ISSF rules art.8.4.1.1.1

gn303 · Post by **gn303** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:34 am

How should the ISSF rule (8.4.1.1.1) be understood?
The art. reads: Bracelets, wristwatches, wristbands, or similar items are prohibited on the hand, and arm, which holds the pistol. Similar items? Does that include rings e.g. wedding rings or other? Have judges made remarks in the past?
Thank you for your opinions and comments.
Guy

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:47 am

I certainly wouldn't consider a ring to be similar to a bracelet, wristwatch or wristband so would not ask for it to be removed under 8.4.1.1.1

renzo · Post by **renzo** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:53 am

I`ve always interpreted the rule (first as a shooter and later as a judge) as banning every item that could give an unfair advantage by means of its use.

By that principle, rings don't give any, so they are allowed. On the other hand, wristwatches could, and so they are banned.

The key factor is the inmovilization of the wrist: does the item in question help or not?? My criteria is to require the first part of the forearm next to it fully free of impediments.

chuckjordan · Post by **chuckjordan** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:42 pm

Why would you assume the ring finger wouldn't give an unfair advantage? It could in the below situation:

Situation: Shooter has oversized wedding ring. grip is precisely grooved where the wedding band resides. Thus, allowing the shooter to place his hand in the exact same position shot after shot.

It might not be obvious to the judges that the groove in the grip was made. But, really you could have any shape on the grips (within reason and within the box). No?

** The pistol fits inside the box, think outside the box **

renzo · Post by **renzo** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 7:15 pm

I suppose that could be the case.

I still don't understand the point in going to all that trouble (risking meeting you or someone of similar thinking) at the EC and get a DQ, when you can tailor your grip directly to your hand????

Spencer · Post by **Spencer** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 8:51 pm

renzo wrote:I suppose that could be the case.

I still don't understand the point in going to all that trouble (risking meeting you or someone of similar thinking) at the EC and get a DQ, when you can tailor your grip directly to your hand????

what DQ?

renzo · Post by **renzo** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 9:17 pm

I was refuting the previous poster, trying to highlight the usefulness of such kind of schemes.

RobStubbs · Post by **RobStubbs** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 2:56 am

chuckjordan wrote: Situation: Shooter has oversized wedding ring. grip is precisely grooved where the wedding band resides. Thus, allowing the shooter to place his hand in the exact same position shot after shot.

And how is that confering on them any unfair advantage ? Positioning the hand is totally different to immobilising the wrist. And you wouldn't be DQ'd just asked to remove said item.

Some (very few) RO's in the UK have seen fit to ask people to roll their sleeves away from their wrist in case that offered support - really ? And no it wasn't just to show the arm was clear, they really wanted folks to shoot like it.

Rob.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 3:02 pm

To go completely paranoid - we have a upper weight limit on pistols, so one could put more weight on the hand with some extra heavy rings ;-)

RobStubbs · Post by **RobStubbs** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 5:14 pm

Tycho wrote:To go completely paranoid - we have a upper weight limit on pistols, so one could put more weight on the hand with some extra heavy rings ;-)

It's easier to add the weight on the gun and if yours is anything like mine it'll be about 300g to spare which equals one big handful of rings.

Rob