Shotgun Forum banner
  • Whether you're a greenhorn or a seasoned veteran, your collection's next piece is at Bass Pro Shops. Shop Now.

    Advertisement
41 - 60 of 112 Posts
How can you tell if the wad (Not a part of the shot) didn't break the center. 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
Good question. Short of a jury of referees on every station, with instant slo-mo replay cameras, it's pretty unlikely anyone's eyesight is good enough to make that call with 100% certainty.

Under most conditions, I can see the shot cloud on missed targets (by others), but would be pretty skeptical of anyone who said they could see a wad on a ground target. Which then renders it a judgement call by the scorer. (Paid or squad members)

If the target disappears in a cloud, then the wad may have helped a bit, but the shot would be said to have broken the target. But if the target breaks, away from the shot, who knows?

This I do know: I'm not willing to pay what it would take to have the technology that would definitively decide. It's a hobby, and expensive enough as it is. So I will go back to my original point: a target that clearly has a visible piece broken from it, is a dead target.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeffery0hn
DPE, I've seen that situation numerous times and agree with your assessment and how it is scored.

Question becomes at what point is a hit/hole in the target considered loss and when is it dead.

Don't see a lot of true overhead targets anymore, but years ago was at a shoot, trap on a hill, shooters in the valley below. Target flight path directly over the shooter's head. Saw several targets that were whole, and after shot at, you could see 1-3 holes in the target/sunlight coming through. No question the target was hit by the shooter's pellets, but no visible piece either.

I believe under a strict reading of the rules, that is a loss target.
Jim,
I would agree with you on the overhead. If its pellet sized holes and no visible piece I would consider it lost. Have to admit I have never seen that detail on a flying target and now with vision changes probably never will. Have picked up plenty of whole targets on the ground with punch throughs though.

If its a 1 1/2 to nearly 2 inch complete center piece removed while you watch the target fly and yet not a visible piece....dead. I don't honestly know where the heck the center piece went and have witnessed that a few times. odd as heck.
 
I have seen crossers with belly towards stand where you could see two pellet sized hole with light shining through. Called it lost target could not see a visible piece. Common sense says there had to be a visible piece, however no one one saw it.
Buster
 
I think his point was, if you don't see the piece, how do you know it was the pellets in his shot that broke the target. Rule G.6. also says, "Targets not struck and broken by the shooters' shot (pellets) shall be called LOST or MISSED and designated on score cards by an "O."

However, I believe Mike's interpretation of this is unreasonable given the situation described. The rabbit was whole, then a shot with dirt and debris kicking up they could not see the center of the target break but it was gone after the shot. Any ref that would rule this a lost target would get run out of town. Given this logic any weakly broken rabbit shot while in contact with the ground could be scores lost because, unless you have superman vision and see the shot pellets actually hit the target, you can't really know that it wasn't kicked up dirt and debris that actually broke the target.
I respect Mikes viewpoint and experience without question but too feel the interpretation is a difficult call. I have seen wads strike a target and not break it. I have heard people say they have seen a wad strike a target and break it but not seen it myself. In any case but two, in 15 years at this, I would not be able to say without a doubt that a broken target was not the result on the shooters pellets and call it lost. I can see the target break but I cannot see individual lead pellets. In all but two cases, I couldn't call the target lost.

The two cases where I was sure of no pellet kill was true pair targets with 15-20 feet of separation and a large chunk of the first broken target careening wildly and into the second target with no second shot fired.
 
Discussion starter · #46 · (Edited)
Rabbits are similar too. You might shoot it and it appears to be a miss, but 10 feet down its path it falls apart. I see that as a hit.
Interesting. On that same day, I called for a "view bird" on the rabbit station. We watched it roll across our vision, and about fifteen feet from the end of its roll, it came apart.
I'd never seen that before.
Although it came apart into half a dozen pieces, it could not have been called a hit/dead, since no shot was fired.
 
Discussion starter · #47 ·
true pair targets with 15-20 feet of separation and a large chunk of the first broken target careening wildly and into the second target with no second shot fired.
Saw this happen multiple times at an event two weeks ago: a true pair that were about 5-6 feet apart where/when the first shot was usually taken. Pieces from the broken first bird struck the second bird and broke it. Personally saw it happen 7 or 8 times before my squad was up. The call each time was, appropriately enough, "dead-a-pair".
 
Just had this same conversation during a friendly outing...I mentioned that I did not see a chip off a clay that changed direction, we agreed to scored it lost. Was I wrong? I would score a target that lost it's perfect spin lost if there were no visible chips.

Next question is this rabbit that broke 10' after the shot. I can see why that may be called dead, but with no visible chip, I would have a hard time calling it dead.

The rabbit with the center knocked out immediately after the shot: IMHO dead!
Part of the reason I watch a target through its path is because sometimes as it changes its orbital rotation, you can get a better view of it. And sometimes, you can see that is was clearly hit.

With the rabbit, keep in mind that it can travel that 10 feet or in the blink of an eye, so its not like it runs to the end of its path, falls apart and we call it dead.
 
I bet you all $1, that if you took a clay with the center out, 100% of the time the clay would not survive leaving the trap. (Nor the short coming impact with the ground)
I don’t count a puff of dust as a break, but I really believe it easy to call a clay missing it’s entire core “dead”
I'd take that bet. Shot a registered event last summer and the target flew perfectly, but on an altered trajectory. I was the shooter and noticed something was different. But my squad mates said the center was completely missing. I didn't notice that from my viewpoint, but from behind, they saw it clearly.
 
I would call it dead as there was a piece missing. How do you score a clay that changes trajectory but you didn’t see a piece fly off?
lost bird
 
Unfortunately the rule book can tell us how to play this game but can't force common sense into people. The rules around breaking a bird are to ensure your shot broke a bird. It's up to people to apply proper common sense. Ex. is the OPs scenario, if the shooter obviously broke the bird and you know it....DEAD bird with common sense applied.
 
There MUST be a visible piece to be scored dead!!!!!!!! I have seen many rabbit targets with multiple holes in them. This is way I always shot at least a Mod at rabbits.

Mike McAlpine
With that approach, a target that is turned to dust should be scored lost. By rule, dust is not a visible piece and there are no other visible pieces.
 
No just the opposite. The blown out center is the visible piece. I interpret “visible piece” to mean a piece large enough to see. As it is gone, obviously it was big enough to see. Don’t have to actually view it. It’s absence alone is sufficient evidence of the hit,
 
41 - 60 of 112 Posts