27 yard shooters dominate Friday prelim handicap again! See statistics.

34 of 62 yardage punches were from the 27 yard line
1 from the 19
5 from the 20
1 from the 21
3 from the 22
3 from the 23
3 from the 24
5 from the 25
7 from the 26

You had a better chance of winning this race betting on 27 vs the field.
The odds of a short yard shooter (19) winning were 34 to 1.

 

Wouldn't that be expected, they didn't get to 27 by being a poor shot. The lone 100 from 27 the next 3, 99 from 22 and less.

 

Rn3.....
It is a handicap event. In the days the handicap events worked, the better shooters were handicapped. How is that confusing to you?

When the handicap system worked and targets were challenging we went decades without a perfect score from the 27.

 

Inst 40+% of the membership at the 27 anyway?

 

Starting with the 19yd line how many entries were there from each yard line?

Dave Berlet

 

What's your point the best shooters will still win the majority of the time and they happen to be mostly at the 27. I would attribute the better scores more to better fitting guns not easier targets.

 

Here's another one for you, Dagen Voightman just broke 100 from the 27, not only that it gives him 400x400 in the HAA 1st in grand history.

 

WOW ///// Dagen. Fantastic shooting. You will be in the record books for eternity. Roger C.

 

Some people will never understand the 27 yd. line is not much of a handicap for today's more proficient shooters. Nor do they understand statistics. It seems like we have more basket weaving majors than math majors on a trapshooting site.

 

That used to be something that occurred twice a century.

 

All ruined by my rival Neil. RIP. Your last graph should have shown the downfall of the handicap system.

 

Good points were made by both Rn3 and STaT mAn STaN.

There will never be a perfect handicapping system to place the less proficient on even grounds with the more proficient.

What is a handicap?

Meriam-Webster’s dictionary defines handicap as:

a disadvantage imposed on a superior competitor in sports

handicap

noun

hand·i·cap |\ ˈhan-di-ˌkap, -dē-\

Definition of handicap

(Entry 1 of 2)

1a: a race or contest in which an artificial advantage is given or disadvantage imposed on a contestant to equalize chances of winning

b: an advantage given or disadvantage imposed usually in the form of points, strokes, weight to be carried, or distance from the target or goal

2a: a disadvantage that makes achievement unusually difficult

bsometimes offensive: a physical disability

handicap

verb

handicapped; handicapping

Definition of handicap (Entry 2 of 2)

transitive verb

1a: to give a handicap to

b: to assess the relative winning chances of (contestants) or the likely winner of (a contest)

2: to put at a disadvantage


When handicap system actually work well?

Well, that depends on the shooters proficiency?

It worked in favor of the less-proficient shooters from 1900 to about 1978.

In 1933, Walter Beaver, of Berwyn, PA was the first 25 yarder (back fence then) to win the GAH event, but it didn't seem to bother anyone since his score was 98.

But 1978 was when the first 27 yard shooter, Reggie Jachimowski, of Antioch, IL, won the GAH with a 100 straight.

Although, the eyebrows raised a bit when John Steffen, Minneapolis, MN, broke 99 from 24.5 yards in 1974. Yes, it was fine and dandy that 99s & 100s won the Grand in previous years by those shooting from shorter yardages.

ATA leaders in 1957 felt so bad for the long yardage shooters who were not winning, most not even posting a respectable score, that officers and delegates considered a proposal to change the yardages and ammunition. The 26 and 27 mark was only two years old but consideration was given to move those shooters up to 25 yards. The other proposal was to change ammo to 2 1/2 dram and limit shot size to 7 1/2 or 8.

The hotshots like the distance changes but not the ammunition change as they thought it gave them a disadvantage. The novices liked the lower powder charge but not the yardage change.

Were long yardage shooters dominating back then? No!

The first 57 years of holding Grand Americans at targets, (1900-1957), competitors were handicapped using their averages and known ability.

In, 57 previous Grand and 56 Preliminary Handicap events only five of the 113 competitions were won beyond 22 yards, where the so-called experts were placed. Seventy were won from 19 yards or closer, from where the unknowns from nowhere did their shooting and prize winning.

The 100-target Grand was won four times from 23 yards and only once from 25. The highest scores in the Preliminary events was only 22 yards.

After 1978, short yardage shooters started to win the Grand American again, until 1983 when Roger Smith, of Wichita, KS broke 100 from the 27. Then another 4 years period of short yardage winners, to again be followed by another 27-yarder in 1988, Britt Robinson, a Texan with a 100. Pat Neff, of Xenia, OH won the grand in 1990 after posting 100 straight from 26 yards.

Oh no, the dominance of long-yardage shooters was out of control.

As of 2013, here's how those proficient shooters faired in the Grand American Handicap event.

Winners from yardages:

27 yards - 9
26 yards - 2
25 yards - 1
24 yards - 5
23 yards - 7
22 yards - 15
21 yards - 15
20 yards - 22
19 yards - 16
18 yards - 8
17 yards - 6
16 yards - 7

The sport entered the period of “easier targets for higher scores and averages” in 1955 when the flights and angles rules were amended, reducing the difficulty of trap shooting. The target area was reduced from 45° to 22°. And the area beyond those normal target paths were also reduced from an additional 25° outside the extreme left and right target to 20°. That condensed the total legal target area down from 130° to 94°; and the usual target flights from 90° to 44°.

Doubles targets were once set 35° left and 35° right of the center stake.

In the 1960s some clubs started throwing 2 hole targets (17°) at 45-48 yards, and there were reports of even others throwing targets from the 1-hole (13.5°).

In the 1970s & 1980s the Grand American Handicap event saw easier targets, thrown short and not as wide.

Would anyone doubt that scores would be higher? Or that domination by the best shots would increase?

Reducing the Flights & Angles settings was harmful to our sport!

That's what I think anyway.

HB

 

HB,
Glad to see you back, you are once again amazing and completely accurate which should make complete sense to any and all who are old enough and sane enough to be out playing with guns ... I APPLAUD YOU ONE MORE TIME SIR, probably will many more times as time passes ... You are the MAN ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

H.B. You are spot on as usual. The EC should look at the past history of the sheet shooting game. It went in the tank when every shooter won a ribbon. Where is it now? Trap is headed in the same direction, are the EC and BOD to dumb to see that. We have the inmates running the asylum. It is either time to clean house or get a new association started.
Roger C.

 

With today's equipment and the ability to make it fit each individual if you made the game harder all it would do is make the gap between the elite and average Joe even wider. Field archery did that and lost 2/3 of the shooters. Before the NFAA made the target harder people thought they were within a few points of the best. They made the target smaller and those average shooters went from a few points to 20 30 or more behind. They eventually got discouraged and quit, I'm afraid the same thing would happen in trap.

 

Not afraid it WOULD happen.

Afraid it DID happen. Done deal.

And thank you HB. As always, dead on.

I would have said dead on the money but that would have been redundant

 

The answer is simpler than you think-more yardage!

 

I would agree but some places don't have room to add more concrete.

 

Rn3, That ia a cop out. With voice calls many would only need one field. Most would never see a 30 yrd. shooter.
Roger C.

 

When your local two trap club in Timbuctoo IA offers All-American points you'll need 30 yd. lines. In the meantime don't look for Harlan in the parking lot!

 

Rn3.....tell me what is better about today’s equipment. I need a laugh. Are the barrels oval now?

 

More yardage is the answer for sure but not the thirty yard line. Put the extra yards on the targets. It worked in the past and will work today, with no added expense to anyone. It's stupid to ask for yardage and then soften the targets.

 

Don't need Harlan at my club we already have 2 27 guys that would be at 30 if there was one and we are a 2 trap club with only 30 members.

 

Most of the best shooters all have custom fitted stocks, even off the rack guns have enough adjustment to make them fit so whats so funny.

 

I have to disagree, all that would do is run off the guys that are donators.

 

There you have it. We didn’t have stocks that fit in 1990? Krieghoff, Ljutic, and Perazzi started doing that last year? Really?

And adjustable stocks didn’t exist before. Probably started that last year too.

 

Do you think the reason Frank Little and Dan Bonillas never had a 100 straight during the GAH was because the gun didn’t fit?

 

Tell all of us again how many AA points your little club is awarding for a win from the 27 yd. line! Never fear, Harlan will never attend and steal away your 2 boxes of Federal Estates prize for the winner.

 

Rn3, please don't put too much in stock in the advancement in equipment (guns, ammo, stocks, chokes, etc.)

Those advancements are all over a century old. Improvements in ammunition such as wadding and powder had a minimal impact on scores.

Choke boring was introduced back in the mid 1800s or there about. I don't know how long barrel adjustments have been around. However, shooters have been bending their barrels likely since that time.

The "Try-Gun" adjustable stock was introduced circa 1900. Shooters preferred the cheaper padding and cardboard on their stocks. Several of the inductee's guns in the Hall of Fame museum still have the cardboard and other pads adhered to the combs. I see a lot of shooters with custom fitted stocks, and for most, it hasn't improved their scores much.

Here's an advertisement from a 1912 Sportsmen's Review (I think).

​

The sensible solution is to first return to the old Flights & Angles rules. Then decide if more concrete is necessary. It's the fastest and cheapest solution.

If history has shown us anything, it is that when the distance handicap is increased, some of our well-meaning shooters and ATA officials decide to support narrowing target angles and shortening the distance.

I don't think shooting 35 yard straightaways are good for the sport.

 

Thank you again HB

So endith the lesson

 

Look, let's admit it, 3-hole targets were mostly gone by the early 70's. The only thing our resident graphmyster did was make them legal in the rule book. The best shooters from an earlier era were proficient trap readers which wasn't really that difficult. The rule book always defined a legal target as one thrown 48-52 yds. in still air. So now it's 49-51-big deal. Heck, most complainers never spent one minute in a traphouse and never knew what hole traps were in.Pour more concrete!

 

I failed to see any handicap event winners at this years grand shooting an 870.

 

I have watched (observed) over many years (since 1975) the number of shooters shooting compared to those watching and figure that has to have something to do with the long yardage shooters having an advantage and dominating the sport, dedication maybe ..? There is an instilled confidence when you practice a lot while others watch and wonder how they do it ... When I started shooting(1975) the targets were 3 hole/ 50 yd and maybe on occasion a bit wider and longer than that but we shot them and tried our best to break a winning score ... I believe that in spite of easier targets the shooters that put more into the game get more out of the game any way once all is said and done ... I have always figured you can, if you think you can and if you think you can't you will probably be right more times than not ... I would like to see the targets go back to the way they were when even the big guns were not running 100 straights but still managed to win ... The game is slowing fading away, someone better figure a way to breath new life into it before it goes way completely ... I sincerely feel to this day the best part of trapshooting is the people I met along the way ... Lets all hope something gets done before its to late ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Ole, I attended the grand this year and never fired a shell. I observed mostly handicap events and I can tell you more concrete won’t slow down the better 27 yard shooters. Maybe more concrete and faster, wider targets could work. I don’t know how much faster or wider but just adding concrete isn’t the answer.

 

The big deal was that many clubs and even at the Grand American Handicap tournaments, targets were thrown in violation of the rules. ATA leaders failed the sport by allowing 2-hole, 45-48 yard target setting.

While I disagreed with most of the "graphmyster's" opinions, he only had one vote when the Indiana Delegate motioned his previous proposal. Our Board of Directors again failed our sport because they did not understand the rules and history. Delegates voted in the majority to "water down" our sport and we selected them to protect it and assure that all rules were strictly adhered to.

Sadly, the issue of "soft targets" in registered shooting goes all the way back to the 1950s, shortly after the introduction of the 26 & 27 yard mark in 1955.

​

 

HB,
I congratulate you once again, you are the man with the facts and those cannot be denied ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

I once watched the late great Frank Little in a PA shootoff where the targets were made increasingly wider and longer. Guess who never missed any of 'em? More concrete!

 

You can't stop greatness, nor can you expect to make a rule to make a mediocre shooter equal to a top-notcher.

Increase the angles and distance. It's a lot easier and cheaper than pouring concrete.

​

Enjoy Our History !

 

Thanks HB

it is unfortunate Frank had illegal shells delivered to him by Remington. He didn’t do squat when he had to shoot the same targets with the same shells at the grand. I think Ollie likes Frank....a little too much.

 

Dear Smithy,

I assure you it was the shooter and not the shell that led to Frank Little's achievements and his enshrinement in the Trapshooting Hall of Fame. I think you place far too much confidence in shotgun ammo.

What was it Mr. Little said about increasing the "back fence??"

​

 

Smithy, you aren't qualified to carry Little's shell bag.

 

I'd say Frank was getting tired of getting beat by those short yardage shooters, hence, he encouraged harder targets to get him into the winners circle. When Frank started shooting shells were still loaded with cardboard wads with bubble gum chewing girl pullers planning their Saturday night dates while Remington 870's and Model 12's ruled the field. Of course, top shooters either straightened out those wider angles or simply shot 'em knowing what was coming. Keep throwing me a fast ball down the middle of the plate knowing it would be there and I just might be successful too.

 

Well, I set hundreds of those old Western traps and I never saw any throwing 45-48 yd targets. The standard we always went with was a 48 yd. setting in the morning in still air and within a few hours those machines threw closer to a 50 yd. target. Before the use of radar guns it was nearly impossible to set a legal target over varying terrain. Thankfully ours was flat.

 

Smithy, I shot a lot of targets with Frank, The shells did not make Frank a great shooter, but ability did. He stuck strickly to the rules and worked at being the best. He never let a rules infraction slide, he questioned it. If you really want to know the truth, when Frank was shooting Remington they were not good ammo. Many would not shoot them. Roger C.

 

Why would Frank take those illegal shells if he didn’t need them? Is it because others were getting them? They were. Frank’s accomplishments are good but strangely not on the GAH. Isn’t that the bar?

When Frank and other HOFers got to the Grand they fell on their faces. Having the same same shells as everyone else? Was that the reason? Was it because most of them were shooting easy targets to pad an average that would get them on the “pallet program.”

Cheating was systemic. And it was being done by the best.

I don’t give a rats ass if you accuse me of not being as good a trapshooters as Frank. Just don’t accuse me of getting those “hot Petes”.

Later graphmeister made the targets easier and pushed to change the shells.

We will never know how good Frank and the rest of the cheats of that era would have been had they been honest. Because they weren’t.

Easy targets and hot shells make difference. Isn’t that the point?

 

Roger....EB got the same shells Frank did. Many did. And they were not what everyone else got!

And.....Franks average went up 3% during the period he had those shells.

 

I believe you oleolliedawg. I know you've spent much time inside the traphouse.

But remember, you were on the East Coast and the last of those to succumb to the "soft target" syndrome.

According to the old timers and articles in the old TRAP and FIELD magazines, throwing illegal targets, both short and narrow started with the gun clubs in the West. It eventually migrated to the Grand American Handicap tournament.

​

I Love our History !

 

You're right about that. Remington shells from that era were probably the poorest ever made. I hated 'em and always wondered why Frank stuck with 'em except that Frank was a bit economical and free was free.

 

Smithy, I wouldn't accuse you of anything. Didn't mean to rile you up.

All I said was that Mr. Little was one of the great shooters. I watched him smokeball 25 straight in a shoot-off at a PA Grand. Three shooters tied with 196x200 in a 200-target handicap. Mr. Little won. A shorter yardage shooter took the group trophy. I broke one less in the same yardage group and there was no runner-up.

I simply think you might be overlooking Mr. Little's accomplishments based on his ability and not his ammo.

To me, his 53 Grand American trophies proves that he was able to compete in Grand competition. At least one of those trophies was very impressive, at least to me.

​

 

Well gee, now you know. They weren’t the same everyone was using. But they were the same color.

Before you ask me, “how do I know?” I have answered that on a previous thread.

After a shoot off at North Lawrence, a wacko friend of mine was a bit peeved at Franks boomers. He broke into Frank’s garage and discovered two “pallets” of what looked like Green Petes. He helped himself to several flats. He said, “they didn’t cost Frank anything and they sure as hell weren’t going to cost me a dime!”

Many of the local shooters in our league with chronos tested the “Pete Look a Likes.” All said they were north of 1300 and were a smidgen heavy.

Like I said before.....don’t bother with the shame on you stuff for not reporting it. I don’t give a rats ass and the cheating was systemic.

Frank was handicapped when he got to the grand. The “mandated petes” in the shell house were junk. Frank was obligated to shoot them.

 

Chronos routinely over estimate shotshell velocities. Those of us with real experience already know they often measure the leading pellet and the results are meaningless. Now Frank had been noted for being late for a few shootoffs and there was some talk about some wives missing for a bit. Maybe you should tell us of some of your experiences with that too!

 

Smithy, You are full of s$$t and your friend is a theif. Why would anyone believe either of you. Roger C.

 

Smithy, You stated Frank and the other shell receivers fell flat on their faces at the Grand. WOW Frank landed on 53 trophies, MOST SHOOTERS NEVER GET ONE. HOW MANY DO YOU HAVE? Roger C.

 

Hey Roger
One of the forums most notable shooters and contributors on the site also received the Special Green Petes. And yep my friend stole the hot shells.

And I don’t give a rats ass if you believe me. How could you not know this?

Are you saying those that were on the program are liars?

I didn’t say Frank wasn’t an accomplished shooter. But, he had hot shells. He did great on the singles but rarely broke big scores on the caps on the GAH.

Here is the quiz Roger. Who on the site said he was receiving the Green Petes too? Were you paying attention? Get someone to help you. Then call him a liar.

Now everyone has hot shells. The angles are narrower. How is that working out?

 

Our little club doesn't throw registered, trying to get that changed. Harlan could come and a good chance he wouldn't walk away with anything.

 

If you would like to see our club we are featured in TrapshootingUSA MayJune20 issue.

 

Smithy, I had some of the Rem's also. I only used them for first shot of doubles. I was a Rem. distributor for many years, so can your bull shit. Every shell maker pumped up their shells for the grand, but they did not make a special run for just a select few. I had AA"s that cronod at 1396 velocity Faster does not make a shooter. ability does. Sounds like you got you ass handed to you so many times you had to say the better shooters were cheaters. Roger C.

 

Hey Roger

you didn’t answer my question. Who is the person that is a member of his State HOF that says the same thing? Wasn’t the clue good enough? You lost the argument and can’t keep track? You can throw stones but can’t follow the discussion? Who said Frank’s average went up 3% when he got those shells? Don’t anyone tell Roger. Let him search for it.

Hot shells help destroy the handicap. When the EC realized they couldn’t control the icons of the sport they gave up. Now anything goes. How is it working out?

 

So, those of us with remarkable memories remember when Frank's BT-99's rib fell off. He sent it back to Browning for a repair and the impact was so far off he couldn't hit squat with it. He then went with a Perazzi and his averages went much higher in Handicap. I suppose we can say it was the Perazzi that raised his average 3%-not supposed hot shells that some amateur with a cheap chrono want's us to believe. As usual, Smithy talks out of his hiney! FYI, one of the top shooters in the nation shoots nothing but Federal paper light 7 1/2"s from the fence with tremendous success. Others may remember how successful Ray Stafford was shooting Federal Extra-lites from the fence back in the 90's. Try again Smithy!

 

In 1988 when I won the GAH HOA I shot Fed Extra Lite 7 1/2's at all shots. About 1995 Winchester made the AA Silver's and they had 1 3/16 oz of shot in them, or about 20 extra 71/2's as I recall counting. The old green and blue shell had about 1 1/16 oz of soft shot which made them not very good from 27 yards. Then the speed craze came with the sporting clays (steel shoot) types. For hard 27 yard targets the weight of the load is more important than speed. More bigger shot kills, ask any bird hunter.

 

Golly! All I’ve heard for years is how “back in MY day we ONLY shot 3 hole 50 yard targets“, or “We didn’t shoot the easy targets of today” or “I won enough money at the Grand to pay for college because we shot 3 hole targets”. Reading the information posted by HB it’s clear that the Grand was throwing 2 hole 49 yard targets 40 years ago. Gee whiz, if someone won a bunch of cash in a handicap event at the Grand in the 1980’s they did it on 2 hole 49 yards targets. I didn’t start registering targets until 1993. I would love to see the sport correct the rules and force every club to throw faster, wider targets. But I’ve been told my whole career that I have no idea what REAL targets look like because I’ve only shot the easy target settings. Reading all of HB’s postings tells me all those “I only shot real target” blowhards are full of shit!

 

If they didn't have so many bloopers those Federal X-lites would still be breaking great scores!

 

Dave is right we should know the number of shooters from each yard line of the handicaps w/their scores, I think this could easily be done by RJ Stuart from their computers and print it out.

GB..................................DLS

 

3 hole 50 yard? 2 hole 49 yard? Do tell. I don't know anything!

 

Dustin,
I’m showing my age with the 3 hole 50 yard nomenclature. It refers to the angle and distance settings commonly used on handset target throwing machines. The 3 hole setting on those handset throwers was designed to give at least a straightaway target from posts 1 & 5. I should use the angle and speed measurements now referenced by the ATA’s rulebook. I believe the 3 hole setting yielded a 22 degree left and right of center target path. 2 hole was closer to 17 degrees left and right.

 

Thank you Don for your response. I understand. So todays legal targets are supposedly around the old 2 hole setting?

 

Yes, I think the rulebook calls it 17 degrees now.

 

If anyone on here cares to check it out look at the Missouri fall handicap scores in the 80's and 90's and compare them to the grands scores this year. Missouri used to throw their targets over the hill, at least 55 yards and the scores were low but the money high. The angle doesn't mean as much as the distance when it comes to how hard a target is to hit and break.

Any of you that don't believe me set a practice trap to 55 yards and don't touch the angle and shoot a few rounds, let me know what you find.

 

Brad, a 55 yd. target was illegal then and now by the rulebooks definition. Yes, they are difficult!

 

Brad, Most of todays Johnny come lateleys do not know the difference then and now. they are getting the used tutu's that the sheet shooters no longer use. I am glad I shot when as you stated, lower scores, but much higher money purses. The sport is in trouble because the EC tried to make every shooter a champion. Ability, hard work, skill is what it takes, not some namby pamby rule or hot shells.
A thief has no honor, and neither does anyone that will publically bad mouth a dead person.
Tell me how any one that won 53 trophies at the Grand, fell on his ass.. You sound like a wantbe that never made the grade, so lets drag all good shootersa down to the cheater level. Roger C.

 

Don Cogan, You do not have A CLUE WHAT THE GAME USED TO BE. TARGETS WERE SET IN THE MORNING, THEY WERE NOT CHANGED UNLESS THEY WERE ROLLING ON THE TURF, OR GOING STRAIGHT UP. THEY WERE SET BY THE BOOK, NOT SO EVERY ONE COULD BE A HERO. Do not bad mouth something you have no knowledge about, it makes you look small. A lot of this talk about lame settings in the 70's and 80's is bull shit. That is how the cheaters justified their actions. Eventually all clubs had to either join them or loose their shooters. Roger C.

 

Here we go again with the “I don’t have a clue what real targets are” crap. Well guess what? I shot the Missouri Fall Handicap in the mid to late 90’s just like Brad did. I had very good scores most years but there was one year when the weather turned very cold for Fri-Sunday and with a 20+ mph wind out of the north, I remember breaking a 74 on Saturday. That year the target speed was really cranked up to drill them into the head wind. Other than that year either I don’t recall the 55 mph targets. Reading the information posted by HB its clear that easy target settings were seen as far back as the 50’s. It’s also right there in black and white that they were setting 2 hole 49 yard targets at the Grand in 1980. That was 13 years before I joined the ATA. I’m sorry I didn’t get to shoot the targets that were rolling on the ground or a mile in the air. I also didn’t have to walk uphill both ways to and from school in a blizzard like most guys tell they did when they were young.

 

I shot at and helped set targets at several of the clubs in Illinois back in the Mid 70's (joined the ATA in 1975), Maywood, McHenry, Frankfort, X Line, West Chicago, Lily Cache to name a few and I can tell you those targets were set to the 50 yard post and straightaway (maybe a tad wider) from post 1 and post 5 at the registered shoots I attended at that time, Calcutta's and game shoots there were no limits to how they got set ... If the changes came about around that time I was to busy to take much notice or pay attention to them ... The targets would get cranked up for any and all shoot offs once it went past the first 25 targets of that shoot off ... There were several really good shooters that attended some of those shoots and we never saw scores like you see today except on a rare occasion ... The Calcutta's at West Chicago always seemed to be cranked up and wide but everyone shot the same targets and they always drew a really nice crowd ... The first few times I attended the Grand I really didn't pay much attention to how the targets were set because there was so much other stuff going on all the time and big guns to watch ... I used to take one full day to just walk around and check out all of the vendors and girls from Bob Allen's place, could always find something I needed or had to have ... Miss those days ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Don, There you go again trying to comment on something you never did or seen. I started shooting registered in the early 70's. By the time you got started the game had morphed into a feel good sport. It was a tough sport, until the cry babies took over. So you shot one shoot in the baaad wind, and now you ARE AN EXPERT ON EVERYTHING.
Shove your hand in a bucket of water yank it back out and put all of you expertice in the hole that is left there. Roger C.

 

"Other than that year either I don’t recall the 55 mph targets."


"Missouri used to throw their targets over the hill, at least 55 yards......."


Did I miss something in the translation?

 

Beat me to it.

 

Then dont die.

The graphmeister is dead. I point out how he helped ruin the sport.

 

Flyersarebest. One year at the spring grand a shooter came into ther club house grabbed Don Brown the manager. He told him that the machine was throwing all of his right and left targets much,much harder than it was for the others on his squad.This man was fuming. We could not make him believe that it was impossible for that to happen. He did not believe us. Maybe they had the 55 speed limit on his targets about then. Roger C.

 

I only posted what I did because Mr. Dysinger said 55 YARD targets and Mr. Cogan said 55MPH targets.

I guess you could get both if the height and wind were just right.

 

Brad told me all 16 yard shootoff targets at the Grand were in the 3 hole. When there was seventy 200's they lost about 30 after the first 25 targets in the shootoff. I was one of them several times.

 

Sounds like they were 2 hole till the shootout, no wonder there were so many 200

 

Roger,
Untwist your undies. I’ve never claimed to know everything. I just get tired of all the guys like you that do claim to know everything telling the rest of us that we ruined the game. The soft targets were in place long before I joined the ATA. If you think you know anything about me or my shooting experiences you are dead wrong. Give Brad a call and ask him about me. Brad always told me I was the one that was hard on the ATA and he got blamed for it. Until reading the information posted by HB I had no idea that soft targets were an issue “back in the day”. I’m okay with it if you want to hate on me because I continue to shoot whatever registered they are throwing these days. I’m just happy I can still get out and enjoy what’s left of our sport.

 

I think we can all agree trap should not be a game of perfection. How we achieve that result I do not know. I do know fighting with other members on here is not the answer. I do know, until its fun for spectators to watch (its not), the $ will never return.

 

Lord Maker, I wouldn’t worry too much about me and Roger arguing on here. I know if Roger and myself ever get the chance to meet and talk trapshooting we would find that we agree on WAY more issues than we disagree on. But with the passing of N1H1 somebody has to cause a ruckus on here to keep Joe’s traffic count up. I got big shoulders, I can take the heat.

 

When the Western 1524 trap came on the scene around 1960 the normal was 3 hole 50yd targets and some of the clubs that I shot at put an additional 21 half turns on the main springs to throw 50yd doubles. In those first few years I really don't remember shooters fussing about the targets. You went to the club and shot the targets that were presented to you. Very rarely did you ever see a trap being reset. After a few years the dumbing down started and was a club throwing 2 hole or 3 hole and what distance were the targets set. Some clubs even drilled and tapped a hole half way between the 2 hole and the 3 hole and we often times shot 2 and 1/2 hole targets. In my opinion as technology started coming on our trapshooting scene the last thing that should have happened is for the targets to be dumbed down. Plastic wads and shells and enter the voice calls and the game was forever changed. Towards the end of the 1524s reign some of the clubs were throwing barely 46 yd targets and as few as 12 half turns more for doubles. If any changes should have been made it should have been to widen and lengthen the targets. But there are too few shooters left that remember those days and there was some money to be won as most shooters would at least play some of the options. Now if Jonny doesn't get a ribbon every one should cry for him. Just my opinion.

Dave Berlet

 

C'mon Dave, you only have 622,525 combined registered, targets under your belt. What would you know?

Read that number again boys and girls.

 

Don, I do not know everything.(SADDLY) , I do know the game that I started many years ago is not the same one that I would stick with today. I have shot over 350,000 registered targets over the years.I manufactured parts and trap and skeet machines for over 20 yrs. I have seen first hand the changes made that have dumbed down our great sport. The EC and BOD have let the members down They were never competitors or they would not have made the changes that they did.
I had machines shipped from all over to my shop in AZ. to rebuild, I could look at the peg hole on the western machines and tell if they were setting targets by the book. I had some from the upper mid west that only had wear on the ONE hole.The small clubs were the most honest about target settings. When the ATA told all clubs that they must have their machines certified that they had interuptors in them. My guy in they wisconsin refused to sign the order only traps that had interuptors were the practic traps. The 8 program traps had none and the one hole was the only hole that showed any wear.
The EC along with the usless BOD have ruined the real game of trap. We still shoot trap, but it will never be the same game that requires the skills that shooters need in the past.
AMEN, David Very well said. Roger C.

 

Singles Shoot off targets at the grand from the mid 80's through the mid 90's were always set harder than the program targets. It wasn't fair by any means but by me being a very good trap reader I quickly picked up on it and it didn't affect me as much.

The first time I won the North American Clay Target in 1978 there were only 7 200 straights and only 2 of us broke the first 25 of the shoot off. My winning shoot off scores were 25 - 24 - 25. By 1989 when I won it again I needed to break 400 straight in shoot off. Those targets though 3 hole were much much softer targets than 1978's targets.

In 1975 I won the Ohio State Handicap from 27 yards with a 98 and shoot off but to be honest with you I have no idea what hole or how far the targets were set. At the time it was the largest handicap every won by a 27 yard shooter, there was 1600 entrees, and this was 1975 twenty years after the 27 yard line started.

In the 70's and 80's we had many more shooters and a lot fewer 200's, and a 27 yarder winning a handicap at the grand made news..

A 200 at the grand used to be hard to come by, don't kid yourself into thinking that today's guns and shells are better it's the targets that are easier.

 

Some of those people that are at shorter yards are just on their way to the 27 and just happened to have shot the Grand. Young shooters and people just starting to shoot Trap may be at short yardage. For example I know the runner up for the Grand American (Shane Taylor) and he only had 1400 handicap targets registered before the grand. He shot a 99 from the 22.5 and missed the first target out. He used to shoot sporting clays and skeet and just started shooting registered trap late last fall.

 

About the new shells being an advantage. Dan Bonialls wiped the dust off a case of 20 year old paper Super Targets. Went out and busted 100 straight from the 27. He later told a reporter from the mag ''Trapshooting USA'' they were the best shells he ever shot.

 

Yes Dave, I remember those 2.5 hole targets and putting 21 half turns on those 1524's. Since pulling has become a non-issue maybe we can say voice activated pulls did more to ruin the game than easier targets-especially in long yardage handicap. You're certainly right about much softer doubles.

 

The #2 1/2 hole was an illegal setting. When they finally reduced the angle in the ATA rulebook from 45° to 22° (in 1950s), 22° was the minimum angle and only the #3 hole provided that.

The ATA thought about the #2 1/2 hole but Winchester told them that their testing showed it violated the rules. The ATA stopped the discussion and again told all clubs to use the #3 hole and any club throwing less that that setting would have their targets disqualified and not registered.

Thank you Mr. Berlet and Mr. Dysinger for giving us on target setting back in earlier days. Hopefully, our younger shooters will learn about the sport in those greater times. And a thank you to Mr. Coveleskie for sharing his knowledge on the old traps.

HB

 

Maybe they should go back to these Western White-Flyer traps that I set targets on, and shot over as a kid.

Now this is the Auto Angle version, and it was an interesting trap to shoot over.

For the youngsters to understand the operation of these traps, the puller pushed the lever forward to cock and index the trap, then brought the lever back to a position he could feel resistance on, and when the shooter called for he target, the puller pulled the lever back and then repeated the whole sequence over again.

Doing this hundreds of times a day was a challenge to some pullers, which made for interesting targets for the shooters. (Ie: slow or fast pulls)

I'll be willing to bet Mr. Berlet , Mr. Dysinger , and othes, can tell us some stories about shooting over these traps.

 

The Auto-Angle mechanism (cams) shown during the refurbishing of this machine.

The upper detents were where the driving pawl indexed the cam when the trap was cocked, and the lower cams that have different depths milled in it, was how the angles were determined when the cocking was finished.




Picture below is during teardown. The indexing pawl is at the bottom, and if you look closely at the left side of the machine, there is a roller that would sit on the lower cam and determine the angle.

 

Better picture of the cam follower (roller) after it has been cocked and indexed.

I am just showing these to help educate the masses on what was used before the electric traps came along.



Indexing pawl is driven by the rod on the right side of the trap in the below picture.

 

The above two pics show that the cocking lever base is 180° from the way it is supposed to be when in use. I was just reassembling things as I took those pics, and didn't realize I had it backwards. Sorry.

By the way, that cocking rod was either run over rollers, or inside a pipe underground for about 30 yards behind the trap house where the puller would stand behind the #3 station shooter.

I hope you enjoyed a little about the old style traps.

 

Looking back when I first started shooting most of the local clubs had versions of the hand cocked type of traps pictured above. The pulling and cocking location was usually located about where the 27yd line is now. The trap was cocked with a small pipe run underground inside a slightly larger pipe usually the larger pipe had a slight dip in it about halfway between the cocking stand and the trap house which was filled with usually used motor oil to make the cocking process easier for the puller. To cock the trap the puller pushed forward on the lever and then pulled back on the lever to a dead spot just before the trap tripped. When the shooter called for his target there was just a slight pull on the lever to trip the trap and then using the motion of the trap arm to help the lever was easily moved forward to cock the trap. How the shooters of that era handled the variety of pulls must be hard to image for 2020 shooters. I remember going to the grand back in the 40's and 50's and seeing all of those men pulling targets on that approximately 24 trapline. Then along came the Cline pull unit that took place of the hand pulls and added electricity to the process. These units worked pretty well if the linkage between the trap and the unit was adjusted correctly if not the timing of the pulls was not as good. Then in a couple of years along came the 1524.

Back in those days the Vandalia grounds were a show place. Everything was clean and freshly painted and there was a worker about every other trap with a stick with a nail on the end of it picking up empty shell boxes, cigar butts, and all other types of rubbish from around the trap line. Around 1980 there was a movement to move the ATA out of Ohio. When this was found out by the Ohio Governor this was quelled, but from that point in time the grounds were not well taken care of and basically the only maintenance done was what had to be done to keep the place operational. Even when the new entry building was built there were several muddy footprints on the steel beams inside the building that were never cleaned off. With hind sight always being 20-20 we should have seen it coming.

Dave Berlet

 

History seeker, When I was in the trap business I had the throwing arms in stock for the machines like yours. We also stocked the springs. I also made the Quality Model 92 hand set machine It was an improved version of the 1524. ALL TARGET PARAMETERS WERE SET BY THE 1524 AND ONLY ONE MACHINE DUPLICATED THAT PERFORMANCE. It was not the Pat trap. Roger C.

 

Could it have been the Superstar?

Dave Berlet

 

Hi David, Good guess. It was. The remington doubles trap threw great doubles. The trap was to large and did not fit in many of the houses. but it threw great doubles. One year at vandalia we had two doubles traps in for practice. Pat was to have two in the houses next to us. they showed up watched the Remingtons throw targets. Got back in the truck and left.
They did not want people to make a comparison of the two. Roger C.