[Phil Kiner]

Pat-One of the reasons that many shooters petitioned to get off the 17- and 18-yard line years ago was the fact that it caused so many squadding problems. As a result, movement in front of the 19 was totally eliminated.

Others:

This comment was straight from my blog http://www.trapandfield.com/philkinerblog.htm and if you will read the blog comments pertaining to this subject Iin its entirety you will see that I addressed short yardage shooters first and then got into the other recs as a BTW if you really want to make some changes.

Since Martin has made the commment that it is not the same game and since guys like Ray Leo Kay Harlan Ricky have had more punches than they can count with no move maye the thought of having to get several punches before you move is not such a bad idea.

 

[matttrapn]

Howdy Phil,

I have been watching this thread off and on, and I am amazed how many have spoke up. Maybe I've missed this, but I really havent seen the question asked which I would like to hear your response.

Where do we go to next?

Lets say we add two/three yards. The "big-dog" shooters will make it back in short order, (in my opinion) these people will still shoot great scores, and win shoots. Then what?

And, as you have said before, wait until these young kids get a few more years on them, "Katie, Bar the Doors"!!!

With that being said, I believe we need more young people becomming involved within our sport, and all the shooting sports. But thats another issue.

Merry Christmas, and a very Large Thank You for all your help.

Matt

 

[jbbor]

If we are going to have a "social" sport and and not a competition, why do we bother with rules, classes and winners and losers? The age of feel good is upon us! Jimmy Borum

 

[DBax]

I feel the expense of shooting is the main problem , I think a one ounce load would help in all areas , even 7/8 oz. . with new shooters considering getting into the sport , the price of shotgun shells is a real downer. also i think we should eliminate the heavy hcp load ... Dean

 

[phirel]

Phil- The specific question I an trying to address is how we can retain more members. The multiple punch idea could possibly hurt retention. It would keep the better shooters at the small local shoots closer and these are the shoots we need to be looking at when talking about retention.

Squadding problems were one, not the only one, reason why the previous short yard shooters wanted to go back to the 20 yard line. These problems will still exist when we begin to see 17-19 yard shooters later this year.

I am not opposed to some changes. I do want to be as certain as possible that the change does not do more harm than good. Which of the possible two following changes would at least generate more members? Restricting velocity to 1200 ft/sec or requiring every club to post at least three signs, similar to the ones politicians use, on the roads leading to the club whenever an ATA shoot is scheduled.

Pat Ireland

 

[jbbor]

From a previous post. (added)

"There is always the problem of squadding a small number of people at less than 20 yards because most, when offered, will not accept reductions. Part of the reason may be that they end up shooting alone or on very short squads. A lot of shooters are (over) handicapped at the 16. If we started shooters at the 17 or 18, the ranks would grow there and the squadding problem would resolve itself."

 

[Jawhawker]

Pat, do you honestly think that any of Phils suggestions would be detrimental to the sport? I know Leo, Ray, Kay, Ricky, Harlan, etc aren't going to hang up their guns because of new yardage. I also would make a substantial wager that none will quit becuase of shell velocities. Now on the flip side, I don't see any short yardage shooters upset with being able to move closer nor quit because of shell velocity. Please then explain how these ideas will have the potential to reduce present members.

I do admit that I see potential for negative attitudes from a number of gunsmiths with the potential reduction of new shooter base because of reduction in release trigger sales.

 

[matttrapn]

DBax, I couldn't agree more. The costs are indeed what drives a great deal of people away. I wish I had an answer for this, that would be effective. The problem I see with changing to 1-oz. or even down to 7/8-oz., is simple, factory shells have no price break between 1-oz., and 1-1/8-oz now. New shooters usually havent started re-loading when they first begin the sport. So with that, where is the savings for new shooters.

A "social" sport? jbbor, I agree with you as well. What I would really like to have said here, and will now, to all those who whine about the top-shooters taking the money. Practice.....

 

[101voodoo]

Just curious, anybody here that was shooting trap when they moved the max handicap distance from 25 to 27 yards?

I've shot at the Auburn California club, and the #1 trap there must have originally been a 25 yard max because the cross concrete walk connects there.

Obviously there wasn't any internet, but the "cost, it won't help, there's no room" etc. discussions then must have been real similar to the current ones.

How was the change made then, and what was the effect on handicap scores?

Can't imagine what handicap scores would be today if 25 yards was still the max.

Jim

 

[Hauser]

Jim


I wasn't around when the change from the 25 to the 27 was made but when I started shooting in the mid 60s we had a number of clubs in the state that did not have concrete walkways. They were either gravel or dirt so increasing the walkway was both cheap and easy.


Jerry Hauser

 

[Hap MecTweaks]

SS, read the rule book on ATA's web-site if you don't happen to have one. There's many answers to most questions on the site.

While there, read about the history of trap shooting, a very interesting and informative read also. Hap

edited for SS.

We have more rules than is needed for our game and a few of the most vital have been already been changed! Matter of fact, some of our own delegates and officials can't agree on several and rely on interpretations to make the decision!!I can't see how dancing all over the yardage lines is a real help to anyone. Usually distance is a hardship on not only the average shooter, but his pattern as well.

Do read the history of our sport, it can be eye opening in seeing when and how rule changes has affected our game.

 

[Quick 1]

I agree with Bob's post at the end of part 2, that the problem is much greater than a simple rule change is going to fix. That the average age of the ATA member is over 50 should tell us something. I started shooting trap in the late sixties after a short racing career, because it was much cheaper and safer than racing while raising my family. In 1990, kids raised, I found myself single and returned to racing as my primary interest. This year I returned to trapshooting after almost a twenty year layoff(it is still much cheaper than racing!)and found it much the same as when I left the sport. It is funny that the problem plaguing racing,trapshooting, and many other sports is the same. No new blood! The numbers go down as people get too old, die off, health problems, or leave for other interests. My own grandsons have very little interests in my two passions, so I don't know where the answer lies. It seems a lot of the young of today like electronics,computers,etc and are not abscessed with cars,guns, and competition the way some of my generation were! If you find an answer to this problem, many other sports would buy the solution! Mike McGee

 

[happy]

Hey Phil, Since trapshooting is 100% vision Why not make the targets smaller , leave the yardages and shot alone. By making the targets smaller they become harder to see at long yardage. Any light or background changes would even up closer shooters due to their ability to pick up the target easier. You can't hit what you don't see. Maybe speed will be needed, but I would like to throw some smaller targets and find out how hard they become. I know those minnis on the sporting clays are sure tough. The only cost would be for different targets, no concrete , no shell testing. Hope you and your family has a great xmas I'll call you some time soon. Thanks for everything Norm & Terri Gilmoure

 

[ivanhoe]

101voodoo

"How was the change made then, and what was the effect on handicap scores?"

Jim very interesting question.(2 parts) The first part of which I can not find any information for(as of yet)I do know that the change was made in 1955. I am assuming(a dangerous thing)it took place at the beginning of the target year. Just when that was is not stated. It could have been September 1, October 1, or January 1.(I doubt it this date)

The first shooter to reach the 27 was at Las Vegas Gun Club on February 12, 1955. Depending on the start of the target year as little as 1 month 12 day or as long as 5 months 12 days.

It took 9 years however to shoot the first 100 from the 27. There was also a second that same day on a later squad belonging to Arnold Riegger, Also interesting to note Dan Orlich in that 9 year period had broken 99, 11 times from the 27 it doesn't say how many were majors.

It is not a lot of help but it is what it is and you can draw your own conclusions.

Bob Lawless

 

[The Kissable Wanker]

I'd be willing to bet that if a 29 yard line were to be enacted that in less than a month someone would be on the 28 and by the end of the year, perhaps the next at the latest, someone would be on the 29. Granted there probably would only be a handful of people in each state that would be shooting at this level. Even though I think that we need to extend the maximum yardage, it's unlikely to change things all that much, except for the relatively short time it will take the current really talented and dedicated people to become proficient at these distances. Unless that change is coupled with a change in shells it will not take as many years as the change from the 25 to 27 for those shooting on the 29 to be dominant again. I'm not talking about just a reduction in speed. I'm talking about a reduction in payload to one ounce or less with the maximum speed around the 1200 to 1250 range.

I think that Phil's original proposal had some teeth. The unfortunate part about making these kind of changes to keep the maybe 2% to 3% of the really talented people from winning a lot, like now, you need to negatively impact those who are not as dedicated, or shoot as much. In reality these kinds of rule changes are only because of the few major shoots where these really talented and dedicated people attend.

 

[ivanhoe]

The Kissable Wanker

"I'd be willing to bet that if a 29 yard line were to be enacted that in less than a month someone would be on the 28 and by the end of the year"

KW if they honor yards earned between reviews I am will to bet there will people on the 29 from day one. If all honorary yardage was paid out there would be those able to qualify for the 40 yard line from day one.

Bob Lawless

 

[R.Kipling]

IMHO: No matter that distance we shoot from, it's the distance 'between-our-ears' that has the most influence on this game.

Our game is getting older, and we need new blood. I happen to shoot often at a small Trap-only Club that was taken over by a local SCTP group. I now get to see the dedication and participation of this organization on a weekly basis. I applaud them all, and the kids. But, it's the kids that I watch.

One of the big reasons I/we see our younger generations come and go from the Trap Club so quickly is the 'recoil-factor'. The other is the 'Competitive-factor'. If we're looking to the future, then these factors should rightfully be a part of any 'change' being contemplated.

I really don't have a dog in this hunt, because, I have chosen to compete with reduced loads (7/8 oz. @ normal speeds). I did it for personal reasons, and that's just fine with me. I started using reduced loads when I saw my two grandson's loosing interest in Trap shooting - from the pain of heavy loads. We all use the reduced loads now, and two of us have won yardage with them (25 & 22 yd's). More importantly, it's changed their attitude from one of volume dependence, to one of developing skills, keeping them in the game.

The overwhelming consensus of the older shooters was/is that you MUST use HH shells to win. Don't think the kids aren't listening when you argue this point endlessly. And, don't think it doesn't play on their willingness to compete, because it does.

The other side of my humble opinion, is the competition factor. Kids like to be together, shooting together is a major part of that feeling. I've never understood the ATA's position on shooting behind your earned yardage. It's an advantage in so many areas; ease of squadding at smaller shoots, keeping a group of shooters together, and giving young, old and progressing shooters a chance to experience the freedom and joy of competing above their collective levels.

I don't think many people understand the emotion for a child that is DQ'ed for accidentally shooting a single post behind their assigned yardage. I've witnessed it happen. Where is the harm?

I don't often do this, but I'm inclined to agree with Sportshot on this issue. "One-and-done" makes perfect economical, environmental and SCTP sense, not to mention release-trigger and aging-joint issues. And, relaxing the specific yardage demands without encouraging the sandbaggers will enhance the participation and enjoyment levels of all our generations. These are both no-cost, no-pain issues.

Pour all the concrete you want, invest in expensive chronographs and radar guns galore. The big dogs will step up and win again. But, while you're spending all this money chasing phantom-baggers your kids will be skateboarding, with their friends.

Respectfully,
Kip

 

[Phil Kiner]

Matt-

While I think you are somewhat correct in that most of the good 27 yarders are going to hit the 29 quickly (if we went there) I think that the 27 yard dominance that occurs AT THE LARGER SHOOTS will decrease significantly. Will the younger generation of young guns still win? Yes of course, but I don’t think it will happen nearly as often. How often? I nor anyone else really knows but I am basing my theories on a couple of things that are facts. First when we went from the 25 to the 27 it really slowed down the winning by what had been the dominant 25 yarders and it took a lot of years for the new group of 27’s to become once again dominant. Secondly, there is no doubt that for whatever reason the 27 is significantly tougher than the 26. We won’t know unless we try but I think there is a good chance that the move to either the 28 or 29 could have a similar impact. Can I say absolutely that it will? No but, if you look at history there is a significant chance that the same thing could happen.

Anyone that says the 27 yarders are not dominant is looking at the game differently than I see it. You cannot just look at the winners at the big shoot you need to look at the winning scores and if you do that I will bet the 27 yarders average something like 75-80 percent of the top scores. I have no idea what the number is but if you go back 20 years that percentage would have be significantly less. As for the smaller shoots the dominant 27 yard shooters do not attend them as much – at least not here in Wyoming.

Pat – I think you and I agree more than it appears but let me throw this out. You are worried about the small clubs and I think moving shooters closer and even making it not so easy to get punches will help the small clubs with increased handicap shooters at the small shoots. One reason I think this may be true is based on one anecdotal example from here in Wyoming. For several years Douglas ran a spring handicap jackpot 100 target shoot in March. This shoot would regularly have 20-30 squads, which was a huge turnout for them and they used it to shore up their bank account every spring. Then one year the delegate gave the winner a 1 yard punch and you know what—the next year they had about 5 squads and it never came back and now they don’t have it anymore. I cam convinced that the chance to both compete and win some money without worrying about getting a punch was a significant part of the success of that shoot. When the stupid delegate punched the winner he killed the shoot, and the shooter he punched was not a suspected sandbagger so he punched for no reason other than he wanted to.

Maybe the ATA should survey all the shooters, by yardage, and find out what would make them more likely to shoot more at both the large and small shoots. And by more, I mean singles and doubles not just handicap. In this day of electronic communication this is something that could be done and it would not break the bank.

 

[Hauxfan]

Please...........Do not make the targets smaller. They are hard enough for us older shooters to see now.

That is not the answer.

Hauxfan!

 

[oleolliedawg]

I'll probably never understand how making the Handicap system work as intended by lowering the scores of "top shooters" at the farthest yardage is a bad idea. The "cure" for poor scores at any yardage is the 1,000 target review and a reduction.

So if you can no longer break winning scores from the fence using 1oz. and have "hit the wall" then it's to the 26 you go!!