TargetTalk

Of all sports, shooting (and perhaps archery) are least spectator friendly. Perhaps the slow pace of shooting, limited on-range spectator capacity, the drab attire (shabby track suits) of shooters, noise, poor TV coverage etc, all have their share in a not very glamorous sport. Can something be done to spice up the shooting scene?

shabby - see pic
slow pace? including Rapid Fire Pistol?
limited on-range spectator capacity - not at any Olympics or World Championship I have been to

Hi

Having attended the Bianchi cup twice as a spectator, I would strongly suggest that our efforts be concentrated on gaining new competitive shooters in any and all shooting sports. People who shoot will attend matches, both to shoot, to shop, and to talk to the world-class shooters.

The Bianchi cup is ACTION pistol shooting, and it's a little interesting, but it ain't Football (or for Europeans Soccer), Basketball, Stock car racing, or beach volleyball. Personally, I found that I was one of TWO spectators on Day one of the cup, and one of about 35 for the finals. Compared to attending a football game, it was DULL.

Again, personally I think that shooting is a lot like baseball. If you played it as a child, you will watch it. If you played it as a child, you will play a form of it as an older adult (softball). I think we should quit trying to change ANY of the shooting sports to make then "watchable", and instead work to make them more available. The younger the better.

Just my $2 (wrote too much for $0.02)

Mike
Wichita KS

Mike's got a point. Non-shooters, for the most part, don't get it.

And while I liked the still picture of the 4 rifle shooters, looking at it is not much different that watching a match- statues dressed in rigid clothing clothing, with very little movement during the match. As for rapid fire matches, they are much different than watching one of those toy birds that bends over to dip it's beak in a glass of water, and then right themselves. It is very mechanical and predictable. Let's be honest; outside of finals, where there are position changes, the match is a tad boring. And that is perfectly fine with me.

Don't get me wrong, I am an avid shooter, and undersstand what ISSF and the IOC are trying to do. But it's hard to "spice up" what amounts to meditation, unless you invent completely new events.

toznerd

I don't want to rain on anyones parade, but watching a match would be one of the last things I would consider doing...I think watching grass grow would be more exciting.

As a competitor, I will watch a match, but only as a means of trying to determine what the "conditions" are while waiting to shoot. It is also interesting to watch others shoot, as a competitor, to see what you are up against.

As far as a spectator sport, I don't think shooting will never be one.

John

I think you could do a lot with the finals IF you had a color commentator who knew what he was doing. Track the relative change in placement with each shot, etc.

Mike M. wrote:I think you could do a lot with the finals IF you had a color commentator who knew what he was doing. Track the relative change in placement with each shot, etc.

Like the Sius Ascor + the ISSF video display and commentary used at World Cups?

Spencer

The four shooters look like those creatures in video games, don't they? Shooting sports require a visually appealing make-over in shooter's fashions, for sure. The anything goes attitude (jeans, track suits, shorts, tees, etc) needs to be replaced by elan and elegance that is seen in sports like golf and tennis.

You mean we've got to wear knickers (knee pants) with loud plaid stockings?
TROLL ALERT!!

BINGO, Spencer. That's exactly the sort of thing that I was thinking of.

Color commentary - the thoughts that a shooter is trying desperately NOT to think - is precisely the thing that can put drama into a final. The whole business of controlling nerves so rattled that you can barely stand...and trying to send a bullet into a 10-ring not much bigger than a quarter 50 meters away.

Part of the problem is that the IOC signed that devil's bargain with NBC Sports...and NBC is by far the weakest of the major American networks when it comes to sporting coverage. Their attitude has very openly been that they bought the Summer Olympic rights purely for gymnastics, basketball, swimming, diving, and (to a lesser degree) some of the track and equestrian events. We tend to think of it as anti-gun bias, but talk to a lot of other sports and you will find that they are in the same boat. Worse, the IOC is pressing everybody to generate television revenue.

Now, if you wanted some visual appeal, substitute muzzle-loading events for the cartridge gun events in the Olympics. Then require period costume. Ever see a Japanese matchlock shot by someone wearing full samurai garb? :-)

OK Mike, all that grease, Hydrogen Disulphide, etc. might not agree with the electronics...

...but the voice over at some World Cups is clearly heard by the competitors (depends on the available resources).
I can remember the look on one shooter's face as the announcer told the spectators that he has slipped 0.2, and was trailing the shooter to his right.

In my experience Munich World Cups seem to be the leader in this presentation - it takes close cooperation between the Sius ascor technicians, ISSF TV, and the announcer - but it works!

Spencer

I'll observe that the commentary should NOT be heard by the shooters. That's for the broadcast feed.

Oh No, Mike!

If we want to improve spectator appeal, we should make the whole thing "interactive!"

Let the spectators boo, cheer, throw paper cups, etc. . . .

Perhaps occasionally a competitor would "snap" and start bustin caps into the crowd . . .

Now *that* would be worth watching!

Betcha the ratings would go up, endorsement money would come flowing in, ("When I go postal, I use Vogel Pellets!") advertising revenues would soar . . . Yee-Haw!

Steve

[after the first couple of televised centerfire matches, I bet UnderArmor would begin offering the Kevlar option]

On perhaps a less amusing note :D
A few years back, eurosport tried an experiment - they televised an air rifle match with all the standard ISSF setup but with two alterations - first, they had women shoot shoulder-to-shoulder with men (which brings in the whole gender divide thing) and second they had everyone strap on a noptel and superimposed the trace on the bottom corner of the screen while showing the shooter. This gives the audience the same view the shooter has (as near as is possible anyway) and made a lot more difference to the experience than I'd thought it would.
Maybe that should be brought in for the larger matches?

Sparks wrote:On perhaps a less amusing note :D
A few years back, eurosport tried an experiment - they televised an air rifle match with all the standard ISSF setup but with two alterations - first, they had women shoot shoulder-to-shoulder with men (which brings in the whole gender divide thing) and second they had everyone strap on a noptel and superimposed the trace on the bottom corner of the screen while showing the shooter.

I think you'll find it was actually a Scatt to show the trace, switching to the shot position from the Meyton target after firing. The linking software was actually written by the TV company. It was at the Dortmund Masters in 2000.

I have a VCR (PAL system) of it but, unfortunately, no longer have a VCR machine.

Thanks David. Couldn't remember what match it was for the life of me. Wouldn't you agree that it was a definite improvement to see the trace before the shot as well as the shot position after the shot though?

We've had the discussion many times about bringing dueling back so that the little gang bangers can settle their scores in a controled environment. Have it on pay per view.

Sparks wrote:Thanks David. Couldn't remember what match it was for the life of me. Wouldn't you agree that it was a definite improvement to see the trace before the shot as well as the shot position after the shot though?

I thoroughly enjoyed it, but then I enjoy watching normal air pistol shooting so I'm no real judge.

What I did find was that I could have done without the shooter being in the picture. I was always just watching the Scatt trace.

David Levene wrote:...What I did find was that I could have done without the shooter being in the picture. I was always just watching the Scatt trace.

.

Similar to my experience when we first set up a projector and screen for progressive scoring display for 10m Qualification Rounds.

People stopped watching the shooters and watched the display.

Spencer

Is it an image problem that Shooting Sports suffer from? Might a sassy Ivanovic or Kournikva or Sharapova help?