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

When our club bought a wobble pat trap, nobody would shoot it because it woould "ruin" your game for registered. When we shot registered, they blamed the machine for bad targets and thier scores were down.

We sold it to another club that does not throw registered, and they shoot on it all the time, just not the ones that shoot registered, well sometimes.....

 

That's funny. Thanks for the post.

 

And that is what I thought but the guys who can run 100 or 200 straight also shoot skeet, wobble and other trap games. I've come to the conclusion that if my game is to reach the next level I will also have to shoot these disciplines.

 

Lady T: I think you can handle those quite well.
GB DLS

 

Perhaps the overall shotgun champion should have to shoot Trap and Skeet?

I've noticed that very good Skeeters are also pretty good at Trap. If you speed and widen up the targets, I imagine the good Skeeters might whoop the good Trappers by not being intimidated by the harder breaks.

 

Just bet a nickel and the skeeters will all disappear!

 

And so will half of todays trapshooters!

 

Put the money on the line and the trap "boys" will take it.
I don't know where you guys got the delusion that Harlan, Matt, Ricky et al are pussies but it is probably
Like Isaiah Thomas when he told Michael Jordan when the Bad Boys from Detroit had their way with Chicago the first year Jordan was a pro He said come back and we will Butt Fu@$ everyone of you -- all he did was wake up the Giant-and he got bent over and over and over again to the tune of 6 rings so threaten all you want but be sure to put some $$ up and the 27 Yard guys will take it all home even though you think they cannot hold a candle to your paper tigers
this site is the most pathetic thing I have ever seen

 

Phil I think you are in the wrong thread.

Your language is not what one would expect of one of the top shooters in the ATA. In fact it is quite derogatory and reflects badly upon you and the ATA. Yet buried in this language of yours is the admission that a challenge is what drives competition just like harder targets would drive competition and bring the best out of trap shooters.

 

The Olympics and the World Cup have very attractive prize money.

Huh? Gross. Apart from the trashy and low talk, you're wrong. Jordan's first year was 84/85. The Pistons won the Eastern Conference in 87/88, 88/89 and 89/90, winning the NBA Championship in 88/89 and 89/90. The Bulls first won in 90/91, well into Jordan's career.

What if that money is at the Olympic or Wobble range?

 

Phil's been having a terrible week at the Grand so maybe we should cut him a little slack.

Smoking357 wants to chip in like the Martins and finance his dream-wobble trap at the Grand as the main event. I believe he's accepting donations somewhere too!

 

PHIL: It's been years since you and the others have shot a competitive target, even you know that, but top dogs will always be top dogs, but give them a competitive target, and the most part perfect scores are the past records, This sport was never designed to be a perfection sport, now was it Phil?

I may still be peeing on the porch, but I am a damn good shooter from the porch.

Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

Phil, can you take a post a picture of DLS' display in the new HOF for Porch Shooting and Most Old Man Pissin'' Contests Started? Smokingsomething is a no show, apprantently his cat is sick. You might have to look near the porta pottys to see it.

 

Sounds like Phil got his panties all up in a wad, probably from that 18 yarder giving out wedgies to Phil and all his pro buddies.

 

The tars and featherin committee draws nearer. The force becomes stronger. Days will turn to hours. Hours will turn to minutes. Minutes will turn to seconds. And then they all know the meeting will happen.

 

Gee phil kiner
It was a nicer forum before your rant

 

Now that is damn funny.

 

I guess Phil is saying the trap boys are good shots and will take your money, he is not talking about Harlan, Ricky or others, he is talking trap help/setters/scorers are good too.

GB DLS

 

Reading this it seems that Phil would rather discuss disgusting acts verse his votes for the repeated 2 yard reductions.

 

Reading Phil's comments would it make you want to be a member of the ATA?

 

Someone that talks like that should be arrested if they go into a boy's restroom.

 

All you have to do to a Pat Trap w/wobble is flip a switch, it then will Travel up & Down as well as Pivot. I absolutely like Wobble Traps used for shootoffs


GB......................................DLS

 

Kiner quotes = disgusting

 

ASCOTRAP,
The delegates that the shooters elect, are not working for you. They represent the ATA's wishes back to their menbers in the states that elect them. Roger C

 

Make the entire event Wobble, and you won't need a shootoff.

Yeah, but if you have a Wobble machine, just move the entire event to that format. Bigger fun.

If someone ever breaks 100 in Double Wobble, I will call that person a great shooter. Double Wobble sounds like a true test of ability.

 

What a stupid idea

 

Back when one of the clubs I belonged to in NY State put in a wobble trap, our Best shooter really enjoyed shooting it.

He told me it sharpened him up for those windy days when everything was on the line at registered shoots.

I can't tell you how many times I saw this fellow shoot 25 straights. AND a few from the 27 just for his own practice when nobody else shot with him.

Last August he was inducted into the Trapshooting Hall of Fame.

Must be Wobble practice worked well for him and his scores, not that we had any doubt.

Just sayin'

 

Neil, I am one of your biggest fans. Especially, on eveything about shotgun ballistics. And, I understand the shooters not shooting hard targets so the ATA mandated easier targets. I have posted as President of Miramar Trap and Skeet in the 90s when we threw hard targets when the big club about 2 hours away threw easy ones. We were drawing fewer and fewer shooters to our events and they were drawing more. I personally reset our targets making them as easy as legally possible and it absolutely did increase our shooters in events.
But that begs the question of the tedium and stiltifying effect of easy targets. 200 straight for the shoot off in every major singles event. Hundred straights common in handicap events and 99 often doesn't make the shoot off. 100 straights common in doubles.
Sorry Neil. I know it draws trapshooters but it is BORING. It is.
And the sport is dying. It is. And you know it.
Sporting clays is growing.
Why is that?
As long as the ATA allowed clubs to throw soft targets those clubs drew the shooters who loved to shoot good scores and who wanted to pad their averages for All American or whatever status. Those shooters would not shoot hard targets. But the ATA didn't have to mandate soft targets. It could have gone the opposite way and mandated hard targets.
So now we have AAA class in singles and doubles? To many AA shooters.
C'mon.
Would you go to a golf tournament where all people did was make 3 foot putts, and 6 footers for "handicap?"
Trapshooting should be a challenge. It came from live pigeon shooting. It was always hard until about 1980 or so. Then it got easier and easier.
It ain't very hard to break 25 straight singles and never see a hard angle.
And don't get me started on failure to fire.
My very, very first ATA tournament in 1966. I was 14 and scared to death. I had shot a few 25 straights in practice. I put up my Browning A-5 field gun, called for a bird and pulled the trigger. No bang. Didn't close the receiver. LOST!
I have been out of trap shooting for a while for various reasons and am recently back at it now. I just in the last few weeks shot an event with singles, doubles, and handicap. I was blown away by the FTF situation. In shooting 200 targets on random squads I must have seen 30 FTFs and everyone acted like that was totally normal. No questions. Just call for another bird.
This sport is supposed to be a challenge. Maybe we can throw nothing but straight aways about 30 yards and make it even easier and instead of FTF let's just allow a couple of "do overs" when we miss.
C'mon man.
This sport is dying. And, its dying of boredom.
With all due respect. And, I have great respect for you. Truly.
Jake

 

Jakearoo, I am very surprised at the number of ftf's you have observed. 30 per 200 target event for a squad?? Honestly, I've never seen anything even close to that. In my experience they are much more rare. 2 ftfs for a squad per 200 target event would be quite a bit. Bad shells or someone with gun issues certainly can come into play, but I don't see anyone turning down targets at registered shoots on a regular basis, it certainly is the exception.

 

Bat, It is an estimate but an honest one. 200 targets is 7 "rounds" and there were at least 4 FTFs in each round from the entire squad. One slight variable was that it was a very windy day. Very windy. Left to right cross wind that gusted and went from about 15mph to probably well over 30mph. That no doubt influenced the FTF rate.
I was still involved in ATA events when this rule was made. I thought it was crap then. I shoot a release trigger. I know about flinches. I know all the discussion that went on about the FTF rule. And, whenever it comes up people chime in that it "is not supposed to be used to just turn down a legal target." But the rule allows it flat out. And, that is exactly how it is used.
We really don't need to have the discussion do we? It is what it is. A shooter can FTF for any reason and get another bird what, 2 times per "sub-event" defined as each round?
What a dumb rule in a shooting game. Of course, those birds in the field will give you a do over if you forget to take off the safety or load a shell in the chamber. And, the sport of trapshooting coming from live bird shooting, we all know that in pigeon shooting you get a couple of FTFs if you don't fire at one of those driving birds that beat you out of the box you didn't expect.
And, as I said above, the thing that blew me away was that with all those FTFs I saw that day (and not just the 30 on my squads but also many, many in observing other squads shooting as I like to watch real good shooters shoot. Especially, squads of 27 yard shooters) not one person ever said a word. The shooter simply lowered the gun, remounted and called again. And, we were of course using voice pulls.
I repeat, you don't want to get me started on this. What a dumb rule. Isn't there anything the ATA can do to make this sport easier?
My God. Oh, the shame of missing a target. Must not be the shooter's fault. Especially, if you are some old dog shooter who has spent 50 years dedicated to your avocation. Oh, the horror.
Jake

 

You make a lot of good points on the rules Jakearoo, but those of us who agree the sport has been made easier to attract and retain shooters less ability, are actually in the minority and our numbers will diminish because newbies do not know, and many older shooters do not care about the history of trap shooting.

As you say, a sport is supposed to present challenges to participants. In the late 1800's shooters accepted this premise and shot live birds from 25-33 yards. And early live-bird Grand Americans had about 3 shooters assigned to the 33 yard mark.

Rather than using the assertion that our rules should throw harder targets, I would as that those voicing their opinions regarding the Flights and Angles rules would consider making it clear that their discussion actually supports "a return to the original rules" as they were established over a century ago.

Trapshooting has seen a multitude of improvements during its existence and its the only sport I know that has been made less difficult. That, I just cannot understand.

Until something is done to reduce the large number of perfect scores, making a 100-straight in any discipline something that we all talk about for years, registered trapshooting will be hard-pressed to grow.

Records made today just cannot be compared with those of old. Here are the target settings from 1924 shortly after control of the sport was handed over to the Amateur Trapshooting Association. Legal targets within 65° on each side of the center stake and the most desirable doubles set at 32° angles, not 17° at present.

I believe a gradual return to the original trapshooting rules would be positive for the sport.

​

 

Jakearoo, not trying to "get you started" on anything. Just pointing out that what you saw happening is grossly different from anything I have seen, or even heard of before. I think what you saw happens more in leagues and informal settings (but not at that level), but at registered shoots I have attended everyone seems to understand the rule and I have never seen such numbers of ftf's as at your shoot. Just an observation. The vast majority of ftfs I see are shells that don't go off, followed to a lesser extent by guns breaking down.

As far as I'm concerned, we don't need two FTFs per subevent. FTF's rarely occur so it isn't a big deal. Yes, someone with more complicated gun problems could get screwed if they misdiagnosed the issue and continued with that gun, but that isn't happening a lot.

 

HB, might be tough going to those spreads, especially the 130 degree max doubles spread! I'm not sure, but even the 90 degree singles spread would seem to be tough to get the birds out of the house?

 

Thank you HB. I could not agree with you more. I am aware of the evolution of the rules on setting targets.
I know that the "45 degree" setting, (allowing for legal targets 10 per cent wider resulting in your 65 degrees of angle legal targets) was the norm and the rule for many, many years. And it does not take a mathematical, physics genius to figure out that when you now make the 18 degree (each way) targets the rule that you have 36 degree targets vs 65 degree and that entire 29 degree difference was in the wide angles. The targets that are harder. You don't even hear people talk about "screaming right angles from station five" anymore. There is no such thing.
And if perchance, a mean ol' 18 degree right comes up on station five and you feel "beat" by it, no problem. Just lower your gun. FTF. Call for another. Its almost down right embarrassing for big ol' tough trapshooters to be such pansies.
Thanks again for your post.
I am afraid you are right as well. We might as well be talking to a wall. Those dedicated ATA hardcores don't want their game to be too much of a challenge. And they will ride that old, slow plug right into the grave. But it doesn't buck much and won't embarrass them.

 

Bat, Tell me what other sport allows a "do over" for an equipment failure?
You do know that the FTF rule followed the widespread use of voice pulls, right? Before then, what the cheaters did when they got beat by a target (one of the old setting targets that could actually beat you if you weren't sharp) the shooter lowered his gun, glowered angrily at the puller and, if necessary, said gruffly, "slow pull."
But they couldn't do that with any credulity with voice pulls. Viola! New rule. FTF for any reason.
I know of no other sport that allows such a thing. You might be able to change out a tennis racket with a broken string. But you can't watch an ace whistle past you on the serve and not raise your racket and say, "I have a broken string and need to change rackets."
The old rules had a few exceptions for bad shells. Equipment failures, not so much. Failure to load, safety on, un-closed breach, doing something dumb, flinching so bad you can't pull the trigger, LOST!
And, that's the way it ought to be.
Can you imagine a pole vaulter being given a do over because his pole broke? A pool player being given a do over cause the tip fell off his que?
Come to play and bring good equipment. These are tournaments. Competitions. They are intended to be tests of the best. The best players and the best prepared.

 

Bat, You can read the old rules as easily as anyone. What the rule was forever was the traps were set to throw targets in a 45 degree arc with an outside variance of 10 degrees legal on each side. That is 65 degrees. But the 22 degrees (supposedly the straight away from post 1 and 5), and the "new and improved"18 degrees (inside of a straight away from 1 and 5) are half measurements.You have to double them if you want to talk about the whole spread as the rule was originally written. HB is right.
Look it up.

 

Jakearoo,

Not sure what has you so upset, all I said was that I had never seen ftfs being claimed anywhere near the extent you posted. That doesn't mean I don't believe you, just stating my opinion that it is not often seen. That's just my opinion ok, not a knock on you.

But after those last two posts I gotta ask you what you are referring to when you said - "You do know that the FTF rule followed the widespread use of voice pulls, right? Before then, what the cheaters did when they got beat by a target (one of the old setting targets that could actually beat you if you weren't sharp) the shooter lowered his gun, glowered angrily at the puller and, if necessary, said gruffly, 'slow pull'. But they couldn't do that with any credulity with voice pulls. Viola! New rule. FTF for any reason."

Well, I agree with you about the slow pull claims in the old days, but disagree with you about any significant change in the definition of a ftf after the voice pulls came around. They changed it to 2 per sub event, but the rule defining a ftf has been the same for at least 2.5 decades, well before the voice pulls. So what are you talking about?.

And then this where you say - "Bat, You can read the old rules as easily as anyone. What the rule was forever was the traps were set to throw targets in a 45 degree arc with an outside variance of 10 degrees legal on each side. That is 65 degrees. But the 22 degrees (supposedly the straight away from post 1 and 5), and the "new and improved"18 degrees (inside of a straight away from 1 and 5) are half measurements. You have to double them if you want to talk about the whole spread as the rule was originally written. HB is right."

What the heck are you talking about there? HP posted old diagrams showing a 90 degree arc (for singles - 45 degrees each side of center) and 130 degrees outside spread (65 degrees each side of center) for doubles. I was just making a point that those would be tough to get out of one of todays traphouses, that's all. Not sure what got you wound about that. He was not posting anything about a 45 degree arc with a 10 degree variance, you are seeing things that were not in his post.

If you want ftf to only be for dud shells, I'd have to think about it a bit, but initially at least it's fine by me, since as I said I don't see many ftf's occurring other than for that reason.

 

What girly hunting-like game needs a failure to fire rule? The new "Championship Series" shoots Merlo is talking about isn't supposed to have that. You don't get freebies in live bird shoots. The grouse does come back around for another shot and the lion eats you if you have a crappy gun.

 

Lady T: I would like to see wobble Traps at all ATA Shoots, The averages would drop, Handicap Yardage would drop, Ties would Drop, Competetion Would Rise,
The Money won would rise I Think, Skill would be a greater requirement, and N1H1 would go beserk w/his Graphs, If it were tried at all ATA Events for a year, you would see competition as never seen before.

There would be a lot more spectators too.

LadyT: You are my kind of Trapshooting Woman regardless of your Height. I would be proud to meet you. I shot the 15 International Trap Layout at the Cardinal and only used my 2nd shot 3 times if memory serves from 2012. My 48 was not bad for first time shooting it.

Shot my brand new Caesar Guerini 32" O/U w/double release for the first time. w/full & X-full tubes.

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

 

Sorry Bat. I should not create hostility. I sometimes get stupid when discussing things I feel strongly about. And, I guess there are times when I feel like animosity is the order of the day. It has been known to surface in the trapshooter crowd. I should know better than to create it myself. Again, sorry.
On the angles of the old vs the new, I may be off on the math stuff. I admit it is not my strong suit. But I have been shooting trap a long time and I shot from a young age at a club where I was pretty involved. I have been a trapper (loaded those old Western handsets) and a puller and when I was Pres of our local club was right in the era when everyone went to PAT traps. (We also had two certified bunkers with their 15 individual traps which I was at least signifigantly enough familiar to change the layouts in accord with International rules.).
I may be wrong but I do not think the modern trap houses would have any problems throwing targets in accord with the old rules that HB suggests. We went from the old Western traps with the "3 hole" targets (and there was a 4th and 5th hole which were seldom used) to PAT traps with few glitches though the PATs were significantly larger because they held more targets.
And the old standard was just outside of straight aways from 1 and 5 with outside variance of 10% allowed. If you look at the diagram that HB posted you can draw a line from 1 and 5 across the center point and it is just inside(We can get into reading the traps and interrupters and all that stuff of course.) the expected outside settings. Trapshooting was harder then. In some ways LOTS harder because those sharp angles, which did get thrown, had a way of finding folks on the corners.
Do you ever hear of people talking about getting "beat" by a target anymore? I don't. You may not make a good move but that feeling of being beat is darn rare. It didn't used to be rare. And, it sure was not rare from the 27.
Anyway, I think it is a shame our sport is dying when shooting is up. There are more folks shooting lots of holes in paper than there have been in a long time. And many of them are young. Imagine.
Right or wrong, I think trap is on a downward "graph" significantly because of dumbing it down. And being away from it for about 10 years I see the incremental change even more sharply.
I saw it happening, but its here in spades.
Cheers, Jake

 

Gary, I have shot a whole lot of Bunker and many times with members of the national team. And trust me, 48 of 50 is better than "not bad" for the first time shooting it. Its "not bad" for some of the best bunker shooters in the world.

 

Using league records from 1965 to the present I found the scores needed to win haven't changed regardless of target settings, voice pulls or ftf's. The ftf rule is useful when some jerk decides his gun should work even if it's obviously broken or his reloads lack primers, otherwise, it's probably meaningless.

 

Oleo, You say the scores have not changed. You are probably right. I certainly have not checked the records.
But, the targets are easier. No debate about that. Narrower angles and shorter distance.
Have the number of shooters in big events (Grand, state shoots, zones, regional grands) changed? Are fewer shooters shooting the same winning scores? Have the number of shooters who shot 100s, 200s to get into shootoffs changed? Are there more? Are there more straights with less shooters?
And I have to disagree with you on the ftf rule. It allows ftf for any reason. Everyone says that it is not "supposed" to be used to simply turn down targets. But it is. And, it especially is when someone has run about 85 birds out of a hundred in a handicap or 185 or so straight into a 200 event.

 

Trapshooting has evolved into expensive recreation where shooters compete with overpriced guns and cheap shells. I get a kick out of watching 70 yo+ wannabees who can barely walk trying to muscle the latest Super Trap Special weighing over 10 lbs. and wondering why they miss targets. When I started back in the 60's much lighter trap guns were the norm and high scores on wide targets were just as common. I suppose we needed to narrow the targets so aging shooters could still feel competitive.

 

Jakearoo,

I realize this is a sore subject with you, and I 100% get that you are saying it is easy for someone to cheat. I agree with that, but you keep posting inaccurate information trying to make your point. Just say that cheaters can get away with it easily, but don't make false claims that the rule allows ftf for any reason, or that the definition of a ftf was changed after the voice releases came about.

I also disagree with you about how often it is claimed, at least in registered shooting. Especially by the better shooters. Go watch a squad of the big dogs shoot, and it will be rare that you see a ftf claimed.

 

Ironic that Bat's argument is absolutely without facts. He tells someone to "watch a squad" and then make a decision. LOL
We need a graph for that statement..

 

Bat, I have watched plenty of "big dog" squads shoot. (Admittedly, not too many since the ftf rule was formally put in place.) I've even shot on a few of them.
As I said in my post above, you see turn downs more when you get to the end of the round. I have watched more than one "big dog" have a straight or 99 going in handicap and in the last 15 birds if they get a hard angle from the corner they don't even move the gun. Just put it down, remount and call again.
In the days of hand pulls, turn down were usually accompanied by glowering at the puller and a mumble of "slow." Not everyone does it certainly. Not even the majority. But it sure does happen. And if you have watched the "big dog" squads shoot, you have seen it too. And the truth is, many of those "big dog" squads who shoot together regularly are almost complicit in it. They don't question their pal. If anything, they support them.
And I ask you again, please tell me any other competitive sport that allows a failure to respond to a ball (or anything else) "in play" and get a "do over."

 

ATA Rule
7. D. 1. "FAILURE TO FIRE
The following procedure shall be followed in all tournaments:
A contestant shall be allowed two (2) failures to fire for any reason including a flinch during each Singles or Doubles sub-event, regardless of the length of the sub-event, with the exception stated in Paragraph C., 2 above.
When the first or second allowable Failure to Fire in any sub-event occurs, the contestant shall be allowed to call for and fire at another target, and the result of the shot will be scored in accordance with these Official Rules."

And yes, Paragraph C. 2. says it is a lost target:
"When a while target appears promptly after a contestant's recognizable command and is within the legal limits of flight and the contestant voluntarily does not fire."

But that is an exception to the rule without any teeth. Who decides if it was a "voluntary" refusal to fire or whether the target was "prompt" or "legal?"

Ever see an ftf happen since the rule went in place on one of those "big dog" squads where the folks they shoot with 35 times a year determined that it was "voluntary" failure and declared it lost? When did you see it?

Might it be possible when those "big dogs" are shooting with all their pals, who they shoot with at most events, that the rest of the squad supports the shooter's ftf and does not question it?

 

OK, sounds like you are agreeing that the rule calls for it to be called LOST. As I stated before, your point is that the rule is easy to take advantage of and cheat, as you call it "But that is an exception to the rule without any teeth". That's the distinction I have been making all along. We all know the rule is that it is lost if you just turn down a legal target. Easy to cheat, I have agreed all along, but don't make it worse by trying to tell everyone that the intention of the rule is to let you turn down legal targets. That's all I'm trying to get across.

As far as the big dogs go, or really any very good shooters for that matter, I do not believe they claim many ftfs at all. My personal opinion is that they are the least likely to do it of all because they know the rules, and, in my opinion, don't cheat. That's my opinion, yours may differ. I think you are more likely to find someone doing it because they have heard shooters tell them exactly what you are telling them - that it's ok to do. They don't take the time to understand the rule, they just hear, or read, you saying the rule allows it, so they do it. Then of course, there are certainly those who know the rule, but just plain cheat. They are out there, I just don't see much of it.

When you say "since the rule went in place" I assume you are talking about back in 1992 or about that time?

 

Of course it is.

 

That sounds like the time frame. Though, I have not looked it up.
And, assuming that you are correct, that would be about the time most clubs had gone to voice pulls. It didn't happen all at once but by the early 90s it was getting pretty universal. At least, at the big clubs.

 

Jakearoo, most clubs had not gone to voice pulls in 1992. It was years later before they were commonplace.

 

Do overs - freebies - mulligans - are all part of the snowflake society. Add participation trinkets and you have Bat's ATA.

 

Oleo, I enjoyed this entire post. But I cut out the above because it literally had me LOL. It is sooooo true.
A $15,000 specialized "trap" gun, often with no artisan special engraving or adornment, and the owners are shooting the cheapest shells they can find.
It reminds me of a friend from high school who had a rich grandfather who would buy a new Cadillac every year and then take it to his mechanic and have the carburetor and fuel injectors modified so it would run on regular gasoline instead of high octane. He was real proud of himself that he didn't have to put expensive gas in his Cadillac.

 

Why's that my ATA? I don't have a problem with you complaining about or changing the rule, just be more accurate when you describe it. Again, I don't see hardly any ftfs during an entire year on squads I shoot. One or two a year for a squad because a bad shell does happen, but besides that I just don't see it occurring in the real world. Maybe I'm surrounded by all of the honest shooters and you have all the cheats??

Really, most of you experienced shooters see a lot of FTFs claimed at ATA shoots? Dawg? You can do away with the rule and it won't have much impact at all. The cheaters will still cheat, they are more likely to claim an illegal target than a ftf anyway.

 

I disagree Bat. I was pretty active in the early 90s. And it was then that I was President of our club. Voice pulls were getting very common. Not universal, but common. And especially at the good and big clubs. We certainly had them at Miramar in San Diego.
Any way you want to cut it, the ftf rule was in the same "era" as the conversion to voice pulls.

 

We can agree to disagree. Anywhere I went it wasn't until the CVR's came out that they were in anything even close to widespread use.

 

Why would anyone want any failure to fire allowances? Someone explain how that made the sport more sporting?

 

I would like to meet this Lady T.

The idea of a wobble trap being the fourth trap suits me.

 

You rock lady T

 

think archery.
think a strike in bowling.
think x in pistol match.


now, think trap.

these are all games that require a disciplined shot. they also require a repetitive routine that must be practiced.

now think wobble or international.
in comparison, its circus trap.

i know shooters who dont compete on windy days.
and i know shooters who wont shoot wobble because they say all it does is encourage shooters to shoot at non regulation birds.
bad birds.

case in point....do you hoop a wobble trap? no need.

hunting and competing in a clay sport are not the same. people tend to forget that.

wobble is jigaboo trap. american skeet and ata trap is ballroom dancing.
hope it helps.

 

I once shot a wobble event with the late, great Frank Little at a charity shoot run by another former great shooter and Winchester rep John Muir. As I recall I broke 24/25 with 2 shots and felt real good. Frank broke all 25 with his Perazzi TMX and one shot. So much for changing anything. Of course, we were all young then.

 

There you have it......a poster implied wobble targets are just as easy. Anyone can post here.

 

Orangeman Do not put to much stock in what some posters say. Roger C.

 

Wobble is best shot at the 27! Trouble is nobody wants to shoot it at our club. If they don’t have a chance to break them all they won’t shoot.