No Money For Shooting-I Still Don't Believe It

Some people continue to complain Trapshooting is in the tank because of limited disposable income. That may be true for some but you should tell that to the individual who just left with Elmer Keith's personal pre-Model 29 he paid just under $20,000 at auction. Yup, he's our age and retired!

 

Sure, there are always outliers. One neighbor just bought a Porsche, the other's house just went into foreclosure. Not sure either really means a thing.

That said, it is hard to argue that we were, and maybe still are, in a national recession that has hit the American middle class disproportionately hard.

 

Ever take a stroll thru your local Casino?

Flyersarebest

 

Dawg

500 shooters showed up at strausstown Pa last week shooting for some ham. No it wasn't a grand. Just bigger.

Evidently they did not get the message.

 

This year we had our largest first of the season shoot at Portland Gun Club. Guess they didn't get the message either.

 

Krieghoff continues to pop out Sporting Clays models by the hundreds but ATA trap is in decline for lack of disposable income. Bah, humbug!

 

I do not buy it one bit. It is a decision. Last year on that other site I posted the results of participation trending over 30 years of the Grand, the National Skeet shoot and the National Sporting clays. When you over lay all 3 you clearly see Sporing clays has seen an INCREASE...Skeet dropped came back up a little but is pretty dammm level for most part (holding its own) than trap....Steady decline and getting sharper.

Givin these facts are all drawn from the USA and its economy and all 3 sports delt with poor economy and you see different results how can you still say?........"trap is declining because of the economy" That is freaking retarded!!

 

Himark,

Your graph misses the mark and your remarks fall short of accuracy. The last year of the grand was boycotted heavily by Ohioans. That was 2005. Some might wonder why you did not bring that up.

Also in 2004 it was rumored that the ATA was going to move the grand venue but it had not announced it. 2004 boycotted by Ohioans as well. Others from the heartland of trapshooting had their fill of ATA politics--long before 2005.

The end of the grand as a name describing a grand shoot had ended. That was not in 2005 but shortly before 2004.

 

Preliminary big shoot at the Cardinal Classic has 30k in prizes. Someone thinks many have monies.

 

The last few years I have read many a kool aid drinker saying gas prices are too high. Lead is too high. No powder.

So the trap fields should be full now.

 

The decline of ATA trapshooting is due in my opinion to three basic problems and not necessarily in this order
1. the introduction of ATA points for All-Star positions
2. the loss of money played in the events
3. local area economy
There could be more but it would depend on your point of view.

 

Please explain why ATA AA points cause a loss in shooters? If anything they would cause those shooters to shoot more. I do know that some shooters have avoided certain shoots because the shoot chose not to award points for whatever reason, is this your cause to blame?

Lefty

 

I can think of many. Today the wind was gusting at 35 mph in NEO. The club I was helping regularly has AA shooters. Not today. Too much wind. Would not want to hurt the average.

The more all star teams the fewer that will shoot in more challenging conditions.

Just one example.

 

Average has nothing to do with All American. Making the state team, most states, state zone team, some states are based on average. You have the chance to bring mega shooters back. Simply convince the state directors to do away with all state, zone or any teams based upon average.

I have known many AA and high average shooters and they never let a little weather bother them. Your leader Mr. Dysinger always said "the wind is my friend" so maybe your missing shooters had another reason.

Lefty

 

Lose the AA average and you are off the program. I do not know of a whole lot of all americans with A averages. Our state teams are based on averages. I was not aware of any states that have all star teams with B shooters.

Get back to shooting for something other than a piece of paper and maybe we can revive a little interest in registered shooting. The point system is nothing more than a way to get shooters to go to a shoot they would rather not attend.

Fortunately for the blue collar shooters in OH, PA and NY, the CC and the PA state shoot have a different philosophy.

If you need the points you make the trip. The trip is too expensive for the blue collar shooter in the big shooting states. The end result is that he doesn't register targets to go to the big shoot.

If not for the points Sparta would fall on its face. Other venues would as well.

We have an ex ATA president that was quoted as believing ATA points are the reason most shoot registered targets. As the years go by that will be all that is left.

 

All-Americans with "A" averages? Well, one was classified "D" at the Southern Grand and promptly broke the 100 Singles!

 

Ok, So I offer evidence and you offer opinion. So if your theory holds "it was boycotted hevaily by Ohioans in 2005 and rumored in 04" than how do you explain the decline in 03? or the FACT the trend is shown to you prior than the boycott.

Face it the cheese has moved and the ATA has finally made a step in the right direction by TRYING to partner with the SCTP. It is a trivial partnership but none the less a step in the right direction. The ATA needs to quit trying to pry the $ out of all the old farts and look to the future shooters.

I am sick to death of hearing how much better it WAS and how much harder it WAS and how making it EASIER has ruined the ATA. What has ruined it is people that talk negative, boycott events and never move on. Read the trends they do no lie.

Now go out promote, mentor and talk positive about the new movement even though you may not agree.

 

The 100th Grand was a cluster .... the next year they scared people off by making the 'requirements' much higher. After the first couple of days of a drastic drop in attendance they changed it ... and by then it was too late. The East banks were empty most days. They started letting people join the ATA and shoot with no penalty the same day. It was just another ill-thought-out action by the ATA that lasted for the remaining years in Vandalia.

Numbers show 'what' happened .... people that were there can tell you 'why' ....

"Now go out promote, mentor and talk positive about the new movement even though you may not agree." .... talk people into something I do not "agree" with is the most asinine thing anyone can do .....

 

Hence proving my and the OP point. It is NOT the economy it is the mentality of our current shooters^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

I have invested time, money, and miles into my attitude ... and not just sit in cyber-land with rose-colored glasses looking at charts, graphs, and numbers I do not understand.

If you want me to "promote, mentor and talk positive about the new movement" .... the "new movement" needs some changes.

At least a trip to Disney you know it is fantasy-land ..... The ATA is trying to sell their fantasy as something real.

D-class shooters winning with perfect scores most of the time is fantasy ..... 18-yard shooters going 150X150 in the GAH is fantasy ..... and on, and on, and on .....

So ..... the "new movement" is selling tickets to one fantasy-land, when the money is better spent at the other.

Anyone is free to jump-in with both feet and waste their money .... but the day will never come that I "promote, mentor and talk positive" them into it.

 

While it is true some things need cleaning up and some changes should be made by those in charge but will it ever happen. It does appear that those in charge are satisified with the present quo and if that is the case until someone is elected with enough foresight to see the need for positive change not just change for change sake we will have to be satisified with what we have at the present time if we shoot ATA.

 

Andy, rather than trying to be coy and getting everyone to guess who this shooter is, why don't you give us the name of this individual, who was misclassified, in your opinion, so we can check their scores and draw our own conclusion? I seriously doubt that, if he was misclassified, it was a systemic fault of the ATA, but rather a mistake made by a volunteer who was at the classification table.

 

I'll make it easy fo

I'll make it easy for you to draw your own conclusions. Simply look up the class and category winners on Monday (the first day of the Southern Grand). That's your homework assignment in Statistics 101. Who cares who's fault it was (volunteer or not)? The end result is an ATA All-American classified "D" with a 100 in Singles. I suppose you approve of negating the "known ability" rule!

Oh all right, the individual was moved up to class "C" for the next event and then "B" after breaking 99 on Tuesday!

 

Andy, the shooter (TD, I assume) had an average of 89 on 800 targets when they approached the handicap desk at the Southern Grand. Under the 6 Class system of classification, "D" Class includes all scores under 90, so by the rule book, this shooter was properly classified. I think that 800 targets is enough to establish an average for classification.

Let's put the shoe on the other foot for a second, and say that this shooter had an average last year of 89, on 5000 targets, and when they were handicapped, their average was 95 on 800 targets this year. Would it be appropriate to place them in any other class than "A" based on their current average. I suppose, based on known ability, they could be placed in "D" class-it is obvious that they were shooting way over their head, after all.

"Known ability," is a BS way to place a shooter in a Class that they, in most cases, will not be competitive in. My question is-when should "known ability" be used? In this case, I don't know?

Another case where "known ability" seems to be used, is when someone has an average at the top of their current classification. An example of that would be someone with an average of 97.9 in singles and they are placed in "AAA" class. They are then competing with people who, don't just have an average a bird to a bird and a half higher, but miss only a quarter of the birds that the 97.9 shooter does. Other than the 97.9 shooter being able to walk around with his chest sticking out, because he is in "AAA" Class, he has been virtually eliminated from winning anything in the event because of his over classification. The same thing happens in the lower classes, to a somewhat lesser extent, when someone is over classified because of "classification creep," as I call it. So, no, I am not a big believer in the "known ability" rule, when it comes to classification.

 

Sure, I can shoot my field grade 87o for 800 targets in Jan. and Feb. while averaging a cool 85%. Who cares if I shot a AA or A class average and made an All-American team last year it's what happens at the Southern Grand in March that counts. That's where known ability and more professional classifying missed that one. It's also just as important for a shooter to inform the classifier they feel they were improperly classified. Where's my darn rulebook on that one?

Heck, if I came from some clubs in PA I could simply write down those scores and never shoot those targets. A small fee and I saved both shells and getting my fingers cold. Please don't tell me it's never been done!

 

Andy, why is it that nothing is, "as it appears," with you? Did this person shoot a field grade 870 for their first 800 targets this year? I doubt it. I can assure you that everyone who shoots a poor score, relative to their past scores, is not a cheater.

As an aside, regardless of the classification of this individual, they chose to shoot as a special category and the two trophies they won were both special category trophies. A more valuable tool, that was used in this case, was the advancement of class winners at the shoot. As a result of that class advancement, they would not have won any trophies, when they fell back to class, in subsequent events. I don't think that there is a conspiracy here.

 

On second thought, let's take the captain of a NY State team, member of an ATA All-American team with a nearly 90% Handicap average from the 27 yd. line over 4,300 targets and hand them a "D" Singles classification at the Southern Grand.

Then, sit here and tell all of us how properly said individual was classified in "D" Singles at one of the most prestigious tournaments sanctioned by the ATA. I think it's about time someone should admit his classification skills were suspect or he should have been questioned by the shooter for the abnormally low classification!

Gosh, I wonder if Nora Ross or Deb Ohye might be offered such a gift if they slumped a bit below their AAA past averages. Somehow I doubt it nor would they accept the classifiers determination!

 

The situation is clearly described in the current rulebook. Anyone in doubt should read page 20, paragraph 5, section b. The shooter was mis-classified!

 

UH-OH Jo2-- you've been slammed!! Have you ever been in a classifying position??? Rule book should be required reading for all, classifiers, shooters, delegates, etc!!!

 

Dawg--calcuttas are popping up big time in PA, NY, and IN. They are not ATA events. This is big money being missed by the ATA.

If it is true that there is limited monies available then the ATA had better correct things quickly. Trapshoots are substitutable. My favorite shoots are at the CC. This could even hurt them.

As the ATA teaches the average blue collar shooter that they can find great shoots closer to home Sparta will become much less affordable.

 

Andy, the person that I am defending is not the shooter, but the person who was doing the classification at the event. The fact that the shooter was a member of both the NY State and All American trap teams was probably not known by the individual who classified this person. What they saw was an average of 89 and classified according to that average. It was not meant to be a "gift." Should the shooter have protested the low classification? Probably, I think most would.

As far as the description in the rule book is concerned, "5. For better classification of shooters it is SUGGESTED that the following method be used," how would you compare suggested to must? Unless the two words are interchangeable, it is not so clear after all. To me suggest means that a person may use that method to classify, but on the other hand they don't have to.

 

Now Jo2, we all know that plenty of previous data was available to the classifier for a much better job at classifying. I don't know of many 27 yd. shooters with thousands of targets fired and a fairly high average that are classified "D" Singles-do you-or try naming even one?

If the method of SUGGESTED classifying as stated in the official rulebook was employed, do you really think a "D" classification would still be appropriate?

 

I would be embarrassed to be an all-American classified in d class. Doesn't give much credit to the prestige of being an all-American. I guess if you shoot enough targets and get enough points, the broken clock will still be right two times a day.

 

Jo2: How can a classifier at a major satellite Grand not know who the all-americans are? So some Joe Schmo from across the street is allowed to classify? Where are the officers and delegates that are paid to attend these shoots??

 

J02, The computer with ATA shooter target history would/should have been available to the classifier along with the shooters current card. The average history in my opinion would have been hard to miss for the classifier. It appears that something happened here but again I wasn't there and I don't know.

 

Vienna, OH----Over 20 squads before I left. Just a weekly Wednesday morning shoot. Only 4 shooters there that have shot registered birds in the last 4 years.

They missed the memo.

 

The state of our sport is a reflection of our delegates and their inability to fix the handicap system. Not the economy.