F Class Classifications

[Hombre0321]

The classification system works and works very well in many other shooting disciplines and it would work just as well in F-Class if it was allowed to do what it is supposed to do.

In ATA Trap shooting the classes start with C-Class and run thru AAA, this is for Singles and Doubles only. For Handicap shooting there is a different form of classification and that is by yardage. In all of these classes there are trophy's or awards given by class. There is no overall Match winner there are winners for each class. It is always just assumed that AAA being the highest award is the "BIG" winner.

In the different Silhouette games High Power, BPCR and Rimfire there are also class's. The also start with a C-Class and run Through the AA, highest rating is Master Class. Here there are awards for each class and a overall Match Winner. Usually this will be a Master Class shooter but not always by any means.

To advance in class in both of the above you must shoot a higher class score 3 times to advance. Unclassified shooters always shoot in the highest class until there are qualified. If you are not able to maintain scores shot at the Class you are in and fail to do this for three shoots you will be set back a class.

Nothing wrong with running things this way, NOTHING, and it also gives the new guys coming up some kind of an award for doing well in there class. This form of classification also makes all of the shooters want to better themselves and strive for a better class or to stay at the higher levels.

ATA Trap left the NRA over 80 years ago. Silhouette is and always has been a NRA Sanctioned Sport. So the NRA could do things this way if they wanted too. They simple don't care at all as long as they receive there share of the pot they will always leave things as they are.

The NRA is a great thing for us shooters to have. I have been a life member for over 40 years and a member for over 50 years and contribute to them as much as I can and as often as I can and I am glad to do that.

The NRA as a Political Lobby is absolutely the best at what they do, as a Sanctioning Body for the Shooting Sports they could do at least a 99% better job just to get good at what they do or mostly don't do.

Here however we aren't talking about ATA Trap or Silhouette, we are talking about NRA High Power Sports. As witnessed by any reader or poster of this site it is completely easy to see that getting any three guys to agree even on the simplest point is both a waste of time, and of effort. High Power Sports Shooters and I mean all of them Sling, XTC, Any-Any and F-Class are without a doubt the biggest bunch of criers and moaners I have not only ever seen but heard of. That is just the ways things are sometimes. I mean someone is proposing a change of the rules at an almost constant rate, Bullet Limit's, Class's vs no Class's, target changes I have seen some wanting bigger and some wanting smaller targets. It is getting hard to find those folks who just want to shoot just for the pure "FUN" of shooting.

For me things are fine just as they are. I do think that the class thing and awards for all class's would work just fine, but I am certainly not proposing a change like that. As for me personally I shoot for my own reasons, and taking home another piece of Fake Wood Award with a Brass Plague attached is just not high on my list. I have a reloading room that is full of that stuff now, more I do not need and hell I might not win another one anyway. But I also would like to see this sport thrive and one way of doing that "MIGHT" be to give these young folks something for doing well at there level and not having to win the match to get any recognition at all...

Roland

I will add this. I am a F-Open shooter, there are two class's in F-Class F/TR as well as Open. In my opinion the two should never be combined for any reason and certainly not for some silly award thing. F/TR is just not on a level playing field ( and should not be) with Open. They are supposed to be different, to treat them the same just because only 4 f/TR shooters show up and any given match is just plan WRONG, I don't care if only one F/TR shooter shows up at a match. if that does happen he gets the award.

 

[lmorrison17]

Well Ken my Ar will be done soon And I'm gonna try a few turns in the gravel with a Harris and prairie poodle popper with a GI trigger.

I'll have to wait and see what wins out, my ego or my competitive nature.
BUT I wonder how long it take before I decide to drop a mint on one of those fancy Geissele triggers.


PS BR gives away baubles but I'd rather have the cash any day.

 

[Joe C]

This conversion reminds me of when bullseye shooters started talking about how unfair it was that in CMP Ball matches some guys got distinguished using an M9 or "softball" .45 ammo. Or those folks that want dot shooters classed different than iron sight shooters...

Me? As long as I'm getting trigger time, I'm having a good time. ;-)

 

[Delaware_Ken]

Thanks for the support Charlie. Looks like we are outnumbered big time.

Larry, we are headed in opposite directions. After seeing you and that Dasher of yours kick butt at the last shoot, I ordered a Dasher barrel. I doubt that I'll be shooting it in F/Class, but she will definitely see some duty in BR. Good luck with your AR project.

Ken

 

[Jennb]

Lets talk about this more! I have been going through match scores from Bergers, nationals and any place I can find long range scores. I FTR I have found 20 high masters so far and I do know several of them shot open also.

If you have a ftr high master or know one send me there name and I will add it to my list.

 

[okshooter]

Jenn,

This is Keith Roberts. I didn't read through this 5 year old post to see if you we're talking about mid or long range, but I made mid range high master last year. Did it at Bucksnort, but proud to say I also shot high master scores three out of six matches at Red Castle last year.

 

[Rope2horns]

Jenn,

This is Keith Roberts. I didn't read through this 5 year old post to see if you we're talking about mid or long range, but I made mid range high master last year. Did it at Bucksnort, but proud to say I also shot high master scores three out of six matches at Red Castle last year.

Shooting HM scores at Red Castle is no joke even with a Fopen rig let alone a FTR rig!..Good shooting Keith.

 

[XTR]

I've commented on this in the past dating back at least 5 yrs or so. This isn't the only thread that has been started about this topic.

For the record, I carry a HM in mid range, a HM in Full Bore and prior to SWN I was an EX in long range, I shot 97%+ in PHX so I should get a MA card in the mail before long.

Fundamental concept here :

• Classifications should group shooters of similar skill for the purposes of competition.
• Classification is not an award for having a good run or a good condition for a weekend.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that classification at LR in F class, at least for F-TR should be tweaked, but I also recognize that it's not likely to happen. Making HM in mid range is probably too easy, then again maybe not, but pretty much any serious shooter can shoot HM. Prone needs a 98.5% for HM in Mid range and F class only needs a 98%. I think that is an oversight.

My thoughts on F-TR long range classifications:

Until about 2015 Danny Biggs was about the only shooter who had ever gotten to HM shooting F-TR. Since then several have made it, but most all have done it either in Houston where the conditions can be nearly flat for more than just the first relay, or at the BSWN in Phoenix in 2016(I think it was) that was shot in very benign conditions.

Trying to post consistently 196+ for the 6 matches it takes to re-qualify is neigh to impossible in F-TR when the wind kicks up, and at most ranges it does that after the first relay.

Most ranges that do weekends do 3x1000 on Sat and 2x1000 on Sunday, and the scores get turned in as an agg for the weekend, so even if you get a great weekend one weekend you are 20 shots short of re-qual, so because the scores go in as an agg you still have to shoot a 980+ the next month. The lollypop relay on Sat morning doesn't get there. (and if you shoot the first relay and DNF to protect your score I have other opinions, but they aren't allowed here) There are those ranges that shoot 3x1000/3x1000 sat/sun, and that does give you the chance to get HM if you get the right conditions, but again, you are hoping for a set of conditions that gets you there and that's not what it's supposed to take.

I've argued in the past that classification should group those competing on the same level together, not be an award for those who got easy conditions one weekend. I'm not taking anything away from those who have achieved it, I'm not saying it's easy and that they don't deserve it, but they should be competing with the guys putting up similar scores at SWN, or the FCNC, and that is not the way it breaks down.

My opinion, the re-classification should take at least 240 shots, not the 120 currently used, so it represents overall performance and not just a good match, with an average of around 96% for HM, 94 for MA, 92 for EX and I'm not sure about the lower ones. Phil Kelly, Steve Ireland, Mike Plunket, and a bunch of others shot 96%±.

I've posted this before, search back a ways. In 15 or 16 there was a proposal to change things, and Jim Croft was one of the supporters, people went ape and it died.

Look at the F-TR agg from SWN. All the guys who carried HM classifications belong on that list, but pretty much everyone who shot 96% and above in F-TR should also be carrying HM classifications, every one of them has the skill to turn in a podium finish. Many of them have at one time or another, and that is what the classification system should reflect..


Take a look at sling scores, HM shooters put up HM scores week in and week out unless it gets gruesome. That's how it's supposed to work.

 

[dcali]

The only problem with the system as it is is that when you switch from open to tr, you’ll be competeing against better shooters (unless you’re a legit high master with a TR rifle).

That’s not the end of the world. Shoot better.

And yes, mid range f class classifications are too easy relative to pretty much every other high power classification.

 

[Medic505]

mid range f class classifications are too easy relative to pretty much every other high power classification.

That depends on where you are shooting. Shoot Red Castle and tell me it's easy.

 

[F Class John]

No good answer to this right now but nothing has even remotely addressed the work load more changes would place on match directors. As someone who runs matches there’s enough targets and classifications to deal with already and keeping them all straight can be daunting as it is. Throw in more targets and more classes and suddenly your awards presentation is a lot longer than it is now which is plenty long already. The pits also need another target size to manage like a hole in the head and trying to manage the relays so that three different sized targets can be used efficiently wouldn’t be fun. Two is already fun enough at some matches. It all adds time and cost. I’ve seen enough matches where MR-1s aren’t switched out for SR-1s and vice versa until after shooting begins. Imagine a third size in the mix

I’m not saying extra work is a good reason to not make changes but if this thread is six years old and nothing’s changed that much on either end then maybe it’s ok to stay the same for a while longer.

 

[dcali]

That depends on where you are shooting. Shoot Red Castle and tell me it's easy.

It’s easier than sling or long range no matter where you are.

 

[XTR]

I'm not proposing changes, the system today is what it is, and I seriously doubt that it will change. It's 33F, raining and I have a foot of snow in my yard. I'm on a shooting website participating in an online discussion about something relating to shooting sports.

Those of us who compete know who we're shooting against, and we know who the competition is. The biggest problem with the system today is that it's a PITA to have to look at HM, MA and EX scores at big matches to figure out who is where in the overall agg.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Returning to Delaware Ken's original question, I also believe that F-TR and F-Open should be classified separately. If you ever attend a local or regional match where there are not enough total F-TR shooters to warrant a separate award, you are automatically lumped in with the F-Open shooters, where you will most often have little chance of winning anything. Not necessarily because of your skill, but because of the major disadvantages of caliber and rifle support. The awards themselves aren't that big of a deal to me, it's nice to win something to show for your efforts from time to time, but I could live without a bezillion cheap little medals laying around from local matches. What bothers me most is being relegated to the status of 2nd class citizen if you shoot F-TR, which is what the current classification process effectively does. It's pretty obvious that the two sub-disciplines within F Class ARE different, so either treat them differently, or what's the purpose in even having two different sub-groups?

As far as the relative ease of attaining a given classification within either F-TR or F-Open, Dean had it right, above. The difference in wind conditions between different ranges across the country can be HUGE. Some ranges are typically so tough that you will likely never see anyone make HM in F-TR LR. Even making HM in MR can be a very difficult feat at those venues. The difference between wind conditions at different venues is not an issue that that can easily be rectified. In contrast, the issue of it being easier to make HM at MR versus LR is pretty much what you'd expect, given that the 600 and 1000 yd targets both have 0.5 MOA X- rings and 1.0 MOA 10-rings. It's simply a LOT easier to shoot 1 MOA at 600 yd than it is at 1000 yd, so the relative scores are expected to be higher. There are really two choices if you want to change the relative difficulty to make MR and LR classifications equally challenging: 1) make the scoring rings smaller on the MR targets OR 2) increase the percentage required to reach a given classification in MR. Either would achieve the same goal. Frankly, as long as the system is consistent for all the participants, I don't see where it makes any difference whether it is easier to gain the HM card at MR versus LR, so changing the scoring ring sizes or the percentages required for a given classification in F-Class MR seems to be a total waste of time IMO.

 

[saunaking]

If you ask any match director what it would be like to have two target sizes for ftr and open, you would see their heads explode. Trying to set up relays and targets for the two disciplines would make the logistics a nightmare.