1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

ATA Member List

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by Pocatello, Mar 28, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Pocatello

    Pocatello Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,547
    I was looking in the current data list from ATA used in the Shooting Sports Software program. The list is dated March 25, 2009, and lists 159,146 records. It is up to date for my shooting records, including my last shoot on March 11. I started by looking at ATA numbers near mine, trying to see whether there were people I knew who started shooting about the same time I did. Then I started looking at Fords. One thing that struck me is the number of people in the list who have not shot at all in the last three years. I use three years because the list shows shooting records from the current year and the previous two, along with lifetime totals. Some people I looked at have shot very little, or not at all - for example there were at least two (Dennis G. and Donald F. Ford) who are listed as Life Members but have never shot an ATA target. Some have shot quite a few targets, but not in the last three years, for example, Thomas Ford, who used to post here and was the ATA Delegate from CT. Then I looked at some members I knew were deceased, and found them still in the list. These died within the last year, and one I looked for who has been dead for about five years I did not find.

    All this leads me to wonder though:

    1) What percentage of people carried in the database have not shot an ATA target in years, if ever?

    2) What percentage of people carried in the database are deceased?

    3) What percentage of ATA Life Members have never shot an ATA target?

    An ATA Average Book lists only those who registered targets during that target year. Glancing through the 2008 book, I see that there were over 33 million singles registered, over 27 million handicap, and over 14 million doubles, but glancing through the pages many shooters registered less than 1000 targets in any discipline.

    4) What percentage of "active" shooters in a year (active = shot at least some registered targets) shot at fewer than 1000 in each discipline? What percentage shot at fewer than 1000 in any discipline? What percentage shot at fewer than 1000 total?

    5) What percentage of "active" shooters would be classified in class D singles in a four class system (i.e. under 89%)? What percentage would be classified under class B (92%)?

    In looking at the High Handicap Average List (Men) in the 2008 Average Book, I count 90 listed as 27 yarders before I come to one on shorter yardage - a Junior named Shane Bartow listed at 25.5 yards. According to the database, he has not shot any targets in the current target year and is still on the 25.5. His handicap average is listed as .9360. I see very few others in the rest of that High Handicap list who are not at 27 yards. The last one on the list averages .9215, from 27.

    6) If the answer to question #5 is what I suspect it is, how can anyone hold the position that mandatory reductions would make handicap more competitive? I suspect that more than half the "active" shooters do not have singles averages as high as the handicap averages of many 27 yarders, so would not be competitive if there were shooting handicap from the 16. Why? Because they do not shoot much, and do not shoot well when they do. But that's sort of a chicken or egg situation, isn't it? Do they not shoot well because they don't shoot much, or don't shoot much because they don't shoot well?

    I would really like to get at this data in a format I could manipulate, say in Excel format. I see the file is listed as a database file. I wonder if MS Access would open it, or do I need Oracle? I guess I'll ask George Cook.

    Neil, do you have the answers to some of my questions?

    Comments, anyone?
     
  2. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    You have mail, Larry

    Neil
     
  3. ric3677

    ric3677 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,511
    Location:
    Montana
    Larry, you have too much time on your hands......LOL....see you in May.

    Rick in Mt.
     
  4. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Larry- I hope you can get the data in a form you can analyze for us. I would find it very interesting.

    There is a problem with deceased members listed as current members. Sometimes the ATA is not notified of a members death and then there are a few shooters, like me, that are at times, when shooting, somewhere between the quick and the dead.

    Pat Ireland
     
  5. mkstephen

    mkstephen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Messages:
    675
    Location:
    Middletown, Indiana
    It's easy if you have the 3s (Shooting Sports Software) program and MSAccess.

    Load the ATA file into George Cooks program. Next set the classes;

    Setup at the top of the screen

    9-Class setup

    Automatic

    Select your classes then POST (if you don't POST there will be no classes)

    After this is done open a new MSAccess dB;

    Import data

    Paradox format

    File to import - C:\3S\ThreeSTrap\Data\MASTER.db (or whereever your MASTER.db is located)

    All data from the ATA will be imported into a table named MASTER within MSAccess. Also because you ran it through 3s and thanks to George Cook the column names will be correct.

    Michael Stephenson
     
  6. Hauser

    Hauser Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    860
    If the ATA has the information and the answers Larry ask for why isn't that information routinely published??


    If the ATA doesn't have detailed member demographic information then that should first thing that gets fixed before they make any decision regarding the future of the sport.


    Jerry Hauser
     
  7. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    I've published a lot of it right here, Jerry. You know, those graphs you make fun of. . . If anyone had asked about the rest, I'll bet I would have answered. Right now I'm occupied with trying to get an Oehler Model 84 to work and it looks like it's going to tie me up for a while. But if you have a specific question about ATA shooters in 2008, I'll answer it in pictures, the best way to get it across. Why you want to know will add to my motivation.

    I guess the reason I've not answered many of Larry's questions is that no one has asked.

    Neil
     
  8. Pocatello

    Pocatello Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,547
    Thanks to Neil, I now have the 2008 Average Book data in an Excel Sheet. Thanks to Michael, I now know how to get at the ATA data from George. I don't have Access on my home computer, but do at work, so will get at that later.

    Rick, maybe my problem is too much time on my hands, but I don't think so. I look forward to having more time after I retire. Also, unless the weather next Sunday is abysmal, I'll probably see you at Butte.
     
  9. Pocatello

    Pocatello Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,547
    Once again, many thanks to Neil for providing the 2008 Average Book data in Excel format. Here is some information I've gleaned about singles shooters for 2008:

    There were 31,301 shooters who registered singles targets (not leagues) in the 2008 target year. Total singles targets registered were 33,100,100 according to the Excel sheet, slightly less than the 33,123,450 that the book claims. I have no explanation for this discrepancy, and all the following information is based on the electronic data.

    The number of targets registered ranges from a high of 38,050 (Gerald Burkhart, OH) to a low of 25 by five different people.

    There were 32 members who registered 10,000 or more singles targets, 0.1% of the shooters who registered targets. The average of their averages was .9484, while the median of their averages was .9533, both low end of A class in a five class system.

    There were 584 shooters who registered between 5,000 and 9,999 singles targets, 1.9% of the shooters who registered singles targets. The average of their averages was .9460, while the median of their averages was .9536, again in the low end of A class in a five class system.

    There were 621 shooters who registered between 4,000 and 4,999 singles targets, 2.0% of the shooters who registered singles targets. The average of their averages was .9424, while the median of their averages was .9498, once again in the low end of A class in a five class system.

    There were 1,329 shooters who registered between 3,000 and 3,999 singles targets, 4.2% of the shooters who registered singles targets. The average of their averages was .9387, while the median of their averages was .9485, near the bottom of A class in a five class system.

    There were 2,613 shooters who registered between 2,000 and 2,999 singles targets, 8.3% of the shooters who registered singles targets. The average of their averages was .9302, while the median of their averages was .9400, right at the top end of B class in a five class system.

    There were 5,926 shooters who registered between 1,000 and 1,999 singles targets, 18.9% of the shooters who registered singles targets. The average of their averages was .9119, while the median of their averages was .9249, in the low end of B class in a five class system.

    There were 20,196 shooters who registered fewer than 1,000 singles targets, 64.5% of the shooters who registered singles targets. The average of their averages was .8515, while the median of their averages was .8880, essentially D class in a five class system.

    The average number of targets registered by an ATA singles shooter who shot singles was 1057.5. The median number registered (half shot more, half shot fewer) was 600. The mode (most common number registered) was 200.

    The average of singles averages was .8768, D class. The median of the ATA singles averages (half lower, half higher) was .9100, low end of B/high end of C. The mode (most common average) was .9400 (low end of A/high end of B).

    The correlation coefficient between targets attempted and singles average was about 0.30. This says to me that there is a positive relationship between the two (i.e. the more you shoot, the better you do), but not a strong relationship.

    2,535 shooters would be classified AA by their average in a five class system, 8.1% of the total. 6,877 would be classified A, 22.0% of the total. 6,489 would be classified B, 20.7% of the total. 4,529 would be classified C, 14.5% of the total. 10,871 would be classified in D class, 34.7% of the total.

    Finally, 17,314 (55.3% of the total) did not average at least .9200 in singles, and would not be competitive from the 16 in handicap compared to the 408 who averaged at least that high in handicap from the 27 yard line.

    More to come.
     
  10. 2labman

    2labman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    54
    "Finally, 17,314 (55.3% of the total) did not average at least .9200 in singles, and would not be competitive from the 16 in handicap compared to the 408 who averaged at least that high in handicap from the 27 yard line."

    I find this statistic eye opening!!!!!
     
  11. Hauser

    Hauser Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    860
    Let me put the question another way.


    When the change was made to the flight and angle rule in the mid 90s who was watching the shooter demographics to see if that change had unintended consequences once the change was made???


    Jerry Hauser
     
  12. One Eyed Left Handed

    One Eyed Left Handed TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    467
    Pocatello, this is in the top ten most interesting threads I've seen in years on this site. I wish I had something to add but don't other than more questions and conjecture.

    For instance, with the former location of Vandalia for the Grand, there were always an inordinate number of shooters compared to Ohio's population, many of whom shot not necessarily as competitor's but more like folks used to bowl, just for the fun of it.

    Point being, I'm curious how State level averages compare to overall averages. I'm a Kentucky shooter and am pretty sure that Kentucky's average targets shot are on the low side overall but I suspect shooter averages would be higher.

    My hats off to you for the time and effort. Same to Neil and others that got you this far.

    How about it Pocatello, are State average breakdowns along the same lines possible?

    Thanks,
    Eddie Quire
     
  13. mollyone

    mollyone TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    299
    I to wish I had something to add



    Top ten list for sure


    jpark
     
  14. Pocatello

    Pocatello Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,547
    Eddie, that's the beauty of having the data electronically - one can slice and dice it in many ways. I'm about half way through getting the info broken out by State: #Shooters, Total Singles Shot, Average Singles Targets per Shooter, Median Singles Targets per Shooter, Median Singles Average per Shooter. I am noticing a slight discrepancy with the Average Book again for most States in the total number of singles shot - I don't know why. For example, the book gives Alabama with 255,625, while the sheet gives them with 255,325.

    Anyway, I'll try to post it when I'm done later. Hopefully I'll be able to format it so it is readable.

    Thanks to all for the comments.
     
  15. Bob Hawkes

    Bob Hawkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,905
    Very informative Pocatello, I'm not wishing bad luck, but I hope you're able to get done with your quest before Spring reach's you. LOL. Shoot well and often while we can, Bob
     
  16. mkstephen

    mkstephen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Messages:
    675
    Location:
    Middletown, Indiana
    Pocatello. I get the same totals as you did for Alabama from the ATA data pull. I don't know why there would be a 300 bird difference unless it's a typo on the average book side.

    Singles = 255,325

    Handicap = 152,500

    Doubles = 72,000

    Michael Stephenson
     
  17. mkstephen

    mkstephen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Messages:
    675
    Location:
    Middletown, Indiana
    Pocatello:

    Here's another handicap statistic that will shock you:

    Given that entity's are states, provinces, etc. and

    Given all of the shooters in 2008 that shot handicap who registered 1500 or more targets in all entitys - average each entity by using total targets broken divided by total targets shot at for each entity.

    Conclusion: only 4 out of 59 entity's averaged greater than .88% in handicap.

    Example:

    UT - Utah - 132 shooters @ 1500 or more = 431,225 ahot at 386,481 broken - average = .8962 and they were one of the 4 high ones.

    Kinda says something for the .89 / .90 breakpoint for reductions doesn't it? Prehaps instead of figuring out a way to handicap the top dogs maybe we should help the not-so-skilled by raising the breakpoint which would allow them to shoot closer and more along their ability.
     
  18. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Michael and Larry, as I'm sure you will both conclude, there's shouldn't be _any_ breakpoint. After all, if it's OK for a 27-yarder to have a high average, why not someone closer?

    But as you will also see, it's won't help. The only people affected would be over 90 averagers (14 percent in 2003, probably not much changed in 2008) who don't get punches. It's a pretty small group, since with an average like that, you usually do get punches.

    The break point has gone from 87 in 1987 to 90 in the Central Zone, and the median handicap average really hasn't changed much at all because of the small number of people in the "affected group."

    Neil
     
  19. mkstephen

    mkstephen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Messages:
    675
    Location:
    Middletown, Indiana
    Neil,

    I agree with what you are saying. 'After all, if it's OK for a 27-yarder to have a high average, why not someone closer?' If we made the breakpoint handicap average say .92 shooters would be getting punches farther back before they could increase their average thereby negating the whole idea.

    However, what if we did away with punches and let the ATA computer award or take away yardage based upon handicap averages based upon a 1000 target review? The current 1000 target review for reductions allows a longer period of time for a shooter to show their ability while the punch system is a 'short' period.

    For example currently a shooter could shoot two complete state shoots in a row before getting a reduction review. However they could receive 2 1/2 yds punches during those same two state shoots if they shot really well. Using the ATA computer to average their last 1000 target average would level this disadvantage.

    Just some thoughts

    Michael Stephenson
     
  20. Pocatello

    Pocatello Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,547
    OK, let's try the Singles Data by State. Note that the targets are credited to the shooter's State of residence, not the location where they were shot. For example, I shot at 500 singles last year at the SW Grand in San Antonio. Those 500 targets were credited to Idaho, not Texas. Anyway, here goes:

    The first column is the home location listed for the shooter in the data.

    The second column is the number of shooters from that location.

    The third column is the total targets from that location. This is where I'm getting some discrepancies from the Average Book.

    The fourth column is the average number of targets shot by shooter from that location, i.e. total targets divided by number of shooters.

    The fifth column is the median number of targets by shooters from that location, i.e. half the shooters shot fewer, half shot more.

    The sixth column is the median average of shooters from that location, i.e. half had a lower average, half had a higher average.

    <strong>STATE</strong><strong>SHOOTERS IN STATE</strong><strong>TOTAL TARGETS</strong><strong>AVG TARGETS SHOT</strong><strong>MEDIAN TARGETS SHOT</strong><strong>MEDIAN AVERAGE</strong>
    [TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][TD][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td][/td]
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page
ata current member list
,
ata member list
,

ata membership list

,
ata shoot records members
,
how many ata current members