TargetTalk

USA Shooting Annual Rules Review to Consider Qualification Standards for National Records

The following argument for the fair recognition of all national record setting scores shot at sanctioned matches was sent to USA Shooting Competitions Division this week and Bob Mitchell has agreed to review this issue during the annual rules review meeting this fall:

By the current USA Shooting qualification standards of requiring a minimum of ten entrants for recognition of national record scores, the Women's 25 Meter Pistol and the Junior Men's 25 Meter Sport Pistol events at this years' National Championships would not have qualified for setting national records.

What’s the logic behind any minimum participation level greater than one being required in the first place? As long as it’s a sanctioned match, there is a match director in charge and a single competitor shows up to shoot, any score shot in that sanctioned match should be eligible to establish a new national record for the event.

PTO scores are certainly counted towards averages regardless of the number of entrants for an event, so why penalize competitors that happen to shoot record level scores for reasons of participation levels that are completely out of their control? When you currently can't qualify to set a national record at some of the national championship events, no matter how well you shoot, it's time to rethink the system at work here.

I managed to establish a new senior level record in January of this year by fortunately shooting with eleven other participants. Until this week, I did not know that ten shooters was a threshold requirement. Naively perhaps, I believed that shooting well enough to beat the established national record in a sanctioned match was all that mattered. Now I realize that feat has to be combined with the dumb luck of simultaneously shooting a record setting score with at least nine other people present.

That realization of how we are disqualifying national records is disturbing. What would the national records look like today without this threshold of participation hurdle? Is my 517 S1 score in 50 ft free pistol actually the highest S1 score ever shot for that event? I'll probably never know for sure as others may have done better, but their scores never got recognized because of this nonperformance related obstacle. Personally I don't want a national record certificate for something that's not actually true; if the national records exclude better performances at sanctioned matches, then the validity of the official national records are questionable and most likely suppressed as a consequence. If my S1 score in 50 ft free pistol is actually the best anybody has managed to shoot in the S1 classification, then I'll proudly display it in the trophy case. I was excited about beating that score this weekend with a 522, but I don't know for certain how many participants were there, as the match was conducted in relays. Was my performance any less if nine people shot the event versus ten?

Are records for scores including finals invalid because only six or eight people participated? Of course not!

The membership at large can't possibly believe this system is fair or even credible. How do you explain to the juniors that they are not being recognized for national records because of low turnout? This situation is not hypothetical, it has happened to juniors repeatedly.

When you shoot a national record setting score, you did not simply compete with those that are present, but you have successfully beaten everyone who's ever posted a sanctioned match score for that event and classification.

Competitors are clearly being short changed out of deserved honors by this rule, and the integrity and authenticity of our entire national record system is questionable as a result of excluding record setting performances.

The present system of restricting the recognition of national records based on minimum participation levels leaves our competitors with the sensation of being denied justly earned honors for noteworthy individual performances. In a sport where definitive scores alone are used to determine placement, rather than the completely subjective scoring methods of the Olympic entertainment type events, it is contrary to the spirit of our sport to deny national records to those individuals that have managed to best a national record score in any sanctioned match.

I am requesting USA Shooting to review the participation level requirement for establishing national records.

Sincerely,

David Blankenship

After requesting that USA Shooting review the rule of participation level requirements for establishing national records, Bob Mitchell has agreed to look into this issue during the annual rules review meeting to be conducted this fall. He went on to say, “If there is good reason to make changes in the best interests of our programs, we are willing to do so.” I encourage every member of USA Shooting to submit any “good reasons” or any other concerns regarding this issue to the USA Shooting website Competitions Division at Competitions@usashooting.org .

CC: Arnie Vitarbo, Cliff Halenar, Doc Sexton, Mickey Brondum, Tes Salb, Ed Wong, John McNally, Matthew DeLong, Mako Kowai, David Schaller, Don Strickland, Curtis Burns, Madeline Bradford, Terrell Deppe, Phil Winnsborough, Buddy Duvall, John Zurek, Bill Demarest, Matt Cole, Dmitriy Shteyman, Eric Daniels, Michael Fulk, Leo Barton, Stephen Swartz, Larry Carter, Ed Ordesch, John Bickar, Richard Poore, Janine Bowman, Neal Stepp, David Spencer & Bruce Martindale.

Hi

I'm inexperienced. One match, hopefully shooting again in October. I'm curious as to how many shooters you consider enough to have a "real match" for the purposes of a national Record.

My personal opinion is that there SHOULD be a minimum number of competitors at a match for a national record. I don't have a number in mind and would have thought ten would be a good number for a national level shooting record. Good as in no worse than any other number under say 20.... And yes, I would have been just as upset to shoot a clean score at a Bullseye match with 9 people as you would be. Apparently no one has done that yet.

We have shooters that shoot ten points higher (for now) at home with the stereo on and no one else around. They even shoot lower at practice, so the in my opinion, the number of people who you're shooting around obviously matters.

Thanks

Mike

Very well stated. I agree that a "record is a record" regardles of the number of competitors in a sanctioned match.
Sandy

I believe that there should be a minimum number of competitors to achieve a national record. if i decide to run a sactioned match with my friends at my home range, i will more than likely be very relaxed.

on the other hand, if i compete against a larger group where there might be more chance of more proficient shooters, there might be a little bit more pressure.

the idea is to shoot the score when there is more competition and pressure. it's kind of like someone bragging about winning a national championship in a postal match. there needs to be head-to-head competition.

i hope USA Shooting decides to stay with the current rules...

Mike Douglass

The status quo presently denies women and juniors the chance to be recognized for record setting performances at the national championships. There was certainly pressure to be experienced at their matches, but the participation level was not achieved. Do you really believe that denying them the opportunity to be recognized for national records is fair?

The trouble with any participation level is that it will eventually deny a justly earned record for somebody, plus the records don't accurately reflect the highest scores shot. Cheating our competitors out of honors they deserve should not be tolerated or continued. The big match pressure argument sounds good at first, but one of the unintentional consequences has been the demoralizing effect it has had on our juniors; they are the future of this sport and we should not be giving them just cause to leave the sport by our short changing them.

I've set national records in NRA sanctioned matches and things don't seem to go haywire just because there's not a participation threshold; I have faith that eliminating this obstacle would be a step forward for USA Shooting in giving all our competitors an equal opportunity for earned recognition.

It's a very good agrument you make in your letter, but it's also a good point about needing shoulder to shoulder "pressure".

Maybe only certain matches should be designated National score matches, and you can only shoot records if you participate there. Like you can only shoot Olympic records at the Games.
That would take away a lot of the home field advantage.

Or maybe any Natl Record score match HAS TO have a referee there.

Juniors can set records at the junior olympics held every year. i am certain the amount of competitors meets the requirement.

here's another thought. the current record for air pistol men is 589 set in 1990. talking to other shooters there has been speculation that this record is "sketchy". i'm not sure what else this individual has accomplished in shooting, but i have not heard of anything significant.

i would rather records be denied from low attended matches as opposed to having possible "bogus" records.

i was present when John Bickar shot his prelim+finals record air gun match. that was well deserved. it was during the time that shooters were concentrating on making the Olympic team. John shot that score with the required number of shooters AND shot against myself, Jason Turner, Daryl Szarenski and others.

I don't agree with the argument that if we deny shooters the chance to earn a national record they will leave. you either shot for fun or to win. a record is merely incidental.

Mike Douglass

I believe that a minimum number of competitors should be required to establish records, mostly to assure that there are sufficient shooters to guarantee that the competition is conducted and scored properly. If there are only a few shooters, or shooters from only a single club, there is more chance of some "hanky panky".

An additional "check and balance" should be that targets for a pending record need to be sent in to the OTC for verification. This would be easy for 10m and 50' and 50yd/m rifle matches but this would not work for 25yd/m & 50yd/m pistol matches where target centers and pasters are used and scoring is done on the frames. I have always had concerns about the accuracy of on the frame scoring but also don't have an easy solution for the problems associated with it.

Having scored many matches at all levels of competition over the last 30+ years I think the worse problem might be that we don't certify/license scorers. For some reason we seem to believe that it is adequate to give someone about 10 minutes of instruction and he/she can become a competent scorer. My experience says that this is certainly not the case. Even using two person scoring teams does not assure accuracy in that if one person is considered the "more competent or experienced" he can sometimes lead the other person, particularly if he is relatively inexperienced. Unfortunately, volunteers are hard to come by and sometimes you just have to take what you can get. But to certify a national record there needs to be someway to verify that a record has really been fired.

At our local events, even state championships, we get 2 to 6 competitors for free or air. I've never seen 10 shooters on the line.

You need to check out the facts before claiming to be "certain" about there being adequate participation at the National Junior Olympic Championships to establish national records. 25 Meter womens pistol didn't reach the threshold at that once a year opportunity. With current attendance trends downwards, more events will likely fall below the mark as 50 feet mens pistol only drew ten competitors this year.

National record setting would normally a be great motivator for juniors, but they are being denied the opportunity to be recognized even at the biggest matches we hold. This injustice to them simply cannot stand.

You are right about real shooters not giving up on shooting though; they'll just go to another shooting organization and format to continue their sport.

I agree that USAS policy of requiring ten or more ashooters is detramental to recruiting and to increase participation in the Sport, especially in Pistol. It has been said by one of the former shooters in Target Talk that the pressure level is not the same unless there is at least ten shooters. I have been shooting for over 45 years and have attained the level of Olympic athlete and have been on ten USA shooting teams. I have held records in Free Pistol, Standard Pistol and in Air Pistol. I have shot over 2660 on more than one occasion. In addition I have won hundreds of medals in National and some International competitions. In addition I am Distinquished in Pistol, High Power Rifle and International Pistol.
The above background is not meant to aggrandize myself, but to give the reader some insight as to my qualifications to make the following statement.
When I go to a Match and the range Officer gives the command to "commence firing" I feel match pressure whether there are 5 or 20 shooters on the line, and I want to win.
The USAS policy of requiring ten or more shooters to set a record is not realisitic when it is noted that they sometimes do not have ten or more at their National Championships in a given event.

Arnie Vitarbo

A record, whether it be National, International or Olympic is an acknowledgement of a level of performance by an individual athlete. National records can be set at the club level, but to require an arbitrary (3, 5, 10, 20 or whatever) number of competitors at a given match negates that achievement by the athlete. Women and Juniors are the most affected by this. For the last few years, at the California Junior Olympics we have not had 10 shooters in any given event. How many false records still stand because there were nine or fewer competitors at a match where the record was broken and it did not meet this arbitrary criteria. As far as false records being submited, why are 10 cheaters more honest than nine or fewer cheaters? The integrity of the Match Director should be accepted unless there is some reason to not trust what he submits. Match pressure is an individual thing and should not enter into the criteria. Some people do better when they are under pressure. The number of competitors at a match is not as important as the level of ability of the competitors. I do not understand how competing against 10 or more average shooters produces more match pressure than competing against fewer elite shooters. The ability is the competition is the criteria, not the numbers.

Hi

I agree with part of your post and disagree with others.

TRUE: A record, whether it be National, International or Olympic is an acknowledgement of a level of performance by an individual athlete.

FALSE: National records can be set at the club level, but to require an arbitrary (3, 5, 10, 20 or whatever) number of competitors at a given match negates that achievement by the athlete.
Comment: I think that in order to have a valid national record, you have to have a valid match. MOST people think of a match as a side by side competitors. One is not usually thought of as a match. I think you must have some standards if anyone is to actually be impressed at your National Record.

TRUE: Women and Juniors are the most affected by this. For the last few years, at the California Junior Olympics we have not had 10 shooters in any given event. Comment: I don't know how many Kansas had, but we are working to get larger attendance at all our matches.

TRUE: As far as false records being submited, why are 10 cheaters ...
Comment: Because a conspiracy of one is the easiest to keep Secret, the more the merrier is not the case in conspiracies. NOT that we have a large problem with that at this time, BUT it has the effect of keeping up appearances.

FALSE: Match pressure is an individual thing and should not enter into the criteria. Comment: It sure does with me, and I strongly feel that match pressure is what makes Bruce Piatt and Rod Leatham winning shooters. I've watched them shoot. The acted different that the competitors that lost. They didn't JUST shoot better.

TRUE: I do not understand how competing against 10 or more average shooters produces more match pressure than competing against fewer elite shooters. Comment: While this is a true statement it's not the only criteria for a REAL match. Someone has to define what a REAL match is, and then we all get to go to them. It's arbitrary, but it's at least believeable. Most people would call someone who breaks the world record in spit ball shooting a liar, if he shoots it while alone in the house. Most people would also call him and his best friend liars if they break it in the parking lot by themselves. A lot fewer people would call you a liar if you shoot it in front of 15 witnesses and 10 other competitors. yes, 10 is arbitrary.

Just my $0.02

Mike

I don't know how may sanctioned matches there are each year (I'm in the UK), but assuming they are limited, larger matches then that is all that should matter. If there only (say for example) a dozen sanctioned matches per season then all should be equally acceptable for setting national records.

Rob.

OK, I know in advance that this is not a thought you want to hear, but here goes.

I don't think a national record should be considered unless shot at a national championship. Olympic records can only be established at the Olympics. World records can only be established in World Cup or World Championship or similar matches. National records should therefore only be established at National Championships. Lots of witnesses, lots of qualified officials, lots of pressure and lots of prestige.

As far as number of competitors in the match, good points have been made here about the lack of enough competitors even at the nationals. I don't really have an opinion on the number of competitors required to establish a record, I just think that the place to do it is at the nationals.

I know there will be those who complain that it is not possible for them to go to the nationals to compete. Sorry, but if you are going to try to set the fastest lap at the Daytona 500, you need to be there, not at the local dirt track.

OK, flame away!!

Marc

Go Gettum Marc!

I would add that perhaps the the competitor number rule would need not apply at the Nationals, because it was the Nationals

i originally stated i agree with the 10 competitor rule. well, after reading all the posts i learned that the number of competitors is difficult even at Nationals, i have chagned my opinion.

i agree with Marc. that seems logical when you look at the examples he presented. who knows, with all the complaints about the current system, maybe more people will come to Nationals to try to break records.

Mike Douglass

I agree with Scott that the number rule should not apply because it was the Nationals. Also, the National Junior Olympics should not have a number rule since it is a National Championship. The performance and the score at Nationals should be the criteria for a National Record.

If the national championships were the only venue for setting national records, we would be taking away the thrill of possibly breaking a record for a lot of juniors that eventually may attend the national championships, but are not likely to attend in the beginning stages. There is motivational value in the "possiblity" of establishing a record, motivation that should be used as a tool to lead juniors along a path to developing their game.

Also, 50 ft events are not part of the national championships, but are the foundation of our shooter base. Between 4H, NRA Bullseye & International, CMP and ROTC programs, there's a lot of 50 ft venues out there, several times as many as 25/50 meter courses. Whatever resolution comes out of this review will hopefully take 50 ft record setting into account, as that's the grassroots course of fire for all of the paper punching sports.

David,
Here I go again...
I hope I know what I am talking about...
50 ft.
Isn't that NRA only?
As far as an NRA National Record is concerned isn't the only requirement that it be a "registered" tournament versus only an "approved".
I don't think the minumum number of competitors applies.
You should get a packet of information concerning national records from the NRA whenever you apply to hold a "registered" tournament.
Am I confused?
JLK