[1oldtimer]

Sounds logical. Possibly should be tried at smaller shoots to not scare shooters away. Funny thing is,I never knew the angles were changed. Been shooting since the 50's and shot the targets where they were thrown. My scores stayed the same. I found out a 98 handicap I broke was on 3 hole targets many years later. If you shoot the targets,you won't know what hole they were set in.
Clyde

 

[trapshootin hippie]

Clyde, why should it scare shooters away as they would be throwing legal targets?


GneJ

 

[W.P.T.]

Why only the shoots at Cardinal Center, why not all of the clubs for a really good overall set of number to compare ..? When I started shooting targets were 3 hole snd 50 yards, nobody complained about them until they started to make changes ... Since they cut down the angles and shortened them up nobody has stopped complaining ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

[Jon Reitz]

The 'dawg will be all over this in minutes...

 

[cubancigar2000]

They are gonna bith no matter what ya throw

 

[Trap4]

They should be SET as the ATA rule book says and NO different.

Trap4

 

[Setterman]

Why not do it at the Dollar?

 

[bubbasdad92]

"Why only the shoots at Cardinal Center..."

OOOH! OOOH! Call on me. I know the answer to this one!!

Because Brad and the pro Ohio/Cardinal Center contingent has bombarded this board with about a gazillion posts vehemently asserting that the ATA's current, "easier" target presentation and the move to provide smaller trophies and awards to more shooters has been the ruination of the once great sport of registered trap shooting.

They have railed that the only way to restore the "integrity" of the sport, attract throngs of shooters and return registered trap shooting to its former greatness is to throw a more difficult target presentation and provide larger trophies and awards to fewer shooters.

Thus, it seems logical that they would lead by example.

 

[391 shooter]

How can you have a registered shoot, to begin with, if the targets are not set to legal ATA standards no matter where you go in the USA?

As I read this I am lead to beleive that we are not shooting legal targets now.

 

[ivanhoe]

"I'm just hardheaded, wouldn't know that from this site And won't give up! Some will if they shoot crappy targets and break crappy scores.Fact of life.

So this means that those who make the rule whether they are right or wrong. Think we should cow down to those that can't break the targets that they call for. They see nothing wrong with there own ability, all they can do is blame the target setting.

The targets have nothing to do with it. It is a matter of the inmates running the asylum. Tell me why did the ATA allow 2 yard reductions two years in a row??? Was someone putting pressure on them about that also. Why is it that those that don't like the reductions are being ignored. Yet those that say they won't shoot the wider targets are being catered to?????

Bob Lawless

 

[likes-to-shoot]

The way I look at it is you set the ATA targets, I'll shoot at em....

The old has beens, wanna be's, those who can't let go of the past and those who will bitch about the Grand moving to Sparta can cry crocodile tears, call people names and look down of shooters who have less targets all they want, all it does is show their type of character to the rest of us.

P.S. Terry (pipelayer), You do realize the majority of shooters (particular outside of Ohio) are in your corner.

Bill

 

[Two Dogs]

Jerry...You know that this time of year at the Dollar, if you don't shoot before 10am., you will be shooting in the wind.That's just the way it is there.

This time of year would not be a good test, BUT if that's what they set, I'll be on the line breaking them.

I shot my first 200 and went to the fence on 3 hole targets.See you there, I need new ears this year...

 

[likes-to-shoot]

Most of the places I shoot we set straight aways from posts #1 and #5. I presume those are still legal targets.

 

[ivanhoe]

Terry I guess I didn't make my point clearly. It has nothing to do with who liked it and who didn't. The ATA won't change the rule back to the 3 hole equivalent. Yet they break the rules for reduction by passing them out in bunches without changing the rule in any way. Not only did they do that but there were no target needed to get the reduction the first year. All one needed to do was say ya I'll take two and you got them.

The point being they won't change the rules on the angles but then turn around give out reduced yardage that isn't in the rules. To be quite honest with you Terry, these are the kind of things that piss people off. They do nothing to endear the officials to the shooters.

I wasn't expecting you to defend the decisions of the EC I was just trying to make a point that this is what happens when they are above the rule. The rules were made and should be lived by.

However they pick a rule that they want changed and bang-o its changed!!!! Not Right, Not right at all nothing to do with giving the reductions. Everything to do with just breaking the rule just because they can.

Bob Lawless

 

[V10]

l-t-s,

Yes, a target setting which gives a straight away from post 1 and 5 ("3-hole targets") is still a legal target.

 

[870]

Bob:

I'm sure I'm going to regret this, but in fairness we shouldn't be saying ATA is breaking a rule with the reductions. They just made a change that was within their power; you and many others don't like it, but that doesn't mean they "broke" a rule. I don't think it was a good idea, but they didn't break a rule. Just like Cardinal is free to throw 3 hole targets any time they want, ATA has absolutely nothing against it. My personal view on that is most shooters wouldn't even notice it if you didn't tell them about it. Of course, once you did that they'd be complaininmg all over the place.

 

[halfmile]

Why not just throw straightaways? That way everyone can shoot good scores, and go home to brag about it.

(this is the thinking that started the whole mess)

HM

 

[shotgunpeople]

Halfmile....

Straight away targets are the ones I miss the most...Ha ha ha

 

[ivanhoe]

"They just made a change that was within their power; you and many others don't like it, but that doesn't mean they "broke" a rule."

I noticed they didn't change the minimum angle that can be thrown. BTW that is in their power also. Yet it won't happen, because as a certain former ATA official said Not if he has anything to say about it. It won't happen because it doesn't fit their way of doing things.

You say it isn't a rule well I think it is at least unless you have 1,000 handicap targets and 500 hundred single targets. An average below the break point you don't get a reduction. Sure sounds like a rule to me.

BTW I didn't see one thing in the rulebook that there was any way to get your reductions by the pair.

Bob Lawless