Lines of thought like this are generally found among those who believe in so-called level playing fields for ammunition quality. GB and British Commonwealth 'Target Rifle' (our version of Fullbore sling shooting with the 308 and iron sights) long took this view, going further and banning handloads for all major competitions and competitors were issued with arsenal manufactured 7.62 ammunition. The GB NRA Journal regularly saw the pros and cons argued over - allowing more freedom would remove this fictional level playing field, those with time and money and expertise to experiment with handloads and different bullets would be given an unfair advantage etc etc.
In the end, such restrictions nearly killed the discipline. There never will be a level playing field other than in having a good set of overall regulations on things like rifle weights. Those with money who really want to buy a small advantage in a restricted discipline will have several rifles each with a slightly different spec barrel to try with different batches of issue ammo, or produce a few extra fps MV. If you're wealthy (or retired and comfortable) and don't need to go to work every weekday, you can practice on a major range like Bisley seven days per week and get to know every wind flag's displays intimately. It still won't make up for a skill shortage though if that exists.
When F-Class spun the restricted FTR sub class off, the whole argument started again with the proponents of tighter regulation claiming it was a budget 'starter' discipline and that the rapid development of FTR equipment and cartridges that has continued unabated almost from year one has been a disaster with 'pounds buying points'. Such critics want to see major restrictions on ammunition, bipod footprints, scope power, even the rifle having to be based on a factory model.
There is a reasonable argument for having such a discipline. The Scandinavian countries use a single rifle model, the SIG-Sauer STR 200 for their major internal and international prone sling competitions. It is a superb rifle and being a factory model is low priced compared to custom built F rifles. It has a quick-change barrel system allowing pre-chambered replacements to be fitted with perfect headspace in a few minutes or to switch between the two cartridges used, 308 Win and 6.5X55mm.
That isn't F-Class though which quickly became like formula motor racing, a development discipline whether in FTR or 'Open'. Ten years ago none of us saw how far and fast the 308 (or 223 for that matter) would be developed. Without FTR, there would be a lot fewer bullets and they'd have a lot lower BCs. Much as I love Sierra and its traditional 7-calbre radius tangent ogive bullets, development of both more advanced designs and improvements in QC were 'gentle' and took place over decades rather than single years. Without FTR, it's arguable if there would be nearly as many 0.308 match bullets as there are now, nothing like the weight range, nor would everybody's manufacturing quality be so good. Just compare the two 200gn Sierra MKs - the one that has been around for 30 (40?) plus years and the just announced new 200.
One can approve of this process or decry rapid if expensive development. But .... like it or not, target shooting is a technically orientated sport like many others. Here in the UK, international gold medals in the Olympics and other major competitions by British cyclists have produced a huge surge in interest in the sport and created no end of jobs in bicycle design, manufacturing and retail. Have you looked at a modern pushbike recently? The costs and high technology materials and design in what are (like firearms) relatively simple machines at a basic level are staggering. And it's not just those that compete at high level who're splashing out large sums either - even commuter bikes have gone high-tech. I don't hear anybody say that road-racing cyclists should be limited to steel frames and wheel rims with traditional wire spokes - or maybe if you're inside that sport, the same calls for restrictions apply. Like it or loathe it, if your sport relies on manufactured equipment with a potential for technical and materials development, those upgrades are going to happen and they usually don't come cheap, certainly never for free.
