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

Short History Lesson

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by jbbor, Mar 19, 2008.

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

    jbbor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,036
    We have had several threads in the recent past on our handicap and classifaction systems and if it is broken or not. This is not a new discussion. When the current problem first started to raise its ugly head in the early 80's, Randy Clark (President 1983) and Larry Scott (President 1984) tried to institute a 30 yard line. They were defeated soundly in their effort. Larry's Zone even tried to keep him from ascending to the Office of President at the 1983 Grand elections. Instead of heeding what possible was the correct and, historically, effective approach to a growing dominate class of shooters, we went the other way. Clubs began ignoring the rules and throwing a softer target. It was just like a cancer. Ever spreading and, in my opinion, began destroying what had, for almost a hundred years, been a growing and prospering sport. We are now at, again in my opinion, a point where if we don't change something and bring the field back in some sort of equilibrium, we are destined to join the failing sport of registered skeet shooting. We can't continue to have all the major shoot handicaps dominated by 27 yard shooters and the lower classes won with upper class scores. JMHO Jimmy Borum
     
  2. KEYBEAR

    KEYBEAR Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,222
    I can not agree more It,s way past time . In singles D-C and B class should be won with a score of 89 to 94 and not 99 or 100 . But to many 20 yard shooters standing on the 25 yard line need soft targets . Scores in the high 80,s instead of high 90,s .
     
  3. Trap2

    Trap2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,685
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Jimmy.... You're preaching to the choir, my friend. You can obviously see, from several posts on the other threads, the questions will not be addressed, nor will the problem, because "certain" individuals don't think it's necessary. They have graphs, etc., while we just don't have any "facts" that uphold our findings, other than 75 years of history with the handicap system working just fine. What the heck do we know? We are expected to just keep shooting registered targets and don't worry, since things "aren't as bad as some people think". Yeah, right.. Dan Thome (Trap2)
     
  4. J.Woolsey

    J.Woolsey Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    930
    Jimmy, it does seem that the ATA would be interested in correcting an obvious problem. The whole thing reminds me of the Bank Of Scotland commercial where the guy is coking to death. One of the diners at the table explains what is happening and what should be done, while the guy continues to choke. But low and behold, no one at the table does anything but talk about it. An observer at another table finally saves him. Moral being, you have to do something.

    There have been a lot of suggestions, some I feel good and some bad. If nothing is ventured, the outcome is certain. Additional yardage is certainly not an impossible task, 3 hole targets, 1oz. loads (not one of my favorites.) for the good of trapshooting, the ATA needs to try some of these and possibly other changes(one at a time/controlled study) that will get factual results one way or another. I started shooting in the early 60's. I don't care much for what I see happening to the sport. J.Woolsey
     
  5. Shooting Coach

    Shooting Coach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    8,357
    Location:
    Nashville Tn
    What Fred said!

    I went to Intl' targets years ago to keep from being bored out of the sport. Now, I am getting the chance to Coach young athletes in these most challenging of disciplines.

    I shoot ATA and NSSA to socialize with my friends, but for pushing my skills to their limits, Intl' Trap and Skeet rule.
     
  6. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    To all of you that accuse the power that be of being Nay Sayers just for the sake of it. Even to the point of accusing these people of having a personal agenda I say. Read what is in front of you that you refuse to see.

    Mr. Borum wrote his opinion and in it he stated "We are now at, again in my opinion, a point where if we don't change something and bring the field back in some sort of equilibrium, we are destined to join the failing sport of registered skeet shooting." I support Mr. Borum's opinion or at least his right to state it. However in the quote that I have included I can find nothing to vote on.

    Should we state this rule change as, A new rule we are going to change something that is not stated at this time but will be someday.

    What I find even more difficult to understand is the first five people to post on this thread after Mr. Borum's post agreed with his opinion to change something but yet know one has stated WHAT something to change and represent with proof that something after it is changed will be for the better of the average shooter.

    Now I am not saying this to attack anyone or belittle anyone certainly not Mr. Borum as I have read many of his posts and can tell from what I read he has quite a bit of knowledge about trapshooting. But I am reading change something just because we think we should, COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!

    Bob Lawless
     
  7. jbbor

    jbbor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,036
    Mr. Lawless - I've stated my opinion "many" time as to what I think, personally, would be a very good starting place. There is not a great number of things that can be changed. One ounce loads would be my first choice. It is my opinion, through a lot of experience with them, that is a good place to "START". They effect the singles, doubles and short handicap little. But with increasing yardage, the effect becomes obvious. A long handicap shooter can still break a good, even perfect, score but every target has to be pointed perfectly correct. I would not object to them being the rule but as long as everyone isn't required to shoot them, I'm not fool enough to spot others the difference when it really counts. Combined them with a return to the wider angle settings will, again in my opinion, bring equilibrium back into our sport. It seems many who don't want to return to wider, stiffer target settings believe "every" target thrown is going to be a wide angle. In reality, it is a very small percentage of the targets you will see. Even fewer now than in the past with Pat Traps. I don't know why I keep doing this as I and others seem to be banging our heads against a rock wall. Maybe there is nothing wrong and it is our sports time to die. Jimmy Borum
     
  8. jimbotrap

    jimbotrap TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    791
    Take a look at eh trophies won in the handicap events at the Grand American last year. Over 2/3rds were won by 27 yard shooters. And a lot of those by perennial all americans. Not to critize the great shooters of this sport but if you go back 30 years you will not see a large percentage of trophies won by 27 yarders. Jimmy is right. Our sport needs critiqued. In the best interest of the sport sooner not later. - Jim
     
  9. crusha

    crusha TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,762
    Jimmy Carter and his damn Camp David accord.


    Sport had been growing for 70 years...but noooo...f'er had to go and ruin it.


    I think the results speak for themselves. But hey, go ahead and let the sport die, what do I know...
     
  10. otnot

    otnot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,426
    The way I see it is that handicap isn't the only problem. Any time you have to shoot 200 straight and then shoot off another 250 to win something is wrong. I propose that we move the singles and doubles to the 18 yard line and extend the 27 yard line to the 32 yard mark. Throw 3 hole 50 yard targets. Let's do away with so many perfect scores in all events. If new shooters have never shot soft targets like todays they will never know the differnce.
     
  11. Gary Waalkes

    Gary Waalkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,401
    Sorry, I don't agree with the premise that the good 27 yard shooters caused a decline in numbers of less skilled shooters. I also don't agree that making handicap harder for really good shooters is going to attract or keep less skilled shooters. I have never seen an exit interview that said "I quit because Kay or Leo or Ray or Nora shoot handicap too well".

    What are you going to do about doubles and singles? The only way you are going to beat the best is if they go blind. IMHO, you need to look somewhere else. Reducing loads or extending yardage is not going improve attendance at the local club and it darn sure won't change anything at the big shoots.
     
  12. Trap2

    Trap2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,685
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Ahhh, otnot.....Truely a man after my own heart!....Dan Thome (Trap2)
     
  13. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Jimmy B "Maybe there is nothing wrong and it is our sports time to die." I guess what I am trying to say is what your last statement is saying no one knows so how does anyone decide which move to make first.

    If a change is made and it turn out after a reasonable amount of time. To be of little or know affect on the score as everyone is complaining. Then what???

    Jim Elliott you said "Take a look at eh trophies won in the handicap events at the Grand American last year. Over 2/3rds were won by 27 yard shooters." My question to you is what percentage of entrants were 27 yard shooters?

    One more point I would like to make is most of you are referring to 2 hole targets as softer targets. I feel they are not soft until they are thrown short of the stake. With 2 hole the angles are less or narrower but not softer.

    Bob Lawless
     
  14. BIGDON

    BIGDON Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,625
    Location:
    Michigan
    Make the stake the minimum and I mean the stake not 3' short. 1 oz loads will not make a difference, the same people that are winning now will win then.

    Make it 3 hole but remember you are also making it harder for those of lesser ability but it would put meaning back into the classes. Look at the Southern Grand 16 yd scores in the A,B,C,D classes, sand baggers heaven.

    30 yd line would make so many clubs inelgible to throw registered targets that it would be ridiculous. You are talking MEGA dollars in an already tight situation.

    Get rid of the all orange soft lollipop targets will be a start.

    What you can do right now is put them in the 3 hole and to the stake, Very simple and cost effective only thing you have to do is make an equipment adjustment. If a club choses not to throw them then they don't throw registered.

    The game is not broken just bent a little.

    Don
     
  15. primed

    primed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,119
    If you run handicap back to the 30 yard line, in places like Proctor, MN you'd be shooting from the kitchen.

    Bob
     
  16. shot410ga

    shot410ga Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,778
    I've said it many times: 1 oz, 3 hole, 50 yard target. 7/8's would even be better. Bring the word competitive back to trap shooting. No one should shoot a 100 straight in "D" class to win, but they do (all the time!!!). And if they do they should be bumped to at least AA at the next shoot.
     
  17. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Darn it sarge, you deleted your post before I had a chance to reply. Was it, perhaps, that you realized that what the single-projectile sports you cited as having growth did was _exactly the opposite_ of what is being proposed here?

    By putting more rings on the target they _magnified_ the difference between masters and the others. The masters still got their 10's and "x's" It was the lesser shooters who lost points in the new system, wasn't it?

    Say we did that in trap. The trap equivalent of more rings is grading the hits. One point for a chip, two for a solid break, three for a smokeball. The better shooter is going to win that game every single time!

    Neil
     
  18. 870

    870 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,390
    I pretty much agree with your post Jimmy. It's just that I am more concerned that going to 3 hole for singles will have a negative impact on the membership overall. Maybe I'm wrong, but that is my concern.

    The problem with singles scores is that shooters are remaining in the lower classes when they should be moved up. It should not necessarily take a win, only good scores to move from D to C etc. That is not how it works in practice now, too many classifiers only look at averages, which for the lower classes is not as good of an indicator as it is for the better shooters.

    For caps, how many of these dominate 27 yarders are we really talking about, and at which shoots is it really such a huge problem? I discount the posts saying we can't add yardage due to space considerations at most clubs. You could easily set it up so only one or two fields are affected, by writing the rule to only affect the truly dominate shooters. Make it hard to get past 27 and harder to stay there. Remember, we aren't talking about sandbaggers here.

    Have it apply just for state shoots and above if it really can't be done at smaller clubs (which I doubt).
     
  19. jbbor

    jbbor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,036
    Bob Lawless - That statement was made in frustration that most who have been in the sport since the 70's and 80's recognize the signs of needed change of the type that the ATA followed throughout its history until the "feel good" mentality took over. We don't change, we die. There are few ways we can change but nobody wants to pick a starting point. The reduction of targets shot during the short period when Neal mandated an adherence to the written rule was, in my opinion, psychological and would have been short lived if allowed to continue. Panic brought us to a change that I believe is close to the last nail in registered shootings coffin. Like I said, just my opinion. My last post here. Jimmy Borum
     
  20. W.P.T.

    W.P.T. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,371
    The economy is going to dictate where the sports of clay target shooting is going and the future don't look very bright for a lot of people ... When people can't afford to shoot the events the incidentals of where, how far, how high, what color, what hole that targets are in just won't matter ... There are things in life that really matter and trapshooting isn't even close to the top of that list for a lot of people and those numbers are growing on a daily basis ... The indicators are not always wrong and sooner or later will catch up and have an impact ... WPT ... (YAC) ...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page

history of trap shooting with works cited