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

MANDATORY REDUCTIONS

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by Dr.Longshot, Oct 31, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dr.Longshot

    Dr.Longshot Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,722
    IF A SHOOTER CANNOT MAINTAIN A 90% AVERAGE AT HIS PRESENT YARDAGE, HE WILL BE AUTOMATICALLY REDUCED UNTIL HE IS AT A YARDAGE WHERE HE CAN MAINTAIN 90% AVG.

    REDUCTIONS CAN NOT BE REFUSED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

    HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE NUMBER OF SHOOTERS ON THE 27 YD LINE?

    HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE THE SCORES THEY HAVE BROKE AT THE 27 YD LINE, THEIR ACTUAL TARGET BREAKING ABILITY.

    AT 1000 TARGET REVIEW BY COMPUTER, THE COMPUTER GENERATES YARDAGE REDUCTIONS,
    THESE REDUCTIONS CANNOT BE REFUSED. IF SHOOTER IS ON A 2 YEAR HOLD FROM WINNING A MAJOR EVENT, HE IS STUCK THERE FOR THE 2 YEAR PERIOD.

    THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED MANY TIMES, A SHOOTERS ABILITY WILL DETERMINE HIS YARDAGE.

    EACH SHOOTERS ABILITY TO MAINTAIN AVERAGE DETERMINED BY THEIR ZONE, SOME ARE 89%
    AND SOME ARE 90%

    Gary Bryant
    Dr.longshot
     
  2. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    "There's no moralist more committed than a former sinner . . ."

    Neil
     
  3. grntitan

    grntitan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    17,209
    Location:
    IL(The gun friendly Southern Part)
    Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah.................................
     
  4. jim brown

    jim brown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,158
    Location:
    Nebraska
    Lots of people will quit shootin because they can't squad with their friends.

    jim brown
     
  5. FlaLagarto

    FlaLagarto Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,458
    Dr Longwind..

    Just looking at averages doesn't always show the whole picture.

    Example: Looking at your page on the ATA web site you should have been taking reductions since 2003. I only see 3 years in your career where you would not have gotten reductions.
     
  6. Setterman

    Setterman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    11,146
    I don't really believe that's true Jim. Never stopped anyone that I know of, but this will never happen anyway. Whats the incentive to change this? What does it hurt?

    BTW, the NSCA is changing its classification system, and it has some of the upper class shooters PO'd as it will move a number of them down in classification. They basically eliminated voluntary refusal of reduction.
    This will get interesting. Around 1500 Master Class shooters now......could be only 300 with the new system.
     
  7. mike campbell

    mike campbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    926
    And still 200 too many.
     
  8. Jeff P

    Jeff P Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,689
    Naw, Yukon's right on this one...I shoot with him. He'll stink it up at 'caps for weeks on end.

    But because we live in Alaska and shoot all winter, eventually he sucks up a cheap win with an 86 or something, and that starts his 1000 bird clock all over again. Happens to all the good shooters up here. Personally, I'm still on the 26.5 trying to get my last cheap half yard - and I WRECKED my average last winter (shot 3 events in the 70s at zero or colder) trying to win one to get to the fence.

    But even given all that, what the hell business is it of ANYONE besides the shooter what yardage he stands at??? As Jim Brown puts it...some folks will quit shooting if they can't squad with their friends. Some guys just want to shoot at the 27, and they don't care what their score is.

    There's room in the game for everyone. Every guy who stands back too far and can't win is just one less guy you have to beat. Shouldn't be anyone's business but theirs.

    In general, I'm in favor of making a reduction a BIT easier to get, but you shouldn't force it on a guy.

    You could solve the whole damn problem by making two little changes: offer a reduction at 91 instead of 90, and move the half yard punch on score from 96 to 97. That would increase the number of shooters who COULD move up, and KEEP folks from moving back so fast on the score of 96.

    Sounds pretty democrat to me...you've never met most of us, but you seem to think you know what's best for all of us.

    UPDATED with 'increase' the break point. Thanks, PERGA!
     
  9. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    So what are your plans for those who no longer shoot singles and cannot be reduced because they don't have the required singles targets?? Hmmmm?
     
  10. tom berry

    tom berry Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    760
    Location:
    Winterset, IA
    Yukon,

    If I'm understanding the Dr's suggestion properly, it won't affect you at all. He's referring to those that yet reductions now and making those mandatory.

    Since you have the occasionally win, even with an 84, you wouldn't be affected.

    At least that's how I interpretted the OP.

    And, I agree with Jeff. Eliminate the automatic 1/2 yard for the 96.
     
  11. Setterman

    Setterman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    11,146
    Jeff and Yukon, Find a Condo in Florida or Arizona and shoot there in the winter! When you find a cheap one let me know. Heck, lets buy a quadaplex!
    We basically have 4 months of good shooting weather. Throw in the job, family, and other stuff, and I can't even get enough birds in to qualify for the state team.

    It's got to be tough for you guys.
     
  12. rustygun

    rustygun Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    314
    I've read on this site that many consider registered shooting more of a social event, than a competition.

    Why don't we have two classes, Social and Competitive, Social guys could shoot whatever yardage they feel like, fluff targets, and each get a letter of participation at the end of the shoot.

    Competitive Class, Harder targets, cash prizes,make it tougher to gain yardage,higher scores to move back.
     
  13. running bear

    running bear Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    622
    Why do you care where people want ot shoot? This has been hashed out for years.
    If you want the reductions, take them, let the rest alone.

    Buck
     
  14. milton03

    milton03 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    32
    Big M:
    Admittedly have not kept up with the "rules" as I should. I thought the rule was that if you maintained a 96+ at 16 you couldn't be reduced below the 24. Is there now a 16 yard target requirement?

    Yukon:
    Considering todays handicap has virtually become a miss and out contest, I would recommend eliminating all punches for scores below 97 for events with less than 125 shooters excepting state shoots and/or ATA zone competitions.

    As to refusing reductions - guilty as charged. Had made it to AA/25 when I got out of shooting in 1981. Returned to the game in 2001 and with eyes/reflex's diminishing quite rapidly as I approach my Veteran status I am no longer very competitive at 16 or doubles. My one goal was to make it to the back fence which I finally did acheive at the Grand this year. I would agree with other posters, if your dumb enough to stand there and take a beating so be it - just don't complian about it.

    Shoot well, Milt
     
  15. jdsfarms

    jdsfarms Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,506
    You want harder targets and then people have to move up into a closer group doesn't make any sense unless we are gonna quit keeping score so nobody gets there feeling hurt AKA know as the Obama plan "all should be deemed equal regardless of ability or dedication to work harder to better themselves" I don't think reductions should be mandatory but if you you don't take them you should give up all right to bitch about the handicap system,thats my first question to people who complain,I'm guessing there would be a lot less posters on here who keep bringin it up over and over again.Jerry
     
  16. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    Milton

    page 66 #9 under 'review process ' 500 singles requirement....
     
  17. milton03

    milton03 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    32
    Big M:
    Got it - Thanks. Have to admit in all the years I've been around this game that's one I missed.
     
  18. Dr.Longshot

    Dr.Longshot Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,722
    It should not make any difference on handicap mandatory reductions concerning 16 yard targets, I shoot few singles, I personally do not like singles, we always seem to get more handicap entries.

    The 500 singles rule I believe is to get you to shoot more tagets.

    I feel you must maintain the 89 and 90 % average to stay on your yardage.

    No one should be allowed to refuse reduction.

    Flagrato I never ever refused a reduction, I had 3, 2 year yardage freezes because of wins.

    You sould have to maintain 89 or 90% average to stay at your yardage.

    Just like auto racing, slower cars are farther back in the pack.

    Like baseball either you are in the major league or in the minor leagues, performance dictates where you are.

    Gary Bryant
    Dr.longshot
     
  19. Hal1225

    Hal1225 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    442
    Rules were there long before I came around, so I just do what I'm told. Yardage doesn't bother me one bit. I squeeze the trigger the same no matter what spot I stand on. Missing comes just as easy too.


    Harry
     
  20. Dr.Longshot

    Dr.Longshot Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,722
    Carl Chadwell the Male golfers have to make the cut, Tiger Woods has failed numerous times lately.

    Ohio was in the 89%+ for average attainment until Ohio was upped to 90%
    but I Did maintain an average of 89+% 1969 89.94-1980 90%-1983 89%-1985 89%
    2000 90.45% -2002 90.68%- 2003 90.28% 2010 89%.

    Carl I had wins at major shoots that held me on yardage 3 times for 2 years.

    I never ever refused a reduction. I had reductions which do not show, but wins took me right back to the 27. My wins were at very large shoots, and also yardage increases at large shoots.

    What I am trying to say a person should have to maintain an ATA average to stay on their yardage attainment.

    And I agree on the no half yards on a score of 96 or lower for the smaller shoots of 15 or less shooters.

    Me making the game harder, yes I want the game harder, if you cannot perform on 3 hole targets and maintain your yardage you should be reduced.

    How they ever come to the rule a shooter could refuse a reduction is beyond me.

    It should have never been allowed in the first place.

    And now in my old age and lack of funds cannot shoot as many targets as I would like to.

    But this SPORT needs a few changes or it is going to die.

    Sporting clays are getting more shooters than SKEET and TRAP put together.

    Now you tell me the reason for that?

    I have stupidly traded guns I shot well over the years, that explains that score in the 60s at Jaquas, a gun straight off the rack that did not fit.

    And the score in the 70s at Ohio State Shoot.

    Gary Bryant
    Dr.longshot
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.