Hi
I have a 15 year old who is shooting 510's in Sporter and 550's in Precision. The difference is in his Offhand. He just purchased a used / display pair of shooting pants from Joachiem (spelling) from this forum and that's when his scores changed. I guess I can see why the are changing the rule. No WIGGLING.
Mike
Wichita KS
The ISSF Pants issue
Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer
-
mikeschroeder
- Posts: 488
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 10:56 am
- Location: Kansas
-
Donald McIntosh
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:04 am
- Location: Falkirk, Scotland, UK
- Contact:
-
mikeschroeder
- Posts: 488
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 10:56 am
- Location: Kansas
-
DSchrankJr
Shooting pants/ back position.
Mike:
If your son wants to win he will be using an odd back position and if he wants to win at high levels he will train in that position alot. The pants help to prevent long-term back problems.
As far as making it harder to win theory: There will always a winner, but at what cost? Life long back pain. If you think shooters won't do that to themselves look at how many athletes in other sports take steriods knowing it is hurting them. The pants allow shooters to train hard while helping to prevent injury.
Look at the international prone scores. The first 600 was fired over 10 years ago. How many since? Not that many. Will dropping pants have any affect on the English match scores? No it won't. There are other means of lowering scores. Score the whole match in 1/10 as the finals are, eliminate the see of wind flags, cut the time down, make the target smaller, etc.
Your post touched on why, in my opinion certain people are pushing to drop the pants. Sporter air rifle has done very well here in the USA and the closer the rules (ie: no pants or shooting boots) are between sporter and precision the easier it will be to get clubs to buy off on sporter rifle thus promoting one specific organization (funny that it is run by the same person trying to get the international shooting rules changed, must be coincedence). David.
If your son wants to win he will be using an odd back position and if he wants to win at high levels he will train in that position alot. The pants help to prevent long-term back problems.
As far as making it harder to win theory: There will always a winner, but at what cost? Life long back pain. If you think shooters won't do that to themselves look at how many athletes in other sports take steriods knowing it is hurting them. The pants allow shooters to train hard while helping to prevent injury.
Look at the international prone scores. The first 600 was fired over 10 years ago. How many since? Not that many. Will dropping pants have any affect on the English match scores? No it won't. There are other means of lowering scores. Score the whole match in 1/10 as the finals are, eliminate the see of wind flags, cut the time down, make the target smaller, etc.
Your post touched on why, in my opinion certain people are pushing to drop the pants. Sporter air rifle has done very well here in the USA and the closer the rules (ie: no pants or shooting boots) are between sporter and precision the easier it will be to get clubs to buy off on sporter rifle thus promoting one specific organization (funny that it is run by the same person trying to get the international shooting rules changed, must be coincedence). David.
-
guido
changing issf rules
Besides preventing chronic health problems (you will begin to see them in many years, not immediately), shooting evolution during time has been towards reaching perfection. This quest should be encouraged, not hampered by people that are not shooting anymore, and have decided to rule what is good or bad in our sport. At a very high level of perfection, granting everybody the same technological resoources available, scores will remain high for most of the elite athletes. But victories will still be decided by very little details in the mental and physical performances. Winning will be even more difficult than it is now.
Changing the rules everytime people perform well seems unfair to athletes as we are promted to learn again how to shoot in different conditions, can be health threatening, will take people away from the sport, and will generate conflicts that should not exist among sport people.
Guido
Changing the rules everytime people perform well seems unfair to athletes as we are promted to learn again how to shoot in different conditions, can be health threatening, will take people away from the sport, and will generate conflicts that should not exist among sport people.
Guido
-
Ryan Tanoue
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 1:20 am
This is a good topic......but what can we as shooters really do about it...nothing really...you can petition the issf all you want, but they arent going to listen...if this is going to change, its gonna change....maybe not forever, you know what maybe not even for four years, but its gonna change after the olympics. The issf wants to see the scores go down....yes its very impressive(for a shooter) to watch someone shoot a perfect score (400/600), but to the common observer who knows nothing about the devotion and tallent it takes to do this,.... what is stopping them from asking "how hard can this really be" this is especially easy in shooting because look at us man...we arent exactly the most athletic or physically imposing people you'll see....in world cups they have 17 year old 5'0" chinese/korean/japnaese girls winning, and yea this is great, but it just drives home that point. By taking away the pants we're not going to see 600/400s standing air, and because of this it will make shooting seem "harder" They arent getting rid of the pants for prone, its for 3p and standing air. by loosing the pants standing is going to be pretty darn hard, and a lot of shooters' styles will have to change, but i think the bottom line for not changing the pants rule is this: the best shooters are still going to be the best no matter what. pants, no pants whatever, the people that are the best will still be. They have the best positions, physical and mental training as well as the most experience. This is what makes them the best not the equipment. so for now i say live with it....deal with it when it changes....i figure they will reinstate the pants before the world championships in 2006.
ryan
ryan
-
Donald McIntosh
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:04 am
- Location: Falkirk, Scotland, UK
- Contact:
Not according to David Parish, the Chairman of the ISSF Technical Committee, and not according to Gary Anderson, Vice-President of the ISSF. It's all about their perception of what the media and the IOC think about rifle shooters.mikeschroeder wrote:No they're trying to make it harder to win.
As for injuries, you need to go read the opinion from the German doctors - they believe that this will cause back injuries, and Gary Anderson effectively admits in his recent article that it will cause knee injuries.
Shock! Horror! Do you imply that rifle coaches now might have to:Donald McIntosh wrote:Not according to David Parish, the Chairman of the ISSF Technical Committee, and not according to Gary Anderson, Vice-President of the ISSF. It's all about their perception of what the media and the IOC think about rifle shooters.mikeschroeder wrote:No they're trying to make it harder to win.
As for injuries, you need to go read the opinion from the German doctors - they believe that this will cause back injuries, and Gary Anderson effectively admits in his recent article that it will cause knee injuries.
- consider the athlete rather than just the equipment?
- concentrate on the long-term effects of procedures on the athlete?
- develop 'fitness' rather than depending on the shooters aptitude to collapse inside a supporting structure (also known as the shooting pants and jacket)
Forgive my cynicism...
Despite Kurt's comments elswhere on this board, my information is that most european rifle clothing manufacturers started TWO years ago to set up for the expected rule changes. At the recent Sydney World Cup at least one pair of pants were examined as a sample of the 'new' regulations, and no way would anyone wear them as as a pair of casual trousers to drive to the shopping mall and walk around in with any level of comfort.
Spencer
Thing is, Spencer, that eliminating trousers is going to cause medical problems, no matter what you do as a coach. Anderson's already admitted as much - that 3P shooters without the trousers will pick up serious knee problems in the kneeling position - and the German Shooting Federation commissioned a medical report which found that eliminating the trousers would cause serious long-term back problems as well - not because of stance problems, but because of the simple fact that a repeated, unsupported, assymmetric loading applied to the spine will eventually injure it.Spencer C wrote: Shock! Horror! Do you imply that rifle coaches now might have to:
- consider the athlete rather than just the equipment?
- concentrate on the long-term effects of procedures on the athlete?
- develop 'fitness' rather than depending on the shooters aptitude to collapse inside a supporting structure (also known as the shooting pants and jacket)
And if you restrict the sport to the fit athletic types who are willing to accept long-term spinal injuries, we can no longer claim to be the most egalatarian sport around, or even the most reasonable one.
Besides that, the fact is that the story that stiff trousers lead to higher scores is just a myth, at least at high levels. The Russians have already found that new, stiff shooting gear just transmits the pulse better through the clothing to affect the aim, and old, looser gear gave better results.
Spencer
My understanding is that those pants in Sydney were a prototype produced by someone in the Australian Shooting Federation as an example compromise that would be presented to and might be acceptable by the ISSF. Fat chance according to some people.
Contrary to what you have heard, the manufacturers have not been "Gearing-up" for this change. I ask you, What specifications are these products to be made to?? Have you seen these new specifications? I had a coach call about two years ago asking for jacket and pants in the new specifications for his team when all this crap started. He wanted to give his younger shooter who would likely not make the Olympic team this time but would be prime competitors for 2008 a head start in the new equipment. He was extremely disappointed to learn that the clothing did not exist. How could it?
The manufacturers are not stupid. Of course they have been thinking of potential ideas for the replacement product if such a thing allowed. Do you have any ideas? I would not be surprised that within a very few days of any decision (on new pants) that the manufacterers would have prototypes of the new product for testing. Does that mean that they are all in a grand conspiracy? NO!
They are really hurt financially by this totally needless process. They have bills to pay and their dealers can't sell any product so they can't pay their bills to the manufacturer.... But we are trying to use logical arguements against an illogical gerantocracy.
My understanding is that those pants in Sydney were a prototype produced by someone in the Australian Shooting Federation as an example compromise that would be presented to and might be acceptable by the ISSF. Fat chance according to some people.
Contrary to what you have heard, the manufacturers have not been "Gearing-up" for this change. I ask you, What specifications are these products to be made to?? Have you seen these new specifications? I had a coach call about two years ago asking for jacket and pants in the new specifications for his team when all this crap started. He wanted to give his younger shooter who would likely not make the Olympic team this time but would be prime competitors for 2008 a head start in the new equipment. He was extremely disappointed to learn that the clothing did not exist. How could it?
The manufacturers are not stupid. Of course they have been thinking of potential ideas for the replacement product if such a thing allowed. Do you have any ideas? I would not be surprised that within a very few days of any decision (on new pants) that the manufacterers would have prototypes of the new product for testing. Does that mean that they are all in a grand conspiracy? NO!
They are really hurt financially by this totally needless process. They have bills to pay and their dealers can't sell any product so they can't pay their bills to the manufacturer.... But we are trying to use logical arguements against an illogical gerantocracy.
Because the kneepad on the trousers protects and pads the knee in the kneeling position. There's precious little support involved there - it's just a big fancy kneepad. But you try firing 40 shots from a .22 rifle on a concrete floor in the kneeling position without a pad, and if you haven't picked up a fair amount of pain in your knee, I'll be surprised. The fact is, shoot for any length of time like that and you will damage your knee, no two ways about it. And as any doctor will tell you, knee joints don't heal quickly or well - blow out a knee, and that's pretty much it as far as that joint is concerned - it quite probably won't ever be the same again. And that's an acute injury - chronic injuries are far worse from the long-term point of view.Anonymous wrote:Why would they pick up serious knee problems without the trousers?
-
Donald McIntosh
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:04 am
- Location: Falkirk, Scotland, UK
- Contact:
I wish people would stop saying that. This is not the objective! David Parish had a letter published in a the British governing body's magazine about this recently, and he stressed that it was not about reducing scores. But, interestingly enough, his letter was full of denials, but contained nothing about what the motivation really is. My understanding is that it is firstly being driven by the irrational whims of certain senior individuals within the ISSF, and secondly they are claiming that it is an attempt to address what they perceive to be IOC concerns about what shooters look like.Ryan Tanoue wrote:The issf wants to see the scores go down....
-
Donald McIntosh
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:04 am
- Location: Falkirk, Scotland, UK
- Contact:
Shooting Pants & Back Pain
Not being a 3-P (or 4-P) shooter, I don't really understand how a pair of pants (canvas or otherwise) can help aleviate back problems in the standing position. Do they come up higher that normal pants? Are they tighter than normal pants? I can see where they might help in kneeling (Ok I lied. I have done some 3-P shooting, but not serious competition.) A knee pad could be helpful over a long period of time.
Usually I shoot prone. I have a Freeland canvas coat from Champion Shooters, but I don't own any pants. Don't see a need for them. Same for the boots, other than to be "legal" I guess. Does anybody else see my point?
Jim
Usually I shoot prone. I have a Freeland canvas coat from Champion Shooters, but I don't own any pants. Don't see a need for them. Same for the boots, other than to be "legal" I guess. Does anybody else see my point?
Jim
-
Guest
Sparks wrote:Because the kneepad on the trousers protects and pads the knee in the kneeling position. There's precious little support involved there - it's just a big fancy kneepad. But you try firing 40 shots from a .22 rifle on a concrete floor in the kneeling position without a pad, and if you haven't picked up a fair amount of pain in your knee, I'll be surprised. ...Anonymous wrote:Why would they pick up serious knee problems without the trousers?
This poster didn't say anything about the weight of the rifle on the LEFT knee. They were refering to the knee being on the concrete floor.
That's where the mat would come in handy, right?!
The other knee gets your elbow on top of it, and a lot of padding in between from the shooting jacket.
Thousnads of people shoot standing without special shooting pants. In the USA, they're called highpower shooters. Ask David Tubb (sp?) if he needs one.