I am thinking of removing myself from this site

I thought it would be more accepting of my views, and what is needed to correct the ATA,s actions toward target settings, instead of accepting my views or reading them thouroughly
and having the foresight of the results, and giving them a real test as I outlined at Sparta.

It just may be the best interest for my removal from this site.

Yours very sincerely Gary Bryant Dr.longshot/the guy for competitive targets. I have met some of the very nicest shooters here and wish you all a very good shooting expierence

 

Hey Bud, we aren't letting you get away so easy !!!

I enjoy reading your comments...We do have a 1st amendment in this country (so far anyway) that gives us the right to speak our mind...

I don't know you, but if Dave Berlet can say some nice things about you, as he has, I guess you aren't so bad...LOL

Stay here !!!

Dave

 

Dr. , Please reconsider your thoughts on leaving this site. Without you and your opinions it would be like loosing the daily newspaper. Some folks might compare it to loosing their real time internet news in the world of Trapshooting. I will stay tuned providing that you will keep up the broadcasting on this news channel . Kind Regards, Storeman Norman

 

If I were you I would stay just to be a thorn in the side of the lurkers on that old site, and the ones that do post here not using there TS names.

Flyersarebest

 

Longshot, are you fishing for a compliment?

A big part of this site is seeing just what you've found out or what's on your mind. A forum isn't web coding. It's the posters.

 

Gary,
You are free , white, and well over 21 so nobody can tell you what to do if thats truly how you feel ... The problem is not all (or possibly any of) of anyones thoughts, ideas, desires , will ever be initiated or ever become reality, thats just one of the facts of life ... The changes came about while most people were sleeping and or because they saw some chance that they could be more competitive by dumbing down the game as many know it and of how it once was ... If you never say another word people know how you feel about certain things and that you are consistant and persistant about them ... I'd suggest you just kick back and watch for awhile and see what happens, can't be or get any worse than it already is so whats the matter with trying that ..? DO NOT take anythjng personal because no one or maybe only a few people agree with you, nothing gets changed over night but thats not a reason to walk away which is an admission of defeat ... I do not see that in anything you have posted here, there, or anywhere else ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Gary,
Don't walk away, like WPT says sit back and watch for a while if you don't feel comfortable posting not everyone has the tenacity to continue to hold for what you believe is the solution for the handicap problem.

 

I'm not a man of many words so this is short and to the point. "Don't leave the site as I enjoy and learn from your post." Please stay!!!

 

Go ahead, Gary. Leave. It's fine with me and many others, I'm sure. Don't let the door hit you on the butt on the way out.

N1H1

 

Goodbye

 

That way, some of them would prick their finger instead of fingering their prick.

 

Ok, Dr. Longshot ... Now it's time to do what Paul Newman did in the Hustler ... Break the Balls and or Targets and just simply say ..."I'm Back" ... Your lifetime friend in Trap ... Norm

 

This just looks like another page in the continuing saga from the Drama Queen.

 

If you got to go you got to go

 

Stick it out Gary. I for one enjoy reading your posts.

Tom

 

Gary
enough is enough- Multiple posts ranting about the same thing- clogging up the threads- every time I got on here all I see is your name.
I agree with some of your ideas but after the 3rd or 4th time it gets real old.
Several others have told me that they dislike this site due to all the Anti-ATA rhetoric being presented. The way I see it the ATA is all we have- It's not perfect but what is?

 

"The way I see it the ATA is all we have-"

I used to live for the weekend registered shoots. As I have posted before I spent every extra cent I had on shooting registered targets. Heck, I would take a loan at the credit union every year to cover the week of the Grand In Vandalia. NOTHING meant as much to me as belonging to the ATA and shooting registered targets, NOTHING!!!

Now that is probably because I wasn't half bad at it. You win a trophy at the Grand and get your picture in Trap&Field your first year there and it kinda feeds the ego and makes you want to do it more. Zone shoots, 5 different State shoots and the full week at Vandalia. NOTHING meant more to me. I lived for it.

Ever write a check for an event knowing that you didn't quite have all the money to cover it if you didn't win? A little pressure huh? Never did bounce one of those checks.

Wasn't really good enough at any sport growing up. Too short, too light, not fast enough, not strong enough, just average. THEN, when I first tried Trap with a borrowed gun I found I could hit those little buggers pretty well. A week later I had my own dedicated Trap gun and was shooting every chance I got. THEN, the guys I went with said I should join the ATA. Did that the next day. 1400 registered cap targets and I'm on the 27. Can you imagine what someone, that was"average in anything else", feels like when that happens? Not back slapping, just explaining why I did it. NOTHING was more important that the ATA and shooting registered targets.

The ATA was THE shooting orginization to belong to. Skeet shooting sucked. Sporting Clays wasn't even on the radar. If you didn't belong to the ATA and shoot registered targets you were just someone " shooting clay targets on a Trap field". It really didn't count. As a member in the ATA you were the real deal.

The operative word in that first sentence is Used.

The next time I talk to any of the dozens of guys, the ones that "used" to shoot all the shoots we "used" to have here in SW PA., I'll remind them that "the ATA is all we have."

Of course I'll have to wait until they step out of the shooting station at one of the Sporting courses they now frequent every weekend.

Why do you think they, and more than half were really great Trapshooters ( State teams, State trophy winners, Grand trophy winners, High average winners, all quit the ATA and moved on to something else?

IMO, they didn't think "the ATA is all we have"

Flyersarebest.

 

Unless you move to the west coast- The ATA is all we have for trapshooting. Sure you can shoot skeet or sporting or meat shoots if you like. I prefer registered trap so the ATA is it for me.
I don't care about what hole the traps used to be in or what some delegate voted on 20 years ago. That means nothing to me- I just focus on shooting my best.

 

Everyone focuses on doing their best.

Unless of course you are trying to stay on the 18 yard line for the month of August.

As far as "not caring about what hole and what some delegate voted on 20 years ago"?

That's the big difference isn't it?
Some of us DO care.

Flyersarebest

 

The problem is that most of those that cared threw their hands up and left. How do we get them back?

 

So if you have a right to care, why don't we have a right not to care? It's history guys. It's been that way for 19 years and has all the signs of being that way forever.

But didn't I read Longshot saying that the present Ohio Delegate was pledged to changing it? Do I have that right? Did you guys really get a someone elected on the platform that he would bring back three-hole target flying 50 yards and shot with 1200 fps shells?

I've attended - gavel to gavel - the most recent thirty annual BOD meetings and I must say that at times they have dragged a bit. But maybe your man Roger will change all that. I look forward to it - a reexamination of the question is long, long overdue. Though the 2-hole was passed by four-to-one margin in 1996, it will be interesting to see if there has been any drift and if so, which way. And passing a 1200 fps rule will certainly teach the BOD why they should be wary next time of passing something that no one in the room recognizes a big trouble just because they haven't asked the questions they should ask about any motion:

1 How will the ATA enforce this?

2. What else will happen?

Both of which questions are appropriate to the 30-yard line motion and the 3-hole motion, and the 1200 too and neither of which is likely to asked, for obvious reasons. So I'll ask it here:

1a. How will the ATA enforce getting clubs to add concrete in the absence of any evidence about how it will work? (Why don't you guys support a realistic test as I have described? It's your only hope, after all. Proving it works.)

2a. What will happen when clubs just drop out of ATA shooting rather than spending the money?

1b. How will the ATA enforce the 3-hole target setting at clubs where the shooter don't want it?

2b. What will the ATA do when this happens again?



and this:



and

3a, How will shot speed be tested and how will the ATA tie - in the legal sense - the shell or shells tested to the shells shot?

3b, How will they deal with the shooters who quit because they think (wrongly, in my opinion, or at least I hope) that the only chance they had against the big dogs was shot speed saying "and if you think the factory-supported-favorites are shooting these legal wimp loads you must be nuts. They are still getting the good stuff; it's just we peons who can't get them."

Yours in Sport,

N1H1

 

Neil
Your graph above fails to show that due to cheating and by your own previous statement, the top shooters in the graph above were shooting 2 hole targets in 1996. They were picking up targets at easy shoots to pad their averages. I think this is another example of your dishonest posts. Are you so senile to not remember we discussed this previously? Do you remember trying to erase the post and graph? I think you remember.

This must be embarrassing for you.

The question was easy Neil. No need to hide behind misleading graphs. Did your lifetime achievement of making the targets easier have the effect you wanted? You keep ducking the question as if you are not proud of the lifetime achievement award.

Let me guess Neil. This is another one of those post, erase and run moments.

 

Neil, you should already know the smaller clubs were never FORCED to add two yards from the 25 to the 27. In fact, I've visited clubs here in the East that still don't have those two extra yards. If you're saying clubs will need a wholesale adding of multiple banks of 30 yard walkways then you're also saying the problem is much larger than you're willing to admit.

Yup, I suppose we'll have to budget many thousands of $$ to extent all 12 banks here in PA to accommodate the tremendous influx of new 30 yd. shooters. You never know what bank Harlan could possibly be squadded on you know, But then, most of us know that's not true. Please don't tell us Ray Stafford is planning to shoot handicap at some obscure two or three squad two trap club with zero All-American points in Timbuctoo IA.

Talk sense Neil!

 

Neil

When you got caught posting that crap the last time you wrote:

By the way, again. I did not "imply" my graph was narrow in scope.

You erased that post. Sucks that is magically appeared.

Guessing you are still avoiding that question.

 

Let's see if I have this straight, FG. You, who hides his identity, have the chutzpah to accuse the top 40 shooters in the ATA of "cheating" because your plan did not work. It did not work; the best target shooters shot just about as well on three-hole targets as they did two. That's because they are really, really good at trapshooting, not because they cheated. As the interesting article in the newest "Trapshooting ATA" says, the best of the thought it was no big deal; they just shot. No one mentioned they had to cheat to shoot well.

The graphs are here. All the data is easily found in old issues of T&F. Go to it if you think they are not true. See how shooting dropped off. If you have other data, post it. If you don't, explain how harder target will make people shoot more now when in the past they made people shoot less.

Do I have it right about the Ohio Delegate "Roger." Is he really pledged to do your bidding at the Annual Meeting? As I say, I think it finally may be something interesting to watch.

N1H1

 

Yes Neil. Cheating was rampant. You have admitted that in the past right? Do we need to pull up more of your posts?

Again Neil.....you imply that the easy targets are just as hard to shoot as the hard targets. WoW!

You made the point before Neil. It will be next to impossible to undo what you accomplished. You are well noted for taking the sport out of trapshooting.

So again we are at the question........Did your lifetime achievement of making the targets easier have the effect you wanted? You keep ducking the question as if you are not proud of the lifetime achievement award.

 

First of all, Ollie, I think it's amazing that Eastern Clubs don't have a 27-yard line. They all do at every club I've been to in registering about 600,000+ targets. How do they get away with i?. A 27-yarder shows up to shoot - how do they handle that on the shoot report? You ran a club; how did you handle it? Do the clubs just lie and and report that they shot from the 27? And no one files a protest? It should be pretty easy to prove, after all.

If the background you referred to in another thread is so bad at PA that 27-yarders are pretty-much in the tank anyway, why do you want more?

But none of this is the point. What possible objection could anyone have to the ATA proving that the 30-yard line will work, that is, be just harder, not result in perfectly-pointed targets being lost, which everyone must call unfair.

One thing seems sure, neither Harlan nor Ray is likely to find himself on the bad banks - what are they, 5,6, and 7? - at the Cardinal Center, as I myself did in 2008 when I shot there. So why aren't banks drawn daily? We do it in Minnesota just to assure shooters that things are being run on the up-and-up. It's easy. Why doesn't the CC do it?

N1H1

 

Who is N1H1?

Is this guy sober? Hiding his own id. lol

 

FG, I have never admitted any such thing. I have never thought it. You guys just call our top competitors cheaters to explain the failure of the 3-hole experiment in 1995 and 1996. Remember the vote for the 2-hole in 1996 was 4 to 1. And both the Ohio and Pennsylvania Delegates voted for it both years. Read the "Trapshooting USA article." It may open your eyes.

I have many lifetime achievements, and I think that no one with any at all would post on a forum in any other name than his or her own. Only losers hide behind "screen names'" in my opinion. Consider some of mine: two third-places in the Clay Target, a Minnesota Singles Championship, President of the ATA, the first 100 in doubles at Casa Grande, the first since Larry Gravestock nineteen years before, half-a-dozen placings as an All-America, and countless other achievements. And you?

N1H1

 

I would tell you who I am, tarpmaker, but I have been forbidden to do so. The people here seem to know my name anyway; if you don't, you haven't been around here much.

N1H1

 

You are forbidden to do so....lol
drink another for me.

 

Neil,

First of all those clubs without a 27 yd. line dropped shooting ATA targets long ago. They were probably ahead of their time.

You already know who isn't in charge of squadding in MN. so why ask the question!!

 

Well, Ollie, if they quit hosting ATA events rather than spend money on the 27-yard line, what you think would happen if the ATA, based on no evidence whatever, demanded the 30?

Once again, is "Roger" that white knight you all were going to elect? Why won't anyone tell us?

N1H1

 

And the one for which you seem to distance yourself from. Removing the sport from trapshooting. That is what got you into the HOF in Minnesota. Again you would not even mention it.

I quote from the MN HOF:

Highpoints were; Jim Bradford, past ATA President, and Neil were able to get the misfire rule changed, and Neil was instrumental in getting the 3-hole target rule rescinded.

Tell me some more about your accomplishment.
Did your lifetime achievement of making the targets easier have the effect you wanted?

 

That's not vitriolic. It's a simple question. Posters here vowed to elect a champion to represent their concerns and "Roger" is a new name. Of course we wonder. After all, a well-reswpected poster here wrote on Wednesday "We have our Ohio Delagate on board, I will not name him." and I'm sure the phrasing of that post piqued the interest of many out-of-staters, not just me. I suspect that the silence which has fallen here is no attempts to keep the wraps on anyone or anything, but rather that none of the posters here actually attended the State Meeting and so have little idea what his commitments, if any, were. If you went to the meeting, tarpmaker. maybe you can fill us in.

N1H1

 

I've listed many of my achievement above, FG. They include:

" two third-places in the Clay Target, a Minnesota Singles Championship, President of the ATA, the first 100 in doubles at Casa Grande, the first since Larry Gravestock nineteen years before, half-a-dozen placings as an All-America, and countless other achievements.

Why not list yours?

N1H1

 

I can see why you are so angry. FG keeps asking a simple question to you that obviously rubs you wrong. Asking about another state's choice of delegate is a good way to distract from that painful question.

Then posting what accomplishments you have also helps distract as well. Not that trapshooting accomplishments are high on my list as accomplishment. Not much of a distraction for me.

Certainly it would be easier to just answer the question: I think he said:

Did your lifetime achievement of making the targets easier have the effect you wanted?

 

Tarpmaker, if it's true that "Not that trapshooting accomplishments are high on my list as accomplishment." I can't imagine what you are doing on a putative trapshooting site.

But my super-powers must impress you! The vote for the 2-hole was four to one. I'll tell you, I beat a couple of dozen Delegates bloody in the locker room to get that majority. I mean, what's wrong with all of you? You get your butts kicked and lay low for 19 years? You had two Delegates (PA, OH) voting the "wrong way" (from your point of view) in 1995 and couldn't oust them before they did the same in 1996? An not a further word in the intervening 19 years? Not one at any annual meeting? Not even a whisper?

Tell me, how lazy, how helpless are you? All that time and you couldn't get anything at all done? That's why I ask about "Roger." Have you finally gotten off your butts and at least tried to do something, elected someone who has promised to try to get action taken?

Were you at the State Meeting? Was anyone who posts here? What can we look forward to? As I said above, I would like to have another vote - three really, all your concerns: three-hole, 50-yard targets, 1200 fps shells - just to cement things either way. Are we going to get to watch it? I attend every year, have faithfully for 30, and will post the results here Thursday morning after the Annual Meeting, I promise.

N1H1

 

Neil, are we limiting it to just trapshooting?

If you need to know because of trapshooting I was able to shoot my way thru college. Back in the late 80's and early 90's before you made your big impact I was able to earn enough money trapshooting to get a second degree. I shot scores worthy of major funds at the Grand when it was Grand, OH State Shoot, NE Grand, WV, Tri State and others. Of course there was money to be won in trapshooting then. The shoots did not have to be ATA shoots and your feminized 2 hole targets. I am a 2X state placer in wrestling and was heavily recruited to wrestle in college. I was competitive in 3 forms of wrestling. I am inducted into an athletic HOF where they keep people like you out that want an easier game.

I have coached many teams and kids that understand the word sport and challenges.

I have owned many businesses.

I hope that is enough for you. I am proud of my accomplishments. And you continue to avoid the question.

Did your lifetime achievement of making the targets easier have the effect you wanted?

 

Difficult to believe anyone would say something like that to another competitor or person that shares the same love for a sport.

You sir have issues.

 

Larry Gravestock shot 3 hole targets 19 years ago, while you were sucking
those easy 1 hole targets, with a pacifier, to console your laughter on defeating a true trapshooters fantastic accomplishment, on PU**Y Targets.
You cannot,and never could handle 44 degree, 50-52 yard targets in many of your self proclaimed accomplishments, they were too hard for you, your trapgun ran out of distance, and had holes in your pattern.
Just like the holes in your MN HOLE OF FAME.

And you hide behind your HANDLE

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

The Devil Made me say that, sorry I meant every word of it. He dictated it to me using the MN Hole Of Fame Gammar.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

Minnesota does have some honest Hall of Fame Trapshooters, my hat is off to your accomplishments.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

Whatever the topic, whichever the forum, the important thing is the message, not the messenger. I read what's posted, I shoot the target that is thrown, I make my decisions based on information I think important.
The importance is in the message...
I suspect that any of us that "go against the flow" will feel unappreciated from time to time but if the message or thought is the real issue personal acceptance is secondary at best...... Larry

 

Side event July 18th at Brad Dysinger throwdown, Beloit, Ohio,- Family Guy and Neil Winston Elder Wrestling Match, Can we do this in the Mud, it is going to get Dirty Anyway, I have Family Guy 2 - 1 favorite.
Neil Winston is trying to change it to a Farting Contest as he is full of Gas.

GB DLS

 

Neil... Your shooting achievements are, indeed, impressive, and I applaud your success, however, the achievements that would carry more weight, for me, would be what you, as an ATA president, and BOD, did to improve our sport during your tenure. Perhaps by letting us all know what you, personally, accomplished that you are most proud of that actually helped benefit our sport we would have a much better understanding of what you really did for trapshooting.....

 

Am I incorrect in thinking the role of president and the bod is to implement the will and decisions of the membership? I do not know but I would hope the direction taken was a reflection of that membership.... Larry

 

Larry Gravestock hasn't registered a target since 1991. That is 24 years ago.

Even though its the internet your statements will be more credible if you take the time to get your facts straight.

 

Garry
I don't think this web site could survive without you so you best not leave.

 

Am I incorrect in thinking the role of president and the bod is to implement the will and decisions of the membership? I do not know but I would hope the direction taken was a reflection of that membership.... Larry

Its always been my contention that those elected by the people are supposed to be the mouth piece of the people, for the people and the betterment of association they represent ... (This case the ATA and its membership ) ... The EC and BOD should not have a predetermined agenda unless it is the will of the majority of membership ... Thought and consideration should be of the highest degree when acting on behalf of and for the people who elected you, in this case the ATA membership (by Majority)... To make a move out of desparation will usually result in a disaster at sometime sooner or later ... The reflection being the majority of the membership not only the ones who agree with their thoughts, ideas, desires, and agenda ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Read the by-laws, guys. They are what control the actions of the BOD and EC. Find what the responsibilities of the BOD are.

N1H1

 

From what Ive seen reading comprehension is in short supply. LOL

 

So, I'm guessing that common sense, logic, thought, and consideration can be avoided as long as its not included and spelled out in the By-Laws ..? I'm talking about being spelled out in plain simple english so its easy to understand ... The By -Laws cannot be used as an excuse for poor management, poor judgement, or gross neglect on behalf of those who are supposed to be bound by the By-Laws and acting on behalf of the membership for the progresssive betterment for the members and the association itself ... I'm not buying that .... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Right on Bill!!!

 

Well, Bill, while often using common sense, logic, thought, and consideration are often all you need to find something out, in this case, it doesn't work. To determine the actual responsibilities of the Board of Directors of the ATA, it has gotten you no where at all to imagine what you think they should be, since both you and Larry are completely out to lunch on this. It is not a question of opinion, it is a question of fact. Either you will determine what the facts are, or will continue with this blather as if your opinion counted. It doesn't. The By-Laws do. What do they say the responsibilities of the BOD are?

N1H1

 

I guess I am missing something here. I only have 3 years involvement with the ATA and have only a few registered birds but I was under the impression the ATA was a member driven organization? Membership probably had a hand in the writing of the by-laws? The BOD is elected by the membership? Any changes should be based on the membership desires? Out to lunch perhaps, confused definitely...... Larry

 

What you are missing, Larry, apparently is the willingness to expend the effort required to find out what the duties of the ATA's Board of Directors really are , specifically that part after the word, in the By-laws, "specifically."

Why do you and Bill think that expressing your "feelings" about this is any substitute for the facts, which are enumerated in Article IV, section 3, as I recall? I feel no responsibility whatever for helping either you in this, since you both are apparently unwilling to help yourselves, but here's a start:

http://www.shootata.com/Portals/0/pdf/ata_rulebook_web.pdf

NiH1

 

T
I think he means the by-laws that he modified, and took away the rights of the Life Members, when they re-incorporated the ATA in Illinois

GB DLS

 

Gary knows full-well that that is an outright lie. I'm sick of your lies, Gary Bryant.

N1H1

 

N1H1,
I seriously doubt that asking a question is remotely connected to expressing my feelings. I do not know who Bill is but I guess he and I must be on the same page at least about some things. If you choose not to be helpful then so be it, that is your choice. The rule book shows the way things work..... First the member, then the delegate and on up the chain to administer and operate for the benefit of the ATA. To me the ATA is the members . Once the "higher powers" of any organization think they are more important and elite than those that got them there the organization is going to have some challenges. Larry

 

The BOD has responsibilities, Larry, specified in a fragment IV, 3 started "specifically." It does not include anything you and Bill think it does. The ATA is a corporation whose aim is promote trapshooting. When a member of the BOD votes such-and-such a way, he is not putting him or herself in a "more important" position, he or she is just following the requirement of the By-laws. It's a job each takes very seriously, in my experience, having spoken literally thousands of hours with BOD members over my 25 years of officership. They try to do what they see as best for the ATA. That's their job, and they do it.

I consider your idea that doing their job an example of "elitism" just wrong. They were elected to make the best the decisions they could and, in my experience do, whether they have voted with me or against me.

N1H1

 

Well, you apparently wisely erased it, after someone pointed out that no one had ever admitted that before. Frankly, I had never considered that possible until then - that any group of ATA members would intentionally they to torpedo the future of the ATA - but there it was.

N1H1

 

N1H1
My statement was just a general statement about organizational management forgetting they represent the body of the organization (the members). I am sure those folks in BOD and EC etc are attempting to do the best they can for ATA but isn't the ATA an association of members rather than an entity to itself? From your post I gather you were an officer of the ATA for 25 years? That is a lot of experience to draw on.... Larry

 

Well, Larry, statements about "organizational management" and "entity to itself" may mean something to someone, but the words in the By-laws following "speciffically" have have not just more weight, they have the only weight. No BOD member is controlled by weighty theoretical conundrums about management; they just are faced with decisions about what is best for the ATA. And they just do the best they can.

Yes, I was an officer for 25 years - Delegate, EC Member, ATA President, Ex-offocio. It is a lot of experience. I had plenty of votes go my way, plenty of them go to the opposition, but I never, ever, thought for a second that the voters either way had anything but the best interests of the future of the ATA foremost in their minds. They were all just doing what they thought was right for the organization. If anyone thinks they are crooked, or dumb, or anything but serious and well-intentioned, they just don't know the hundreds of them I have known.

However, in contrast to you and Bill, they read and know the By-laws. They are simple and direct. "It shall have the duty, specifically, to see that the property, business, and assets of the Amateur Trapshooting Association are efficiently managed to the best interest of this Corporation." Nothing about keeping Ohioans happy, not even following the wishes of this-week's most insulting members. Just the best interests of the corporation. And they do. As I said, I've been to 35 annual meeting, Gary has been to one, most, if not all the others, I suspect, zero. Who are they to judge any of this? They, just as you, won't even read the rulebook or By-laws and yet presume to lecture us on what they require the BOD to do. What a joke!

N1H1

 

I have read them, I am not lecturing you. I am asking the question..... Is the ATA BOD and EC representative of its membership? Does the corporation serve only itself or does it serve the wishes and intent of the dues paying members? I have read posts that attempt to lecture. I have also read those that simply inquire about things. The statement above seems to indicate the Corporate interest takes precedent over what the general membership might desire....... "the best interests of the corporation". Is that the case? If so then the real "joke" might be that members believe they are part of an organization that is concerned and looking out for their interests....... Just a question N1H1, not a lecture.......... Larry

 

The By-laws are clear and simple, Larry. A BOD member is charged with promoting the best interests of the Corporation as he or she sees them. That's all there is to it. Each is free to interpret that in whatever way makes sense to him or her. All the rest is BS. If you want to run it differently, run and get elected and have at it. That's what I did. All the rest of that is talk, talk, talk and, to my mind, a waste of time.

At an annual meeting, discussions are not about "corporate interest" or anything half so esoteric. They are "should we do this or that?" Take the rest to an academic conferecce where they are free to - and not incidentally get paid to - contemplate their navels until next year and don't have to actually run anything.

N 1H1

 

If .... "promoting the best interests of the Corporation" is to infer that 'members' are viewed as 'customers' used to keep the "Corporation" 'alive' .... they are failing on that level also.

If a "Corporation" is 'selling' what a shrinking number of 'customers' are 'buying', then the "best interest of the Corporation" is no longer being served.

 

And that is as it should be...... if members have heartburn they should make it known to their representative and let the process work. Thank you...... Larry

 

Blame it on the By -Laws, about the same as blaming it on Bush ... N1H1 has never made a mistake or at least admitted to one in his life and like Obama people buy that BS .... If we had a few more people like N1H1 running the ATA it would of folded a long time ago, look at the number from he was in his prime ... I don't even care to talk to him because he can justify anything at anytime by blaming something other than his poor management skills or having concerns for the members ... They all need a Plaque so no one forgets the bunch that ran the thing into the ground after 100 years ... If Moral character does not play a part we are all in deep trouble ... People like N1H1 drive more people away from shooting the ATA then any garbage targets you could possibly present ... The EC and BOD are self serving and out to drain the ATA cash cow for their benefit so they can be there to represent the members of the ATA until something gets screwed up, then its the By-Laws that did it ... I do not believe anything N1H1 says let alone anything he thinks he can prove by posting a graph so even he can believe it ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

What year did you break that 100 in doubles at Casa Grande? I see you are at 23.5 yards, you had only 3 scores of a hi of 94
in hdcp, 6/14/15-9/7/14- and one other 94 in 2014, all other scores in hdcp were mid to lower 80s. back to 2006.
so how do you compare to Roger Covelski's straight on the 30 yard line, when your trapgun runs out at of patterns at 24 yards max at Pa trapfield elevations, and has a better pattern at high elevations over 5,000 ft?

I think your graphs and Charts can prove me wrong? The ATA shooter information center went down when I was checking your scores, your ATA # ***7028 lists you at 23.5 yds,

Why were there only 5 voters on the Target angles you said vote was 4-1, and both Ohio delegates voted for the 2 hole angles, I am confused here, only 5 voters, something here is rotten in Denmark, as the old saying goes.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

As N1H1 stated in his latest thread " A BOD member is charged with promoting the best interests of the Corporation AS HE OR SHE SEES THEM". Therein lies the problem they vote on their own personal interests, not in many cases in the interests of the members that voted them in to represent them at ATA meetings. Many delegates after elected no longer consider the member interests, don't rock the boat, rubber stamp the idea's that someone with time and money can lobby for. Don't confuse me with the facts.

 

Make sure to cast your vote wisely.

 

Jeez Bill.... I really like your style. Tell it like it is, period. No mamby-pamby B/S for us... My philosophy is simple, "fish or cut bait"..... Great post!

 

"So, I'm guessing that common sense, logic, thought, and consideration can be avoided as long as its not included and spelled out in the By-Laws ..? I'm talking about being spelled out in plain simple english so its easy to understand ... The By -Laws cannot be used as an excuse for poor management, poor judgement, or gross neglect on behalf of those who are supposed to be bound by the By-Laws and acting on behalf of the membership for the progresssive betterment for the members and the association itself ... I'm not buying that" .... WPT ... (YAC) ...

I have read the By Laws even requested the latest copy of same, so your telling me that the by laws can over ride common sense, logic, thought, and reasoning, all else get thrown to the wind ...? This is totally rediculous to even make that statement let alone believe in it ... We are in a lot more trouble than we even realized if they are all thinking along those lines ... Self serving bunch at best ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

DLS, he was referring the voting ratio, not the total vote.

 

It's a wonder that a graff or at least a flow chart was not presented to substantiate the theory by N1H1

 

From the articles of incorporation....The corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively for purposes described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, including, for such purposes, to: (a) promote and govern the sport of trapshooting in the United States, Canada,.....

From the By Laws Section 2: Duties. The BOD shall have the duty to outline and put in force the General Policy of the ATA, designating the time, place, and Rules of all registered tournaments and registered club shoots, prescribing all championship requirements, allotting, donating and distributing all trophies, cas contributions for competitive trapshooting under such conditions and at such times and places as it in its judgement may deem best for the sport. It shall have the duty, specifically, to see that the property, business, and assests of the ATA are efficiently managed to the best interest of this Corporation.

In reading these two items together, and in my opinion you must, the main purpose of the ATA is to promote the sport of trapshooting therefore the actions of the BOD should be manage the Corporation so that it promotes the sport. So the question is how is that done?

Let's go back to 1995/1996. Did the delegates at that time poll their constituents? Should they have been expected to? I do not recall any discusssions regarding target presentation in my state. I was, and still am, a nobody in the big scheme of things so the delegate wasn't going to come and ask my opinion. But if he had I probably would have said ' I don't really care, I'll shoot whatever they throw'. But let's say a delegate does a great job and reaches out and talks to 20% of the shooters in the state and by a 60/40 split they want 2 hole targets. Now within that 40% are the perennial All Staters and big money shooters, they guys with the clout. How should that delegate vote? The majority want 2 hole, but the elite shooters want 3 hole.

Larry above says this is an Association made of the members and the members must be heard and listened to. If so, the delegate votes for 2 hole.

But the delegate is charged with doing what's best for the corporation, not what the members want right. This delegate has this 40% group of long time shooters saying this change will destroy the game so he is leaning towards 3 hole. But then delegate gets this data that shows a drastic decline in overall participation during the manadated 3 hole year. We know the results of the vote. We know where shooting is today.

What we don't know is where would shooting be today if the 3 hole target were the rule. The fact is, NOBODY KNOWS what the results would have been. My guess is about the same place we are today.

 

Our delegate at the time did. I know he wasn't the only one. The vote was overwhelmingly in favor of 2 hole.

 

Thank you he mis lead saying both Ohio Delegates voted for it. I will blame it on the by-laws

GB DLS

 

It is always interesting how people use what they are told ....

One (1) year shows a possible decline, that MAY be caused by a rule change from 2-hole to 3-hole ... there is an immediate reversal. The same when the 'target-year' was changed, and then back again, because the All American points for one year gave one an advantage over someone else.

MANY, MANY, MANY years pass with a greater decline and NOTHING GETS DONE ..... wake up ..... get real ..... stop drinking the Kool-Aid .....

"this data that shows a drastic decline in overall participation during the manadated 3 hole year" .... the one year that someone may have improved their All American position over one of the never-was leader's Idols .... and that got corrected quickly ....

It's Kool-Aid .... stop drinking ....

 

Who keeps pulling this guys string

 

Thank you he mis lead saying both Ohio Delegates voted for it. I will blame it on the by-laws

GB DLS

I think he was refering to both years it came up for vote, hence both delegates.

 

Mabye the good dr should also list his avgs they should be pretty good because everybody can hit these easy targets.

 

User1, you're correct, there may be a variety of reasons why there was a steep decline in the target count and it may not all be attributed to the 3 hole thing. But to ignore it would be just plain stupid. And to think that the only reason for the current decline in ATA shooting is due to flights and angles... well, I've already said it.

Interesting how you focused on just that one piece of my post and ignore the rest of it. What about the rest? What was the delegates to do if the majority of the shooters in their states wanted the 2 hole targets. You all bitch an moan that the BOD/EC do what they want without regard to the membership. But if the membership speaks and wants something, but it disagrees with your thoughts you bitch and moan that the BOD/EC makes a bad decision.

I'm by no means an ATA koolaid drinker. I don't get why if someone disagrees with something you guys say they are "no questions asked, gung ho supporters of the ATA". Couldn't be further from the truth, in my case anyway.

 

The thing about cyber-chat is what many warn about ... If we have a 'face-to-face' conversation it has a different 'tone' to it.

Reading words or being able to hear talk, after you get to know someone, is much different.

Take this .... "But to ignore it would be just plain stupid." .... my thought is apply this to Grand attendance. A much greater problem than the 2-hole 3-hole thing.

But ... if I jump to using something you said to convey my thought about something else, that makes sense to me, it may offend you because you may not follow it that way.

Please do not take poor writing skills as personal attacks .... it is not. The reason a novel takes hundreds of pages is to put the background details in for the readers. To keep a post short incomplete thoughts are used.

Have a Great Day

 

I have the same doubts, Longshot. I just posted a question about trap scoring in Trap Talk, and it was moved to Off-Topic. I can't imagine how scoring the sport is off topic in a forum devoted to the sport. I have had posts deleted that mentioned other sites, but Neil Winston gets to bait posters here by referring to the other place as the "Friendliest Site," and his post stays up.

 

After many years of listening to and reading graphs and charts, I got to the point where I am not interested in anything Neil Winston has to say, or points he is trying to prove ... I do not like to block anyone because to me that is total disrespect for anything that person thinks or feels ... I have finally used my powers and blocked N1H1, Neil Winston and a few others so I will not have to be bothered with piss ants anymore ...

There are some cases where the only way to do it is face to face, eliminates the Rambo effect ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

​

​

 

If it makes Obama happy I am staying, anything to make him unhappy is good for me.

GB DLS

 

NASCAR did not make the 500 mile races shorter, Golf never reduced the 72 hole tournaments, Football did not shorten the 100 yard field, Baseball never shortened the base distances, Tennis never changed the Net Height, or baselines, Basketball never lowered the Baskets, Football fined and suspended Brady for Inflategate, supposedly for a better grip, why the Hell did the ATA change Target Specifications, speeds, Height, and Angles? These were the Standards for years, all the other Sports Have not lost attendances, But guys like NW get involved and a sport goes to Hell in Handbasket, in just a few short years.

Doesn't the ATA EC and BOD have common sense not to re-instate the Target Guidelines as they were?

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

Just a bit of a different thought here...... The items you list above are all true but during the course of the events the rules for those activities did in fact change. Other than the 10 commandments nothing is forever. On a totally local level I suspect the targets could all be changed to straight-away, the speed could be lessened, the birds made bigger and so on and we would still suffer from a lack of shooters. The largest local club (4 traps) has sold 25 memberships this year and 17 were renewals. The rest of the membership are life members and contribute nothing financially unless they shoot and pay range fee's. Most do not shoot. For us the changing of rules or the lack of changing the rules is not the determinant for continuing into the future.. Larry

 

Gary, the rulebook says targets are to be set a minimum of 34 degrees wide, MINIMUM. with an allowance of 10'degree variance, meaning a club can set their targets to 44 degrees.

The rule book says clubs can set their targets from 8 to 10 feet high, 10 yards from the trap.

The rule book says the targets can be set to travel from 49-51 yards from the trap.

here is the rule dealing with angles:

"In Singles shooting the trap shall be so adjusted that within the normal distribution of angles as thrown by the trap, the right angle shall not be less than 17 degrees measured to the right of center (3BF), and not less than 17 degrees measured to the left of center (3BF), with a total angle between outside target limits of not less than 34 degrees. (See Diagram II) Trap machines shall be adjusted so as to throw not less than equivalent angles. Where terrain allows, a visible stake may be placed on the centerline of the trap on the arc of a circle that has a radius of 50 yards and its center is Point B."

If you read this rule carefully, it was written to say targets may not be set less than 17 degrees left and right, 34 degrees minimum. The rule does not say the targets MUST be set at 17 degrees left and right 34 degrees. The rule goes on to say the set may have a 10 degree variance or up to 44 degrees outside target limits.


Again the rule book:

"However, no target is to be declared illegal unless it is significantly outside normal parameters (e.g., more than 10 degrees outside normal)."

Normal meaning 34 degrees wide. Perhaps this rule could be better understood if it said "more than 10 degrees outside minimum setting."

Instead of the ATA dictating a fix set of settings, it has provided the clubs to set targets within a range of numbers. The targets must set within those minimums and maximums. It is the clubs that are choosing to set the machines at the minimum settings, not ATA.

 

No, Azcotrap, the wording was carefully chosen. Not all clubs may want to use that minimum setting; let's think about a "3-hole club". Your proposal

"more than 10 degrees outside minimum setting."

would put the average hard-right or hard-left target at those cubs right on the border of illegal. "Normal" is a better word, since it allows clubs preferring wider target-setting to establish their own, local, "normal."

N1H1

 

ok, but I guess the point that 17 degrees is minimum, will have to be repeated many times before people come to understand the "3 hole setting" is out there if a club wishes to use it and the targets set wider than normal, not to exceed 10 degrees are legal ATA, correct?

Certainly a legal vs illegal target could be obvious if the field is properly staked out.

 

PROMISES PROMISES PROMISES. SHUT UP AND DO IT

 

How about you just do the first part and shut up? I haven't seen where you add anything worthwhile.

 

Guys,

What Neil has just told all of us is, The elite that run the member supported ATA are not there to do the bidding of the members. They are there to do what they deem fit to run the corporation. Do most of you think they are doing a good job of it? Listening to or reading many of his posts, it sounds like many of the leaders have been on a power trip. He sounds much like our federal government. With his logic and the lack of interest from most of the members, I can see why our sport in in decline. I think of a quote I read , but do not remember who to attribute it to; Evil will prevail when honest men do nothing.
The changing of the 3 hole to the 2 hole in it's self is not the biggest problem. The fact that the ATA new about the cheating that was going on for years and did nothing about is a shame on everyone of their heads. The same as the height rule in now being cheated on. Sparta does not have a bench mark on the fields to set the target height. Neither does Tucson, is this a violation of the rules. Neil stated that he was associated with the ATA for 25 years. What did he feel about the violations that were taking place? He new about them, and did nothing to stop the practice. His actions indicate that he in fact condoned them. It is a shame what has happened to a once respected sport brought about by people that do not seem to care about only them selves and their egos.
Was that 100 in doubles at Casa Grand before or after the 44 yd. distance came in to the rule book? Roger C.

 

Roger, I attended the Spring Grand in Phoenix for many years when you and wpt were right in the thick of it. I was the Minnesota Delegate at the time, not the Arizona one.

The club threw 2-hole targets the whole time was there. Why did the club cheat? Why did the Arizona Delegate permit it? Where, specifically, were you and Bill when this was going on and why did you permit it?

Now that you mention height, you must have noticed how high the targets were when being thrown when you two were running it. The highest, generally speaking, I have ever seen anywhere. Why did you two permit that? Why did the Arizona Delegate?

In what evidence you you write that "Sparta does not have a bench mark on the fields to set the target height. " (They do.)

"Neither does Tucson, is this a violation of the rules" No, of course it isn't. You would know that if you knew (or had followed) the rules.

N1H1

 

The Virus has spoken.

Notice no mention of bringing the once great sport back to it's once great target settings. Just continue in the direction of decline, such as the recent allowance for the removal of the corner stakes. Another bright move.

It's true. The ruling body has been hijacked.

 

So what are you going to do about it?

A new organization could accept and record all your prior-earned scores, so you'd lose nothing.