TargetTalk

So what actually constitutes wrist support? I noticed this image of a Male Olympic shooter at Beijing and on inspection it appears that the grip provides a reasonable amount of support for the wrist!

Cheers

David

That does look bad, doesn't it?

If the picture is accurately described then yes, any halfway decent line judge would have raised the bullshit flag immediately.

Now

Are we sure the picture is taken during world-level competition? If so, this certainly doesn't flatter the quality of judges at world-level competitions . . .

Its apparently of the Olympic Gold Medallist, Wei Pang (CHN) taken straight out of the current ISSF newsletter (5/2008) in an article titled "Glory and Shame" - of course it could be just a bad quality image and/or poor angle.....

I'd say the image is pretty unambiguous, despite being low-res.
There have been other threads on this topic before.

I never heard about this rule being ever enforced. If your pistol does not comply with the rules, there's physical proof of that; but if someone's grip supports the wrist, there's no hard physical evidence even if the fact is obvious, so no judge would dare to challenge a shooter during a world-class competition - how would he prove that the challenge was legitimate?

However, as long as everyone is in the same boat, I don't think that is much of a problem.

AAlex wrote:...I never heard about this rule being ever enforced...

I have

Spencer

spencer, whats your thoughts?

can I go make a new grip?

AAlex wrote:.... but if someone's grip supports the wrist, there's no hard physical evidence even if the fact is obvious, so no judge would dare to challenge a shooter during a world-class competition - how would he prove that the challenge was legitimate?

Remember that the grip doesn't have to support the wrist to be against the rules, it mustn't touch any part of the wrist.

The biggest problem is to determine where the hand stops and the wrist starts. Sometimes it's easy, sometimes not.

so if the grip is so long, you cant see if it touches the wrist, as it is halfway down the arm, then it is ok because you cant see if it is touching/supporting the wrist.

what sort of wood should I use?

bryan wrote:so if the grip is so long, you cant see if it touches the wrist, as it is halfway down the arm, then it is ok because you cant see if it is touching/supporting the wrist...

I would suggest that if the last point of contact cannot be seen, it cannot be passed

Spencer

Actually I thought that it would be quite easy to define each shooters wrist. Get a rubber band and put it around their wrist. Get them to bend/flex the wrist and adjust the position of the rubber band to coincide with the middle of the bend. Then get the shooter to hold their pistol and if the rubber band touches the grip - there you have it?!

higginsdj wrote:Actually I thought that it would be quite easy to define each shooters wrist. Get a rubber band and put it around their wrist. Get them to bend/flex the wrist and adjust the position of the rubber band to coincide with the middle of the bend. Then get the shooter to hold their pistol and if the rubber band touches the grip - there you have it?!

Nice idea, but not really something you could reasonably do on the firing point during the preparation time or match. Even if you did, and the same would apply if the test was done at equipment control, there is no guarantee that the shooter would pick up the gun in the same way that they would for the competition.

I'm afraid that you have to rely on the diligence, experience, judgement and bravery of the range staff and jury.

It would be interesting to see the view of the grip from the other side.

The intent is that the grip doesn't immbobilise or restrict the nutural movement of the wrist in any way. An arbitrary measure no doubt but many are. A simple flex of the wrist and all is revealed. If the judge says no then that's it unless an appeal to the jury of appeal is lodged AND won.

Why test the mettle of the judge with dubious grip?

Better to avoid the agro and the possibility of some hasty woodwork me thinks, I like a quiet life!

ausdiver99 wrote:Better to avoid the agro and the possibility of some hasty woodwork me thinks!

If only every shooter thought like that.

It's like shooters who stand REALLY close to the firing line and then get upset that range staff always seem to be looking at them.

ausdiver99 wrote:The intent is that the grip doesn't immbobilise or restrict the nutural movement of the wrist in any way. An arbitrary measure no doubt but many are.

It's actually a lot simpler than that. The intent is that the grip doesn't even touch the wrist. Simple intent, sometimes difficult to police.

Hi David

I agree, that's exactly what 8.16 states, but define wrist, especially on the line? A quick squint at Greys show's its a complex place. Does the wrist begin at the:-

End of the metacarpal bones (long bones in the palm)
The distal row of carpals (bones closest to the metacarpals)
The proximal row of carpals (bones closest to the forearm bones)
The ends of the forearm bones (perhaps defined by the bump on the outer edge)
Somewhere in the middle of all that architecture where it "moves"

Wrist http://www.gwc.maricopa.edu/class/bio20 ... awrist.htm

I contend that the intent of the rule is that the wrist is not immobilised by the grip. Provided the grip doesn't impede full & free movement of the wrist at any time when the wrist is being fully flexed through it's range of movement then I believe that there should be no issue.

That is certainly the way I have seem the most common test of the "wrist" rule applied - in 50 Metre.

Cheers

Pete

]

Where does the confusion about where the hand ends and wrist begins come from?

My hand has a clear thick wrinkle line separating the hand from the forearm. When I normally hold the grip, you can see the line all the way down. If i hold the grip too deep so the palm shelf extends beyond the hand line, the line is partially covered by the side of the grip. It looks very obvious and unambiguous.

Do not all hands have that line?

ausdiver99 wrote:I contend that the intent of the rule is that the wrist is not immobilised by the grip. Provided the grip doesn't impede full & free movement of the wrist at any time when the wrist is being fully flexed through it's range of movement then I believe that there should be no issue.

That is certainly the way I have seem the most common test of the "wrist" rule applied - in 50 Metre.

Cheers

Pete

I would agree with the first part of the above, but that doesn't necessarily follow on to the second part. It's much easier to say if it touches the wrist * or not, it's more difficult to say whether it impedes movement, or even more difficult to say whether or not it offers any support.

* I would also contend that the wrist is not at the main bend or fold of skin, but rather it's at the second smaller depression about 1cm further up the arm. And that can only really be decided by careful feeling around a persons individual wrist. Which can't be done properly whilst holding a gun.

Rob.

Looks pretty unabiguous to me . . . the grip is clearly well into the bones of the ARM, let alone beyond the bones of the HAND.

Again, if the picture was taken as one of those "posed" things, or even during sighters, well, o.k. fine.

If the picture was taken during record shots or finals, I think we have a pretty clear case (PROOF perhaps?) of a clear violation.

If- again if- the photo was taken during record fire, then the competitor should clearly be DQd.

If it was taken during qualifiers, then the competitor is DQd for the entire event.

I mean c'mon . . . don't be getting all "OJ Jury" over this!

AAlex wrote:Do not all hands have that line?

Again, I'm afraid it's not that simple. 0-2 lines are not unusual.

I have one line, but it's about 15mm forward of the joint.

It really is down to the common sense of the range staff, and the shooter by not pushing his/her luck.

Even if the shooter is technically correct on the position of their wrist, if they are challenged on the firing line it will affect their concentration. They might win an appeal after the match but that won't help the score they have just shot.

The best advice to shooters has got to be to make sure they know the rules and to make it totally obvious that they are complying with them.