Cheating at New Delhi

[GolfShot]

After watching the rifle events at the New Delhi World Cup, I was disappointed at the cheating I had noticed throughout the events.

See attached images and below for further details.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Technical Rules
6.7.4.4
Mobile phones or other hand-held communication devices (i. e. tablets, etc.), electronic devices or wrist-worn devices (i. e. smart watches) may not be used by athletes on the firing line.

6.7.8.1
Side Blinders (on one or both sides) attached to the hat, cap, shooting glasses, or to a headband, not exceeding 60 mm deep are permitted for Shotgun athletes only (Rule 9.13.4) (A). The front edge of a side blinder, when viewed from the side, must not extend more than 30 mm forward of the center point of the forehead. Side blinders must be made of plastic material only.


Rifle Rules
7.4.2.7
e) Taping of any kind may not be used to attach weights to the rifle

7.5.8.8
Visor or Cap
A cap or visor may be worn, but it must not touch or rest on the rear sight (must be visibly free from the sight) while the athlete is shooting. The cap or visor may extend forward of the athlete's forehead no more than 80 mm and may not be worn in a way that makes it a side blinder.

[GolfShot]

continued

[GolfShot]

continued..

[Tim S]

I think it's a little harsh to call this cheating. Infractions perhaps, but cheating seems unnecessary.

Just to clarify, does the prohibition on taped weights not mean that athletes can't strap weights on with strips of tape. I don't read that as banning self-adhesive weights.

Also where do you see taped weights on Ziva Dvorzak?

Stankiewicz appears to have a blinder attached to herar rearsight, rather than a side blinder attached to glasses or under her visor.

Are you sure that Jan Lochbihler's watch is a smartwatch?

[GolfShot]

I think it's a little harsh to call this cheating. Infractions perhaps, but cheating seems unnecessary.

Just to clarify, does the prohibition on taped weights not mean that athletes can't strap weights on with strips of tape. I don't read that as banning self-adhesive weights.

Also where do you see taped weights on Ziva Dvorzak?

Stankiewicz appears to have a blinder attached to herar rearsight, rather than a side blinder attached to glasses or under her visor.

Are you sure that Jan Lochbihler's watch is a smartwatch?

Cheating by its very definition is not following the rules to gain an advantage over your competitors.

Regarding the weights, the two examples that I have shown are the athletes using wheel weights. Wheel weights have adhesive tape on the back hence 'taped'.

Ziva Dvorzak has wheel weights attached to her check piece raiser (where her last name is displayed).

Stankiewicz is using her blinder in such a way that it is acting as a side blinder.

Jan Lochbihler's watch is most defintately a smart watch.

[Tim S]

Clearly the jury disagreed.

Can you be certain that the weight on Dvorzak's rifle (displaying her country's name incidentally, not her name) is held on with tape? There is no tape over it, and the video doesn't show the back.

Pettifogging is the word that comes to mind.

[Tavishwm]

Taped weight was further clarified to say no visible tape wrapped around thee weight. I noticed they were not enforcing the rule that says the offhand stand rest can not be higher than the shoulder

[pfiori]

The question regarding stick-on weights was thoroughly discussed and clarified when the rule was introduced. Weights attached with/by tape over the top of them are what the rule addresses, not the stick-on wheel weight type.
For rifle, the Blinder is regulated by rule 7.4.1.6 https://www.issf-sports.org/getfile.asp ... -Rules.pdf

[jhmartin]

Jan Lochbihler's watch is most defintately a smart watch.

Is it a communication device?
You would have to supply the make & model to define that.
Being a watch that monitors pulse, date/time, GPS, even a digital one, while electronic does not make it a com device.

And even in that the ISSF rules are in conflict. Non-verbal communication is allowed
(That last is just me being a PITA)

[Xman]

Swiss prone shooter with wristwatch

it permitted to have the buttplate so configured that the top angle of the buttplate RESTS ON TOP OF THE SHOULDER/BACK????

[Tim S]

Swiss prone shooter with wristwatch

it permitted to have the buttplate so configured that the top angle of the buttplate RESTS ON TOP OF THE SHOULDER/BACK????

Yes. The height of the buttplate is not limited, only the hook and the curvature.

Rule 7.4.5.1 d The top projection of the butt-plate must not extend more than 25mm to the rear of this perpendicular line.

The "perpendicular line" is defined under 7.4.5.1b: .. perpendicular to a line drawn though the axis of the bore of the rifle, and that is tangent to the deepest part of the butt-plate depression that normally rests against the shoulder.

[Xman]

Swiss prone shooter with wristwatch

it permitted to have the buttplate so configured that the top angle of the buttplate RESTS ON TOP OF THE SHOULDER/BACK????

Yes. The height of the buttplate is not limited, only the hook and the curvature.

Rule 7.4.5.1 d The top projection of the butt-plate must not extend more than 25mm to the rear of this perpendicular line.

The "perpendicular line" is defined under 7.4.5.1b: .. perpendicular to a line drawn though the axis of the bore of the rifle, and that is tangent to the deepest part of the butt-plate depression that normally rests against the shoulder.

The application of the rule should not let that position be legal IHMO unfair and an unfair advantage

[Tim S]

The application of the rule should not let that position be legal IHMO unfair and an unfair advantage

How is his position an unfair advantage? Plenty of ISSF shooters, male and female, run the butt plate up quite high to ensure good contact with the shoulder and to counter the recoil impulse. Lochbihler is pretty tall, so he has a degree of mechanical advantage from long limbs, but the rules can't (and shouldn't) penalise that. Should Martynov have been penalised for his unusual position, or rewarded for technical initiative?

The butt appears to be a Grunig Return, based on the 1980s Anschutz 4760. The plate has a fairly modest curve, and wouldn't lock over the top of the shoulder. To my eye his jacket sleeve has creased around the buttplate making it appear more curved than it actually is. The very top of the plate may not actually be in contact with his shoulder. Remember the yoke of the jacket will bunch up, and not follow the shoulder perfectly.

[Xman]

The application of the rule should not let that position be legal IHMO unfair and an unfair advantage

How is his position an unfair advantage? Plenty of ISSF shooters, male and female, run the butt plate up quite high to ensure good contact with the shoulder and to counter the recoil impulse. Lochbihler is pretty tall, so he has a degree of mechanical advantage from long limbs, but the rules can't (and shouldn't) penalise that. Should Martynov have been penalised for his unusual position, or rewarded for technical initiative?

The butt appears to be a Grunig Return, based on the 1980s Anschutz 4760. The plate has a fairly modest curve, and wouldn't lock over the top of the shoulder. To my eye his jacket sleeve has creased around the buttplate making it appear more curved than it actually is. The very top of the plate may not actually be in contact with his shoulder. Remember the yoke of the jacket will bunch up, and not follow the shoulder perfectly.

What happen to the concept that the "rifle" and I use the term rifle VERY loosely here, that the rifle must be supported only by the front shoulder and the forward hand with sling when in the prone position.

[pdurben]

The requirements and restrictions of the prone position are listed in ISSF Rulebook Section 7.6.1.2. No where does it state "the rifle must be supported only by the front shoulder and the forward hand with the sling when in the prone position." The closest is part "d" that states "The rifle may be supported by both hands and one shoulder only." So unless I'm mistaken, you can use the front, top, back, underside, or whatever part of the shoulder you want.

[GolfShot]

Jan Lochbihler's watch is most defintately a smart watch.

Is it a communication device?
You would have to supply the make & model to define that.
Being a watch that monitors pulse, date/time, GPS, even a digital one, while electronic does not make it a com device.

And even in that the ISSF rules are in conflict. Non-verbal communication is allowed
(That last is just me being a PITA)

Was watching the final of the skeet mixed team and noticed a competitor wearing an Apple smart watch.

[Tim S]

What happen to the concept that the "rifle" and I use the term rifle VERY loosely here, that the rifle must be supported only by the front shoulder and the forward hand with sling when in the prone position.

I think you have mentioned elsewhere on the forum that only wood-stocked rifles are real rifles. I suspect that's a minority view.
The 3x40 wasn't historically called the Free Rifle match for nothing. It was an everything goes dedicated match rifle from the start. Evolution happens.

Should we go back to flintlocks, or do "real" rifles need a slow match?

[Mike M.]

Should we go back to flintlocks, or do "real" rifles need a slow match?

Both! Under MLAIC rules, they are different events. Although having shot a matchlock, I'll say that they are both harder and easier to shoot than you think.

[jhmartin]

I think overall this can be put down to inconsistent/lax/lazy/misunderstood interpretation and enforcement of the rules.

The rules have had extra rules and interpretations piled on, on top of piled on, on top of piled on rules so that there are so damn many inconsistencies. Many of these pile-ons are done to supposedly clarify a rule w/o thinking of the consequences.
Rather, the jury teams that go and work all these matches should be MUCH more consistent in the administration of the rules and either not let little violations go by or get rid of the rules they are letting slide.

[GolfShot]

I think overall this can be put down to inconsistent/lax/lazy/misunderstood interpretation and enforcement of the rules.

The rules have had extra rules and interpretations piled on, on top of piled on, on top of piled on rules so that there are so damn many inconsistencies. Many of these pile-ons are done to supposedly clarify a rule w/o thinking of the consequences.
Rather, the jury teams that go and work all these matches should be MUCH more consistent in the administration of the rules and either not let little violations go by or get rid of the rules they are letting slide.

Out of curiosity, what are these inconsistencies?