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

The Dawg Proposes a New Handicap System-Look!

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by oleolliedawg, May 11, 2007.

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

    oleolliedawg Banned User Banned TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,124
    Location:
    Northampton PA
    I threw this baby around at the local gun club last night and it really had us thinking. How about this starting in 2010!

    Mandatory 1oz.loads for Handicap beginning in the 2010 target year.

    All male shooters including current and new members must begin the target year at the 20 yard line.

    All Female shooters both current and new will begin at the 19 yd. line.

    All junior and sub-junior shooters shoot from the 18 Yd. line.

    Only high scores of 96 and up will be punched.

    1000 target reviews with mandatory 1/2 yard reductions after no progress.

    Eliminate the break point for reductions.

    Utilize the 16 or 17 yard line for Handicap if necessary!

    The goals of this system are many such as: encouraging more shooting at the smaller clubs without the penalty of yardage increases for poor scores, getting those non-competetive back yardage shooters back in the game, bringing the money back in the game as more shooters would then feel competetive and be more willing to play options, eliminate the discrimination against the top dogs whenever any other system is proposed-everyone's on the same page, remove the shell issues from the discussion as 1 1/8 oz. loads can be used for Singles and Doubles.

    I think it would put fun back in the game again and eliminate the need for the 30 yd. line!!
     
  2. Setterman

    Setterman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    11,164
    you'll get grief from people who don't like (never shot) 1oz loads, but I'd give it a shot. Why pour more concrete. It's $85 a yard here!
     
  3. lumper

    lumper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,586
    Sounds perfect!
     
  4. Mac V

    Mac V Guest

    I have 2 questions...

    <blockquote>"Mandatory 1oz.loads for Handicap beginning in the 2010 target year.</blockquote>

    Who gets the duty to police the loads?

    <blockquote>"Utilize the 16 or 17 yard line for Handicap if necessary!"</blockquote>

    So how does shooting from the 16 yard line constitute a "handicap"?

    Mike
     
  5. Cherokee Kid

    Cherokee Kid TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    291
    Go to a large shoot like a Sat Grand and you will find that 90% of the shooters have absolutely no chance of winning from their yardage regardless of what it is. 95% of the 27 yarders have absolutely no chance of winning from the 27. This is because people won't take reductions. They would rather shoot from their "earned" yardage tahn be competitive. So be it, leave them alone.

    The only change the HC system needs is the addition of a 27A class based upon average from the 27. If a shooter can average 93+ from the 27, put them in the A Class with mandatory reduction if their average falls below that. This will put the guys that always win in a class by themselves where they belong. While it is possible to beat any of the big dogs sometimes, it is almost impossible to beat all the big dogs anytime.

    I am convinced that there are only about 15% of the shooters competing that really want to win, will work to get better and are on a mission to gain yardage. The other 85% just show up and shoot.
     
  6. Big Heap

    Big Heap TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,748
    Over the last year there have been several innovative suggestions for improving the ATA Handicap system. If someone has a suggestion about how to get anything changed in the ATA R&R's that will be the first step.

    A previous Central Handicap Chairman who knew how the system worked remarked that "go along to get along" was all that worked with the ever changing cast of ruling ATA Poobah's. Each EC member in his turn keeps the ship on course and then retires to the comfort of existence in the company of all the other Past Presidents, secure in the knowledge that he has done little to change the game.
     
  7. oleolliedawg

    oleolliedawg Banned User Banned TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,124
    Location:
    Northampton PA
    mac v, I'd say the same people who are policing the 1 1/8 rule, the velocity rule and the no larger than 7 1/2 shot rule.

    Under that system if anyone was unable to take additional yardage after shooting 6,000 targets we may have to pour additional concrete forward-just kidding. As Frank Little used to say, "maybe they should take up Fishing".

    cherokee kid, I think those un-competetive 27 yard shooters might suddenly become more competetive than you think at the 20 yard line and they'll also be shooting with their buddies. You might be surprised how they might sparkle again when standing next to Kay or Ray-at least for a little while!!
     
  8. littlebear

    littlebear TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    65
    Cherokee Kid,
    Your post is probably the most on the money I have seen here. I even agree with you percentage guess. I really like the idea of a 27A class. As one of the 15% people the shooters that do not take reductions only help me.
    DTD
     
  9. oleolliedawg

    oleolliedawg Banned User Banned TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,124
    Location:
    Northampton PA
    cherokee kid, please tell us how that will prevent those shooters from winning the Lewis class, the purse, the 25's and 50's money!!
     
  10. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Dawg I think the idea has an interest factor that I would like to see explored further.

    But I have a question were you trying to be different or did you just miss the other important argument. You know 3 hole targets you didn't even mention them.

    Bob Lawless
     
  11. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    I would rather see punches tied to average. When you can average 90+ at your yardage on your last 500 out of 700 targets,(to allow a couple of throw outs for windy days), then you get to move back a yard. If your average falls to 85- you move up a yard.

    Half yard punches are really nonsense because you don't actually move on the first one.

    Earning punches for beating 14 other shooters with an 85 on a bad weather day doesn't make any more sense than getting a punch for shooting a 95 in a big shoot or a 96 in a small shoot without actually winning anything. Neither are very indicative of your mastery of the game at a given yardage, only averages can demonstrate that you have mastered your current yardage.

    And, just because you shot a good score in a big shoot and got 1.5 yards, why should that lock you out of reductions for 2 years? What sense does that make?
     
  12. oleolliedawg

    oleolliedawg Banned User Banned TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,124
    Location:
    Northampton PA
    Bob, I purposely left that out of the equation but it was foremost on my mind when I dreamed up this proposal. I'm inclined to believe this option has merit but left it as part of the 'tinkering" stage.

    J brooks, I don't believe averages in Handicap have any real merit because they're too easy to manipulate and too difficult to police. That approach was attempted in the past using a purified average-that is-throwing out abnormally low scores-and was abandoned!!
     
  13. Jawhawker

    Jawhawker TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,734
    mandatory one ounce loads, 95t% of the shooting populas isn't competive with 1 1/8 oz loads and we are going to further handicap them! Also, sure are alot of 1 1/8 oz charge bars/bushings in existence! I know that I personally use the annular ring alot in breaking targets and thus don't want to reduce the number of pellets in it which is exactly what happens when utilizing 1 ouncers!
    However I guarantee that Leo, Harlan, Phil and many other all americans center their targets more consistently....

    Mandatory 20 yd line for existing and new males. So Leo, Phil, Ray, Kay and others all start the year at 20 yds?

    Scores of 96 and up are automatically punched now. So are you saying a score even if it wins and is below a 96, that it will not be punched, no matter how large the shoot?
     
  14. Justin L.

    Justin L. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    499
    And, just because you shot a good score in a big shoot and got 1.5 yards, why should that lock you out of reductions for 2 years? What sense does that make?

    JBrooks,

    That's about the one rule the ATA has to fight against sandbaggers.
     
  15. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    oleolliedawg made several suggestions including the mandatory reduction topic. Some shooters love reductions, some hate them. Reductions are now optional. Some say that requiring the rather large group of shooters, who do not now wish to accept a reduction, to take a reduction will increase participation. I fail to understand how forcing participants to do something they do not want to do would help any recreational sport.

    Elimination of all punches unless the shooter shoots a score of 96 or better does not really seem logical to me. Shooting an event high score of 89 in cold, wet, windy conditions probably required more shooting skill than shooting a 96 under ideal conditions.

    His suggestion of starting everyone each year at the 20 yard line would put everyone who attend the Missouri Fall Handicap on the 20 yard line. That could result in a rather long shoot off.

    Pat Ireland
     
  16. oleolliedawg

    oleolliedawg Banned User Banned TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,124
    Location:
    Northampton PA
    Yeah Pat, I agree the first shootoff would be a big one-just like the Krieghoff challenge at the PA State shoot-and it turned out to be one of the most popular events ever.

    Please tell us again how many decent Handicap events are won with scores below 90 and why we should continue punching those scores at the small clubs and adversely affecting participation.

    Just think Pat, you, me, Harlan, Kay, Ray and all the rest will be back at the 20 yard line for a few shoots-won't that be fun?
     
  17. Don S

    Don S Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    287
    The idea of putting shooters with limited skills on the 16, 17 or 18 yard line would make some more competitive with the long yardage guys. Isn't that what we are looking for?
     
  18. lumper

    lumper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,586
    What some people are looking for is to make the sport more competitive thusly making it more fun as well while others are looking to make the sport tougher so they can have a better chance at making more money when they shoot well.

    Unfortunately there will never be a happy middle ground that everyone will be happy with.

    I say take all the cash out of the sport and see how many stick around to continue shooting for the competitive fun of it all. Then you will have that group of people who are willing to change.
     
  19. southpark

    southpark TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    400
    I like Cherokeekid's ideas best, though I would make a mandatory change to the 3 hole targets as well.
     
  20. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    What sandbaggers? Name some. Look at your Trap& Field. The big events are usually won by a 93%+ average shooter from the 27 yard line. Few shooters care about sandbaggers because if they did, they would be taking their reductions to get competitive. They are not.

    I have shot at two Satellite Grands this year. One with 750+ shooters and one with 500+ shooters. 90% of the guys on the 27 are absolutely terrible at that yardage. We're talking scores in the 60s, 70s, and low 80s in reasonable weather. I shot mid-yardage with guys that I have no idea how they got there, let alone why they stay there.

    The primary problem in HC is that shooters won't take a reduction. However, I agree with Pat. Why make them take a reduction if they are willing to show up, BS with their buddies, pay for the shoot and post 80s.

    I want to be at the 27, but I want to shoot against guys that are averaging 90+ and when they are on, post 96-97, not guys that shoot 8,000 targets a year from the 27, have done that for 10 or 20 years, average 93+ and when they are on it's a 98+.

    Here in California, we have a dozen guys that average over 93 in HC. These guys are talented, dedicated and experienced. They deserve our respect and have earned what they have. However, if 3 or 4 show up at a shoot, one of them is going to post a 98+ almost everytime. They are in a league of their own and they deserve to be in a class of their own. I have no problem if 20% of ALL option money was allocated up to that class. That would be a bargain price to pay just to watch them shoot.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page

content