TargetTalk

[sarcasm]Why stop at banning seams on the left side? Let's just ban anyone fortunate enough to have body proportions that allow them to rest the elbow on the hip bone. That's an unfair advantage![/sarcasm]

Hello everyone,

I was the author of the petition for the ISSF to reconsider it's proposed changes. I forwarded that petition to the ISSF last week and got a rather nasty reply today from Mr. Gary Anderson. I may repost it in its entirety at a later time. It seems the ISSF doesn't believe that what it is doing has any effect on junior programs here in the US. That's funny because the National 3 Postion Air Rifle Council has already adopted in part some of the rules that the ISSF has passed like the shoes not having square toes or heels. The jacket seam rule still has me worried. Mr. Anderson reported that they had checked several different jackets and only a couple manufactures (which he didn't name) would have problems. I applaud Kurt Thune for standing up and agreeing to modify his clothing to meet the new requirements. If only all of the manufactures would do that, and if only junior programs like the one I'm involved with could afford to buy Kurt Thune products and not those made by the lowest bidder. Regardless of it being now or on 1 January 2014 it looks like change is coming whether we want it or not. Mr. Debevec's statement confirms that no opinion is worthy of the ISSF's consideration. I was certainly made to feel that I was an "alarmist" and that I had questioned the sanctity of the ISSF.
After having taken teams through the equipment check in process at national competitions and seeing how even new gear can sometimes be interpreted to be out of regulations, I shudder to think about how long it will take to get all those ground off shoes through the process. It may be time for us to encourage the US shooting sport bodies to separate themselves from the ISSF.

Steve Harris

Steve
Please post the reply from Anderson, it would be interesting to see his responce. I heard that KT will only modify recently purchased products, (this year?) but I may be wrong.
Raymond Debevec is spot on with his view of the ISSF decision making, they have no interest or concern for the majority of shooters. We supported your petition as it would not just be the US Juniors who would be effected but the total hundreds of thousands of grass roots shooters across the world.
They will push these rule changes through because they are arragant and as I suspect you have discoved from the tone of Mr Andersons reply they believe they have some strange devine right, but the result will sadly be a world wide separation from the ISSF rules with different countries going different ways and in some countries such as here in the UK several sets of rules.
Good shooting
Robin

This is not the reply back to Steve, but one that Gary Anderson recently sent to Randy on the jacket topic:
(note: my bolding)

Randy:

The new ISSF rule regarding seams on the left side panel of rifle shooting jackets has been clarified to specify that only seams "under the elbow" are prohibited. The ISSF rule now reads "The construction of the side panel may not place any horizontal seam or seams under the elbow of the support arm in the standing position." This is a very narrow area and almost all of the jackets we have checked will have no problem complying with this rule.

There is unfortunately one manufacturer that has used the placement of a rigid seam directly under the elbow as a means of stiffening the side panel. The ISSf is trying to stop these attempts to build performance enhancing features into shooting clothing in order to keep the equipment race under control and keep the performance enhancing capabilities of shooting clothing as equal as possible.

I can also tell you that this rule was not included in the 2012-2014 National Standard Air Rifle Rules. This means that the jacket you have should not be affected and even if you were to have juniors shoot in USA team trials they should not be affected unless they have one of the rare jackets that does place a seam directly under the left elbow.

Gary
Gary Anderson

Robin ... where do you find info on KT jacket repair?

Two weeks ago I sent a submission to ISSF on increased time limits for paper target systems. The next day I received a very pleasant and constructive reply from Gary Anderson outlining changes to the draft rules. The actual email is on the home PC so I can't attach it but ISSF do act on suggestions.

The summary of Gary's reply is that paper target systems will have increased time to shoot their matches to allow for the extra time taken to change targets compared to electronic targets.
Martin

jhmartin wrote:Robin ... where do you find info on KT jacket repair?

I'm not Robin C but I assume he's thinking of this: http://www.kurtthune.com/warranty.pdf

I received this reply from Mr. Anderson this past Monday. Although it is not as noticeable copied here I noticed mixed font as if it was a cut and pasted of many different responses:

"Dear Mr. Harris:
Thank you for contacting ISSF Headquarters concerning your petition asking for reconsideration of the 2013 ISSF Rules. Secretary General Franz Schreiber asked me to respond on behalf of the ISSF Ad Hoc Rules Committee.

Unfortunately your petition does not provide any information regarding specific rules that might actually affect "junior clubs and scholastic teams" except to say that they concern "equipment and clothing used in 10m and 50m rifle competitions." Thus we can only guess that you have fallen prey to the many false rumors that were circulated by people who did not bother to find out what the rule changes reported in the ISSF's circulation of brief summaries of 2013 rule changes really mean. A copy of your petition is attached for the information of those on the copy list.

One persistent rumor concerns a new ban on movement or oscillation reduction systems that would affect the rifle BEFORE the shot is fired. This new rule will not prohibit any feature on current rifles as they are now designed and produced because this new rule is concerned with systems that might be used to control rifle movements BEFORE the shot. All so-called vibration reduction systems currently sold with rifles are designed to affect movements AFTER the shot and therefore would not be banned.

Another persistent rumor concerns a rule that prohibits seams directly under the elbow on rifle shooting jackets. Lots of jackets have seams on the left side panel, but unless the seam is directly under the elbow, those jackets are not affected. We have inspected lots of rifle jackets and have found jackets from only one or two manufacturers that are in violation. At least one of those manufacturers is using this technique of placing a seam directly under the elbow as a means of increasing support for the left arm and therefore increasing the performance enhancing capabilities of the jacket. This is technological doping and will not be allowed.

Other rule changes regarding shooting shoes and seat pads on shooting trousers require simple modifications that any shooter can make on their own without any cost.

Furthermore, it is likely that teams like your NJROTC rifle team are not even affected by those changes since the rulebook your competition programs use is the National Standard Three-Position Air Rifle Rules. The 2012-2014 edition of those rules does not include the rifle jacket left side panel seam rule and a two-year grace period is given for the simple changes that will eventually be required on shooting shoes and trouser seat pads.

We are not aware of any new ISSF or National Standard Three-Position Air Rifle Rules that will require the junior and scholastic programs you speak of "to severely modify their current equipment or buy new compliant equipment." The new ISSF rules are not going to "cause many teams to be ineligible to compete because they cannot afford to buy all new equipment." That statement is patently false and does a great disservice to everyone who saw it.

Therefore, we cannot accept your petition as a valid expression of concern because there is no evidence the allegations in the petition are correct or based on any responsible analysis of the new 2013-2016 ISSF Rules.

Please learn what the rules actually say and do before alarming other shooters and shooting coaches with false, inaccurate and ill-informed conclusions.
Gary Anderson
Gary Anderson
Vice President, ISSF
for the ISSF Ad Hoc Rules Committee"


Could it be possible that all of us are wrong? Many of you here are much more involved in higher level competition than I am. I have read many opinions here and other places on the internet. There were 158 signatures on that petition and many well known top level shooters signed it. I would bet that many of them read the same rules summary that I did. I'm sure they know more about the ISSF rules (past, present and future) than I do. Am I that off base to think that this will cause problems for rifle sports? It seems Mr. Anderson thinks I am therefore I would assume the ISSF does also since he is empowered to speak for the body.

I might add that I replied to this email with much more information and detail and received another reply from Mr. Anderson again dismissing my (our) concerns. The fact remains that equipment ie: shoes and trousers, will have to be modified to meet the regulations of 2014. Some gear may be readily modified but other gear not so much. The grinding of 10 pairs of boot soles is not high on my list of things I want to do. Knowing the problems that I have seen at equipment check with a new pair of boots made in a factory under close scrutiny I suspect that there will be issues with boots that will be ground in coach's work shops on bench grinders and sanders.

There will be no compromise or concession on the part of the ISSF. Their word is written in stone and brought down from the mountain. I hope that in 2014 we can find weight in Mr. Anderson's assurance but with what I've seen of the ISSF I'm not going to hold my breath.

Bulldogcoach, many of us certainly appreciate you authoring the petition. I know I signed it, and there were no "false rumors" that you were spreading in that petition. That reply from Gary Anderson is extremely arrogant, and it is unfortunate that you had to take that email. The fact that he makes the notion that this will not effect clubs is wrong. We know that these changes will make their way down. Maybe not next year, but certainly within two, three if we are lucky. USA shooting I'm sure will be the first to adopt these rules, followed by NCAA Rifle and everyone else there after. And I do have problem modifying equipment, and I especially hate the fact that these rule changes were made strictly executively, absent from any input from top shooting coaches, let alone the shooters. And don't get me started on the new finals format.

Bulldog
Mr Andersons arragant reply is typical of the ISSF attitude, which is "we are right, you are wrong"!
I agree with your fear of modifying boots and some boots boots (Saur?) I suspect my not be possible to remove the flat.
He is wrong that its a misunderstood rumour, Rajmond Debevec was on the Athletes committee and he has resigned over this, is Mr Anderson not aware of this?
Rajmond Debevec was also on the ad hoc committee that reviewed clothing and he states catagorically that the jacket seam issue was never considered a problem and was never even discussed!!!!

Below extracts from an e mail I received from Rajmond

"I was a member of the adhoc rifle clothing committee with in the last two years and this matter was never discussed or exposed as a problem. I don't know who's proposal it was but if it stays in a form as written it will be a real catastrophy for all the shooters worldwide. I have written to Hirvi about that problem as he was also a member of that ad hoc committee and he replied that he had sent a letter to ISSF headquarters with a request for explanation".

"You can use everything from my reply and quote me to post on forums
Best regards
Rajmond"

Mr Hirvi is the chairman of the ISSF Athletes committee, and he was also not aware of the seam rule change!!!! Rajmond D who was also on the same committe and Mr Hirvi were also on the ad hoc clothing committee and were not even aware of a problem or a change of rules!!!!!

So who did Mr Anderson or his associates on the ISSF ad hoc Rules committee consult? Clearly not even the Athletes committee!!!!!!!!!!

Mr Anderson is also wrong on the jackets which have seams at the elbow. Any jacket made for a woman will have seams at the point of elbow, tell the idiot that they won't fit otherwise!!!
I have checked Ladies jackets from most of the manufactures and they all have seams at that point. KT, Monard, AHG, Gehmann, Marksman house, etc, etc. And many of the mens jackets from those manufacturers are similar. They are not made to give extra support, Mr Anderson may not have noticed that woman have smaller waists and bigger hips than men, if there is no seam then the jacket will bunch up like a sack.
If he is leaving it to equipment control to decide which jacket seam is a support and which is not and is shape tailoring then he is looking at a riot at equipment control!
How will they check, by wether its possible for the shooter to touch the seam with their elbow? What about different arm lengths with similar jackets?
This rule is stupid, dreamed up by a paranoid idiot who see's cheating at every turn, with out consultation from shooters, and its un necessary as no one uses a seam as extra support any way.
If any one had a massive seam it would be picked up on the thickness check any way.
And the USA has given its shooters two years to comply, if the rule was sensible they would not need to, other countries are doing similar as they also have concerns about these changes.
I think you should reply to Mr Anderson and the above is some evidence that he is wrong, it will effect not only USA juniors but all shooters worldwide who use the ISSF rules.
Good Shooting (despite the ISSF!)
Robin

The response and tone from Gary was unfortunate.

I don't like spin after the fact and some of that is spin.

1) The wording of the VRS initially published was so vague as to absolutely warrant the uproar it caused.

2) The specific wording of the Left Side Jacket panel rule was specific enough to again warrant (and still may) the uproar there. Specifically area of elbow needs to be defined ... "below" needs to be defined. For now I'm interpreting it if the elbow point is supported by seam or "bunch" the seam causes, else we do indeed have an issue still. I can only make that interpretation by the explanation offered by Gary in the email to Randy S.

3) The "two year grace period" for 3-P air is disingenuous. Those rules were published at the very end of September of 2012 (9/29) ... essentially Oct 2012. Grace period ends Jan 2014. That's no two years ... 2 years is 24 months. Grace period is actually only 15 months. Or did I flunk kindergarten math?

I agree there were no false rumors ... only outrage at ill defined wording and "pop-up" rules with no thought behind them.

jhmartin wrote:2) The specific wording of the Left Side Jacket panel rule was specific enough to again warrant (and still may) the uproar there. Specifically area of elbow needs to be defined ... "below" needs to be defined. For now I'm interpreting it if the elbow point is supported by seam or "bunch" the seam causes, else we do indeed have an issue still. I can only make that interpretation by the explanation offered by Gary in the email to Randy S.

jh
The problem is its near enough undefinable, you could have the rediculous situation of one make of jacket which could be OK for one shooter and not another depending on arm length. Who and how do they decide wether the elbow is just touching a seam or is being supported by it? Its also close to imposible to control, what do they do, ask you to get into the shooting position at equipment control? Then you simply get into a shotgun position! Perfectly legal! How can they then recheck accurately at the firing point?
They have not even thought of the female situation, women have a shape with a bust, waist and hips, they go out, in, and out! The elbow sits at the in, the top of the hip, the jacket is naturaly tailored at that point, the elbow is at the point where the ledge of the hip is and there is naturaly a seam at that point. Clearly no one at the ISSF who dreamed up this lunacy has seen a woman.
This rule is an impractical answer to a problem that does not exist.
I was told that the man who dreamed this up was Willi Grills, was he a rifle shooter?
Good shooting
Robin

Robin ... I can't argue with you.
I'm not a shooter ... only a jr coach & official that watches the line.

Right now I'll have to go with an admittedly subjective view of what looks like support.

If the jacket bunches and creates a "ledge" that would voilate the spirit of this rule I guess.

I think your point is well made and this could be avoided, as you mentioned earlier, if the seam was made a mandatory control point.

Jh
I think we both agree, I also coach, mostly juniors and its a pain getting kit to pass control now, I'm really not looking forward to EC at our UK championships which is far more traumatic for me than the shooting. Fortunately our body has ruled that they will stick to 2012 rules for the next one in Feb but there always seems to be some petty trivia that we have to alter for EC, and its starting to turn a pleasure into a chore. Its bad enough now trying to source old kit for penniless shooters and then getting it to pass as some trivial rule has changed.
Good shooting
Robin