Hood, Thanks for clearing that up for me. I have read the other posts and better understand where and how this originated. Please keep in mind that second quessing the decisions of a ruling body without having access to all of the facts is something that should be handled with care and some reservation. That being the case, my opinion is this. If the shooter filed an official protest, and if the target was found in violation of maximum distance, he should be vindicated in his protest. However, due to the shotgun start, and the uncertainty as to which targets were scored in which place, the targets should have stayed as recorded. Deducting 11 points from a competitors score because he recorded the 14th target he shot rather than target # 14 seems to go against good sportsmanship and common sence. If you could have positively identified that target on everyones score card then throwing out that targets score would be in order. At no time should protesting a target give the protester a tactical advantage over other competitors. If, as Aussie stated a range official had checked the target and it was found to be legal, then no action should have been taken at all. Just my opinion from my seat, far from where the activities took place.

this circumstance does not in any way reflect badly on the club or the people who worked very hard I' m sure to make this shoot happen. the outcome of the situation does need to be clarified because the advice they were given was not correct I would be more then glad to talk to a member of the club or the state rep. if they would like to call the IBO office to get my home phone number. I will be leaving for Nelsonville on Wed. and will be home Mon.


Gene Bihler
IBO-v.p. & shoot director

aussie guy

What is this shoot listed as on our Cowtown website?

Robert

Robert.
it was the 2nd leg of the TX tripple crown at Brownwood

Cowtownbowmen' s website is showing 284 as the winning score.