Two players meet in a parking lot. One squirts the other with a water gun. Did the elimination happen? That depends entirely on what your bracket decided before the season started. Whether you accept video, need witnesses, or trust the honor system shapes every contested kill from week two onward. Pick the wrong one and you will spend April settling disputes instead of playing.

Why proof rules matter

A single disputed elimination can fracture a whole season. Player A says they got Player B in front of the coffee shop at lunch. Player B denies it happened. Without a proof rule written down before day one, you have no way to settle it. The organiser becomes a judge, friendships suffer, and by mid-April half the bracket is angry at whoever you picked.

Proof rules also shape player strategy. If video is required, players will ask people to film. If witnesses matter, students will bring friends as alibis. If honor is enough, players may take bigger risks because there is no permanent record. The rule you write changes how the entire game plays out.

Video as proof

Video is the clearest standard. A phone recording, a security camera, or a friend filming on purpose all create undeniable records. If you require video, cheating becomes much harder because you need footage that shows your target getting wet without a doubt.

The catch is that video requires planning. It means players asking friends to be cameramen. It means hunting for security footage after the fact. It means students need confidence that they can get footage, or they will give up on targets because of the friction. Some eliminations happen in private places or at inconvenient times. A hit at 6:15 AM before school is harder to film than one at lunch.

Video also creates a privacy question that parents care about. Some schools already record students on campus, so a hit there is easy to verify. But a hit at someone's house, a friend's garage, or a local park starts to feel like a lot of recording for one game. Make sure your rule is clear about where you expect footage to come from.

Witness proof

A trusted third party watches the elimination happen and confirms it was real. The person being eliminated agrees it happened. Both players accept the witness's word. This works because cheating requires two people to coordinate a lie, and most high schoolers will not commit to a false story under social pressure.

The problem is that witnesses are often friends of the person doing the eliminating, so they can be biased. A good rule defines who counts as a witness: maybe anyone but the target, or maybe only students not currently playing, or maybe only adults. Without a definition, disputes start when one player says the witness does not count because they are too close to the shooter.

Witnesses are also inconvenient to arrange if you want to eliminate your target when they are alone. You need someone else present and willing to vouch. That means more coordination, or more eliminations happening in groups where eyes are already there.

Honor system

Trust the player being eliminated to confirm they were hit, and trust the shooter to report it honestly. This is the simplest rule. It places the burden on both people to be truthful.

Honor systems work when the player base is honest and when stakes feel low enough that cheating does not seem worth the guilt. Most high schools lean toward honor because it reduces friction and favors the game over the rules. But honor also fails fastest when someone wants to cheat. There is no way to verify claims, and you have to guess who is lying.

An honor system requires a clear prompt. Does the target themselves have to say they are dead, or can a friend report it? Does the shooter text them, call them, or message them? What happens if the target never responds to confirm? The rule must answer these questions or else people will invent answers that favor their own position in the dispute.

Comparing the three

Video is strongest proof but hardest to get. Witness is a middle ground that prevents most cheating with less friction. Honor is easiest to play but easiest to abuse.

Video also favors quick, planned eliminations where you can ask someone to film. Witnesses favor eliminations where other people are already around. Honor favors players who take their word seriously and hurts players who are skeptical or dishonest.

Some seasons start with honor and switch to witness rules in the final weeks, when eliminations matter more and disputes hurt harder. Others keep the same rule all season to avoid changing expectations mid-game. The right choice depends on your school's culture and whether most disputes come from actual cheating or from simple misunderstandings.

Setting up your proof rule

Write the rule before invitations go out. It should appear in the same section as your other elimination rules, near the beginning of your rulebook. Be specific. Instead of 'video is preferred,' say 'Video must be clear and show the target getting wet. A friend's phone recording counts. A security camera recording counts. Screenshots do not count.'

If your bracket accepts proof from multiple sources, list them in order of strongest to weakest. This way, when someone disputes an elimination, everyone agrees on which proof is best. The organiser can then ask 'do we have video? Do we have witnesses? Does the target confirm it?' and follow the hierarchy.

Tell players where to send proof. Create a process: hit happens, shooter sends proof to organiser within 24 hours, proof gets reviewed, target is reassigned if approved. Without a process, some proof gets lost, some shows up weeks late, and you cannot enforce your rule fairly. You can use your rules template to spell this out before publishing your bracket.

• Define which types of video count and which do not.
• Name who qualifies as a witness: student, adult, not a close friend, etc.
• Set a deadline for submitting proof after the hit happens.
• Decide what happens if someone claims they were hit but gave no proof and never confirmed it.

Handling disputes that proof cannot settle

Even with a clear proof rule, some eliminations get disputed. A player claims they never got the text. A witness story changes when questioned. A video is too blurry to see clearly. These are the cases where a proof rule is not enough.

Set up a dispute process before the game starts, not during it. Decide whether the organiser makes the call alone or whether the shooter and target can appeal. Decide how much time you give people to gather evidence. Decide whether you ask other players what they saw. Most seasons benefit from a simple senior assassin rule disputes process written down ahead of time, because settling a argument fairly takes ten minutes if both sides know the rules and an hour if you are making them up as you go.

Some seasons ask the target: would you bet ten dollars that you were not hit? If the answer is no, they concede. This puts the burden on the person claiming they were cheated, which feels fair to many brackets. Others require the shooter to present proof, which is harder but prevents bias against unpopular players.

Small season differences

Brackets under 40 players can run different proof rules because everyone knows everyone else. Witnesses are easier to find, honor carries more weight, and disputes are more personal. If you are running a senior assassin rules small school game, you might use honor as default and only ask for witnesses or video when someone objects to a hit.

Larger seasons benefit from stricter rules because anonymity makes cheating easier. A junior you have never met has nothing to lose by lying about an elimination. A classmate you see every day feels more social pressure to tell the truth. Scale your proof rule to your bracket size.