If we had a 30?

3 questions.

If we had a 30 yard line who would be the first to stand on the back square?

Another question....... who can stand there the longest?

The money question.......of all the better shooters, which one would whine the loudest?

 

Harlan
Harlan
I don't know

 

Hundreds,at every large or small shoot there are always shooters on the 27 that get a yd punch. You would never know who the first person was unless ata gave their name.

 

And who was the last person to get a punch to the 30?

 

FG: Thank you for posting a few of the questions I've asked for quite some time!

There's way too many "ifs" to merely state this or that as a solution to further handicap those mastering our current settings. My thoughts concerning this is; long before we began monkeying with actual accommodating rule changes to allow super ammo and lesser settings allowing higher scores, we needed a yardage increase using the same criteria used for the last one in 1955. That was long before the easy crowd took total control of a process that was proven to work.

Those in charge today isn't apt to accept harder cookies when the masses were offered soft cookies via clubs in the beginning violating the standard setting rule of our sport. "IF" our sport was to ever have another max yardage mandated again, a totally different set of parameters should be put in play. We certainly wouldn't want to put any further hardship on all the clubs across the country either by mandating more concrete and expense! Another thing is paramount, never handicap anyone beyond his equipment's ability to break each and every target! No one including Mr. N.W. or Dr. Andrew J. can tell us where that line is for sure.

How to attain that new yardage? As Neil W. says, any change should be approached slowly and testing the water so to speak. Today, we're dealing with more gifted shooters that are shooting a terrific average from our max yardage than one lone shooter responsible for our last increase in 1955?

Keep the "honorary" yardage recognition purposes for scores shot but wouldn't be applied toward the new max yardage alone. ONLY a winning score and ties at the most MAJOR of handicap events with a declared minimum number of shooters could gain the necessary yardage to be advanced toward the new goal of 30 yards. Should those gifted shooters not be able to sustain a certain average, he'd be mandated to take his reduction back toward the current 27 yard line. Yardage increases and reductions mandatory for those shooters ONLY. This is a way to test any shooters ability for distance and averages while testing the best of the best. That my friends would be the real test and not some added money event to entice participants to partake.

Who would be the first? Who would be the best under those parameters and for how long? How many would actually achieve that new max even if awarded 2-1/2 yards for a perfect score from the 27? Would there be further improvements in both guns and ammo/shooters as a result as was the case last time we had an increased yardage mandate? Fodder/food for thought?

HAP

 

I think it would be between Harlan and Ricky on the first two questions. If my memory is correct, Ricky carries a higher cap average than Harlan. Of course Harlan shoots 3 times more registered than Ricky does.

 

Depends where they are shooting at most of the time.

 

No one that shoots the Federal or Winchester Shells, the Beretta's, Krieghoff's etc have come forward to say he or she is the person that can handle the yardage. No one says they are the king. No one says this is their opportunity to separate themselves.

 

Most of you brag that you don't shoot ATA so go ahead and change your trap fields to 30 yards and quit bitchin.

 

That is that type of thing Big Don would say. But with a shorter sentence. Maybe Leonidas just needs a nap.

 

The 30 yard line, the 32 yard line, the 35 yard line, none mean a thing if you keep shorting up the distance you throw the target, Speed kills, there is a world of distance in front of the trap use it. It makes NO sense to move the shooters back and then chase them with shorter targets. Brad

 

Brad, I wholeheartedly agree, that statement has always been true in any shotgun sport! The yardage mandate in 1955 was more drastic than a 3 yard increase would be today. Difference then was the use of inferior shot when compared to todays higher antimony shot. I feel with today's trap shooting mentality being what it is, further change is almost impossible? The only exception may be to an even easier set target which some seem to want.

Target speed is the shooters ENEMY, longer distance is the shotguns ENEMY. We lost the will to further handicap those somewhat mastering the handicap game when club operators began using less angle and speed to attract shooters looking to pad his All-American averages if they would shoot at that particular club. Who in their right mind would shoot a tougher format when other clubs were cheating the standard rule and getting by with doing so? That same mentality and cheating practice carried over to ATA's own Grand American officials setting targets that didn't adhere to our own setting rules? That's shameful at best.

Is anyone really looking out for the integrity of our sport by abiding by our own rules? Our historical records say our leadership hasn't done so good in the last few decades. What will the shooters/delegates accept as far as any further difficulty change goes? Not much it seems according to what most say unless it's an easier target so everyone can break better scores down the road. Kinda like the skeet org. did to their game and practically destroyed that game in the process.

HAP

 

One question for Hap, Brad or both,

What about the shooters who are on the target quick. wouldn't a little practice and they would be just as deadly (score wise) as before? It wouldn't make any difference how far the target would travel because they would break it as close to the house as before.

 

Hap: you said it correctly, The cheating clubs that threw soft angles, and soft target distances, and the ATA officials obliging it.

The actual test Mr. N W wants to spend OUR ATA money on, Is a non needed TEST. Actual target settings to the original specs, including the addl 20 degrees outside of Post 1 & 5 is still a legal target, and distance to 50-52 yards. An ATA mandate implemented immeaditly to those target settings for the 2015 target year, and a severe fine to any club not in compliance, with ATA shooters policing the GUN CLUB target settings,

I suggest a $5,000 fine for any club not adhering to target settings, for 1st offense, and $10,000 for second offense
and loss of all ATA shoots, and ATA membership, and club officers, lifetime suspension, for 3rd offense.

This is what ( GREAT THINGS ARE ACCOMPLISHED ONLY BY THE PERFECTION OF MINOR DETAILS )
No money is needed results will be seen immeaditly, the top dogs will still be top dogs, as the Cream will come to the top.

The ATA went from 44 Grand Slams up to approx. 1982, and to over 450 more since 1983 that in it's self is the REAL STORY.

At least I am not the only one that stands up for Integrity of our Trapshooting Sport.

Mr. N W and his cronies tore the Trapshooting Sport apart and is almost causing it's demise. We have a nice facility in Sparta, it now needs having the above posts implemented in 2015 target year
Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

Obviously they're only referring to distance because it indicates launch speed.

-Gary

 

We do not need to worry about BIG DON making the 30 yd line unless it was a gift1

 

Big Don is on the 27. You aren't.

-Gary

 

I guess only privileged people can call out people by name in several posts that has nothing to do with the subject with out any reprimand !!

 

GW22,

But wouldn't a quick shooter catch on fairly fast and still shoot as good. I would think that all that would do is handicap the normal shooter.

I'm sure you've been to shoots where targets were flying to the 50 yard line (wind or poor setting of targets) and the overall score were down except from the top shooters. So it seems to me all speed is doing is isolating the two groups from each other making the odds better for the top shooters.

 

Speed handicaps everyone but especially the long yardage shooters. Short yardage shooters can afford an extra split second to get on a fast bird; if you do that from the 27, pattern degradation will start costing you targets. I've never seen a slow 27 yard shooter (except for a couple who refused to move forward as their skills faded).

-Gary

 

A 55 yard target would be like shooting from the 30.

 

Sure, why not throw 'em to the 70 and award everyone 2 shots. Oops, we already have Bunker Trap!

 

Try this a little more blunt .... if you crank up the current trap-machines, the targets needs to be tough-enough to take it.

When the target will stand it, those 'light-8' shooters from the fence are going to lose targets. Should they just accept it as part of the handicap game ... sure. Will they ??? ... not for a second.

Every action effects something .... the problems of today are a bunch of patch-work solutions gone wrong.

A simple solution to years of 'changes' sounds great .... until you wake up from the nice dream.

 

User 1
The 2 clubs I attend the most regularly throw 55 yard targets. Dysinger had the targets at the cc going 50 without a problem and we had fewer 27 yarders at the top.

At what point is the breaking point? Never heard that discussed.

 

Those light 8 shooters, lose them now. That's why most from the fence use 1200 or higher. Except I guess Stafford as Pheasantmaster claims, he gets his 96 average from using extra lights. So if Stafford has a 96 average using extra lights than, light 8's should be fine. Not what I think, but a Pheasantmaster claim. This is of course Pheasantmaster from another forum.

Given your example, though it is possible they will lose more targets, it just means they will move up accordingly to the average they obtain. The 27yd line is not a fixture as it appears to be. Just a place to stand on for the game. If your average dictates you move up, you probably should, if you want to win. If you want to just want to hang with your friends, well, that should not be in the decision of the game. The game of Handicap.

Also, I think as close as the ATA targets are to the International targets, the ATA targets can handle a little more than they are now.

I could be wrong.

John

 

I imagine, when people are talking 55yd targets it would be like days of old...... calm wind. I tend to like the MPH setting or fps settings as they tend to give more consistent launch speed, club to club. What is the launch speed of a 55yd target? I am sure the ATA targets can handle that.

 

A faster and wider set target requires even more precise pointing. Some have the ability to correctly point those most of the time but not every time. Under that scenario, even the best of the best will run out of pointing talent long before he runs out of efficient breaking patterns, even with a 2-3/4 dr eq 1-1/8 ounce load. Remember Arnold Reigger's claim to fame? Dominated the handicap game with tougher set targets than we shoot today using a 2-3/4 dr load of soft chilled shot?

Leonidas, if we were shooting a totally different target setting than we use today, it's hard to tell who or which shooter we think of today as some of the best would rise to the new occasion! Why? Because other factors will also come into play and possibly separate more shooters ability to break difficult settings. 1. Quality of eyesight. 2. Reflexes are also different and that factor alone doesn't just belong to the youth shooters. Those two but equally important factors vary among those we consider at the top of the heap today! More difficulty in precise pointing is compounded by instant decisions on faster and wider targets. Hope I've somewhat answered your query?

HAP

 

I don't believe Stafford shot Extra-lites since the early 90's. The late great Frank Little commented at that time he'd take a beating in FL with those slow shells and he did breaking in the mid-80's in the Handicaps!

 

LongShot , Have you been in the MoonShine. LOL

 

Just the Seagrams Dark Honey in the freezer a nip before bedtime.

This would put Mr.N.W. Test to the task w/o spending any money, and put the targets back to where they should have stayed, am I the only one standing alone on my beliefs? If so, So be it, that's my stand, Like Dan Thome stated earlier.
Dr.longshot

 

Brad, as a point of clarification, how much farther did the target go under yesterday's 48-52 yard rule than today's 49-51 yard rule? Don't tell me a yard, because no one that I know of (including Ohio in the 1980's in Vandalia, as Neil pointed out in another post) threw the target to the maximum distance.

 

User 1, using targets that were so hard that they didn't always break when they were hit, have no place in the game of trapshooting. A hit target, within reason, (not a raked target) should result in a broken target.

 

Jo2: Neil did not belong to the ATA until 1982 or 83 and had no idea of how the targets were set, I think todays rule is 48 yards max, And we have a President now that tried to get 44 yard doubles. Don't believe everything Mr. N.W. says, been proven several times.
Dr.longshot

 

Family Guy: If the targets were set to 1970 ATA Rules I doubt very many could make it, That being 44 degree + 20 degrees being a legal target, and being thrown 50-52 yards, even with todays Shells, & Voice Calls, One good way to find out before pouring concrete is Amend the target settings for the 2015 target year immeaditly, no need to hire somebody to design a test like Mr. N.W. wants. A lot cheaper and the perfect test under shooting conditions. THE PERFECT TEST.
DR.LONGSHOT LIFE MEMBER ATA

 

Dr Longshot, rather than thinking, and making yourself look foolish, why don't you look it up? The rule currently, is 49-51 yards. I don't have access to a 1970 rule book, and I stand to be corrected, but in the mid 70's when I started shooting, the rule was 48-52 yards. As to your suggestion that Rob Taylor is the person who advocated 44 yard doubles, the rule is, and has been, for some time 44-46 yard doubles-look it up! He was only a delegate when this rule was implemented.

 

I believe that the time to stiffen the target flight parameters is the way to go, or make a more resilient target compound, or both, plus back the shell payload to 1 OZ- 1200 fps.

 

I would stay away from more resilient targets. They never go over very well with shooters.

 

Jo2, read my posted words again?

You may change averages to wins if that's better suited for selecting All-Americans.

Neil Winston told us how the target setting committee in the 80 were set when his friend was in that group and Neil assisted! Neil also stated from his beginning ATA trap in 1982 that he'd never shot 44 degree angles anywhere! If that isn't validating a rule cheating scenario I can't imagine what would be! Why even have rules if our leadership doesn't follow them either? Especially during our world championships at the Grand American shoots! Yeah, it's shameful in my view of fairness to our sport. I feel that kind of rules out the fact ATA wasn't involved in such change when the rules called for 44 degree angles and 48-52 yard targets be set?

As for Rob Taylors wanting an easier set target, ask his reasoning's as why he made the statement and if he alone wanted that change?

HAP

 

Hap, as to the fairness to our sport is concerned, I suppose that as long as everyone at a particular shoot was shooting 2 hole targets, it is fair for everyone at that shoot, which is all we really need to concern ourselves about. The fact that Neil declared that he had shot no 44 degree targets (I have never read where he made that declaration, but if you say so) simply proves how wide spread the use of 2 hole targets was and when the ATA passed the 2 hole rule, it was simply legitimizing the long term practice.

Rob Taylor simply made a suggestion that a softer target may enhance the scores of the average shooter, (he claimed that if someone were to go home with a good score on his card, he would feel better about his shooting, as I recall), but his suggestion was defeated, case closed, forget about it.

 

Jo2, it's hard for me to justify cheating our rule settings just because some do and some don't. You may choose to close your thoughts on his view on how to legislate better scores from the average joe but I certainly can't disregard it as easy as some do.

My thoughts on shooting the same targets parallel yours, everyone shoots the same settings. Mine varies to where I believe in further handicapping those believed to have somewhat mastered out handicap game. Like the leadership of our sports history did. Certainly not make it easier for that group?

Yes, Neil wrote that same thing again recently but it doesn't make it right.

HAP

 

One mistake that a lot of target setters made was the 50yd. line was the top of the field stake. Not the bottom where it entered the ground. If the stake was 2ft. high and the next one was 5ft. high they did not set them at the top of the stakes. The stakes were supposed to be set at the same level as the concrete pads we stand on to shoot. Roger C.

 

I was on the 27, earned no gifts for many years, On hold there for 6 years because of wins, do a little research GW22 I would guess from 1972 through where I took the yardage reductions offered. I was a senior vet still on the 27, then How about You? Shoot ATA does not show yardage changes when you get a reduction or an increase, it happened so many times, at least some 30 years on the 27 total, I took the reductions but went right back.
Dr.longshot

 

Hap do you remember the club that has 30 yard walks where we shoot over a pond from atop the hill off route 13 by the Golf Course, I have been shooting 30 yard buddies there for years, before Management quit running it, I forgot completely about it. It is owned by the 4H group I think, it is north of New Lexington and south of Thornville, on the east side of Route 13 by a mile, I cannot remember the name of the Gun Club other than New Lex. We never had any problems breaking targets w/1200fps shells there in 1988.
Dr.longshot

 

Yep, my clubs grounds out in front of the houses had a slight down grade to it. It didn't look like much until you stood to the side of the line of 5 traps, then you could really see the difference in elevation.

They shot the field with the transit. We had the stakes in the ground at the 50. We marked them with tape to show the 50 yard distance LEVEL with the trap. Started with the base of the machine and figured the inches back to right under where the target would be sitting on the arm. 50 yards from where the target started.

Some tape marks might be only 12" off the ground. When you got to trap 3 that mark might be 28" off the ground and trap 5 could be 40" off the ground, or more. The target would hit or come damn close to hitting that tape mark. SAME level as the trap at 50 yards.

Flyersarebest, But I'm Still a Trap Shooter.

 

THE POINT IS, despite all your bluster and schoolgirl drama about mega yardage and making the game harder, you took the reductions and you're a 22 yard shooter of those "easy, slow" targets you constantly cry about. You'd think with those legal 1290FPS shells and shamelessly narrow targets you would at least be on the 23, LOL. Maybe you should start calling yourself Dr. Mediumshot.

As for me, I stink. Just like you. Except I know it.

-Gary

 

My opinion on this, "if we had a 30 yard line", isn't the same as the last time yardage our was increased. We shouldn't put clubs in a financial bind or neglect those that just don't have room for more yardage either. Our membership numbers decline say we're losing way too many of those clubs already! Those kinds of clubs fed ATA membership roles for years and we should tread lightly there with any drastic rule changes.

If, we're ever to have a yardage increase again, to such a max yardage, it must not be fashioned in the same way as our last increase was. Leave our current 27 and below shooters alone, no mandatory yardage reductions at all as it now stands for all. To earn the right to stand on the new max should be earned with wins and ties only for winning that honor toward the new max yardage. No cheap punches regardless of score or number of shooters! Those wins should only come from scores winning at our most major of shoots spelled out as those at our Grand American events, ATA zone when numbers of shooters meet a certain number in handicaps, ATA Satellite Grand's having the required numbers and the largest of state shoot handicap winners. BTW, a 30 yard shooter can still shoot with his 27 yard buddies if the spread is correct!

For that gifted group of shooters alone, set a standard required average that must be maintained. If not, that shooter should be mandated to take his reduction at the current rate the rest of us live by. Under such mandates how many clubs would actually add a more comfortable standing place for those so gifted? Not very many but would give new meaning to our most gifted elite shooters in our sport. That new max certainly wouldn't get as clogged with shooters as our 27 has and wouldn't affect anyone else in the process! A change everyone could live with.

HAP

 

Hap,
One of the reasons we are loosing shooters is because we are loosing clubs//// The small feeder clubs do not attract the shooters they did in the past. The main reason is I think the top shooters are all out chasing AA points and never show up at the small local clubs. Joe average shooter likes to rub shoulders with the top shooters in their local area. He knows he can not beat him but enjoys trying.
I brought this subject up with some of the ATA people but never heard if they even discussed it at a meeting. Roger

 

The reason the "big dogs" are no longer present at the small clubs is they're busy chasing All-American points at the big ones. The feeder clubs are taking it on the chin because of the proliferation of Satellite Grands and multiple shoots at the larger facilities. Diminishing returns holding registered shoots at small clubs simply means many are dropping those programs altogether!

 

I made one of my suggestions above for further handicapping the gifted ones in our sport. Roger and Andy have been in the sport a very long time and can see the effects that changing the game has led to. Difficult as it may be, we can never give up hope our sport continues having the ability to capture more membership as it did us. It seems to me too many take a very personal view when discussing possibilities for bettering our stagnant sport.

I see bickering instead of more suggestions that may or may not help unless it's out there for everyone to discuss and evaluate? Seems a lot are taking sides so to speak? There's the everything is just right crowd. Also another bunch says, my hero says this and I agree with his POV without thought crowd. How can our sport be improved in your opinion? All of which goes directly to your state delegates if the ideas are right for our sport. Right for the sport instead of egos hoping to match scores with the best of the best in shooting averages and higher scores! That will never happen regardless of how easy or tough our game is! It's never been that way either.

HAP