steve,
I hate to burst your bubble, but electronic scoring is not the new standard and won't be until it is significantly more accurate than the " old, antiquated method" of plugging. It's not even close now, as several experienced scorers that were at the Nationals or rescored targets afterwords can attest. You're free to use it at your own club since you never turn in scores to the USARB scoreline, but Orion will not be used at the next Nationals unless protests are A.- allowed, with a substantial amount of time allowed to compare the scores on the printout with the targets shot (My recommendation would be 30 minutes per match), and B.- they are checked by several referees experienced in scoring, with a .224 plug.
Todd
 
Oh no worry on busting any bubbles! As we all know, plugging targets rips every hole, either towards or away from the center. It's that simple! So in reality plugging actually alters scores! The only true method for scoring is to use an optical measuring device, and for that, an enlarged high resolution scan, with an untouched hole is optimum. Any time an item is jammed into the hole, it alters it even before the plug is fully inserted.
One thing we realized with this modern system, is that no matter how many holes are shot, we see that no hole is perfectly round, and this was very difficult to see with the naked eye. And any time that a hole is plugged, alterations occur to an already imperfect hole. Any experienced scorer can agree, no system is perfect, but lesser of two evils is certainly the optical scanning system. It sometimes is a challenge for tradition to be wavered, but experienced scorers can attest the better system has arrived.

Scoreline is a great way for clubs across the country with sparse numbers to compare their numbers to others and to give one the sense of participation. Experienced shooters understand that conditions vary world wide, and as a result, the shoreline system is not an accurate barometer of ranking. Unless of course you shoot indoors.
As for protest times, I can agree with you, more time is necessary.

Kind regards
Garrett
 
Todd,

I hate to burst your bubble, old guys, with bad eyes and hands that shake, trying to push a little plug, while attempting to follow an imperfect hole is NOT the standard that any sport, in the 21st century, should be relying on. Yes, your guys are "experienced" but that is where the advantages begin and end. Nothing personal here.

It is clear you have a difference of opinion. Since I am trying to show some restraint, as you suggested, I will try to not read between the lines of your post but ask you to explain things when the vagaries of the internet hide your true meanings.

As the WRABF Technical Director in charge of reviewing electronic scoring systems, how do you reconcile your current opinion with what is going to be used at the 2015 World Championships? Have you seen, tested and approved of the system to be used there? How is it different/similar to Orion's system?

"but Orion will not be used at the next Nationals unless protests are A.- allowed, with a substantial amount of time allowed to compare the scores on the printout with the targets shot (My recommendation would be 30 minutes per match), and B.- they are checked by several referees experienced in scoring, with a .224 plug."

Does this demand mean that the board of directors has taken a vote that no one is aware of?

Does it mean you are building a bunch more benches and the National event will be held in Salem? I know it is early but some people like to make their travel arrangements early.

Does it mean you are returning your medal because you are an experienced expert and are convinced the scoring was flawed?

Another, "(My recommendation would be 30 minutes per match)" Why are you recommending more time to protest than you allow the shooters to finish a relay? Is this only a recommendation or simply part of the bigger demand?

One more, "since you never turn in scores to the USARB scoreline,". Does this shot at Garrett for not posting scores to the USA Scoreline mean that because they use electronic scoring, their scores are not eligible? Have the rules for the USA Scoreline now banned electronic scoring?

Lastly, on the issue of posting scores on the website. Have not seen your regional results yet. Will you have them published anytime soon?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sgeorge said:
Todd,

I hate to burst your bubble, old guys, with bad eyes and hands that shake, trying to push a little plug, while attempting to follow an imperfect hole is NOT the standard that any sport, in the 21st century, should be relying on. Yes, your guys are "experienced" but that is where the advantages begin and end. Nothing personal here.

It is clear you have a difference of opinion. Since I am trying to show some restraint, as you suggested, I will try to not read between the lines of your post but ask you to explain things when the vagaries of the internet hide your true meanings.

As the WRABF Technical Director in charge of reviewing electronic scoring systems, how do you reconcile your current opinion with what is going to be used at the 2015 World Championships? Have you seen, tested and approved of the system to be used there? How is it different/similar to Orion's system?

"but Orion will not be used at the next Nationals unless protests are A.- allowed, with a substantial amount of time allowed to compare the scores on the printout with the targets shot (My recommendation would be 30 minutes per match), and B.- they are checked by several referees experienced in scoring, with a .224 plug."

Does this demand mean that the board of directors has taken a vote that no one is aware of?

Does it mean you are building a bunch more benches and the National event will be held in Salem? I know it is early but some people like to make their travel arrangements early.

Does it mean you are returning your medal because you are an experienced expert and are convinced the scoring was flawed?

Another, "(My recommendation would be 30 minutes per match)" Why are you recommending more time to protest than you allow the shooters to finish a relay? Is this only a recommendation or simply part of the bigger demand?

One more, "since you never turn in scores to the USARB scoreline,". Does this shot at Garrett for not posting scores to the USA Scoreline mean that because they use electronic scoring, their scores are not eligible? Have the rules for the USA Scoreline now banned electronic scoring?

Lastly, on the issue of posting scores on the website. Have not seen your regional results yet. Will you have them published anytime soon?
Click to expand...

Steve,

The board has not taken a vote on the use of electronic scoring.

Scoring methods are only as good as the folks running it, JMHO. With enough experienced people it can be done either way. If a World or National event using electronic scoring does not bring in enough experienced folks who understand both methods of scoring, mistakes will be made and shooters scores will suffer the consequences. Having targets scored and hung in a timely matter and being able to protest are all factors in how well the hosting organization is prepared. IMO, Scoring is the most critical part of a competition match and should be applied as such.

My feeling is, the 2015 Worlds in Australia will do it right.

Regards,
Joe
 
Joe,

As usual, yours is the voice of reason. While I agree with most of your points, there is one small place where we disagree.

While it would be better for those using an electronic scoring system to have your experience in pushing plugs, I do not view that as a necessity.

First, scoring a target accurately and consistently is not rocket science. Anyone can be taught to scan a target, score it and review the results. The attention to detail and conscientiousness of the person is the key. As you mentioned, it comes down to the folks running the system.

Second, given where we are with electronic scoring, it will be quite awhile before we have a large number of people with both the experience of pushing plugs and the experience with electronic scoring. With the exception of ARA and PSL match directors, Garrett and his team have more experience with electronic scoring than anyone. Neither system is perfect, we are attempting to determine which is less imperfect.

I am happy that the board has not taken a vote on electronic scoring.
 
Garret I didn't get an answer to my question about lost scores on the national score

Maybe you just didn't see it but as your responding here how do you explain my light varmint card showing and marking a zero for a very visible 9.8-9.9 . And the chart marking a hit off the target where there was no hole ?
Thanks
 
linzie said:
Maybe you just didn't see it but as your responding here how do you explain my light varmint card showing and marking a zero for a very visible 9.8-9.9 . And the chart marking a hit off the target where there was no hole ?
Thanks
Click to expand...

Well that was an obvious error! It turns out that when the bar code name sticker is placed too low (in the shooting area), or it's calibrated with one that is too low, it can give some of the results you experienced. Essentially the white of the bar code, matched the white of the scanner hole, it picked it up as a shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top