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

My Final Remark on 3 hole Targets

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Pony Keg, Jul 24, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Pony Keg

    Pony Keg TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Ok, Ok, Ok, Here is what I am reading into this discussion.

    1) 3 hole targets are never going to come back because they are too hard.
    2) If the ATA throws 3 hole targets, shooters will leave the sport.
    3) If shooters leave the sport, the ATA and the Clubs will make less money.
    4) Shooters (customers) pay for easy targets.
    5) It is not fair that the AAA shooters will win all the time with 3 hole targets.

    You have got to be !&%$#@!# kidding me. Does any reader here realize how stupid these arguments are, especially the last one? The AAA 27 yard shooters win all the time now.

    I have a new proposal: NEW ATA TARGET SETTINGS

    Every club now has to throw a 0 hole target. Set the machine to manual and throw a straight away target 10 feet high and 35mph. Use a hoop to check the flight.

    1) 2 hole targets are too hard so they will never come back to haunt the sport.
    2) The ATA will have an increase in shooters. Shooters will be lining up at the gate to shoot the easy targets.
    3) More shooters mean more money for the ATA and the Clubs.
    4) Shooters (customers) will get to pay for easy targets.
    5) The D, C, & B Class shooters will all become AAA 27 yard shooters over night. Fairness is what the ATA is all about.

    We can all high five and pat each other on the butt when we are done with each round.

    Double events will be removed from the programs because only half the registered shooters like them anyhow. We can shoot more Singles = More MONEY

    Make sure we start a new record book so no one in the future confuses the new shooters with REAL MEN like Frank Little , Kay Ohye, or all the past and present great shooters who had to shoot at the dreaded 2 or 3 hole target.

    Jeff Warren
     
  2. cim jr.

    cim jr. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    43
    Wow! What a stupid idea.
     
  3. Delbert

    Delbert TS Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2008
    Messages:
    409
    Mr. Keg, I like your idea but I think the ATA should go to 1-hole targets for awhile to get everybody used to the change. That way the shooters can show improvement twice. Why should they bother trying to actually get better when they can just think they're getting better?
     
  4. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Jeff Warren - I do regret to inform you that you just failed basic logic. You attempted to support "if 2 is better than 3, then 1 must be better than 2 and 0 would be better than one". You attempted to use a syllogism in your deductive reasoning. But, a couple of years ago Aristotle explained that a syllogism must have two propositions that overlap. The propositions in your syllogism do not overlap so your logic completely fails.

    I would suggest that you study deductive reasoning for some time and try again.

    Pat Ireland
     
  5. grnberetcj

    grnberetcj Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,680
    Dang it...where's Sherlock when ya need him?

    60 & 60,

    Curt
     
  6. Mr Newbius©

    Mr Newbius© TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,463
    So I take it 4 hole targets are out of the question for good?

    What are your feelings and thoughts on the ATA requiring doubles to be thrown on wobble traps?
     
  7. BDodd

    BDodd TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,594
    So, none of you see just a modicum of irony, satire, mockery, paradox, sarcasm, twist, or just plain humor in this original post? But then, I've not involved my own self in the first of a suggested pair of postings so maybe I'm on the wrong ferry.....Bob Dodd
     
  8. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Pat, while you wrote "Aristotle explained that a syllogism must have two propositions that overlap" I think if you reconsider you will agree that a classical syllogism has three propositions, and three terms, each of which appears twice.

    I'm sure you did not intend to mislead the readers of TS.com in this way.

    Neil
     
  9. Mr Newbius©

    Mr Newbius© TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,463
    Bob ... get off that boat, there are only 2 boats around here and 1 of them is the trap boat and the other is the skeet boat so if your on the wrong boat you must be ... um ... uh ... you sure look cute in that pink skirt Bob.
     
  10. BDodd

    BDodd TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,594
    Speaking for Pat, if I may Neil, isn't your third proposition actually the conclusion and not a proposition?....Bob Dodd
     
  11. BDodd

    BDodd TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,594
    Sir Mr., I travel on ALL boats with pride occasionally to the consternation of others....Bob Dodd
     
  12. Mr Newbius©

    Mr Newbius© TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,463
    Oh ... The Consternation ... aint that a big Navy ship that totes around them planes?
     
  13. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    I believe, Bob, that they are all propositions. They are differentiated: the first two are premises, the third the conclusion, but they all remain propositions.

    Neil
     
  14. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Well Pony Keg you manager to worm out of that one!!!!!!!!!!!

    You didn't get your way so you get real sarcastic and then cut and run. All for the HONOR of the sport. Yeah Right!!!!!

    Bob Lawless
     
  15. BDodd

    BDodd TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,594
    OK, I'll buy that Neil!
     
  16. Pony Keg

    Pony Keg TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Sarcasm is not my strong point. I just believe that we should go back to 3 hole targets. I do understand that the ATA is a business. I understand that each club is a business and needs to throw as many targets as possible. I could ramble on all day and get a horrible case of carpel tunnel syndrome. I just believe that the sport will be better served in the long run with the 3 hole target. If I am not mistaken, the 1970's were the heyday for the trap shooting and the ATA. Also, if I am not mistaken the 1970's were the heyday for the MONEY shooters as well. I was told a man left the VA state shoot in the early 1970's with over $35,000.00 dollars in his pocket. In today's money that would be about $300,000.00 dollars. The first mistake may have been to make the targets easier for the top 1% of the shooters. Then, run off the money shooters that were mid yardage. And next all the money shooters left the sport. Is there a correlation with the money shooters leaving and the number of shooters dropping out. If I have a better chance to win a big pile of money @ the 24 or 25 yard line with 3 hole birds then I do with the 2 hole birds it would make since for me to stay. If the 27 yard shooter has a better chance at the 27 then the mid yardage shooter then there will be less money and fewer shooters. Play hold-em for free. Then, play hold-em for money. It is a totally different game. In the 1970's there were a lot more money shooters and people who came out just to bet on the shooters and run up the money and more people got involved? Then, the money left the sport and so did a ton of shooters.

    As I have written, I believe the SPORT should honor the original field of play. The original post was not about money or averages or players money, it was about the three hole target rule set forth in I guess the 1960’s.

    Voting should not be an option because people will get there feelings hurt and leave the game. Democracy is also known as MOB rule.

    I am new to this game. I probably do not have all my history correct. I am still learning. I hear from so many old timers about the heydays of the 70’s and all the big money and the money shooters and people wanted to be a part of that. Nothing gets people’s attention like MONEY. Look at Texas Hold-em. All that media attention every kid in the world wants to be a great Hold-em player and win the World Series of Poker.

    Very truly yours,

    Jeff Warren III
     
  17. jevoliva

    jevoliva Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    889
    First off, Jeff, is that $35,000 in 1970 money is worth $197,384.66 now.

    Second, you were "told" this? Can anyone back this up?

    Everyone want to go to three hole targets to make it more equitable. How will it achieve this? The AAA shooters will lose MAYBE 0.5% on their singles average but they still will be the best. The C & D class shooters will probably lose anywhere from one to three precentage points. How does this make it more equitable for everyone?

    You really think making a harder target makes it more equal on handicap? Please... the big dogs will still win. The only way to even the field on that is pour more concrete. Everyone says that we cannot do that, but why not start at the Grand and go from there? If a 27 yard shooter earns yardage, then they move farther back. Anywhere there is an option to shoot 28-30 yards, you shoot that. If not, you shoot from the 27. If you earn honoray yardage throughout the year, then when you come to a club you shoot from the 28. Punches from 28 to 29 or 30 can only occur at shoots that have the extra concrete.

    The ATA has gone through this before. If memory serves, the max yardage used to be 23, then changed to 25, then to 27? Shooters and technology has improved, so why not pour more concrete.

    Also, no one has even approached for the longest shoot-off record in the last 20 years (approx) -- to me, that means 2 hole targets are fine for singles.

    John
     
  18. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Neil- Yes, a syllogism must have three propositions, but only the first two must overlap. The conclusion does not overlap the first two propositions. I stated that a syllogism must have two propositions that overlap. I did not state that a syllogism only has two propositions.

    And, this is much more fun than talking about 3 hole targets.

    Pat Ireland
     
  19. Smiley

    Smiley Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    148
    With all the talk about monet being won perhaps the ATA should become the PTA(Professional Trapshooters Association).
    Smiley
     
  20. Pony Keg

    Pony Keg TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    John, I understand the mentality of punishing the rich because they are rich or punishing the top shooters because they are the top shooters. Why punish the poor who are the majority when you can punish the rich who are the minority. Let’s increase the yardage to 30, that makes total since to punish the top 1% of the sport. The majority makes the rich pay higher taxes because they are successful. So, let’s make it harder on the shooters who are successful. Why should you have to practice more or work harder yourself? I AM NOT REFERING TO YOU PERSONALLY. Now who do you really punish but the clubs and venues who have to pay for new concrete. The AAA 27 yard top 1% will still kick our butts from the 30 yard line, I PROMISE YOU. All you need to do is make the adjustments at the machine. It will only make the majority feel better to punish the top 1% until they dial in at the 30 yard line. Then what, add more yardages? The venues will have to fork out money to increase the yardage. Punishing the top few is a natural human instinct. It is easier than looking in the mirror and saying, “I need to work harder, I need to take lessons, I need to practice more." Yes the weapons have improved, the shells have improved. Why does the majority always look for a way to punish the top 1% for working harder?


    jim_kneecricket, you call me a troll. I have now idea what the definition is in this context. I am not offended if that was your intent. I do play the money and loose more then I win. If the targets are changed, I will still loose more then I win. The original post was not about money as I stated earlier. The post is about the targets. It was speculation on my part about the heyday's of the 70's and all the money was there and there were more top handicap shooters in the mid yardage. When people say you loose money because of the harder target then it makes since to throw an easier target. So my sarcasm stepped in and said lets make target setting STUPID easy. Also, I stated that I am new to this sport and only hoped my history was correct. There are a lot of shooters here who shot back in the day and remember the history. I have no wish to get into a fight here. I just like a venue where WE can discuss options. Learn from each other. And try to improve our sport. Even if it means we say we made a mistake and go back to the 3 hole 50 yard target. I can admit I made a mistake by starting another post. I was not aware of the rules. I WAS WRONG! I just did not wish it to be lost in the first.

    Neil Winston, I am grateful to have a sport that I can be competitive in with all the physical problems I have. They are mine to bear. I do not think that setting the targets to 3 hole will help that either. I am pleading with the ATA and the governing body to re-look at the rules for target setting. We would love to see our SPORT grow in a positive way. We would love to see our sport get real media attention. We would love to see real sponsorship come into our sport. Trap is no more boring to watch then GOLF or POKER. TRAP just needs positive attention. Nothing gets peoples attention more then Money or characters. And I have found that our sport has a ton of characters. I believe we should start with the targets. Would ESPN really want to shoot film for 60 shooters with 200x200 in a shoot off or shoot film for 15 people with 200x200 in a shoot off at the GRAND AMERICAN.

    1) Go back to the 3 hole target angles.

    2) Have the clubs re-install the stakes at the proper angles.

    3) Throw the target 50 yards.

    4) Use the T-Bar to measure height.

    There is no need to have each venue bare to cost of adding concrete and even grading land. Or some clubs may not even have the room on some banks to add yardage. So what do they do? Do you handicap the 27 yard shooter with lost targets? I do not see the since in adding three extra yards, when adjustments can be made at the machine. I do NOT advocate punishing the top 1%.

    Very truly yours,

    Jeff Warren III
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.