Trapshooters Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Stats 2 hole targets relating to Grand Slams

Jump to Latest
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 84 Posts

Dr.Longshot

· Banned
Joined
·
5,706 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Several months ago Neil Winston asked me for stats on 2 hole target scores.
I wanted to go to Vandalia and check the records, but this months February Trap & Field issue solved that problem for me.

I compared grand slams History, 1st was in 1964 by Dan Orlich, 2nd 1965 George Snellenberger, 3rd 1966 Larry Gravestock, 1967-0, 1968 -1, 1969-0, 1970-0
1971-0, 1972-1, 1972-1, 1973,1 1974-0, 1975-1, 1976-7, 1977-1, 1978-3, 1979-6
1980-2, 1981-4, 1982-2, 1983-4 1984-7, 1985-3, 1986-5, 1987-5, 1988-7

Now comes the 2 hole target 1989-13, 1990-16, 1991-16, 1992-11, 1993-21, 1994-18, 1995-17, 1996-13, 1997-20, 1998-17, 1999-15, 2000-19, 2001-20, 2002-19
2003-17, 2004-11, 2005-14, 2006-16, 2007-22, 2008-17

The easier 2 hole targets allowed the 27 yd hdcp scores in most cases to make the grand slam. And the greater numbers came when there were less shooters
in competetions.

And the record 850 16yd tied singles championship shootoff 2 hole targets.

That amounted to 1700 targets thrown by the ATA and lost revenue in targets
plus all other shootoffs of long duration, is lost money to the ATA.

The record numbers of 200 straights in singles being recorded now shows the easier 2 hole targets= more higher tied scores.

The significant grand slams were made in HANDICAP to complete the grand slams.

The doubles scores stayed virtually the same over the years.

The early years were the largest number of competetors.

So the statistics prove we should go back to the harder 3 hole target as reiterated and posted on this site by Phil Kiner and Brad Dysinger as well as myself and some others.

Gary Bryant
Dr.longshot
 
#2 ·
Gary- Your conclusion is based on the assumption that more higher scores are bad. Can you support this assumption? If the intent is to lower scores, then getting rid of voice release systems and adjustable combs would be more effective.

Pat Ireland
 
#3 ·
As long as we stay in our own back yard.. A 2 hole target is fine.. If you ever leave this country.. the title of ATA Champ means you shoot with pink socks and your squad is women and children.. It's a very shallow victory..quickly taken away from you.. I speak first hand.. HOA meant nothing in Italy..and they were right.. Many 100's straight was quickly answered by..shoot Bunker against a C class shooter here..and lets see how well you do..I won only 1 match so far over there.. I shot a 37/50.. for a free lunch..A distance from the 196/200 I was doing here.. Today.. I am most humble with much to learn. I guess what it boils down to is.. do you want to be respected here.. or world wide???
 
#5 ·
"So the statistics prove we should go back to the harder 3 hole target as reiterated and posted on this site by Phil Kiner and Brad Dysinger as well as myself and some others."

No, all it proves is that 3 hole is a little harder than 2 hole. I could have told you that without looking at statistics of any kind.

Your logic would dictate trying a 4 hole target.

However, in addition to the easier 2 hole target, voice calls, Pat traps, adjustable guns, higher POIs and instruction from accomplished shooters also has had some effect.

The reality is that 99.9%+ of the shooters who ever shoot a registered target will not complete a Grand Slam and probably 97%+ will not even complete a single leg of a grand slam.
 
Save
Like Like
#6 ·
Perazzi BB: Why are you bringing foreign countries into this?? Who really cares what they think other than them. I have seen foreign shooters, their supposed best come to the Grand and what do they do - Zip. I am not including the Canadians. So if they are so damn good why don't they score more here?? Now who looks foolish and is shooting in the pink tights and with the women. Pray tell how many of us trapshooters care about Bunker that you keep bringing up and how many are going to Italy.

Dr. Longshot; Glad you brought up the other things that have influenced scores. In addition look at the equipment that the kids are shooting today as opposed to prior years. There are many factors. But as I have said before if you want to tighten the game then increase the difficulty (3 hole) and forget the other BS.

Don
 
#7 ·
Over the years in the rifle shooting sports the targets have gotten harder, not easier. And guess what happened, the shooters and equipment got better. To give you an example, the 50 foot international smallbore target doesn't have a 10 ring, it has a dot a few thousanths of an inch in diameter. You hit the dot you get a ten. And you're worried about hitting a clay target with a 12 guage shotgun. HMB
 
#8 ·
hmb, different mind set.

Iam still not sure that we want to try the persay 3 holer again without a vote at each state meeting. I fully understand Phils beliefs and also Brads but we have a definet mind set in this country that tends to make involvers of endavors want more simplified terms of their persuit so a higher ability is achieved in less time. Its a tough call now without a trial as most likely you will loose some because it negatively affected their scoring to the extent they became totally disatisfied with their ability. On the other hand it may bring new in, retain a higher percentage or develop an interest for new shooters due to increased difficulty.

On the issue of more slams since two hole target, granted there are but right along with it are the realivant items described above, ie the voice calls, automatic traps, better understanding of how to set a quality target, better shooter understanding, more targets registered now by a given shooter, existing proficient shooters refing their already abilities, adjustable every which way guns, etc. How does one pinpoint the exact item without entering in all the rest?
 
#9 ·
I am getting real concerned as I find myself agreeing more and more with Big Don! For a change, I think PBB is full of crap! If these great Bunker shooters all over the world are so damn good, why do they not come to our big shoots and make some serious money! Oh I forgot! They are making big money with their huge crowds at their own sport right?! Whatever! Tom Rhoads
 
#10 ·
Dr.Longshot

"Now comes the 2 hole target 1989-13, 1990-16, 1991-16, 1992-11, 1993-21, 1994-18, 1995-17, 1996-13, 1997-20, 1998-17, 1999-15, 2000-19, 2001-20, 2002-19 2003-17, 2004-11, 2005-14, 2006-16, 2007-22, 2008-17"

Well Doc that is interesting but some what disturbing. In the Kiner Blog 4 thread I ask for some type of proof as to when the ATA officially changed fro 3 to 2 hole targets. One person on here provided me with the answer I requested in his usual sarcastic way and this was his answer.

"For those who have access to a 1995 ATA Official Averages Book as I do it states "Flights and Angles-In singles shooting the trap shall be adjusted that within the normal distribution of angles as thrown by the trap, the right angle shall be not less than a straightaway from firing post 1 and the left angle shall not be less than a straightaway from firing point 5"

This would indicate that 2 hole targets were mandated by ATA rule after 96 as the rulebook now reads.

"Under no circumstances shall a Standard Model 1524 trap be set in less than the #2 hole. Any other trap machine shall be adjusted so as to throw not less than equivalent angles."

This would indicate that your figures about 2 hole targets seem a bit premature as I read it by 8 years. Did you notice an increase in 89 over the previous years and assume that was when the 2 Hole era started???

Bob Lawless
 
Save
Like Like
#11 ·
Don.. Excluding other countries.. I'd like to try 3 hole here. Never shot it..I don't shoot enough to be great at any form of shooting.. If it were more difficult..at least I'd have an excuse.. On the up side..IF I did shoot well in 3 hole..even if I did not run the 100 straight.. I'd feel like I won more than an endurance contest.. In my days of shooting sporting clays.. even though I did not do it much.. I enjoyed the challenge.. Guess.. to me.. that's what it's all about.. Something new.. different.. and a challenge.. I even enjoy wobble trap..and ZZ bird.. Never shot a clean round in either.. but if I did..THAT would be really meaningful to me.. I guess I was way full of myself a few years ago.. and a trip to Italy cured me of that.. I bring Bunker into the equasion..because that's all I've shot in the last year..and now.. I've put that down to shoot handguns.. This could leap over to why is the ATA loosing members?? if they are I don't really know.. But I think the rank and file ATA shooters would welcome a different target.. a more difficult target. Even if the scores were not what they are now..the feeling of accomplishment I believe would be greater.. Also.. in the times we face.. 75 Hard targets could easily make up a shoot.. No need for 300 per day.. Could be a huge money saver so more people might stay in the sport.. Honestly.. if I don't shoot at least 500 shells a week.. I suck.. To me..I'm Not a natural.. I must work at each and every target.. I guess I keep going back to Bunker..I don't think you'd ever shoot more than 5 rounds in a day.. period.. To me..much more cost effective.. A good ZZ bird shoot could be no more than 50 targets. I've also been a fan of a 410 division for trap shooting.. I think that would be a blast also.. Anyway..I meant no offence to anyone.. but I would like to at least see the 3 hole target I've heard so many people belly ache over.. All Good.. Mike.. BTW.. could we throw the 3 holer 65 yards??? More fun yet..
 
#12 ·
According to the data posted by Pocatello on the similar thread two hole targets may be getting way more credit for this than they should. Straightaway targets from one and five were shot throughout the ATA for most of 1995 and all of 1996. But the number of Grand Slams completed in those years looks about average. Doesn't this mean that the angle of the targets is not responsible for the general increase in Grand Slams?

Neil
 
#13 ·
Neil - You seem to be assuming that all clubs, besides the Grand, threw 3 hole targets in 1996 & 1996. Since a great many clubs ignored the rule in a few years previous to that why would you assume they would suddenly decide to follow it? Jimmy Borum
 
#14 ·
I don't know that they did in Texas, Jimmy, but in Minnesota we shot straightaway from one and five.

Besides, there's no logic to your argument anyway, Yes, previous to 1995 2-hole targets were thrown almost everywhere. But then, in case you forgot, the rules changed for a year and a half. That's why I would assume they"suddenly" decided to throw the wider target.

Besides, all you guys _know_ that there were two conflicting rules - one for the straightaway, one saying (words to the effect that ) " In no case shall a trap be set in less than the two-hole."

Neil
 
#15 ·
No Grand Slam for me........200 singles? Yes.......100 doubles? Yes.......100 handicap from 27? No....a few 99's..........Even though I have not accomplished the suppposed easier feat.......

I am convinced the more I read this stuff that our aging population of trapshooters will not like to face the facts that their eyes and hands are failing and with the reintroduction of a harder target so will their scores and their self esteem. There are a few who make noise who would prefer a trapshoot to be about physical skill and not what it is today, primarily a mental skill. I happen to be one of those who would prefer a tougher target.

I would like to challenge Leo to a footrace, Ray to an arm wrestling contest and try to out eat Phil at a buffet....(might lose that last one)but not in a two hole trap singles shoot off........ I don't think I am alone in knowing that if I shoot 200 today and continue to shoot well it is going to cost me another hundred bucks in shells to win 20 dollars in added money and a two bit trophy that will collect dust.

Lyle
 
#16 ·
No Grand Slam for me........200 singles? Yes.......100 doubles? Yes.......100 handicap from 27? No....a few 99's..........Even though I have not accomplished the suppposed easier feat.......

I am convinced the more I read this stuff that our aging population of trapshooters will not like to face the facts that their eyes and hands are failing and with the reintroduction of a harder target so will their scores and their self esteem. There are a few who make noise who would prefer a trapshoot to be about physical skill and not what it is today, primarily a mental skill. I happen to be one of those who would prefer a tougher target.

I would like to challenge Leo to a footrace, Ray to an arm wrestling contest and try to out eat Phil at a buffet....(might lose that last one)but not in a two hole trap singles shoot off........ I don't think I am alone in knowing that if I shoot 200 today and continue to shoot well it is going to cost me another hundred bucks in shells to win 20 dollars in added money and a two bit trophy that will collect dust.

Lyle
 
#18 ·
The real King of Sports is live bird.. I've seen pots that equal many mens yearly wages.. Been to a few.. never shot in one.. That's where our big boys and their's go.. The "Grand".. as much as I like it,is diminutive next to a large "Live Bird".. shoot as far as money goes. One day..maybe if they make a junior league.. I might try.. TCR.. what ATA shooter ever won the "World" in Texas???? I think that's a pretty good test of who's who.. I believe it was a "Sporting Clays' shooter the last few years.. Anyway.. matters not.. name of the game in my book is to have fun..and meet some great people.. I'd like to master bunker..I'm to damn blind for Sporting Clays..ZZ bird is fun.. and so is the parking lot.. For those who like easy targets.. why don't you just stack them on the traphouse.. see how many you can break with 1 shell.. Wonder what the shoot offs look like??? Anyway..as Don said.. who cares???Today.. I certainly don't.. I'd still like to try a 410.. say doubles??? Now.. that could be ALOT of fun.. screw the scores.. Anyway.. shoot well and often.. Mike
 
Discussion starter · #19 ·
Neil I think you missed the whole point-the grand slams were completed with 2 hole targets, and they are less than a straightaway from posts 1 & 5. Now how do you propose the increase in grand slams from 1964-1988 to the drastic change in increased grand slams from 1989-2008, only 2 major changes, voice calls and 2- hole targets.

Then there was also the easy targets thrown in Texas, shooters that had money went there to try and get their grand slams, and there was this club in Idaho
that threw easy targets, high averages was the result there.

The guys from 1964-1988 earned their grand slams, the rest were cherry pickers
as far as I am concerned. The guys in 1964-1988 had adjustable combs, release triggers, Federal Paper Shells, and 1200 fps max load shells, then some ones bright idea to use SAAMI specs, 1250 fps is still a 3 1/4 dram shell in 1 1/8th oz of shot.

Now you go to 1250 fps shells-voice releases-2-hole targets, you might as well consider 1 1/4 oz loads next, that would make it even more easier to get grand slam.

The guys from 1964-1988 worked on their guns to get them the best scores possible.

When you shoot 850 targets in singles shoot offs doesn't that open your eyes to the easiness of the CANDY targets.

Don't get me wrong they are great shots and those days they were on them, I believe it would have been a different story if they were shooting 3 hole targets, but same winners but a lot less targets thrown.

The rule book from 1964-1988 showed how wide a legal target could be thrown
and it was more than a straightaway from posts 1 & 5.

PAT IRELAND: Higher scores are not bad, they were un-justly earned shooting candy targets. And your statement to get rid of voice calls and adjustable combs, The voice calls really gave the shooter an honest pull, and on time without human error, thay had adjustable combs in 1964-1988. And gun fitting was done by more gunsmiths, not standard on many new guns then.

There is a lot to be learned here just by looking at the GRAND SLAMS.

Gone are the days of shooting for a new car, why? Shooting expenses to the average shooter with a family to raise, is out of sight and not affordable.

The CASINO's have withdrawn from hosting because of costs and lack of shooter spending money at their CASINO's. Ask Steve Carmichael.

I gave you the proof it's just how you digest it, or want to give an argument just to argue, the point is 2 hole targets are CANDY targets.


Gary Bryant
Dr.longshot
 
#20 ·
The problem is, Gary, that the the change to 2-hole targets did not occur in 1989. I started in 1982 and have shot 2-hole since the start. I participated in target setting at the Grand from 1985 to 1995 and they were 2-hole every single year.

They didn't have 1200 fps max shells. there were plenty of lots of shells I tested what were about as fast as today's handicap.

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank">
Image
</a>

Have you got a Grand Slam? I sure don't!

Neil
 
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
About this Discussion
83 Replies
31 Participants
Last post:
Barry C. Roach
Trapshooters Forum
posts
4.3M
members
93K
Since
2005
A forum community dedicated to Trap shooting enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about targets, clays, hunting, gunsmithing, gear reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Shooting Related Discussions For Sale Reloading Want to Buy/Trade Threads Gunsmithing