9 Feet that's right. adding 9 Feet

Do you think adding 9 feet to handicap on the present target settings is going to make a difference?

Absolutely not, with the shells we have today, that are at 1250 fps, the Trapguns we have today, are designed and perfected to have the best patterns available.

To me this is an absolute joke, the Trapguns that are properly choked are just beginning in their effective range. 27 yards is not the maximum range of todays trapguns,

In just a few shoots after the 30 yard Handicap, if ever is put in effect will have numerous shooters standing there. In a large shoot with a 2 1/2 yard punch, he will be at 29 1/2 yards.

Live bird shoots are shot at longer yardages. My first live bird shoot I was handicapped at 33 yards, and they just looked at the Trap & Field yardage on me, saw I was a 27 yard shooter with a decent 27 yard average.

Live birds are a different story than the 17 degree Trap angles, you don't know where the live bird is going to fly, is he going to be a Driver, low and fast to the closest fence? Or a Riser and flyer?

That is why LIVE BIRD shoots are for the Elite Shooters.

Todays easier target angles and shorter slow moving targets are a piece of cake with 1250 fps shells
for todays long yardage shooters.

Do you recall what XX said about the maximum of todays gun was 27 yards?

This will prove how wrong he is if 30 yards get approved on todays target settings.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

So the best thing to do is change nothing and pretend the big dogs are not dominating handicap events. Too many people forget Kay Ohye's handicap average went UP .5% the year we threw 3-hole targets. Anyone who ever watched Frank Little eat up others in a shootoff on 4-hole sped up targets would realize the folly of that idea!

 

It is not all about what "9 feet" actually is, it is about what it represents.

You can NOT 'pick-on' the chosen one's ... They 'paid-their-dues' to earn the 'right' to participate at a different level than all the other "Amateurs".

The never-was shooters who feel like being close to, and the protectors of the best shooters in the ATA makes them somehow better ... will NOT let anything change the balance of powers.

 

Even though it's only 9 feet back, to think any shooter can average the same thing from there as from the 27 day in and out is foolish.

Andy's right, the best will always be the best, just not EVERY day.

HAP

 

Eliminate the 9 ft and use classification in lieu of ... Everyone shoot from true handicap yardage say 24, 25, 26, and 27 respectively and have them separated by class ... AAA, AA, A, B, C, D, etc ... 24 AA, 24 A, etc 25 AA, 25 A, etc ... 26 AA, 26 A etc .. 27 AAA, 27 AA, 27 A, etc ... With the use of modern technology this could be worked out and made to work ... Each class would shoot for its own money, eliminate the trophys for all classes and make them for runner up and Champion only ... Its not Rocket science, we are talking a Game when it all comes out in the end ... ( gimme a HIGH 5 and lets get on with it ) ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

I do not have a problem with 27 yds Handicap for the best because very few have a good average there, and I don't believe the Guns are any better today. I do believe people have better fitting guns with stocks fit to them.
I also believe the higher scores is better shotgun shell's period.
I also would like the wider angles as being straight from Post 1 to Post 5. I shoot Trap to shoot Pheasant's better, this would be better for Me. The best are there not only because they are good but they could afford this hobby.

 

I am curious as to why some shooters want to add distance to handicap. Is it because some shooters can break good scores?
If it is so easy to break a good score why don't we see more 100 straights in handicap? The people I hear complaining about
those shooting a good score are those who shoot a lot less than those breaking high scores. This game/sport is the same as others
if you want to be in the top shooters then you are going to have to make the commitment to and practice to get better and improve.
We all have reasons/excuses as to why we can't do something but until those are set aside and you put your mind to spending more time on your shooting
you won't get better and be in the top scores.
Besides all of that if we want to make this game one that is nearly impossible to shoot a perfect score then let's save ourselves a lot of grief and
agony. This is one of the reason sporting clays exists.

 

There is no shooter who will have a higher average if he/she shot angles, straight-away from post #1 and #5. There would be no need for those 9 feet.

The top shooters will be top shooters, but their averages will not be as high.

There will be less perfect scores from the 27 yd line.

There will be more short yardage competetors, like there used to be.

I never will be a fence sitter on this subject, you are either for or against a straight-away from posts #1 and #5, there is no in between.

Every ATA, BOD, and EC member knows where I stand on this subject. I am proud of that, I am not wishy-washy, back and forth, as some others.

I would like to see how WPT's handicapping would work?

I am not naming names, but the fence sitting has to stop for there to be any change.

Posting top shooters will always be on top, so why make a change? If you threw the angle targets suggested there would be FEWER of them. And more closer yardage shooters moving up the Handicap Yardage Ladder.

Competetive targets is where it is at, are some of you afraid to shoot Competetive Targets?

I really think some of you are actually afraid to shoot Competetive Targets.

If the ATA set aside a bank or Two in front of the GRANDSTANDS for the present 27 yard shooters and threw Straight-away Targets from Posts #1 and #5 and 50-52 yards at 11' Feet high, you will see there will not be the need to pour any concrete. But one more stipulation is using Traps other than Pat Traps, that will throw more angles, and have a longer Throwing Arm, so we have more target spin for stability.

I believe there would be Trap Mfgrs. that would loan their traps for this test.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

Gary B., are you forgetting that most clubs during the cheating era (80 to 96) did in fact throw the target settings you keep mentioning? Straights from 1/5 and 48-to 52 yards?

In late 70s early 80s, remember how many 100s were shot from the 27 back then? We should have had a two yard increase at that time due to that number if we followed our prior history on making it more difficult for the masters?

Completely changing just the game of handicaps? That isn't gonna happen either in my opinion because it would alter our history to much to be accepted!

If ANY change does come about, it certainly won't be the wholesale change you mention all the time. Some change, is the best hoped for but only if, it's done at a reasonable acceptable rate, one small step at a time. Those responsible for getting us to this point, knew practically nothing of our sports history while accepting the cheating practice as the best thing for trap shooting! That change of attitudes toward competitive trap shooting destroyed the notion our game wasn't one of shooting almost perfect scores. That perception was the draw in bringing more shooters into the game and they stayed around longer because of that perception!

HAP

 

Hap: Change it is not up to you, that's what bothers me, the competitive target that is needed needs to be implemented, and it is going to take like minded delegates to make those changes, there is a lot of support for the changes.

More people like the young shooters who want competitive targets, is what it is going to take, the movement has started. The awakening of the BOD and EC are seeing what is being discussed, The likes of XX has been defeated, the ATA Membership is listening, and has seen what has happened.

The mere suggestion of 30 yards has not been tested at the 27 yet, to prove it is needed.
That 3 yards is a tremendous cost, a cost that some clubs cannot afford, especially when it has not been tested on competitive targets.

Until that is done we should not even be considering the added concrete.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

Who are the delegates that support the change?
Is the Ohio delegate on board?

Of the 60 or so delegates how many would you say are in favor of the change?
Will this be on the agenda at this years meeting at the Grand American?
This is exciting news.

Who or what is an XX?

Thanks

 

Kay Ohye's handicap average went UP .5% the year we threw 3-holers. Is anyone foolish enough to believe throwing a wider target is gonna be enough a handicap to make the little dogs beat Harlan. The only dogs affected by a tougher targets are the ones who can't break a narrower target either!

 

Hap does the New Arizona Delegate favor a tougher target presentation?

I don't see the support personally but it doesn't mean its not there.

Thanks

 

Our delegate was talked into the running for this job but I seriously doubt he would be for a tougher target, I may be all wrong. I haven't talked with him since our state shoot.

Gary, the changes I support are up to me. I was probably one of the first shooters I know to actually inform my delegate a club was setting illegal targets! That was in 1982. If you've located that much support for post 96 rules, I haven't met them as yet?

We were in dire need of further handicapping the masters even before the cheating became so prolific. That's your suggestion for fixing exactly what?

HAP

 

Hap
Thanks for the reply.

 

Olliedawg: the tougher targets you are talking about were the ones the short yardage shooters were winning on. You should know that, you ran a gun club you say for years.

If the ATA will run a test at the Grand on a bank of traps in front of the Grandstands, and throw targets from I suggest 4 Pro-Matic traps, set at 44 degree angles a straight-away from post #1 and #5, on 50-52 yard targets, set at 11'ft or the Std height, shot from the 27 yard line, my money is they will not need the 30 yard walks.

Short yardage shooters can shoot over the same traps, and you all will be suprised at the results.

We the shooters need to take control of the handicap, but do it with the proper testing.
On a trap that will throw a proper share of angles, and have an arm that will give the target proper spin for stabilization.

It needs to be done on the 27 yard line, for long yardage shooters.

Spending money for this test is absolutely unneeded.

You will not need 30 yard walkways,

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

The biggest issue long yardage shooters suffered was hand pulling-not wider targets. Since voice systems were added they just made their lives much easier. Let's not forget the difference between newer guns with adjustable impact and all the rest.

You need to further handicap the big dogs BEFORE discussing any other changes.

PAT traps are here to stay. Get used to it!

 

PAT traps are here-3 yards are not!

 

May I suggest that while they are poring the concrete for the 30 yd. line that they go up front and pour for the 13 yd. line to take care of the Youth Group and the newbie's. Then we will have a 13 & 30 for everyone.

 

We have had this argument many times, the only way straighten this out is create a Pro Class make them shoot for there money and not ours. Kay shoots because he knows dummy shooters will play the money and he can out shoot 98% of the average shooters (sandbaggers don't count).

 

We have our Ohio Delagate on board, I will not name him.

GB DLS

 

So I guess you are standing with the cheating group? You definitely are not opposing them. You are not making a stand, just status quo.
GB DLS

 

This is an amateur group, good luck in establishing a PRO Class, that would
call for another Organization, that is not going to happen.

GB DLS

 

You're more FOS than a stuffed turkey.

HAP

 

An opinion is just like an A-Hole ... we all have one.

Storeman

 

Good to hear you have a voice on the BOD.
Maybe you can finally get some traction.

 

Well Doc I don't like cheating, that's why I said Pro class because u are not going to beat Harlen, Kay and others on a regular bases. U will beat them some times, like when the wind is blowing. But not on a regular bases even I know that. Those guys shoot for a living, I used to bolt and spike for a living, I worked for the railroad 35 yrs. I loved when I did beat them Brad included also Leo.

 

The purpose is not to beat them and others, it is to get back to a competitive target, the ATA took target settings to a new LOW, that is why tere are over 500 grand slams on the books, all due to easy targets and faster shells. The top shooters will always be top shooters, so why is adding a competitive target going to hurt anybody, we all jhave to shoot them. what will happen is some short yardage shooters are going to win,
and handicap averages will be lower, the singles averages will be lower too, but there will still be some 200 straights, no where near the quantity there is now, that is it in a nutshell, I see a better Trap coming, the Pro-Matic for one, it should have been in the bidding process.

I have a lot of knowledge and ideas, but haphazardly adding 30 yards and costing clubs Thousands of dollars to do it correctly is absolutely unneeded.

My proposal should be listened to,will not cost anywhere near what NW wants to do, I believe I can get can get 4 Pro-Matic Traps Loaned for the test.

Please Gentlemen give it some serious thoughts and contact your delegates about it. It is time shooters took control of OUR DESTINY.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

A principle of testing is to keep everything the same except the variable you want to test. A second principle is to have, if possible, a "control group" which is not subjected to the change in the variable you want to test.

Ending the small-gauge entertainment (we aren't going to introduce small-guage trap, after all) and substituting a Grand-long trap throwing (in the first study) 30-yard targets, thrown from the Pat traps which we own (and are not going to replace with any other brand) and throwing the targets 42 MPH as we do one the event traps will give us what we need to test the "fairness" of the 30-yard line. Though Ollie will construe this as a claim of "a wall at 27", which it is not, it remains my contention that our guns are at about their maximum range (defined as having a very, very high, but not 100%, probability of breaking a target which is perfectly pointed) in the Midwest and other common elevations of ATA clubs with mid-summer air densities.

The evidence is clear if one just looks. Compare the 96+ handicap scores from the 27 at the recent Western Satellite Grand at Vernal with the recentPennsylvania State Shoot and the Ohio State Shoot. There were plenty of good handicap shooters at the latter two, but the number of those high scores are not remotely similar; Vernal wins by miles and miles. The difference is altitude, specifically air density, which spreads patterns more at low altitudes than the mile-high position of Vernal. At 5000+ feet above sea level, guns did not fail to break perfectly-aimed targets at nearly the rate they did at, in these cases, Pennsylvania and Ohio. It's been going on for years. Look back at the scores from Ray's Mile HIgh; see how many high averages over the years were posted at in other high-altitude western clubs.

It will cost some money to ensure everyone is really doing their best. I suggested $18,000 divided $10,000, $5000, $3,000, high gun or ties divide, whichever our statistical advisor settles on. As the "control group" we would have contemporaneous scores from the same shooters at the same location and, if the test is professionally designed and analyzed, we will know if the 30-yard-line is "fair" or just robbery, randomly reducing scores in ways that the shooter cannot control or overcome, (which I think will be the outcome.) No one in the ATA, no one on this or other forums, has the competence to refine the design and carry out the analysis to give us the information we are paying to get; it would be nuts to do a half-way job, spend the time and money, and not get what we are after.

The ATA is making money and if it contemplates forcing clubs to undertake expenses to pour concrete, it must first be willing to invest some effort and money to see if it will work. Otherwise we are forcing member clubs to fly blind and how many clubs will be willing to do that? Were I to own a club, I think I might just decide hosting ATA events is not worth the trouble and expense with no evidence that it would do any good. If the ATA were able to prove it would benefit the sport, I might change my mind.

We only need professional help for the first iteration. We can then try 1200 fps shells, wider angles, whatever interests us in future years.

On another topic, there is apparently reluctance to name the Ohio Delegate, though I can't imagine why. Did you actually manage to elect a Delegate to officially bring up the concerns of some posters her? You were dead-hot to elect one not long ago; did you do do it? If not, why not?

Yours in Sport,

N1H1

 

Oh Neil

You forgot again to answer the post earlier. Just to remind you. The question was....

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.

Also you stated:

I am guessing those targets would be one hole at most.

Yet you, the person that is most known for removing the sport from trapshooting still sign your name....."yours in sport". lol

How about answering the question Neil.

 

One has to find humor in the fact that ... a 20-yard schmuck breaks ONE 'good score' and gets yardage, they are told it is an 'honor' ... good shooting. A 27-yard full-time shooter breaks many 'good scores' ... then gained yardage becomes an 'unfair' penalty. That has to be funny, nothing else fits.

"just robbery, randomly reducing scores in ways that the shooter cannot control or overcome, (which I think will be the outcome.)" EVERYONE needs to feel the pain of being 'over-handicapped' ... reductions are then the best friend for everyone. Everything that gives the 20-yard schmuck a better score ... gives the better shooters double, or more, additional targets. Over the years there have been people with great financial ability try to buy their way out of a LOFT problem ... it rarely happens. So the leaders of the ATA think, in their little minds, that 'easier' is the better way to keep this pool of fish for their Idols to feed on. The problem with this thinking is ... most do not acquire large amounts of money from being stupid.

 

Were those the western clubs throwing #1 hole targets? For high averages? Were they shooting your Narrow Angles, And 38 yard targets?
Why are you so worried about our Ohio Delegate? Why not use a good angle throwing Traps like the Pro-Matics, I think I can get them loaned to Sparta for the tests, that you are so afraid of having done on different traps that can throw more angles. You want the ATA to give $18,000
why don't you donate your money, the 27 yards Trap guns are just coming into their performance range. Why are you so afraid of the 44 degree 50-52 yard targets at 27 yards?We need a test to prove we need 30 yard walks first. Why do you think we got over 500 Grand Slams on your easy narrow targets? Neil you literally ruined the Handicap System with your narrow targets!! You personally Mis-guided the BOD and EC and back stabbed Neal Crausaby our ATA President during his tenure trying to influence delegates using your personally mailed letters, to get an upperhand on the voting of delegates w/o debates. It is all in the open, Printed in Trap and Field quoting President Neal Crausaby on your actions.

You cannot influence me, with your un-docemented writings.

Why are you so afraid of our Ohio Delegate? You want his name so bad you can taste it.

Why are you so afraid of my suggested test at the Grand on 4 Pro-Matic Traps?

How about using 4 Pat Traps next to the 4 Pro-Matics Traps in front of the Grandstands, that would be 2 banks, or possibly 2 Pat Traps& 2 Pro-Matics
Side by side, and a sign in front of the trap houses stating what traps are inside, so everyone can see the difference. All 4 set at 44 degree angles and 50-52 yard targets set at same height, that shows no favoritism.


Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

I forsee Pat Traps updated w/longer arms, or replaced with Pro -Matics
as Pat Traps wear out, or need replacement due to other problems.

GB DLS

 

Rogers name is plastered all over the ATA website as is every other State Delegate.

 

Neil, I see you've never shot in PA. If you did you'd realize the reason for lower scores and I doubt it's air density. Visibility is #1 on the problem list.

More and more smaller clubs are already forgoing holding ATA shoots on the East coast. The law of diminishing returns has hit many and will continue unless some changes to bring back some interest in the Handicap event. Trinket shooters are the first to quit and money shooters have already left. Not good!

 

"about their maximum range (defined as having a very, very high, but not 100%, probability of breaking a target which is perfectly pointed)"

OK .... time for more 'fun-with-numbers' ....

I take my favorite shotgun to the pattern-board ... I shoot one shell at 30 yards, I only get one shot in singles and handicap, and I look at the pattern and see holes big enough for a clay target to pass through, maybe producing a miss/lost target.

Now the 'numbers' ... from the 16 yard-line I shoot at the target 14 yards into it's flight of 48 yards, making the point of contact be at 30 yards ... I now know my favorite shotgun can produce a pattern at 30 yards that can "randomly (reduce) scores in ways that the shooter cannot control or overcome" ... when shooting from the 16 yard-line ...

OK .... now wait .... this is supposed to only happen when standing past the 27-yard-line .... maybe I did something wrong ....

16 yards from where the target is 'thrown' .... shoot at it 14-yards into a 48 yard flight, not too slow ... is it ???? .... 16+14=30 and I just patterned my favorite shotgun with one shell at 30 yards and see holes .... I give up, my favorite shotgun could "fail to break perfectly-aimed targets" from the 16 yard-line ....

Is it just one more 'myth' that 'patterns' may produce a miss/lost targets from long yardage 'handicap' shooting only ... in an attempt to shield the Great-One's from "unfair" yardage gains ??????

 

The MYTH about the patterning board is that the shot is placed on a non dimensional target where as targets in reality are multi dimensional being as they do not quit moving or even hesitate once thrown ... The hole in the pattern would possibly not be there a millisecond later or sooner for that matter ... Shotgun shells and snow flakes have a lot in common being as there are no two the same so a hole presented from one might not or could not be in the same spot in very next shell or any after that one for that matter ... My father wasted more time and money doing patterns, counting holes, making templates, etc till he was blue in the face ... I told him all the time none of what he was doing mattered to anyone but him because none of it was consistant or could it be duplicated ... No one has yet to prove me wrong on that, though many will argue with you about the advantages of patterning a gun, actually they are patterning the shells ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

WPT, I agree. Any kind of pattern density or holes is as you say, in on a non - dimensional target and for that shell only. Shooting at a pattern board for that type of information is like trying to milk a boar.

The only thing the pattern board will tell you is the APPROXIMATE center of pattern above your aiming point. Shoot 5 or 6 shells and take the average at 35 to 40 yards.

 

Patterning will tell you if your gun and ammo, together, are any good for long-yardage handicap. But you you guys don't care, that's fine with us. More than fine, really.

N1H1

 

Like my 19inch patterns at 35 yards with my Caesar Guerini Full Choke tubes. Tightest tubes I have ever tested..

GB DLS

 

US?

Flyersarebest

 

Just like trying the 30 yards, before seeing how the 27yard line holds up on 44 degree angles and 50-52 yard targets, shot off a Pro-Matic Trap that can and will throw the angles. The Pat Traps were pushed off on us shooters when the bidding process was halted. The Pat Traps were never
evaluated and proven. How can you honestly believe XX on this bill of goods he is pushing. Put a pair of each Traps, Pat Traps and a Pair of Pro-
Matics in the Trap Houses next to each other, with a sign specifying which traps are in the houses, so EVERYONE CAN WHAT IS HAPPENING, AND COMPARING SCORES, that's a true evaluation.

We trapshooting members have seen what he has done in the past,
back stabbing ATA President Neal Crausaby, the Trap & Field Story has been posted on here.

This is like the Sparta Story, build it they will come. Like the Pat Traps are here to stay, They stopped the Bidding process. Who actually stopped the bidding process deserves to be known, to the Members.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

OK, do the three-hole test on one of those small-gauge-event traps at the Grand. Three-hole, costing whatever the Grand will cost, shooting for $18 Grand, three monies. The whole Grand.

Get a statistician to design the experiment so we can finally see how it works without claims of cheating or whatever. It will compare the same shooter at the same location at the same time for lots of targets. How does the three-hole affect long and short yardage shooters? Put the 30-yard line test off until next year, 1200 fps shells later if technical problems can be realistically solved and the political backlash can be handled.

A well (professionally) designed test will answer the question for once and for all. Then the ATA would have an argument for doing it if the result so indicates, not doing it if not.

We are wasting those traps now, in my opinion. Sure, 28 gauge trap might be fun, but it's a dead end and we all know it. Why not do something useful instead?

We are not buying Promatics. Why test them? Pat traps are here to stay. The Cardinal Center has had them for ages, Pennsylvania has them now too. They are what the ATA shoots over. Time to accept that and see what other possible changes might do, for better of worse. Knowledge is always better than blindly guessing and hoping for the best.

N1H1

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but when Deb Ohye was having some health issues a few years back I recall she broke 100 straight from the 27 yd. line with 1 oz. loads. Hardly possible according to some!