TargetTalk

I wanted opinions from people more experienced than me, I'm still learning.

My daughter shot a 3P smallbore match (50ft) recently, scored by Orion. Challenges were allowed, I believe following CMP rules and scoring with integer. She challenged the two shots linked, thinking they would be ruled tens. Looking at them, I agreed. The challenges were denied, ruled 9s. I know any time a shot touches the dot, Orion scores 10.0. We were told the Orion couldn't be plugged, but my understanding of the CMP rules was that an official could rule at shot to a higher score.

What are your opinions? Should we challenge these shots in the future? Is this something you would rule a ten if you were the judge?

I was disappointed with the outcome and am trying to understand how I should have handled this/coach her to handle this in the future.

Thanks for the input!

https://postimg.cc/5HZbBVG4

https://postimg.cc/Vr8LywF7

9, 9.

(second shot not even remotely close.)

On scoring, only the 4.5mm lead counts. "No-go" on torn paper.

Hence, what is the latest on acquiring Kruger targets?

In the "olden days" NRA used to have a division (read an employee) whos only job was to measure and certify the printing of targets.
Inside/Outside of lines to the edge of the x and so on.

When ORION was new and really only used by CMP, back in the days of the Daisy Open and Nationals in Bowling Green, I had a situation similar to yours where we challenged one of my daughters shots and was overruled as you were.

I had a (sorta heated) discussion with Erik Anderson the creator of the program.
He explained to me that ORION was scored the same way as electronic targets were ... from the calculated center of the black aiming bull. This is different from a method of measuring from the lines (which a shooter cannot see anyway).
ORION targets (as I understood the explanation) were really only quality checked for the dimension of the black aiming bull. The lines and dot printed on the bill/target are for "reference only" and not to be used for scoring.
My comment to Eric was then remove the lines like a normal electronic target. The lines are on the targets so that the shooters have feedback, sorta like they do on a normal electronic target display ... the lines are not on the downrange aiming bull on those, but the monitor provides MUCH better feedback than looking thru a scope.

In my mind that is the only complaint/ding I can do to ORION.

I have used ORION to score all sorts of youth targets since the system became available to the public and with good pellet velocity, I feel they score accurately. Now with the old simple sporter pump guns where the pellet does not have the velocity to cleanly tear (or even push thru) the paper ... a lot of manual interpretation is required to get the scoring circle on the shot ... sometimes then all you have is lead marks on the paper....

10 and a 9. The 9 due to rough edge at the dot. 10 has clean edge at the dot IMHO.

Interestingly I ran the target through a different Orion system and both were scored 10.
I like the system, it just makes me question whether there are calibration issues between machines and whether it should ever be used for integer scoring if challenged targets won’t be verified by plugging. On decimal these two targets make 0.2 point difference, in integer it’s two points.

The only problem with Orion IMO is the scoring is only as good as your scanner. That is why you have to review every single shot on the computer to make sure the Orion system has interpreted the center of the shot hole accurately.

These are cellphone or digital camera images correct?

Once the paper target is scanned, it cannot be scanned again. The scanner deforms the holes as it runs it thru. Even a flatbed can do that.

The "official" target now & forever is the scanned digital image.
(Just saying - I don't like that that CMP was goaded into making the new Crosman a sporter either - it's a precision rifle with precision adjustments)

But looking at your photos, #1 would be a 9 ... tears don't count and in the image the hole outline would be pretty far above a dot ... My eye says 9.7ish.
#2 is hard as I'd need to put it in the program and look at how the algorithm placed the shot. As BDutton says, a good scorer will look at and check every shot .... especially true with using it on smallbore targets.
To really see the holes you need the scanned image.

And also remember ... the scoring calculation does not look at the rings or the dot ... it sees the black aiming area and calculates a .177 hole center off of that comparing it to the calculated center of the aiming area. Rings are for shooter reference during the shooting ... not for any official scoring.
If a match wanted to use plug scoring, the ORION targets should not be used ... the match should use the official CMP or NRA targets. (I have a couple of cases of these that I pretty much give away to local clubs and individuals that want practice targets)

On another note -
Anyone remember using the single bull 100mm targets as we used to do before USAS got their electronics?
ORION was built to score these as well ... and does it VERY ACCURATELY.
These were targets meant to be scored manually, and had all the nits picked in terms of the printing on the targets, bull size ring locations, ring widths, center dot location & center dot size.
(Again - remember ORION does not certify the printing on the targets ... would not surprise me if they were OK though)

USAS has (had??) a single bull scanner that was ISSF certified and we used to use it during finals.
I used to collect these and run them thru my ORION system back in the scoring room to see how well ORION compared to the certified machine. (I was leery about this new fangled, much less expensive scoring system)
I think over 3 or 4 national match finals (both open & JR) I only ever had 1 target not match the ISSF system and then it was only off by .1. Kinda sold me on the system.

So fancy note ... if you have any old ISSF paper targets around (rifle or pistol), if they fit in your scanner ORION can score them.

Humidity affects target dimensions and this, in turn, can change the shot value given by a target reading 'machine' if the target moisture content changes.
While this will not alter a 10.9, the further out the shot, and the greater the change in moisture content of the target paper between the shot being fired and when it is scored (or re-scored), the greater the value returned.

My opinion on the images would be a 10 and a 9. When you mention the shot touching the dot, ruling that a 10 is an air rifle ruling. In smallbore, the dot must be "obliterated" to be ruled a 10. In other words, the dot must fall completely within the shot radius. In the 2nd pic, the dot is missing, but it wouldn't fall completely within the shot radius.