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

category rule, the truth from one of the authors

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by dangwood, Sep 10, 2009.

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

    dangwood TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    20
    Hi folks...My name is Dan Wood and I'm the ATA delegate from Iowa. I will also admit that I am one of the people who helped draft the new category rule and lobbied other delegates for its passage. Now let me explain how the rule came to be. Over the past three years I've had some people asking my thoughts on how to clean up the category rules so that it would not be as confusing as to when/where/how and what declarations need to be made. I and two others put together this rule at our state shoot in July. I will not name them on this forum. To clarify, the suggested rule we came up with is part B of the rules passed. It was my intent to bring this to the central zone meeting and then to the BOD meeting on Thursday night, but on the second morning of the Grand, a member of the E.C. showed me what is now part A of the rule passed and asked me what I thought. I told him I liked the idea and that we had a suggestion along the same lines.He looked at our idea and felt it was compatible with what he had said he would take it to the C.H.C. and rules committee and get their opinion. Two days later it was approved by them and put into its present wording and presented at each zone meeting. Now, did we make this rule to help speed up the shoot-offs at the Grand? No, but by the time the rule was presented at the central zone meeting I felt that it would definately help. I've read many opinions of people who stated that the category declarations were just an excuse for the shoot-offs running late, but I don't recall seeing any of them in the shoot-off building or for that matter even helping to referee!! I also did not mind explaining to a cat. shooter what they were eligible for. The proglem comes when they find out and then won't declare until the other cat. shooters declare! Seriosly, this took one shooter one and a half hours to declare. Not one shoot-off sheet can be filled out until we know who is shooting for what. Now I'm sure that most everyone on here thinks that most cat shooters are against the rule change. At the Heartland Grand I did have some express their dislike of the rule, but the majority liked the rule change after getting the right interpretation of the rule and it was not just those that were chasing AA points. In the words of one lady "I no longer need to worry about how much time I have to declare or whether I was making the right declaration." Now I will admit the added money was one thing that didn't come to mind when drafting the rule, but hopefully that will be taken into consideration when the new programs are written. And for those of you who think I have no empathy for the cat. shooters, I started shooting as a Jr. at the age of sixteen and I am now the proud father of a thirteen year old Lady Sub-Jr. who won her first Sub-Jr trophies at the H.G last week-end. Please, all I'm asking is give it some time before you make your decision on whether you like the rule or not. And remember, all issues have at least two sides and it's rare that anything is ever cut and dried. I will respect everyone's opinion as long as it is presented rationally. All I ask is the same in return. Respectfully submitted, Dan G Wood Iowa ATA delegate
     
  2. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Dan- I recognize the problem you expressed. I have many times been involved in directing shoot offs at 1 A.M. If we are trying to solve a shoot off problem with a rule change, than the change should be directed specifically at shoot off. This rule change simply moves the problem to classification.

    I have a problem with a class C Vet shooting a 199 being required to shoot off against three AAA Vets while class C is won by another shooing a 196. Something like this will happen several times at the Dixie Grand.

    At the Southern Grand, a Junior, Lady class C shooter will face a dilemma at classification. At larger shoots, any category shooter who is not at least a AA shooter would probably be best advised to give up their category and just shoot for class.

    Pat Ireland
     
  3. Don S

    Don S Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    287
    Having all classification personnel aware of the new rule and its ramifications would be a good start. This new rule has not even made the rulebook yet and already many are confused.
     
  4. 870

    870 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,390
    Dan:

    I appreciate that actually dealing with live situations is always more complicated than a rule change would seem to indicate, but I really do not like this change for the reason Pat posted above. I simply feel that single issue is more important than any of the good intentions involved in the change.

    As Paul mentions above, I do not understand why a shootoff would be held up by a CAT shooter for 1.5 hours? The rule was that they had 15 to 45 minutes and generally it defaulted to 15 minutes after the event ends. I understand trying to be nice and accomodate shooters, but I'd rather that rule was enforced than creating the new rule that results in the situation Pat mentioned above.

    Seems w/ the new rule at the larger shoots, categories will be only for AAA shooters. Anyone else declaring is probably making a bad decision. Really does not seem right to me.
     
  5. Jay Adams

    Jay Adams TS Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Messages:
    53
    Dan,

    There is no reason a category shooter should hold up shoot offs for 1.5 hours. If they can't make up their mind, shoot off personnel make it up for them!

    Also, why couldn't this have been a policy enforced at the Grand...or at least allowed states to follow. I still don't have a clear answer on this.

    This is NOT a problem at Wisconsin and I am very disappointed that we will have to follow it at our State Shoot.

    Jay Adams
    WI ATA Delegate
     
  6. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,226
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    I respect the difficult job most of our state delegates do year in and year out!! Thank you one and all!

    Unintended consequences from rule changes usually requires more amendments to cover those too. Our rule book is way too thick now and growing by leaps and bounds. Only you guys can stop all that nonsense by making the games rules apply evenly across the sport for what's best for the game overall, not the individual shooter whims.

    As the rule book now stands, even a good Philadelphia lawyer might get confused at times and it's getting worse as other improvements are added? Maybe new candidates for delegate should be required to pass a history test of our sport since it began? That may slim down the size of rule books needed to enhance our game with less confusion? JMHO on what our forefathers in the sport did when it worked so well.

    Hap
     
  7. Clay Addict

    Clay Addict Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    213
    Look at it another way. If I am a wheelchair, lady, vet I have the opprotunity to shoot for possibly dozens of trophies. Lets think about this, she is shooting for sex, class, wheel chair, event champ, and vet. 5 opportunities with possibly 3 tropyies each for a total of 15. However, if I am a non category shooter I will get to shoot for class and champ. 2 opportunities with possibly 3 trophies each for a total of 6. I personally do not have a problem either way but I am not involved in the management of any shoots (thank God). Just food for thought.
    CA
     
  8. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Dan, by Bob Stuart and Mark Steven's fine rules about management's assignment of category in the absence of a declaration in the 2009 Grand program, a shooter got only one category. Was it the same at the shootoff window at the Grand? A young lady walks up and says "I want category.? Did she get asked "Junior or Lady?" or did she get to go on for both?

    Neil
     
  9. Jack10

    Jack10 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3
    I have to agree with 870. Almost all categories are now only for AA or AAA shooters. Anyone in A thru D class would not be very smart to declare for a cat. The exception seems to be chair shooters which looks to me like age discrimination.

    Why are we giving the AA and AAA shooters more trophies to shoot for than the other shooters when they are the ones that win the most trophies anyway.
     
  10. scooterbum

    scooterbum Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    Why do shooters capable of a high score need to shoot in a category?

    Thank you,
    Longshooter
     
  11. perga1

    perga1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,474
    Why don;t we just go back to the rule book that was in effect in 1960's before it was made better? JRM
     
  12. sliverbulletexpress

    sliverbulletexpress TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,645
  13. scooterbum

    scooterbum Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    ("I have a problem with a class C Vet shooting a 199 being required to shoot off against three AAA Vets while class C is won by another shooing a 196.")

    Seems appropriate to me!

    Longshooter
     
  14. 870

    870 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,390
    Longshooter:

    Why does that seem appropriate to you? The Class is being won by a Vet anyway, just doesn't seem appropriate it is the Vet with a lower score.
     
  15. 320090T

    320090T Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,348
    Location:
    Indiana
    Do away with cats, all shoot classes, only more of them???
     
  16. scooterbum

    scooterbum Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    If he can run with the big dogs, then he should. The 196 score seems more appropriate of a c class shooter. NO?

    Longshooter
     
  17. dangwood

    dangwood TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    20
    Folks,
    I posted on this forum in order to clarify a rule and to let everyone know how it developed. Please give it a chance to work.

    Respectfully submitted,

    Dan Wood
    Iowa ATA Delegate
     
  18. recurvyarcher

    recurvyarcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,450
    Dan, you did say above that you would respect everyone's opinions as long as they were given in a reasonable manner. I believe that people are complying with that.

    I agree with Pat Ireland and others. Imposing a time limit on the declaration process would have met your end goal without alienating some of your category shooters.

    Of course, some of your category shooters are going to like this rule simply for the fact that it reduces their competition. For example, Ladies no longer have to compete with the Jr. and subjunior shooters who happen to shoot better.
     
  19. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Dan- Your plea to give the new rule a year or two to see how it works is an unreasonable request to make to a Sr Vet. A year or two test may appear to be a good idea to a 40 year old shooter but not a 70 year old shooter. Many shooters only have a year or two left to shoot. Many Jr and Sub Jr shooters only have a year of so left in their category. A year can be important.

    Pat Ireland
     
  20. monroesc

    monroesc Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    385
    Good point Pat!

    The people making and changing these rules need to have a little more forethought! When it is stated that "we didn't think about added money" that just goes to show you that not enough thought went into this at all!

    I don't see a big enough advantage to this rule--only a nightmare on many avenues.

    Sara Dean
    NE OH Director
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.