TargetTalk

BEA wrote:Seems like those running the ISSF have a liberal flavor to them. Take it as you wish, but introducing "all inclusive events to build a cross discipline shooting community" sounds like liberal crap to me. That is feel good BS that I doubt makes many on this forum feel good. It is a smoke screen for downgrading/minimizing our sport. You can take that excrement and shove where the sun don't shine.

Its probably worth noting that nobody ever changed their mind because they were shouted at, insulted or called names. Such behaviour only tends to entrench their viewpoint.

Whilst use of the terms "all inclusive" could well involve some management-speak, it could also mean exactly what it says - all shooting sports. Whether that's proper, 100yd Running Deer (not the watered down "10m Running Target" that the ISSF developed to avoid shooting at anything that isn't a black circle), which used to be in the Olympics, fullbore rifle, F-Class, Sporting Clays, etc.

Mike M. wrote:I think part of the problem is that the ISSF tends to be focused on the Olympic Games...which means dancing to the tune of the IOC, and ultimately NBC Sports. The latter being rabidly anti-gun.

Certainly, the ISSF - like other Global federations - gets a chunk of funding from the IOC to run the World Cups and support the Olympics.

Does anybody really care what NBC Sports thinks? Their Olympic coverage is abysmal, outperformed in the mediocrity stakes only by their Paralympic coverage. Presenters who don't know one sport from another, weird scheduling, a desperate desire to avoid any sort of live coverage ("An American is about to win an event - but we'll bring you that later instead of showing it live, now let's roll to a VT from earlier in the day"). For the Rio Games their viewing figures were so bad they had to give advertisers free ad slots because they fell outside their contracted viewing/exposure figures. Yes, they cough up a fair amount for the broadcast rights, but the IOC collects plenty of cash from the rest of the world. The USA should be their largest market but really isn't.

For comparison, Sky and BT pay £1.7Bn/yr for Premier League broadcast rights just in the UK. NBC pay about the same for the US rights to each Olympic Games, despite having nearly 5x the population/potential market.

Mike M. wrote:I understand the pressures they are working under with regard to the Olympics - though I think the solution adopted by the FIE (fencing World body) for a similar problem would be better. They wound up going to a rotation of events, which kept everything an Olympic sport even if one specific event was not held at a specific Games. Having said that, I put the entire onus on the IOC...ISSF knows that if they dropped RF today, there would be a move tomorrow in some countries to ban the possession of repeating pistols. Kindly note that ISSF is pushing back hard against IOC notions about replacing firearms with laser toys.

True, though on closer inspection, it should be noted that Fencing is only one event short, and they had an even number of medals and already had gender parity so they dropped a team event. Epee, Foil and Sabre were in every Games individually (so that's 6 medals across men and women), and then 2/3 of those events would get a team event. It's a bit easier for them only having 3 disciplines (traditionally there were 12 medals, so for men and women you had 3 individual events and 3 team events. When they reduced it to 10 medals they just dropped a single team event each for men and women). By contrast shooting has 10 disciplines, and whichever way you cut it, 15 medals doesn't go evenly between men and women.

Fundamentally though, this is all coming from the IOC as you say. The ISSF are having to choose between bad and worse options. The IOC won't bump them up to an even number of medals (unless they voluntarily drop to 14), won't allow mixed individual events, but demand gender parity, and the ISSF itself wants to maintain discipline parity - so equal numbers of Rifle, Pistol and Shotgun events. The only way to do that with individual events is have a number of medals divisible by both two (for genders) and three (for disciplines). That means 6, 12 or 18.

As I follow the discussion, I search and learn more.

Is the "W/C" in this discussion the World Cup or World Championships? Once every 4 years, there's the "ISSF World Championships - All Events".

Hemmers wrote:the ISSF itself wants to maintain discipline parity - so equal numbers of Rifle, Pistol and Shotgun events. The only way to do that with individual events is have a number of medals divisible by both two (for genders) and three (for disciplines). That means 6, 12 or 18.

2016 Men's
Pistol: air pistol, rapid fire pistol, 50m pistol > 3 Events
Rifle: air rifle, rifle three positions, rifle prone > 3 Events
Shotgun: skeet, trap, double trap > 3 events
(Events dropped in 2020 in bold)

2016 Women's
Pistol: air pistol, 25m pistol > 2 events
Rifle: air rifle, rifle three positions> 2 events
Shotgun: skeet, trap > 2 events

2020 Team Events: air pistol, air rifle, trap

Guess you're right about attaining balance between sports. For 2020 it's 2 of each for both men and women (So 12), and 3 team events.

Need to view the Olympics as a big show. Olympic records are often less than world records. The focus of the Olympic games is not the sport but the spectacle. The ISSF and others need to put their competition descriptions bottom to top, not the other way round. The international money might come from the top, but the life blood and development of the sport comes from the bottom.

Example: http://www.issf-sports.org/theissf/championships.ashx


The top of international competition in shooting is the once every 4 years "ISSF World Championships - All Events"

The focus on the Olympics has placed the Olympics at the top of the competition pyramid. But the Olympics, PanAm Games, Commonwealth Games and others should be IMO BONUS sideshows or a replacement for regular competition in the Olympic events.

Been trying to make a chart of all the competitions, and it's rather complex. especially once you delve into the discipline by discipline listing. I'm not so certain everyone understands the different competitions in each discipline before worrying about the Olympics.

There are rules in each ISSF competition for which disciplines are mandatory and which are optional. And how mandatory disciplines can be dropped.

In principle, I agree that the World Championships should be considered the #1 event. But in practice, the Olympic Games have money and name recognition. Which makes it hard, both on ISSF and on NGBs dependent on funding from national Olympic Committees.

Having said that, I do think a strong case can be made that ISSF needs to start thinking independently - to assume that the IOC will throw shooting under the bus eventually and get organized in a way that makes the sport resilient to this. Whether or not the IOC does so is immaterial - the goal is much greater independence.

In the name of all competitors, I promise that we shall take part in these Olympic Games, respecting and abiding by the rules that govern them, committing ourselves to a sport without doping and without drugs, in the true spirit of sportsmanship, for the glory of sport and the honor of our teams.

The Olympic pledge fails to mention sport being a spectacle. Win or lose just keep the ratings up while you do it has become the unspoken intent I guess.

I’d argue that anything that does not have a tangible or measurable score based, not on judge’s opinions, but on speed, goals, holes in a target, distance covered, first across a line, weight lifted, etc is not a sport but a display of athleticism. So figure skating, gymnastics, half pipe skiing, and many other feel good events should be removed before a scored event is removed. I can go to the circus to see an acrobat, why bother with self-centered gymnasts being judged by even more self important judges?