Yet more DSQ's

Help Support :

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Dog Tyred

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
2,084
Location
Tammuff
Yet another DSQ for overweight cartridges, this time at the World Cup event in Gabala. However this time they waited until after the women's trap semi- finals were completed before throwing out the Russian shooter, Tkach, only after she had qualified for the medal matches.

this is all getting a bit silly.

Maybe the prospect of an ISSF supplied, certified single brand cartridge is not that far away after all? If every shooter is using sealed and uniquely packaged ammo supplied by the ISSF at the ground then they can do away with the need to check cartridges for minute weight variations and just look for the 28 grammers !

or they could just leave it as it is and buy a decent set of calibrated scales and take three samples from each shooter instead of one.

DT

 
Why do the cartridge manufactures fly so close to the wind with their shot loads when they know their product is going to be used in such high brow competition?

Maybe the shooters should make a stand. After all it's losing them medals/prize money and tarnishing their reputations for being branded a cheat.

Hull Superfast in it's 27g loading sounds like a sure bet, and maybe there's a 23g version in the pipeline for those disciplines that require it?

 
One dsq and an official complaint from Italy against the reffing,  mainly when the Russian Ref gave Alipov a target again that he had missed after the next two shooters had shot already.  Also a complaint against the reffing at last WC when ref declared a broken target lost for Pelelio..

Things need tightening up.

On the ammo front, a set of scales that are accurate are £10 max, its each shooter that should take responsibility and check them, I know a very well known shooter whom changed brands at an Olympics after weighing his own ammo at practice.  Its not rocket science and gives you a peace of mind if you randomly sample your own ammo...

 
The only resolution to the crap with the heavy loads is for the national teams shooters and coaches, etc to COMPLAIN about the situation.  It's THEIR game not the refs and if they don't attend to it no one will since they are the only ones suffering as a consequence of the current situation.  Just like the GP drivers did a couple decades ago to make THEIR game a better one.

 
First up, i wouldn't trust a £10 set of scales. Secondly, there's two arguments to the sampling of cartidges. In a totally different "sport" that has limits on velocity of the projectile, three samples are taken (shots fired) and if the average of the three exceeds the limit you are DQ'ed.

 
Is it the same manufacturer in each case or a different one? If it was only one manufacturer and people at the top level stopped using them you would like to think they would improve the production process.

 
dunno why they bother,, if you miss at Olympic level because of a 24.1 shot load or1258ft/sec speed over spec,  don`t think the ammo is the problem,,,,,,,,,,,

it can be you,,,,,, 

 
dunno why they bother,, if you miss at Olympic level because of a 24.1 shot load or1258ft/sec speed over spec,  don`t think the ammo is the problem,,,,,,,,,,,

it can be you,,,,,, 
Exactly what I thought, everyone knows 21g load of 9's through 1/4 is all you need as long as you put it in the right place.  :lol: :rolleyes:

 
I guess the issf will need to get together with the cartridge makers and try to get special certified batches of shells made for these comps and testing should be done before a comp. Then if the shells are not to spec, ban that cartridge maker from comps.

 
First up, i wouldn't trust a £10 set of scales. Secondly, there's two arguments to the sampling of cartidges. In a totally different "sport" that has limits on velocity of the projectile, three samples are taken (shots fired) and if the average of the three exceeds the limit you are DQ'ed.
Approved for weighing gold and certified, I would trust them.

But as it says in ISSF rules, it is the shooters responsibility to ensure the equipment they are using complies, It was two shells at one time, but as with everything its cut back for time allowalable to do such tests etc.

The allowable shot charge is 24.5 so thats enough room for error, any more is sloppy or devious loading...

 
First up, i wouldn't trust a £10 set of scales. Secondly, there's two arguments to the sampling of cartidges. In a totally different "sport" that has limits on velocity of the projectile, three samples are taken (shots fired) and if the average of the three exceeds the limit you are DQ'ed.
I would agree with that Stan but a £25 digital kitchen scale is more than up to determining whether the carts are up to spec,in fact an old fashioned balance is probably better, remember you are allowed to be 0.4g over . I don't know if I would really want to check every cartridge I was going to fire in a comp though :)  

I guess the issf will need to get together with the cartridge makers and try to get special certified batches of shells made for these comps and testing should be done before a comp. Then if the shells are not to spec, ban that cartridge maker from comps.
I have stated before that cartridge manufacturers are great at extoling the medals the have won and all the figures for velocity etc... however they seem reluctant to state that their product meets the standards set by the ISSF !!

Is it the same manufacturer in each case or a different one? If it was only one manufacturer and people at the top level stopped using them you would like to think they would improve the production process.
Remember a lot of these people shoot the cartridges because they are given them by the manufacturers by way of sponsorship.

 
check 10 shells per carton is all you need, thats a good random, you dont need to chop them all if you have the weight of a correct shell for that loading..

 
check 10 shells per carton is all you need, thats a good random, you dont need to chop them all if you have the weight of a correct shell for that loading..
There would be no point in chopping up cartridges that you want to use :) You are right all you need to do is take a cartridge and weigh the shot in it and set your max standard load on the balance for the max by adding extra shot then anything less is acceptable. The balance below could easily measure the difference in over weight shells.  Question for me though is were the cartridges that were found to be over mass a special competition loading for the shooter or straight from a standard purchased box ?

_84863458_qs3sty3m_jxeqmg1bc-gzxrnchytodc-_waajvrpdja.jpg


 
You cannot weigh assembled carts.  There is too much variation in component weight.  I've tried with a .01gm beam balance and it don't work.  Weighing the shot alone is the only method.  

Or did I misunderstand?

 
cut and weigh one or two, but take weight first, if from same batch should be no wad variations, and powder isnt going to be more than a couple of flakes,  If you are getting shells that are over, cut them open, 

 
Of course the nonsense of all of this is while in theory it is OK to weigh the shot load of cartridges you are taking to an event it is not really practical to start cutting open cartridges bought at the event, especially in your hotel room!

In addition the potential to be overweight applies to every single cartridge so measuring 10 random samples does not preclude you being caught out by the one the ref removes from your pocket. In addition there seems to be no recourse open to shooters to have the sample independently verified in the case of dispute. Hence my previous suggestion that a minimum of three samples are taken at the same time and in the event of the initial sample failing the two further samples are assessed in the presence of the team manager/shooter. If the two subsequent samples are OK then the shooter is given the benefit of the doubt. Any subsequent violation could result in a target deduction or two which would essentially kill their chances of a medal while removing the stigma of a DSQ from the shooters record.

To exclude a shooter on the basis of one rogue cartridge bought at the venue in good faith (or even supplied direct to a shooter by the manufacturer) seems draconian in the extreme.

There are of course many and varied solutions, including single supply of 'official' event cartridges (identifiable by having pink cases with blue spots) but the logistics of control of thousands of cartridges once in the shooters pockets is problematic and I doubt the various suppliers/sponsors would be to thrilled with this one. That said, single tyre supply in many motor racing formula seems to work. Or of course the ISSF could simply buy a good set of scales and take three samples.

It would seem the most logical way forward is for manufacturers to set their shot load calibration a little lower, effectively taking out a few pellets to ensure they are always under load. It does no one's reputation (shooter or cartridge manufacturer) any good whatsoever to be excluded for equipment irregularities (perceived cheating)! It also does the reputation of the whole sport no good at all if there are frequent disqualifications for perceived cheating at the elite level .

I'm sure this is going to rumble on but come on ISSF, get your own house in order or face the ridicule of the elite shooters you are purporting to represent and the general shooting public alike.

Ho hum

DT

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What, I wonder, would happen if they just got rid of the weight rule and let shooters shoot whatever weight of load they want? Would the sport be any worse for it?  Just a thought.................................. :wink:

 
What, I wonder, would happen if they just got rid of the weight rule and let shooters shoot whatever weight of load they want? Would the sport be any worse for it?  Just a thought.................................. :wink:
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\didnt make a difference here on Italy, all the lower class shooters didnt suddenly win everything because they could use 28gm,  36gm maybe.....   

 
Exactly what I thought, everyone knows 21g load of 9's through 1/4 is all you need as long as you put it in the right place.  :lol: :rolleyes:
not sure if you missed the point of what i said,,,,

so, rules are rules, and limits have to be in place. what i said is that if a target is missed, its not the cartridge, whether overweight, or under. i do not see a .1 gram overweight as cheating by a shooter, however, rules are rules,,, if you follow my logic,,,,, 

 

Latest posts

Back
Top