Trapshooters Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Current Handicapping System

9K views 139 replies 31 participants last post by  Rvator97 
#1 ·
If the purpose of the handicapping system is to level the playing field so shooters of differing abilities have an equal chance of winning then following data suggest that the system is not achieving its purpose.

There were 10 handicap events during the 2009 Grand. The 10 events include all handicap events during the prelim week, the Grand week and the White Flyer Super 500.

27 yard shooters were declared the champion in 8 out of the 10 events.

A 22 yard shooter was declared the champion in event 8 and a 24 yard shooter was declared the champion in event 13.

This data is inconclusive because it only includes 10 handicap events at one large shoot and it does not consider the number of shooters in each yardage group by event. Example - if all the shooters in an event were 27 yard shooters then a 27 yard shooter is going to win that event. If half of the shooters in an event were 27 yard shooters and the other half were 22 yard shooters then it should be about a 50/50 chance of whether a 27 yard or 22 yard shooter would win.

How hard would it be for the handicap committee to gather the numbers from a representative sample of large, medium and small shoots and then have a qualified professional do a statistical analysis on them to determine how fair or how unfair current system is?
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Garry...

I think you're wrong...if half are 27s and half are 22 yard shooters, my money would still be on the 27 yard pool. They've proven themselves to be better shooters. I might lose the bet (certainly wouldn't win all the time), but it's not a heads/tails, 22/27, problem.

My question why won't anyone answer my question:

Instead of spending so much time worrying about the scores everyone else is shooting, the trophies they are winning, and how far to move them back or limit their shot to 1/4 ounce of 10s (from the 45 yard line, apparently), why don't folks spend more time practicing so they can win????

That's my question. Anyone?
 
#4 ·
Garry,

The current system is not designed to be fair (as you wish to define fair). It is designed to give the appearance of being fair to those who are not very good with numbers.

It rewards the best of the 27 yard shooters (as many think it should) not those who may have a good/lucky day.

Take your reductions. Play only yardage purses and only when you are shooting well.

Don Verna
 
#5 ·
What do you guys want? Do you think a player with 22 yard ability should win as often as a 27 yd. shooter? Or how about a 19 yard player....how often should they win?

oneata...those guys that won't shoot ATA do so because they can't break a score at 20 or 22 yards.....if they could, they'd play....if those guys were good enough to break a 97 or 98 at short yardage, they would beat those long yardage boys most of the time.....but what happens, they get a yard or two, and can't hang, so they don't want to play. So don't blame it on the system....it could stand alittle tweeking, but not much.
 
#6 ·
Jeff P., You aked:

"why don't folks spend more time practicing so they can win????"

I suggest you pick 5-10 of the big dogs and go back and look at their shoot records. You will find that typically they will have 150,000 registered HC targets with a good percentage of these being recorded in high pressure, big shoots over 10-15 years.

These shooters have talent, the desire and have invested the time and money into developing their potential. The vast majority of shooters are lacking one or more of these 4 things.

Yes you have to practice and compete, but you better start young.
 
#7 ·
1) Practice is not going to improve things much on an overall basis. For newer shooters, of course it helps. Once someone is experienced, I don't really think practice will change things much. Face it, some shooters are better than most of us will ever be no matter how much we practice.

2) Handicap will never be an event where everyone is handicapped to the point we are of equal skill from yardage. This has nothing to do with ATA rules, it is simply impossible. Further, if everyone was exactly the same skill after their handicap, you would practically never win, since you are no better than anyone else. So cut the posts about the rules not giving everyone an equal chance. We can only make it "more equal", never equal.

3) To make it "more equal", more yardage could be added (and it can be done as posted many times) or as someone already posted, reduction yardages could be raised significantly, combined with mandatory reductions. Maybe a combination of both. This would move the rest of us closer where more of us would win more often. There is a large percentage of shooters that would still not be competetive, but that's how its always been and will likely remain.

4) A major roadblock to making changes is that the ATA is stuck dealing with a sport that is both recreational/social to some members and highly competitive to others. Balancing these two interests is just about impossible for an organization of this size.

5) Creating a "pro" status would be great if there was money available. That is not the case though, so forget about it. I really disagree with all the posters that want these shooters forced to shoot amongst themselves. That would not be good for the game.
 
#8 ·
Garry I have responded to you before. You do not however seem to respond to my questions or opinions. Yet you seemingly fell that people avoiding your question. I think there need to an even flow before you get what you seek.

You stated that.

"if all the shooters in an event were 27 yard shooters then a 27 yard shooter is going to win that event. If half of the shooters in an event were 27 yard shooters and the other half were 22 yard shooters then it should be about a 50/50 chance of whether a 27 yard or 22 yard shooter would win."

If you are correct about your assumption on the balance of shooters in relation to wins. Then the following stats from the handicap events at the Eastern Zone as an example don't seem to back up your statements. The information is taken from RJ Stuarts Website on the total yards paid out in all events and how each yardage faired is earned yardage.

Total Earned Yds Paid Out By %

27-----56-----53.84%

26-----7-----6.73%

25-----6-----5.76%

24-----8-----7.69%

23-----7-----6.73%

22-----10-----9.61%

21-----3-----2.88%

20-----5-----4.80%

19-----2-----1.92%

18-----0-----0


As should be apparent to anyone if your theory is correct the only shooters present were 27yd shooters.!!!!!!!!!!!

BTW if you don't like the stats for this shoot you pick a shoot from this year that is on Stuarts Website and I will get you the same information.

WGH

"What do you guys want? Do you think a player with 22 yard ability should win as often as a 27 yd. shooter? Or how about a 19 yard player....how often should they win?"

I will tell what I want. I want equal yards actually given to shooters who shoot equal score. Not a yard to a 20 yd shooter and an honorary yard to a 27 yard shooter.

Bob Lawless
 
#9 ·
Well thanks, NHSC, for making my point.....

OF COURSE the vast majority of shooters are lacking one or more of the things you mention. They don't have the drive or the ambition to win outright...but they still want to win, of course, so....

So the answer to that is to penalize the folks who have made the investment? Because someone has maximized themselves...we have to tear them down? Make it harder for them so SOMEONE ELSE can win?

Really? ARE YOU GUYS FREAKING KIDDING ME???

Pardon me...I'm going to file suit with the NBA to get the rims lowered to 6 feet. I can't dribble or shoot a foul shot, nor can I dunk (being only 6' and about 240lbs with bad knees and gray hair), but that really shouldn't stop me from playing in the NBA on a competitive basis. Those guys are way better than me, and they practice more, and they are taller. None of that matters - I should be able to compete on an equal basis.

Sounds pretty liberal to me.
 
#11 ·
Jeff P

"So the answer to that is to penalize the folks who have made the investment? Because someone has maximized themselves...we have to tear them down? Make it harder for them so SOMEONE ELSE can win?"

So Jeff you seem to feel that this practice would be wrong is that what you are saying??? Well guess what Jeff I happen to agree with you. What I don't understand is why you don't seem to feel the same way about the short yardage shooters.

As an example I will post three shooters their scores and what they received for yds.

ASH GLENN H-----------IN-----100-----2.5-----18.5-----21.0

HAWLEY SEAN-----------UT-----100-----2.5-----27.0-----27.0

SHAEFFER JR DAVID-----MD-----100-----2.5-----27.0-----27.0

With all due respect to Mr Hawley and Mr Shaeffer both of whom are phenomenal shooter and I am taking nothing away from either or making light of their ability.

What I don't understand is what makes Mr Ash's 100 worthy of 2.5 yards and puts him on a yardage he may have to work at to duplicate the score or at least it will make it more difficult for him.

My problem is how would 2.5 yards affect either one of the long yardage if it had been a actual move in yardage??? If it at least makes it more difficult to duplicate the score wouldn't that at least be equal.

"Pardon me...I'm going to file suit with the NBA to get the rims lowered to 6 feet. I can't dribble or shoot a foul shot, nor can I dunk"

You are now I am sure being satirical. I do not however know about you but I started shooting Trap(which is only one of the things I have competed in)as a form of recreation If I wanted a second career I would never have chosen Trapshooting that for sure. Still everyone says to those that think like I do that.

"you need to practice more and become a better shooter"

In order to become the caliber shooter that is needed to shoot 100s at the major shoots. I would need to be able to stay at the same yardage until that skill level came up. As I am not a 27yd shooter that isn't going to happen. Not mention the fact that my age is also against me. I am not referring to me in the sense of myself as much as my age bracket.

Bob Lawless
 
#12 ·
LMAO...no longshooter...I get it. But raising the rims to 12 feet makes it harder FOR ME. I need a lower rim. I suppose we could have TWO rims...if you're over 6'3"...you have to shoot at that rim waaaaay up there. And you can't block my shot at this little rim over here...that would be unfair.

Pushing a 27 yard guy to 31 has no effect on the guy who stands at the 20. He still has to break his targets. And rather than focusing on breaking more of them (say, 95 or 96 of them as opposed to the 89 he's breaking now), the focus is on HOW TO GET THE LONG YARDAGE GUY TO BREAK FEWER SO HE CAN WIN. Without ANY improvement on HIS part.

Look, I'm a 24 yard guy (used to be 25, took a reduction because I was struggling). Last weekend I got beat by a 26.5 yard guy. At the state shoot the champ came off the 21 yard line. Great shooting by BOTH of those guys - and yet we've not addressed the fact that I didn't shoot well enough to win either of those days.

I suppose it will be possible to move Harlan Campbell back (given enough concrete) far enough so that I can beat him. And what's the sense in that??? I get a trophy with an 85 (that was my score last weekend 22/22/21/20) and he gets nothing with his 84 from the 35 yard line?

I assume my 85 will get me a punch now, right? So pretty soon I'm gonna be at the 28 yard line - remember I "won" my way back there because Harlan, well, he's struggling at the 35 yard line where #7.5 shot isn't too effective, so I've been kicking his ass with 85s and 88s and all manner of "good" scores. I'm happy. I'm winning. But what's the point? Now i'm back far enough I can't "score" either - like 88 was really doing for me, anyway. What happens now?

Bob...I see what you're saying about equal yardage. But if I got beat by a 27 yard guy last weekend with a 92 (to my 85)...we don't NEED to move him back. I NEED to break more than 92 to BEAT HIM. ITS MY PROBLEM...not HIS.

I, too, took up the game as a hobby. But I'm driven to be the best shooter I can be - if I can't beat you, it must be my problem. If I shoot 93 from the 24 and get beat by a 94, my first thought isn't "that bastard. he should be back on the 29" it's "man. close. Gotta get better."

Man, I don't know about you guys...but until I can break all my birds, I think it has to be MY problem. No one but me is swinging the gun.
 
#13 ·
HUH yourownself...

How does the yardage I stand at help or hinder you in your quest to break a trap target?

I'm on a different squad. At a different yardage. Shooting an hour earlier than you. I'm on the 24, you're on the 21 (for example).

How does ANYTHING I do affect you? You call pull...a target comes out. You're SUPPOSED to break it. With that shotgunny thing you're holding.

But folks're not, apparently, so interested in that as they are in making sure I don't break too many so that they can win....my yardage and score might affect the OUTCOME of the event...but not your SCORE. You know...the number of targets you broke? With the shotgunny thing?

As I noted on another thread...maybe we can just draw the winners name out of a hat. That would be fair.

Dying to know the yardages and averages of the folks that are doing the complaining....

Jeff Pokorny
24 yards, 88 (give or take) handicap average in the target year ending today.

(and that average ain't good enough to win most days, LOL)
 
#14 ·
I think what JeffP is trying to say and I have to agree is that the majority of the ATA shooters can't average what the bigdogs do from the 20 yard line. I saw Jeff bet a shooter that he couldn't shoot a 100 straight from the 20 yardline. The shooter said sure he could. Jeff reminded him that he had just shot a 95 from the 16 so how could he expect to shoot a 100 from the 20. The average shooter is never going to beat the bigdogs unless they spend the time and money to shoot as many targets as they do and have done.
 
#15 ·
Jeff P

"I suppose it will be possible to move Harlan Campbell back (given enough concrete) far enough so that I can beat him."

Jeff tell me where did you see me use any of the AA names in what I am advocating. That is other than posting Sean Hawley score above. I not worried about AA it is a given that the average shooter won't defeat them 1 out of 50 times.

What you are over looking is in the Eastern Zone shoot their were 56 shooters who earned yardage from the 27yd line alone. Using all the other yardages combined there were only 48yds earned. Are you expecting us to believe that the AA won them all???? The same thing at the Grand the 27 yard shooters won 646 yards the whole Grand only paid out 1101 so what does that tell you about the the rest of the shooters.

Those shooters that are proposing adding yardage to try to level the field by making it easier to win against the AA. They live in a fantasy world don't wake them up.

Not what I want at all. All I want is actual yardage paid for a score that requires a payout. Equal actual yardage for equal score no more no less.

Bob Lawless
 
#16 ·
The Big Dogs have you beat even before you pull a trigger. They have mentally whipped you. Actually they didn't do anything you did all to yourself. Most shooters are not mentally prepared to win. It's the difference between thinking you might run a 100 and knowing you can run a 100.

If you don't believe this game is a large part mental then you will never be a Big Dog. One problem most have is that they have to many things on their mind other than shooting, instead of being totally focused.

Put the Bigs where ever you want and they will still whip you because they know they can and you don't.

Practice Mental Toughness.

Don

Don
 
#17 ·
Bob, I'm not "necesarily" arguing with you on that.

But we have practical limits to the amount of yardage that can be added to any field. Harlan Campbell is just an example...there's virtually no limit to the number of shooters that can beat me - or you, I'm guessing - on any given day. Hell, anyone that can average better than 88 has to have a good shot, just on average alone.

What do we do about the 20 yarder that walks out and runs 100? First time? How is that fair? The system clearly isnt' addressing that problem.

What I want - no more, no less - is to break the best score I CAN BREAK, everytime, and lets see how we measure up. you beat me, I go back to work. I beat you by one bird, well...I get to enjoy a beer and know that today, I was the best one out there. And to me, I don't much care if I beat you and you're on the 20, or the 27.

And lets do it again tomorrow. And we'll see who's the best then.
 
#18 ·
Jeff P

"What do we do about the 20 yarder that walks out and runs 100? First time? How is that fair? The system clearly isnt' addressing that problem."

There you go again you perceive a problem with a 20yd shooter that shoots 100 his first time out. Yet you see no problem with a 27 yarder that can shoot a 100 multiple times a year.

The system will take care of the 20yd shooter that does that, next shoot he will be at 21.5 or more according to the earned yardage table. That 27yd shooter he will still be at the 27!!!!!!!!!!

Bob Lawless
 
#20 ·
In the weeks leading up to the grand, when the post, "Who's going to win the GAH?", there were quite a few 'votes' for some unknown 23-yarder (from Kentucky, usually) nobody has ever heard of.

As long as that happens enough that it is not a rarity so's that people remember it, the handicap system works like it is supposed to.

The people who regularly win are supposed to, but there will be days when the birds are jumpy and the 'kid' has caught lighting in a bottle.

I think the automatic punch system bites frustrates the whole purpose of HCP, and there are a couple of other things that make sense, like lighter loads and a bit more concrete, but as long as the opportunity for serendip is there (and happens occasionally), it works.


Bob
 
#21 ·
Back in the day when I could run and jump I played in a 3 0n 3 National Basketball Tournament called Hoop-it Up out in Long Island NY. They set up about 200 rims in a parking lot and let us go at it. There were tons of D1 College players on the pavement that weekend. I'm 6'1 and at the time about 180 lbs. and I in fact could dunk. They Handicapped the event by size. I played against no one that was over 6'2" or 6'3" I can't remember as it was a while ago. What I do remember was that I felt very comfortable on the boxes that day as I did not have to jump over somebody that was 6'10". Now with that said even in the NBA if you notice they try to create what is called a mismatch. That is getting one of the smaller players down low with the center or one of the power forwards where the smaller player has no chance of defending. NBA players are physically gifted athletes for sure but if you handicap them by height you have some what of a chance. Every one at that 3 on 3 could play just like everyone at one of the shoots can shoot. If the handicap is done right we all have a chance. We got to the finals in that tournament by using a simple pick and roll all day long and planting me down in the boxes jumping over the little 6 footers and snapping rebounds off the rim. There must be a way to figure out this handicap thing after all there are a lot of experenced shooters out there that must have a lot of great ideas. If we have to make the 7'1" players play against the 7'1" players I know I don't get paid millions of dollars to shoot nor do I pay $100.00 or more to watch the elete shooters shoot. Our sport is not made that way. Most of the money comes from us the shooters. If they don't want to be handicapped then Don't shoot. I'll shoot either way.
 
#22 ·
In discussions like this one, we should keep in mind that we are not talking about 27 yard shooters as a group. We are talking about five or six 27 yard shooters. I believe the current system works well for +- 3,000 27 yard shooters but not quite as well for 5-6 of them.

Pat Ireland
 
#24 ·
Would the 30 yard line make that much difference?? I'm old enough to remember when they went back to 27 from the 25; clubs had grass and gravel at the 26 & 27 until later they poured the concrete. Shooters that got moved back there shot a few lower scores for awhile, then they started breaking them just like they had at 25! So, will the 30 make that much difference in the long run??
Dick C.
 
#25 ·
I DON"T percieve a problem at all. That's what no one seems to be getting.

If someone beats me from the 27 (I'm on the 24, remember) that's fine with me. I clearly didn't break all the targets that day. And if, by chance, I ran the 100, then another 49 in the shoot off and Leo or Harlan or whoever ran 50 in the shootoff...that's OK too.

Ditto if the winner comes off the 20. Ok. Super for him. Again, I must not have broken all the targets that day, or he wouldn't have won. He'll get his punch and we'll try it again tomorrow. And if he beats me again, so be it.

All this talk about penalizing shooters who shoot well will forever be a bunch of whining to me. You want to win? Get you ass out there and practice. Take a clinic. Get some help. Buy a new gun if that will do it. Or accept that you shoot for fun and will likely never win a major event.

Until then, you're only realy complaining about YOUR OWN SHORTCOMINGS. You're admitting you don't have the stones or the moxie to beat the good shooters and that the only way that will happen is if you get some help in penalizing them for being good at something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top