It's not at all clear to me that the current debate has been caused by the medias desire to make shooting sports more attractive.
I'm skeptical that the media (USA) is all that keen to make shooting sports media attractive in the first place. They have a surplus of sports that support heavy marketing. Why bother with shooting when there's pro wrestling?
However, I would not be surprised to find that some individuals (or groups) are interested in making shooting sports more attractive to the media.
Is it essential that the shooting sports become more media attractive?
I guess that there is some prestige in knowing that ones personal interests merit TV attention, and I would certainly enjoy seeing shooting sports on TV from time to time.
I'm told that in parts of Scandinavia national shooting events are televised. For those that can't get to a TV the radio works too! Clearly, we ask for what we get. If there was sufficient demand for shooting sports on TV in this country it would be on TV! If shooting sports can't get air time in the US it's hardly the fault of shooters, or hats or pants etc. It's all driven by what the public wants to watch while getting a dose of advertising. Clearly the public in the US is more attracted to violence, mock violence, and sexually suggestive material than shooting. Hats and pants won't change this.
Who cares if the media finds shooting hats or pants obnoxious. If the change is being proposed for the sole purpose of media attraction and the media still can't sell the product to the public (US), what have we gained.
I wonder how figure skating would do with monotone outfits of one specific design etc. Is that where we want our sport to go? Do we want a panel of corruptable judges determing who stands on the victory platform? Don't their outfits provide a form of artificial support in building confidence or asthetic attraction?
There should be no debate that pants help in OH and K.
If we take the issue to the extreme then slings offer artifical support. If used improperly they can contribute to wrist and arm injuries. When used properly, with or without a coat, there should be little cause for concern.
As for health issues and shooting pants, if the position is truly harmful without shooting pants then the position may be unsafe in the first place. If a shooter cannot sustain their position, without shooting pants, for the duration of the event, and without incurring injury, they are getting artificial support. I'm not too certain any athlete could continue to compete at the highest levels under these circumstances. Any athlete with a solid and "comfortable" position in the first place should out perform the athlete whose sole benifit from shooting pants is a painless/injury free position.
The issue of artificial support will not go away until all are satisfied that the benifits derived from pants are equal. The present rules governing the use of pants are equitable. If we elimiate them on the grounds of artificaial support then we might as well eliminate the sling as well!
Even so, very serious consideration must be given to EVERY new product that is used in our sport. We did not always have "shooting" pants. If any item on the firing line is not mentioned in the rules it cannot be used. It's excluded by omission.
In the end it's a matter of how well the existing rules are enforced. If everyone has access to the market for these products then the playing field should be considered equal.
my two cents
petersondean-at-hotmail.com.45707.0
Shooting Pants
Moderators: rexifelis, pilkguns
-
JT
Re: Shooting Pants
Bravo Dean!
Lets just have everyone shoot nekid. That would get media attention! And everyone in the world would watch.
Though I think the womens events would draw a larger audience.
: It's not at all clear to me that the current debate has been caused by the medias desire to make shooting sports more attractive.
: I'm skeptical that the media (USA) is all that keen to make shooting sports media attractive in the first place. They have a surplus of sports that support heavy marketing. Why bother with shooting when there's pro wrestling?
: However, I would not be surprised to find that some individuals (or groups) are interested in making shooting sports more attractive to the media.
: Is it essential that the shooting sports become more media attractive?
: I guess that there is some prestige in knowing that ones personal interests merit TV attention, and I would certainly enjoy seeing shooting sports on TV from time to time.
: I'm told that in parts of Scandinavia national shooting events are televised. For those that can't get to a TV the radio works too! Clearly, we ask for what we get. If there was sufficient demand for shooting sports on TV in this country it would be on TV! If shooting sports can't get air time in the US it's hardly the fault of shooters, or hats or pants etc. It's all driven by what the public wants to watch while getting a dose of advertising. Clearly the public in the US is more attracted to violence, mock violence, and sexually suggestive material than shooting. Hats and pants won't change this.
: Who cares if the media finds shooting hats or pants obnoxious. If the change is being proposed for the sole purpose of media attraction and the media still can't sell the product to the public (US), what have we gained.
: I wonder how figure skating would do with monotone outfits of one specific design etc. Is that where we want our sport to go? Do we want a panel of corruptable judges determing who stands on the victory platform? Don't their outfits provide a form of artificial support in building confidence or asthetic attraction?
: There should be no debate that pants help in OH and K.
: If we take the issue to the extreme then slings offer artifical support. If used improperly they can contribute to wrist and arm injuries. When used properly, with or without a coat, there should be little cause for concern.
: As for health issues and shooting pants, if the position is truly harmful without shooting pants then the position may be unsafe in the first place. If a shooter cannot sustain their position, without shooting pants, for the duration of the event, and without incurring injury, they are getting artificial support. I'm not too certain any athlete could continue to compete at the highest levels under these circumstances. Any athlete with a solid and "comfortable" position in the first place should out perform the athlete whose sole benifit from shooting pants is a painless/injury free position.
: The issue of artificial support will not go away until all are satisfied that the benifits derived from pants are equal. The present rules governing the use of pants are equitable. If we elimiate them on the grounds of artificaial support then we might as well eliminate the sling as well!
: Even so, very serious consideration must be given to EVERY new product that is used in our sport. We did not always have "shooting" pants. If any item on the firing line is not mentioned in the rules it cannot be used. It's excluded by omission.
: In the end it's a matter of how well the existing rules are enforced. If everyone has access to the market for these products then the playing field should be considered equal.
: my two cents
shootingsports-at-ev1.net.45716.45707
Lets just have everyone shoot nekid. That would get media attention! And everyone in the world would watch.
Though I think the womens events would draw a larger audience.
: It's not at all clear to me that the current debate has been caused by the medias desire to make shooting sports more attractive.
: I'm skeptical that the media (USA) is all that keen to make shooting sports media attractive in the first place. They have a surplus of sports that support heavy marketing. Why bother with shooting when there's pro wrestling?
: However, I would not be surprised to find that some individuals (or groups) are interested in making shooting sports more attractive to the media.
: Is it essential that the shooting sports become more media attractive?
: I guess that there is some prestige in knowing that ones personal interests merit TV attention, and I would certainly enjoy seeing shooting sports on TV from time to time.
: I'm told that in parts of Scandinavia national shooting events are televised. For those that can't get to a TV the radio works too! Clearly, we ask for what we get. If there was sufficient demand for shooting sports on TV in this country it would be on TV! If shooting sports can't get air time in the US it's hardly the fault of shooters, or hats or pants etc. It's all driven by what the public wants to watch while getting a dose of advertising. Clearly the public in the US is more attracted to violence, mock violence, and sexually suggestive material than shooting. Hats and pants won't change this.
: Who cares if the media finds shooting hats or pants obnoxious. If the change is being proposed for the sole purpose of media attraction and the media still can't sell the product to the public (US), what have we gained.
: I wonder how figure skating would do with monotone outfits of one specific design etc. Is that where we want our sport to go? Do we want a panel of corruptable judges determing who stands on the victory platform? Don't their outfits provide a form of artificial support in building confidence or asthetic attraction?
: There should be no debate that pants help in OH and K.
: If we take the issue to the extreme then slings offer artifical support. If used improperly they can contribute to wrist and arm injuries. When used properly, with or without a coat, there should be little cause for concern.
: As for health issues and shooting pants, if the position is truly harmful without shooting pants then the position may be unsafe in the first place. If a shooter cannot sustain their position, without shooting pants, for the duration of the event, and without incurring injury, they are getting artificial support. I'm not too certain any athlete could continue to compete at the highest levels under these circumstances. Any athlete with a solid and "comfortable" position in the first place should out perform the athlete whose sole benifit from shooting pants is a painless/injury free position.
: The issue of artificial support will not go away until all are satisfied that the benifits derived from pants are equal. The present rules governing the use of pants are equitable. If we elimiate them on the grounds of artificaial support then we might as well eliminate the sling as well!
: Even so, very serious consideration must be given to EVERY new product that is used in our sport. We did not always have "shooting" pants. If any item on the firing line is not mentioned in the rules it cannot be used. It's excluded by omission.
: In the end it's a matter of how well the existing rules are enforced. If everyone has access to the market for these products then the playing field should be considered equal.
: my two cents
shootingsports-at-ev1.net.45716.45707
-
scott
Re: Shooting Pants
All,
IMHO, the existing shooting pants are more akin to a weightlifter's belt. They are there to 'partially stabilize' the shooter's position, and provide a small measure of protection from injury, but do not provide a crutch for bad technique. 'Partially stabilize' and 'artificial support' may be two points along the same line, but they are very distinct and identifiable points. Partially stabilize means just that, like the shock absorbers on a car. Artificial support is more like putting that same car on railroad tracks.
Let's face it, shooting well in the standing position is a great physical challenge, and holding the weight of a rifle for hours on end, in both practice and competition does over the years create significant long-term wear-and-tear on the body, especially on those athletes who have not reached their full adult size and strength. Doing away with shooting pants will mean more and more of our athletes, and especially our younger shooters will retire from the sport or not reach their full potential due to long term injury.
In my opinion the impact of existing pants designs on scores isn't a pressing issue. OK, maybe, MAYBE they'll give an elite athlete an extra point per match, at most. If we all were seeing herds of 12-year-old kids with six months experience whacking out 600's and 105.8 finals in every club match around the globe, then we'd have an equipment issue to deal with. We've had, what, at most a mere handful of 600's in major international competition in MAR, ever?
Regarding the 'media demands' issue, that's total BS in my opinion. Broadcast and print media just love the athlete's colorful, unique equipment, regardless of the sport. Auto racing, football, hockey, skiing, BMX all have their unique 'look' and it's a major attraction for fans and viewers alike. Ask any beginning skier snowplowing down the bunny hill or sitting on the lodge’s sundeck why he or she tries so hard to look like they are fresh exiles from the US Ski Team. Ask any middle-aged suburban couch spud or teen in the 'hood about his newest official NFL/NBA/NHL jersey and shoes. The huge media attention that Cowboy Action shooting is currently getting is mostly because of their unique clothing, rather than in spite of it. Cool, high-tech specialized athletic gear makes for more media and advertising potential, not less. Appearing for an Olympic rifle final in a cute little fabric jacket and Lycra tights is just not as cool as a determined-looking athlete lumbering out onto the firing line looking like a modern gladiator ready to do some serious battle for the gold medal, especially to the largely male-dominated demographic that is by default our sport’s major audience. You want cute, check out rhythmic gymnastics over on Channel 2.
I think much of the pressure or demand to make these changes comes instead from an international federation mired in the past, seeing their once-proud sport assaulted by political pressures and liberal social agendas worldwide, and thus dwindling in international stature, participation and media exposure. Sadly, they now appear to be grasping at straws, adopting every off the wall proposal and hair-brained idea that is thrown out on the table. It's much like the ISSF's recent change in 25M RFP, a radical solution looking for a problem. If existing .22 Short gun/ammo reliability is drastically impeding the efficient flow of the match is the real issue, then change the rules to allow only one malfunction per half course and the issue resolves itself. You break more than twice over two days, you can just go home. Mandating the change to a hot .22LR round and the Standard Pistol is like mandating everyone drive a 4x4 SUV at the Indy 500 or running the Olympic 100M hurdles in snowshoes. If the IOC’s alleged complaints about their host city’s costs for construction of a dedicated 25M range for just 2 medals events is the real issue, then drop 25M RFP and 25M WSP from the Olympic program and replace them with similar 10M air variants, and then still shoot the original format events at the WCH, individual national championships and at local club matches. Don’t destroy the basic nature of a century-old event by mandating the use of both equipment and ammunition that have been considered inferior for that very task for at least six or seven decades.
Candidly, I don't know if ISSF has fully thought through just how this latest 25M RFP mandate will be implemented. Installing chronographs at every firing point, thus testing every round going downrange during the match? Issuing some standardized rulebook-legal ammo to each shooter as they come onto the line? Impound all the guns and ammo, and then have the jury examine and live fire test a statistically valid ammo sample from every shooter after the match? Won’t that create several more hours of waiting after a big match while all this testing is completed before announcing the official results? (That will be a huge hit with the broadcast media, “And the winner is…uhhh… check back tomorrow.”) How about all the protests and appeals? Tech inspection and match administration just got an order of magnitude harder, not easier, for the already overworked 25M juries and range crews.
Our sport is what it is. We have no need to apologize for it in any way. With the possible exception of the clay target events, the casual observer can't see the effect of each individual shot. ( And without a spotting scope or target monitor, the athlete generally can't see it either.) It's a sport that people tend to do, not watch. If enough people want to watch shooting as a spectator sport, the free market will supply their demand for programming. If not, it still remains a great mass-participation sport, with centuries of proud traditions, and hopefully a solid, albeit a probably somewhat unheralded future.
Scott
submoa-at-aol.com.45724.45707
IMHO, the existing shooting pants are more akin to a weightlifter's belt. They are there to 'partially stabilize' the shooter's position, and provide a small measure of protection from injury, but do not provide a crutch for bad technique. 'Partially stabilize' and 'artificial support' may be two points along the same line, but they are very distinct and identifiable points. Partially stabilize means just that, like the shock absorbers on a car. Artificial support is more like putting that same car on railroad tracks.
Let's face it, shooting well in the standing position is a great physical challenge, and holding the weight of a rifle for hours on end, in both practice and competition does over the years create significant long-term wear-and-tear on the body, especially on those athletes who have not reached their full adult size and strength. Doing away with shooting pants will mean more and more of our athletes, and especially our younger shooters will retire from the sport or not reach their full potential due to long term injury.
In my opinion the impact of existing pants designs on scores isn't a pressing issue. OK, maybe, MAYBE they'll give an elite athlete an extra point per match, at most. If we all were seeing herds of 12-year-old kids with six months experience whacking out 600's and 105.8 finals in every club match around the globe, then we'd have an equipment issue to deal with. We've had, what, at most a mere handful of 600's in major international competition in MAR, ever?
Regarding the 'media demands' issue, that's total BS in my opinion. Broadcast and print media just love the athlete's colorful, unique equipment, regardless of the sport. Auto racing, football, hockey, skiing, BMX all have their unique 'look' and it's a major attraction for fans and viewers alike. Ask any beginning skier snowplowing down the bunny hill or sitting on the lodge’s sundeck why he or she tries so hard to look like they are fresh exiles from the US Ski Team. Ask any middle-aged suburban couch spud or teen in the 'hood about his newest official NFL/NBA/NHL jersey and shoes. The huge media attention that Cowboy Action shooting is currently getting is mostly because of their unique clothing, rather than in spite of it. Cool, high-tech specialized athletic gear makes for more media and advertising potential, not less. Appearing for an Olympic rifle final in a cute little fabric jacket and Lycra tights is just not as cool as a determined-looking athlete lumbering out onto the firing line looking like a modern gladiator ready to do some serious battle for the gold medal, especially to the largely male-dominated demographic that is by default our sport’s major audience. You want cute, check out rhythmic gymnastics over on Channel 2.
I think much of the pressure or demand to make these changes comes instead from an international federation mired in the past, seeing their once-proud sport assaulted by political pressures and liberal social agendas worldwide, and thus dwindling in international stature, participation and media exposure. Sadly, they now appear to be grasping at straws, adopting every off the wall proposal and hair-brained idea that is thrown out on the table. It's much like the ISSF's recent change in 25M RFP, a radical solution looking for a problem. If existing .22 Short gun/ammo reliability is drastically impeding the efficient flow of the match is the real issue, then change the rules to allow only one malfunction per half course and the issue resolves itself. You break more than twice over two days, you can just go home. Mandating the change to a hot .22LR round and the Standard Pistol is like mandating everyone drive a 4x4 SUV at the Indy 500 or running the Olympic 100M hurdles in snowshoes. If the IOC’s alleged complaints about their host city’s costs for construction of a dedicated 25M range for just 2 medals events is the real issue, then drop 25M RFP and 25M WSP from the Olympic program and replace them with similar 10M air variants, and then still shoot the original format events at the WCH, individual national championships and at local club matches. Don’t destroy the basic nature of a century-old event by mandating the use of both equipment and ammunition that have been considered inferior for that very task for at least six or seven decades.
Candidly, I don't know if ISSF has fully thought through just how this latest 25M RFP mandate will be implemented. Installing chronographs at every firing point, thus testing every round going downrange during the match? Issuing some standardized rulebook-legal ammo to each shooter as they come onto the line? Impound all the guns and ammo, and then have the jury examine and live fire test a statistically valid ammo sample from every shooter after the match? Won’t that create several more hours of waiting after a big match while all this testing is completed before announcing the official results? (That will be a huge hit with the broadcast media, “And the winner is…uhhh… check back tomorrow.”) How about all the protests and appeals? Tech inspection and match administration just got an order of magnitude harder, not easier, for the already overworked 25M juries and range crews.
Our sport is what it is. We have no need to apologize for it in any way. With the possible exception of the clay target events, the casual observer can't see the effect of each individual shot. ( And without a spotting scope or target monitor, the athlete generally can't see it either.) It's a sport that people tend to do, not watch. If enough people want to watch shooting as a spectator sport, the free market will supply their demand for programming. If not, it still remains a great mass-participation sport, with centuries of proud traditions, and hopefully a solid, albeit a probably somewhat unheralded future.
Scott
submoa-at-aol.com.45724.45707
-
Jake
Re: Shooting Pants
Scott,
Nice idea on the surface, but the reality is if the ranges are not built for the Olympics, they probably won't be there for the WCH to follow! If ISSF drops 25 meter events from the Olympics then that part of pistol shooting will die just like RT. It may be a long, slow, lingering death, but it will die!
:If the IOC’s alleged complaints about their host city’s costs for construction of a dedicated 25M range for just 2 medals events is the real issue, then drop 25M RFP and 25M WSP from the Olympic program and replace them with similar 10M air variants, and then still shoot the original format events at the WCH, individual national championships and at local club matches.
.45743.45724
Nice idea on the surface, but the reality is if the ranges are not built for the Olympics, they probably won't be there for the WCH to follow! If ISSF drops 25 meter events from the Olympics then that part of pistol shooting will die just like RT. It may be a long, slow, lingering death, but it will die!
:If the IOC’s alleged complaints about their host city’s costs for construction of a dedicated 25M range for just 2 medals events is the real issue, then drop 25M RFP and 25M WSP from the Olympic program and replace them with similar 10M air variants, and then still shoot the original format events at the WCH, individual national championships and at local club matches.
.45743.45724
-
scott
Re: Shooting Pants
Good point, and it is well taken on my end.
In a re-read of the ISSF's Executive Committee minutes, they suggest (wisely for a change) developing a superimposed 25M/50M venue, which makes great sense for both a major competition and as a legacy facility. With electronic targets one only has to roll them out to the 25M distance and then back them up with an impact plate to protect the 50M equipment further downrange. Everyone might win under this system.
BTW and IMHO, my comments on the ill-advised equiopment and ammo changes in 25M RFP still stand.
: Scott,
: Nice idea on the surface, but the reality is if the ranges are not built for the Olympics, they probably won't be there for the WCH to follow! If ISSF drops 25 meter events from the Olympics then that part of pistol shooting will die just like RT. It may be a long, slow, lingering death, but it will die!
: :If the IOC’s alleged complaints about their host city’s costs for construction of a dedicated 25M range for just 2 medals events is the real issue, then drop 25M RFP and 25M WSP from the Olympic program and replace them with similar 10M air variants, and then still shoot the original format events at the WCH, individual national championships and at local club matches.
submoa-at-aol.com.45756.45743
In a re-read of the ISSF's Executive Committee minutes, they suggest (wisely for a change) developing a superimposed 25M/50M venue, which makes great sense for both a major competition and as a legacy facility. With electronic targets one only has to roll them out to the 25M distance and then back them up with an impact plate to protect the 50M equipment further downrange. Everyone might win under this system.
BTW and IMHO, my comments on the ill-advised equiopment and ammo changes in 25M RFP still stand.
: Scott,
: Nice idea on the surface, but the reality is if the ranges are not built for the Olympics, they probably won't be there for the WCH to follow! If ISSF drops 25 meter events from the Olympics then that part of pistol shooting will die just like RT. It may be a long, slow, lingering death, but it will die!
: :If the IOC’s alleged complaints about their host city’s costs for construction of a dedicated 25M range for just 2 medals events is the real issue, then drop 25M RFP and 25M WSP from the Olympic program and replace them with similar 10M air variants, and then still shoot the original format events at the WCH, individual national championships and at local club matches.
submoa-at-aol.com.45756.45743
-
Jake
Re: Shooting Pants
Yes indeed your comments are on the mark about RFP.
My point taken alittle further, yes you can overlay 25 meter on 50 meter. but i will probably extend the length of the WCH event a day or two for range change and maybe even longer if the event is not held where there is midnight sun;-) like Lahti
.45757.45756
My point taken alittle further, yes you can overlay 25 meter on 50 meter. but i will probably extend the length of the WCH event a day or two for range change and maybe even longer if the event is not held where there is midnight sun;-) like Lahti
.45757.45756