Dear shooters, coaches,
I believe the most of you have had the opportunity to read the article posted on the page 49 of ISSF Journal 3/2010 written by former shooter of Argentina shooting team.
I do not need to write anything else in addition to brilliant reply of Bill Murray. You can read the letter (with Bill's approval to be posted on forum) to ISSF (I expect to be posted in the following issue of ISSF Journal) here:
Gesendet: 14.07.10 16:28 Uhr
An: munich@issf-sports.org
Betreff: Article New Rules by Prof. Rio
Dear ISSF, dear sports colleagues,
I would like to reply to the article on Page 49 of ISSF Journal 3:2010 by Professor Rio.
I too am a former member of the Great Britain Shooting Team during the years 1990-1994, and have since worked as a professional coach in Great Britain, Australia (as Head Coach to the Australian Shooting Team) and in Germany, where I currently work as State Rifle Coach for Hessen - a number of shooters I work with will represent Germany at the next World Championships. During my time in Australia, I was based at the Australian Institue of Sports and worked closely with some of the world's top sports scientists.
I wish to challenge the assumption in Professor Rio's article, which is that stiffer clothing is the cause of higher scores in rifle shooting. I have never seen one iota of evidence which objectively proves this assumption. At the very least, the people like Professor Rio who believe this to be true, should be able and willing to back up their statements with hard evidence. Sure, the scores in rifle shooting have gone up in leaps and bounds in recent years, above all in the standing position. I would argue that this is due largely to three factors:
1. The introduction of electronic targets.
I began working in Hessen in April 2002, when we were still shooting on paper targets. I work mainly with a squad of about 12 young shooters aged 14-18. In October 2005, we installed electronic targets at our Training Centre in Frankfurt. The increase in economy, efficiency and (for the coach) feedback from these systems led within one year to an average increase in performance of more than 4 points for a 3x20 programm, across the entire squad.
2. The improvement of coaching knowledge and the use of infra-red and video analysis.
Without any shadow of a doubt, the knowledge and ability of good coaches to achieve fast improvements in performance has increased dramatically, aided by modern technology, publications and coach education initiatives such as the ISSF Training Academy. It is, if I may say so, an insult to coaches the world over, to simply ascribe increases in performance to clothing. Of course, the more people from within our sport make this mistake, the more people outside our sport will be inclined to arrive at similar over-simplified judgements.
3. The improvements by manufacturers - and also as a result of enlightened rule changes - to the construction of target rifles.
These changes - together with improvements to the clothing - have contributed to the huge growth worldwide of rifle shooting, especially at high level. In short, where in the 1970s it was absolutely necessary for the shooter to possess certain anatomical advantages in order to adopt an effective shooting position, advances in equipment have permitted many more shooters, with strongly varying anatomical characteristics, to reach high levels of performance. This is, however, exactly the strength of our sport - the participant base. If this is undermined, and we return to a situation where only a few anatomically (genetically) advantaged people can be capable of achieving high results, then our sport will lose its biggest - perhaps its only - advantage in comparison to other sports, with which we have to compete for future participants.
As a full-time professional rifle coach, and advisor to my athletes, one of my tasks is to help them choose equipment. In this capacity I have been able to compare, with objective measures such as steadiness of hold on the Scatt System, the differences between 'conventional' leather and canvas clothing and 'modern' rubberised/artificial fibre/plastic clothing. I am firmly convinced that the stiffest plastic clothing is nothing but a hindrance to good performance, because the different postures the shooter needs to adopt cause tension in the clothing against which the shooter's body struggles. This conviction is borne out by the fact that very few top shooters have in fact chosen to use this clothing. With the less stiff, but still stiffer than canvas/leather, modern clothing, the only advantage seems to be that artificial fibre does not change its stiffness characteristics with long use or with relative humidity; these clothes then offer security for the clothing controls. They do not, repeat do not, improve performance when compared with well-fitting leather/canvas clothes: I challenge anyone to prove objectively that I am wrong.
It seems to me really absurd, that clothing materials which have only been introduced in order to ensure a more consistent compliance with the ISSF's own Rules, should now be the subject of over-simplified judgements which, to my mind, serve only to bring a wonderful sport into disrepute.
In writing this, I do not want in any way to imply that there is no need for a close and careful monitoring of equipment - and all other Rules - to preserve the principle of fair play. However, it is clear to me that anyone wishing to cheat by unfairly stabilising themselves in the shooting position, would do this (perhaps some are already doing so) by the direct application of tapes or support bandages on the body and not through the external protective clothing.
Our sport has grown precisely because of the equipment which enables many people of different anatomical characteristics and ages to learn the necessary technical skills (so that, in the end, the mental strength of the athlete on the day of competition becomes the deciding factor). Isn't this something we should celebrate and preserve?
I must also take issue with Professor Rio's statement "...it is seriously questionable that rifle shooters should find it easier to improve their scores by using a more rigid shooting jacket than by investing hours of training in a gymnasium in order to improve their strength...". Strength is definitely not a characteristic which improves rifle shooting performance. Otherwise slimly-built girls would not be capable (as they are) of producing scores which can shame the strongest of men. Hours spent strength training in the gymnasium are as useless as a fully rigid shooting jacket for improving rifle shooting performance.
I believe that rifle shooting will die out if we, the shooters, add to our own - already considerable - difficulties. Our sport exists as strongly as it does because it is a sport which can be successfully practised all over the world - there are at present almost no genetic barriers - and athletes can stay at high level for a considerable number of years. Destroy our strength and we will destroy our sport. Ban rifle shooting clothing, and inevitably the sport will become dominated by a very few genetically advantaged people. Some sports such as Biathlon are highly commercially successful even though they have almost nil participant base, the elite exists as a circus which performs to large audiences. Is this what we want shooting to become? And can shooting ever compete for public attention and survive in this way? The sport I have served for 30 years has survived and grown on a completely different principle and I applaud all developments which mean that even more people can compete at the highest level and so drive world records even faster upwards.
Yours sincerely,
Bill Murray
State Rifle Coach, Hessen
Former Head Coach, Australian Shooting Team
Former Director of Coaching, Great Britain
Former British recordholder
Commonwealth Games silver medallist
Reply to the article on Page 49 of ISSF Journal 3:2010
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
-
guidolastra
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:59 pm
- Location: Columbia, MO
I have not had the chance of reading the article yet, but I tend to agree on this issue, although I think we all recognize that there is an influence of the clothing stiffness on stability, at least in standing and kneeling. Looks like this is true only to a certain "threshold"?
Thanks for sharing with us, Rajmond!
Thanks for sharing with us, Rajmond!
I am not a rifle shooter but would be interested to know if anyone can relate the improvement of the clothing with the average weight of the rifle used.
How heavy were the rifles in the 60s when they used less stiff clothing?
Are they now able to use heavier rifles as the clothing advances?
Which leads me to ask, would the average rifle weight just come down if some of the clothing was no longer allowed?
How heavy were the rifles in the 60s when they used less stiff clothing?
Are they now able to use heavier rifles as the clothing advances?
Which leads me to ask, would the average rifle weight just come down if some of the clothing was no longer allowed?
I shot 3 position in college back in the mid 70's at the time colleges were starting to switch from the strap and buckle "heavy" NRA coats to the then 3 button ISU style. I had the "perfect" build then ( not anymore LOL). tall, very lean, great hip swing and back bend, my standing usually matched or beat my kneeling scores when using the heavy coat. When I personally bought a ISU coat knowing that I would compete after college I switched with the coaches permission to only use the ISU coat and ISU sling. There was no real major change in my scores. A good standing position is built from the floor up, feet, legs, waist, chest, shoulders, arms, neck and head. You rely on the bone structure support, balance, muscle memory and practice practice practice. My technique honed over a few years at college made the coat switch easy. Coats today and the "space age" materials, design, cut, and construction methods are vastly superior to the ISU Hawkeye coat I had. Strength, stability, COMFORT, and adjustibility within the rules make a great coat. But you still have to have the sight picture, trigger control, breathing and follow thru to shoot tens.
I preface my comment by saying that, on the surface, the members of the committee deserve nothing but the utmost respect and commendability for taking what one may describe as a theorhetically proactive approach to some arguably signficant concerns set forth by undesclosed representatives of the IOC at the 2008 Summer Olympiad in the city of Bejing.
In the absence of the positive identification of said officials, as well as the absence of the verbatim translation of said commentary, from an official source of either the IOC and/or the ISSF; documentable, readable, searchable, available on demand by members of constitutent organizations and/or the general public, casts serious doubt on the legitimacy of the statements, as well as on any future modification of any rules or regulations based on these statements.
With the preceding stated, a statement, dated 13.04.09 and available below, certifies that Dr. Ricardo Rio, PhD, has been certified by the ISSF General Secretariat as a "researcher and scientific articles writter." One may reasonably accept that Dr. Rio does have proper credentials to serve as an expert in the scientific research, specifically as it applies to human performance.
Given the qualifications of Dr. Rio, after reading the article on Page 49 of the Third Issue, 2010 Volume of ISSF News, one may only conclude a sense of abject absurdity at the bulk of the arguments placed forth to the reader.
Dr. Rio only advances anecdotal evidence as to the increase in scores over the past two decades. It appears, most dangerously, that Dr. Rio puts forth a concept that sport target shooting, specifically that which uses a rifle, suffers from some lacking of sporting nature due to the fact that the clothing has an inherent rigid nature. The danger of said conclusions is accompanied by the fact that Dr. Rio, an already acknowledged expert in the field of scientific human performance, puts forth no emperical evidence to support this claim. He offers no battery of scientific tests, statistics, or premises to support his conclusions.
What both Dr. Rio, as well as the relevant committee membership of the ISSF puts forth, questions a fundamental understanding of both the history and participative nature of our sport. First and foremost, any rendering of currently available, legal, and legitimate clothing and associated apparati as either obsolete, illegal, or no longer permissible will place a hardship so great on the active participants, as to make the sport unattainable for many, if not most or all participants, in many of the constituent nations of the ISSF. Second, for the ISSF to modify the current rules regarding clothing is to state and acknowledge that the previous committees of the ISSF were incapable of competent conclusion, opening EVERY scientific decision of the ISSF since its inception. Third, Dr. Rio fails to acknowledge and defend the current, inherent athletic nature of riflery as an endeavor of human sport. No participant in sport of target riflery could possibly deny condition required for the precision demanded by elite and Olympic level competition. If nothing else, rifle clothing requires an additional strength on the part of the wearer to accurately operate the weapon. Dr. Rio and the ISSF committee fail to acknowledge the basic history of riflery, specifically the cultural signifigance of sport-specific clothing. For the IOC to question the legitimacy or necessity of rifle clothing is the equivilent of the IOC to challenge the necessity of any clothing in any IOC participant sport. As the IOC questions the necessity and rigidity of rifle clothing, one must also question the sporting value of any activity requiring sport-specific protective clothing. We, as shooters, do not question the sporting nature of Fencing Face Guards or Judo vests; of boxing helmets and hockey masks. Using this logic, I suggest we, as sportsmen and women, should question the sporting nature of any sporting activity, irregardless of season, which does not utilize a purely scientific methodology in its scoring system and awarding of prizes. One simply, and quite effectively argue that any Olympic sport, such as Ice Skating, Ice Dancing, and Gymnastics, which uses an unknown and purely subjective level of scoring has no place in the consideration of sport.
In the absence of the positive identification of said officials, as well as the absence of the verbatim translation of said commentary, from an official source of either the IOC and/or the ISSF; documentable, readable, searchable, available on demand by members of constitutent organizations and/or the general public, casts serious doubt on the legitimacy of the statements, as well as on any future modification of any rules or regulations based on these statements.
With the preceding stated, a statement, dated 13.04.09 and available below, certifies that Dr. Ricardo Rio, PhD, has been certified by the ISSF General Secretariat as a "researcher and scientific articles writter." One may reasonably accept that Dr. Rio does have proper credentials to serve as an expert in the scientific research, specifically as it applies to human performance.
Given the qualifications of Dr. Rio, after reading the article on Page 49 of the Third Issue, 2010 Volume of ISSF News, one may only conclude a sense of abject absurdity at the bulk of the arguments placed forth to the reader.
Dr. Rio only advances anecdotal evidence as to the increase in scores over the past two decades. It appears, most dangerously, that Dr. Rio puts forth a concept that sport target shooting, specifically that which uses a rifle, suffers from some lacking of sporting nature due to the fact that the clothing has an inherent rigid nature. The danger of said conclusions is accompanied by the fact that Dr. Rio, an already acknowledged expert in the field of scientific human performance, puts forth no emperical evidence to support this claim. He offers no battery of scientific tests, statistics, or premises to support his conclusions.
What both Dr. Rio, as well as the relevant committee membership of the ISSF puts forth, questions a fundamental understanding of both the history and participative nature of our sport. First and foremost, any rendering of currently available, legal, and legitimate clothing and associated apparati as either obsolete, illegal, or no longer permissible will place a hardship so great on the active participants, as to make the sport unattainable for many, if not most or all participants, in many of the constituent nations of the ISSF. Second, for the ISSF to modify the current rules regarding clothing is to state and acknowledge that the previous committees of the ISSF were incapable of competent conclusion, opening EVERY scientific decision of the ISSF since its inception. Third, Dr. Rio fails to acknowledge and defend the current, inherent athletic nature of riflery as an endeavor of human sport. No participant in sport of target riflery could possibly deny condition required for the precision demanded by elite and Olympic level competition. If nothing else, rifle clothing requires an additional strength on the part of the wearer to accurately operate the weapon. Dr. Rio and the ISSF committee fail to acknowledge the basic history of riflery, specifically the cultural signifigance of sport-specific clothing. For the IOC to question the legitimacy or necessity of rifle clothing is the equivilent of the IOC to challenge the necessity of any clothing in any IOC participant sport. As the IOC questions the necessity and rigidity of rifle clothing, one must also question the sporting value of any activity requiring sport-specific protective clothing. We, as shooters, do not question the sporting nature of Fencing Face Guards or Judo vests; of boxing helmets and hockey masks. Using this logic, I suggest we, as sportsmen and women, should question the sporting nature of any sporting activity, irregardless of season, which does not utilize a purely scientific methodology in its scoring system and awarding of prizes. One simply, and quite effectively argue that any Olympic sport, such as Ice Skating, Ice Dancing, and Gymnastics, which uses an unknown and purely subjective level of scoring has no place in the consideration of sport.
My spanish being nonexistant and therefore not up to searching through spanish academic articles, could someone whose spanish is closer to usable use google scholar for a few moments and pull up some of Dr.Rio's research please? It would be interesting to see what direction his research has taken and what experimental results he has obtained. (And obviously, Portuguese as well if Dr.Rio is Brazilian - I don't mention English as a scholar search in English doesn't turn anything up).
Thank you...
Thank you...
Sparks,
I was thinking along those lines as well. The ISSF document references the University de Flores in Buenos Aires. My search of their website could not locate a listing for a professor Dr. Ricardo Rio, PhD; that doesn't mean that he's not there, that means my Spanish is about as good as yours.
Now it does appear that he has some strong affiliation to an organization known as AICACYP: Association Industrial and Trading of Articles for Hunting and Fishes (in English). This organization serves the ISSF document associated with Dr. Rio, dated 2009.
Of what I have been able to locate, it would appear that he's a serious expert in the field of Human Performance, specifically shooting sports. Of the ten or so articles he appears to have written, it looks like they're almost exclusively or ISSF News. I see a few conference presentations about sports in general, but nothing that one might consider peer-reviewed; none of his articles anywhere I could find are longer than three pages total. This doesn't mean that he hasn't written them, it just means I couldn't locate them.
The only thing I can say at this point is that, if the ISSF wants to change the in-place clothing rules, there's going to need to be much more than suspicions, thoughts, and hypotheses.
I was thinking along those lines as well. The ISSF document references the University de Flores in Buenos Aires. My search of their website could not locate a listing for a professor Dr. Ricardo Rio, PhD; that doesn't mean that he's not there, that means my Spanish is about as good as yours.
Now it does appear that he has some strong affiliation to an organization known as AICACYP: Association Industrial and Trading of Articles for Hunting and Fishes (in English). This organization serves the ISSF document associated with Dr. Rio, dated 2009.
Of what I have been able to locate, it would appear that he's a serious expert in the field of Human Performance, specifically shooting sports. Of the ten or so articles he appears to have written, it looks like they're almost exclusively or ISSF News. I see a few conference presentations about sports in general, but nothing that one might consider peer-reviewed; none of his articles anywhere I could find are longer than three pages total. This doesn't mean that he hasn't written them, it just means I couldn't locate them.
The only thing I can say at this point is that, if the ISSF wants to change the in-place clothing rules, there's going to need to be much more than suspicions, thoughts, and hypotheses.
Okay, here's what I've got:
This is a site called fulladventura.com. It appears to be some sort of professional site. It has a picture of Rio, as well as his resume. The timelines are consistent and referenceable.
http://www.fullaventura.com/comunidad/rio2.php
This is the ISSF document certifying Rio as an expert. Note: it's served by AICACYP.
http://www.aicacyp.com.ar/cursos_de_tir ... 20-RIO.pdf
As for the article references and searches, here are the links I used to search:
University de Flores: http://universidad.uflo.edu.ar/
AICACYP: http://www.aicacyp.com.ar
With the UFLO site, maybe someone else can have better luck than I did searching. I tried several variants of the name and just came up with nothing. Again, I'm not saying nothing exists, I'm saying I couldn't find anything.
With the ISSF articles, anyone can search them. Anybody can see for themselves what they consist of, what they have (and don't have), and their respective lengths.
This is a site called fulladventura.com. It appears to be some sort of professional site. It has a picture of Rio, as well as his resume. The timelines are consistent and referenceable.
http://www.fullaventura.com/comunidad/rio2.php
This is the ISSF document certifying Rio as an expert. Note: it's served by AICACYP.
http://www.aicacyp.com.ar/cursos_de_tir ... 20-RIO.pdf
As for the article references and searches, here are the links I used to search:
University de Flores: http://universidad.uflo.edu.ar/
AICACYP: http://www.aicacyp.com.ar
With the UFLO site, maybe someone else can have better luck than I did searching. I tried several variants of the name and just came up with nothing. Again, I'm not saying nothing exists, I'm saying I couldn't find anything.
With the ISSF articles, anyone can search them. Anybody can see for themselves what they consist of, what they have (and don't have), and their respective lengths.