F-Class @ Camp Perry - 2015

[WindSurgeon]

I like the qualification idea. They do that in many sports.

 

[Dos XX]

Anyone have an idea what the shooter capacity would be at some of the smaller ranges being discussed?
I think there were 175 ish shooters at Phoenix last month?

 

[280man]

Lodi is 120ish. If I recall they have around 30 targets.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Rick,

I believe that splitting up FTR and F-Open and placing them on seperate dates, at seperate location is a viable option. This will allow smaller ranges to host either event, and also keep a "cap" on all the guys that would "crossover" if the events where shot back to back in the same location, thus exceeding the range cap at small ranges while at the same time allow those die hard guys that would shoot both to be able to do so...looks like a win/win to me..

I could not disagree with this more. Splitting F-TR from F-Open and at different dates is just plain wrong. We share the same target and the same classifications and we learn from one another.

I also do not like having MR and LR one after the other at the same time and place. They should be separate events and I wonder if there are more 600yard ranges that could host MR.

I do not like having to extend the match to have days for F-TR and days for F-Open, just trying to go through all possible scenarios.

The FCNC is THE event and if it can only be held at certain locations, so be it. I don't like the idea of qualifications for the FCNC but if it's that or bust it up in separate pieces, I'd vote to use qualification. Much as that concept is repugnant to me, preserving the whole event is more important.

 

[Steve Blair]

I think the other 2 are Butner and Perry, both military ranges. I don't know of any private range on the East coast with 50 or more positions. If you limit yourself to large private ranges then the Nationals will be forever more in the Southwest and forget moving them around country. Usually military ranges wil honor their committment to civilian clubs if the country isn't at war. The only time we've had issues at Butner or Lejeune was during the early part of the war in Afganistan and Iraq. I can't speak for other clubs using military ranges but our relationships have been pretty good.

[br]
This is also our experience at Camp Pendleton. The occasional club match is preempted but a Regional or other important event has not been. Our relationship with the Navy and Marine Corps is pretty good. The Marines are shooters, too, and many compete with us. [br]
We do have a 600 yard range with 150 firing points but San Diego is probably right up there with northwest Washington, Maine and south Florida for travel problems.

 

[Erik Cortina]

About splitting T/R and Open, what about the shooting families where some shoot F-Open and F-T/R? I don't think splitting them is a good idea at all. Requiring a classification makes more sense to me.

 

[randy x]

Every sport HAS NATIONAL Championship. But only the best should playing. that will make all the room you need.

 

[randy x]

Like the hall of fame idea Erik had .

 

[Dos XX]

Ramblings From A Mid Pack Shooter:

I competed in F/TR Sharp Shooter at nationals. I finished lower mid pack overall.

Rick's comment about having it in the summer to increase Jr involvement is to be noted. We must have Jr competitors or we will all get old and F Class will die.

That said, it will further put a strain on range capacity, but I think it is important and needs to be a consideration, a strong one.

Not sure how the regional qualification idea would work or be implemented, though I think it is a good idea. Are we talking regionals and state matches? Mid range as well as long range? How many regionals are there currently, especially long range? How would the reporting be handled? How would the number of invites be decided? What if you invited 120, using Lodi estimated capacity as example, and only 60 showed. What if you invited 180 and 160 showed? Would you extend the qualification invite through a certain date then open it to everyone? Is the difficulty level of managing this too much?

Classification might be doable, but it brings questions as well. Would you cap the number of each classification? Would lower classifications have a lower cap? There are a number of shooters that have a large disparity in their classifications in LR than MR. I am one of them. This can be due to lack of opportunity at LR.

I didn't go to national's thinking I had a chance of finishing at the top of the board. But the opportunity to shoot 160 rounds for record at 1000 yds, plus the team day, is an opportunity that is hard to come by. My goal was a new classification, which I achieved. This is progress. The argument could be made that the Bergers give that opportunity, and it may be a valid point.

My point is that shooters that are climbing the ranks need opportunity. An example of this is the shooter that won Sharp Shooter was the 5th match winner. If they aren't given the opportunity, then the same shooters will always be at the top. If using classification as a qualification for nationals, and this may be the answer, let's consider how deep the cuts are on the lower classifications.

The goal for using regionals, state championships, or classifications is to reduce the number of shooters to match range capacity. Part of that sentence was, "to reduce the number of shooters." We need to think about that. Hard. This may be the problem with smaller ranges.

Capping attendance at range capacity takes care of the attendance problem. Sign up early or risk not getting in. I think that anyone that is in serious contention for the title, or top of the board finish for that matter, is going to get in early. If they don't, that is on them. Is it better to have 120 "qualified" shooters at a smaller range, or is it better to have 175, or possibly more, at a larger range? This is a question that needs to be pondered.

Some sponsors might be asked their opinion on this question as well. I think we heard Eric Stecker's opinion at the shooter's meeting in Phoenix. I don't want to try to paraphrase what he said at the meeting, but he seemed in favor of smaller venues. Maybe he will chime in?

 

[falconpilot]

If you want to kill the sport, restrict it.

 

[Dos XX]

If you want to kill the sport, restrict it.

Agreed. That is why I wonder if the current open format is the best way. It also brings the point up that the larger ranges might be the best venues.

 

[falconpilot]

Everyone should have the opportunity to compete in our National event. After all, the orgins of our sport come from being able to lay down on the ground, shoot and have fun with whatever you bring. I think the ideal of requiring qualifications is a very bad ideal at the very best considering how really small our numbers are right now. This is a not a professional sport where people are paid to shoot or get paid to shoot for that matter. IF we continue to grow and have no other choice than to restrict our shooters then we need to look at how USPSA does it..

USPSA Handgun Nationals - There are slots given out to each Area/Regional club. These slots are won or filled by placement in larger shoots, AND this is important, by amount of of shoots that shooters make...ie...if you travel and make a lot of shoots, make a lot of your home range/local area shoots, your dedication and time is noted of importance by qualifying you for a slot, regardless of what class a shooter you are. Slots are required in USPSA nationals for the very thing we are talking about, range capacity. There are ten of thousand of USPSA shootes as compared to our 1000's of F-Class shooters.

 

[280man]

Please don't misunderstand guys I'm personally not in favor of qualification based entry. Qualifying tournaments maybe but managing them with our current system would be difficult at best. I'm merely asking questions to keep the conversation going and to hopefully bring new ideas to the table.

 

[280man]

Everybody including myself has mentioned Raton in the Nationals equation. But here is the real question. Who will run the Nationals at Raton? I don't think its fair to assume that the BERC will.

 

[randy x]

Thought we were talking about National CHAMPIONSHIPS. How would that be a sport killer. Plenty of club matches for getting a new card. No disrespect to anyone but those matches to find a national champion. Regionals state matches how you get in. NRA GETS ALL THE SCORES.

 

[280man]

Raton is also a place that can hold the Nationals in the summer time without everyone dying. It is also relatively centrally located within the lower 48. But again we have to have a dedicated group of volunteers to run it and as it sits right now I'm not sure we do.

 

[280man]

Thought we were talking about National CHAMPIONSHIPS. How would that be a sport killer. Plenty of club matches for getting a new card. No disrespect to anyone but those matches to find a national champion. Regionals state matches how you get in. NRA GETS ALL THE SCORES.

No disrespect to the NRA but I'm not sure they could handle the task. Look no further than our National records. They have some fairly serious budget issues in the competitions department and constantly deal with manpower shortages.

 

[Dos XX]

Thought we were talking about National CHAMPIONSHIPS. How would that be a sport killer. Plenty of club matches for getting a new card. No disrespect to anyone but those matches to find a national champion. Regionals state matches how you get in. NRA GETS ALL THE SCORES.

You could declare a national champion at a range with 10 or 20 firing points. Invite 30 or 60 shooters, run 3 relays and be done with it.

 

[Dos XX]

It is easy as a shooter to declare where we would like a match to be. It is another thing to actually have that match occur there. Someone has to run it, and preferably someone that knows how to and is capable of doing it.

 

[clowdis]

Exactly! First of all a club has to be willing to put a Nationals on and that isn't everybody. As for qualifications, the sling shooters have to qualify for teams to shoot in the International Matches and everyone else is usually selected by classification, those higher having first refusal. At least it was this way in Canada in 2007. If the Nationals are to be held on the East coast with a range having only 50 positions then there would be a max of 200 shooters invited. Then there would be a need for qualifications. Which in my mind isn't a bad thing. A National isn't a place for a new shooter to "get his feet wet". It's a series of matches to determine who is the best in the Nation and as such maybe it shouldn't be open to any/all shooters. While this may be harsh on new shooters who are looking for the ultimate competition experience they can also find an ultimate experience shooting in a qualification event. Just as tough as the real deal and almost as much pressure. If there are to be Nationals moving around all over the country then I don't see much choice. I'm not trying to be hard or unfair to new shooters but some limitations need to be in place for smaller ranges to host. Those choices are few when you can only have 200 shooters. Unless you want to go to more than 4 relays