21st Cent.

Hopefully this will answer your questions, although one will remain a non-answer.

#1. No, the wording in the up-coming yearbooks addresses the issue the same as in years past. It does give guidelines,but not in the specific mannor you are addressing.

#2 The rules package in question contains a variety of issues still under discussion. Speculating wether or not any or all of them may or may not apply to this or future years is therefore premature. However, as ej noted,changing horses midstream is usually not the option of choice.

#3 As noted.

Now, as a matter for discussion or debate, lets look at this rule for a minute. First off, let me just say, I understand your point and concern very clearly. The wording whichRudy posted wasone version submitted for consideration. This would address your immediate conserns rather well, it would seem.What if, however, this person with less than ethical intent, merely decided to play that perticular game in reverse. Errant mistakes to the low sidecould then be used to handicap an opponent.

Either way you establish a hard and fast protocol could be manipulated if someone was intent on doing so. That returns us to careful consideration before any additions or modifications are made. As for my own opinion, I will only say that if I had to choose between option A or B I would choose that which would tend to make the entire shooting group more diligent in the accurate recording of scoresrather than a cavalier "No Harm - No Foul" approach.

Chris Turner
IBO Director