TargetTalk

It seems that too often, folks on here talk about how much we need to groom better younger shooters to become super-awesome world class shooters so that our national team will win medals, or how we need to do this or that to better support our national team, etc.
How about just making the idea of ISSF style shooting fun, instead of some ultra serious life-or-death quest for medals?

In addition, it seems the main focus on all of the marketing and reaching out to new shooters is geared toward junior shooters. That might be nice if we had a widespread method of drawing junior competitors (lots of h.s. pistol teams or college teams) to draw from, but we don't. There are only a few, they're mostly air rifle only, and most of them are JROTC only. The pool of ISSF pistol shooters in the US is so small that we need to actively reach out to beyond just junior shooters. As I look at the homepage for USA Shooting right now, I don't see ANYTHING that tells someone what ISSF disciplines there are, what the rules are, or how to get involved at the ground level. There's not even the most basic FAQ on this stuff. Comparing this to another discipline I shoot (IPSC, or practical pistol), if I go to www.uspsa.org , and look at the left hand side of the page, I see a series of buttons that say, "What is 'practical shooting?'", "Where can I find a match?", "How do I get started?", and "Where can I get more info?" Clicking on these will bring up descriptive info on each topic. If anything, the only thing I can fault their site on is a lack of photos and a demonstrative video clip. USA Shooting should have something similar, so that a visitor can find out what events are out there and the basic rules of each.

Furthermore, if the only attraction for ISSF shooting in the US is the quest to win medals, then a lot of beginners aren't going to bother to try, and lots of existing shooters are probably not going to stick around. It's worth remembering that 99.99% of ISSF shooters here in the US will NEVER make the National Team, much less win a medal at a World Cup or Olympic event. We need to create an incentive for them to start and continue shooting, even if they never do get to the national (much less international) level. What's in it for them?

If we promote ISSF shooting as competitive shooting disciplines that can be enjoyed by the casual shooter, I think it will be easier to increase the number of shooters across the US. This can only have the effect of increasing the quality of shooters on the National Team. The greater number of shooters, the larger the pool of potential athletes to draw from in the long run.
While some might say casual shooters will never yield national and/or international level shooters, I disagree. In the other discipline I shoot (IPSC), I met a guy who was into skeet shooting, and had never picked up a handgun until invited by a friend in casual local match at the age of around 25 or so. Next thing you know, he got hooked, and had some pretty incredible undiscovered natural ability. Within two years, he was one of the top shooters in Europe. He never would've even tried IPSC if he hadn't been invited to a casual local match.

Which brings up another thing. We need more local matches. I realize a lot of this isn't USAS' fault, and is something that individual members have to step up to the plate and organize. However, the idea of slavishly following every ISSF rule and specification regarding ranges, firing points, and procedures is insane. If we want to create greater opportunities to shoot, something has got to give, and the first thing to go should be the insistence that a range MUST have turning targets. This is probably one of the biggest hinderances out there. Audible shot timers out there can be had for a fraction of the cost of a turning target system (for about $100 vs. thousands of dollars) and don't require any changes to a range. We should embrace their use in events like Rapid Fire, Sport Pistol, and Standard Pistol. However, because they record shots based on sound, their use might require a staggered firing order. For example, in a rapid fire match with two shooters at the line, Shooter A would fire his string, then Shooter B would fire his string. But for local matches, this shouldn't be a big deal and the rules could and should easily be bent to accomodate this.

Above all else, we should be looking at ways to increase opportunities to shoot ISSF discipline events at the local level, even if means making minor adjustments to the rules.

Sparky,
I don't know but aren't lights (red light, green light) used at the highest levels of ISSF shooting for at least Rapid Fire?
Perhaps David can tell us when turning targets are required and lights are allowed.
Thanks!
JLK

Sparky,
Oooops!
I found this on our hosts website in a section explaining Rapid Fire:

<<Electronic targets differ in that the faces never look any different. There are red lights above the targets and green lights below. The red lights indicate the targets are faced away, and when the green lights are lit the shooter may raise his arm.>>

JLK

Sure, but for local matches, let's just ditch them. Everyone can start off an audible start signal (BEEP!). It's a lot easier than having clubs trying to construct that apparatus and try to find power at an outdoor range. Besides, if I recall correctly, they didn't always have them at the highest level.

See, it's this "since they have it at the Olympics, we've GOTTA have it at the local level, or we shouldn't shoot" type of destructive thinking I think we've got to get rid of.
There's no way we're going to have everything that is available (and mandated) at the national and up level down at the local level. Clubs can't afford it or won't pay for it. So we need to make some exceptions to (or just flat out ignore) certain rules regarding things like red and green lights and turning targets in the interest of making it easier to hold local club matches. Like I said before, weigh the cost of turning targets (thousands of dollars and permanent range modification) vs. handheld audible shot timer (about $100 and can be carried in your back pocket).

As it is, we have what, maybe half a dozen Rapid Fire club matches a year, nationwide? Maybe a little over a dozen monthly Air and Free Pistol club matches nationwide?

I think easing a few rules for local matches only in the name making it easier to hold matches is a pretty good trade.

I think Sparky is right. The same problem exists for other shooting disciplines.
I find a lot of discussions to build the sports trying to do that from the top down. "Let's get some new guys to join us Olympic wannabes." Wrong approach IMO. Forget the National Team for now. Just get the shooters to the line.

"Forget the national shooters for now. Just get the shooters to the line."

I agree- but that's (apparently) the mission of the NRA. It certainly isn't the mission of USAS.

We keep coming back to the issue of The Great Schism.

USAS barely has the resources to run a National Championship once a year. Expandign their mission to include development of the shooting community is a no-go from the start.

If the rifle disciplines didn't already have the infrastructure (provided by the military, NRA, CMP, etc.) they certainly couldn't expect the USAS to build it for them now.

Pistol Shooters need to recognize that if we are to develop new shooters, we can't look to the USAS for much support. "Somebody else" needs to develop pistol shooters, then turn them over to the USAS for conversion into medals when they are ready.

USAS has it's hands full just figuring out what "ready" means (and using limited resources effectively to convert "ready" into "medals").

Steve Swartz

I posted about it in another thread, but it seems relevant here too.

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.

sparky wrote: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. .... 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.

Hi

I just left the parts I wanted to comment on. I haven't been to Camp Perry, BUT there are squabbles about the NRA's support there too. Camp Perr, that's where Bullseye, Highpower, and Smallbore championships are held each year. I did attend (one day as one of the three spectators) the Bianchi Cup NRA Action Pistol championship (met Pilk and family). The NRA supports it as well as ANYBODY else does. The cost per competitor is $325 if you sign up early. The Green valley people have a lot of stuff there being used, and they probably make some money on it. The prize money isn't much so most of the money isn't going there.

The Gun manufacturer support is minimal too. 2003, Sierra was there (20 miles away), Graf and sons were there( same distance), Midway (20 miles away) wasn't, no Springfield arms booth, no Smith and Wesson booth, no Colt booth etc. Cylinder and Slide was there and THAT was it.

Your comment on the NRA and the Olympics is VERY accurate. On the other hand, if I ran the NRA it would STILL BE ACCURATE. The NRA was running things, from what I've seen no worse that what's being done now. They were kicked out of running it, for reasons having little to do with Olympic medals, and a lot to do with politics. Why would they support International shooting, if they do, they are still going to get crapped on by the media.

In summary, not only does the NRA do a poor job of supporting competitive shooting , so does everyone else. Trap shooting excluded. Yes the NRA doesn't support international shooting, but since they were effectively kicked out of international shooting, WHY SHOULD THEY??? The NRA was told to go away, and they went away, is that a problem?

Rant over.

Mike
Wichita KS

Sparky,

I already chided USAS for their poor web site a couple months ago and was told they're working on fixing/upgrading it. No time frame so who knows when it'll be done, but we can hope it will be soon.

- Nick

For my part, I've been helping to get IPSC shooters interested in Rapid Fire over on the forum at: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/ .

Well, I know it is always easier to raise a flag than lend a hand, but I have to ask what we all as individuals are doing to personally promote the shooting sports among new shooters, or those with no competitive shooting background, at a grassroots level.

My contributions to date have been volunteering my time to set up an air rifle/pistol club in my hometown and starting a junior program--this met with great success and only was halted by the range owner filing chapter 11. More recently, I invited two friends to join the local gallery pistol postals team at my fish & game association. Small steps, yes, but every little bit helps.

Oh, and my buddies are having a ball on Tuesdays punching holes in paper. Will they ever progress to international style shooting? I doubt it, but who knows, maybe their kids will?

Patrick

I am a returning shooter after a 13 year absence. And by my recollection part of the reason why there was a desire to split from the NRA was the idea that with a separate shooting organisation it may be possible to get more corporate sponsorship for U.S. International and Olympic shooting for the sport itself instead of corporations worrying about being labeled as "pro gun" and beaten up by the liberal media.

jackh wrote: Forget the National Team for now. Just get the shooters to the line.

Jack is right. The solution itself is extremely simple to identify- the only way to attract more shooters is to have more shoots. Period. You can't attract someone to the sport if there aren't any shoots in their entire state! Of course, how to do that is obviously where it gets difficult.

Olympic style shooting could learn a lot from Cowboy Action Shooting. SASS (the Single Action Shooting Society) began as a couple of guys back in the '80s who wanted to dress up like cowboys and have shooting competitions. Now the organization has over 62,000 members worldwide, and there's a weekend shoot just about anywhere. Within a one hour drive of me are four or five SASS clubs, and there's a shoot at one of them every weekend of the month- some with 80 or more shooters. Imagine what RF or FP shooting would be like if there were that many matches that one could go to.

So what lessons could be learned from SASS that might help? First, the emphasis at Cowboy shoots is on having fun. Yes, there are folks out there with super-slicked up $2000 guns who's motto seem to be "win or die," but the atmosphere itself does not intimidate someone with some clunkers for guns who shoots once a month, who don't care if they place last but only wants to do better than they did the month before. And everyone goes out of there way to make a new person feel welcome- offering to let them borrow their guns, their holsters, whatever they might need at that shoot until they get all their equipment. It may sound strange, but it's more of a "family" that you're being welcomed into- not just a one day shoot. And it's that welcome and friendliness and emphasis on fun that has people coming back after their first time, and that has them bring their friends out to join.

Second, things at the local club level are more flexible, allowing them to make do with what they have more so than some rigid adherence to every rule. This is particulaly applicable to the turning target/red light-green light vs. just an audible command issue of rapid fire . If allowing an audible command means the difference between a club being able to have a RF shoot or not, than that should be a no brainer- allow the audible command. (Better than not having a shoot at all.) There could be a provision that requires the lights or turning targets at the state and regional competitions, or for valid records.

Third, SASS is run from the bottom up. Every local club has a representative who goes to an annual SASS meeting, and it is this gathering of club representatives (not some committee of people most shooters have never met or heard of) who approve or disapprove every proposed rule change (or any other change). Keeps the organization in line with what people want.

So, how could this be applied to Olympic style shooting? Start a new organization whose emphasis is on just getting people to have fun and shoot this style of matches. I mean, just about everyone who shoots pistols owns at least one .22 pistol. Doesn't matter if it's some clunky old revolver, they would probably still enjoy the challenge of trying out a RF or FP course (the same goes for rifle and air pistol). In the beginning this organization would start with some of the very experienced people, and some of the key clubs who have been holding official olympic style shoots, who would spend time with other shooting ranges and shooting clubs in their region setting up a match they could run based on their resources, space, available $, etc. Then after a while, people from those local ranges help set up things at other local ranges, and before you know it (which realistically means about ten years) you have 10 or 20 matches a month going on in some states. Then once the number of clubs with matches begins to increase, you begin having state championships, regional championships, etc., whatever, but the key is that you have hundreds and hundreds of people who now have an opportunity to shoot Olympic style shooting.

But then, the idea is easy- unless someone is willing to call some local shooting range an hour from where they regularly compete in an Olympic style match, and say "this is me, this is my experience, and I'd like to come out there and see if we can't set up an Olympic-style shoot that you could run for your members once a month," then we're not going to do much to attract new shooters to this sport.

-Ted

Even if there's already a provision in the rules, it seems very clear from the posts on this forum going on and on about how expensive Rapid Fire bays are because of the "need" for turning targets that many, if not most folks out there aren't aware of the rule.

My club has had two rapid-fire bays for the last 15 years and they have been used about 7 or 8 times by an average of 5 to 8 shooters each time.
As an active conventional shooter I was intrigued by the idea to shoot Olympic style pistol, as in free and rapid. When I showed up with a model 41 to try free pistol even though I knew I would not be competitive with it, the ridicule and scorn I received be cause I did not go buy a $1500 pistol to try something new surprised me. That was 15 years ago and this new shooter never returned to your dieing sport. I think about this when I have to be careful cutting the grass around the two mostly unused rapid-fire bays.

T.D.Smith told me he shot the 1964 Olympic Free Pistol event with a S&W Model 41.
JLK

Dave C. wrote:My club has had two rapid-fire bays for the last 15 years and they have been used about 7 or 8 times by an average of 5 to 8 shooters each time.
As an active conventional shooter I was intrigued by the idea to shoot Olympic style pistol, as in free and rapid. When I showed up with a model 41 to try free pistol even though I knew I would not be competitive with it, the ridicule and scorn I received be cause I did not go buy a $1500 pistol to try something new surprised me. That was 15 years ago and this new shooter never returned to your dieing sport. I think about this when I have to be careful cutting the grass around the two mostly unused rapid-fire bays.

Don't let 'em discourage you. Give it a chance. Besides, I don't know if the same folks are still shooting, but it'd be cool to give 'em a run for their money with a model 41.

Let me throw a provocative question.

Why is USAS making NO effort to attract the top shooters in NRA Bullseye, Highpower Rifle, and Smallbore Rifle to cross over to ISSF pistol, 50M rifle, and 300M rifle?

Am I the only one who sees talent not being developed to the max?

I still sense a misplaced theme here that the top (USAS, NRA) is not doing what the bottom rank and file should be doing. In the US, the NRA International shooting system should be the main system. End of that story.
If gifted shooters rise out of that to qualify for Jr or Sr Olympic try outs, fine. Let the USAS then do their National team development. I think that is what they are supposed to do.

My daughters did well in swimming and water polo. They participated in age group, scholastic and university (scholarship) systems. Never did we see any development national assistance or encouragement until they qualified for selection clinics. Both went to the OTC for a week of water polo study. Neither qualified there for anything further, although my little one was passed up for the JR national team only because she was too small to be a goalie at the world level. I was told she had the skills and determination.

Point is I think the bulk of the shooting for the rank and file should be under the NRA system. Club, local league, State, and Regional and Sectional Matches should be for the shooting majority. Grass roots efforts to get shooters to the line is needed in a less formal than PTO's all the time system.

An effort should be made to NOT display shootem-em-up spray and pray disciplines as the main image. Instead a retro effort to reintroduce shooting as a ladies and gentlemans sport is needed. There lies the biggest problem.

jack, agree 100%.

On your last point, we are being harmed by our own "gun media". Particularly by the TV gun programs and their addiction to "action" sports. Some have refused to even consider coverage of the National Matches.