ATA submits bogus numbers to Trap and Field and you? AGAIN! (Archive)

Below you will see two pictures. The first picture shows the chart published by Trap and Field that shows the entry figures since 2009 for the grand. Note the bottom line in yellow. Those are the totals the ATA would like you to believe.



Note the huge spike in entries in 2014, 56,544. [BS]
Note the continued numbers for 2o15, 58,213. [BS]
Note the continued numbers for 2016, 58,555. [BS]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now for the real numbers.

See below the corrected numbers in green. It is the same chart. The real numbers have been added.



The ATA has figures in yellow that are grossly wrong! Correct numbers are in green.

Thanks for the help. You know who are.
Merlo out

 

This is why I haven't bought Trap & Field for 20 years. Is it T&F that is full of shit or the ATA who has been caught lying again? I'm waiting for you Pipelayer, give us the scoop. Brad

 

Just a tiny little error. Making a mountain out of a molehill again? I don't expect much out of Terry since he professes to be one of the good guys. Maybe Mr. Shaw can provide some insight? I'm sure they'll say it was simply a transposition error that'll disappear next month. Some of you forget-the ATA owns that magazine now!

 

I can't help but wonder, does anyone else think Merlo provides more oversight of our ATA and pays more attention to details than most Delegates?

I think Merlo deserves a Delegate hat, shirt and parking place. Merlo For Delegate ! Merlo For Delegate !

HB

 

Thanks. The info is given to me. You guys do the deciphering.

 

Its just an excel error. I dont think its intentional. Its sad it made print, but not evil intent.

 

bullshit! The original had a line drawn under it by hand and then published. The numbers at the bottom are not generated by computer. Excel adds the columns. If you add the columns you get a different number. No one thought to check the numbers of the ATA until now.

I suppose the statement they gave to the TV reporter on the 2nd day about there being 30,000 competitors already at WSRC was an excel program error too.

If this were an excel error, the years 09, 10, 11, 12, and 13 would have the same errors. They don't have that error.

 

C'mon man. Its just a formula to add row A-Z. someone put a subtotal in there for 14-16 and did not change the bottom formula.

 

I am posting this for username lord maker. The page below is from last year. Obviously the same format. The same system but no incorrect numbers have been inserted into the columns.

Note 2014 and 2015 are correct figures.


The above from '15 is unmodified. As someone mentioned the bottom numbers are flush with the columns. No inserted numbers. I think proof that the figures shown at the top of the thread were intentionally modified. You tell me.

Thanks for providing this....
You know who you are.

Merlo out

 

Look here ..... http://www.trapandfield.com/info.html ..... for this .....

"On May, 1, 2014, the Amateur Trapshooting Association announced the historic acquisition of Trap & Field Magazine. Both entities, in business more than 100 years through their predecessor organizations, have worked in a unique and synergistic partnership, but as seperate[sic] companies. Iconic businessman Dr. Beurt R. SerVaas, who passed away in February, owned T&F for nearly 50 years. The SerVaas family arranged for the ATA's Acquisition of T&F. Trap & Field's headquarters is now in Sparta, IL along with the ATA Headquarters and many staff members work from remote offices in Indiana and Michigan."

So ..... Why would it "surprise" anyone they would publish trash ?????

 

No delegate caught this. If not for this forum the shooters would all think there were close to 60k entries. LOL

 

The explanation for this should be good. Is this an effort to keep a shoot near someone's business?

 

As Lord Maker stated it is pretty obvious what happened, but you guys can of course make more out of it if that is what you want to do. Especially now that Merlo posted the prior year pic, you can see that someone simply added a function (most likely using "AutoSum)" to get the total count of all events prior to the GAH. They added this SUM in the columns for '14, '15, and '16 only. The problem is that by inserting the new calc for the total entries prior to the GAH, that number will now be included in the range of the data fields included in the bottom total formula. It is unlikely that anyone used any actual "Subtotal" functions in the spreadsheet, like many users they just use "Auto Sum." And despite what someone incorrectly posted above, if you do this Excel will most certainly double count what you are calling a "subtotal," since to Excel it is not a subtotal unless you go to the trouble of actually using the proper function. Just poor control over spreadsheets, which is a very common issue.

The yellow highlighted rows do not appear to be manual entries at all, they are in a different font size, that's all. They line up exactly where you would expect them to in Excel. They are still right justified just as you would expect, but the font is larger so they look a little different, extending farther left. This is done to help draw attention to total lines, subtotal line etc in spreadsheets all the time.

 

Thanks for the "offer" to "make more out of it if that is what you want to do".

If I was going to LIE to the unknowing "Press" giving the "ATA" coverage ..... I would want to "back it up" with false numbers published in a bankrupt "ATA" owned rag.

That is just me ..... I know the "ATA" leaders have much more pure intentions in their little minds .....

And thanks for the "Excel" tutorial ..... The unwashed masses ain't never seed nuttin like that afore .....

 

For "Bat" ..... http://www.dummies.com/business/acc...-how-to-distinguish-between-errors-and-fraud/

"Fraud takes place when you find evidence of intent to mislead."

Now "Bat" ..... was there "evidence of intent to mislead", by NOT taking the time to have someone of your superior intellect "proof-read" the "published material" ?????

Did you send your "Excel" tutorial to the "ATA" and "Trap and Field" ????? They no doubt want to print a "correction" so it will not look as "evidence of intent to mislead".

 

They no doubt want to print a "correction" so it will not look as "evidence of intent to mislead".

YOU MUST BE KIDDING US !!!

Proof Reading is a thing of the past, everyone relies on that danged Spell Check for everything.

Now anyone can do whatever they choose with facts and figures as long as it is within the Spell Check parameters....

Gee, I used to be a proof reader, and I would certainly wonder why the spike in numbers for those last 3 years compared to the previous years.

I just have a "Feeling" ~~~~~

 

harryone, what are you talking about? If you use Auto Sum to do all your totals for you, it will add-up every number in the range it references, whether that range includes just entered data or any sums you inserted. You have to know what you are doing or you can easily double things up. From Merlos post of the prior year it is clear the yellow highlighted lines are products of the spreadsheet functions, not entered by hand (whatever that means). In the 2016 worksheet, a row was added after event 24, and a function was inserted to sum the data above it.

They probably used Auto Sum to add all the prelim numbers from the first row under "Monday" to the event 14 row. That SUM is the SUB TOTAL PRELIMINARY WEEK row. Then they likely just used AutoSum again to total everything from the Yellow SUBTOAL row through the event 25 GAH row. That worked fine in the 2015 info Merlo posted, but in 2016 when the person wanted to calc a subtotal for everything through event 24 he got what he needed but screwed up the rest of the spreadsheet for those 3 years. Since the grand total at the bottom is most likely just an AutoSum from the Subtotal Preliminary week through the row showing the GAH, it will include the new subtotal in 14, 15, and 16 columns that was inserted in the new row.

As I said, whoever was trying to get a total of entries from event #1 up through event #24 was careless, no question about that.

 

Brad's Friend, you are sooo right about proof reading in this day. It is even worse with spreadsheets because you can't see the formulas in a printout. They did a poor job on this one, but that isn't anything new.

 

harryone, what do you mean "entered by hand not in the computer"? How did they insert a blank line in the report without using Excel? Did they take the original report in paper form then cut it and add some more paper, then type a subtotal by hand, that just happened to accurately sum all the numbers above it? Huh?

A row was added in Excel, an Auto Sum was inserted to sum everything above the newly inserted row for 3 of the columns. That newly inserted sum now gets included in the Auto Sum total on the very last line, screwing up the totals for those 3 years. The crazy results are exactly what you will get from Excel when you are careless when making changes to a spreadsheet.

 

You state that as "factual" .... Is it your work ?????

If it is your work, you may want a "correction" published .....

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-malice-and-negligence

"A plaintiff can establish negligence on the part of the defendant by showing that the defendant did not act with a reasonable level of care in publishing the statement at issue. This basically turns on whether the defendant did everything reasonably necessary to determine whether the statement was true, including the steps the defendant took in researching, editing, and fact checking his work. Some factors that the court might consider include:"


..... "the amount of research undertaken prior to publication;"

..... "the trustworthiness of sources;"

..... "attempts to verify questionable statements or solicit opposing views; and"

..... "whether the defendant followed other good journalistic practices."

 

Funny stuff here. You have to wonder how many vendors read this "bogus" stuff before getting a lease. Or how many campers think they are attending a shoot that has 60,000 entries? (smirking)

 

harryone, who cares about the line? The overinflated numbers sure don't seem to have been written in after it was printed, how did they get the font and point size to match so well? An extra row was inserted, how was that done after it was printed? Obviously they did not format the cell in Excel to have a line at the bottom, and someone added that line by hand before a PDF was created.

User 1, you are correct. I should not make it sound like what I said is a fact, as have not seen the spreadsheet. What I should say is that the fact is what I described about inserting a row and an AutoSum in Excel, to show a subtotal for all events prior to the GAH, would have resulted in exactly the numbers shown in Merlo's postings.

It is easy to understand. It is factually accurate. It is a simple explanation of what might have happened here. Much more likely than harryone's posts saying someone took a printout and somehow changed it after printing to include a new row and amounts, all in the matching font and point size.

 

Bat,
As a reader you had me convinced it could be a mistake. That was until I looked at the chart on post number 10. It shows the correct format and numbers for 2009-2015. It looks like someone attempted to rewrite history.

 

jen, sorry but I don't think you followed what I was saying.

My point is that the spreadsheet was obviously changed between 2015 and 2016, that is my whole point. The chart in post 10 is fine. I think we all agree with that. That is the spreadsheet as it existed at that previous time. What I am saying is that in 2016 the ATA edited that spreadsheet by updating to include a column for 2016 and they also inserted a row immediately before the GAH event row. If you compare the two charts it is obvious a column for 2016 was inserted, as you would expect, correct? That's what normally happens with a chart like this, you simply open the old spreadsheet and add another column for the new year. I think its safe to assume we all agree on this?

At that point everything is still fine. The first yellow subtotal line (Prelim) is likely an AutoSum of all numbers entered from top line down to event #23 row. The second yellow total (Total Entries) is the sum of all rows starting with the (Prelim) first yellow row (after event #23) and running through the row for event #24 (GAH). That is a pretty standard way of setting this type of worksheet up.

Next, here is where the wheels fell off. It looks like somebody wanted a comparison of entries for the past three years excluding the GAH. This makes sense to me because the GAH this year was poor weather, and they likely wanted to see how numbers compared without that expected drop. So to do this they inserted the new row after the Event #23 row. That should be obvious to everyone by comparing the two worksheet posted. At this point, the totals would still be the same on both worksheets. We agree so far?

Next, they inserted an AutoSum function in the new row in columns for 2014, 2015, and 2016 which gave them a new subtotal of entries for the whole grand excluding the GAH. Those subtotal numbers on the new row are correct for those 3 columns. But, what they did not realize is that by adding that AutoSum total in those three columns on the newly inserted row, yes they got the new subtotal they wanted, but it screwed up the remaining total at the bottom of the page, grossly overstating the total event entries. You will note that the entries are overstated exactly by the amount of the newly inserted subtotal above it. This is because that is what Excel does when you are careless and add a AutoSum into a range that is already summed to another cell. If they wanted the new subtotal in there, they should have changed the formula for the Total Entries row in those 3 columns to only include the range from the new row plus the GAH row.

If someone wanted to simply make the numbers look better, they would have only had to overwrite the grand total cells with whatever number they wanted. No casual viewer would know the difference unless they actually tried to add everything up manually.

Why would they make it obvious that changes had been made (inserting a new row, and adding a new subtotal) if they were trying to deceive, it makes no sense. They were just very careless with a spreadsheet. People make mistakes all he time. I would be more critical of the person that then took this and actually sent it out without reviewing it.

 

I do note now that the 2015 GAH entries changed by 9 entries between the two years besides the error in the new subtotal as explained above. That I agree is a mystery. I don't think it was a conspiracy though.

 

End result........

The Trap and Field prints an ever so tiny retraction. The magazine will still be out there with the "bogus" numbers. Unsuspecting vendors will think they are buying a spot to a shoot that had 60,000 entries. In reality it is a venue that has fallen on it's face. 1700+ in the GAH....uggh.

You will hardly notice the retraction next month. Mission accomplished.

The WSRC will still function and Director Gipson's business there will still have it's doors open.

T&F, owned by the ATA, will say we are sorry. It was the art department. Ooops. Bat will say I told you so. Honest mistake.

Merlo will point out another creepy thing the ATA did next month. Regardless of the creepy factor Bat will defend the indefensible.

Life will go on as we know it now. The ATA is ran by a bunch of creeps. Groundhog Day....again.

 

Ask yourself. Why would anyone want the numbers inflated?

 

FYI: Trap & Field Magazine is located in Sparta. They dont want to relocate. hmmmmm

 

This story is very strange. How are we supposed to believe the leaders of the ATA did not know the figures are bogus?

 

I can see a few of these guys enjoying their cushy expense accounts to the point they missed this.

 

Who would benefit from the exaggerated numbers?

 

One owns the other. Not saying bad things about either but it is not good that the T&F was part of the record keeping of the ATA. Not anymore.

 

The point is why? Answer is obvious to all, including Bat.

 

Penguin,

I think its pretty obvious - weather was real bad for the last event and at least someone wanted to see how things compared to the last two years if you did not count the last event. Makes sense to me, knowing that total entries were down, they were probably hoping a good chunk of the drop might be blamed on the weather during the GAH, that would be my guess.

If they were simply trying to show inflated numbers, why wouldn't they have just changed the numbers for 2016 to suit whatever they wanted? It is clear they simply added a new subtotal for the current and prior two years for comparison purposes. If not, why bother going to the trouble to add a new row and insert a subtotal of all events except the last one?

 

I wonder if that same person whom provided that false information, does their Federal IRS Tax Returns???????

Gary Bryant....................................Dr.longshot

 

OK "Bat" ..... "at least someone wanted to see how things compared to the last two years if you did not count the last event"

So, YOU want everyone to BELIEVE this "person" could not SEE the OBVIOUS ERROR of this action ..... Were "they" just that STUPID ?????

Then YOU want everyone to BELIEVE it was sent to be published, and EVERYONE else was too STUPID to notice it.

I have NOT looked at a copy of that rag in years ..... In my opinion they can go down with their current owners.

To each their own "Bat", but YOU sure make YOURSELF look the FOOL with YOUR efforts on behalf of the "ATA".

FWIW ..... this is PURE BULLSHIT ..... "they were probably hoping a good chunk of the drop might be blamed on the weather during the GAH" ..... The All American "Points" collectors and the prior "money" shooters would/have shot in ALL weather conditions. So the "blame" IS NOT the "Weather", it goes to the Dumb-Ass leaders of the "ATA". You know, The Dumb-Ass people that told everyone to stay home or go home if they are not happy, and "BLAME" it on IF the wind blows or a rain drop falls.

 

Again,

Piss poor proof reading at best.

A RED FLAG would be held high seeing the HUGE spike in those last 3 years, and a HUGE question would be passed to Mr. Gipson before I would publish such numbers...

My own 2 cents

 

Because you have to really examine the column this way. Rather clever. The average bloke just looks to the bottom line which of course they hilighted.

 

Poor "Bat" ..... To think ACTUAL Trapshooters are willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars for "equipment" ..... spend thousands of dollars for shells and entry fees ..... travel hundreds of miles ..... stay away from home, work, and family for days and weeks ..... just to NOT SHOOT the "so called" biggest event of the year because of a drop of rain or the wind blowing .....

The 'occupy the 27' shooters may go home to protect their 67 handicap average ..... but not many sane people want to spend thousands of dollars and days from home, to just go home .....

Your lost again "Bat" ..... This is not the place in cyber-land that Kool Aid is free and dreams of "someday" shooting at Trap targets is plenty.

 

Penguin, seems to me if they just wanted inflated numbers they would have just changed the numbers in individual events to increase the total, or they would have simply overridden the total line itself, since as you say the average bloke simply looks at the bottom line. Then you would have to really look closely, actually add the numbers yourself. And if they just wanted to show inflated numbers by adding them by hand, as someone posts above, why wouldn't they simply make up a number? Why did they inflate the total number by subtotaling all of the events shot prior to the GAH and then adding this total as the "extra" number. Seems very odd to go through all that trouble if all you wanted to do was inflate the number.

 

Who said what day they did this? Like Penguin said "clever." The why comes down to who, whom, would benefit? What group or people would benefit.

And to think all they had to do was print out the original spread sheet but someone wanted this copy printed. This was the copy, the copy they wanted printed.

And this surprises someone?

 

So they could have Dumb-Ass people try to pass it off as "just an error" if it is ever questioned .....

What "seems very odd" is someone "go through all that trouble" to keep posting about how the "ATA" can do no wrong .....

Bat, Do you think the "person" who did this was too stupid to see the "error" ????? You keep supporting it was done in "error", but fail to give a reason why the "person" did not see the resulting "error" ...... WAS THIS PERSON THAT STUPID ????????????

 

FG, I don't follow that first sentence? What day...?

I think this is the original spreadsheet, why do you think it is some other spreadsheet. It is obvious the "original" spreadsheet had a new row inserted etc., etc. in the current year as I have pointed out above. Maybe they made a copy before that made the changes to calc the new subtotal, or maybe they just created a new worksheet in the same file, that actually would have been the way to go before modifying something you use over and over every year.

Seriously, if the intent was to deceive, I see nothing "clever" about what was done. I'd say it was actually a very poor and obvious plan if they were really trying to intentionally inflate the numbers. More likely just poor/careless Excel skills and a total lack of any oversight in the back office.

 

The "ATA" ????? ..... "Trap and Field" rag ???? ..... both ????? ..... all the above ????? ..... Is EVERYONE running the "ATA" "just poor/careless" ?????

 

Or.....Too much oversight from the front office.

Gee Bat, you don't give many points for effort. It is much like those 15,000 competitors they told WSIL were staying in the campground. This group caught that too.

 

Do any of you know what the outgoing ATA president does for a living.

You guessed it. He is a CPA

Ron Burdick

 

The real question is how much did the ATA pay the State of Illinois for the 3 buck per entree.? Did they pay the REAL number or the FAKED number? At three bucks a pop it adds up pretty quickly. Almost enough to pay off some of that over due electric bill, maybe enough to open the grounds for the grand. A way to hide that would be to go back a couple of years and re-write a little history so no one (delegates) would notice. Does anyone on here think that is an impossibility? Brad

 

I don't know about "an impossibility" ..... but major stupidity would apply ..... Talk about going to Jail .....

It is one thing to try and make things "sound" better ..... but involving "money" could take it to some very dark places .....

 

Ron Burdick, you old scoundrel you !!!

You owe me a new key board as when I read your statement, I had a mouth full of coffee....

That statement was the funniest thing I have read on here in a LONG TIME, sure makes one wonder.......

Thanks for the insight !!!

I do so much hope the ATA didn't pay the IDNR for 58,000+ entries these last 3 years

I guess after what Hillary is getting away with, anything is possible. She set a precedent !

 

Bat, you are entertaining.

 

Glad I'm entertaining Union. I just think is it far-fetched to believe this was a plan to present inflated numbers. Hopefully everybody agrees that it is obvious nothing was done "by hand" here, other than someone drawing an underline to set off the new subtotal of all entries from the start thru the second to last event. There is no indication anything else was done "by hand," and I have no idea how someone could think it was. I don't know how you add a blank line to a spreadsheet without doing it in the spreadsheet itself. No sign of manual cutting and pasting that I see.

They added a new row, added a new sum to give a subtotal of all entries prior to the GAH, and unfortunately failed to change the formula for the total at the bottom. That's what they did...all the math on the incorrect spreadsheet supports this - it all foots perfectly. It is just a dumb error in failing to update the final total formula after they added that new subtotal line, it foots perfectly but gives a meaningless result now. It seems too far-fetched to me that someone intentionally sat down and thought "ok, its too boring to just make up a number, I'm going to overstate these entries by exactly the number of entries from day 1 through event #24." Then this guy goes ahead and actually enters this "extra" number into the spreadsheet directly instead of trying to hide it? I don't buy that at all.

Why do you guys believe this summary from T&F is what ATA uses to report rent to IDNR? It sure doesn't look like anything that would be used for the purpose, it sure looks like a spreadsheet that is maintained from year to year for comparison purposes, and ATA made the mistake of letting someone change the format that had no business doing such thing.

I will admit that the ATA seems to fail at every turn as far as the careless use of wording in minutes, in releases and now in spreadsheet use.

 

I don't! I think its a mistake. A mistake that really should have been found by many people prior to print. But then what would we have to talk about? Sparta? Flights & Angles? 7 1/2's or 8's? Oh, that one is from the other forum.

 

I think there is a past history of the numbers being skewed towards a higher number. Was it a mistake for many years when it was previously done? Is it a mistake now?

 

jhunts, you may be correct about the first part of that statement, but do you really believe this is not just a failure to update that final line formula? Just seems too odd to me that what I suggest happened (wanting to obtain subtotal of entries prior to GAH because of poor weather in that event and concerns about putting a better spin on Grand numbers dropping) actually results in exactly what happened with that erroneous spreadsheet. It all foots exactly as expected if that error was made. If they were just trying to make up better numbers, why go to all that trouble. Just too far-fetched.

 

Yeah. Why publish numbers in your official nationally distributed publication that says you must have had 6000 shooters and 60,000 entries? Who would benefit from that?

Who benefited from the statement to WSIL that there were already 30,000 competitors on day 2. And who benefited from the statement that 15,000 were staying at the campground. Who benefited by saying the other 15,000 were at nearby motels.

Why go to the trouble?

You tell me Bat. This has turned into your story. I cant write a better one.

 

"Bat" seems to have skipped all the classes about "correlation vs causation" ..... https://www.google.com/search?q=correlation vs causation&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

"Correlation does not imply causation" is a phrase used in statistics to emphasize that a correlation between two variables does not imply that one causes the other. Many statistical tests calculate correlation between variables."

The 2016 GAH entries were down AND the weather was bad ..... "correlation" .....

The "ATA" is controlled by a tribe of fools ..... "causation" .....

See how easy that is "Bat" .....

Here ..... http://www.dummies.com/software/mic...o-use-the-correlation-analysis-tool-in-excel/ ..... just for you "Bat" .....

 

User, I was making no such claim about the weather and the GAH numbers. I was pointing out what I believed the ATA may have been doing.

 

"making no such claim" ..... really ?????? Unless YOU are the one that performed the work in question, the ONLY thing YOU CAN DO is make a "claim" .....

 

Since the correlation/causation issue we were discussing has to do with weather/GAH numbers, and not with any work performed, your last post makes no sense.

 

I can see how it may have went over your head.

 

Gee, I wonder if Terry Haag has read this...

A Black eye on someone, whether it's the ATA feeding T&F the information, or her staff.

I suspect it was someone at the ATA level who gave the T&F people the info, and of course T&F just published it as gospel because it came from the head office of the ATA.

Sort of like the Hillary followers. She says it, and they don't question it !

My own 2 Cents

 

No call from her?

 

The number difference could be the previously un-accounted for Mississippi shooters.

 

Calls from the front office yet?

 

There will be a retraction from Hillary first.

 

No, as any spreadsheet system user can attest, it is not obvious, and there is no way you can be sure what was put into the program without seeing the program.

 

skeeter, you serious?

You cannot dispute that, between the 2015 and 2016 images of the worksheet, a row was added, nor that a column was added for 2016, nor that a subtotal of all entries above the new row was added in the columns for 2014, 2015 and 2016. Finally you can't dispute that the final total line equals the sum of all the individual row entries above it. That is all shown above and is obvious without having access to the spreadsheet formulas.

What we cannot attest to without seeing the actual spreadsheet is what the formula on the new row or the last total row are, or if they are simply manual entries. Yes, it is true on the old 2015 sheet someone may have simply added everything up manually and entered the result directly instead of using Excel's math functions. I doubt you believe many users actually do that though.

Instead, I would think everyone that uses a spreadsheet would believe that in the original spreadsheet the final total is calculated by a formula that is a sum of all the line above it. You are correct that it might not be a sum function, it could be a subtotal function (would have been very odd to use in this situation at that time), we cannot know for sure. All we know is that the total presented equals what Excel would return if a SUM was used.

Now, if you insert a row, and add a SUM on that new row of all the numbers above it, you will get exactly what the new spreadsheet shown above provides. Every spreadsheet user would know that also. But, since we don't have access to the spreadsheet, that is only a description of what Excel would do in that situation. Odd that Excel, using the most common formulas would return exactly the same figures as shown above, if someone just wanted to go to the trouble of manually overriding any formulas?

 

And in the end no one and to be extra clear, no one knows what was in the program, (if there was one) without reading it.

The ATA posting this is suspect at minimum. I also would guess this is aimed at Illinois tax dollars.

 

As I said, nobody knows with certainty what formulas, if any, were used in the spreadsheet. But we do know exactly what was printed, and that matches exactly what everyone familiar with Excel will understand it would return if setup, and later modified as I described. Whether it was done in Excel, or by hand, the bottom total is simply a SUM of all the numbers above it. Which leads to an overstatement in those 3 years.

The ATA's control over this spreadsheet was poor (but it is not an uncommon mistake if it happened as I guess), allowing it to be sent out without review was inept (even worse if someone did review it), and T&F certainly did a poor job not noticing the error either. You guys consider it an intentional misstatement, I simply believe, in light of previous issues with things printed in minutes, etc., it is just another example of very careless procedures and lack of attention to detail.

I'm more interested in Merlo's anticipated release of new info from the AG. I expect that will be the interesting info.

 

Bat....find an opinion and keep it. You keep changing in an effort to make yourself less disingenuous.

But it was their decision, their numbers, and I believe an intentional lie. They controlled the bottom line and the publication. And be clear, the bottom line was the intent.

Like the publication of 30,000 shooters that showed up for the beginning of preliminary week? Or the 15,000 they claimed were at the campgrounds? Or the other 15,000 that were staying in motels? Or the 150,000 people that the ATA told the state of Illinois would attend each year?

Your statements fail to defend the ATA pilfering the tax coffers of Illinois.

 

Bat, I've looked over the October issue and personally, I think you're being a bit too critical. Oooops! Sorry!

​

 

Thanks HB, really the October 2016 issue shows that? Yes, that falls perfectly in-line with my perception of the controls in place.

FG, I have not changed my opinion about anything. If you believe that, it is your misunderstanding.

 

Bat must think many of you are dumb, stupid, and just cant see the obvious.

You don't hear Bat coming up with an excuse for the ATA blatantly lying to WSIL TV in saying there were 15,000 shooters camping at the campgrounds.

You don't hear Bat saying it was a lack of controls when the ATA blatantly lied to the IDNR saying there would be 150,000 people attending Sparta. (ref HB's post)

You don't hear Bat saying it was a lack of controls when the ATA said this year there were another 15,000 shooters staying in motels that were attending the shoot in Sparta.

Bat skips all of the above and goes to the official T&F publication, published by the ATA, that once again seems to have blatantly lied to the trapshooters.

60,000 entries that ATA publication said. 60,000. Think about it.

And then the icing on the cake. They went back and rewrote history by changing and re-publishing the numbers from the previous 2 years.

Bat's excuse "lack of control"........more like lack of control by the AG.

 

Note the list of shooters by location (states) is 3400, the report on Grand Attendance says 3397 shooters classified. Maybe the ATA and Trap&Field just rounded up to 60,000. With 260 All Americans you would think that there had to be 30,000 competitors there after a couple of days, especially at a world shooting event with 15,000 campers. Brad

 

Where in the Hell is "Miscellaneous" that is on "the list of shooters by location (states)" ?????

Did those "3" shooters live under the same bridge ?????

 

Hey "Bat", How is that for "inflating numbers" ????? You no longer have to be from a known place on planet Earth to be "counted" as part of a "total" .....

Do the shooters from "Miscellaneous" need to be "represented" ??? Or is it just some type of "simple error" from someone using "Excel" ?????

 

Has there been a retraction? Will there be a printed correction? Is this the information they want out there?

 

No retraction that I saw in the following Trap & Field.

 

And where is my friend Bat? In light of no retraction....Wouldn't it be great if he could show and defend the integrity of the publication. After all....just an excel error.

 

History Buff....

I love the date at the bottom of the T&F stated October 2017.

I was looking for Michael J. Fox, and "Back to the Future"

 

butterly,

Why would I "defend the integrity" of the publication? Look at HB's post above showing other errors in that issue, and the comments by Brad's Friend about the same, just proof of more careless mistakes in that issue as I have been saying all along. I'm not sure what that has to do with their "integrity," but it certainly shows they need to do a better job of reviewing things.

Also, from HB's other thread showing the FOIA reply, it sure seems that the whole issue here about the IDNR relying on that erroneous, obviously overstated spreadsheet was mistaken. We can't tell what numbers the payment to IDNR was based on exactly, but it certainly wasn't those from the spreadsheet error we wasted so much time on earlier.

 

Ahhh my friend Bat. Again you show up with some sort of distracting mumbo jumbo as if we should forget the the target audience was us, the vendors, and maybe the Illinois taxpayers. And the information presented was wrong. If it were a mistake in the printing or the ATA did not want to mislead anyone the fake numbers would have been corrected.

The lie continued. The numbers are there for a reason!

The sin is not the over payment or the under payment. The sin is the corruption. The sin is the lie. The next sin was not making a correction after it was pointed out.

The last sin....and thanks for participating is it defense.

There has been a correction......moderator

 

Sure seems to me that when I said IDNR was not relying on the incorrect spreadsheet, many took issue. HB has settled that matter.

I agree with you, ATA and T&F should correct that published info though. The fact that it wasn't in the most recent issue does not mean they aren't doing it - I think T&F has a pretty long lead-time, but who knows.

My opinion, you are making a big deal out of nothing with this issue. Just an opinion though. Wait for Merlo's next release, it might be a whole lot more interesting!

 

Bat, I would expect no other statement from you. We should expect less from the leaders we have producing the lies. This is right in your character. Mumbo jumbo and focus somewhere else.

No retraction and my friend Bat defends the indefensible. Groundhog day all over again.

There has now been a correction....moderator

 

Trap and Field is an extension of the ATA being as it is owned and operated by the ATA ... The numbers being inaccurate are because the ATA wants them that way, so they will not retract, change, alter, or Modify same for what ever reason they have ... This would not be done to mislead the membership, or the State of Illinois because the ATA has professed to be a Transparent Organization with nothing to hide, except maybe the real numbers ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

There has now been a correction......moderator

 

Most recent issue of Trap and Field had a corrected chart. Excel error confirmed.

 

5 pages had errors that had to be revised. Who is running the joint? Is this what happens when there is at least some outside oversight? And then we hide behind the program we wrote. LOL

 

FYI.....THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS EXCEL PROGRAM ERROR. NOT POSSIBLE!

Computers do not write programs.

 

Listen. The formula at the bottom was not updated for the subtotals someone added. Its as simple as that. the subtotals are removed and the math works. You may now return to your conspiracy theories and being scammed.

 

Hey Lord Maker,

Yeah.......and while we are listening.....that description of what happened is NOT an excel error. Just to keep the record straight.

Sure.....now they work. It all works now that a watchdog group caught it.

So tell us Lord Maker why your pals let that crap get published. Just an accident? Maybe? On purpose? Maybe? Either way it was caught by this group. Otherwise, it does not get corrected.

Tell us now about the 15,000 at the campsite and 15,000 in motels bullshit. Another excel error. Illegal gun giveaway, another excel error? Published information including 100,000 visitors to the WSRC?

Now carry on with your kool aid drinking. We are not all that stupid in my state.