POLL - Wider angles faster targets - you decide - POLL

This poll is by request.

Should the ATA be throwing wider angles and faster targets? It is an old question but attitudes change.

I report. You decide.
merlo out

 

When I was younger I would agree. Now that I'm older been shooting for a long time I can't
adjust to the faster wider target speed. The younger shooter have no problem adjusting, Faster wider targets would quicken my end to my shooting career.

 

Thats why we have a handicap system. Take a few steps closer.

 

There you have it. The selfish old farts that are over handicapped dont want the game changed because they refuse to move back. So here's what we will do. Let's take the sport out of the game. Reduce the sport to a game of checkers.

The golden years of trapshooting are gone because delegates have the same attitude as this fellow. (no offense intended)

We can turn the sport into a registered game of practice. Would that be a good idea? It is what we have. And we have the 4 mulligan rules. All this started by a cigar puffing queer from Minnesota. Dont laugh.... It is documented on this site.

 

Is it time for a graph..........?

 

Mr Webb
Would it be better for the sport if you could shoot 99 from the handicap every event?

 

Well that was interesting. I been on the the 27 probably more years that you been shooting I'm still very competitive there. I don't shoot for money any more as no there is none but I like to break scores that me feel like I did well. This comment does have as a few things that may be correct but I'll bet that you don't shoot all over the country and see what is really going on today in trapshooting things have change because of cost of everything. I love shooting trap I will as long as I feel that I'm still competitive once that I can't be I will remove myself for the sport and the sport will go on without me.
Jeff

 

Only wish I could. That's a rarity you only see them scores at big shoots with lots on young eyes.

 

There ya have it folks rather than take a few steps forward this fellow would rather we sacrifice the sport. And as he says he wants to shoot scores that make me feel well.

Mr. Webb I must respectfully say you are part of the problem. There isn't money because the handicap system is broken. It is broken because of the easy targets. And thus there isn't any money.

Got participation ribbon?

 

From reading the post on this thread, it almost sounds like slower and narrower targets are a form of a handicap system.
I'm no fan of the operational decisions of the ATA, but I'm pretty sure the target presentation is about the Benjamin's. That is to say what financially beneficial to the organization.
As to the original question, I like the idea of tougher targets. But I don't think it would have massive changes to the sport as some believe

 

Jeff, I like how you think. I also spent quite a few years on the 27 and at my age I probably belong on the 21, if I desire to win another belt buckle. Unfortunately, most of us already know the current handicap wasn't designed to make all shooters competitive. The biggest problem is mandatory yardage for crappy scores that guarantees most shooters are back to a yardage they couldn't handle in the first place while the big dogs eat their lunch money. Very few shooters are willing to take yardage at a 15-shooter event in Timbuctoo so that eliminates the small clubs from even running ATA shoots. Time to resurrect the graph meister as we often agreed on this one.

 

It is interesting that we talk about target angels and target speed.I have found that in my years of shooting another factor comes to mind.Target visibility. I have found that at some clubs the targets are easier to see. Better background. Trees ,no trees. Not facing north. Nevada had some easy to see targets compared to the Midwest. Target color.Black rim New York style all orange.how about the fluorescent green targets.also the time of day makes a differences in visibility..At the smaller shoots the traphouse hight makes a difference. I think the big difference with the handicap from years ago to now was the voice release.
Sometimes I shoot skeet with my friends and we pass the controller around.Sometimes I think the guy pulling is not paying attention
and I am right. I have seen some bad pulls at registered shoots years ago and we shot four traps for the hundred and the banks were posted the morning of the shoot.Most of the big dogs shoot the same bank for the whole shoot now.

 

i knew people who'd pass on a registered shoot if it was held at a particular club.

 

Well all do.
That doesn't mean we all need to break 100/100 to be satisfied.
Tougher targets would just mean that a good score (better than everyone else that day) might be a 92 or even a 90. Kinda' like Sporting scores........?

 

The guy has almost a 90 average over 150000 targets,how's yours.

 

I can assure all of you that Jeff is one of the best shooters in the country.

 

No you can't....but he did assure me he is over handicapped. And he proved he is part of the problem.

He can't compete at his yardage and wont take a step forward. He implied on the thread he would rather hurt the sport than have his ego damaged thru bad scores.

Telling me about a long time average has nothing to do with him being over handicapped now. There are lots of folks that shot better at one time or are new to the sport. That's why we had a handicap system. It doesn't work now. Easy targets and whiners that want to shoot at the 27 with their friends are the problem.

Note to Jeff....take a step forward.

 

He has 97.80 singles on 1000 and 89.50 on 800 from 27 89.80 doubles on a 1000 are yours any better.

 

I need to butt in

Let's be clear.....
An average has never won an event. Never! I am surprised you dont know that. The number that is most important is the score of your last event. I shot my way through college plus beer money. I made enough money to pay tuition, car insurance, and still had beer money. Who cares about the average? Banker never asks.

The stupid question is what a persons handicap average was for the year. A better question would be what my average was at Vandalia, or the NE Grand. Ask me how much jack I earned at the tri state or West Virginia. Ask me after the shoot. The averages are just bullshit. Plain ole' bullshit.

If you are worried you cant compete at the 27 on these easy targets then you need a reduction>

The important question is - are you so over handicapped that you cant pop a money score when it counts? Are you selling for big money at the Calcuttas?

And the non money question....are you one of the whiners that needs a reduction and wont take one?

That subjectively nice average over 150,000 targets only means something if you have a mansion paid for thru trapshooting. 150,000 targets costs a lot of money. What was the payout for that?

Buying 150,000 targets doesnt make you look bright unless you have something to show for it.

FYI....Dave Berlet took his reductions when they were offered. No one asks what his average is. I would buy him at the Calcutta.

 

If I gave that information, what would you do with it? And do you really think any of those numbers are the best?

What would the average be on wider angles? What would that average be on faster targets?

 

If it is true that a shooter with a 97 singles average and a 89 hadicap average is one of the best shots in the country the ATA is in worse shape than I thought. If today's best shooters in the country can not average 90 in handicap on the puff targets that is thrown today it just blows my mind.

 

Have they ever given a car to the guy with a good average? I remember the car days. That was before the point system.

 

Not that I can remember.

 

Is the ATA so successful now that changing the target angles could ruin everything?