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

**How another sport handles mandatory reductions

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by sliverbulletexpress, Nov 9, 2011.

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

    sliverbulletexpress TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,645
    You can't compare trap shooting to fencing, makes no sense. In fencing you are....dueling....with the other competitor. If you are A and fight a D it's not a fair contest, may as well compare it to boxing put a featherweight against a heavyweight. In trap it has no bearing at all on your own score whether the other shooters are over qualified. If you have under qualified or sandbagging it still can't hurt...your...score either, but it can and will hurt your standings and winnings.
     
  2. $$$SHTR

    $$$SHTR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    756
    I Think Steve’s proposal has some merits. No changing shells, concrete, or target angles. You have 3 years to get a punch , or lose yardage. Would a place or show punch count, or only wins? If any punch under the current system counted, this would be very easy to get going.

    For the guys who refuse reductions so they can shoot with their friends, I’m pretty sure if this was implemented, nothing would change. They can still shoot with the same friends, just at a different yardage.

    I’m sure there would be heartburn at first, (like any change), but when the smoke cleared, the new system would be accepted and then praised.

    Tomas
     
  3. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    I'm interested...
     
  4. miketmx

    miketmx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,969
    How does the "Same" Sport handle Mandatory Reductions ? The PITA doesn't have any problem with Mandatory Reductions because PITA does not give out a Reduction unless you request it by sending in the appropriate Form with your Handicap average under the trigger point. Of course the PITA operates on a much smaller scale than ATA so this is not an administrative nightmare like it would be in ATA. In PITA there is no automatic half yard for a score of 96 but there is a full yard for a 97 or better. The ATA Handicap System could be improved if they allowed computer internet connection for receiving a Reduction and allowed you to "ACCEPT" a Reduction with an online Acceptance Form instead of nullifying your Reduction because you shoot 500 targets from your old yardage. They don't send a letter if they nullify your reduction. Technically speaking you could be disqualified for shooting from a yardage different from your "Official Yardage" but how does the ATA really know if you "Refuse" your computer generated reduction or merely have a problem with snail mail delivery ? How does the ATA know if you are shooting from Penalty Yardage or for that matter from your PITA yardage because it happens to be longer ?
     
  5. Brad Dysinger

    Brad Dysinger Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    578
    Good Thoughts, Thank You. Brad
     
  6. schockstrap

    schockstrap Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    325
    Other than changing statistics, how does the right to refuse a reduction hurt anything? I refused a reduction for the first time this year, and I had no good reason to do so other than this notion in my head that I didn't feel like I belonged at the shorter yardage. Making yardage reductions mandatory wouldn't make me want to quit the game, but I fail to see what it would truly help. I could personally give a rat's behind about someone wanting to stay at 27 yards and take a beating. Have at it.

    Fencing is different in the fact that you have to defend yourself in direct competition with another contestant. There is no such situation in ATA trap. In ATA trap, more highly skilled shooters are handicapped with distance from the target -- why is that any less valid of a system? If you want an invite-only championship event where local champion competes against local champion, it already exists -- it's called the champion of champions event during Grand week.

    If you only enjoy competing on an equal basis, shoot the singles and doubles events. Handicap is meant for the folks that enjoy competing on an artificially levelled playing field. I enjoy both and shoot all 3 events.

    --Dan
     
  7. Setterman

    Setterman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    11,143
    Makes sense to me.
     
  8. romie

    romie Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    910
    Dan
    You ar correct in my opinion. Who cares if you want to sit on the 27 and adverage 75.He will not be in the money.I have won money in a lot of handicaps from the 20 and hated that I didn't move back.I did not realise that a lot of the guys that were behind me should have been with me.

    The handicap system is ok.

    I still think the lead off guy in doubles should get a look at a pair when he moves from station to station but I will not open up that can of worms again.,,,,, or for now


    Monty
     
  9. daddiooo

    daddiooo TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,004
    Location:
    GEORGIA
    Yardage...it's MINE to earn with good scores. It's also MY option to refuse reductions.

    "request yardage" is a slap in the face to shooters who "earned" their way back with good competitive scores. Don't know who started that but it's a joke.

    Who does a mandatory reduction benefit???
     
  10. SirMissalott

    SirMissalott Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    2,241
    Maybe we could duel with shotguns?? Just a thought!
     
  11. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    Ha!! The 27 yarders would still win!!!
     
  12. Setterman

    Setterman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    11,143
    Steve, I'm still on the fence about this sport.
     
  13. Setterman

    Setterman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    11,143
    Maybe we should make Leo, and the BigDogs wear one of those mask when they shoot?

    Stock fit would be challenging!
     
  14. dverna

    dverna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,717
    I did not see any fat old men in the clip.

    NXSER,

    Here are the problems I see.

    First, there are too many HC shooters who have given up playing the money. They shoot to "have fun" and be with their buddies. Making HC more competitive is of little concern to them. Now, these are the guys who may play the money if they had a snowball's chance in hell of winning - but it will take time.

    Second, we have this "aura" about being a 27 yarder. Those who have "lucked out" and got there by shooting low 90's in small shoots, or getting a lucky score want to keep what they "earned" under the old rules. They do not care about being competitive. They do not play the money either - if they are smart.

    Third, the top dogs are averaging higher scores from the 27 than many ATA shooters can average from the 18 yard line. HC, as it stands, with mandatory punches for a 96, may still over HC many shooters. But I agree your system would reduce the gap. For the top dogs to support a change they would need to believe that having more people to play the options will offset the number of times they do not win. And that is unproven and will take time.

    On the plus side, many HC shooters are hopelessly outclassed. I do not see a lot of resistance for any change coming from we the "rabble". We will shoot HC anyway. A new system that may be better has no downside. So I wind up shooting from 2 yards closer (or whatever) - big deal.

    Don Verna
     
  15. $$$SHTR

    $$$SHTR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    756
    Doing away with the Bridemaid punches would also help. Should only be top score and ties. Also, the money punch never made a lick of sense to me.

    Tomas
     
  16. running bear

    running bear Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    622
    The money punch was to hit the sand baggers. Who shooting just shooting trap can make a living out of it with out giving lessons and other things? I thought trap shooting was suppose to be sport where you could get together with your friends and have a good time. Why does anyone care if I don't want to play the money and just shoot targets. Who am I hurting?

    Buck
     
  17. schockstrap

    schockstrap Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    325
    NSXER,

    I'm sorry, but you're going to have to help me out on this one... How does mandatory reduction help with the credibility of the sport? There is no classification in handicap -- you receive a "handicap" based upon your demonstrated skill, and you have the opportunity to reduce your handicap if you no longer become competitive. If you don't take advantage of that reduction, you can happily plod along at losing every single event until you die. I don't see how that gives anyone an unfair advantage.

    Classification is used in the singles and doubles events, and there you get classified at every shoot based on "known ability" (i.e., a judgement call). That's a much bigger farce than anything related to the handicap system. If you can average 94+% at singles for a few hundred targets, you should not be allowed to go below A class for at least a year.

    Perhaps you can explain how the classification system is used in fencing? If only a gold, a silver, and a bronze medal are awarded, are only members of the top class allowed to compete for them? If so, we already have that event at the Grand and you should be happy. If not, what are the classes used for?

    --Dan
     
  18. Avaldes

    Avaldes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,876
    Location:
    Central Coast of California
    Any sport where you play with swords is cool...I don't care what anyone says! :)
     
  19. grnberetcj

    grnberetcj Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,680
    Oh crap...the easiest fix to the dreaded "H" problem to institute a system like the type golf uses.

    Put everyone on the 27 yd. line and a combined average will dictate how many targets will be their "Handicap".

    Curt
     
  20. schockstrap

    schockstrap Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    325
    So, the highly ranked contestants get an advantage at Nationals (and really at local tournaments as well), and that makes it more credible?

    I understand that you are proposing an alternative _classification_ system for trap, but what I keep hinting at is the fact that a handicap is NOT a classification. It is, by definition, a way to provide a disadvantage to contestants of higher skill in order to level the playing field. In your fencing example, a contestant's classification is used to give them an advantage over the field -- an earned advantage that they can lose if they fail to prove worthiness. It's the exact opposite of the ATA handicap system. A mandatory reduction in ATA handicap would be, in fact, forcing an advantage onto a contestant that has failed to be competitive over the last 1000 targets. If that contestant then wins from 20 yards instead of 21, is it more credible?

    --Dan
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.