Ladies and Gentlemen:
We had some discussions about this and related issues at the last couple of competitor's meetings. I'm talking about issues like allowing non-resident athletes to shoot internationally (on their own dimes) in order to compete for quota slots, etc. Also issues of allowing non-resident athletes to gain various types of support from USAS system.
O.K., so the Army shooters are pretty much full-time, as well as the resident athletes. They will be and must be the focus of USAS attention.
But
Know what a sparring partner is? Anybody see the movie "Rudy?"
Look, I'm proposing that allowing ("First, Do No Harm") true amateur athletes- Mucho Props to guys like John Zurek etc.- develop into a strong, vibrant pool of competitive shooters to give the resident athletes a little "rear view mirror" motivation.
Any ideas on how to accomplish this? What carrots can we/should we dangle in front of the "almost there-wannabe" level shooters to develop this pool?
- Dynamic, meaningful ranking system, tied to:
- Opportunities to train at OTC
- Opportunities to travel as "Third Tier Developmental" athletes
- . . . . ?????
Remember the end game:
-- A broader pool of world class and near world class competitors
-- Tools/mechanisms to identify and nurture talent
-- Securing more quota slots
-- New headache for national coaches: too many elite athletes to choose from
-- Stronger "varsity" team
-- MEDALS!
Remember, this will probably take at least two quadrennials to get from "now" to "then."
Steve Swartz
USA Isue: Developing Amateurs
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
-
Mike McDaniel
Personally, I think you may be working from a false premise - the idea that the current crop of resident athletes ought to be the primary focus of USAS.
I've seen this sort of reasoning before. The U.S. Fencing Association has used it for about 50 years. Pouring resources into a handful of athletes (usually from one or two clubs), with pathetically poor results.
Sometimes, you are better off to change horses. The goal of an upgrade program should not be to put pressure on the current team members, but to develop a new, larger, pool of potential team members capable of outshooting EVERYBODY. And if the current shooters can't keep up, so be it.
Things I'd be doing are:
1. Offer opportunities to train at the OTC. Think in terms of a 1-week cram course in a given event, with the course materials to specifically include training methods that can be used at home on low-end ranges.
2. If possible, develop a chain of regional ranges. You can shoot FP and AP most anywhere, but RF bays are EXTREMELY hard to find. USAS can't afford to buy a range in every state, but ought to be able to subsidize ranges in different areas. There are a lot of ranges that would cheerfully hold shoots if USAS was guaranteeing a minimum profit for the club. Best to talk to the smaller clubs about this, BTW. Their rates are a lot cheaper.
3. Once a chain of regional ranges has been established, start holding 1 or 2-day cram courses there.
4. I support the idea of letting higher-end not-quite-Olympic-quality competitors attend some major international shoots on their own nickel. This is a good opportuinity to get people acclimated to the international level before they actually are expected to win something.
I've seen this sort of reasoning before. The U.S. Fencing Association has used it for about 50 years. Pouring resources into a handful of athletes (usually from one or two clubs), with pathetically poor results.
Sometimes, you are better off to change horses. The goal of an upgrade program should not be to put pressure on the current team members, but to develop a new, larger, pool of potential team members capable of outshooting EVERYBODY. And if the current shooters can't keep up, so be it.
Things I'd be doing are:
1. Offer opportunities to train at the OTC. Think in terms of a 1-week cram course in a given event, with the course materials to specifically include training methods that can be used at home on low-end ranges.
2. If possible, develop a chain of regional ranges. You can shoot FP and AP most anywhere, but RF bays are EXTREMELY hard to find. USAS can't afford to buy a range in every state, but ought to be able to subsidize ranges in different areas. There are a lot of ranges that would cheerfully hold shoots if USAS was guaranteeing a minimum profit for the club. Best to talk to the smaller clubs about this, BTW. Their rates are a lot cheaper.
3. Once a chain of regional ranges has been established, start holding 1 or 2-day cram courses there.
4. I support the idea of letting higher-end not-quite-Olympic-quality competitors attend some major international shoots on their own nickel. This is a good opportuinity to get people acclimated to the international level before they actually are expected to win something.
-
Richard Newman
Training Amateurs
I'm with Mike McDaniel on this. His points are well taken and could be part of an overall new shooter development program. Some added comment:
1- Other sports do make use of the USOC facility for other than elite athletes. My two swimmer daughters made a number of trips to CS for week long training sessions, using the new facilities US Swimming built there a few years ago. They went both as club team members and as individuals. Definitely beneficial to both the kids and the sport.
2, 3 - Another reason to mourn the loss of Wolf Creek. Sadly, the big guns apparently never got together to make a win-win deal for Fulton Co. But I've had may say on that in other threads If regional ranges can be obtained, three day 'long weekend' sessions can work well. Most of us employed types can get a long weekend every so often.. This can work even without regional USAS ranges, using existing ranges and traveling teams of trainers
4- An interesting idea, but I wonder if ISSF regs would permit this?
Keep up the good thinking and maybe we can get some action.
Richard Newman
1- Other sports do make use of the USOC facility for other than elite athletes. My two swimmer daughters made a number of trips to CS for week long training sessions, using the new facilities US Swimming built there a few years ago. They went both as club team members and as individuals. Definitely beneficial to both the kids and the sport.
2, 3 - Another reason to mourn the loss of Wolf Creek. Sadly, the big guns apparently never got together to make a win-win deal for Fulton Co. But I've had may say on that in other threads If regional ranges can be obtained, three day 'long weekend' sessions can work well. Most of us employed types can get a long weekend every so often.. This can work even without regional USAS ranges, using existing ranges and traveling teams of trainers
4- An interesting idea, but I wonder if ISSF regs would permit this?
Keep up the good thinking and maybe we can get some action.
Richard Newman
Some of you may not be aware but there have been camps at the OTC of the years. I have been to both Rifle and Pistol camps over the last 12 years. They have been called Masters Camps. They both lasted a week and were led by National Team members and the Coach. It was a great chance to meet other people from all over the US.
If we are looking to try and get more than just one week a year I would think we need to work with the Coach for each event and work something out. In the past to apply you needed to be at a certian level to be accepted to camp. We could look at the possability at trying to get some different levels of camps established. This is important to not have some of the people show up who will not be able to lean from some of the coaching. The other factor that starts to become an issue is the time of the coach to give and or range time. If a camp shows up for a week the residents get displaced from training schedules.
After the '92 games Bob Foth came out to Vancouver, Wa for a one day camp. I do not remember how the logistics worked out to make that happen but I know it is possable. Some how a club needs to work out something with a top team member to come out. The club will more than likely have to work out he funding of who pays for what to get a visit aranged.
It can be done we just have to drive it and make it happen.
If we are looking to try and get more than just one week a year I would think we need to work with the Coach for each event and work something out. In the past to apply you needed to be at a certian level to be accepted to camp. We could look at the possability at trying to get some different levels of camps established. This is important to not have some of the people show up who will not be able to lean from some of the coaching. The other factor that starts to become an issue is the time of the coach to give and or range time. If a camp shows up for a week the residents get displaced from training schedules.
After the '92 games Bob Foth came out to Vancouver, Wa for a one day camp. I do not remember how the logistics worked out to make that happen but I know it is possable. Some how a club needs to work out something with a top team member to come out. The club will more than likely have to work out he funding of who pays for what to get a visit aranged.
It can be done we just have to drive it and make it happen.
-
Guest
Re: Training Amateurs
Yes -sort of - ISSF rules cover entries to ISSF Championships (World Cups, World Championships, Regional Championships + some others). For these, entry is only per NFs but a NF could nominate additional non-national-team shooters from their country (up to the maximum team size). In other words, if there were vacancies within the maximum team size it could be done.Richard Newman wrote:
4- An interesting idea, but I wonder if ISSF regs would permit this?
Keep up the good thinking and maybe we can get some action.
Richard Newman
For various other championships (e.g. National Championships, Grand Prix) it is up to the Organising Committee if (and under what conditions) they will accept entries.
-
Steve Swartz
All:
Talent is talent. Yes, we need to do different thigns for Juniors to build the "seed corn."
Beyond that, at least my vision is a fairly fluid, dynamic, and FAIR treatment of ALL shooters based on TALENT alone.
Specifics of program TBD; but the bottom line ought to be
"Developing a large pool of World-Class Shooters who can win the maximum number of quota slots, with agressive competition at the top tier leading to medal winning performance."
IMNSHO, what we have right now today (at least in Pistol) is not designed to do that. Since the program/system is not designed specifically to achieve the "Vision" statement above, of course, our results have been hit/miss.
The system/program has to take into account the capabilities and potential of ALL competitors, assigning the (very limited) resources of the USAS to achieve the greatest results possible.
It's all about the "Ways" and "Means."
O.K., back to the specific question:
- We can't focus too much on today's resident athletes . . . or too little
- We can't focus too little on the Junior programs . . . or too much
- We can't leave the majority of competitors (not in above categories) by the wayside either
A special category/special treatment for Collegiate shooters? Why? How?
*IT ALL HAS TO FIT TOGETHER*
Steve Swartz
Talent is talent. Yes, we need to do different thigns for Juniors to build the "seed corn."
Beyond that, at least my vision is a fairly fluid, dynamic, and FAIR treatment of ALL shooters based on TALENT alone.
Specifics of program TBD; but the bottom line ought to be
"Developing a large pool of World-Class Shooters who can win the maximum number of quota slots, with agressive competition at the top tier leading to medal winning performance."
IMNSHO, what we have right now today (at least in Pistol) is not designed to do that. Since the program/system is not designed specifically to achieve the "Vision" statement above, of course, our results have been hit/miss.
The system/program has to take into account the capabilities and potential of ALL competitors, assigning the (very limited) resources of the USAS to achieve the greatest results possible.
It's all about the "Ways" and "Means."
O.K., back to the specific question:
- We can't focus too much on today's resident athletes . . . or too little
- We can't focus too little on the Junior programs . . . or too much
- We can't leave the majority of competitors (not in above categories) by the wayside either
A special category/special treatment for Collegiate shooters? Why? How?
*IT ALL HAS TO FIT TOGETHER*
Steve Swartz
-
Mike McDaniel
What I've got in mind is three distinct levels of coaching.
The entry level takes place at local ranges, and is geared toward relative newcomers to the sport. Not complete novices to shooting, but people with very limited experience. The primary focus would be on basics and on training methods that can be done at the shooter's home range with a minimum of equipment. For example, RF shooters would practice the raising of the pistol and firing the first shot, and perhaps moving to shoot the second shot. Instructors would be experienced shooters in the area.
The intermediate level takes place at the OTC, and at major regional ranges if possible. Instructors would be either very experienced shooters (members of the national team) or the national team coaches. The focus of this would be on more advanced techniques, including an introduction to mental discipline. For example, RF shooters would practice complete strings, and be introduced to the need to focus on the positive - to think "Shoot the 10" instead of "Don't shoot the 5". Material would still include a good deal of training methods targeted at the shooter who has very limited range facilities.
The advanced level would take place at the OTC, and would be targeted at those shooters with a reasonable chance of making the national team. These would be taught by the national coaches, with emphasis on fine-tuning technique and on mental discipline.
The entry level takes place at local ranges, and is geared toward relative newcomers to the sport. Not complete novices to shooting, but people with very limited experience. The primary focus would be on basics and on training methods that can be done at the shooter's home range with a minimum of equipment. For example, RF shooters would practice the raising of the pistol and firing the first shot, and perhaps moving to shoot the second shot. Instructors would be experienced shooters in the area.
The intermediate level takes place at the OTC, and at major regional ranges if possible. Instructors would be either very experienced shooters (members of the national team) or the national team coaches. The focus of this would be on more advanced techniques, including an introduction to mental discipline. For example, RF shooters would practice complete strings, and be introduced to the need to focus on the positive - to think "Shoot the 10" instead of "Don't shoot the 5". Material would still include a good deal of training methods targeted at the shooter who has very limited range facilities.
The advanced level would take place at the OTC, and would be targeted at those shooters with a reasonable chance of making the national team. These would be taught by the national coaches, with emphasis on fine-tuning technique and on mental discipline.
Developing a Coaching Scheme...
We already have a plan and a program for training coaches and how coaches are suposed to interface with the shooters.
It is a cooperative effort of the NRA, USA Shooting and the Civilian Marksmanship Program.
While it may not be perfect, (we are working on that) it is the best program we have and it is the envy of many countries around the world. Very few countries have a shooting coach education program that I would consider as equal or better than ours.
We have considered and even developed some rough plans for restarting the "Masters Camps", but like so many other things, we need to find the time and money to do it.
We also do several camps for junior shooters around the country
an intermediate rifle camp at Camp Perry
Advanced rifle camp in Burlington, VT and Grand Rapids, MN
Advanced Pistol Camp in Streator, IL
Advanced Shotgun Camp in Montoursville, PA
and
A Junior Olympic camp for rifle and pistol in Colorado Springs
All that in addition to writing, revising, distributing and conducting coach training.
If you have any questions or suggestions about training or coaching please feel free to give me a call.
Best Wishes for Good Shooting,
Marcus Raab
National Coach Trainer
National Rifle Association
Voice: 703.267.1589
Fax: 703.267.3999
Coach Program information can be found at the following address:
http://www.nrahq.org/education/training ... chools.asp
http://www.asep.com/asep_content/org/NRA.cfm
[/url]
It is a cooperative effort of the NRA, USA Shooting and the Civilian Marksmanship Program.
While it may not be perfect, (we are working on that) it is the best program we have and it is the envy of many countries around the world. Very few countries have a shooting coach education program that I would consider as equal or better than ours.
We have considered and even developed some rough plans for restarting the "Masters Camps", but like so many other things, we need to find the time and money to do it.
We also do several camps for junior shooters around the country
an intermediate rifle camp at Camp Perry
Advanced rifle camp in Burlington, VT and Grand Rapids, MN
Advanced Pistol Camp in Streator, IL
Advanced Shotgun Camp in Montoursville, PA
and
A Junior Olympic camp for rifle and pistol in Colorado Springs
All that in addition to writing, revising, distributing and conducting coach training.
If you have any questions or suggestions about training or coaching please feel free to give me a call.
Best Wishes for Good Shooting,
Marcus Raab
National Coach Trainer
National Rifle Association
Voice: 703.267.1589
Fax: 703.267.3999
Coach Program information can be found at the following address:
http://www.nrahq.org/education/training ... chools.asp
http://www.asep.com/asep_content/org/NRA.cfm
[/url]
-
Steve Swartz
On a different thread, the issue of the different (and hopefully "Supporting") roles of the NRA vs. USAS has been raised.
Facts (?) to consider:
1) USAS does *not* have the resources to develop a shooting base for pistol. If Rifle didn't already have the infrastructure they enjoy at this point, tehy would never be able to get it from USAS now.
2) USAS has a more "distinct" or "focused" mission than the NRA
3) There are many things the NRA can do that the USAS can't, and vice versa
4) In order for USA to compete successfully, we need *both* the capabilities and committment of hte NRA *and* teh capabilities and committment of hte USAS
So, given that history is what it is, where do we go from here? In what way(s) are the USAS and NRA leadership coordinating their efforts to secure USA dominance of the shooting sports internationally?
Steve Swartz
Facts (?) to consider:
1) USAS does *not* have the resources to develop a shooting base for pistol. If Rifle didn't already have the infrastructure they enjoy at this point, tehy would never be able to get it from USAS now.
2) USAS has a more "distinct" or "focused" mission than the NRA
3) There are many things the NRA can do that the USAS can't, and vice versa
4) In order for USA to compete successfully, we need *both* the capabilities and committment of hte NRA *and* teh capabilities and committment of hte USAS
So, given that history is what it is, where do we go from here? In what way(s) are the USAS and NRA leadership coordinating their efforts to secure USA dominance of the shooting sports internationally?
Steve Swartz
From what I've seen of the NRA, unless it's bullseye, they don't give a damn. Their support of NRA Action Pistol, one of their own newer events, has been an absolute travesty. I've personally met some of the people in charge of running Action Pistol and they didn't even have a clue about it, so I don't hold out much hope for NRA Competitions Division getting out their seats on the 6th Floor of the South Tower of the NRA HQ building to go out and promote ISSF pistol events, particularly if you're not going to allow them to run the whole show and have the glory of showing off the National Team, and any medals they win in full NRA regalia.
What can USAS do, that NRA is incapable of?
Why does USAS not have the resources? I think it's more of changing their approach.
I refuse to accept "lack of money" as an answer. As it is, they provide virtually NOTHING for the average shooter. I don't know about y'all, but all I got for my $35 was a membership card, a glorified newsletter and the "privilege" of paying $6 per PTO I shoot, and $85-120 per EVENT I shoot at the Nationals. Yippee.
It's not like we're asking a lot from a National Governing Body here. We're talking about the oversight of an established sport that is recognized internationally and has about 100 years worth of rules, history, and tradition to draw on.
For comparison, another pistol discipline I shoot sprang out of obscurity from absolutely nothing (no rules, no history, just about a dozen deciding to shoot at certain targets drawing from a holster and including some movement) in 1977 and had managed to become a popular worldwide pistol shooting discipline within 10 years. Their National Championships run smoothly and attract hundreds for ONE of their events. Local matches are held all over the country, and in most places you can find about two local matches a month. There are probably tens of thousands of active competitors in the US and probably tens of thousands more all over South America, Europe, and Asia.
What can USAS do, that NRA is incapable of?
Why does USAS not have the resources? I think it's more of changing their approach.
I refuse to accept "lack of money" as an answer. As it is, they provide virtually NOTHING for the average shooter. I don't know about y'all, but all I got for my $35 was a membership card, a glorified newsletter and the "privilege" of paying $6 per PTO I shoot, and $85-120 per EVENT I shoot at the Nationals. Yippee.
It's not like we're asking a lot from a National Governing Body here. We're talking about the oversight of an established sport that is recognized internationally and has about 100 years worth of rules, history, and tradition to draw on.
For comparison, another pistol discipline I shoot sprang out of obscurity from absolutely nothing (no rules, no history, just about a dozen deciding to shoot at certain targets drawing from a holster and including some movement) in 1977 and had managed to become a popular worldwide pistol shooting discipline within 10 years. Their National Championships run smoothly and attract hundreds for ONE of their events. Local matches are held all over the country, and in most places you can find about two local matches a month. There are probably tens of thousands of active competitors in the US and probably tens of thousands more all over South America, Europe, and Asia.
-
Mike McDaniel
The NRA has never cared about the international disciplines - except to use them as a financial stalking horse to subsidize Camp Perry. This is why USAS got formed to begin with.
I don't have access to the detailed budget, but I get the distinct impression that USAS is a very top-heavy organization, with a lot of full-time officials. Frankly, when I saw them come out with a "mission statement", I knew that they had fallen into the management blather tar pits.
I'd be tempted to drastically reduce the number of full-time positions. Coaches, one good secretary, and whatever maintenance staff is needed at the OTC. Everything else handled by volunteers, with expenses covered to the greatest degree possible. Take the savings and put it toward broadening the base. Subsidize local shoots. Buy an interest in regional ranges. And don't put all your chips on the kids - top-flight pistol shooters don't often come from the junior ranks. Be sure to invest in the up-and-coming 20-, 30, and 40-something shooters as well. Hell, even rent a booth at Camp Perry, and do some recruiting.
I don't have access to the detailed budget, but I get the distinct impression that USAS is a very top-heavy organization, with a lot of full-time officials. Frankly, when I saw them come out with a "mission statement", I knew that they had fallen into the management blather tar pits.
I'd be tempted to drastically reduce the number of full-time positions. Coaches, one good secretary, and whatever maintenance staff is needed at the OTC. Everything else handled by volunteers, with expenses covered to the greatest degree possible. Take the savings and put it toward broadening the base. Subsidize local shoots. Buy an interest in regional ranges. And don't put all your chips on the kids - top-flight pistol shooters don't often come from the junior ranks. Be sure to invest in the up-and-coming 20-, 30, and 40-something shooters as well. Hell, even rent a booth at Camp Perry, and do some recruiting.
The great schism!
The amateur athletic reform legislation that allowed us to send professional basketball players to the Olympics wouldn't have anything to do with it. eh? You know the one. It's the one that prohibits the NGB's from engaging in political activism. The NRA had to give up defending our rights or international shooting. Gee, that's a hard one. The million moms and their ilk couldn't have planned a better way to get us fighting each other... if they weren't behind it in the first place. Congressionally mandated divorce. The NRA lost the prestige of fielding an Olympic team and the infant USA Shooting doesn't have access to the membership and money they need to sponsor an effective program.
Sure there are those that didn't like the way the NRA ran international shooting. Just like there are those that don't like the way USAS does. But that is not why USAS had to be formed. Continuing to nurse the schism continues to play into the hands of our enemies. We need more than a joint coaching program, although that's a start. The NRA, USAS, CMP, and 4-H need to develop a way to work together. Kiss and make up before we don't have a sport.
Larry
The amateur athletic reform legislation that allowed us to send professional basketball players to the Olympics wouldn't have anything to do with it. eh? You know the one. It's the one that prohibits the NGB's from engaging in political activism. The NRA had to give up defending our rights or international shooting. Gee, that's a hard one. The million moms and their ilk couldn't have planned a better way to get us fighting each other... if they weren't behind it in the first place. Congressionally mandated divorce. The NRA lost the prestige of fielding an Olympic team and the infant USA Shooting doesn't have access to the membership and money they need to sponsor an effective program.
Sure there are those that didn't like the way the NRA ran international shooting. Just like there are those that don't like the way USAS does. But that is not why USAS had to be formed. Continuing to nurse the schism continues to play into the hands of our enemies. We need more than a joint coaching program, although that's a start. The NRA, USAS, CMP, and 4-H need to develop a way to work together. Kiss and make up before we don't have a sport.
Larry
hold a local PTO
I believe that success for developing shooters in any discipline starts at the local level. Hold a local PTO, I held one last October, two shooters came out that had not shoot a match since their college days 10 years earlier.
Think of a flywheel that you have to get moving. Each little push only makes a slight movement, but lots of little pushs builds moment in the flywheel.
Think of a flywheel that you have to get moving. Each little push only makes a slight movement, but lots of little pushs builds moment in the flywheel.
Re: hold a local PTO
This is very true. As soon as I graduate, pass the bar examination and get a job, I'll be looking to start one, wherever I end up.PETE S wrote:I believe that success for developing shooters in any discipline starts at the local level. Hold a local PTO, I held one last October, two shooters came out that had not shoot a match since their college days 10 years earlier.
Think of a flywheel that you have to get moving. Each little push only makes a slight movement, but lots of little pushs builds moment in the flywheel.
Actually, you do have access to their IRS FORM 990, which is the return for tax-exempt entities. They have to provide it on request; just ask for it.Mike McDaniel wrote:T
I don't have access to the detailed budget, but I get the distinct impression that USAS is a very top-heavy organization, with a lot of full-time officials. .
I suspect you'll find thet they are a pretty lean outfit.
-
Jose Rossy
- Posts: 414
- Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:17 am
- Location: Troy, Ohio, USA
Is anyone paying attention?funtoz wrote:The great schism!
The amateur athletic reform legislation that allowed us to send professional basketball players to the Olympics wouldn't have anything to do with it. eh? You know the one. It's the one that prohibits the NGB's from engaging in political activism. The NRA had to give up defending our rights or international shooting. Gee, that's a hard one. The million moms and their ilk couldn't have planned a better way to get us fighting each other... if they weren't behind it in the first place. Congressionally mandated divorce. The NRA lost the prestige of fielding an Olympic team and the infant USA Shooting doesn't have access to the membership and money they need to sponsor an effective program.
Sure there are those that didn't like the way the NRA ran international shooting. Just like there are those that don't like the way USAS does. But that is not why USAS had to be formed. Continuing to nurse the schism continues to play into the hands of our enemies. We need more than a joint coaching program, although that's a start. The NRA, USAS, CMP, and 4-H need to develop a way to work together. Kiss and make up before we don't have a sport.
Larry
Take a look at the numbers of people that play NRA Highpower Rifle vs those who play ALL ISSF rifle sports in the US.
Ignoring or marginalizing the NRA and its huge pool of competitors is one way to guarantee that international shooting will never be more than what it is in the US.
I'm new in this sport, but anyone with some intelligence would figure out pronto that there HAS to be more shooter crossover from the NRA disciplines to the ISSF disciplines.