TargetTalk

I just got my eBook version of Shorting Sports USA,
Dennis Willing has written a multiple page answer to many pistol shooters
Concerns about eTargets at Perry, and the future of the sport in general.

He doesn't say what he plans on doing right now.

I won't comment here, but am interested in hearing other shooters concerns.

My $0.02 input. I LIKE, walking downrange, scoring and repairing targets. That is about half of this sport. We socialize and banter in that march to score and repair targets. I shot at camp perry and every year met someone new from that experience. Most are still friends to this day. I also shot at the air pistol range. I like it there wonderful place to relax in climate controlled environment. But I have no clue who was next to me. If they were from Akron or Argentina made no difference. I shot very well with a score in the 560's and walked out with a smile. But the people around me. No clue if they were marksmen or high masters. It is like a library in there shushed tones, be very quiet.

I like the idea of using repair centers and just one target per day. staple gun and pasters. If the turning target system is completely knackered use a whistle

Read the article and Dennis makes some very Valid points. I still like the walk down range. Staple and pasters. Also agree there should be a large test done prior to switching equipment at the nationals. Pick a large event (Canton) and see how the electronic targets fare there. As for an aiming point on the black, Is it not possible to project onto it? It will change our way of doing things. I am for Evolution rather than Revolution. Possibly a choice, shoot on the old system or electronic system as you sign up. I have to admit if that was offered in 2015 I would sign up for the electronic system just for the novelty of it. Might go back afterward and regret it.

As I wrote elsewhere, if the simple technology systems were neglected, how do they expect to maintain the state of the art systems. No one would even replace rotten wood, or contract for new timers and switches.

I recently read an article about states giving up on electronic voting because it was too expensive to maintain and upgrade. Technology has a life span and the life span of electronic technology is significantly more limited than that of electro-mechanical.

All of that said, if they can do turning targets, I could support it. I think it will turn out bad, but I could still support it.

For those of you that donot receive the eBook magazine, here is the link.

http://www.nramedia.org/t/3339552/7481100/511/7/

Even if they were to sign a contract tomorrow, I think the earliest we would see electronic targets at Perry is 2016, maybe 2020 latest to be on the safe side. They are going to have to either repair or limp along with the old equipment for at least another few years.

I will shoot, no matter what they have up there, because I am too darn old to stew about it for a few years.

My contracting experience tells me, they haven't even begun to think about all the possible obstacles and expenses of full implementation.

I like your testing ideas Dan, but if it is still a one target line system, (as they have proposed) with the shooters moving up to the short line, exactly how are they going to test that at any of the big regionals, or at any range really set up for regular bullseye?
The only place I shoot that is like Perry is The Whittington Center at Raton.


Makes me wonder if the end game is to move the National Pistol matches somewhere else that can house a dedicated range.

In order to be used at Camp Perry the system MUST be portable. They have to set it up and break it down every year. Which supports my idea of use at a big even like Canton Regional prior to implementation at the National level. It is feasible to have the range split in half. 50% long line and 50% short line. When done shooting the NMC slow fire, shooters move equipment laterally to the sustained fire line. So if you were assigned to position 13, you would shoot initially at 13L then move to 13S. I think that could work. I'm having trouble with the turning target system for sustained fire. The solution that comes up is to have something like a starting gate that has a paper target on it but in front of the for score targets. Blocking your view of the electronic targets. It could even be part of the electronic target. The commands would proceed as normal but rather than turning the paper target would drop exposing the electronic target behind. At the end of 20/10 seconds the paper target would pop back up. Like a clam shell target in USPSA if you have ever seen them. I think the movement Plus an audible Plus a visual Light would satisfy most people in most situations. I believe we (shooters) have the ingenuity to specify and design a system. It needs to be by committee with a lot of feedback from the shooters. I am convinced an off the shelf unit designed for international (iron sight only) is not going to work for our sport. All of the examples given in the article were based upon iron sights. I would suspect less than 5% of the shooters at Perry were as stupid as myself and shooting irons all way through...

"I believe we (shooters) have the ingenuity to specify and design a system. It needs to be by committee with a lot of feedback from the shooters."


I don't think that is going to happen. This looks like a cram down to me.


But I like your idea of a target cover, dropping to expose the target.

motorcycle_dan wrote: It is feasible to have the range split in half. 50% long line and 50% short line. When done shooting the NMC slow fire, shooters move equipment laterally to the sustained fire line. So if you were assigned to position 13, you would shoot initially at 13L then move to 13S. .

Dan

In all the years I shot the Atlantic Fleet Match when it was at FCTC Atlantic, Dam Neck, VA, that is exactly how the match was conducted. You fired your three 50 yard slow fire targets, packed up your stuff, and walked over to the 25 yard range.

Worked just fine.

Richard Ashmore

If and whatever changes are made, you will get used to it.

I am more concerned about the predicted aging of the ranks, with limited replacements.

Times, politics, economy, industry marketing, all play into this.

this was posted on the bullseye L list earlier today

As I suspected, money has now become a factor.

"Everyone,

I just received an email from Denny that the NRA just implemented another round of budget cuts so the option for the electronic target program is off the table.

Denny is still of the belief that electronic targets are the only way to save bullseye from extinction, so please email Denny directly about your ideas to help grow the sport without focusing on just the 1 event--the national pistol match.

Denny also said he has only had feedback that agreed with his article--let him know what you believe.

Denny Willing: dwilling@nrahq.org"

With the exception of Jackh, you guys have completely missed the main point of the article.

>>>>>>86% of the competitors at Camp Perry last year were 60 or older.<<<<<<<

That means this sport is dying, literally. Young people are not coming into it. They're going to IPSC (which is more like the video games they grew up playing) or they're playing with their phones, or whatever. But they're not taking up bullseye.

Here in Southern California, we have 2 sanctioned matches. Both get about 12-15 people a month. My club's "combat pistol" match gets 50-100, including lots of 20 & 30 somethings. My club's bullseye match has had exactly 1 junior in the last 3 years. He was the son of a regular member.

I think the electronic targets are irrelevant. I doubt the NRA will actually spring for the money, anyway. It would be far cheaper to just replace the existing target setup with new mechanisms.

Some of you are just plain paranoid:
1) The NRA is not going to ban the use of paper targets.
2) Using electronic targets will not turn bullseye into Olympic shooting. The ISSF certainly doesn't want us (and our 45's).
3) This is not an excuse for the NRA to drop bullseye pistol. If they wanted to do that, they don't need an excuse.
4) The NRA has tried to come up with some new ideas in recent years (2-handed pistol, equipment divisions) that I personally thought were pretty lame, but they're trying. Both of those ideas were attacked viciously on this board, and the other one.

Yes, we like it the way it. What are YOUR ideas to bring juniors in, and save this sport?


Mark Freedman
Escondido Fish & Game Assoc Bullseye Pistol Match Director
Escondido, CA

"With the exception of Jackh, you guys have completely missed the main point of the article.

>>>>>>86% of the competitors at Camp Perry last year were 60 or older.<<<<<<<"



Ever been out on a golf course in Phoenix?
Looks a lot like the firing line. USTA rated tennis tournaments, the same way.

The youth shooters don't develop into adult shooters at a high enough percentage. They leave for several years, and then a few come back when they have the time and the money.

We are never going to "grow" the sport through Junior shooters. The gun laws, and video games have taken care of that. It isn't 1950 anymore in this country, and it never will be.

We will survive as a sport though, as mature shooters, or adult rifle shooters decide they want to do something different.
I invite people to shoot with me all the time. I have gotten four people to come to a match. Two of them have stuck with it.
I have talked five people into coming to Camp Perry.

What are you personally doing?

Isabel1130 wrote:"With the exception of Jackh, you guys have completely missed the main point of the article.

>>>>>>86% of the competitors at Camp Perry last year were 60 or older.<<<<<<<"

What are you personally doing?

Ditto

I work with youth groups, provide rifles and ammo, conduct classes etc. After 4 years of this I feel like I have done a great job with teaching safety and am very proud of it. But I have not gotten one youth or family interested enough to join a facility and take up shooting sports. I have been disappointed by this. Cost is primary issue. Time is another. A number of Dads tell me when the kids are out of the house they will join the local club and take up the sport. For now it is about learning gun safety and an afternoon of entertainment.

I do the same with adults friends in taking them to the range. Introducing them to BE and precision shooting in general. About all of them think it is too hard, too expensive and not much fun. They talk of wanting to explore steel or 3 gun events instead but never do.

In my 5 years of shooting experience our local international pistol matches have gone from 8 competitors to 2 or 3 and now none as the match director gave up. Bullseye league folded when we lost access to a free use facility. The private ranges cant support a league as the proposed entry fee to make up for lost revenue of general range time is more than local guys want to pay. Local 2700 has gone from full line every match (5 years ago) to half a line and several drop out after 22 or CF stage due to fatigue (guys are getting older).

Great people and a great sport. Feeling sad that in a few years I will be an old crusty relic shooting 50 yard targets with a one handed grip. Wait! I am already that old but not crusty relic shooting 1 handed.

What are you personally doing?


I run my club's BE pistol match.
I teach new people how to shoot.
I try to get club members to try the match.
I answer every phone call I get about the match, inviting the caller to try it. I have guns to lend them, if they don't have anything appropriate.

It's not working. We get very few new shooters, and most of them don't come back a second time. It's a long, steep learning curve: young people don't have the attention span, and old people figure they don't have the time.

You're right: new people don't have to be juniors. They can be 20's or 30's. But those just aren't interested. Can we survive with just middle aged people taking it up? Maybe, but relying on that makes me nervous.

Mark

The biggest complaints I hear about bullseye pistol shooting are: (1) It's too difficult. (2) It's too boring. (3) It's irrelevant.

I just started shooting just over a year ago at the age of 37. I just introduced bullseye to a friend who is a proficient shooter, and he is hooked. He is 44. From my very also new perspective,we can pull in new shooters of any age. Experienced shooters with some firearms experience and/or proficiency seem to be good candidates too. They don't even need to be taught many of the basics.