changes to ISSF rules - pistol

If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true

Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H

Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
Spencer
Posts: 1890
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

changes to ISSF rules - pistol

Post by Spencer »

I have posted a summary of the major 2009 changes as they affect pistol at http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/nrc_pa/issf.htm

Spencer
Alexander
Posts: 512
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:27 am
Location: Old Europe

Post by Alexander »

I was startled - and a bit taken aback - about the new (and somewhat hidden) no. "6.4.2.1 Clothing Regulations".

Can only have been prudish Americans who invented it.

*sigh*

As to the rest and the many comments: excellent work by Spencer, many thanks!

Alexander
Spencer
Posts: 1890
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by Spencer »

really only the camo bit that has changed.

the old 8.4.7.1 It is the responsibility of the competitor to appear on the ranges dressed in a manner appropriate to a public event. v the 2009 6.4.2.1 It is the responsibility of the competitor to appear on the ranges dressed in a manner appropriate to a public event. This must be controlled by the Jury. Clothing made of camouflage material is prohibited.

Spencer
Alexander
Posts: 512
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:27 am
Location: Old Europe

Post by Alexander »

Ah - thanks for setting me straight!

I withdraw my speculation, to recycle it at a more appropriate occasion ;-).

Alexander
User avatar
Fred Mannis
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 8:37 pm
Location: Delaware

Post by Fred Mannis »

Alexander wrote:Ah - thanks for setting me straight!

I withdraw my speculation, to recycle it at a more appropriate occasion ;-).

Alexander
It is always appropriate to engage one's mind before opening ones mouth :-)
Alexander
Posts: 512
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:27 am
Location: Old Europe

Post by Alexander »

Fred Mannis wrote:
Alexander wrote:Ah - thanks for setting me straight!
I withdraw my speculation, to recycle it at a more appropriate occasion ;-).
It is always appropriate to engage one's mind before opening ones mouth :-)
Hey, at least I engaged it afterwards - that's already a virtuous step. ;-)

Alexander
User avatar
Jack Milchanowski
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:35 am
Location: In the woods of Sunset, Texas, U.S.
Contact:

Post by Jack Milchanowski »

Thanks for the posting Spencer.

Jack
David Levene
Posts: 5617
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: Ruislip, UK

Post by David Levene »

higginsdj wrote:I am new to this and don't pretend to know all the rules but 6.11.4.1 seems a little odd to me. Whats the point of stating which value the 2 points is deducted from. Its still going to cost you 2 points if it is taken from the lowest or highest value - ie why not just record it as a deduction rather than affecting individual shot scores!
It makes a big difference if you get to a tie break count-back under rule 6.14.2.2

6.11.4.1 is a general deduction, i.e. one not applying to to a specific match series. To take it off any but the first series could penalize the shooter twice for something that happened before the start of the official shooting time.
User avatar
higginsdj
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:21 pm
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

Post by higginsdj »

Yeah - I realised when I read further - but here is an issue. By deducting 2 points form an actual shot score the shooter is bascially knobbled twice. First for the deduction and then on the countback (ie if my lowest score was an 8 and is now a 6 then I get tagged ont he countback as well if it goes down to the 8's)

In AP what score/shot isn't the 'first series' other than the final?
Spencer
Posts: 1890
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by Spencer »

higginsdj wrote:Yeah - I realised when I read further - but here is an issue. By deducting 2 points form an actual shot score the shooter is bascially knobbled twice. First for the deduction and then on the countback (ie if my lowest score was an 8 and is now a 6 then I get tagged ont he countback as well if it goes down to the 8's)

In AP what score/shot isn't the 'first series' other than the final?
part 1 - Short solution - don't do it! Even simpler, don't do it a second time (when the penalty applies)!!
part 2 - Although competition shots are a continuum, they are scored as 6 (or 4) series of 10 shots: 6.11.1.1.1.2

Spencer
User avatar
j-team
Posts: 1381
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:48 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by j-team »

Spencer wrote:really only the camo bit that has changed.

Clothing made of camouflage material is prohibited.[/i]

Spencer
They would have been smarter to say that military or paramilitary clothing is prohibited.

So, a girl in pink camo pants is not allowed, but I can turn up in full black SWAT gear OK?
Dogchaser
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:49 am

Post by Dogchaser »

j-team wrote:
Spencer wrote:really only the camo bit that has changed.

Clothing made of camouflage material is prohibited.[/i]

Spencer
They would have been smarter to say that military or paramilitary clothing is prohibited.

So, a girl in pink camo pants is not allowed, but I can turn up in full black SWAT gear OK?

Don't worry, I'll be in "Hunter Orange" from head to toe.
Melbnshooter

Post by Melbnshooter »

The catch is in the requirement for the Jury to be involved in compliance monitoring. If, in their opinion, the clothing contravenes the rules then off it comes!
User avatar
RobStubbs
Posts: 3183
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:06 pm
Location: Herts, England, UK

Post by RobStubbs »

j-team wrote: They would have been smarter to say that military or paramilitary clothing is prohibited.

So, a girl in pink camo pants is not allowed, but I can turn up in full black SWAT gear OK?
What is 'paramilitary' ? That is open to interpretation and varies across the world. That could include black 'swat' gear, green shirt and trousers, green T-shirt etc.

Camo gear is more easily defined.

Rob.
John H

Post by John H »

I've always thought that the no-camo rules which certain clubs and some national shooting federations have had for years is as much to do with safety (i.e. participants should not be making themselves more difficult to see) as it has with disassociating ISSF shooting from paramilitary organisations.
I can recall a situation at our own club where a full camo-wearing patcher was still patching the last of the holes of the previous series when the R.O called out "For the next series.....!". He didn't quite get to calling "load!" before the presence of the patcher was brought to his attention. Yes the R.O. should have been attentive, but it was a dull cloudy day and the patcher was actually quite difficult to see.
User avatar
RobStubbs
Posts: 3183
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:06 pm
Location: Herts, England, UK

Post by RobStubbs »

John H wrote:I've always thought that the no-camo rules which certain clubs and some national shooting federations have had for years is as much to do with safety (i.e. participants should not be making themselves more difficult to see) as it has with disassociating ISSF shooting from paramilitary organisations.
Perhaps but I must admit I don't like the camo clad attire some people wear as it just gives the wrong impression. To me it gives out the message that you're playing at soldiers (unless of course you're in the armed forces - which is fine). We are taking part in an olympic sport and hence clothing should be appropriate for that. Shooting is in the public eye for the wrong reason 99% of the time and doing the camo thing just adds further options for negative press and stereotyping.

Rob.
jacques b gros
Posts: 174
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Rio Grande do Sul - South Brazil

not so off topic...

Post by jacques b gros »

I might translate the new rules into portuguese, depends on agreement with national organization.

Is there a version in editable format? Working on a 7mb pdf is next to impossible. Tried to convert, became a word file of 150mb. And the free programs I found are bad, tables become text boxes.

Thanks for any help.
User avatar
Fred Mannis
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 8:37 pm
Location: Delaware

Re: not so off topic...

Post by Fred Mannis »

jacques b gros wrote:I might translate the new rules into portuguese, depends on agreement with national organization.

Is there a version in editable format? Working on a 7mb pdf is next to impossible. Tried to convert, became a word file of 150mb. And the free programs I found are bad, tables become text boxes.

Thanks for any help.
NitroPDF Professional should do what you want. See their website www.nitropdf.com
jacques b gros
Posts: 174
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Rio Grande do Sul - South Brazil

Post by jacques b gros »

Thank you, Fred, but the tables (and the thing is full of them) came out all mixed. Plain text came out ok, but for that I simply save a copy in txt format and toil away. Will have to rebuild the indexes, though.

Will ask, via Brazilian natl organization, for a copy in another format from ISSF. Doubt they will give, seems they are not there to help. They should at least offer alternatives to the natl orgs, for translation purposes.

Thanks.
Reinhamre
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:17 am

Tie breaking

Post by Reinhamre »

6.14.2.1 the highest number of inner tens;

6.14.2.2 the highest score of the last ten shot series working backward by 10 shot series in full ring scoring (not inner tens or decimals) until the tie is broken;

Slow fire has been more important. Lucky me :-)

Kent
Post Reply