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

olympic bunker trap selection match

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by tommy boy, Mar 22, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tommy boy

    tommy boy TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3
    first off, I would like to congratulate the winners, cory cogdell,brett erickinson and dominic grazioli. as a spectator at this match, many questions come to mind after listening to shooters share thier concerns and views about this match. I witnessed one squad shooting in a heavy downpour on a covered shooting stations. thats find, except the rain water was running off the top so heavily that the shooters couldn't hardly see targets through it, high score for this squad was 16. if one squad should have to shoot in these conditions, everyone should have to, not part of the squads in the open and part under covered shooting stations with a water falls. also heard alot of concern about a number of shooters training weeks ahead of the match on the fields that the match was held on. seems to me that this might be a advantage to these shooters in the aspect of eye focal pionts and hold points on each field and some of this is at tax payers expense. looks to me like when your paid by taxpayers to shoot with unlimited ammo, targets and time,you should be at the top. if some of these other shooters had the opportunity to paid camps, unlimited shooting ammo,targets and coaching, things might be different. another concern was one of the refs was showing me the bunkers, strictly off limits to anyone, seems machines are not mounted to issf rules and measurement requirements looked like center of throwing arms were much lower than they should be??? another concern was distance on targets, I don't understand for the life of me how anyone could accurately set distance on targets plus or minus 5 meters on a cable mounted well over ones head.over heard one ref say thats close enough??? seems to me like a radar gun would be alot more fair. these are just concerns in my mind about how our selections matches are done. maybe its time the olympic shooting board of directors looked into this. tommy boy
     
  2. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Tommy Boy,

    Just to answer a few items you have posted here: Training ahead of any match is always open to whomever wishes and it is unlimited. While it may provide some advantage to those who partake it has been that way and will continue to be so. In our case since all the fields were used in the match it would be difficult to prohibit training on them given the fact that we are an official training site.

    The roofs you mention are sloped to the back so the rain runs away from the firing line not toward it so the rain was running off the back of the roof not the front and does not prevent the athletes from seeing the targets.

    As to the machines being mounted to ISSF specs did you know that ISSF technical inspectors in fact measured all of the fields prior to the 2006 World Cup Shotgun match held in Kerrville and found them to meet the standard? to be out of specs now would have required us removing each machine and cutting down the tables they sit on to move them. I am not sure why anyone would think we would have done that once they were officially checked by ISSF. Each field was constructed to exacting standards and we welcome anyone to come and measure them. Radar guns are not allowed by ISSF rules as they do not give the accuracy required. As to how to tell the distance, please come early next match and stand at the wire and see how it is done. It is not rocket science for sure and is quite easy to see the target make the wire. PS it is 76 meters +- 1 meter for the distance.

    Lastly the reason we do not let folks go into the bunkers is for safety reasons. Many machines with arms flying tends to be a hazardous environment. We welcome anyone to come to inspect the bunkers or any other of our facilities but ask that folks not wonder downrange without staff escort for safety.

    Hope this answers some of your questions.

    Jack Burch
    Executive Director
    Hill Country Shooting Sports Center
    U.S. Olympic Training Site
    Kerrville, Texas
     
  3. Baber

    Baber TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,348
    Thank you Jack.... You made the case perfectly. I shot the match. I shot in the rain as a lot of people did. Wish we had not had to but thats the game. I agree that the more practice at Keerville the better. Wish I had come a couple of days early but business commitments prevented it. That's my choice as it was yours Tommy Boy. Keerville is a difficult place to get your look points down. I have not learned them yet and as the match went on my scores improved.

    The machinery could have been better. I am the one that had the broken trap that caused a delay of 2 hours. I am not a fan of the Laporte traps. Jack and myself argued that when he bought them but what is done is done. Laporte supplied the traps at Athens in 2004 and is the trap supplier for this years games in China so it is an advantage to our shooters to have the opportunity to shoot them. Different traps throw targets differently so its good training to shoot the same traps used in major competitions.

    If you had watched the targets during the morning target showing as I did you would have seen than many of them especially the straight aways hit he wire as they were supposed to. If they had not then Jury made up of fellow shooters would have fixed them. The use of a radar gun to set bunker targets is impossible because they are not accurate enough to provide correct data. There is no substitute for properly installed range stakes. Everything I have seen at Keervile tells me that everything is installed correctly as required by ISSF Rules.

    Suggest you learn a little more about the game before you start complaining.

    Tom
     
  4. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Tom,

    A target broke in the machine and then another which started a chain reaction of broken targets. When the machine was full of them the cocking pin on the arm sheared off and that caused the problem. Just an unfortunate happenstance. Also I think that we had the machine repaired in 46 minutes but I could be wrong. The only other problems we saw were a mic that went bad on field one, a microswitch on one other machine, a stuck release plunger and a power outage that sent the computers into orbit. For the 35,000 plus targets thrown and four days not too bad.

    It still amazes me how many times we hit the wire when setting the targets. Given the wind and the up and down drafts it is something.

    Just to let all know during the World Cup in May shooters may participate in the shoot who are not on a team. This is to fill in positions to make the shoot flow better. Contact USA Shooting if you would like to shoot and be on the same squads as shootings from around the world.

    Jack Burch
     
  5. tommy boy

    tommy boy TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3
    jack, I stand corrected as I was looking at my usa shooting rule book, page ct-14& ct-15 article t.6.2.7.1a didn't know it had been changed by the issf. as for the water coming off the roof, I was watching breanna's squad shoot and water was running off in front of the shooters like it was being poured out of five gallon buckets, be it the wind or whatever the cause. the machines did appear to be lower than .50m from the top of the roof to the center of the throwing arm. I agree with tom that laporte machines aren't in the same class as the rolls-royce nasta and mattarelli machines. jack if you can make those laporte machines hit a three eights cable with 1.5 to 3.5 meter targets at 76 meters your good, because personally I only saw just very few targets hit the cable, must have been wind updrafts.tom I did observe some of the jury checking targets and I did hear them told when distance was questioned, they where told that was as close as they could get the distance. personally tom I don't think laportes will throw the exact target line every time, you are more knowledgable about this than I am. when the usa team travels overseas,from what I understand they only get a couple of practice rounds, this is why I questioned so much training ahead on fields that the selection matches were being held on. tom is a very knowledgable person about the sport, perhaps one of the most. my guess is he would be a alot more involved, time permitting and not wanting to be involved in politic's. i'm not trying to start a pissing match, just stating some views I feel need to be addressed for the betterment of the sport and I don't even have a dog in the race. HAPPY EASTER!
    tommy boy
     
  6. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Tommy Boy,

    The 76 meter rule has been in effect since before 2004.

    Not saying the water could not come out the front just that the roof is sloped 5" from front to rear. One other possibility was that the rain was being driven by the 20 mph wind we had on Monday.

    Perhaps so on the visual of the machines being more than .5 meters below the top of the roof but measured well within the .1 meter variance by ISSF technical staff.

    Refs set the targets and called the distance. If the Jury thought they were out of bounds they have the power to change any target. Dave Center was the captain on one jury and BJ McDaniel on the other. Both well healed in the art of jurying targets. Just think that if there was something wrong with the targets these two would have and did make changes.

    I once saw a video of several machines in which they were put in a building so there was no wind to contend with. It was interesting to note that the Beomat was the most consistant (we have Beomats in the skeet houses). All others had about the same variance in target accuracy. They were throwing at a 6" target at the same distance, I think it was 21 yards but I could be wrong. No question that Nasta and Mattarelli make good machines but in our experience no better than the Laporte and certainly all others pale in comparison to the capacity of the Laporte which is important to us because of manpower.

    When any team travels the amount of practice rounds are controlled by when they arrive at the host range and how many rounds are allowed after official practice. If the range is open for training before the OT day any amount is allowed. This is the most common during World Cups and the like as the host site wants to make as much money as possible from training rounds. The coaches most of the time discourage too many practice rounds as they feel it just tires the shooter out. After the normal 3 rounds of official practice the ranges usually let unofficial training continue until the ranges are needed to reset for next day, the first day of the match. Once this is done the competitors may not shoot any more practice for that discipline. During the 2006 World Cup we held many teams came in as much as a week early to practice.

    You are 100% correct about Tom Baber. He has been a great help to us in the design of the range to date and continues to give input to make it better. We need good debate on subjects like the ones you have brought forward to insure that ranges comply with the standard. In addition we need to listen to shooters to improve their chances during local, national and international competitions. Thanks to you for giving us the forum to answer questions about our facility.
     
  7. Baber

    Baber TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,348
    Jack:

    Thank you for the complement.

    We can argue about LePortes until your Assistant referees (aka cows) come home but what is done is done. As previously stated its good to have a range with similar machines to what will be used in the Olympics so that our team can train. I will however express some concern regarding the electronics. Saw too many slow calls not only on me but others. I personally believe you have a problems with microphone impedance mismatch but could be wrong. How you fix it is difficult pin down. If I lived in Keerville we would find a solution. I guess I am spoiled with a new NASTA bunker with the latest EP System. Glad we bought it last year as we probably could not afford them today.



    Tom
     
  8. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Tom,

    My assistant referees are officially offended. They feel that they add "ambiance" and class to the place.

    You are correct on the calls but for a couple of reasons. We took the time to match all the speakers by impedance prior to the match. A gentleman who works on Canterbury systems helped us make sure that they were right. I asked the refs about the mics and they mentioned that a few folks were having problems but it was the same folks and on every field. I know that one mic went bad on field one but was changed as soon as we knew about it. Prior to the World Cup we will go through them again.

    We looked at the new EP system as well and have a grant request to use them here. What I like is the card reader system instead of the coins. Would like to see if anyone is using a similar system to see how well it works.
     
  9. Baber

    Baber TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,348
    Jack:

    If you Assistant Referees would gore the chief referee every time they failed to see a piece i will be happy

    That aside lets talk about microphones. But first to add insult I was the one who had the slow pull on 1/1 that prompted the microphone replacement. I broke the hard left and almost shot the referee when he said 'no bird' and had to break it again.

    We have found that most of the Italian systems are set up on 16 Ohm speakers. Colorado Springs, Benning, the Rossini systems etc. They use a small RCF speaker that cost like no tomorrow... something like $70+ a pop. We attempted to substitute a CVR replacement speaker and found that they were 8 Ohm. This caused slow pulls not only on the speaker it self but throughout the system. We even put a resistor in the circuit to fool the system. All to no avail.

    The new EP system we have is something like 40 ohm and we have had little if any problems although the box in currently in Italy for repair because some of the minor items did not work like the buzzer and that it was stuck on 'Girl Trap' for DT (40 birds not 50).

    I still suspect they you have some sort of impedance problem. Don't know where but its there.

    TB
     
  10. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Tom,

    I'll work on that training!!

    I asked Progetti on the mic impedance and they say that the 8ohm is correct but I note that the 40ohm is the one they use for the new systems. They are proud of their mics but Dave Center seems to have good luck with them.

    Looking for a diamond mine.

    Jack
     
  11. Baber

    Baber TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,348
    Interesting especially in light of the fact that the EP systems at Colorado Springs are 16 ohm....

    TB
     
  12. jbbor

    jbbor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,034
    I suppose you guys have figured out by now that 7/8 ounce 7 1/2's are not an adequate load for breaking clay targets at distance, have you not?? Sometimes at a paltry 80 yards. The graphs prove it!! Jimmy Borum
     
  13. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Tom,

    Sure won't argue with you on that just that they say 8 is ok. REEaly like the look of the new system though. Do you know anyone using it? It takes all the work out by combining the two boxes we have now.

    Jbbor,

    No question that it is marginal but the top shooters were getting so good that the ISSF wanted to make it harder so the ammo was the quickest method. Yet we see targets broken at extended distances. Have also noticed sporting clay shooters going to the 7/8 oz loads as well with good results.

    Jack
     
  14. Mr Newbius©

    Mr Newbius© TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,463
    Excuse me but if ya'll would shoot a many sport of regular ATA style trap or even skeet ya'll would have more fun and not all this paltry arguing.
     
  15. jbbor

    jbbor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,034
    Jack - I guess you missed the satire in my post. Notice the reference to "graphs". Jimmy Borum
     
  16. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Sorry Jimmy. I did. Those are the things with the squiggly lines right? Really interesting to see the sporting shooters using international loads though.
     
  17. ARMDQT

    ARMDQT TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2
    Dear Tommy Boy,
    I stumbled upon your message this week and had the urge to reply. First off I would like to say that I understand your concerns but that I find them a little unfounded and I hope I can help educate you on the Olympic team selection possess, how the USA Shooting team is funded and when and how that money is distributed.

    First I would like to address the comment about shooters being paid by tax payer’s money. “Looks to me like when you’re paid by taxpayers to shoot with unlimited ammo, targets and time, you should be at the top. If some of these other shooters had the opportunity to paid camps, unlimited shooting ammo, targets and coaching, things might be different. “

    First of all neither USA shooting nor the Olympic Organization is funded by the government. It is fully funded by donations by individuals and corporate sponsorships or endorsements. So no worries about your tax paying dollars going to help me shoot. I wish it was this way as it is in many other countries but it is just not the case in the USA.
    Secondly I believe that you create your own opportunities and your own destiny, with the lords blessing above and a gift of natural talent I believe that any shooter with the determination, desire and hard work can bring there shooting to a level they never new they could achieve weather that is an Olympic level or not. If USA shooting gave everyone that aspired to be anything unlimited ammo, targets and training camps ( which they don’t give anyone anyways!) there would be nothing to aspire to get or to bed. The whole point of training your butt off to make a team is to get some of those things and opportunites. That is the pay value!

    Finally, everyone did have the Opportunity to come and practice as much as they wanted. Weather they had the desire and dedication to make the sacrifices it would take to do that is up to every individual that attended the match. Almost every day that the range was open prior to the match anyone could have come and practiced. As for getting to practice on ALL the fields that the match was shot on that’s not true. I was in Texas for about two weeks prior to the match and 95% of the time I was told to practice on field 7 or 8 so I guess I can say I got REALLY good on two field ha-ha.

    I hope this cleared up some of your concerns. I do believe that the way USA shooting squaded and ran the event was with the intention of making it as far as possible to all competitors. Unfortunately they can not control the weather and sometimes that gives an advantage to some shooters and not others, but that is the game that we sign up for and you have to go into it understanding that.

    Did you shoot the event also? Or did you have a child in the event? If you don’t mind me asking, what is your name? Anyways best of luck to you in your shooting endeavors. Shoot straight and dream big!
     
  18. tommy boy

    tommy boy TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3
    armdqt,
    wasn't referring to usa shooting,but I do beleive that that the amu unit is on the gov't payroll with unlimited ammo and funding.purely a spectator enjoying the sport,due to health reasons had to give up shooting and no, I didn't have a dog in the race,sometimes I happen to be in the area of a shoot on business and I get a chance to enjoy watching some some very good shooting.
    tommy boy
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page

trap selection matches