Just read the new ISSF rules. Are people aware that the new order of the shooting positions (match and finals) for 3P is kneeling, prone, standing? I don't remember seeing this mentioned in any discussions.
Also, in the new 45 shot finals format for 3P it is more like a sprint than a precision shooting match.
(1) 200 sec for 5 shots kneeling (3 times)
(2) 7 minutes for changeover from kneeling to prone, including sighters, all the while the announcer is giving commentary.
(3) 150 sec for 5 shots prone (3 times)
(4) 9 minutes for changeover from prone to standing, including sighters, and more commentary.
(5) 250 sec for 5 shots standing (twice)
(6) 5 individual shots standing, 50 sec each, with a shooter elimination after each shot
The changeovers are going to look like the transition area between swimming and biking in a triathelon and the shooting is going to look almost like biathelon! Oh what fun.
New ISSF Rules - order of fire of positions & finals spr
Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer
-
Thedrifter
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 8:26 am
- Location: San Antonio, TX
-
STL William
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:25 pm
- Location: St. Louis, MO USA
Have these new finals formats even been tested at a world level event by world class athletes?
Can someone please explain how rushing between positions to set up your equipment, and shoot your sighters, and all while the announcer is talking, can be a good measure of one's shooting skills? This whole push to make the sport more interesting to the average TV viewer is crazy. It is just not going to happen unless we either start shooting at each other, or are shooting at exploding targets, or are shooting in Speedos (or less).
Can someone please explain how rushing between positions to set up your equipment, and shoot your sighters, and all while the announcer is talking, can be a good measure of one's shooting skills? This whole push to make the sport more interesting to the average TV viewer is crazy. It is just not going to happen unless we either start shooting at each other, or are shooting at exploding targets, or are shooting in Speedos (or less).
Somewhere I read or heard a comment that Jason Parker went to Munich to shoot in an evaluation for the new finals format. So yes, it has been tried.
If you read the article on the new changes on the home page of the ISSF, Nicco Campriani apparently also tried the new format. It is interesting he is quoted as liking the decimal scoring for the air gun and prone but comments regarding the 3P final are absent. You could read a few things into that.
I wonder if the sprint format is intended to cut down on the tinkering with the rifles. Many years ago I shot in a collegiate club. We routinely participated in a local league where the rules were 30 shots, 3 positions and I think it was 41 minutes block time. The best solution was to leave the 1413 in the locker and shoot a 1407. This made position change pretty easy, set the butt, set the handstop and keep moving. I don't think I shot as well as I would have with a 1413 under more normal circumstances but for the format, having a simple rifle and more time to concentrate on the actual shooting, results were better.
But I am just rambling here.
'Dude
If you read the article on the new changes on the home page of the ISSF, Nicco Campriani apparently also tried the new format. It is interesting he is quoted as liking the decimal scoring for the air gun and prone but comments regarding the 3P final are absent. You could read a few things into that.
I wonder if the sprint format is intended to cut down on the tinkering with the rifles. Many years ago I shot in a collegiate club. We routinely participated in a local league where the rules were 30 shots, 3 positions and I think it was 41 minutes block time. The best solution was to leave the 1413 in the locker and shoot a 1407. This made position change pretty easy, set the butt, set the handstop and keep moving. I don't think I shot as well as I would have with a 1413 under more normal circumstances but for the format, having a simple rifle and more time to concentrate on the actual shooting, results were better.
But I am just rambling here.
'Dude
-
silentfury214
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:07 am
- Location: Tennessee
This is ridiculous! Rifle is meant to be a precision sport, how in the world does "sprinting" a final help show this?! I am sure she will adapt, but how will people like Sonja Pfeilschifter (and those that take as long as her to shoot (like me >.<)) continue to stay on top or do well? Also, what about wind? Are we going to be shooting finals indoors from now on?
Last edited by silentfury214 on Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
At the regional club I preside we have a national tournament scheduled for mid-april 2013.
I talked with the national federation about how this finals format will make everything incredibly harder for those who aren't blessed with SIUS-ASCOR equipment, but had to settle to the argument that with the new rules erasing the quali scores before the OF's, shooting an important match without them with be useless for the shooters willing to keep in shape for Intenational compromises.
We are pushing all our capacity, but in five months' time I'll tell you how (or if) it's possible FROM THE PURE ORGANISATIONAL P.O.W., and it will surely take a lot of people, time, worries and simpathy from the participants to even attempt at it.
Talking about the subject to fellow rifle shooters (I myself am a pistoleer) they are all VERY worried about the pressure the new OF time limits put on them regarding change from one position to another and zeroing in so little time. One of them went to the extreme of joking that the new rules must've been sponsored by MEC, as having three sets of preassembled buttplates would be no longer for the elite but for almost everyone who could afford it, as the time saved would be too much (as in desproportionately) important to the results.
Another subject for worries was the situation of the ladies shooting 50 M. 3 Position: they will be having 60 shots for quali and 45 for finals, a bit too much of a good thing............
I talked with the national federation about how this finals format will make everything incredibly harder for those who aren't blessed with SIUS-ASCOR equipment, but had to settle to the argument that with the new rules erasing the quali scores before the OF's, shooting an important match without them with be useless for the shooters willing to keep in shape for Intenational compromises.
We are pushing all our capacity, but in five months' time I'll tell you how (or if) it's possible FROM THE PURE ORGANISATIONAL P.O.W., and it will surely take a lot of people, time, worries and simpathy from the participants to even attempt at it.
Talking about the subject to fellow rifle shooters (I myself am a pistoleer) they are all VERY worried about the pressure the new OF time limits put on them regarding change from one position to another and zeroing in so little time. One of them went to the extreme of joking that the new rules must've been sponsored by MEC, as having three sets of preassembled buttplates would be no longer for the elite but for almost everyone who could afford it, as the time saved would be too much (as in desproportionately) important to the results.
Another subject for worries was the situation of the ladies shooting 50 M. 3 Position: they will be having 60 shots for quali and 45 for finals, a bit too much of a good thing............
I would not be too concerned about the ladies, recall prior to about 1980 the ladies used to shoot 120 shots right along side the men, usually with the same heavy barrel rifles the men were shooting.Another subject for worries was the situation of the ladies shooting 50 M. 3 Position: they will be having 60 shots for quali and 45 for finals, a bit too much of a good thing............
I don't begin to have the time to train for 3P so I don't, but as a guy the idea of 165 shots for record is a bit daunting. I have noticed I am not a teenager with just about infinite endurance anymore. : (
The only saving grace to this mess is that it is 45 shots in total. The more shots that are fired the better the chances are this contest will actually determine the best shooter on the line, not the shooter who happened to have a handful of better shots.
'Dude
-
silentfury214
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:07 am
- Location: Tennessee
'fury
Yeah, if everyone was judged on the same number of shots it would be much better.
This is like a "made for TV movie", crap that is put on the air so people who have no background in the sport and do not care to learn anything about it may consider it to be fun to watch. Just like the contest style TV shows where after every week someone gets sent home.
In fact, I think viewer voting would be a fantastic idea!, the TV viewers get to "text" their votes as to who gets to sit down after every shot. To heck with the actual value of the shot or score to that point. The viewing audience can vote on such things as the color choice of the shooting gear. The pattern of inspection stickers on the rifle or pistol. The Competitor's hairstyle, fingernail polish, tattoos or any other number of meaningless criteria.
Oh, sorry I was getting carried away. OK, I will come down off my soapbox now but I do feel better after ventilating. : )
Cheers,
'Dude
Yeah, if everyone was judged on the same number of shots it would be much better.
This is like a "made for TV movie", crap that is put on the air so people who have no background in the sport and do not care to learn anything about it may consider it to be fun to watch. Just like the contest style TV shows where after every week someone gets sent home.
In fact, I think viewer voting would be a fantastic idea!, the TV viewers get to "text" their votes as to who gets to sit down after every shot. To heck with the actual value of the shot or score to that point. The viewing audience can vote on such things as the color choice of the shooting gear. The pattern of inspection stickers on the rifle or pistol. The Competitor's hairstyle, fingernail polish, tattoos or any other number of meaningless criteria.
Oh, sorry I was getting carried away. OK, I will come down off my soapbox now but I do feel better after ventilating. : )
Cheers,
'Dude
-
bpscCheney
- Posts: 187
- Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Wisconsin
Made my day sooooooo much better. XDjustadude wrote:'fury
In fact, I think viewer voting would be a fantastic idea!, the TV viewers get to "text" their votes as to who gets to sit down after every shot. To heck with the actual value of the shot or score to that point. The viewing audience can vote on such things as the color choice of the shooting gear. The pattern of inspection stickers on the rifle or pistol. The Competitor's hairstyle, fingernail polish, tattoos or any other number of meaningless criteria.
Cheers,
'Dude
-
STL William
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:25 pm
- Location: St. Louis, MO USA
Beyond interesting, I'm speechless! I don't even know where to start.jhmartin wrote:Has anyone read Rule 7.7.1?
7.7.1 50m and 300m 3 Positions events must be fired in order:
Kneeling – Prone – Standing.
That's not just finals, but Qual as well ... interesting?
Anyone have an idea as to why they changed the order?
I think that they want the most "difficult" position last so that it is fired when the shooters are most tired so we can see "who is the best" under the most difficult conditions. Wind also usually gets worse as the day goes by. They made a similar change in skeet with the "hardest" station of #4 doubles being shot last, or near last.
-
STL William
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:25 pm
- Location: St. Louis, MO USA
That makes sense, but why have Kneeling first? If you want the match to be more difficult as it goes on, wouldn't Kneeling logically go second?PaulB wrote:I think that they want the most "difficult" position last so that it is fired when the shooters are most tired so we can see "who is the best" under the most difficult conditions. Wind also usually gets worse as the day goes by. They made a similar change in skeet with the "hardest" station of #4 doubles being shot last, or near last.
I always thought kneeling being last was a great test of endurance and mental and physical stamina, due to the physically tough nature of the position. I always felt that kneeling was where you occasionally saw the gulf between technical proficiency and sheer personal toughness open up at the end of a long programme where people are tired and sore already. I think it'll be easier to shoot kneeling first but I think it'll spoil that element of the three-positions match. Certainly standing being last will be easier than the previous format for me, but it takes away from the nature of the competition, to my mind.
Dear shooting friends,
long time ago the order 3P was Prone, Kneeling, Standing. From the point of difficulty that order was at that time right. But there were also good reasons to change this order to the now well known order.
We all know, it is very easy even for experienced shooters to settle down slightly wrong in the kneeling position and the leg sleeps away. After that shooting in the Standing position is no real fun.
Greetings from Germany
Frank
long time ago the order 3P was Prone, Kneeling, Standing. From the point of difficulty that order was at that time right. But there were also good reasons to change this order to the now well known order.
We all know, it is very easy even for experienced shooters to settle down slightly wrong in the kneeling position and the leg sleeps away. After that shooting in the Standing position is no real fun.
Greetings from Germany
Frank
Paul aren't you glad we are too old to have to worry about learning this new stuff?
This is all about TV as if this is a made for tv sport like rythmic gymnastics. The introduction of the finals in about '85 was just to make it more interesting for tv. This is total Bull stuff and is not precision shooting. Maybe they are afraid someone will shoot a 1200.
The comment on the equipment driving this may not be too far off. Everyone who has a chance to shoot finals will need 3 buttplates and 3 sight sets. Add this to the new requirements for coats, pants and boots and we are looking at another few thousand $ in addition to the thousands already spent on stuff, some of which will be worthless on Jan 1.
It is my understanding that the IOC crammed the original finals down our throat with the threat of removing shooting from the Olympics completely to make it more "interesting". Just as with college football and bb can anyone doubt that the Olympics is driven soly by money. All this upheaval just so ONE match every four years can be interesting for tv. And we all know the 3p match will get about 15 minutes on ESPN 4 at 3 AM. Almost makes you want to tell the IOC to shove the Olympics into their elitist butts and focus on the World Championships.
This is all about TV as if this is a made for tv sport like rythmic gymnastics. The introduction of the finals in about '85 was just to make it more interesting for tv. This is total Bull stuff and is not precision shooting. Maybe they are afraid someone will shoot a 1200.
The comment on the equipment driving this may not be too far off. Everyone who has a chance to shoot finals will need 3 buttplates and 3 sight sets. Add this to the new requirements for coats, pants and boots and we are looking at another few thousand $ in addition to the thousands already spent on stuff, some of which will be worthless on Jan 1.
It is my understanding that the IOC crammed the original finals down our throat with the threat of removing shooting from the Olympics completely to make it more "interesting". Just as with college football and bb can anyone doubt that the Olympics is driven soly by money. All this upheaval just so ONE match every four years can be interesting for tv. And we all know the 3p match will get about 15 minutes on ESPN 4 at 3 AM. Almost makes you want to tell the IOC to shove the Olympics into their elitist butts and focus on the World Championships.