TargetTalk

Recently, I came across this article by Arnold Vitarbo on the history of the Air Force pistol team, whose members won medals and set records in a number of International pistol events:
http://www.airforceshooting.org/avarticle.html
Something in it brought memories of a last year's thread in which some lamented performance of US shooters in International disciplines while some others shamed them for doing so. Vitarbo, himself an Olympian in free pistol, who also shot a record 586 in Standard pistol in his time, seems to offer some perspective on the subject:

"During the past 10-15 years the Pistol scores in the United States among the International Shooters, and except for a few people, even the "Bullseye" scores, have declined steadily... For example Standard Pistol Scores are very low, with winning scores sometimes in the 560s as opposed to the 580s 30 years ago... While I was the National Pistol Coach from 1992-1994 I was concerned with the decline in scores so I asked a Former Air Force shooter, Donald R. Rupp, to assist me with the Sport Pistol Event. We were both disappointed by the attitude of the shooters at the time and their approaches to shooting. They thought that their techniques were very modern and that they could not learn anything from an "old" guy such as Don Rupp. Don was an excellent Center Fire/CISM shooter and has proven himself on the firing line. Both of us were disappointed with their approach to shooting and the current level of performances is indicative of their lack of application of tried and proven techniques. A good indication of the attitude which still prevails, is the statement made by former National Pistol Coach, Dan Iuga from Rumania. When I mentioned about Blankenship's World Center Fire Championship score of 596, his comment was that Bill shot well but had a very poor shooting technique. I heard this comment among shooters of other events while I was the National Coach and down to the present. Many shooters of today are looking for all sorts of gimmicks and so called modern techniques, but the scores are very low."

While intriguing, I am not sure what to take out of this. What would be those "gimmicks", and "modern" vs. "old and poor" techniques? Any thoughts?

I guess ol' Arnie will put some knickers in a twist. He's a quiet, but straightforward kind of guy. He obviously knows whereof he speaks.

I opened the link and read the entire article. Fascinating!

"What would be those "gimmicks", and "modern" vs. "old and poor" techniques?"

Why don't you ask Arnie?

I'm guessing ol' Rover has read Mr. Vitarbo and found what he was looking for - not what the author had written. I'll bet Rover saw "gimmicks" and immediately thought "precharged pneumatic" whereas the article was about technique not equipment. I admit to reading quickly; still I failed to find any exhortation to use obsolete technology as Rover frequently urges.

Speaking of equipment, I still happily use a 20+ year-old Vitarbo grip - made by the man himself - on my standard pistol.

Rover wrote:Why don't you ask Arnie?

I don't know... May be because at the back of my mind there is always some skepticism -- in those old glory days the professional AF team members had virtually unlimited resources available to them -- and I would not like to second guess him in person. But mostly I would also like to hear other folks' perspective on what might be the cause of the drop of US scores. Shrinking pool of up-and-coming shooters, lack of governmental sponsorship, falling public interest, lack of equipment development? In a sense, Arnie's article is self-contradicting at places. First he writes how the AF team did not have coaches, implying that the success was the result of self-experimentation and the competitive atmosphere, but later he laments how the new generation shooters is closing themselves to a valuable coaching advice.

I think one big issue in the US is the large variety of shooting disciplines. When I was growing up, all there was in the way of competition most places was "NRA bullseye" matches. The collegiate pistol teams in the 70's started out shooting that, and over the course of the decade, switched to International style shooting. In the 80's, International matches at local clubs were fairly common.

Along came: silhouette shooting, falling plates, bowling pins, IPSC, cowboy action, PPC, and there are probably one or two I missed. If you are just starting out pistol shooting and want to compete in something, there is a bewildering range of types to choose from. The vast majority are centerfire based, and many appeal to the self-defense angle. In the meantime, NRA bullseye competition is still chugging along. The big national matches at Camp Perry are all in "conventional" NRA bullseye.

There are only so many hours in the day, and I suspect a lot of very good pistol shooters end up focusing on one of the other disciplines. The number of International matches hosted at local clubs has dropped significantly because there just aren't enough shooters interested in competing (and running matches) to sustain things.

I also think the schism between the NRA and USAS also had an effect. Having two organizations just muddies the waters for a lot of people, and if they look at matches they can shoot locally, they gravitate towards bullseye. The drop in matches & attendance in New England followed the split, and I don't think it's entirely a coincidence.

I help coach a collegiate team, and all we shoot is international. Not that many of our students continue shooting after they graduate, but those that do look around, can't find international matches, and switch to NRA bullseye.

The one counter example is air pistol. The NRA doesn't have an alternative to the international format, and that is going fairly strong. The ability for juniors to get involved easily helps a lot. We have a couple local clubs with monthly matches. It's relatively inexpensive, and you can easily set up a range at home.

Compare that to standard, sport, rapid, centerfire or free pistol, and there is next to nothing. We are lucky to have one match a year in Massachusetts for free & rapid. I don't recall EVER seeing a sport pistol match advertised, and it's been decades since I've heard of a standard pistol or centerfire match in the area.

Arnie is always worth reading and, better yet, listening to.

In the '90s, one of the shooting 'gimmicks' that Arnie and I discussed was the Red Dot sight, usually an AimPoint at the time. The Army was testing them in the '80s and, by the '90s, the dots were seen at all the big matches 'cept hardball. Pretty soon new shooters were being taught to shoot with dots instead of iron sights and, today, many shooters don't know how to use irons very well, if at all, and international shooting started to slide. The 'dot', I believe, was the downfall of international shooting in the US, but the multitude of shooting sports also contributed.

The scores fired with iron sights prior to dots are amazing. Don Hamilton's 2668 with iron sights at Camp Perry is still the record, even after so many top shots using dots have chased it. Shooters, back then, used iron sights for NRA matches and international. Very, very, few do now.

"Precision shooting is just too hard" is something I hear a lot from juniors, and young adults, who plink. I also hear it from pin and plate shooters. Often, shooters will leave the bullseye 'donut leagues' and migrate to the other events, finding rewards in those sports after never getting above sharpshooter in bullseye. Precision shooting requires a longer attention span than many other shooting events. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the other events, but I'm just not encouraged by the numbers of new international or conventional shooters. Most matches look like an AARP convention.

Richard Ashmore, from RI, just ran an NRA Sectional in air and standard. He runs good matches and the club's ventilation system is excellent and, in the past, several national records were set at his matches. He only had 11 shooters total in air and 9 in standard at this year's match. Worse yet, only 1 was a junior. For a Sectional! (Gwhite, even an MIT team alum showed up to shoot!)

Will Hart

Greetings,

If I am not mistaken, Hershel Anderson's 2680 still remains the record for Outdoor 2700 shooting. Iron Sights, I believe.

By the way, I enjoyed the "AARP" reference to the current firing line.

Cheers,

David

Dave,

Anderson's 2680 score might be the current national record, I'm not sure. I know that many shooters have shot higher than 2668.

The 2668 score by Don Hamilton, though, is the current record for Camp Perry. I did not make that clear.

Thanks for noticing that.

Will

Shooting international is also very expensive. I went to the international shooting championships a few years ago and the cost per gun was either $125 or $150...can't remember for sure. This coupled with staying in a hotel, and it gets expensive. Plus, it seems that the USA shooting bunch that runs these matches are so darn persnickety about this and that. Now they have adopted this long drawn out finals program for some unknown reason...it is almost impossible for a typical club to conform to all this. It has ceased to be fun to attend these matches. They do not need my talent, but they do need my money and that from others who don't aspire to make the team, but just might enjoy shooting. International pistol shooting has suffered in a big way since the NRA was pushed out and I do not look for it to recover.