Trapshooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In reading the thread concerning handicap and voluntary reduction, it got me to thinking.

How many of you...

If a persuasive argument could be made, (I'm not saying I could make it, it is theoretical), that showed that registered trapshooting would be more attractive to newcomers if handicap reductions were mandatory and you were forced to shoot at yardages the governing body decided for you...

...would willingly accept this new concept in order to try and help grow the sport?

Regards,

Chip Porter
 

·
Well-Known Member
Joined
·
2,755 Posts
I shoot a lot of practice trap and almost all the events at the shoots at the Dollar. Sometimes I skip the doubles as they seem to always delay them till the laaaate afternoon/early evenings, but I do shoot almost all there are.

I've been to the Grand several times, the Cardinal Center once (never again) and shot the Georgia State Shoot as well as at many of the clubs here in Florida in addition to the Silver Dollar.

I am fairly new to the 27 yard line, and am learning that it is not always easy, at least for me, to shoot a score I am happy with there.

I think, with work, my scores will get better at the 27, just as they have at each of the yardages I was on preceding the 27.

If, because I was under the break point at a 1000 target review, I was told I HAD to move forward, I would simply not shoot registered handicap anymore.

I can't help but notice that the folks here that advocate for mandatory reductions are mostly (but not all) shooters who have never been to the 27 or who are short yardage shooters. I fail to understand why they have an interest in getting someone to move within their yardage group who might be able to beat them.

While I am at it, I also notice so many former shooters or those who shoot little ATA want the glory days with big payouts back. I don't think that will happen and I could care less if it does or not.

I rarely play any options, maybe the Lewis once in a while, and don't shoot trap for money. I like to break the targets, that's what attracted me to the sport and keeps me here. Trap lured me away from competitive pistol and rifle shooting and I am quite satisfied with the way things are going.

I don't care about the "trinkets," the plates, etc. and I have no idea where mine are now (we redid the house last year, my wife stuck them in some boxes and I never looked for them). I like my Shamrock shooting bag I won, and use it, but most of the rest of the stuff is just stuff. I still like to shoot well enough to get the "trinkets" though, even if I don't pay attention to them after the shoot is over.

I like to be left alone which is why I don't want anyone telling me that I must move to another yardage.

I don't care about two or three hole targets, I would shoot whatever they throw (if you are regular Dollar shooter, you understand what I'm saying-you know, the old Forrest Gump box of chocolates analogy here).

I also hear some posters talking about the EC/ATA but I think they don't realize that, every year it changes-one new one arrives, one old one leaves. Unless they really believe that every single one of the new persons is a crook, then the EC is completely changed every 5 years. No one involved with the Sparta decision remains, many have passed on, and the ATA has millions of bucks in the bank.

Will ATA survive? Probably, but it will still be here for the relatively short time I have left on this earth and, if it didn't, if it dropped into oblivion tomorrow, I'd still shoot practice and still shoot 'caps from the 27.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,903 Posts
Bob, so you say "I like to be left alone which is why I don't want anyone telling me that I must move to another yardage."

So did not someone tell you what yardage to shoot from while working your way to the 27? Or did you just pick a spot and shoot from wherever you wanted that day?

They tell ya when it is time to move back, why no have em tell you when it is time to move up? Pride getting in the way? Or is it "Hey look at me, I'm a 27 yard shooter?"

GneJ
 

·
Well-Known Member
Joined
·
2,755 Posts
No, as I said, I believe my scores will get better with more time on the 27. It took me a while to get to the 24.5, then a relatively short time to get to the 27. Practice worked then and I think it will work on the 27, too.

I probably should have said, that, sometimes I'll run 25, then a 24, then maybe a 23, then a 20(not always in that order, of course). I want to try to get away from the 20s and my personal goal is to have everything a 23 or above.

I bought a new to me MX15 last January and struggled with it through the shooting season at the Dollar, but, and with no small thanks to guys here like Setterman, Neil and others, it came together for me in the Spring (or as DLS would say, I finally got it trained).

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,295 Posts
Mostly, it's shooting with shooters that know why they are there. In a nut shell. Not always, but most of the time.

JMHO

on the other hand, "they" haven't offered me a reduction for awhile.

Rick in MT
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,170 Posts
I'm a fairly new ATA shooter. I started at penalty yardage , moved to the 20, and then got a reduction to the 18. I don't care for the snide comments about shooting from the 18 yard line . The ATA put me there. I trying to get a punch . I'd like nothing more than to be moved back, but until I earn it , I'm stuck ... If people don't like the rules, get involved in the governing body and change them.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
If the governing body that you mention is the one that handed out four yards of gifts the last two years then no. Our system was working fine until they installed a welfare system. I know it's been discussed to death but that was death to handicap shooting as I know it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,106 Posts
Moving the yardage markers back to the 30 would do far more to equalize the Handicap event than mandatory reductions and grow the sport.

Why focus on winning a flashlight, pewter plate belt buckle when most eventually end up in a long forgotten box in a dark corner? ATA policies have removed the genuine incentive to win-cash. Solve the lack of option playing and let the competition begin. All that's left in registered target shooting is prestige. Take that away and kiss it good by altogether!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
This mandatory reduction thing has been hashed over time and time again. What I really don't understand is why some people want to make reductions mandatory.

What good do mandatory reductions serve? All it will do is drive the people who currently refuse reductions out of ATA shooting.

I turned down a lot of reductions in my younger years during my quest to make the 27 yard line. Now I'll stand as close as they'll let me.

The system currently in place serves both the shooters that want to be as competitive as possible by taking reductions and allows shooters that want to continue to stay where they're at, for whatever reason, to do just that.

The thread title is "for the good of trap". Well, in that context, just leave the reduction process alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,038 Posts
For the Good of Trap, how about just doing away with shooting at less then 20 yards (for all shooters) and not worry if someone can't shoot at the 27 yard line competitively, but stays there because he or she earned it and doesn't wish for a reduction.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
19,357 Posts
The short answer is that if one does not take the mandatory reduction many of you feel we should quit shooting. Very few of the guys that moved up won or maintained a 90 Ave and now they are stuck there. Shooting from the 18. No, I have that wrong... They have quit. A few were able to take advantage of the 4 yards and won. I do not begrudge your success, but telling the rest of us that we have to do it your way is wrong as well.

I can tell you too, that many of us older shooters do not have the energy to shoot a 300 bird program. And were happy to get thru 2 events. But now with the wrath heaped upon us by the righteous few we do not travel to just shoot 100 singles practice targets. And so, you've lost us.

the 4 yards was not good for the sport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Unfortunately, we've drifted away from the original question. We pretty much know all the arguments for and against voluntary/mandatory reductions.

I was trying to figure out if people would sacrifice their own personal goals, for the goal of bettering the sport. Again, I'm not arguing that mandatory reductions would accomplish this, but if a persuasive and plausible argument could be made that it would, would you go along with it to help grow the sport?

Regards,

Chip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
I would and have taken all reductions and yardage punches as they have come. I would gladly take the mandatory reductions for the good of the game.

I also strongly believe that it would improve the game tremendously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
MX2G,

You may be entirely correct, it may not even be reasonable, however, my intention was to sample the mindset of todays shooter with the theoretical concept.

Regards,

Chip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
I accepted my reduction so I guess my answer is "yes".

Historically, it is probably unfortunate that reductions were not made mandatory from the very beginning. If that had been the case then we would all recognize people on the 27 yard line as shooters that had not only achieved that goal, but were continuing to earn it every time they competed.

If the ATA implements mandatory reductions now it will probably only serve to alienate some long yardage shooters at a time that they can not afford to alienate more shooters.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
287 Posts
I am a fairly "new" shooter, having started 3 summers ago. My goal for last year was to shoot well enough to make "A" class, which I did, but just barely. Now I know I have to shoot certain scores to stay in "A", if not, it is back to "B", not my choice, just the way the "rules" are. I seldom shoot handicap, just not alot of interest in it for me, but just like having to maintain a certain average to stay in "A" class in singles, reallize I would have to shoot certain scores to move back and to stay moved back. Can't stay in "A" with a 92 average because rules say I can't. that being said, I will stick to 16's and shooting doubles and leave the handicap targets for everyone who seems to enjoy shooting them
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,398 Posts
I think it is best left alone...if someone enjoys shooting from the 27 and breaking 75's more power to them, if they don't want to move let them stay...

Personally, I'm on the 27, and would use every reduction I could get... :):):)



tony
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,524 Posts
The handicap system is far less damaged than debated. If everybody took their reductions, lots of the problems would be diminished ... on the other hand, I don't mind if folks want to shoot from the 27 regardless of their ability. In a perfect system, ideally, the average shooter should "bounce" between the yardages near their actual ability.

I don't identify it as a problem until those, that choose to shoot there, complain that the handicap system is broken. I'm not for mandatory reductions. After all, this is supposed to be fun at any level you choose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
I don't believe that reductions mandatory or otherwise help the sport! All they do is shuffle the shooter base around IMO. The ATA says if you like your yardage, you can keep your yardage, therefore, they must not really think there is a plausible or persuasive argument to force anyone to take a reduction! I believe that a bigger problem is the hours it takes for shoot offs to decide who won!
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top