Would you like to see smaller f open targets?

[JFrank]

Gents
There may come a time for a handicap when competing against a master or high master
Similar to APA billiards players are ranked by average performance 3-7 whereas a 7 must beat a 5 by 3 games if I recall correctly.
Any thoughts on that?
J

 

[Dgd6mm]

And how about participation awards?

 

[sdean]

There may come a time for a handicap when competing against a master or high master
Similar to APA billiards players are ranked by average performance 3-7 whereas a 7 must beat a 5 by 3 games if I recall correctly.
Any thoughts on that?J



My thought is there is another solution looking for a problem.

 

[XTR]

Actually it wasn’t too bad! ...

Let’s leave the targets alone.

Larry, when I started shooting F-TR around 2011 one of the Oak Ridge shooters that was at that second FCNC was still shooting there and told me the story of his shooting something like a 200-26 or something like that with a Dasher (I think) on the old target, and that was in part support for the argument for the change.

Was F Class recognized yet at that point or was it a provisional ruleset?

 

[Lbart]

XTR
In 2005 FC did not have its own official NRA rules. We were working on them however. The targets used were the SR-3 ( 3”X & 7” 10) the 1st day at 600 yds and the LR (10X & 20” 10) the 2d & 3rd days at 1k. FO champ was Jeff Cochran with a clean 1200-91x, Bret Solomon was clean w/90x’s and Bob Bock was 3rd w/78x’s. In F/TR Dale Carpenter had a 1197-58x, Emil Praslick the 3rd was 2nd w/1185-57x and Paul Phillips was 3rd with 1183-51x. Note all these guys are still shooting and still at the top of the leader board.

 

[rardoin]

Gents
There may come a time for a handicap when competing against a master or high master
Similar to APA billiards players are ranked by average performance 3-7 whereas a 7 must beat a 5 by 3 games if I recall correctly.
Any thoughts on that?
J

Already built in to the game....called classification. Unfortunately it is only effective as a hadicap at larger entry matches.

 

[JFrank]

As always I'm a day late and a dollar short

 

[500Stroker]

It seems like it would be more interesting if f class matches were settled more often by score instead of just x count. Why is the f open target so much bigger than an ibs target? Like 600 yard bench with a 1.2" x

Yes smaller targets.
Please tabulate the results or this all goes for naught.

 

[davidjoe]

Yes smaller targets.
Please tabulate the results or this all goes for naught.

I think it would only be for naught if the thread got deleted by the poster. A lot of careful thought has been expressed.

The comfort level by the numbers expressed in the thread is for the status quo. I do agree it is very important that up coming and steady shooters feel a sense of achievement, over potential score intimidation.

I’ve said much about the rings favoring magnums. I’ve fed magnums lately, and .284’s for quite a while now, and my $ ratio per shot is an easy 6:1 factoring in brass and barrels.

Magnums don’t shoot more X’s than .284’s but they do drop fewer points, and this is demonstrable in their very high finishes, and selection and use by guys capable of winning national matches. Caliber is not officially collected, but ask around, this is not new.

An excellent point of LB’s is that not everybody’s trying to win a championship. (And nobody’s making them spend huge bucks.)

If shooters drop some 9’s with .284’s that can’t be made up with high X’s, so be it, they aren’t risking bullet blowups, absorbing as much recoil or spending as much money. It’s not like my .284’s are going anywhere, and they will always be ready for when a little more precision is called for at matches with less wind drift.

 

[kzin]

If you're at a high scoring range and want 599 40x to beat 600 20x you don't need new physical targets.

Use the same algorithm used to shoot f-class scores if you only have sling targets available.

score - # of shots + # of Xs

600 - 60 + 20 = 560
599 - 60 + 40 = 579

Trivial if you score in a spreadsheet. Quite possible in your head.

 

[davidjoe]

If you're at a high scoring range and want 599 40x to beat 600 20x you don't need new physical targets.

Use the same algorithm used to shoot f-class scores if you only have sling targets available.

score - # of shots + # of Xs

600 - 60 + 20 = 560
599 - 60 + 40 = 579

Trivial if you score in a spreadsheet. Quite possible in your head.

Well, yes, I suggested a few times that pin point .284’s would rule if an X could offset a 9, but they must have thought that was tricky lawyer talk. Crickets. Left me hanging. ). It’s ok, I’ll see them in the wind at Raton at 3,150 FPS.

 

[500Stroker]

I think it would only be for naught if the thread got deleted by the poster. A lot of careful thought has been expressed.

The comfort level by the numbers expressed in the thread is for the status quo. I do agree it is very important that up coming and steady shooters feel a sense of achievement, over potential score intimidation.

I’ve said much about the rings favoring magnums. I’ve fed magnums lately, and .284’s for quite a while now, and my $ ratio per shot is an easy 6:1 factoring in brass and barrels.

Magnums don’t shoot more X’s than .284’s but they do drop fewer points, and this is demonstrable in their very high finishes, and selection and use by guys capable of winning national matches. Caliber is not officially collected, but ask around, this is not new.

An excellent point of LB’s is that not everybody’s trying to win a championship. (And nobody’s making them spend huge bucks.)

If shooters drop some 9’s with .284’s that can’t be made up with high X’s, so be it, they aren’t risking bullet blowups, absorbing as much recoil or spending as much money. It’s not like my .284’s are going anywhere, and they will always be ready for when a little more precision is called for at matches with less wind drift.

All I wanted was a simple tabulation by the poster of the thread, how many Yes and how many NO.
I leave preaching for Sundays.

 

[BT1]

All I wanted was a simple tabulation by the poster of the thread, how many Yes and how many NO.
I leave preaching for Sundays.

What he said. I say NO.

 

[davidjoe]

All I wanted was a simple tabulation by the poster of the thread, how many Yes and how many NO.
I leave preaching for Sundays.

Point taken. I’m sure the poster or somebody will gladly tabulate all this for you.

 

[Lbart]

DavidJoe while waiting for dinner to be prepared I did go through the 216 posts. I tried to decipher what the posters were saying to the best of my limited mental ability. The posts in some/many cases could be interpreted differently by someone else and of course many people posted more than once or twice. Somehow or the other I missed marking down 7 posts so my numbers are off a bit. Here’s the result: For Smaller Targets 3, No Change 98, Other Comments 107, Shoot Sling 1
The results are in, the thread should die a quite death. See you all at the range.

 

[Dgd6mm]

DavidJoe while waiting for dinner to be prepared I did go through the 216 posts. I tried to decipher what the posters were saying to the best of my limited mental ability. The posts in some/many cases could be interpreted differently by someone else and of course many people posted more than once or twice. Somehow or the other I missed marking down 7 posts so my numbers are off a bit. Here’s the result: For Smaller Targets 3, No Change 98, Other Comments 107, Shoot Sling 1
The results are in, the thread should die a quite death. See you all at the range.

Thanks Larry, for all you do for the sport.

 

[sdean]

Thank you Larry. This horse has been beat down to nothing but hooves and teeth. I am one of those guys you were talking about. Just started to compete at 65 and I am not one of those that shoot clean, YET. I say if you want smaller rings IBS, if you want the X to count in the score UBR. Call me when you shoot 60x's and I'll send you a gift.

 

[davidjoe]

DavidJoe while waiting for dinner to be prepared I did go through the 216 posts. I tried to decipher what the posters were saying to the best of my limited mental ability. The posts in some/many cases could be interpreted differently by someone else and of course many people posted more than once or twice. Somehow or the other I missed marking down 7 posts so my numbers are off a bit. Here’s the result: For Smaller Targets 3, No Change 98, Other Comments 107, Shoot Sling 1
The results are in, the thread should die a quite death. See you all at the range.

LB I’m just a late joiner to the thread, but it’s a privilege (and hard earned right) to get to play at this game, in the first place. Any set of rules will suit me, and my only personal connection to the 1/5th moa at the very center of the black, is that I feel a tinge of unfairness, when I steal a place with my SAUM in the wind with winged 10’s, from guys that shoot the best center, by the rings. 98 to 3. If they don’t mind, I won’t mind.

 

[bbarber25]

No.

 

[rardoin]

Not to beat a dead horse....but....

A comment posted by 'jkl' in the E-target missed shot thread prompted this thought.....

If we are seeing, on a regular basis, cleans in MR 3 x20 matches and near 60x count deciding the winner, instead of changing the target size just start the first match with 2 sighters and no sighters for the remaining matches that day.

That ought to do it.