I'm sure many wouldn't..........and I suspect Dennis's doesn't & that's his problem? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's really trying to throw legal targets. That's hard to do if you're working with a field that isn't layed out right and/or a trap that isn't set in the house right.
Setterman: there is no max height except at 10 yards; the 15' and 17'4" maximums you mention do not exist as far as a rule is concerned, that's why nobody has ever tried to measure them. It's just going to confuse some here.
870, I know. Both Field and Clays and Remington have posters and general write ups and "how to build a trap field" that show the target's flight path and heights. We have a Remington poster in our clubhouse that shows the "legal target flight".
Protractors an radar guns are the norm now, but for some reason our birds are now much higher. Everyone want "cushy" targets.
Once upon a time, our height rule read from 8 to 12 feet high 10 yards in front of the trap. Most target setters at the time choose a 10 foot setting to allow for wind discrepancies and it worked pretty well for most clubs and shooters. Why that rule was changed to 8-10 feet I have no idea? Then, our ATA recommends to us a 9-1/2 foot target height as desirable? Maybe we shoulda left the old rule alone in the first place it seems to me?
This more target face business across the country is a rule violation plain and simple. Why would we shoot practice at the home club where rules are adhered to when it comes to height settings and attend state and Grand shoots where extremely high targets are the norm? Either adhere to the rule or change it but high targets only hurt the average ATA shooter more so than the top shooters with the higher shooting POIs. I'm not at all surprised that it's recommended we throw away the height poles and use radar guns and a protractor for target settings. How long will it be till that rule undergoes another change to improve shooting averages again, soon?
If we're not going to go by our own rule book, why have it written in there in the first place if we accept bending the rule as best for ATA shoots? Have we no shame? Personally, I feel it's a disgusting practice and we should change it or adhere to it!
That was my point too Hap. I've seen some ungodly high birds at some of the bigger shoots. Usually some selfish SOB who can't shoot regulation targets tells the trap boy to raise the targets and they just do it. Then the next squad walks up and either doesn't know any better or doesn't want to raise a fuss about setting the targets back down. Happens all the time.
2 years ago, I got in a piss'n match with one of our "elite" shooters who wanted our trap raised 2 notches. We were shooting doubles, and the targets were on the low side, but legal. I said the targets were fine, but got over ruled by him and his buddies. The result were birds that did not resemble any birds I had shot that year, but he broke a 96. Oh well.
I can see a lot of resets when the wind is changing, but we have to keep the birds with in reasonable heights. It's part of the game!
"Admit, you have been upset with me ever since, I come up with the subject of "gun speed" which you never heard of and it embarressed you when I proved it."
What ever this is about is a mystery to me. In the first place if it happened I have no recollection of the discussion you are referring to. I the second place if it did happen it wouldn't be the first time and you wouldn't be the first prove something. As far as embarrassing me I don't think so.
"Yet, how often have you gone off subject and ranted at people who did dot their i's or cross their t's to your standards??"
Well why would I rant at people that did it to my standards as you call it????
So you just live in your fantasy world. It is still just a matter of opinion mine. BTW Rick I made that comment so you and other like you can see that I am not the only one that hi-jacks threads. I am just the one that gets blamed for it every time it happens. So how does it feel when it happens to you.
I also don't understand why most people in this thread attacked the man that asked the original question. It sounded to me like he was seeking help and in the next six posts he wasn't given advice he was ridiculed and laught at. So much for everyone being perfect wouldn't you say????
Bob, the man was asking for advice on how to cheat the game with a higher more face target. In very short order he was told how in the first few posts. It's impossible to abide by the rule of the game and throw such targets without violating one or more aspects of the rule book as outlined by John above! Just because it's done at the Grand and other larger shoots across the country still doesn't make it right by our own written rules!! Our ATA has once again allowed the top shooters in the game to set targets more favorable to them. So much so it's almost common practice these days at the bigger shoots across the country! Cheating is cheating but it seems hardly anyone has a problem with that part of the game today?
The man asking that question WAS having some difficulty with legally set targets compared to those set at cheating clubs which includes Sparta, the Cardinal and other bigger Grand shoots around the country.
"With a Pat Trap--how can we show more 'Face" of the target during flight??As it is now the target shows little color and more of the black rim.The target appears as an "eye slit". Frustrating!!!!!!!!!"
He assumed correctly from my post that others were cheating the setting rule and promptly got pizzed at me for not knowing much about anything? That's alright by me as it's his loss also, not knowing the rule and the consequences of violating it. As I stated above concerning smaller clubs adhering to the setting rule and their members venture to the big shoots only to be disappointed by targets they weren't used to shooting, more face and much higher? We can't have it both ways, it's detrimental to the game in the same fashion as was cheating the angle rule a few years back! Shameful practices skew the history of our great game and I don't like that kind of crap one iota! This shameful practice is just barely cheatin and benefits whom?
Cowboy John, That's too funny. Maybe a P'n+B'n thread.
As far as Dennis original question, I don't think he was looking to throw illegal targets. I believe he has a visual problem where ever he is shooting. It could be background/contrast, or machine placement as expressed above. Some times we make it more complicated than it needs to be. Hve fun and shoot often.
"the man was asking for advice on how to cheat the game with a higher more face target."
All I said was he could have been given the benefit of the doubt. His intention just might have been honest but of course no one in this thread seemed to care that the question just might have been sincere. As he might have thought that there was a legal way to show more target face.
Of course treating him as a criminal is going to educate him he won't be insulted or anything. Ya right
Dennis, if I was you call the various clubs who throw the targets you like & ask them on how they set their targets. There is a big difference in the appearance of legal targets. I believe a lot has to do with background, sun angle & target design. On a sky background I prefer a dombed target, the black edge gives me a point to look for.
Bob, I know the man wasn't intending to cheat when he referenced all the others doing the more target face thing, backed up by some ill gotten information from a trap manufacturer! I merely cut out the BS and called a spade a spade regardless of intent or bad information. Why do we tolerate these cheating practices and look the other way instead of following our own rule book? I can't find a good enough excuse to defend cheating our rule book or game! News to those not knowing the rule possibly or how this practice is really bending that set of rules?
We're not "treating him as a criminal" Bob. He wondered how to get more "face" and we told him.
There's no magical mysterious way to get the trap to throw targets with more "face", the ONLY way to get more face is to raise the angle of the plate as I said in my first reply, then to keep the target down where you don't need a clearance from air traffic control for the launch you back off the spring. So now you got a 38 mph target that'll go barely over 40 yards. There....THAT's how you set LOLLIPOPS......."lollipop 101".
"Why do we tolerate these cheating practices and look the other way instead of following our own rule book? I can't find a good enough excuse to defend cheating our rule book or game!"
Hap, its pretty simple and reasoning is twofold.
First, the ATA fears some sort of a legal battle I've been told and who knows by todays standards of lawsuits.
Second, I fear many will leave the game whom have started using present practices. Many are barely holding an interest due to their scoring under present presentations. If we went back to the day of old and some of the presentations we've seen and where expected to shoot, can you imagine the squealing, complaining and simply whining that would occur?
"Why do we tolerate these cheating practices and look the other way instead of following our own rule book? I can't find a good enough excuse to defend cheating our rule book or game! News to those not knowing the rule possibly or how this practice is really bending that set of rules?"
Do you really think so. Well I have a suggestion for you if you want an answer to that first question you asked. You need look no further than the,
"Whatever happened to Earl Scripture?"
Thread read again and look at the number of those posting that were defending him. I don't care if hundreds did the same and got away with it or not. There in lies your answer.
Cowboy he could have been told that there was no legal way which you didn't seem interested in doing. Judging by your answer!!!!!
"I am just getting a little sick and tired of what Bob Lawless approves or disapproves of being relevant to any postings on this site. It is an open discussion forum, but he does not understand that."
Rick you are correct it is an open forum yet seemingly not for Bob Lawless I never said that you couldn't post that information. I simply stated that it was off topic. Which again is fine when rick says so but not when Bob says so.
"I thought I had a legitmate comment to this thread and had no intentions of hijacking it."
I felt the same about my comment so what is the problem. Maybe you are upset because my opinions differ from your so what I say becomes a problem. Funny it only a problem for you.
In my third reply, and after it'd become apparent that OP was sincere about wanting to throw legal targets I believe I in fact DID suggest that assuming the trap was mounted correctly in the house there was no LEGAL way to set the targets to show more "face".
Perhaps I shot from the hip on the first reply and made assumptions I shouldn't have made? Perhaps I just get tired of people pi$$ing on my shoe and trying to tell me it's raining? I've been places where they set 'em at 42 mph with the radar gun on a "Pat-Pal", I've been places where they they set 'em to drop at the BASE of a 50 yd stake that was fifteen feet lower than the level of the trap, I've seen "50 yard stakes" that measured 42 yards from point "B". Try to say something and they just ignore you, I've even had 'em tell me that they WANTED 'em that way so people would shoot good scores and then they'd want to come back! I'm talkin' ATA registered targets here. Perhaps I just get tired of listening to all the lame excuses people can come up with to justify throwing lollipops.