Lets talk changes to handicap and shootoff rules (wobble & presentation)

Shootoffs will be wobble trap.


As for handicap short yardage will shoot regular trap with the exception that birds thrown will be from a 3 hole setup. Faster birds with wider angles. Big fun.

Mid yardage will shoot wobble trap. Really big fun.

Long yardage will shoot double wobble.

 

Are you really a Lady Trapshooter? To me it sounds like a male shooter with good ideas, or a Lady with a set of-.

Your ideas are not out of the realm of Trapshooting Shootoffs.

I think the program should follow the shootoff criteria.

GB DLS

 

Well after you try it a couple of times please at your shoots please report back and let us know how the shooters responded to the format.

I shot off for a handicap trophy with a old boy on the weekend who doesn't own a twin pipe.
I think your double wobble might have given me an unfair advantage.

Had some great shoot offs over the years as targets were sped up and widened.
Nothing stops the clubs from doing this.

 

So if I'm female my ideas are not good?


You see Doc I was the runt of the litter at 6ft tall. First born with 4 brothers. I'm a mixture of Castilian Kingdom of Spain, Cuban, Kentucky Appalachian Mountain Gal, 33 year Far West Texas Desert Dweller and 13 years in the US Army.


As far as shooting handicap in Trap goes it should be a handicap. It shouldn't be easy.

 

Change must come about with recommendations that MAY be accepted and voted on by the BOD. Completely changing all three games we play certainly wouldn't be acceptable to the masses today. Even though we do need to make our game of handicap more of a challenge to change others perception our game has gotten in the last 20 or so years. What's reasonable? Certainly not completely changing the game of trap as it has always been, historically speaking!

HAP

 

IMO,

Change in the games has to come at the local club level. If whatever innovation is a good innovation, it catches on and spreads across the country at the grass roots level. Then the Directors are familiar with the innovation and vote to accept the change. That is the only way it can work.


Another thing that make change happen is competition. MAYBE if ATA is not being responsive to the needs of the shooters, then a new organization or organizations need to form, but at regional levels, such as Ohio-Pennsylvania Trap Association, (OHPATA) Eastern Seaboard Trap Association, (ESTA) Gulf States Trap Association (GSTA) would either cause the ATA to change or fail.

PITA is now across the Western States region and actually created two associations Western shooters can belong to and shoot more often and wouldn't you know it, the games and rules for both organizations are darn near identical.

One of the things ATA messed up on was not embracing Sporting Clays as a new game and not creating a division or adopting it into the ATA fold.

 

Lady, if you make the entire event Wobble, you won't need a shootoff.

 

Just this morning, you were arguing against democracy, now you're you're on its side.

 

New rule. All clubs must have a wobble trap available for shootoffs. Damn the expense while we can't even afford some rubber mats or chalk lines for yardage beyond the 27. Whatever some of you people are smoking I want some!

 

When I say change comes at the local level, that means by popular referendum, though the State Delegate casting his vote as a BOD member. That is the basis to accept change in unison, because people know in advance what the change is because they have participated in it and it is not sprung on them unawares.

I still agree the BOD are our representation needed to make the changes as mentioned. For example to abide by Lady T's suggestion would require clubs to have wobble traps that might not have time, changing trap settings will require more time, just the thing people don't like, making the shoot take longer. We have to make sure changes are viable and workable and not make changes just because someone thought it sounded good. So in order for Lady T's suggestion to work, it needs to be tried before being putting it into effect.

In regards to my objection to Democracy in ATA representation, what was talked about in DLS' thread was flooding the BOD with like minded people from more populous states to overcome any opposition of changes from less populous states. If one State delegate was to represent 500 shooters, then a State like Ohio would end up with 4 delegates where as a State like Wyoming would have one. He wants to prevent a future move of ATA again if it decided to move to a State even further than where it was moved from before. I see no conflict in my two posts.

 

You're wrong on both counts, AZCO. It's the job of the leadership to lead. If the leaders tell the members that the game has to be toughened up to save the sport, that's leadership. As to who should lead, that's for the majority to say. If you don't like a leader's direction, vote him out. I'm not sure why there should be delegates voted in with respect to state boundaries, but it is to be in such a fashion, then it's long proven that the states with the most participants should have the greatest voice.

If state boundaries were eliminated and the members directly elected all delegates, the greatest number of participants would elect delegates of their choosing.

 

Smoking 357

What the hell you talking about? We don't elect people to bully us around, we elect them to REPRESENT US.

That is what delegates do. If you want leaders, form an organization that has privates, sergeants, captains, colonels and generals.

If we have poor "leadership" through our delegates, the blame starts with the people who voted for them.

 

LadyT, you wrote

"So if I'm female my ideas are not good?"

No, your ideas are not good in respects not at all related to your sex. I don't know why you would ask such a question, since trapshooting is as "gender neutral" an any game I can think of. Sure there are MSP's here (and on the trapline as well I suppose, that I can't recall meeting any,) but this is an "open" forum and in that (single) respect, I think posters here are models of decorum. No, if people here don't like your ideas it's simply because they don't like them, and to accuse your opponents of sexism, rather than defending them (the ideas), is just a cheap, unjustified shot against people who have done you no sexist harm.

Your suggestions are fine for "games" or other, non-registered trap events. But for registered, where people spend endless time and money to compete on an equal footing with other dead-serious shotgunners, the addition of chance elements such as "wobble," where one shooter may get mostly easy birds, another mostly very difficult, adds far too much "other than skill" elements to the outcome. The point of registered shooting is to determine the best shooter, not the luckiest. If you want to determine the latter, draw cards, roll dice. You can save the cost of ammo. But you will not determine the best shooter. And if that's not your goal, why do it at all?

N1H1

 

I know when we bought our Pat Traps the wobble option was quite a bit more money. Not all clubs have wobble traps.

 

Poor Neil. Trap, now, is random along the y-axis. If you've shot Trap long enough, you'll have seen five hard rights from Station 5, while others on the line saw creampuffs. Wobble is no more random than ATA along the y-axis, so you have no valid objection to the vagaries and inequalities of random targets. Your objection to Wobble being random along the x-axis, as well, is thus hollow and dismissible.

What a duplicitous argument. You're actually attempting to claim that a more challenging round favors luck, not skill. How utterly hollow.

Just what are ATA shooters afraid of?

 

Actually, s357, it's the x-axis, not the y-axis. And the rest is as nonsensical as that.

If LadyT wants to shoot against others who want that sort of thing, I say have at it.

N1H1

 

Oops, when LadyT talked about wider angles, I assumed she was advocating "full" wobble trap, added width and variable height. I see that is not necessarily true though that may be what "double-wobble" is; I do not know the term. If it was an error, I regret it.
N1H1

 

Don't run away. Stand and fight. I completely destroyed the silly point you were flailingly trying to make by showing your false objection to random targets when you only shoot random targets.

I will publicly call you out on your unwillingness to defend your own argument.

Tough arguments. Tough targets. I see you don't care for either.

 

Let's just agree that she wants to up the target difficulty to determine winners.

Why do you object to that?

 

There used to be a huge, super-tough (mechanically) Western "International" trap which threw wide, variable-height targets. Both the Minneapolis and Metro Gun Clubs built the specialized houses appropriate to the sport they offered. Both houses are now empty; the wonderful machines broken up for aluminum scrap.

The point is, s357, is that you need to throw events which people want to shoot. People did not want to shoot what I take to be "double wobble." The houses sat unused for years!

All ATA rules have (at least) two aspects, the mechanic and the political. Any proposed rulechange has to address them both: 1. How the rule is supposed to work and 2. How shooters will accept it. A rule which does not address the second question may last no more than a year, as did the 3-hole rule in the 1995/96 era or the target-year change more recently.

As a respected friend and Trapshooting Hall of Famer, has told me many times, "No one has to shoot trap." If you make rules they don't like, most won't try to set things straight, they will just do something else with their time, their money, their vacations. Once a 20-year participant in his or her State Shoot decides to give it a pass this year under these new rules, it's over as far as that membership, that participant is concerned. That, (and not the rule itself,) is what's wrong with 1200 fps shell rules, 3-hole rules, double-wobble shoot-off rules, and most of the rest I read about here. It's not whether Ohio wants it, or even whether it's a good idea; the determining factor has to be whether the shooting members of the ATA will support it. If they won't, none of the rest makes any difference.

OK, face it, LadyT's idea, appearing only here, has not a snowball's chance in hell of ever being adopted; we must agree on at least that. The job of anyone even faintly interested in getting that done is not typing here which is just a total waste of time no matter what the topic; it's garnering support for the idea.

How would you like to unmask and become a spokesperson for the idea? Or does "stand and fight" only apply to others?

N1H1

 

First off what is a MSP.

Second. The good Dr. bifurcated his response along Gender lines which frankly was a bit offensive and I suggest N1H1 that you reread the post and stay out of a conservation that you were not invited to. The conservation if any is between the good doctor and myself and you are butting in.

Third. You have people complaining about handicap and when someone offers a suggestion it's shot down. No one wants to extend out to 30 yards. No one wants to change anything. Yet you have a post wanting to throw everyone out of office so they can implement what they think is right. Now my suggestions were thinking outside of the box which the ATA better start doing if it expects to remain a viable operation 5 to 10 years from now given the declining numbers. The ATA is dying on the vine and you know this just as everyone else does. You cannot turn a blind eye to the numbers. They are cratering. The future if any is bleak. The ATA has to pump new life into the game otherwise just close up shop.

Fourth: As far as suggestions go at least I'm making them and not going around fighting to keep things the same. After all keeping things the same has worked out how well over the past 10 years or so?

Fifth. You talk chance. I doubt there is a person here who hasn't wondered why someone was getting nothing but straight away targets and the rest seem to be magnets for hard lefts and rights. All chance. So to degrade the other versions of trap and use chance as the reason is a cop out.

 

1. Male Sexist Pig.

2. If you respond "along gender lines," why can't Longshot?

2a. Who are you to require that I stay out of any thread on a site that purports to be "open?"

3. Some suggestions are good. This one is not, in my opinion. If you imagine people are not shooting because handicap shoot-offs, which very, very few ever get to anyway, are not 3-hole, wobble, or "double-wobble," I'd like to hear why you think so, or even more to the point, what's your evidence?

3a. At "real" trapshoots, few if any ATA members complain to me about handicap. Americantrapshooter.com, you must realize by now, has little or nothing to do with registered trapshooting, and to generalize from what you read here is unjustified. Go to some trapshoots. Talk to some shooters. If you find support for your views, run for office. Get it done. That's what I did. It is a lifetime commitment and well worth the effort, believe me.

4. Some things are the same because most shooters are pretty-much satisfied with them being the same. They - nor the Delegates who run the ATA - have an obligation to or agree with or even listen to your suggestions; you have to convince them that your ideas are better than what now pertains. This takes work. Or were you only typing? If so, why do you think we must listen? Start to really work; I'll listen.

5. What you are (apparently) suggesting is what was once even at the Grand and called, then, "International." It is long, long dead and it you had ever shot it, you would know why. Every competitor wants about the came challenge as those he or she is opposing. Add vertical variation and greater horizontal range and the challenge of some is going to be a lot tougher than for others. Sure, next trap, even next shot, that may reverse, but it will seldom "even out."

While ATA "international" is a morbid duck and shows all indications of staying that way, Olympic Trap has addressed "chance" by eliminating it in every way it possibly can, and has, as a result, ended up with the most amazing set of rules you will ever run across. But, realistically, what's the relative participation in the US for USA Shooting and ATA? Shooters really do vote with their feet (and wallets) and where do you think the real action is?

N1H1

 

Correcting a typo above - am I the only one who gets only 4 minutes to do so?

"Neither they (shooters in general or participants here ), nor the Delegates who run the ATA, have any obligation to or agree with or even listen to your suggestions; you have to convince them that your ideas are better than what now pertains.

 

That's not quite the most accurate answer.

What you should be saying is that Trap needs to throw targets that are for the good of the sport.

The organization needs to lead.

Stop sanctioning and recording current regulation ATA targets. Make regulation tougher targets. Take off the training wheels. Whatever regulation targets are will be the ones that are shot. This is where leadership comes in. If you have a group of participants who are risk averse, you have to put the spurs to them, or they'll kill the long-term health of the sport. Sport needs to have a huge gap between the accomplishments of the occasional and the champion.

In the current organization that only has 50,000 paying members and may not exist in a few years and may be facing competition from a new organization? Figure it out.

"Spokesperson?" I'm interested in running the whole show. The organization is in deep trouble. You need to hire a turnaround guy who will probably fire you and not listen to a thing you have to say. You need to do this and walk away for the good of the sport. If you don't hire that guy, you'll eventually be hiring a guy with skills in liquidation and receivership. This guy won't listen to you, either.

 

"Spokesperson?" I'm interested in running the whole show." What is this, a contest to top Longshot as the craziest poster here? Face it, the field is over-crowded with talented contenders now and you have a big job ahead of you.

N1H1

 

Hang on .... did I read that right ????? Did N1H1 'defend' "Longshot" ??????

"2. If you respond "along gender lines," why can't Longshot?" ......

 

In looking at folks such as you, I don't see where there's much talent at all in the field. much less crowding it. Your involvement with the ATA corresponds with a period of staggering decline.

If the ATA politely asked, I would run the organization as a favor, as a gesture to the sport, but I would need absolute independence, especially from folks such as yourself.

Further, don't pick on Longshot. Your disapproval of the passion of one of the Trap's most devoted customers and participants shows just what a disaster you are.

If we add skill level to the discussion, he can clean your clock.

 

Your right smoking 357, I feel ashamed.


Hey while I am thinking about it, I will not be attending the Grand this year as I have some unexpected tranportation issues come up. Can you take a picture of the space dedicated to DLS in the new HOF with all his accomplishments in it and post that picture for us?

Thanks in advance.

 

N1H1: I suggest you go to the top and see who made the first post. That was me. Now look at the second post which is the Dr's. and you will see where he posted along gender lines. I did not bring Gender into the discussion, the Dr. did. Learn how to read man.


N1H1 said: "3a. At "real" trapshoots, few if any ATA members complain to me about handicap. Americantrapshooter.com, you must realize by now, has little or nothing to do with registered trapshooting, "

So why are you here?




N1H1 said: 4. Some things are the same because most shooters are pretty-much satisfied with them being the same. They - nor the Delegates who run the ATA - have an obligation to or agree with or even listen to your suggestions


And there you have it. The reason ATA has lost 70% of its membership and continues to lose members. Wake up N1H1. Your thinking is exactly why the ATA is on life support. It's why by 2020 ATA will cease to exist.

 

Bears repeating.

And there you have it. The reason ATA has lost 70% of its membership and continues to lose members. Wake up N1H1. Your thinking is exactly why the ATA is on life support. It's why by 2020 ATA will cease to exist.

And there you have it. The reason ATA has lost 70% of its membership and continues to lose members. Wake up N1H1. Your thinking is exactly why the ATA is on life support. It's why by 2020 ATA will cease to exist.

And there you have it. The reason ATA has lost 70% of its membership and continues to lose members. Wake up N1H1. Your thinking is exactly why the ATA is on life support. It's why by 2020 ATA will cease to exist.

 

What total bunch of nonsense,

Lady T, if you find ATA registered trapshooting and the people who participate in it, such a losing proposition, why don't you do yourself a really big favor and give it up now. Take up skeet, sporting clays, international trap, golf, quilt making or something else. Maybe the participants of those sports will appreciate your ignorance more than we do.

Don't concern yourself of stay involved with what you consider a lost cause. You have a lot of nerve who as a newbie, shooting trap for not even a year, claim to know more about it's "problems" the the combined experience of 28,000 plus ATA members, many of which have decades of shooting under their belt. Your arrogant all knowing attitude is unwelcome and not needed in our sport. The problems you see, exist only in your mind. Do all of us a favor and do not renew your membership next year.

 

Same goes for any of your followers and like thinkers too.

 

Az

What about the other 2/3 of our sport that have left recently? Those that have shot more than me, seen more corruption than most, and grew tired of the bs.

Not than I am siding in the above tiff but how many targets do you have to break before you understand that $2.1 million is a lot to pay for a building you do not own? Do you have to be an All American to understand that moving our big shoot away from the trapshooters might not have been smart.

What group of trapshooters thought a move to an anti-gun state would help membership grow?

What rocket scientist thought the settings for targets not less than a straight away from 1 and 5 was too complicated to enforce?

How many registered birds do you have to shoot to realize taking the sport out may have chased sportsman away?

I am talking about the combined thinking of 75,000 shooters that said adios. Not the few still remaining.

 

Whoa, buddy. I like Lady T. Don't call her ignorant when she obviously knows more about how things ought to be done than you. You sure you want to be testing these waters?

 

LadyT, I repeat my question, which was not "Does Longshot have a tin ear when dealing with everyone?" but rather, "2. If you respond "along gender lines," why can't Longshot?"

I take it you base your defense for doing it three times now is no more than a schoolyard "He started it." I suggest you simply grow up. This is the rough & tumble internet and people who find things "a bit offensive" have choices. A realistic one is to realize that no one cares if they are "a bit offended" or not (this is a common response to people with a chip on their shoulders as big as ours) and get on with it by getting over it. There are others. of course. You are free to choose any that appeal to you. As is Longshot. As am I.

"So why are you here?"

I am here for the fun of it. And to inject a bit of inconvenient fact into what is otherwise pretty-much an informational desert. But really, when it comes down to it, mostly for fun. To counter some BS. To marvel at first-year shooters who lecture me on the operation of the ATA. And twist some tails on the way; after all, "They start it!" And I also think I have to be here to open the eyes of some poor non-registered trapshooters mired in "games" and worse who might wander in here as a result of a misleading Google search and think ATA shooting is something to avoid rather than the rewarding lifetime sport it really is. "Fair and Balanced" is my motto. And I bring balance.

Along the lines of "Expertise" I wonder where the numbers you quote came from. I can't do it in red, but here's what got my attention:

"ATA has lost 70% of its membership"

And I pose these questions.

1. In what time frame?

2. Where did you get your information and how do we check it?

And I hate to repeat myself, but on what evidence do you link declining shooter participation with "people are not shooting because handicap shoot-offs, which very, very few ever get to anyway, are not 3-hole, wobble, or "double-wobble?" Specifically. And how, specifically, will your suggestion "turn things around?" Since you seem to be promoting increased difficulty, and again specifically, what happened to shooter participation in the years 1995 and 1996 when wider (more difficult) targets were mandated? A graph would help us understand your point, as it so often does mine. After all, you must understand that some changes are worse than inaction; if changes are to be made, they have to be the right ones, not the wrong ones, and as historybuff so often shows us, a valuable pointer forward can often be discovered by looking back.

If you pay no attention to anything else I've written, you should take to heart my experience that rule-changes are not just shooting-based, they are equally political. Changes which our present membership will not support can be a drastic mistake; a lost member can find any number of other fun things to do on his or her weekends and the ATA cannot make anyone shoot trap, no matter how "good" an idea the change seemed to be, even to people who know what's going on.

Yours in Sport,

N1H1

 

Boy, FG and s375, Ladyt's assertion of the magnitude of shooter loss really has grabbed your imagination, hasn't it? I doubt she has access to the records which would support such a claim, but you, or others here, must. Give her a hand, won't you? In short, prove it.

N1H1

 

BS, smoking 357,

Lady T claims she has been shooting trap for less than a year, but acts like she knows more about it than any 100 of us who have been shooting it for 40 years or more. I don't care if she has doctorates in a dozen fields, I don't care about her gender, I don care about her service record, I don't care what other shooting disciplines she has mastered. She has a sour arrogant know it attitude and rips people who have been at this far longer than she has. If she has such a problem with ATA registered shooting, she is not welcome among us as long as she has the personality of a know it all, a trait she has demonstrated here and on some other forums as well. I really would like her to take up something else. If she wants respect, she is going to have to show some first. We all have accomplishments in our lifetimes, hers are of no higher status than any of ours. She needs to get over herself.

 

Family guy, I normally have you on ignore, and I do not have to justify myself to a blowhard like you. Your type of nonsense is just as unbearable. You and your kind that makes a habit of slamming other people are going to get slammed right back.

All you guys do is blah, blah, ATA bad, blah, blah, blah, ATA crooked , blah, blah, blah. Then when somebody who actually shoot sATA, give you some resistance, you come back with "well how many target have you shot, what is your average, blah, blah, blah.

Your one trick pony is getting old.

 

That's entirely possible.

So? Some people really are smarter or more perceptive than others. Are smart people not supposed to speak?

 

H1N1,

You have the facts. Prove her wrong. Just how precipitous is the membership collapse?

That's trolling. You come armed with nothing but opinion, resistance to change and enmity.

If you're into "facts," show us the proof of the depth of the membership collapse.

Neil now impugns the tough Trap disciplines, instead of embracing tougher competition. "Mired?" yes, shooting the piece of a target is so much less challenging than the same narrow and slow ATA targets you're comfortable seeing. What trolling.

Couldn't it be better? Wouldn't it be better as a more challenging sport?

 

Entirely impossible. Grow up.

 

And when have I asked that question of anyone? That should be easy right. My above statement was the opposite.

Here is most of my statement:

What group of trapshooters thought a move to an anti-gun state would help membership grow?

What rocket scientist thought the settings for targets not less than a straight away from 1 and 5 was too complicated to enforce?

How many registered birds do you have to shoot to realize taking the sport out may have chased sportsman away?

I am talking about the combined thinking of 75,000 shooters that said adios. Not the few still remaining.

 

Lady T makes more sense than others about Trap targets. Ergo, her one year of shooting has made her a much quicker study than people who have been doing it for much longer.

 

JUST MORE BS, different smell.

 

AZCO

The point of my post is you don't have to shoot a lot to decide the ATA is not for you. That is the problem.

 

No, seriously, s375, you said, four times and in red, that "And there you have it. The reason ATA has lost 70% of its membership and continues to lose members." It is what Carl Sagan referred to as an "extraordinary claim." And so it requires extraordinary evidence. What's your evidence?

And you don't actually think LadyT knows, do you? Or FG, for that matter? Without evidence, we all just have to conclude you are all lying.

N1H1

 

Heck, I'll help poor misguided LadyT with a bit of history since you two clearly simply don't know much of anything. Here's what happened in the abortive (and aborted) 3-hole years.



So my challenge to her remains to explain why she thinks that making shoot-offs harder will increase participation.

N1H1

 

But why can't the ATA improve itself to make it more appealing?

 

Oh, no, not the return of that kooky chart that tries to answer a question nobody asked.

We're talking membership, and you said you had the facts that showed the precipitous decline in membership from where the organization was to the 50,000 it has now.

 

One of my favorite misleading graphs again....

Yes the one where you are to forget the shooters that were shooting in the marathon 1 hole shoots in N1H1 area stopped doing that. You are also mislead by the graph as it makes you assume that the shooters in previous years were all shooting 3 hole targets when in fact cheating at the clubs was rampant. Clubs were enticing shooters with easier targets to pad their stats.

A better graph would be the number of shooters participating in the sport before N1H1 became a delegate and the number of shooters we have now. That would be a telling graph. But we wont see that will we.

No N1H1 will never show that graph. lol

 

It's the number of targets shot. Make what total BS excuses you want; people quit shooting and it took years to get participation back. Shooters didn't like harder targets and they voted with their feet. That's why the rule was changed. Why does LadyT think things have changed? What's her evidence. What's yours?

And for heaven's sake, how can anyone write "Lady T makes more sense than others about Trap targets" when she apparently thinks that wobble handicap shoot-offs will keep people shooting? Don't either of you see how totally off-the-wall that is?

N1H1

 

But that's the graph everyone is talking about. That's what everyone wants to see. Neil said he had the facts on that. I'm sure that graph will be posted shortly.

 

N1H1

So did taking the Sport out of trapshooting give you the results you desired? Is this the outcome you wanted? You were given that lifetime achievement award by the State of MN for being instrumental in this endeavor.

Highpoints were; Jim Bradford, past ATA President, and Neil were able to get the misfire rule changed, and Neil was instrumental in getting the 3-hole target rule rescinded.

How do you feel about it now?

 

That is pretty out there. We all know the entire event should be Wobble. With Continental, you won't need yardage handicap or shootoffs. The winner will emerge after 100 shots.

That's a badge of shame. America can't field an Olympic Trap team because our version of the sport is so easy.

 

I am not in the wobble trap argument. Just the misleading graphs and that you don't have to shoot 10,000 registered birds to see some needs for change in our sport.

 

Has LadyT shot 10,ooo birds in the single year she has shot? That sounds like a lot . . .

N1H1

 

Are we talking:

Practice
or
Registered
or
Practice + Registered

Tomorrow, Wednesday, I will shoot 10 rounds of doubles, 2 rounds from the 16 yard line, 2 rounds from the 27 yard line and if I have time I'll try and squeeze in a round of Trap from my handicap of 19 yards. On Friday I'll shoot 10 rounds of Trap from the 16 and 10 rounds of Trap from the 19. Off Saturday and Sunday I'll maybe shoot a few rounds of 5 stand and doubles then take a break till the next Wednesday where I'll just shoot 2 rounds of Trap from the 16 and one of Trap from the 19 then rest till the weekend shoot on Saturday.



Now as for membership numbers someone posted the numbers but I can't remember where.

Yes I'm new. I'm finishing up my first year in ATA and I didn't do as well as I expected but then again I didn't expect to be out 4 months or end up in this frigging wheelchair. Be that as it may things are looking up. Got a left handed PFS stock for the Beretta so no more shooting it with a right handed stock. My Perazzi is back but I'm still searching for a left handed stock for it and the 90T. Going to shoot a Zone at the end of October then off to Tucson for the Autumn Grand. After that it's send the guns out for service then enjoy some old fashioned goof off time.




One last thing.
Yes I'm new and therefore do not belong to any clique. So I have a fresh set of eyes. Handicap is filled with sand baggers. The classification system is broken beyond repair and ATA does not appear to care about this problem which causes people to walk away if members or not join. Singles are no better. The birds have to fly faster and the angles have to be wider. Give the shooters a challenging target to engage instead of these ducks in a barrel.

 

smoking357 quit trapshooting over two years ago claiming the price of shells was too high for him to afford. He's a troll probably related to 221 on that other site. Best to ignore!

 

New shooter (sort of). Planning on shooting my first registered trap in September.

Trying to get a better understanding here - so please be patient. What is the purpose of the Handicap in ATA? I have played many other sports including golf and also understand betting lines and the purpose of those concepts.

In golf, the handicap is set up so that players of different abilities can play against each other and have a mostly fair and fun competition. If either player has a great day, they will likely win. If either player has a bad day, they will likely loose. It makes sense.

From what I understand, many shooters who get to the 27 are pretty dang good. And then they get better. How does a less talented (or practiced) shooter have a fair chance against them?

Again - I have never seen any of this first hand, so please bare with me. Is it common for the fence shooters to have an unfair advantage of all other yardage shooters. What is the incentive for someone like me to want to compete in Handicap other than my own personal yardage gains?

Another crazy idea from someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. What about taking away shots from 27 yarders? In other words, instead of gaining yards (which they can't do), how about taking away 1/2 shots per round of 25. Similar to how a better golfer will give another player shots per 9 holes (or 18) when playing skins.

Just my .02

 

Sometime when clay targets replaced glass balls which replaced live pigeon, the handicap came along as another shooting game, but it was shot from the 22 yard line. As time went, more and better shooters, better guns, better ammo, advancements in trap machines, the Handicap distance increased to 25 then in the mid 50's to the 27. I am sure someone like Historybuff can provide specifics.

Where we are at now is an never ending discussion as to what to do next. Go to 30 yards, reduce ammo shot load size, no closer than the 20, a golf handicap like you suggested or whatever. Many have suggested a whole new game, such as shooting from the 22 and 27 as two separate events with a classing system, but is met with much resistance.

 

Lady T,

The main problem you have as a new shooter is getting caught up with fantasy, myths, superstitions, lies and other falsehoods passed on to you by disgruntled, D class short yardage shooters who cannot improve their game," but explain their shortcomings on "forces beyond their control. It is easy enough to see when you are parroting such things as "sandbaggers, broken classification, wider angles, faster birds, ATA corrupt, etc., etc., etc. ". These shooters believe the only way they can improve their game is to make it more difficult for others, but they fail to realize their poor shooting skills will be even worse than before.

Do yourself a favor. Stop hanging around a bunch of losers, find yourself a shooting coach, stay away from these wrong info forums, study the history of the game, and work on improving your own game, because in the end, the person you are shooting against is yourself. After you achieve AA, AAA and land on the 27, you will wonder how you ever let yourself get trapped into believing all this crap in the first place. Or you can continue on your present course and be a loser like the ones who have been lying to you from the start.

 

It's always funny to hear hardcore ATA shooters talk about "improving" when they won't shoot Wobble, won't shoot International, won't speed up or widen the targets. If you really want to improve as a trapshooter, shoot something more difficult than narrow and slow.

 

Sorry to disappoint another you, but I have shot 5 Stand, SC, skeet, learned how to shoot on a wobble and faster, wider targets as well. Improving my ATA game has nothing to do with learning other clay games or shooting them at the same time, but everything to do with concentration on the game at hand, honing my skill with a shotgun. While I have experience on other clay games, I prefer ATA trap.

You are a typical wrong info source feeder to Lady T like I was talking about. You are not doing her any favors feeding her your own misguided views on something you know very little about and in most cases were brought up on the same carp you are passing on. If you were one of the all time great AAA-27-AAA Champions, then that would be different, but you are not, so give it a rest. We are laughing at you.

 

. . . And it's not. LadyT, just the political nonsense - common enough but mostly here -that can hold you back. Most of what you hear at gun clubs about the technical aspects shooting itself is no better. You are sure to run into well-meaning target-break readers (known as TBRs) who will tell you things that look logical but are just totally wrong and if you listen to them for a second it will cost you time and money to recover from. Follow the developing "Big bore" thread here and you will see two kinds of pattern analysis, one hard work and barely worth it and often not even that, one easy but worthless. And so it goes. You can, for example, shoot your way to A or AA by flat-out aiming at every target, though that is heresy to most here (who don't, generally speaking, shoot, by the way.)

When you are told this or that ask yourself not just "does it make any sense at all?" (since so many misconceptions seem to) but far more important "what's his or her evidence?" If there is none provided, be polite about appreciating the well-intended help, move away and and vacuum it out of your mind as soon as possible. Just as bad rule changes are worse than inaction, bad shooting advice is far, far worse than working it out for yourself, as frustrating, time-consuming, and expensive as that is. It's still better than believing the wrong things.

I see you are working hard on our shooting and I really, really do wish you the best.

Yours in Sport,

N1H1

PS I hope you noticed how these guys bailed out on you when they were asked for a single, solitary fact to support your post. They don't have any. That's another facet of the "evidence" point I made above. I commend you for citing your source as "someone posted the numbers but I can't remember where." You must know what that means, but the clique you don't think you belong to weren't even able to do that. As you must be realizing by now, they just make it up and when the going gets even faintly tough, it's "me first" in the lifeboat.

In the meantime, look at the target-participation graph in the 3-hole (harder target) year-and-a half I posted above. Read it, Study it. Note the axes. Then read what Family Guy got from it. It will scare you whom you allied with, as I will point out later.

And I mean it, I wish you good luck with your career in ATA shooting. I'm sure you will have fun and maybe we will meet someday. I'm the one with the cape, horns and a pitchfork; you should be able to recognize me.

N1H1

 

N1H1,

You forgot to mention your tail.

 

There are lots of dogs at trapshoots; I don't want to make this a more complicated discrimination than it need be.

N1H1

 

Certainly can't disagree with any of that.

Right, Neil?

 

There is a point in an inconsequential public argument beyond which I don't think it's appropriate to go, even on the internet.

N1H1

 

Hey, I was going to remain polite and not call your comments inconsequential, but if you're succumbing to a moment of candor, well...

 

DLS, S357, and others keep referring to the slower targets shot now, relative to the, presumably, fast targets shot in the past. Do you really believe that an additional one yard additional distance is that significant?

 

What the ATA needs is a complete, virtual, overhaul, on targets settings, which includes angles, height and distance.

A massive replacement of the EC and BOD, with members of Integrity, Business men who know how to regain the lost members and invite new members.

We do not need someone who sits on the fence and swings both ways, he /she sits solidly on the Competetive Target Side
of that fence, burrowing deeper into the Real Needs of the ATA, NW and TA tore hell out of the ATA structure by losing thousands of Honest ATA members, The back bone of the ATA has been broken by Poor Management, Not listening to it's membership, only interested in Their Self Interests.

A major showing of the Membership and The Real ATA Delegates at the Meetings In Sparta During the GRAND AMERICAN
Making their voices heard, is the only way CHANGE IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE to save our Sport Of Trapshooting.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

For NW it would be luck, his Trapgun has a limit on distant targets, barely handles 27 yard targets.

GB DLS

 

Gary
You mentioned on an earlier thread that "Roger was on board"
We he be presenting some of these ideas at the BOD meeting in Sparta?

Will he be focusing on target setting or will there be other issues on the agenda?

 

Have to agree with DLS on this.

The fact that 100% of new trap shooters are shooting perfect 100 straight from the 16 by their 2nd shoot, 98 of 100 targets by 4th attempt at doubles and they all end up on the 27 by their 5th handicap, targets are way too easy. Destroying the ATA completely is the only way to save turkey shoot's, Annie Oakely's, Buddy and Porch shooting.

 

Let's just look at the present. ATA Trap is the easiest organized Trap sport of all the worldwide Trap disciplines. Look at what is shot across the world. ATA-style Trap is called "entry-level."

 

QUIT? QUIT? I didn't quit when they put me in this frigging wheelchair a few months ago. Did I quit. H... NO! In fact I upped my expectations to making the State Team and the All American Team in 2017. So what makes you think you or N1H1 could make me want to do so. Not going to happen.

It was you and others that presented the very sad case that the ATA is in to this new shooter. In the face of the obstacles that the ATA faces the chance that it will correct its downward spiral is bleak because so many have closed their eyes to the impending crash. They don't want to change even though deep down something must be done or the ATA will soon be no more.

Perfection is not the norm in fact its a rarity but in the ATA it is as normal as the sun coming up. As a new shooter I can say this. The targets are too slow and need to actually go out to the 50 yard stake and the angle on the targets must be wider. The classification system is garbage. It must be fixed. Sand Baggers are taking up residence in Handicap. When D Class winners are shooting 100's you have a problem and if you don't see it you are the problem. The targets have to be faster and angles wider. The days of gimmie targets have to come to an end. Handicap has to be moved out to 30 yards. When you see, in singles, seven 200's and eleven 199's you have a problem that needs immediate attention.

 

Sorry Neil I didn't bail out. I just have more important things to do then waiting on you to disprove my remarks.

 

Tell us Dr Longshot will YOU be there? If not let someone who will do the talking!

 

What many fail to understand is that there are fixes that are needed. You may not like my ideas, they may be unworkable, but they may trigger another idea that will work. As a new shooter it boggles the mind that AAA scores are needed to win D Class. Then people wonder why there are fewer people shooting ATA. Face it folks something has to change. I'm wondering if the Golf example is a workable solution.

 

What in world makes you think, LadyT, that I want you to quit? In my most recent post, the one you cited, I wrote

1." I see you are working hard on our shooting and I really, really do wish you the best." And later I repeated the same sentiments:

2. "And I mean it, I wish you good luck with your career in ATA shooting. I'm sure you will have fun and maybe we will meet someday."

The idea that want you to quit is not in anything I have written that I can see. Maybe you should quit trying to read meaning into my text that is in your head, not in this thread.

N1H1

 

LadyT, I suggested you look back at the graph of what happened to target participation when the targets were made harder in 2/3 of 1995 and all of 1966. I hope you have already studied that and paid particular attention to the quality of comment it generated from Family Guy. He is, after all, one of your ilk. Heres, again. are the data:



And here is FG's response:

"One of my favorite misleading graphs again....
Yes the one where you are to forget the shooters that were shooting in the marathon 1 hole shoots in N1H1 area stopped doing that. You are also mislead by the graph as it makes you assume that the shooters in previous years were all shooting 3 hole targets when in fact cheating at the clubs was rampant. Clubs were enticing shooters with easier targets to pad their stats. "

What do you think of his argument?

It is total nonsense; FG can't even understand what he's looking at though he's seen it before.

1."Yes the one where you are to forget the shooters that were shooting in the marathon 1 hole shoots in N1H1 area stopped doing that." FG apparently has not noticed that the y-axis specifies "Handicap Targets." Do you think marathon shooters do a lot of handicap shooting? Have you ever shot one? Did anyone shoot handicap and how many? The only time I see any at all is when shooters need a hundred of so to avoid penalty at their State Shoot or need to have enough on their cards to qualify for state or All-American teams. Otherwise, marathons I've been to have been mostly singles, some doubles with the right crowd, but barely any handicap if at all. For FG to attribute the loss in registered targets to marathon shooters just shows how little he knows and how little he cares about the facts.

2. ".You are also mislead by the graph as it makes you assume that the shooters in previous years were all shooting 3 hole targets when in fact cheating at the clubs was rampant." What did you make of that? Don't you see that he's got it backwards? Read the title of the graph. Is it not clear that in the previous years we were not shooting 3-hole targets? How could he think that I assume they are?

This is the general intellectual and knowledge level of the people here you have allied yourself with. If shooting went down when the targets were harder, why do you think that would change now? Be specific. You might add why you think that wobble or double-wobble handicap shoot-offs will make people keep shooting or take it up.

How well, on the average, do ATA members shoot these "fish in a barrel" singles? How about handicap? What is, specifically, the median average for both sports? Please be specific.

N1H1

 

Lady T,

There is nothing wrong with your ideas for change, but they are not new and are not going to happen because only 1,000 people agree with you that the ATA needs change where as some 27,000 do not.

ATA trapshooting is a family sport. We just had a zone shoot where a 10 year old shooting from the 19 tied with a Vet shooting from the 27. The shoot off went for 124 vs 123. What can possibly be wrong with that?

I am not going to respond to the other stuff you posted, because it is the same tripe parroted before by your friends who are giving you bad advice.

I suggested you take up another shooting game, because you have apparently, mastered registered trapshooting in just a few weeks and find it no longer challenging. It has to be frustrating for you when you break 100 and find out every other shooter present that day did the same thing. There were no 78's, 88's 90's, 91's 95's, everybody shot 100, just like you did.

If you want targets that are faster, wider angles and higher, and you want fewer shooters, fewer winning scores, there is a real easy fix for that, take up International also known as bunker.

 

Most that did care left. I doubt 1 of 7 in PA and OH shoot registered targets. We are left with only 27k. They must need easier targets in his state.

Next year 25K?

We may have a dying sport due to the above attitude.

 

I think you should take it up with FG and not do some chickens*** tactic of trying to involve someone who isn't part of your petty snarking.

 

Butterly,

ATA trap has been losing shooters long before the targets became easier. Everytime someone tells me they are giving it up, it is because they no longer have the disposable income or the stamina (old age, failing eyesight, etc.,) they once had. I have never had anyone tell me they quit because the targets were too easy.

Not all trap shooters are ATA members, that is true, but it has always been true. I shot trap for years befoee I joined ATA and I continue to shoot 100-150 non ATA targets a week minimum. I have shot some league but not at present. You know what is the most surprising thing I notice whenever shooting league or a non ATA shoot? People want the traps set for easy targets, sometimes easier than ATA settings.

My club was given a brand new Pat Wobble trap a few years ago. And in all that time since, years mind you, nobody wants to shoot it on wobble. They keep it on ATA settings. You may not like my attitude, but it is one from reality, not nonsense as so often repeated here. I would have no objection to more difficult targets, but we would still lose shooters, maybe even at a faster rate, but I would continue to shoot.

 

What nonsensical stuff is that?

 

Butterly,

You really do not understand that

I'll let you think about it while I go reload some shells.

 

Put the cap on the glue.

 

AZCOTRAP,

Do you have membership numbers from lets say 1960 - 2010? Would it be yearly active shooters in number, is that what you are saying the ATA was losing prior to 1996? Do you have active shooter numbers from the ATA for the same years?

Thanks.

Shoot well

John

 

I've seen the same thing. Your experience is a sad commentary on Americans. This isn't the country it once was. We need someone to kick America in the backside to get this horse to run again.

 

Jhunts,

N1H1 posts a graph every once in a while that shows a decline in numbers of Grand attendance for a couple decades, before the chance in angles. I don't have annual average books, but if somebody wants to list the numbers from those books for the last 50 years, maybe you guys can prove the point your trying to make.

 

Really,

Do you have a copy of that chart? Are you basing your statement on what N1H1 has said? Are you sure you want to do that?

I am not trying to prove a point, you said,

Now you said,

Prove it.

Thanks.

Shoot well.

John

 

jhunts,


I am not the one complaining here about losing shooters. It's , Lady T, Smoking357, Doctor LongShot, family Guy and others," because the game is too easy and the only way to keep and gain membership is to make the game more difficult." Unless that claim can be proven to me, I claim it is nonsense.

 

AZCOTRAP,

I guess I am confused.

You said,

and,

I am only asking you to prove your statements. Those are your statements, correct.

Thanks.

Shoot well.

John

 

If you want grand attendance go to HOF site. It lists winners and attendance.

 

Well that ought to make it easy for AZCOTRAP to prove. Would love to see the graph from N1H1 that shows the declining numbers decades prior to the rule change as well.

Shoot well.

John

 

The "losing shooters" bit is not my argument.

I'd actually be fine seeing shooters drop off who aren't willing to shoot a tougher target and rebuild American trapshooting around a more challenging game.

ATA-style could still be kept around for novices and retirees.

Losing shooters in the presence of easy targets is what ought to scare the heck out of the Old Guard.

 

Now that is sad.

 

I shoot a lot of wobble. But azcotrap is right. Most just want to shoot 16 yards

 

Lad T,

No it's not sad, the club members don't care for wobble. Why is that a sad thing?

-----------

Jhunts, fine! ATA is not losing shooters, in fact the numbers are the same, no they are growing.

Now convince your cohorts here of that. You guys are a real trip. You say we are losing shooters, then you want me to prove what you are repeating..

I based my observation of fewer shooters, because of the dwindling numbers of shooters I see at clubs in my area, the decline number of shooters at my club, plus the loss of half a dozen trap clubs in the last 4o years. At my club we would have 50-60 shooters for an ATA shoot 20 years ago. Last shoot this month we had 7 shooters. A private open to the public business shooting range gave up holding ATA shoots due to lack of interest, but league shooting is strong. Another public range made the same decision 5 years ago.