The ATA Handicapping System

Damn so many new shooters that know nothing about the past, and competetive targets, that we Teethed on.

Trying to tell all how great it is today, that are shooting soft targets, Hdcp, Sgls, and very short yardage Doubles
it is like they are on PABLUM, and they do not know what PABLUM was.

Hell you can legally shoot 1340 fps shells, thats 1250 +or - 90 fps=1340, to be safe I would load 1320fps, all thanks to N1H1 and all his Graphs, and mis-understanding 1200fps and 3 1/4 dram loads, he was setting up the TOP DOGS winning agenda's. LEO and I would shoot #6s if they let us. His words #6s. Try some 1250 1 1/8th oz #6s and look at the smoke they make.

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

 

Keep in mind this sport was never meant to make losers into champions. That was their job, to practice and perfect their skills. No rule change can make people of unequal ability equal. You are starting to sound like a bunch of liberals.
The only way to even come close to doing that is to pour more concrete. Roger C.

 

Here's something to consider.

In an amateur golf tournament, only those in the Championship flight are eligible to win the Championship. Each flight below the championship flight will have a flight winner. Tournament organizers handicapping by average scores need to make the handicap ranges small enough so that all the golfers in a flight feel they actually have a shot at first place in their flight. Tournaments that go to an 11th or 12th flight or even more have lots of entrants, and tightly bunched handicap levels.

Are there any take-a ways from golf that could help improve the ATA handicapping system?

 

True, but that made me laugh.

 

So tell all of us what your overall handicap average is!

 

Right now, 2018 is 88 plus. Do I suck like you?? LOL

 

And that's over 2,500 handicap targets for 2018.

 

You'd better take every reduction. You, like me, are always first or 2nd losers.

 

The reductions are why I am coming full circle. In 1974 I started on the 22 yrd. line shot 100,000 targets from the 27 yrd. line . I'm now a USTA -B on the 23.5. 1.5 more and I will have come full circle. I enjoyed every minute of it. Roger C.

 

The system must have to make sense before it can work. Giving people a computer generated 1 yard reduction when they have an 88 plus average does not make sense. I got a 1 yard punch at the current Northeastern Grand even though I was recently given a reduction which I refused. I do agree that the old guys on the 27 with 75 averages should be moved down. I think that's where most of the problem lies.

 

After reading every post on this subject, I find it hard to understand why most of you supposedly competitive shooters can not see that the only way to come close to equalizing the venue of handicap in trap shooting is MORE YARDAGE.
There are very few clubs that will ever see any shooters standing on yardage of 27 yds. or more. The B.S. that it is to expensive to add the concrete is just that B.S. Two yards of concrete are more than enough to convert a field to the 30 yrd. line. Or 15 stepping stones placed properly would be cheaper.
There is no way to make good shooter out of people that do not have the dedication to become great shooters. That is a personal agenda that every one makes for them selves, There is no way to elevate poor shooting performance shooters to greatness with out the work on their part.
I hope soon the EC has the balls to try this answer to a very complex problem. I was a 27yd. shooter for many years, carried some fairly good averages from there, but age and body problems will never let me attain the 30 yrd. line, I would have loved to been able to compete from there. Roger C.

 

It would be very difficult to make it so everyone has an equal chance of winning the handicap. You have a 19 yard shooter that can't hit 85 on a good day from the 16 versus someone like Keith Ditto that carries a 96 average from the 27 yard line and a 99.69 from the 16. You would have to add about 20 yards of concrete and I would still bet on Ditto.

If you really want equal chances, we might as well put the names in a hat and pull one out as the winner. No would have to even shoot.

 

Add 20 yds. of concrete you say? Next you'll suggest centerfire rifles since only they would be successful on the 47 yd. line. Rocket science at it's best.

 

Then replace the word Handicap with 27 Yard Singles and use the class system like16 yard Singles and Doubles uses. Everyone shoots from the 27 yard line.

 

I have seen a lot of fun shoots where they do a pretty good job breaking targets at 50 yards with a shot gun. I am not recommending it, I am just saying that there is no way to make it so everyone has an equal chance of winning other than randomly drawing a number for the winner.

 

This discussion has been going on for years and I know most shooters are pretty well set in their opinions but let me relate a little experiment that was done last summer. We had six shooters, all legitimate 25 and 27 yard shooters. First we all shot 50 targets from roughly 30 yards. The second 25 were better for four shooters which seemed to tell us good shooters will adjust pretty quickly. Next we shot 50 targets from the 27 but the angles were increased considerably, how wide I’m not sure but much wider. We all shot lower scores with the wider angle targets and only one shooter showed any improvement with the second 25. The wider angles seemed to really hurt all of us much more than the longer yardage. Not very scientific but we all struggled with angles more than distance. Not many targets were shot at so I’m sure we don’t have the answers but before you disregard wider angles give them a try.

 

Two good quotes and there were others too. It's encouraging to see some readers giving deeper thought to our handicapping system.

I tend to agree with the position that a handicap event is not a championship at all, though our governing bodies have largely stood by the premise that someone shooting from 19 yards who posts a higher score than a shooter competing from 27 yards in the Grand American Handicap can be known as a World Champion.

The Grand American Handicap event should determine yardage winners and nothing more. Anyone who thinks a short yardage competitor is more accomplished than those from long yardage because they posted the high score winning the event, don't have their thinking caps on.

As I've stated before, 'all competitors shoot singles from 16 yards.' 'All competitors shoot doubles from 16 yards.' Both these events allow for the crowning of a champion (the best shooter when everyone shoots from the same distance) and offer class trophies and options for those of lesser ability.

Why does it make sense to some that it is perfectly acceptable for them to shoot for championship honors while standing several yards closer to the target? If this position applies to distance handicapping, it must also apply to the Singles Championship and Doubles Championship. But it does not. All competitors shoot from the 16-yard mark. Name one Class D shooter who enters either of the above championships believing they have a good chance of winning the event. There are none and what's more disheartening to them is seeing several scores of 194 in D Class at their State Shoot. There is no perfect handicapping system yet devised and therefore true shooter equality will never be achieved.

You can't penalize someone who has worked hard to become a good shooter and maintains a creditable average, by making them shoot from 8 yards further distance than those who lack the ability or who don't put in the time and effort.

We certainly want to continue staging handicap events, but they should not be considered as championships. A long-distance Championship, where everyone who wishes to enter, shoots from the same distance is a true championship mirroring the long-standing equity presumed in the Singles and Doubles Championships.

I might also remind readers that in the early Grand American Handicap At Live-Birds, the handicap distance for shooters of less ability was 24 or 25 yards and the best shooters were assigned to 32 and 33 yards. This all took place before voice-activated calls, plastic wads, lenient rule changes allowing failures, adjustable stocks, and improvements in ammunition and other areas.

Some food for thought from Sportsmen's Review in 1920:

​

I look forward to thoughtful rebuttals and debate, especially any rationalization as to why all shooters compete from the same distance in singles and doubles championships.

HB

 

Josh, Now get 5 shooters with an 85 or less average from the 16 yard line and conduct the same experiment. Then post the results. Roger C.

 

Roger, why would I want to do that. I’m pretty sure angles would just further frustrate them. My point was just that for us that day angles were more challenging than distance or at least that’s how it seemed.

 

Some of us may have been present when the late great Frank Little shot off for the 16 yd, title many years ago in PA. Since the two main competitors showed no signs of missing any targets and it was getting late the distance and angle was changed several times. Of course Frank just ate up any and all targets thrown. I was present when he broke 25 straight wobble targets-all with one shot. Can anyone tell me in what hole those wobble targets may have been thrown in and why it didn't affect Frank? Add concrete!

 

We do not need concrete, what we need is an ATA BOD w/intelligence, to go back to a MANDATORY 45+ degree Angle at 50-52 yards. On a BETTER Trap Machine like a PRO model that can throw as many angles as Straight a-ways which should be a Mandatory Specification of the ATA Required Target Throwers/ Trap Machines, Amen Shooters. Most ATA BOD/EC/Central Hdcp Comittee / do not have a 90% Hdcp Average, Which should be a Mandatory Requirement for them.

Give Mandatory Yardage Reductions to shooters until they can Maintain a 90+ average, some can never produce a 90% average if you put them on the 16 Yard Line.

I have preached this for years, and my View has Never wavered from it. Ask any long term Trapshooter if I have ever WAVERED from this in my 55 Years of shooting?

My personal opinion is the 16 yard singles should be eliminated altogether, Why it is nothing but an endurance shoot.

NO Sport I know of has a CLOSER Procedure, not even Horse Shoes, SKEET/SPORTING CLAYS that throw everything at you, climbers/ drifters/ floaters/ overheads/ incoming/ crossers/ Rabbits, different size and designs of targets.

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

 

I think you might need to add more concrete than is currently being considered. The farther back you go the less gun movement you have. Back far enough and you’ll only move the gun a few inches left or right. Move closer and shoot wider targets and you’ll have gun movement of a couple feet left or right. I think most misses are caused by having to move to a target.

 

Haven't spent any real time at the 27 yd. line I see?

 

Enough time to complete my grand slam years ago. Thanks for reminding me why I don’t post here

 

Understand that these add more concrete guys want to kill competition so that THEY could be more successful. I fully agree with HB, any prizes and money should be on a yardage group basis. Anyone with less than maximum yardage should never be crowned overall champion. And yes, I am not a 27 yarders so I should not be an event champion.

 

Why not? Anyone can be an event champion in a 16 yard singles event or a 16 yard doubles event if they don't shoot for category and break more targets than everyone else. In addition to the 16 yard singles event, why not have a 27 yard singles event and let the shooter decide if he/she wants to shoot for category of event winner just like they do for 16 yard singles? Why not base class assignment on demonstrated averages regardless of gender or age?

 

Josh, what year did you get your Grand Slam?

 

Please read HB's detailed post. Everyone shoots the same targets from the same positions for singles and doubles so any shooter regardless of class can be event champion once they shoot the highest score and win any shootoff.
The current handicap system should tell you in which sandbox you need to play. Short yarders should not be allowed to play in long yarders sandbox.

 

Yup, 200 straights are common in Handicap. I get 'em all the time-in my dreams.

 

Let’s see, who said anything about 200 straights in handicap but with wider angles there would be fewer 200 straights in singles. I guess the year I completed my grand slam is important regarding my ability to post on here. It’s been over 10 years.

 

I think a handicap system is one that makes it easier for the "lesser" accomplished people not make it harder for the people who worked their butts off to be among the best.

Maybe we should let the less accomplished shoot handicap from the 16 yards line if their singles average is less than 90.

 

Josh, are kidding? You really don't remember the year you completed your Grand Slam. Here's a link to the ATA website that list the name and year of everyone who has a Grand Slam. Please find your name and let us know the year. Thank you.

 

I know exactly when and where I completed my grand slam and who was on the squad. I also remember shooting under the lights in Vandalia. I’m in my seventies and the last time out in ATA in shot 92 and 93 from the 27. So if it’s so important to you to know go figure it out.

 

Mike, I have posted before that at least 40 percent of the shooters have a 16 yard average of less than 90 percent. You could have this group stand 1 yard behind the trap house and they still would not be competitive enough to win the handicap event. Yardage does not give everyone an equal or mostly equal chance of winning the event.

 

Josh, I already looked at the names who have completed a Grand Slam before I asked you for the year. I didn't see a Josh Randall listed on the ATA website. I am also in my seventies and don't see nearly as well as I once did, so I maybe I missed it. Help me out and tell me the year.

http://www.shootata.com/ShooterInformationCenter/GrandSlamRecognition.aspx

Thank you.

 

Shooting a 92 or 93 in Handicap seldom gets more than an honorable mention here in PA. Now in Mississippi!

 

He must have confused himself with Randy Ross. It happens sometimes when you hit those golden years.

 

I was always under the impression we were not supposed to use our real names on here. By the way when did you complete your grand slam

 

Josh....did you ever shoot 200 birds straight? Do you need to know the secret?

 

Now you're really confused. Not once did I profess to own a "grand slam" as did you. If I did as you say please point out the source of your info.

 

Josh does not know the secret of running 200 straight.

 

Josh asked Hap a while ago how to run 200 straight.
You know eventually you're going to have to tell us your secret to running 200 straights in big shoots...Josh Randall

 

Josh, a grand slam is something to be proud of. Your unwillingness to tell us the year you completed your grand slam speaks volumes.

 

That was directed at Garry but as long as you’ve decided that I have to identify myself in order to be believed then I’ll give you a little information. I’m from the northeast originally and did know Frank a little. I also knew of a guy is that has a wife and son that are good shooters. I’m pretty sure he sells or sold guns and also I believe he managed a gun club. All I did was post my thoughts and then the attacks started because I disagreed with someone who doesn’t even compete anymore. A H I would never ask you about a grand slam because I already know you don’t have one.

 

Where did I ask anyone how to run 200 straight

 

Just so happens I knew Frank Little plenty. He also often stated he found the 27 yd. line his biggest challenge. You, on the other hand, professed to believe the 27 yd. line is easier than shorter yardage because of less gun movement. I simply stated you're full of it. Now do agree with me?

 

I never said it was easier I said that moving back to 30 from the 27 May not present as much of a challenge to good shooters as some think it might. I also said that wider angles from the 27 made things quite a bit more difficult because wider angles require wider gun movement.

 

January 12, 2015. On this forum.
You know eventually you're going to have to tell us your secret to running 200 straights in big shoots...Josh Randall.

 

Just went back and reread my first post due to the fact a couple individuals can’t seem to comprehend my point. I said I believe shooting today’s targets from the 30 would be harder but I felt and still feel shooting wider angle targets from the 27 would be as hard if not harder.

 

So Smithy I just went back and read the post about running 200 straight. I also read the post directly above from my good friend who had just run his first 200 at Tucson. I was on the squad behind him. I was congratulating him on running 200 and said tongue in cheek you’re going to have to show me how you do that. Nice job twisting the meaning of the thread

 

Josh, Doc,
Wider angles and tougher targets in general will hurt the less accomplished shooters more than it will the good shooters. That will not solve any problems it will only help thin the ranks of the shooters we have left. Common sense dictates MORE concrete.
Are we trying to save the shooters we have, or do you want to speed up the mass exodus that has been going on. Can you tell me one thing that will do what more concrete will achieve? Roger C.

 

"I believe most misses are caused by having to move to the target". The resident troll speaks profoundly.

 

the shooters we have are moving to sporting mostly due to the challenge. The older people such as my self are getting so we are not competitive any more. You might lose shooters with wider targets but I doubt you’re going to gain many with more concrete, you’re just telling the older uncompetitive shooters not to worry because we’ll get rid of the good shooters for you. Put things back where they were and sell the sport to everyone don’t rely on a future by hoping to keep what little you have left. Remember Roger I see you at Tucson and this comes up all the time. Ask Pat M what he thinks in November. Don’t know what he’ll say but I value his opinion.

 

Ollie - ever wonder why a lot of shooters tend to hold a higher gun as they become more a proficient. I think they are trying to cut down on movement. Ollie, some of us still try to compete to bad you’ve decided to sit on the porch and become a crusty old curmudgeon but it’s pretty easy to become negative towards everything I guess

 

No twisting there Josh. I think you are FOS.

 

It was not tongue in cheek. More like smoke up an ass. Troll on.

 

If you didn’t twist the intent of my post then you have a comprehension problem

 

Keep trolling with that intent. wink

 

well let’s see now - I’m still shooting and having fun while the rest of you negative wannabe’s aren’t. So I’ll leave you all to whatever it is your trying to accomplish on this website.

 

Who isn't shooting?

A lot of people leave this site after the fact checking.

 

No fact checking just misrepresentations. I’ll let my posts stand and as far as my 2015 post you referred to I think anyone reading the post prior to mine from a good friend will put everything in perspective. If you wonder why your website isn’t growing this thread is a perfect example of stupid attacks on anyone with a different idea or thought. You guys have fun among yourselves.
…..……………………….

Hi Josh.....I like the question.
If you wonder why your website isn’t growing.
Every month is a record. Every year is a record. Our site is visited my more shooters than that old worn out place. Our site provider says we may be the busiest shotgun site. We have thousands visiting this site in a day. Thanks for being another visitor.

These guys do a lot of fact checking.

Before you leave be sure to find the thread with the Americantrapshooter.com decals...….joe

 

Different idea or thought???? Poor guy got caught in a fib and he calls it a different idea. Bullies. LOL

 

Got caught in a fib? You tell me what the fib is I’m accused of then we’ll put up a large amount of money and we’ll see. Put your money where your mouth is

 

I’m waiting Joe. You and Andy like to make accusations and have a fun little time huh. Well you’ve called me a liar and now you can prove I’m a liar. Put your money up

 

No need for 30 yards, wider angles, more spring, mandatory reductions. I probably don't know what I'm talking about although I did pay for a 200 acre farm shooting and from what I won or knew about trap shooting. Brad

 

So Brad, you're saying 51 yds. is too close. What do you recommend 55-60 or maybe just put in those old international springs and let 'em fly.

troll on!

 

The offer stands Andy. You two name the amount and I’ll prove everything I said. Put up Andy or are you going to run and hide. Knowing Frank can’t help you now.

 

OK, I'll finally admit it. I'm really Frank Little and I got my grand slam in 1968. I tried to keep it a secret. Ooops, I can't be Frank Little-he's dead. Alright I'm really Leo Harrison and I got my grand slam in 1979. I'm still talking about it and how great I am. Oh darn, big Leo is dead too. Old age makes you forget easily. Now who am I?-I'm working on it.

 

Josh,
I shot with Pat M. for many years. We never ask to have a machine reset. Where ever they were we shot them. This was when the targets were more sporting. I know where Pat stands on this subject. I respect his stance and he respects mine. Good friends can do that.
On another note, you seem to be a little thin skinned. Temper is not a very becoming thing to show in public. Check and see if your med's have run out. I will be in Tucson for the Autumn Grand, stop me and say hello, I shot in Ohio for many years, always nice to meet another buckeye. We vent on this site, but we try hard not to get personal with one another.
Roger C.

 

No Andy, your just a guy from Pa who lives vicariously through his son and second wife. You love to make others think your in the know but your really just another beer drinking hanger on. As far as Leo goes when he lost the singles championship to Gary Bonetti at his last spring grand after a couple hundred targets it was me sitting in the golf cart with him and getting more shells for him. You know everybody and everything. Ask around you’ll find out who I am. I’m done here and now I guess I’m really not mad anymore I just feel sad for you. Joe I understand as he wants to get people to visit his site although I disagree with some of his actions but I’m done.

 

Roger, I haven’t seen you called a liar on here. I’m sure you would be a little pissed off if you were, especially from someone very few hold in high regard.

 

I love trapshooting history! It reveals much for those who pay attention to it.

From the beginning every attempt at achieving equity in handicapping shooters has been short-lived and doomed to failure. We currently have the most successful handicapping system ever devised, yet complaints continue, shortfalls are identified and competitors don't feel they have a chance (even in their own yardage group).

The arguments of today regarding fairness in handicapping shooters, are the same ones that took place more than a century ago. Every conceivable idea has been tried, from allowing poorer shooters to stand as close as 14-17 yards from the trap, to giving them added targets, to counting a certain number of misses as "no target" allowing another shot, allowing 1-5 uses of the second barrel on each sub-event, using each shooters 16 yard average to handicap, to increasing the shooting distance for the more accomplished shooter.

Here is some information from Mr. W. W. Lancaster who was a member of the Grand American Handicap committee. It appeared in the September 27, 1930 issue of Sportsmen's Review:

What! The Grand American Handicap has been won mostly by short yardage shooters for the first 31 years?

​

How shooters were handicapped at the 1934 Grand American: (not one shooter was handicapped to the 26 or 27) The maximum handicap used was to 25 yards.

​

So how long has handicapping been viewed as a problem?

1887

EQUAL & FAIR AT THE TRAPS

WANTED – A SOLUTION
A Problem Which Has Been and is Still Vexing Trap-Shooters.​

"A practically unsolved problem is how to fairly and therefore satisfactorily equalize shooters at the trap. Five years ago this was not a problem. It is the outgrowth of trapshooting at inanimate targets which has afforded so cheap a means of acquiring skill in the use of the shot-gun as to almost nationalize this recreation. Trap-shooters everywhere are seeking a solution of this problem."

1890

" How to make it equal for all men at the trap seems to be the leading question among the shooters just now. To put a good shot back so far that the chances are against his killing a hard bird seems unfair, and yet if he shoots with the beginner it discourages a novice. You can never make a bad shot win over a good one."

So, what has history shown us?

It has shown that those who truly desire to become more proficient at any yardage, will.

The maximum handicap yardage has been increased several times over the many decades.

They were increased to diminish the dominance of the long-yardage shooters. This even though shorter yardage shooters had swept the handicap events and GAH for over a century.

​

In 1952, Harold's Trapshooting Country Club had a 27 yard mark on the second station of their fifth trap and the label adjacent to it said: "Mr. Riegger." That's Mr. Arnold Riegger, All-American from Seattle, WA who is a THOF Inductee.

The ATA increased the back fence for the 1955 target year. Why?
There were only 8 ATA members who achieved the 27 in 1955, Arnold Riegger being the most prominent.

Well according to written accounts, the handicap increase was made to "Stop Arnold Riegger."

Mr. Riegger had won the diamond badge placed in competition at Harold's Gun Club at Reno. Harold Smith decided to run for Nevada State Delegate with his main goal to get the handicap distance increased to 27 yards in an attempt to stop Riegger. He proposed the new rule at the Board of Directors meeting and it passed.

My point is that history shows us that increasing yardage at best is a short term partial fix.

TIMELINE OF CHANGES
​

16 & 18 YARDS In 1885 single target shooting was handicapped based on the gauge (bore).
Singles was an 18-Yard event however when more shooters started using the 12 ga. it was thought they had a disadvantage so they were permitted to shoot from 16 yards.

​

14 – 25 YARDS

​

22 YARDS Effective before 1914

​

23 YARDS Effective Date – January 1, 1907
Approved by Resolution of the Interstate Association at their meeting
December 6, 1906, for 1907 Target Year.

​

25 YARDS Effective 1925

​

27 YARDS Effective 1934-1936
In the Grand American programs but never used.

​

27 YARDS Effective Date – January 1, 1955

​

It never takes very long before the best are back shooting good scores. And don't forget all the well-meaning people who also favor making the sport easier for those with less ability by reducing the Flights & Angles.

In conclusion, does anyone really think adding a 30 yard is a good idea when increases have not fixed the problem for over a century? If it does hurt the back-fencers and allows more short-yardage winners, does this mean equity was still not achieved since long yardage shooters were over-handicapped?

Trapshooting was created to aid in hunting and live-pigeon practice. There were no perfect targets.

Who thinks it has been a good idea to diminish the difficulty in trapshooting in the face of improvements like voice-activated calls, rule changes eliminating shooter mistakes (not loading a shell) that were once scored "lost" and of course improvements in guns and ammo believed by some.

What would old-time record holders think of today's winners? Remember, they shot doubles at 35° left and 35° right of the center stake. With all the improvements, we shoot 17° and cry when we get a first target just a little wide.

Hey, but I know there will be no return to the old ways. Some think it may drive shooters away and stymie new members. Why did most of us continue to shoot for better scores when we only broke a few targets out of our first 25 instead of saying "its too hard for me I quit"?

Enjoy Our History

HB

 

FYI, at least I have a family that's willing and able to participate in Trapshooting with me. Darn good at it too. Others, like you can only wish for my good fortune while you'd rather be only with the guys. Well, the last two Singles events I shot produced two 99's. Not bad for an old hanger-on but proves nothing. Now, in our Winter league last year, which fields around 400 shooters, I tied Bob Malmstedt for HOA after 14 shoots, won it twice and placed 18 times since 1969. Not bad for an old hanger on who consumes at least 3 Miller Lites each and every day. Now, off to Sporting Clays later this week.

 

This discussion has digressed from the OP's important topic, reminding of why I departed from another forum years ago. Very sad.



HB

 

And we get do-overs / mulligans as user-1 would say. How many mulligans is the ATA giving now?

 

Great post!!!

 

According to the poster of many charts and graphs the 27 yd. line is about the max. current ammo will prove to be effective. Phil Kiner believes adding only one yard will reduce scoring significantly. I believe very few shooters on the East coast will ever come near a 30 yd. line. If in fact shooters bunch up shortly after the addition of the 30yd. line it only proves how much we needed it.

 

From a club's perspective, widening the angles would be a much more attractive option than adding yardage. Same with speed.

 

Kilmon,
(from a clubs perspective) That is how the 2 hole was put in place. Clubs wanted easier targets thinking it would increase attendance. They did this even knowing that they were not following the rules of the ATA. Also the ATA did not try to enforce the rules that they set. Do you really think that the same clubs would now widen the angles?
If the ATA made reductions mandatory , and added yardage, it would make many shooters more competitive and add a little more difficulty to the more accomplished shooters. It would be a great first step in reorganizing our sport.
A note to Josh. I have been called worse by some posters. I just put on my thick skin coat. and smile at the attempt to make me angry. Roger C.

 

My point is that if the ATA tells me to throw wider angles at a faster speed, I can and will comply in 30 minutes without any cost. Adding 9 feet to five stations requires contractors, time and most importantly money.

 

I got an idea. Just mark off three yards at each station-hammer in stake and if you like invest in a line maker (like they use at ballfields). Then sit back and wait for your first shooter to show up wanting to shoot at 28-30yds. Better bring a cold case of beer as it's gonna be a long wait.

 

Until everyone gets serious about enforcement, any "changes" will not get a lot of mileage ......

Before the "rule-book" included Mulligans, there were too many that would break a 100 by calling for 150 targets .....

 

Thanks User 1, that made my day!

 

East Coast shooters will be affected a little more than the West Coast trapshots at the implementation of a 30 yard line, and "how about that". . . another long-standing inequity resurfaces, i.e. the competition for high annual average winners in each of the disciplines. The difficulty of the East Coast targets vs. the West Coast targets. Now how can we fix that unfair condition??
I guess that's why Kay Ohye, of New Jersey, was so proud the year he led the nation.

There will never be equalization of the trapshooting ranks. Our current system could be made better if classifiers would take a little more time to review the average card and ask about recent wins and ties that are not recorded on the card rather than depend so much on the computer screen.

I'd still like to know the rationale for reducing the Flights and Angles in 1997. Didn't anyone think about how it might also make it easier for the long-yardage shooters? I believe it was a bad idea and not in the best interests of the sport. It has caused an abundance of high scores, made the options unattractive and a rise in the number of shootoffs, adding to the club's expenses. Then not long after came target setting by the use of a chronograph or radar gun. More high scores. What were they thinking?

Perhaps some will be shocked to learn that in the 64 years since the inception of the 27-yard mark I count only nine (9) 27-yard shooters winning the Grand American Handicap, the overwhelming number of winners being short-yardage shooters. So do the back-fencer's really dominate the sport? Do they have an unfair advantage? Perhaps it is the best shooters who have been penalized by the handicapping system and maximum distance mark. Surely, if they unfairly dominate the sport there should be more 27-yard champs don't you think?

Adding concrete is a non-ending quick fix. Shoot trap the way it was introduced. Sports are supposed to be difficult. Gun clubs can throw non-registered easy targets as much as they want. For those who like competition and have a desire to register their targets, the difficulty factor must be higher, especially in championship events. It's not practice - its competition.

Return to a competitive target, its better for the registered sport, or keep penalizing the 27-yard (or 28, 29 & 30yd) shooter who devoted more time, effort and money in striving to be the best. Shame on them.

Will the matter finally be solved when the list of GAH Champion's contains not one long-yardage shooter's name?
Perhaps they deserve a bit more respect for remaining silent on the handicap issue, especially knowing that history has shown us it is the shooters positioned closer to the target, usually with lower ability, who have had the best chances of being crowned as the Grand American Handicap Champion.

HB

 

You can not judge a "handicap" system by ONE Event ......

Add up ALL the "earned yardage" from the "27" for the year and see what that tells you .....

 

I wouldn't put much faith in what Kiner thinks, he was the force behind the 2 yards off TWICE that was supposed to make everyone shoot handicap. I told him it was a bad idea. It was a BAD idea.

Three hole, longer targets, mandatory reductions, and draw for banks or get used to getting your butts kicked for ever by the REAL good shots. Just facts. Some people are better than others and the good shots kill easy targets. Brad

 

I find it very difficult to understand how someone claims we're penalizing a shooter by having him shoot from the 30 yd. line. Afterall, the only way a shooter gets to the 30 is by winning or placing high enough to earn yardage. Heck, he might actually win the shoot and quickly make the new fence. You're not penalizing anyone, just further handicapping him as a reward for his achievement-just like the 19 yd. shooter who had his day in the limelight and also moves back. So you actually believe it's a penalty for shooters who've already accumulated thousands of unanswered yards? Baloney!

 

Kilmon,
You would be one of a very few that would honor the ATA's mandate of wider angles. If something is not done to refresh this sport you will not even need the 27 yrd line. If you run a gun club, you must invest in the infastructure if you want to stay in business. Investing in a little concrete my make the difference between having a successful club and a closed one. Remember the golden rule of business, you are either moving ahead or moving backwards. In business there is no such thing as standing still.
The best start for rebuilding this sport is, MANDATORY REDUCTIONS,and MORE CONCRETE. It is the only way that will not affect the marginal shooters. The good shooters will adapt to the changes, the marginal one's will not have to.
Roger C.

 

Let's look at this way. Let's first decide if added yardage a penalty or a reward! At the Westy Hogan this year a 13 year old boy broke a 99 in the preliminary handicap. I believe he received a 2 yd. increase. Quite an achievement for a youngster. He came off the line beaming with pride. Unfortunately,since he shot half price targets he wasn't able to play any options. I'd feel real sorry for him if he felt that 2 yd. increase was considered a penalty when he felt it was a reward for great shooting. I also fail to understand how another shooter farther back is rewarded for shooting good or the short yardage shooter is penalized for shooting good. You can't have it both ways. Therefore, more yardage is needed to further penalize or reward top shooters. Let them decide what it is!

 

HB, thanks for the these numbers. So, in the last 64 Grand American Handicap's, 9 shooters who shot from the 27 yard shooters or 14 percent won the event. That seems to invalidate the theory that many short to mid yardage shooters quit playing the money because they felt they were just feeding the 27 yard shooters?

Here are some interesting numbers on the Grand Slams. The first Grand Slam was completed in 1964 by Dan Orlich. From 1964 through target year 2018 there are 487 shooters who have completed the Grand Slam. 69 percent of the Grand Slams were completed from 989 to 2008.

1964-1968 - 4 shooters
1969-1978 - 16 shooters
1979-1988 - 47 shooters
1989-1998 - 163 shooters
1999-2008 - 173 shooters
2009-2018 - 84 shooters
Total 487 shooters with Grand Slams

 

H.B. It is not that western targets are easier than eastern targets. Remember that in Southern Cal. Nev. AZ. New mexico, we shoot 12 months out of the year. We also have nicer weather most of the year. Eastern and northern shooters have about 5 months of fair weather for shooting. Those are some of the factors differing from west to east. I have split over 40 years of shooting between east and west, there is not that much difference between targets.
Also remember that the sissy targets now thrown, were started in southern California. That raised their averages several years ahead of the east throwing the same sissy targets.There are a lot of things to factor in when comparing areas for shooting and comparing averages.
User 1, adding up the earned yardages is a good way of comparing the ability of shooters. Maybe Kathy Keys could get the info out of the ATA records. Worth a try. Roger C..

 

My bad, I meant to type from 1989 to 2008 - sorry.

 

My bad again. I meant to say: in the last 64 Grand American Handicap's, 9 shooters who shot from the 27 yard line or 14 percent won the event.

I need to call it a day and rest these old eyes.

 

So you're saying all yardage between 19 and 27 is earned (rewarded) but any after the 27 is a penalty? Since we try to avoid a penalty in football we could also say it's proper to possibly break the first 75 in handicap then drop enough targets in the last 25 to avoid a penalty (more yardage). Maybe the sandbaggers have it right. You can't have it both ways!

 

Touche' oleolliedawg, I agree - penalize was not the best word and it was a bit of overreaching on my part. I should have used something along the lines of impede or disadvantage.

In the 1920s, the word handicap as it relates to sports was defined by Websters as:
"To impose disadvantages or impediments upon in order to offset advantages. A condition imposed to equalize the chance of competitors. To encumber with difficulties, hinder or retard."

My 1996 Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines handicapping a little differently:
"A race or contest in which an artificial advantage is given or disadvantage imposed on a contestant to equalize chances of winning. A disadvantage that makes achievement unusually difficult."

I hope some can see how some can see the being disadvantaged might feel a little like a penalty.

I agree that shooters earn their way back to long yardage but they are playing with the current rules and if the ATA leadership thought there was a problem, they certainly would have proposed a change in the name of equity. Although I seem to recall the "more concrete" discussion in an E. C. meeting back when Tom Acklin was president but the 30-yard mark didn't get any traction.

As I've stated, I support a return to the old target setting rules before pouring more concrete. We've been pouring more concrete for a century and the issue of inequity remains. At what point do we stop the pouring? No new rule will make the great shooters stop winning. The 27-yard post didn't stop Arnold Riegger or Dan Orlich. And it seems that the "do-gooders" always push to reduce the difficulty of our sport.

I would like to better understand the problem from your perspective. I think most of us would appreciate learning what problem or inequity you believe the move to 30-yard line solve?

Roger,

I'll yield to your expertise since I admit I have never shot targets out West.

I do understand that shooting conditions make it a little tougher shooting in the East and remember the differing handicap trigger points, but I'm also reminded of opinions I've heard directly from Western shooters as well as articles by Hall of Famers regarding speed and air density. Both Rudy Etchen and Vic Reinders held the opinion that it took more spring tension to throw a target 50 yards in the East than in the West. Here's an interesting article that speaks to several points.

​

 

How do you define them in the context of your post? Thank you,

 

HB, I don't know how you find the articles and information that you post such as Shooting Ballistics, but I am sure glad you do.

 

H.B.
I manufactured trap machines for over 20 years, and never came across needing more spring on east coast targets. On the old X1524 one turn on the main spring added one yard on singles and 1/2 yard on doubles targets. That was about the norm.
I had an airline navigator explain the difference to me. His reply was the difference is so small on a target that it should be of no concern to a shooter. He was talking about in still air conditions.
When you can shoot in nice weather all year it does give you an advantage. In the spring back east we had to shoot many targets just to get back into the game. A winter layoff messes with a shooters mental game also. It is sometimes slow in getting back to normal. Western shooters do not have this to contend with.
On another note most of the very best shooters were from the east. There were and still are some of the best that can not afford to be full time shooters, they never get the attention that the others do. I do not agree with lowering the target requirement, as this would open the door to some one getting lucky and then not competing for the rest of the year.
If the target flight rules are followed, the advantage is very small. I think it is more in the mind than on the field that some see a problem. Roger C.