2020 NRA F-Class National Championship MATCH DIRECTOR’S BULLETIN #1
- Thread starter Matthew Schwartzkopf
- Start date
- Status
Guys, it is not the rule I am opposed to. It is the act of editing of a rule before a big match to make happy a certain individual or crowd of people for what they will consider to be an advantage to themselves. If the NRA provides a waiver to the host club authorizing this change in the rules, then so be it. I would like that posted in writing on the clubhouse doors for the entirety of the matches in question.
I do find it concerning that we no longer, in FTR under these misguided rules, have a sensible way to alleviate the problem of uneven firing points. You are doomed to the firing point you are assigned to , level or not. Even though the rules have addressed these issues at length, to make the line an equal playing field, specifically with carpet or like material, I don’t see any way to relieve this condition under these new rules. So, if we really can’t use carpet, the suggested material In the current rules, how do we find relief?
food for thought.
I do find it concerning that we no longer, in FTR under these misguided rules, have a sensible way to alleviate the problem of uneven firing points. You are doomed to the firing point you are assigned to , level or not. Even though the rules have addressed these issues at length, to make the line an equal playing field, specifically with carpet or like material, I don’t see any way to relieve this condition under these new rules. So, if we really can’t use carpet, the suggested material In the current rules, how do we find relief?
food for thought.
MikeMcCasland
Team Texas F-T/R
Appreciate the PMs that provided some additional insight.
Reminds me of this old Nike add.
Reminds me of this old Nike add.
Last edited:
I miss out on all the fun being in Fopen. Would this be a mat made by a well known company that this alteration is intended for? I’ve seen a lot of way out there set ups that push the interpretation of rules as far as mats and boards under bipods over the years.
D-4297
Gold $$ Contributor
For the sake of just plain old argument , I went and measured my front "Board" , and it is 10-1/4" X 24" . 3/4" thick Marine Plywood , and covered on the "TOP" side with a Mouse-pad type material . It meets ALL of the current rules and specifications covered under the current NRA Rules for the F-TR class . I've used this front board in four Arizona Mid-range championship matches , and three SWN Mid-Range competitions . And it appears to be similar to virtually every front board I've seen used by the majority of TR shooters in these competitions . So what's the "Beef" , really ? Somebody playin with their front board ? Piece of shag carpeting that has "TRACKS" worn in it , that kind-of help out "Tracking" your rifle , And think it will be disqualified for violation of the Rules ? I began shooting as a Junior in 1963 , with a NRA Jr. Club , and went all over the country shooting in all kinds of Matches , and the very first thing I learned was this : The MATCH DIRECTOR has the authority , given to him or her , to make , or adjust ANY part of the NRA Rules for a given Match . In reading the Rule being discussed here , I don't see any deviation from the Rule . Just a more concisely defined interpretation of it . Deal with it , Or stay home ! As Shakespeare said ; "Me thinks some doest protest to much "
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
Skip, I would add to your statement (which I happen to agree with) that it's not just altering the accepted NRA Highpower/F-Class rules not long before the U.S. Nationals, it's also that there will be shooters that have previously competed in complete compliance with the current F-TR rules that will no longer be in compliance under the new rule:
The pad surface should be smooth enough to allow the bipod to be moved in any direction without having to lift the rifle or move the pad that the bipod is on.
Since when has there ever been any emphasis placed on whether the bipod feet can move equally freely in a lateral direction in addition to a front-to-rear direction? Why not just make all the F-TR shooters that use a ski-/sled-type bipod shoot off a perfectly smooth piece of glass. IMO, this is an unnecessary addition to the rule, made by a person without prior authorization to do so from the governing body (NRA), unless of course, there's something else we're not being told.
In fairness, I don't even use a ski-type bipod. I'm a dinosaur, and thus I use a slightly enlarged Harris-type bipod, heavily pre-loaded. I don't believe my use of it it has ever held me back or impaired my scores. I'll even go so far as to say that I have never felt that the ski-type bipods were really in compliance with the intended "spirit" of the F-TR, as least as I have always perceived it. They really appear to be more of an an attempt to mimic the gun handling and tracking possible when using an F-Open style front rest, while still staying marginally within the rules for F-TR. Nonetheless, I will support and defend the rights of shooters that have chosen to use this style of bipod. I have competed against many F-TR shooters that have used a piece of carpet under their ski-type bipods for a long time, often some type of shag carpet with a longer nap. I don't believe it gave them any advantage over me with the bipod I choose to use. Further, it is absolutely possible to use such a piece of carpeting without creating a set of permanent "grooves" or "tracks" that render it in violation of the current rules. It just requires a little more diligence by the user to examine and, if necessary, replace it regularly so it remains in compliance.
This addition the official rules is almost certainly going to make a certain number of current shooters' front mats illegal. Anyone using carpet with a little nap to it could be disqualified if in the judges opinion the carpet offered any resistance to lateral movement of the bipod feet. In fact, it could be argued that a requirement for free lateral movement without lifting the rifle would make even a Harris-type bipod having rubber feet illegal. I can guarantee you that the rubber feet on my LRA bipod will not move laterally on the rubber mat I use in F-TR matches unless you actually lift the rifle. This amendment to the existing rule seems capricious, ill-advised, and could be perceived as going against the whole idea of being as inclusive as possible in our sport. I don't care what someone's background or history in the shooting sports is. That doesn't give them the right to make up new rules whenever they see fit. If you want to make up such a rule, do it the right way and get it approved by the NRA Rules Committee first, before announcing it to the shooting community as though it were already written in stone. This addendum to the existing rules appears to be primarily aimed at preventing having to deal with the whiners that complained over this very issue at the SW Nationals. I've stated it here before and I'll state it again: that match was not won because of some tracks worn into a shooting mat. It was won by exceptional skill behind the rifle.
Last edited:
DE-F-Open
Gold $$ Contributor
Gents,
Mid is NOT altering the Rules. The language in the Match Director's Bulletin simply clarifies the the intent and spirit of the existing rule. See Rule 3.18. That same language is currently before the High Power Committee for consideration if and when this COVID mess allows such a meeting to take place.
The Rules also allow the Match Director of a National Championship to post the conditions of the match - that's what a Match Director's Bulletin at a National Championship is for. Competitors are always free to fire under protest and have the Protest Committee rule on the issue.
John
Mid is NOT altering the Rules. The language in the Match Director's Bulletin simply clarifies the the intent and spirit of the existing rule. See Rule 3.18. That same language is currently before the High Power Committee for consideration if and when this COVID mess allows such a meeting to take place.
The Rules also allow the Match Director of a National Championship to post the conditions of the match - that's what a Match Director's Bulletin at a National Championship is for. Competitors are always free to fire under protest and have the Protest Committee rule on the issue.
John
There are some very good point in both sides. I completely agree that this portion in italics below is going to cause issues. As written, this is unenforceable. Every shooter who has rubber feet, puts their bipod on the mat , etc. is instantly in violation. Hell you can’t slide a Harris in grass. This may need a creative re-write. Now, clarity could be covered in the match directors bulletin and the safety brief before the match each day but IMO its to late at that point. Shooters need sufficient time to modify their equipment and the morning of isn’t realistic.
The pad surface should be smooth enough to allow the bipod to be moved in any direction without having to lift the rifle or move the pad that the bipod is on.
The pad surface should be smooth enough to allow the bipod to be moved in any direction without having to lift the rifle or move the pad that the bipod is on.
coldboreshot
Silver $$ Contributor
Don't like it? Stay home! Too damn many of you out o' towners anyway!
I'm sure the event promoters would appreciate the sentiment.It IS called the "National Championship" afterall.
I guess I could maybe see a problem with the mat Rick posted if the bipod feet were narrow enough to fit into the grooves on the mat (which I do think should be turned with the flat side up) and the carpet backing was soft enough to allow the bipod feet to deform it into these grooves. That's a lot of ifs and maybes. I absolutely don't see a problem with the combos that dskogman or Dean posted above and would say that anyone complaining about having to compete against them would be better served spending more time practicing or honing their reloading skills then whining about what somebody else is using. Anyone that thinks that the nap of carpet is going to stop lateral movement caused by the torque of a 185 to 200+ grain bullet being pushed at 2700 fps is crazy. What will stop it is proper body position. Should be outlaw laying at a certain angle (which I suspect varies with every person) to ensure that the rifle moves off line after each shot? Or how about we dictate that the scorer has to kick the bipod or rear bag after every shot? Or how about if we have the NRA or clubs provide all rifles and ammo and the outcome of the match comes down to luck of the draw and who actually is the best shot. Or here's a really crazy idea, how about we all just go out and shoot our best while hoping and wishing all our competition the best (and just hope their best isn't as good our best).
First, I have not been involved in these discussions at all. That said, I don't think anything nefarious is going on. Here are the current rules without any changes. "In the case of a bipod, the board or plate may be as wide as necessary to accommodate the bipod at its widest point, but not be more than 12” front to rear. It is not permitted to provide tracks for the guidance of bipod feet." I bolded the last part for emphasis. Now, if you have a deep shag rug that creates a groove to guide the bipod feet, is that in compliance with the spirit or letter of the current rules? This is what I think they are addressing since it is what was brought up at the SWNs. Again, I am not the one who brought it up, so save your fire for someone else!
Scott, the problem with the highlighted language is that it also appears in the language of F-Open rules, above the section on TR, in the 2020 rules I’m looking at. The language is identical.
So, technically, when you TR rail gunners get thrown into F-Open and win, your rifles could be protested.
... But, the F-Open rules, where Mid is sending such TR rifles by default that do not comply, specifically prohibit tracking bipods.
Before a decision is made on a rifle, no violation has been determined. Once a decision has been made to bump the rifle’s division, it is necessarily an F-Open violator.
Is it better to be “suspect” in TR or a patent violation in Open?
The safer approach would be not making any decisions until the Rules clarify things. By allowing carpet and such, along with skis in the current rules, the board could not help but track.
Last edited:
The entire underlined passage needs to be read to get complete context.
It is not permitted to provide tracks for the guidance of bipod feet, nor may the combination of bipod feet and/or pad materials create a track. The pad surface should be smooth enough to allow the bipod to be moved in any direction without having to lift the rifle or move the pad that the bipod is on.
Here is my understanding
- It is not permitted to provide tracks for the guidance of bipod feet.
- nor may the combination of bipod feet and/or pad materials create a track.
- The pad surface should be smooth enough to allow the bipod to be moved in any direction without having to lift the rifle or move the pad that the bipod is on.
Based on the full underlined section you can use any material that does not provide a track or the combination of bipod and material created a track. The "track" has not been defined as permanent or temporary
thick carpet has always created a track and would appear to violate the rule even without the additional testing step listed above.
Harris (and my favourite LRA) bipods are acceptable as they do not create a track. Any surface would be permitted as long as the surface was smooth enough to allow it to move in any direction.
If you don't use a surface and use the ground then the above does not apply.
There is also a subsection for bipods like the harris or LRA that use spiked feet.
My only critique would be the timing of the announcement; as the new interpretation and testing has not formally been adopted announcing (springing) this to "most" competitors 3 months prior to the nationals is going to cause confusion. I wouldn't want to have booked time or money to attend the event only to find out i am in violation of the new interpretation of the rule and moved to F Open.
Wishing a successful drama free 2020 F class nationals
Trevor
- Status
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.