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

Does Making It Easier Increase Participation?

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by MTA Tom, May 10, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MTA Tom

    MTA Tom Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,301
    Many here feel strongly that the decrease in registered trap participation over the years is linked to changes that have made the game easier.

    It was interesting to see a a parallel golf discussion titled "A Golf Ball That Won’t Slice Comes With a Catch: It’s Illegal" in today's New York Times.

    "Dick Rugge, the senior technical director at the U.S.G.A., has little use for the argument that making the game easier will foster golf’s growth.

    'For the last 15 years, advances in conforming club and ball technologies have made it easier to play,” he said. “So we’ve already had a 15-year experiment on this make-it-easier logic. And what have been the results? Participation has not gone up. So we’re not going to dumb it down.' "
     
  2. GoldEx

    GoldEx Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,228
    Location:
    Howell, MI
    Tom, I think that any sport that rewards mediocrity is destined to ultimately fail. Look at NASCAR. They had the world by the ass and had to go make the cars as equal as possible and have parity amongst the brands and make sure that nobody has an unfair advantage and they are dying now. The sport has become boring to watch anymore and I was a big fan for a lot of years. Same can be said for trap shooting.

    Not much will change in trap by making the game harder again. The great shooters will still dominate the game just as they always have. They will continue to post the highest scores because they are in fact better shooters. Very simple concept.

    Everyone including these top guns will just have a slightly lower average than they do now. It will speed up parts of the game too. Go back to a 3 hole target and you won't have as many 200 straights in the 16's to have to provide free shoot off targets for. You won't see nearly as many 100 straights in the caps either. Lots of this stuff has been beat to death for years but going to an ounce at 1290 FPS would change things a lot too. No need for a 30 yard line at least for now. All of the mathmatical bull crap posted here aboout how a perfectly pointed target can still be missed with an ounce is just that.. Bull Crap. If it were true, the scores in the olympics in bunker trap (A much harder game anyway) would have gone down yet they went up. The core of the pattern is still hot. You will lose birds on the fringe. Which means... You didn't point it right.

    Only way to find out is to do it Tom but as long as the game is dominated (run) by a group of aging men who refuse to acknowledge their own mortality we'll never know.

    JK
     
  3. motrap

    motrap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    156
    Location:
    MO
    I'm with the group that believes that making the game easier is counter-productive to increasing participation -

    It is already currently daunting to see that to win; one must first be perfect thru the initial 100 (or 200)targets ..... and then master a lengthy "shoot-off / endurance test" to actually garner the trophy .......

    Making it even easier yet ( forcing even longer endurance shoot-offs against even more competitors ) only aggravates this circumstance .......

    If targets were harder, allowing for a potential win with less than a perfect score ( like in the old days when low 90's won most handicap events, even at State shoots 99's & 100's were very rare ), more shooters would feel they have a chance ..... everyone has broken a 88 or 89 at least a couple times ...... the perception of being able to win would be tremendously enhanced
     
  4. dverna

    dverna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,717
    Great comments guys.

    I also would prefer tougher targets and smaller payloads. It would be motivating to think a 198 or 199 might win in AA. Now, a miss means you are out of it.

    Although a move to 1 oz provides a paltry $.30-.35 savings per box, it does reduce costs for those you whine about stuff like that. The big advantage is lowering HC scores without having to address target set up or adding concrete. HC is in trouble if the big dogs continue to average over 94. JMHO.

    Don Verna
     
  5. BIGDON

    BIGDON Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,624
    Location:
    Michigan
    We could always get to the point where we don't keep score and everybody gets a trophy. All 5 contestants would be happy. We have already made it to easy. Just enforce the rules we have would be a start.

    Don
     
  6. quartering

    quartering Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,440
    nope. cheaper makes it easier to participate. good luck with it
     
  7. BigBearRod

    BigBearRod Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    94
    Doesn't the "A" stand for Amateur??? Why are there shooters that have been in the top AA catagory for 20 years still "amateur"??? Maybe they should create a "professional" catagory and move them up. This wouldn't make it easier, just make it more interesting and matbe draw more to trying it.

    Rod
     
  8. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    With the cost of ammunition being what it is today, fewer targets that mean more would bring the cost of shooting down and return trap to a shooting skill game instead of a mental focus longevity game. Back when ammo was relatively cheap a 200 target 2-hole singles presentation might have been attractive to a lot of people. Today I think 100 singles with a 3-hole presentation would. I don't shoot trap because the high costs on boring 2-hole targets is not attractive to me. If ATA was throwing fewer singles but with a 3-hole presentation I would probably take it up.
     
  9. 3357

    3357 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    769
    3 hole targets and 1 ounce loads would give everyone an opportunity to compete.

    The need for perfect scores keeps many people from shooting registered targets.

    Phil Kiner was/is correct, 1 ounce loads (and 3 hole targets) would off-set advances in firearms, ammunition, and mental management and give everyone a chance in competition.

    Jess Reed
     
  10. Mark T

    Mark T TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    46
    Just a simple question. If trapshooting is so easy whay are there not more perfect scores? Most shooters have the skills to shoot as well as the "Big Guns". The problem is the same as in many other endeavors and that is people ecpect that they can just go out and participate periodically at something and be the best. You have to work at something more than 1 or 2 time a week to be the best at it and become proficient. That's the difference between the average shooter and the best shooters. The best shooters shoot alot and work at improving their game as well as they take it seriously whereas most of the other shooters are there to have a good time.

    For those skeptics out there read the new book by Michale Oher and see what he says made him a success besides just some good luck it may just open your eyes a little.
     
  11. Matt Colman

    Matt Colman Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    108
    I agree with the 1oz loads, 3 hole targets. These will reduce the number of perfect scores and may reduce the number and length of shoot offs. But this is not going to give you any advantage over the same Big Dogs that are now winning everything. The best will still be the best.
     
  12. TD1958

    TD1958 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    596
    I agree that the smaller payloads and 3 hole targets will change the game per say for a short period of time but as it was said along time ago. The cream will always rise to the top. In other words you may give some people a false sense of winning for awhile until the big dogs as you say it figure the targets and smaller pay loads out then you will be right back here trying to figure out how to make the game more competable for all. Just my opinion. Tim
     
  13. superxjeff

    superxjeff Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,781
    Tell me this guys.. Why do you guys think that sporting clays is gaining new shooters at 3 times the speed trap is?


    Trapshooting in Oregon where I live is dying on the vine not enough new shooters to replace the ones that are dropping out or passing away.

    Sporting clays is going gangbusters and one local club that put in a sporting clays range is now doing great when before it was just hanging on.

    Now this is true and can not be denied. The question is, is it as simple as sporting is just more fun? Jeff
     
  14. stokinpls

    stokinpls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,489
    Let's see, you take a sport involving a bunch of frustrated perfectionists and make it more difficult to achieve perfection, then expect them to hang around? Set it up so the usual score is a 70 and then take a census.

    I don't have an answer either, but if I were to guess, besides the increasing expenses, the realization that you're going to be waiting 4-5 hours between events is what makes shooters look elsewhere.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.