2020 NRA F-Class National Championship MATCH DIRECTOR’S BULLETIN #1

[Medic505]

You have to be able to read to go to school.... LOL

True

 

[Monte F]

What is an emoji? I thought they were called smiley faces!

 

[Oleg S]

The Seb Pod-Pad could be tough to get in compliance. I see tracks forming as the sand settles away from the feet as the match goes on. I would have fill it up enough to not dent under the weight and movement of the rifle but still keep flat on top instead of bulging up.

Tracks forming in the ground wet or soft...

 

[Ned Ludd]

Ned, the trending goal with the TR guns is a nearly straight back recoil so smooth it doesn’t come off target. You mention front loading your Harris. That is stable for the shot, but, - especially with 200’s, it bounces off your shoulder requiring significant reset in the front and rear. With a Harris, you no doubt control elevation from a pinch bag with your non-trigger hand and angled butt stock. You’re driving a stick shift classic Corvette, meanwhile you can’t even get anything today but paddle shift from Maranello.

edit : )

I know how to drive my F-TR rifles, regardless of the type of bipod they may be wearing. I own both the Flexpod and the Duplin bipods in addition to a couple of the LRAs, and I shoot from all of them on occasion. However, I choose to use the LRA, which is really not much more than an oversized Harris with a much wider footprint, in competition for a couple reasons. First, I prefer the McMillan A5 stock, which has a highly angled toe that is not ideal for maintaining elevation with a ski-type bipod setup. Second, I finding making minor elevation or aiming adjustments by squeezing the rear bag to be light years easier and more natural than reaching up to adjust a set screw on the bipod itself, or twirling a joystick. FWIW - if the rifle is bouncing off your shoulder when using a pre-loaded traditional bipod, then you're not handling the gun correctly. It should never move that much. I have no difficulty spotting impacts in the berm or seeing the shot markers fly out of the X-ring.

Regardless of all that, even though very few F-TR shooters these days still use a traditional style bipod, it doesn't change the fact that any pre-loaded bipod with rubber feet fired of a rubber mat will not move easily if at all, in any direction, unless the rifle/bipod is lifted off the mat. How then is using a piece of carpet that might ever so slightly inhibit minor lateral movement due to the length of the nap any advantage over a traditional bipod where the feet move very little, if at all? For those using a ski-type bipod, the rifle still has to track properly front to back, and maintain elevation at the target. Each style has its own caveats. With a preloaded traditional bipod, the amount of pressure used to load the bipod is absolutely critical for consistent elevation on the target. With a ski-type bipod, body position and tracking perfectly straight front to back are the critical elements. Each requires a slightly different skill set to master. As I mentioned, I have both types of bipods and I can tell you that within reason, the kind of carpet someone uses underneath the bipod is not somehow going to allow them to shoot a winning score if they don't already possess the skill to do it. This whole bipod rule thing is making a mole hill into a mountain.

 

[kzin]

I'm the rare new guy who studies the rules before getting started. I've been amazed that experienced shooters 'get away' with using material that clearly tracks up.

 

[kzin]

should be changed to "must have equal resistance to movement in all directions."

That would allow for the bipods which are still designed for the feet not to move.

 

[Jetjock1]

Here's the NRA High Power Committees response:

F-class Rule change stalled due to CO VID 19


During these strange times we are living in, innovation is the key to our being successful. As chairman of the NRA High Power Committee I have tried to follow the procedures set forth by the By-laws and the NRA Board of Directors when changing rules in the rulebook.

Rules are generally submitted to the committee and after discussion and consideration, if passed, they then move forward to Competition Rules & Programs Committee and if approved they are forwarded to the Board of Directors where they become final and are incorporated into the rulebook.

Due to the CO VID 19 there will be no Competition Rules & Programs Committee meeting nor Board of Directors meeting before our F-class National Matches.

A rule change to High Power F-class rule 3.4.1(b)(2) “F-class Target Rifle (F-TR) Rests” was proposed last February, after the Southwest Nationals. Many of the high master F-TR shooters were made aware of this situation. They investigated it, discussed it and took photos. All this was forwarded to the High-Power Committee along with a proposed rule change. Those F-class knowledgeable committee members reviewed all pertinent data and the proposed rule. All agreed to the change but no meetings were ever held due to the May NRA Annual Meeting being cancelled.

At this time the F-class nationals are on track to being held and this rule must be adhered to even though it will not be official.

I have taken this one step further and as a former referee I have reviewed once again the current rule and determined that the type of setup which was being used in Phoenix is not in accordance with the current rule and is therefore illegal. I am therefore invoking Rule 20.5(g) and including the proposed rule change which will be enacted as soon as the appropriate governing bodies act to approve the change.

As always, a decision like this is not made lightly. If any competitor is warned when using this type of setup in competition a protest is in order. Otherwise a rebuttal email to the High-Power Committee would be appropriate.

Proposed rule change:

Section 22. Rule 3.4.1.b.2 (F-Class) – The use of “tables” i.e. a single flat surface extending under both front rest and rear bag is prohibited. Carpet or similarly flexible matting may be placed under the front rest and rear bag. Separate flat boards and or plates not exceeding the dimensions of the individual rests by two inches on a given side may also be placed under the front rest or rear bag. 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, 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. No leveling screws or protrusions are allowed on these board plates. They must be flat on the top and bottom.

Jetjock

 

[Jdne5b]

should be changed to "must have equal resistance to movement in all directions."

That would allow for the bipods which are still designed for the feet not to move.

And would be impossible for a ski type bipod to pass that rule, even when used with carpet which is clearly allowed in the rules. Even a piece of felt would allow easier movement forward\back vs side to side with a ski type bipod.

Another unenforceable rule change unless you're suggesting match directors carry around a milligram scale to measure movement forces.

 

[Nowhere Man]

The whole idea of standardized rules is so competitors can travel nationwide to compete without fear of localized rules making it impossible. This Match Directors Bulletin sure muddy's the waters.

 

[Nowhere Man]

Here's the NRA High Power Committees response:





Proposed rule change:

Section 22. Rule 3.4.1.b.2 (F-Class) – The use of “tables” i.e. a single flat surface extending under both front rest and rear bag is prohibited. Carpet or similarly flexible matting may be placed under the front rest and rear bag. Separate flat boards and or plates not exceeding the dimensions of the individual rests by two inches on a given side may also be placed under the front rest or rear bag. 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, 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. No leveling screws or protrusions are allowed on these board plates. They must be flat on the top and bottom.

Jetjock

As mentioned earlier, does this new rule disallow the Seb Pod Pod?

 

[MikeMcCasland]

As mentioned earlier, does this new rule disallow the Seb Pod Pod?

I don't agree with it, but it seemingly would. I've never seen a pod pad that doesn't create something resembling tracks.

If we're taking the words strictly at face value, I think this means we'll all be shooting off bare wood or derlyn? Most every 'soft' material I know if creates a track just due to the rifle/bipod weight & narrow ski.

It's hard to say, and I think that's kinda the problem.

Edit: I'm curious what the folks who protested this, or created this new ruling were shooting off of? Do we have examples of 'what right looks like'?

 

[Crow]

The allowance of carpet alone seems to contradict any restriction stating "It is not permitted to provide tracks for the guidance of bipod feet.", inasmuch as standard carpet is concerned.

Throwing out either half of those contradictions would make the 'spirit of the rule' a lot easier to interpret, but unless we're going to begin looking hard at the various types of bipod feet, many of which have for years been expressly designed to improve tracking, what would be the point of banning carpet?

 

[davidjoe]

should be changed to "must have equal resistance to movement in all directions."

That would allow for the bipods which are still designed for the feet not to move.

Bingo, those are the words that I believe Mid is searching for, as to any effect that a surface has on the bipod.

 

[davidjoe]

The allowance of carpet alone seems to contradict any restriction stating "It is not permitted to provide tracks for the guidance of bipod feet.", inasmuch as standard carpet is concerned.

Throwing out either half of those contradictions would make the 'spirit of the rule' a lot easier to interpret, but unless we're going to begin looking hard at the various types of bipod feet, many of which have for years been expressly designed to improve tracking, what would be the point of banning carpet?

I know that years back the rules said that the bipod had to make contact with only two points and there was no reference to carpet. There has been a watering down and now comes a walking back.

 

[Crow]

Good luck to those that want to walk it back - that horse is way out of the barn. Investments in gear, records set, etc...

 

[dannyjbiggs]

If you are an F-TR competitor and want to use carpet, because the rules specifically call it out, while denying an obvious use for it with bipod skate-blade feet, i.e. groove tracking, and you want to convince others that you absolutely are not using it for that purpose (and you want to convince yourself, too); just turn it over and use it "pile down". Unless the carpet is rubber backed, you should easily be able to achieve the rule's intent/limitation. Personally, I would look for another surface.

Dan

 

[kzin]

The essence of the rule is you can't have tracking. Legal surfaces are a separate but overlapping issue.

Several people are saying 'carpet is legal and a joypod is legal so if I'm getting tracking with those legal components it must be ok.'

No!
If your foot/surface combo is providing tracking it should be regarded as illegal and really always was. Makes no difference at all if it's an approved surface otherwise.

Might be good to mandate all bipod feet be circular and symmetrical. With a year or so warning to acquire affordable retrofit feet.

 

[skibar_tx]

Great! Just GREAT! Anybody want to buy a couple of Seb's Pod Pads? Going real cheap.

 

[MikeMcCasland]

I've seen in this thread, as well as the FB group discussion; there are supposedly photos of setups that are currently in use that are widely regarded as 'safe' & legal after the rule change.

I'm asking this genuinely...can someone share some of those as a navigational beacon for match directors & competitors?

I ask that not to try and pick it apart etc. Honestly curious.

 

[XTR]

Look at what Seb's setup in the picture above, he's got short nap carpet on his Pod Pads. That looks to be completely in compliance with any interpretation at least to me. I may actually buy the pod pads to go this route.

edit for closeup: