Trapshooters Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I normally don't post threads on TS.COM unless it directly impacts me or the state that I represent as a delegate. So with that in mind I want to let the Executive Committe of the ATA know just how disappointed I am with your decision to cap the competition factor for state shoots at a 7.

In particular the Ohio State shoot last year was just a few shooters shy of having a competition factor of 8 and we were looking at the 2009 target year to move to this higher level. To accommodate the shooters needs and desires Cardinal Center is increasing the number of traps from 40 to 52 for the 2009 shooting year.

With this increase the logic was that more traps could accommodate more shooters since we maxed out in two events during the state shoot in 2008. With more shooters up goes the competition factor which in turn brings in more shooters because of the higher competition factor.

More shooters means more in daily fees for the ATA and OSTA.

Our board of directors for the OSTA operate under this 3 point principle when making decisions that affect our shooters.

Does this decision/action benefit the shooters Yes or No.
Does this decision/action benefit the clubs Yes or No.
Does this decision/action benefit the OSTA Yes or No.

If as a board we can not answer yes to all three of the above we do not move forward with the decision or action.

Let's look at this ATA EC decision and use the same priciple.

Does this decision/action benefit the shooters. No, since a reduced competition factor at a state shoot means an individual could be penalized points based upon the competition factor cap.

Does this decision/action benefit the clubs. No, since the capped competiton factor may keep some shooters away that only have a limited amount of resources to spend on shooting and want to compete where they can win maximum points.

Does this decision/action benefit the OSTA. No, for the same reason listed above. In addition to this the less shooters means less daily fees for both the ATA and the state organization.

It seems odd to me that at the same meeting you want to increase our membership in order to grow, but at the same time put a strangle hold on certain state organizations that want to continue to grow and use increased attendance and the corresponding competition factor as one of our drawing cards.

Thanks for listening.

Roger Edgington
Ohio State Trapshooting Associatoin
NorthEast Zone Director
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Zoltan,


It is obvious in my mind why the change in competition factor for state shoots to a max of 7. If the Cardinal Classic continues to grow as it has for the last two years and gets bigger than the Grand American you will see another rule change in the competition factor that will limit the Cardinal Classic.

It is okay for clubs to do well just don't do to good and embarrass anyone... jake513
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks for the feedback BIG PAPA. I am sending this back to the top so that maybe Mr. Winston will see this and comment as to why the ATA Executive Committee made this change for the betterment of trapshooting.

Roger Edgington
Ohio State Trapshooting Association
North East Zone Director
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,941 Posts
Roger, the All-American Committee is constantly trying to keep things in balance, one aspect of which is making the points available roughly - and that's the best which can be done - on parity with the level of competition, which is to say more difficult victories should get more points, generally speaking.

Right now, the Prelim Grand gets a competition factor of 8, the Grand itself, 10. I think you will agree that it's much harder to win something at the Prelim Grand than the Ohio State Shoot or the one in Pennsylvania. That's why both get fewer points. It's not just attendance which determines difficulty, after all, it's more the number of potentially-winning shooters, and in that area, the Grand, Prelim or Main event, is unmatched by any state shoot, even yours.

So why not just increase the Preliminary Grand so say 10 and the Grand to 12? Well, that starts to overload the Grand, making it too influential in getting on the All-American team. Put too many points in it and making the team or not begins to depend way too much on a good or bad Grand, and alsot there are plenty of people who can't even go and they shouldn't be handicapped unduly by that.

The present system was not done to harm any state shoot - seven points is a big draw, after all, and will anyone pass up the Ohio because it's seven instead of eight? It's just part of the All-American Committee's continuing effort to keep the system fair and attractive.

Neil
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,706 Posts
I agree with Zolton and to some degree with Neil Winston, why not give the Preliminary Grand a Competetion Factor of 9 the Ohio State and Pennsylvania State Shoot an 8 and any other state shoot that draws that many shooters an 8.

This would be the best solution to all involved including the All American Committee unless they have a problem attending the Ohio and Pa. shoots then that in itself puts a new curve in the solution.

Shouldn't the ATA membership be allowed a vote before a decision of this magnitude is instituted. When was the last time ATA members voted on a proposal?



Gary Bryant
Dr.longshot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,474 Posts
Gary -

I think you got to vote at your state shoot when you elected your delegate.

It's kind of like saying the general population of the US should vote on any large bill going thru congress - like it or not that's why we have representatives.

Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Actually I checked with the ATA Delegate for the state of Ohio and he was unaware of this change being on the agenda. So with regards to Gary Bryant's suggestion, lets just lift the state level cap to an 8, the Preliminary Grand to a 9 and we have a solution.

Roger Edgington
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,941 Posts
Roger, go to the link above and scroll down to the High All Around results for the Ohio State Shoot for last year.

Then go to

http://www.rjstuart.com/Trophies/2008/grandprelim.htm

and do the same for the Preliminary Grand last year.

It's just way, way harder at the Grand and I don't mean 12% harder, I mean vastly harder. Look at the names; look at the scores, not just the top ones but especially the categories. I don't think you'll conclude that Ohio is being cheated.

Neil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
with all this good thinking yu would think it should not mater how many shooters there are when determining a punch but reather who is sooting and how good they are if it 20 really good shooters then a big punch if all the shooters are like me then no punch ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
487 Posts
Mr. Winston,
I understand your points and concerns and agree that right now this measure is probably a good solution. I am a bit troubled by the need to cap the state shoots at a comp. factor of 7. Cardinal Center and the O.S.T.A. are investing a great deal of money in the hopes of attracting more shooters. If we can generate enough attendance to rival the Prelim. Grand numbers, I hope that the E.C. would give this a second look.

I do not agree with the method of comparing two shoots just by looking at winning scores. Certainly the level of compitition plays into this, but so does weather, target presentation and whole host of other factors. If you have ever shot at Middletown, Ohio, you know what I am talking about. I have seen 95 win a handicap event at Middletown with over 400 shooters entered! Tough targets, GREAT MONEY! I have also seen very high scores needed to win at Mason, Michigan regardless of the number of shooters because they have a nearly perfect target presentation. Just my thoughts.

Thanks,
Don Cogan
NW O.S.T.A. Director
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top