As many of you have seen, there is a proposal on the table with the ISSF to change the clothing/equipment for Rifle. As coaches, I would be interested in getting your opinions about this issue. That said, I really DO NOT want to jump to conclusions at this point, since no ISSF vote has taken place, nor have any rules been changed.
But if they did, what would you do about it? Would you allow your shooters to shoot standing with a 15-16 lb "free rifle", knowing full well that you may not be providing adequate (prove/unproven, that is the question) back support? I suspect those in the JROTC arena don't care much about these rules, but everyone else who is thinking seriously about shooting in college should care very much.
Again, jumping way ahead, would you like the NRA to follow suit? Or, would you recommend that the NRA keep their International category as well as the traditional "NRA"-type shooting, like Camp Perry, where any type of equipment is legal?
I am interested in your thoughts.
Bill
Disclaimer: Although I am a coach of a junior club, my views in Target Talk in no way represent that club, unless stated otherwise.
Clothing and ISSF
Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer
-
Guest
NRA International should track whatever is being done internationally, or else it isn't worth it's name. NRA Conventional should remain the open category it always has, so that all shooters of all persuasions and equipment can enjoy competing together.
My juniors don't want to hold 15-16 lb rifles, pants or no. (and rarely do I) It is a self weeding process, actually. If they don't have the artificial support, their bodies and brains will rebel. Rifle weights will go down. I don't fret about THAT issue, but, personally, will sincerely miss the anti-slip and padding features of the pants in kneeling position.
My juniors don't want to hold 15-16 lb rifles, pants or no. (and rarely do I) It is a self weeding process, actually. If they don't have the artificial support, their bodies and brains will rebel. Rifle weights will go down. I don't fret about THAT issue, but, personally, will sincerely miss the anti-slip and padding features of the pants in kneeling position.
I pretty much agree with "Guest" on the NRA rules. I do appreciate the standard NRA rules since it allows highpower shooters and those with older equipment to play the game.
As far as holding 15-16lb free rifles with no pants there is precident here. I shot as a junior in the 70's. My jacket was an ISU jacket which provided about the same support as current jackets. Pants as are used now did not exist then or at least i never saw them. I was a scrawny teenager and I shot a 15 lb anschutz 1413. I can't remember any talk of back injury. Seems like most people don't think there is anything to be learned from these dark ages of shooting but I think it would be interesting to talk with some of the top shooters of that era and see what their thoughts on the subject are.
Personally I think that standing body mechanics will need to be changed so that the shooters are leaning back only enough to get the rifle center of gravity between their feet and no further. JP O'Connor discussed this a little on the old forum.
As far as holding 15-16lb free rifles with no pants there is precident here. I shot as a junior in the 70's. My jacket was an ISU jacket which provided about the same support as current jackets. Pants as are used now did not exist then or at least i never saw them. I was a scrawny teenager and I shot a 15 lb anschutz 1413. I can't remember any talk of back injury. Seems like most people don't think there is anything to be learned from these dark ages of shooting but I think it would be interesting to talk with some of the top shooters of that era and see what their thoughts on the subject are.
Personally I think that standing body mechanics will need to be changed so that the shooters are leaning back only enough to get the rifle center of gravity between their feet and no further. JP O'Connor discussed this a little on the old forum.
-
mikeschroeder
- Posts: 488
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 10:56 am
- Location: Kansas
Hi
I have heard through a local coach, that the NRA will follow suit on the pants issue. He didn't say Smallbore, Highpower, International, or anything else, so I assumed all.
I have a related question. In Constantine's book, he shows a back brace like the stockers use at Home Depot. It's "an example of an illegal back brace." Why are back braces illegal? Back braces only hold your back up. The pants hold your back and legs stiff. If your legs are "free" that's where most of our buys wiggle. Is there any talk of adding back braces, and leaving out the pants?
Mike
Wichita KS
I have heard through a local coach, that the NRA will follow suit on the pants issue. He didn't say Smallbore, Highpower, International, or anything else, so I assumed all.
I have a related question. In Constantine's book, he shows a back brace like the stockers use at Home Depot. It's "an example of an illegal back brace." Why are back braces illegal? Back braces only hold your back up. The pants hold your back and legs stiff. If your legs are "free" that's where most of our buys wiggle. Is there any talk of adding back braces, and leaving out the pants?
Mike
Wichita KS
Re: Clothing and ISSF
Bill wrote:As many of you have seen, there is a proposal on the table with the ISSF to change the clothing/equipment for Rifle. As coaches, I would be interested in getting your opinions about this issue. That said, I really DO NOT want to jump to conclusions at this point, since no ISSF vote has taken place, nor have any rules been changed.
But if they did, what would you do about it? Would you allow your shooters to shoot standing with a 15-16 lb "free rifle", knowing full well that you may not be providing adequate (prove/unproven, that is the question) back support? I suspect those in the JROTC arena don't care much about these rules, but everyone else who is thinking seriously about shooting in college should care very much.
Again, jumping way ahead, would you like the NRA to follow suit? Or, would you recommend that the NRA keep their International category as well as the traditional "NRA"-type shooting, like Camp Perry, where any type of equipment is legal?I am interested in your thoughts.Bill Disclaimer: Although I am a coach of a junior club, my views in Target Talk in no way represent that club, unless stated otherwise.
Currently our club shoots only 3P sporter-class, so we don't use shooting pants or jackets. For a club like ours, not having shooting pants does simplify things. We have not had anyone complain of back pain, but our rifles are limited to 7 1/2 pounds. If we were to concentrate on ISSF air rifle, I would expect that we would try to get our shooters on the lightest suitable rifle and slowly move the weight up to a point where they felt it was optimum for them.
I believe that the NRA should follow the ISSF in all of its "International" disciplines. Conventional disciplines should retain their original rules.
I am assuming that NRA / 3P Council 3P air rifle will still allow shooting pants, even if the ISSF does change the rules - has anyone heard any mention of it?
Jay V
AIAC
IL
www.aiac-airguns.org
Pants Issue
The ISSF banning special shooting pants is pretty much a done deal. The special technical committee has recommended it and all that is necessary is a final vote by the whole ISSF. The back issue has been discussed in detail in ISSF News and elsewhere and there is certainly no physical reason that more backs will be injured either with or without the specail pants. We shot without the special pants and without the stiff coats that we have now in the late 60's into the early 80's and I don't recall any great number of back problems in rifle shooters. There is certainly no doubt that the pants (and the stiff coats) are providing today's shooters with a significant amount of artificial support and the ISSF, even with its "stiffness" rules, has been unable to limit it. Thus, we need to take one giant step backwards in order to move forward.
My guess is that the pants will still be legal in NRA 3P and conventional smallbore shooting. Don't know where we will end up in 3P air.
My guess is that the pants will still be legal in NRA 3P and conventional smallbore shooting. Don't know where we will end up in 3P air.
pants and artificial support
My opinion, is that we will probably see juniors (and others?) using lighter fireamrs. While our club has an older 1413 in excellent condition, it is only infrequently we get the shooter who can handle it. Our newer purchases have been 1912s, and most of the higher levl shooters have no problem with these (talking HS sophomores and older, but not always real buig kids).
I have found that i do better with the 1912 than my old 1413 becasue of the weight. My back problems have been resolved over the past 8 years with a well directed exercise program. The trainer I used found that while I had stron abs and back, the lateral obliques were very week, and I've worked them to the point that back problems are now rare.
Shooters are supposed to be athletes, and good core strenght is a prerequisite for accurate offhand shooting. Why the complaints about something that will only make one better in many ways? The "back supports" used in Home Depot were also used by UPS for a few years, until they found drivers were having more back injuries - due to weakened back muscles which had become dependant on the braces (many of the later injuries were on "Off time" doing yard work, etc.
I have found that i do better with the 1912 than my old 1413 becasue of the weight. My back problems have been resolved over the past 8 years with a well directed exercise program. The trainer I used found that while I had stron abs and back, the lateral obliques were very week, and I've worked them to the point that back problems are now rare.
Shooters are supposed to be athletes, and good core strenght is a prerequisite for accurate offhand shooting. Why the complaints about something that will only make one better in many ways? The "back supports" used in Home Depot were also used by UPS for a few years, until they found drivers were having more back injuries - due to weakened back muscles which had become dependant on the braces (many of the later injuries were on "Off time" doing yard work, etc.
If the goal of sport is to be strong enough to do that sport unaided, why do weightlifters wear those kidney belts? Why do cyclists wear helmets? Why do shotgun shooters wear safety glasses? Why do boxers wear gumshields, gloves and padded helmets? Why do all sports allow safety equipment?
And make no mistake - that's what the trousers act as. They prevent long-term, chronic damage to the spine. Which, especially in junior shooters, is absolutely vital. The German Shooting Federation have already submitted a formal protest to the ISSF, with a report by a medical expert on the problems that these rule changes would cause.
As has been said, there are far better ways to make the sport harder. And this isn't a way to make the sport seem more photogenic, because a quick glance at the pistol and rifle lines at the olympics shows that the rifle lines make a better, more colourful and novel (hence, easier to sell to the press) photo.
I'm still trying to figure out what is possessing the ISSF to pursue this course of action.
And make no mistake - that's what the trousers act as. They prevent long-term, chronic damage to the spine. Which, especially in junior shooters, is absolutely vital. The German Shooting Federation have already submitted a formal protest to the ISSF, with a report by a medical expert on the problems that these rule changes would cause.
As has been said, there are far better ways to make the sport harder. And this isn't a way to make the sport seem more photogenic, because a quick glance at the pistol and rifle lines at the olympics shows that the rifle lines make a better, more colourful and novel (hence, easier to sell to the press) photo.
I'm still trying to figure out what is possessing the ISSF to pursue this course of action.
ISSF and Shooting Pants
For the best discussion that I have read on the subject read Gary Anderson's article from ISSF News
http://www.issfnews.com/default.asp?fil ... les&id=338
http://www.issfnews.com/default.asp?fil ... les&id=338
Back Brace or Pants??
IMHO---I coached Juniors--High Schoolers--for the better part of 22 years and Collegegiate shooters for 9 years---during that time I saw the evolution of jackets, gloves, shoes (boots), slings, rifles, sights, opticals etc. etc. The technical and mechanical evolution of shooting equipment almost always came from the Eastern Bloc nations---and they were winning eveything in sight. I saw the introduction of new style jackets and shooting pants & boots during my "collegiate period"---my team wanted them---we bought them---well offhand and kneeling scores started moving upwards---slowly at first and then logarithmically. It got to the point that the shooters (male & female) would not even practise without the robe and disrobe process, because their practise scores would suffer without the acoutrements. I never heard of one complaint about back problems before the pants---but I started hearing complaints when the pants were issued and they shot without them. Lifting a fifteen lb. Free Rifle is not an impossible task for any shooter--they need a reasonable amount of weight training to begin with--yes a 12-16 year old male or female may experience this weight and shy away from it---but I have seen some rather slim high school age and collegiate shooters tote some mighty hefty guns without any problem. It's training, training and more training---the attitude is---If I cannot have the equipment shooter X is using I am not going to shoot. Boy that's a lot of wind---so let me wind this up---I purchased some back braces from Home Dopey and passed them out---"use 'em for practise and let's see wha' hoppens"---amazing correlation between pants and back brace---what's my point? The tight pants are an artificial support and nothing else will convince me. My trials did exemplify the "Scientific Method". That's why they (sic) have to go ASAP---IMHO
So over a period of decades, shooting equipment has slowly evolved to the present state, and you think that hacking the kit to pieces in one go is going to work well without any health risks?
I can tell you what I'm expecting from this - 3P 50m shooting is going to see a lot of seniors drop out from back problems and juniors advised against taking it up. Air rifle scores will drop and recover, and then we'll see the senior teams all coming down with the back problems that have plagued the US team in the past.
And you can forget about the nice, colourful firing lines we have from fully-suited shooters now.
And the thing is that our college club shot without trousers for years - and we did see back injuries as a result, including some chronic nerve damage to myself. And since we got the trousers, those problems have gone away.
I can tell you what I'm expecting from this - 3P 50m shooting is going to see a lot of seniors drop out from back problems and juniors advised against taking it up. Air rifle scores will drop and recover, and then we'll see the senior teams all coming down with the back problems that have plagued the US team in the past.
And you can forget about the nice, colourful firing lines we have from fully-suited shooters now.
And the thing is that our college club shot without trousers for years - and we did see back injuries as a result, including some chronic nerve damage to myself. And since we got the trousers, those problems have gone away.
Clothing and the ISSF
Actually this whole affair is quite bizarre. I note several shooters here claiming that the trousers currently used provide artificial support for the body. I dare say that those same people would say this about existing jackets as well.
However this can't be true. Look at Rule 7.4.9
"7.4.9 Clothing Regulations
The use of any special devices, means or garments which immobilize
or unduly reduce the movement of the shooter's legs, body or arms is
prohibited in order to assure that the performance skills of the shooters
are not artificially improved by special clothing."
All clothing used in high level competitions including World Cups and Olympic Games must pass inspection based on these rules and since the competitiors wear these clothes during their matches, it follows that what they wear has been approved by the Equipment Inspectors and therefore has the imprimatur of the ISSF on their use. Is that not so?
Therefore, and in view of what the above rule says, the clothing concerned obviously does NOT "immobilize or unduly reduce the movement of the shooters legs, body or arms" nor clearly, under the same rule does the clothing "improve the performance skills of the shooters". How could it? It would be banned under these rules if it did.
Or are you trying to tell me that the ISSF, in violation of its own rules is condoning the use of equipment which they KNOW to be illegal?
You can't have it both ways. Since the gear IS used currently by shooters and since Rule 7.4.9 is so clearly prescriptive, and since we must assume that the ISSF would not deliberately defy its own rules, then how can there be any talk of banning the equipment in question? The gear being used obviousl7y does NOT provide artificial support for shooters, so why the talk about banning it? It simply defies logic.
However this can't be true. Look at Rule 7.4.9
"7.4.9 Clothing Regulations
The use of any special devices, means or garments which immobilize
or unduly reduce the movement of the shooter's legs, body or arms is
prohibited in order to assure that the performance skills of the shooters
are not artificially improved by special clothing."
All clothing used in high level competitions including World Cups and Olympic Games must pass inspection based on these rules and since the competitiors wear these clothes during their matches, it follows that what they wear has been approved by the Equipment Inspectors and therefore has the imprimatur of the ISSF on their use. Is that not so?
Therefore, and in view of what the above rule says, the clothing concerned obviously does NOT "immobilize or unduly reduce the movement of the shooters legs, body or arms" nor clearly, under the same rule does the clothing "improve the performance skills of the shooters". How could it? It would be banned under these rules if it did.
Or are you trying to tell me that the ISSF, in violation of its own rules is condoning the use of equipment which they KNOW to be illegal?
You can't have it both ways. Since the gear IS used currently by shooters and since Rule 7.4.9 is so clearly prescriptive, and since we must assume that the ISSF would not deliberately defy its own rules, then how can there be any talk of banning the equipment in question? The gear being used obviousl7y does NOT provide artificial support for shooters, so why the talk about banning it? It simply defies logic.
Tom
A point by point commentary--Very long
This was written by my very good friend Jaroslav Liptak back in January in an almost immediate response to "The Letter" by Gary Anderson.
I apologize for the extraordinary length but Jaro is nothing if not thorough!!
Dear shooting friends,
Short before Christmas, I was approached by the ISSF secretariate to write my comments on the rule changes for 2005, prepared by the Ad-hoc Committee under the leadership of Mr. David Parish. I dedicated some time to discuss the topics with leading shooters, officials and medical experts in my home country. There are many changes that are to be considered, but, to remain focused on the topic of the article written by Gary Anderson, I am providing a collection of comments on the intended ban of shooting trousers.
I also used the opportunity to consult the topic with fellow shooting coaches attending the ISSF A coaching course in Kuortane, FIN during the past days. So these comments are not a lonely voice of a single person, but they are reflecting a collective experience on the topic.
Below is the text of the comments; the printed text was handed out personally to Mrs. Unni Nicolaysen, NOR, Vice-President of the ISSF during the last day of the ISSF A Class Coaches Course in Kuortane.
We have two opinions on the topic now. I am interpreting the question mark in Gary Anderson´s article title as an invitiation to a dialogue; therefore I urge all fellow shooters, coaches and officials to consider all pros and cons, to remain focused on facts and not to put extensive weight on the emotional side of the communication. Your comments are welcome!
Thank you for your attention.
Jaroslav Liptak
_____________________________________________________________
The Shooting Trousers Question
------------------------------
The "Artificial Support" Issue
Anything what is not actually a part of the shooter´s body provides artificial support. This paragraph is for years a source of misunderstandings since it allows for subjective decisions.
It shall be rewritten in a more specific way adressing rather the issue of immobilising a part of the shooter´s body, which is an extreme that shall be avoided. The mobility of a particular joint can be checked in a simple way requiring the shooter to do a special exercise without any need for measuring physical values.
It is a common myth that stiff equipment provides better stability. It might work for the lower scores, but for higher scores, it may be even contraindicative. In the end of the 90s, Russian top shooters observed and measured a phenomenon where new, stiffer equipment compared to old, used and expected to be soft equipment provided for worse stability (measured at the same shooter, same conditions, same setup). It is explained by new equipment´s better transferring of mechanical waves coming from heartbeat and tremor across the shooter. Shooters actually do not want stiff, rigid pieces of clothing. They want to have a comfortable shooting position.
Some support is necessary and inavoidable.
Shooting trousers provide support. This is a fact. The support is artificial, because they are man-made and are not an organic part of the body. This is another fact. The question is, what is bad on artificial support? Any trousers of any made will provide artificial support just because of their weight and their placement on the waist. The real issue is immobilizing; when an agreement on the definition of immobilizing is met, the term "artificial support" may be removed from the rules.
In fact, support allowing for more comfort in the shooting position is good. The shooter´s spinal column is exposed to repetitive asymetric load and despite compensation exercises, shooters will develop at least a spinal column deformation over years. If the back musculature is strong enough, the shooter can cope with this load. But if the skeleton and musculature are developing or aging, protective support may prevent larger deformations, even injuries.
We are proud of being able to bring generations on one firing line providing them equal chances. We are proud to have the oldest Olympic Games medailist and the largest age interval (16-72) of Olympic Games medailists. We do not want to restrict the success to a certain somatotype,
discriminating those who were born thinner, smaller, larger or disabled.
Young Shooters Proceed Faster
Protecting the health of an athlete is a prior task of a coach. Coaches are nowadays not sufficiently supported by research in the area of the impact of equipment characteristics on health anomalies of the back musculature, the spinal column and the hips. They have to rely on experience and evidence from their close neighbourhood. One positive aspect of research done is the emphasis on the consequences of load on young athletes, especially rifle shooters. We can believe that any federation has collected experience in that area and designed youth competitions accordingly. Despite of this, young shooters start to shoot standing with full-size rifle at a rather early age (13-14) if observed from the viewpoint of growth and even considering skeletal age. Any support that protects the areas in danger (lower back, hips) without interfering much with the performance will pay off years and decades later leaving the shooter without major wear and damage. Another observation is that younger shooters proceed faster in performance with 1988 rules trousers and need less load to reach an advanced level.
If there are considerations to leave trousers for junior shooters, there will be still a need to handle all issues related to trousers; it will result to more complicated rules featuring more exceptions, so why not let them in use for all?
Older Shooters Are Protected
The silent majority of shooters in Europe is above 30, even 40 (estimate, no figures available). Entering the so-called productive age, a very little percentage can maintain the original physical condition over years. The consequence is loss of strength, building fat, weaker musculature, loss of flexibility, mobility and regeneration ability. The probability of spinal column deformation or injury is considered to be higher with age when continuing with competitive rifle shooting. In order to assure participation in sport into a high age, the shooters must feel safe from a risk of pain or injury. It is not only the youth we shall take care of, it is the older population which passes the experience, does almost all the valuable voluntary work and, last but not least, brings in the money.
The problem with special trousers
It was already stated than any trousers provide artificial support. From the very moment of reserving a pair of trousers to shooting, they become special because of their use. But this is only playing with the terminology.
In fact, trousers are needed that provide protection from the cold when training prone in early spring. They must be easily to open in order to provide for ventilation if competing in midsummer, They must provide knee protection (see Gary Anderson´s commenting on shooters who experienced knee trauma from kneeling position practice before the 1988 ruling was introduced).
They must enable belt fastening. They must offer better positioning in kneeling having reinforcements on the butt. There may be a discussion about details and measures, but these are the basic requirements. The bottom line is that rifle shooters need special trousers.
---------------
The Image Issue
Much time was spent in the discussion about media appearance. Note that the clothing and the movements of the rifle shooter are also to be communicated as something special and typical for our sport. It is our choice if we do it in a friendly, assertive way or if we let the media uneducated and allow them incorrect interpretations.
The "Duck Walk"
Much time was spent on the story communicated along the shooting community about comments made by an unidentified IOC member on the strange walking of shooters. In order not to make this issue the centre of all discussion, there is only to be noted that if somebody is expressing
real concern, the answer shall be informative and competent to remove all doubts and leave a positive image; if there were only comments not based on knowledge, the answer shall be educative signalizing that we are proud of the tradition and the achievements we made and why things appear that way. Many other sports (cycling, skiing) show athletes with non-stardard walking when wearing equipment; it is understandable, normal and nobody cares that much. We shall signalize that this is normal instead of switching into anxious defensive mode.
Saving Shoes
It is obvious to any rifle shooter of any level, but it shall be noted that the careful walking is not caused by trousers. Shooters protect the soles of their shoes from bending that way. These shoes are produced in small series and the price reflects this fact. Saving equipment is a good thing, it shall be rewarded and not punished.
An alternative would be requiring the shooters put their shoes on after arriving to the firing line during the preparation time.
Hiding Some Irregularities
Although it did not happen in the recent years, especially after the West/East competition was de-escalated, there is still a possibility that the shooters in question may be hiding some illegal means of support. It is the duty of the Jury to observe all irregularities and to check the equipment any time during the competition. Increasing awareness of this right of the Jury will prevent the behaviour of the shooters from developing in the wrong direction.
Trousers are Fashionable
... but nobody cares yet. Shooters actually choose the colours very carefully, outer appearance is a major issue for almost everybody. The problem is with lack of pointing out this really aesthetic attribute of shooter´s clothing. Just think about figure skating, where the dress of
the competitor is commented as carefully as his/her performance. The ISSF shall benefit from this aesthetics, shooters have some free space to sell and they need it desperatedly.
What is the Alternative Appearance?
If not allowed to use shooting trousers as specified by the 1988 rules, shooters will look for alternatives. The determining factor will be functional, i.e. pants providing the most support under new rules (there will be always some support), the lowest friction in the kneeling position and the best protection against thermal anomalies. In order to match all these requirements, the result will be custom-made or specially adapted pants, which can be considered special pants in the sense of the restricting rule and therefore provide for more dispute. Any other pants, after modifications done mostly by the shooter, will probably not guarantee an appearance communicable to the media and public. The solution will be then provided by the industry, closing the circle.
Training Pants
Training pants are generally not designed for integrating a belt and providing for sufficient knee protection. Thermal protection will limit the choice even more. The result will be customized and custom made shooting pants.
Regular Pants
Regular casual pants will be probably the most frequent basis to choose from when looking for replacement. Another domain of choice will be military pants. Both look in combination with a multicoloured shooting jacket very strange, possibly generating even more comments from IOC
members looking for aesthetical appearance of sport.
-----------------
The Results Issue
It is no doubt that the equipment contributes to the result. Besides the fact, that no comparative study was published yet, the empirical evidence says that the use of trousers (as specified by the rules) in standing rises the performance by an one-digit amount of points if compared to the equipment common in the 70s. But coming to a performance basis good enough to provide for performance in the level of world record takes - with or without 1988 regulation trousers - more than six years of intensive training at least.
Results close to a maximum are more exciting that results requiring some basic arithmetics like average shot value in order to come to a comprehensible value of the shooter´s performance. Yes, maximum results are probable and already here, but the probability of reaching them is rather overestimated and based on subjective perceptions rather than on statistics. The shooting sport can live with one to two instances of an absolute score per year, and this level was not yet reached.
The probability of an absolute score
To calculate probabilities right, results from 1989 from all major competitions supervised by the ISSF are required. These data was not available at the moment of writing this comment, so the following calculations shall be considered to be best possible estimates.
For the estimation of the probability, following values are taken into account:
- The approximate number of shooters performing in the performance class near the world record
- The probability of hitting a ten by a shooter from this class
- The total number of starts of these shooters in competitions allowing for setting up the world record.
These estimations shall be replaced with statistical information based on real data when available and ready.
Prone
Estimated number of shooters able to score 594 or more per top competition: 20
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 594: 90% (the probability of scoring 600 with this performance is 0,0018, i.e. 0,18%)
In three position, the 40 prone part provides no problem since the score is taken from all three positions and medals are awarded for the sum. In fact, it can be appealing to the media if interpreted properly. Situations like unexpected point loss of a favorite in that "easy" position may add dramatism to the qualification report.
Prone is in fact the only position where material determines the success, but it is not the trousers, it is the barrel/ammunition combination that can make a significant difference.
Standing
Estimated number of shooters able to score 390 or more per top competition: 2
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 390: 75% (the probability of scoring 400 with this performance is 0,00001, i.e. 0,001%)
Conclusion: There is no reason to fear many 400s per year even with trousers specified by the 1988 rule.
Kneeling
Estimated number of shooters able to score 396 or more per top competition: 2
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 396: 90% (the probability of scoring 400 with this performance is 0,0148, i.e. 1,48%)
Air Rifle
Estimated number of shooters able to score 396 or more per top competition: 6
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 396: 90% (the probability of scoring 400 with this performance is 0,0148, i.e. 1,48%)
Estimated number of shooters able to score 594 or more per top competition: 6
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 594: 90% (the probability of scoring 600 with this performance is 0,0018, i.e. 0,18%)
The Negative Impact of Permanent Change
Permanent changing the basic rule framework diminishes the value of world record in terms of historical comparability and also in terms of motivation. A good example is the free pistol discipline: the target, equipment and procedures did not change since 1900, therefore results from the past century are well comparable with today´s results. There was also an impressive progress, driven equally by excellent performance of
shooters (just remember the world records of Torsten Ullmann in 1936 and Alexander Melentiev in 1980) and improvements in the weapon technology. For this, free pistol is considered a traditional, classical discipline, it is shot in almost any member country of the ISSF and the
probability of removing it from the Olympic programme is rather low.
Another example provide moving target disciplines, nearly as old as Olympic shooting. In these disciplines, almost all changed since their first appearance on the international scene. There were changes in calibre, distance, targets (running deer, running boar, targets with aiming points), and procedures; almost any aspect changed with time, there were also periods of not having a dynamic rifle discipline on the Olympics. The perception of this discipline has therefore never left the area of something exotic, the area of trial outside the traditional mainstream. Although it found acceptance among the shooters, it did never manage to make its way to the public; there was simply no time to generate heroes, leading and reference personalities for upcoming generations. Consequence: the last appearance of running target on Olympic Games will be Athens 2004.
The smallbore free rifle and sport rifle are on the edge between tradition and laboratory trials. In the dominating 3x40 discipline, at least the distance, the calibre and the number of shots did not change. But there were already resets of the world records to zero and to a start from the scratch, most of them caused by target changes. Removing the shooting trousers means - in the spirit of fairness - another world record resetting. For the observer outside the sport - be it a common spectator, a sponsor or media - permanent change causes unnecessary confusion resulting into a choice of a more known, stable, comfortable environment.
Observers we are depending on need an environment that is predictable and easy to describe. It is not only an issue of spatial comparability, i.e. who is the best at the moment worldwide, but also an issue of historical comparability. Argumenting with artificial support means casting a shadow of non-fairness on those who competed in any competition since the first appearance of canvas trousers in mid 80´s and the last target change in 1989. Making this change means shorten the current historical period to only 16 years, which is less than the normal duration of a shooter´s career. The majority of the people shooting in late 80´s is still shooting today. Let us hear their opinion and compare the experience with that generation with the experience of the generation that shot in the 50´s, taking serious medical research into account. Gary Anderson writes that ISSF rules must "respect shooting´s history and heritage". In European terms, it is called "tradition", nowadays always connected with a positive image of keeping values like fairness, equality of chances, friendship, trust and support through generations preserved for our successors. It is our decision, if we offer the media and the outside world this image, or an image of shallow entertainment-oriented actionism, prone to change with every call for something more shiny.
Alternative solutions to split up the midfield
It is actually not the very top of the list that is causing result understandability and
communicability problems, but the midfield with up to 10 shooters occupying the same position with the same results. To make these differences more visible, two major approaches are possible. But do not forget the impact of the resulting necessary reset of valid world records.
Keeping the 10 size, reducing ring distance
This appears to be the universal solution for both smallbore and air rifle. Since the size of the 10 ring in smallbore is already on the physical limit of ammunition accuracy, reducing only the ring distance will result in lower scoring of shots that are obviously outside the group and that are most probably caused by an error in shooting technique.
Decimal scoring
Decimal scoring is possible only in the air rifle and air pistol disciplines, because of the precision of contemporary smallbore ammunition. The smallbore target 10 ring is already an area where random factors caused by ammunition may significantly influence the decimal part of the result. In other words, the precision of measurement allows for introducing a significant amount of noise in the result.
----------------
Financial Impact
The interpretation of the rule change proposal in terms of profit / loss draws the observations rather to the loss site. Although the probability of all following scenarios becoming all real at once is low, it leaves the shooter in a state experiencing a sudden loss of values which can not be compensated.
The Need for Lighter Rifles
One possible scenario is that due to the fact that the lower back will be more exposed to load, shooters start to look for lighter rifles, leaving their old rifles without any chance to be sold in an vanishing market. Rifles for young and beginning shooters, usually bought second-hand, will not be available that soon. A short term boom and long-term decline of business is the consequence for the rifle manufacturers.
Cost of Clothing Replacement
Custom-made jackets are fit to the shooter with trousers on; now at least rework will be necessary. This is a minor issue, involving only the loss of some time. The major issue is that the market for second-hand equipment, providing supply for junior and beginning shooters (and also shooters with lower income), will disappear completely for a few years. New jackets will not be bought for insecurity of change and for saving on investment; trousers will not be bought for obvious reasons.
Average high quality trousers change their owner 2-3 times per lifetime, same applies to jackets.
Wasting Values as Demotivating Factor
There must be a clarification in the meaning of "expensive equipment". Quality equipment might be expensive, but it is worth the money in terms of low wear-off, high robustness and low long-term change of mechanical characteristics. The willingness to invest in a good equipment is very high even in countries with low income population. Shooters are ready to pay the price of a good equipment even if it means to invest a multiple of their monthly income. They expect a long-term pay-off, that for the difference between a new price and the price of selling the equipment to the successor, they get a long period when they are able to train without any need for replacement or repair.
An abrupt change in the rules may destroy the motivation of these people; they do not repeat such investments twice or more. They will perceive the rule change as if someone had destroyed a valuable piece of their property. Without any solution for this target group, they become lost for the Olympic rifle shooting.
Loss of Business
There is a common misunderstanding that the proposed rule change follows the interest of the market and of the manufacturers. In fact, most of the clothing sales are jacket/trousers combinations, which will almost fall to a half from the very moment the decision will become official. The manufacturers will try to catch up with increasing jacket prices and introducing special shooting trousers, but the damage was already done. As a collateral damage, the jacket market is also expected to shrink.
For small companies relying on revenue will that mean to consider deep cuts on the cost side of running the business. Some may reduce employees, some may close. A consequence is a raised cost of purchase for shooters forced to order at remote locations. If this was meant by making shooting cheaper, it can go in the opposite direction.
----------------
Medical Opinions
There is no known research proving the hypothesis of protective support, this is a fact. But taking the non-existence of an evidence as a supportive argument for an action obviously raising the risk of pain or injury shall be considered non-professional and non-ethical. If there are numerous voices of shooters and coaches, even medical doctors pointing out this risk, the issue shall be handled with scientific approach providing a statement based on a well-designed research. In doubt always for the benefit of the shooter.
The strongest voices are heard from top-level national and international shooters. This is natural since they have to bear the immense load of a full-time preparation to top events.
Several hundred shots a day, tens of thousands shots per year is the price for being on the top and aiming for the highest awards. They do it for our sport. They deserve to be supported.
Please listen to them. There is no fear of losing world records. There are not that many world records as there are concerned shooters and coaches.
Thermal Protection
One major missed fact is that shooting trousers, as defined by the 1988 rule, provide thermal protection. With first competitions starting in early spring, it is inavoidable to train in the cold (indoor facilities are rather an exception). There is a permanent threat to the urogenital system, especially with female shooters. Trousers provide for some protection. Keeping this attribute on the list of requirements reopens the special trousers question again.
Extreme Positions
This area is the one where the most damage shall be attributed to bad coaching, as Gary Anderson put it right. But there is a danger that coaches do not change their view on the so-called extreme positions despite the proposed rule change. Experience shows that shooters are more ready to abandon these bad practices than coaches. Complaints of shooters on the proposed rule change is a signal that this situation might be on the edge and that more medical, orthopedical engagement in this area is required. Physicians are commonly accepted authority among coaches and shooters.
Prevention of permanent damage
Public discussion among shooters/coaches/medical doctors missing on:
Scoliosis
Misdevelopments of the L vertebrae
Other irreversible spinal column deformations
Hip bursitis
Inflammatory diseases
Learning from other sports
Weighlifting belts are for one single purpose: is it to increase performance? What looks obvious may have other reasons. Is there some research done on weightlifters? What can we learn from them?
Probable Reactions
Switching to Other Shooting Disciplines
Rifle shooters have the tendency to switch to following disciplines:
Benchrest
Muzzleloaders
Shotgun
Practical Rifle
Only one of them belongs to the Olympic family, but the probability of restarting a career is quite low. Other migration is directed outside the scope of ISSF disciplines.
Switching to Other Sports
Switching sport is highly probable, rifle shooters behave quite proactive. It is estimated that this probability almost equals the probability of switching to other shooting discipline.
------------
Legal Issues
Clarity of Formulating the Alternative
The major problem of the new rule proposal is the wording of Article 7.4.7.9.1 "No special trousers are permitted". This unprecise formulation allows for many interpretations and perhaps some more misenterpretations as well. In fact, if a shooter decides to use a particular pair of trousers for shooting, that pair becomes special from the very moment because of its dedication to a special purpose. The lack of specification of what might be generic trousers for shooting will bring even more problems and disputes as the competition officials have nowadays with substantially more precise defined equipment. We are entering a vicious circle which may show up at the end with some weird overspecification of a plain product for which guaranteeing compliance to the rules may be in the same order of magnitude on spent effort and funds as we have now with ordinary shooting trousers.
The question is what to choose for an alternative? Commercial off-the-hook products, if the specifications will be formulated this way, provide a tremendous variety on designs and materials, underlying permanent short-term saisonal changes driven by the fashion industry.
Custom-made products contradict the recent requirement of non-specialty. Following this path of development means opening a Pandora´s box of endless disputes, revoking nad rewriting rules and decisions, ending up with loss of authority necessary for long-term development of the sport.
The instability of the consequences of such a decision can be easily demonstrated on examples.
Training Pants
Training pants have generally no belt loops, so any added loops might shift the classification of the pants to the illegal "special shooting pants" category.
Material Specification
It is not clear what materials will be allowed and/or forbidden. There may be some considerations about slippery or sticking materials on a proper place allowing for better repeatability and stability of assuming the shooting position. It is also not clear what fastening devices (zippers, velcro etc.) and where will be allowed.
Popular Style Pants
If the use of casual style pants will be implicetly or explicitely allowed, the juries will have to cope with numerous and fast changing fashion trends. For example, recent popular style pants have zippers in the ankle area. Another example are cargo pockets on jeans providing the opportunity for carrying weights or some stiffening material. Low-rise tight jeans for women with the proposed belt would benefit the shooter even more than current pants and belt due to the optimal location of the support line. The consequence is that the equipment control, range officers and juries will have to spend at least the same (if not significantly higher) effort on supervising compliance of far more heterogenous pieces equipment to the rules and specifications.
The Impact on Behaviour
The rule change - if accepted - will not remove the shooters and manufacturers from the pursuit of their goals. Usually, designing a brand new rule bears an increased risk of introducing a legal loophole.
Shooters
Shooters always look for a good comfortable position. Experiments are to be expected in the area of jacket modifications and trousers modifications with major focus to the belt. After a short shock period juries will have to spend much more time to evaluate the legality of all new and modified equipment.
Manufacturers
After a short period of shock, new special jacket models with higher prices will appear on the market. "Special trousers" - inavoidable - will follow soon. One battle was lost, but the war is on instead of a constructive dialogue.
Probability of Litigation
There is a non-zero probability of a collective lawsuit of shooters (long-term) suffering from back pain, hip pain or injuries against the ISSF for being negligent in consulting the topic with specialist in medicine, orthopedy, with experienced coaches and other specialists; negligence means also not initiating an appropriate research.
There is a non-zero probability of a collective lawsuit of manufacturers (short-term) for compensation for loss of business. Sponsorship agreements might be reconsidered in some cases.
----------------------
The Decision Procedure
Transparency of Decisions
On 21st January, an article appeared on the ISSF News website, claiming the rule change as a common decision of the members of Rifle Committee, Technical Committee, Executive Committee and Administrative Council. Other official ISSF sources say (personal communication) that the final decision will be made at the ISSF Administrative Council meeting during the pre-Olympic World Cup in Athens this April.
There is really no need to present things as already decided.
The arguments provided by Gary Anderson are consistent and depict the considerations of persons in charge to run the ISSF and take care of the future of sport shooting as a member of the family of Olympic sports. But if decisions enter the private zone of shooters, officials and manufacturers making the sport run, they have to be incorporated in the dialogue preceding the decision or the process of drafting a proposal to the decision body. The membership base is not passive; it is also considered about the future of Olympic shooting. The worldwide membership is estimated to be in the order of magnitude of millions - the probability of finding talented, proactive, creative persons willing to help the ISSF to create a new vision for the future and also to draw the roadmap and milestones to get there is very high. The proposal is, instead changing the rules by trial and error, to invest some time into a dialogue about the future.
Gary Anderson provided an excellent presentation of how we got to where we are. The decision on where we should move from here shall to be made by all passengers on this boat. And the decisions shall not favorize only the 300+ athletes participating in the Olympic Games, but have to comply with the wishes of athletes preparing themselves in every remote village in the world. The ISSF shall not resemble a multinational stock company driven by shareholder value. It is based on membership and prevailing voluntary work. If share prices of a multinational company fall, employees are fired; if they rise again, employees are hired. But if members, which dedicated decades of voluntary, non-paid work to activities they love get frustrated, they will leave and will never come back. Multinational companies know that keeping a customer is 10 times easier than acquiring a new one.
All shooters, coaches, physicians and other shooting sport practitioners are and will be encouraged to send their opinion to the ISSF as well. The Administrative Council shall be supported in the decision by opinions of active members.
Closing the Communication Gap
Gary Anderson states in his article that the ISSF shall be "responsive to today´s athletes and trainers". Trainers and athletes invite the representatives ISSF to an open discussion in order to find a solution that will serve the positive development of rifle shooting and will respect the opinion of the majority of shooters, not the majority of a small group or a small forum. The ISSF should more open the decision processes to the membership in order to allow for more active participation on topics requiring a creative approach; decisions and proposals for decisions
shall be available to everybody to follow in the spirit of a modern open society. The technological means are already available.
---------------------
Proposal For Solution
To keep things in a constructive context, there is a proposal for solution. It will require some effort from the side of the Rifle Committee, the Technical Committee and the Judges Committee, but the outcome will solve the problem without any further escalation of the tension between rifle shooters and the ISSF. Moreover, the proposed procedure, if proved effective, may be used for handling any other necessary major changes in equipment.
Agreement on a Standard Pant Design
The solution can provided by thoroughly handling the issue, learning from past mistakes and misunderstandings. The proposal is to put representatives of elite shooters, experienced coaches, manufacturers and members of the Rifle Committee together in a professionally moderated workshop figuring out all issues in a direct communication. The presence of the Secretary General in the role of legal and media adviser would also help.
The one and only objective shall be a common agreement on a design for shooting pants that allows for fair competition while providing sufficient protection. (Example: Single thickness throughout all pants except double thickness on belt, "V" insert on back and fly opening only. Agreement on the maximum number of components/fields that will limit the number of seams. Placement and thickness of patches shall also be revised.) The proposals shall be sent in and redistributed early at least two months in advance to allow for eventual experiments. The entire procedure shall be transparent to the public and allow for input from any other shooter or
official.
Time of introduction of the new rule shall be agreed as well. If the new rule shall take effect in 2005, the "wearing out" period shall be extended to 2007. "Wearing out" means that the use of old double thickness type trousers still will be allowed provided the inner lining is cut out on places where single thickness will be prescribed in the future. Starting from 2008, only new type of trousers will be allowed. This will provide for continuity of usage and reducing the waste of resources, allowing the old type pants to be pased from top-level to regional type shooters and youth shooters like it was up till now.
Investing Effort in Measurement and Specification
Having an agreement on a standard pant design, there remains the open question of selecting of the most suitable set of parameters to be measured on the shooting trousers. The solution (extendable to the jacket in the future) can be a list of measuring points with indicated physical values and intervals to be measured. The measurement procedure itself shall be subject to standardisation as well. National federations may provide experts with adequate educational and practical background to participate on the process of designing the standard which will be later incorporated in the special technical rules ("Rifle Rules").
The necessary skill and responsibility for drawing these standards lies with the Rifle Committee; a close co-operation with the Judges Committee is recommended for the need of specifying the enforcement procedures.
Another measurement procedure may be to define a set of body postures and movements to be executed by the completely dressed shooter with all fasteners closed (sitting on a chair, raising arms, crossing arms...).
Better Supervision of Compliance
To avoid overcrowding the equipment control section at major competitions, the proposal is to assign the task of authorizing equipment for use in major competitions to selected individuals with an ISSF license, equipped with the appropriate approved measurement equipment and authorised to mark critical pieces (to be defined) of equipment with an ISSF seal. The presence of an ISSF seal (with a certain expiration date) will be then considered a sufficient indicator of compliance to the ISSF rules at any following major competition. For the case that it will not be possible to create a sufficiently covering network of regional approval points, such approval points (one person is sufficient) shall be established temporarily, but on a mandatory basis, on each World Cup, Continental Championships and World Championships. The Equipment Control on the Olympic Games shall also have this authority.
Another solution is to ask manufacturers to submit samples of new models to the Rifle Committee for homologation and approval. Then a particular model will be approved and released to the market provided that variable parameters (like button placement) may be checked anytime.
Consequent Enforcement of Rules
The shooters and officials shall be made aware that compliance to clothing rules will be consequently checked and enforced. The example of trigger weight checking in pistol disciplines shows us that it can be done with low effort and that acceptance can be obtained if it is for the purpose of ensuring fairness of competition. Provide for enforcement procedures allowing for checking at specified time spots during competition. Consider eventually changing the consequences of not complying to the rules.
Jaroslav Liptak
Chairman, Committee for Coaching and Methodology
Slovak Shooting Federation
Written in Kuortane/FIN, 22.01.2004
I apologize for the extraordinary length but Jaro is nothing if not thorough!!
Dear shooting friends,
Short before Christmas, I was approached by the ISSF secretariate to write my comments on the rule changes for 2005, prepared by the Ad-hoc Committee under the leadership of Mr. David Parish. I dedicated some time to discuss the topics with leading shooters, officials and medical experts in my home country. There are many changes that are to be considered, but, to remain focused on the topic of the article written by Gary Anderson, I am providing a collection of comments on the intended ban of shooting trousers.
I also used the opportunity to consult the topic with fellow shooting coaches attending the ISSF A coaching course in Kuortane, FIN during the past days. So these comments are not a lonely voice of a single person, but they are reflecting a collective experience on the topic.
Below is the text of the comments; the printed text was handed out personally to Mrs. Unni Nicolaysen, NOR, Vice-President of the ISSF during the last day of the ISSF A Class Coaches Course in Kuortane.
We have two opinions on the topic now. I am interpreting the question mark in Gary Anderson´s article title as an invitiation to a dialogue; therefore I urge all fellow shooters, coaches and officials to consider all pros and cons, to remain focused on facts and not to put extensive weight on the emotional side of the communication. Your comments are welcome!
Thank you for your attention.
Jaroslav Liptak
_____________________________________________________________
The Shooting Trousers Question
------------------------------
The "Artificial Support" Issue
Anything what is not actually a part of the shooter´s body provides artificial support. This paragraph is for years a source of misunderstandings since it allows for subjective decisions.
It shall be rewritten in a more specific way adressing rather the issue of immobilising a part of the shooter´s body, which is an extreme that shall be avoided. The mobility of a particular joint can be checked in a simple way requiring the shooter to do a special exercise without any need for measuring physical values.
It is a common myth that stiff equipment provides better stability. It might work for the lower scores, but for higher scores, it may be even contraindicative. In the end of the 90s, Russian top shooters observed and measured a phenomenon where new, stiffer equipment compared to old, used and expected to be soft equipment provided for worse stability (measured at the same shooter, same conditions, same setup). It is explained by new equipment´s better transferring of mechanical waves coming from heartbeat and tremor across the shooter. Shooters actually do not want stiff, rigid pieces of clothing. They want to have a comfortable shooting position.
Some support is necessary and inavoidable.
Shooting trousers provide support. This is a fact. The support is artificial, because they are man-made and are not an organic part of the body. This is another fact. The question is, what is bad on artificial support? Any trousers of any made will provide artificial support just because of their weight and their placement on the waist. The real issue is immobilizing; when an agreement on the definition of immobilizing is met, the term "artificial support" may be removed from the rules.
In fact, support allowing for more comfort in the shooting position is good. The shooter´s spinal column is exposed to repetitive asymetric load and despite compensation exercises, shooters will develop at least a spinal column deformation over years. If the back musculature is strong enough, the shooter can cope with this load. But if the skeleton and musculature are developing or aging, protective support may prevent larger deformations, even injuries.
We are proud of being able to bring generations on one firing line providing them equal chances. We are proud to have the oldest Olympic Games medailist and the largest age interval (16-72) of Olympic Games medailists. We do not want to restrict the success to a certain somatotype,
discriminating those who were born thinner, smaller, larger or disabled.
Young Shooters Proceed Faster
Protecting the health of an athlete is a prior task of a coach. Coaches are nowadays not sufficiently supported by research in the area of the impact of equipment characteristics on health anomalies of the back musculature, the spinal column and the hips. They have to rely on experience and evidence from their close neighbourhood. One positive aspect of research done is the emphasis on the consequences of load on young athletes, especially rifle shooters. We can believe that any federation has collected experience in that area and designed youth competitions accordingly. Despite of this, young shooters start to shoot standing with full-size rifle at a rather early age (13-14) if observed from the viewpoint of growth and even considering skeletal age. Any support that protects the areas in danger (lower back, hips) without interfering much with the performance will pay off years and decades later leaving the shooter without major wear and damage. Another observation is that younger shooters proceed faster in performance with 1988 rules trousers and need less load to reach an advanced level.
If there are considerations to leave trousers for junior shooters, there will be still a need to handle all issues related to trousers; it will result to more complicated rules featuring more exceptions, so why not let them in use for all?
Older Shooters Are Protected
The silent majority of shooters in Europe is above 30, even 40 (estimate, no figures available). Entering the so-called productive age, a very little percentage can maintain the original physical condition over years. The consequence is loss of strength, building fat, weaker musculature, loss of flexibility, mobility and regeneration ability. The probability of spinal column deformation or injury is considered to be higher with age when continuing with competitive rifle shooting. In order to assure participation in sport into a high age, the shooters must feel safe from a risk of pain or injury. It is not only the youth we shall take care of, it is the older population which passes the experience, does almost all the valuable voluntary work and, last but not least, brings in the money.
The problem with special trousers
It was already stated than any trousers provide artificial support. From the very moment of reserving a pair of trousers to shooting, they become special because of their use. But this is only playing with the terminology.
In fact, trousers are needed that provide protection from the cold when training prone in early spring. They must be easily to open in order to provide for ventilation if competing in midsummer, They must provide knee protection (see Gary Anderson´s commenting on shooters who experienced knee trauma from kneeling position practice before the 1988 ruling was introduced).
They must enable belt fastening. They must offer better positioning in kneeling having reinforcements on the butt. There may be a discussion about details and measures, but these are the basic requirements. The bottom line is that rifle shooters need special trousers.
---------------
The Image Issue
Much time was spent in the discussion about media appearance. Note that the clothing and the movements of the rifle shooter are also to be communicated as something special and typical for our sport. It is our choice if we do it in a friendly, assertive way or if we let the media uneducated and allow them incorrect interpretations.
The "Duck Walk"
Much time was spent on the story communicated along the shooting community about comments made by an unidentified IOC member on the strange walking of shooters. In order not to make this issue the centre of all discussion, there is only to be noted that if somebody is expressing
real concern, the answer shall be informative and competent to remove all doubts and leave a positive image; if there were only comments not based on knowledge, the answer shall be educative signalizing that we are proud of the tradition and the achievements we made and why things appear that way. Many other sports (cycling, skiing) show athletes with non-stardard walking when wearing equipment; it is understandable, normal and nobody cares that much. We shall signalize that this is normal instead of switching into anxious defensive mode.
Saving Shoes
It is obvious to any rifle shooter of any level, but it shall be noted that the careful walking is not caused by trousers. Shooters protect the soles of their shoes from bending that way. These shoes are produced in small series and the price reflects this fact. Saving equipment is a good thing, it shall be rewarded and not punished.
An alternative would be requiring the shooters put their shoes on after arriving to the firing line during the preparation time.
Hiding Some Irregularities
Although it did not happen in the recent years, especially after the West/East competition was de-escalated, there is still a possibility that the shooters in question may be hiding some illegal means of support. It is the duty of the Jury to observe all irregularities and to check the equipment any time during the competition. Increasing awareness of this right of the Jury will prevent the behaviour of the shooters from developing in the wrong direction.
Trousers are Fashionable
... but nobody cares yet. Shooters actually choose the colours very carefully, outer appearance is a major issue for almost everybody. The problem is with lack of pointing out this really aesthetic attribute of shooter´s clothing. Just think about figure skating, where the dress of
the competitor is commented as carefully as his/her performance. The ISSF shall benefit from this aesthetics, shooters have some free space to sell and they need it desperatedly.
What is the Alternative Appearance?
If not allowed to use shooting trousers as specified by the 1988 rules, shooters will look for alternatives. The determining factor will be functional, i.e. pants providing the most support under new rules (there will be always some support), the lowest friction in the kneeling position and the best protection against thermal anomalies. In order to match all these requirements, the result will be custom-made or specially adapted pants, which can be considered special pants in the sense of the restricting rule and therefore provide for more dispute. Any other pants, after modifications done mostly by the shooter, will probably not guarantee an appearance communicable to the media and public. The solution will be then provided by the industry, closing the circle.
Training Pants
Training pants are generally not designed for integrating a belt and providing for sufficient knee protection. Thermal protection will limit the choice even more. The result will be customized and custom made shooting pants.
Regular Pants
Regular casual pants will be probably the most frequent basis to choose from when looking for replacement. Another domain of choice will be military pants. Both look in combination with a multicoloured shooting jacket very strange, possibly generating even more comments from IOC
members looking for aesthetical appearance of sport.
-----------------
The Results Issue
It is no doubt that the equipment contributes to the result. Besides the fact, that no comparative study was published yet, the empirical evidence says that the use of trousers (as specified by the rules) in standing rises the performance by an one-digit amount of points if compared to the equipment common in the 70s. But coming to a performance basis good enough to provide for performance in the level of world record takes - with or without 1988 regulation trousers - more than six years of intensive training at least.
Results close to a maximum are more exciting that results requiring some basic arithmetics like average shot value in order to come to a comprehensible value of the shooter´s performance. Yes, maximum results are probable and already here, but the probability of reaching them is rather overestimated and based on subjective perceptions rather than on statistics. The shooting sport can live with one to two instances of an absolute score per year, and this level was not yet reached.
The probability of an absolute score
To calculate probabilities right, results from 1989 from all major competitions supervised by the ISSF are required. These data was not available at the moment of writing this comment, so the following calculations shall be considered to be best possible estimates.
For the estimation of the probability, following values are taken into account:
- The approximate number of shooters performing in the performance class near the world record
- The probability of hitting a ten by a shooter from this class
- The total number of starts of these shooters in competitions allowing for setting up the world record.
These estimations shall be replaced with statistical information based on real data when available and ready.
Prone
Estimated number of shooters able to score 594 or more per top competition: 20
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 594: 90% (the probability of scoring 600 with this performance is 0,0018, i.e. 0,18%)
In three position, the 40 prone part provides no problem since the score is taken from all three positions and medals are awarded for the sum. In fact, it can be appealing to the media if interpreted properly. Situations like unexpected point loss of a favorite in that "easy" position may add dramatism to the qualification report.
Prone is in fact the only position where material determines the success, but it is not the trousers, it is the barrel/ammunition combination that can make a significant difference.
Standing
Estimated number of shooters able to score 390 or more per top competition: 2
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 390: 75% (the probability of scoring 400 with this performance is 0,00001, i.e. 0,001%)
Conclusion: There is no reason to fear many 400s per year even with trousers specified by the 1988 rule.
Kneeling
Estimated number of shooters able to score 396 or more per top competition: 2
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 396: 90% (the probability of scoring 400 with this performance is 0,0148, i.e. 1,48%)
Air Rifle
Estimated number of shooters able to score 396 or more per top competition: 6
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 396: 90% (the probability of scoring 400 with this performance is 0,0148, i.e. 1,48%)
Estimated number of shooters able to score 594 or more per top competition: 6
Average number of top competitions per year: 7
Probability of hitting a 10 with a score of 594: 90% (the probability of scoring 600 with this performance is 0,0018, i.e. 0,18%)
The Negative Impact of Permanent Change
Permanent changing the basic rule framework diminishes the value of world record in terms of historical comparability and also in terms of motivation. A good example is the free pistol discipline: the target, equipment and procedures did not change since 1900, therefore results from the past century are well comparable with today´s results. There was also an impressive progress, driven equally by excellent performance of
shooters (just remember the world records of Torsten Ullmann in 1936 and Alexander Melentiev in 1980) and improvements in the weapon technology. For this, free pistol is considered a traditional, classical discipline, it is shot in almost any member country of the ISSF and the
probability of removing it from the Olympic programme is rather low.
Another example provide moving target disciplines, nearly as old as Olympic shooting. In these disciplines, almost all changed since their first appearance on the international scene. There were changes in calibre, distance, targets (running deer, running boar, targets with aiming points), and procedures; almost any aspect changed with time, there were also periods of not having a dynamic rifle discipline on the Olympics. The perception of this discipline has therefore never left the area of something exotic, the area of trial outside the traditional mainstream. Although it found acceptance among the shooters, it did never manage to make its way to the public; there was simply no time to generate heroes, leading and reference personalities for upcoming generations. Consequence: the last appearance of running target on Olympic Games will be Athens 2004.
The smallbore free rifle and sport rifle are on the edge between tradition and laboratory trials. In the dominating 3x40 discipline, at least the distance, the calibre and the number of shots did not change. But there were already resets of the world records to zero and to a start from the scratch, most of them caused by target changes. Removing the shooting trousers means - in the spirit of fairness - another world record resetting. For the observer outside the sport - be it a common spectator, a sponsor or media - permanent change causes unnecessary confusion resulting into a choice of a more known, stable, comfortable environment.
Observers we are depending on need an environment that is predictable and easy to describe. It is not only an issue of spatial comparability, i.e. who is the best at the moment worldwide, but also an issue of historical comparability. Argumenting with artificial support means casting a shadow of non-fairness on those who competed in any competition since the first appearance of canvas trousers in mid 80´s and the last target change in 1989. Making this change means shorten the current historical period to only 16 years, which is less than the normal duration of a shooter´s career. The majority of the people shooting in late 80´s is still shooting today. Let us hear their opinion and compare the experience with that generation with the experience of the generation that shot in the 50´s, taking serious medical research into account. Gary Anderson writes that ISSF rules must "respect shooting´s history and heritage". In European terms, it is called "tradition", nowadays always connected with a positive image of keeping values like fairness, equality of chances, friendship, trust and support through generations preserved for our successors. It is our decision, if we offer the media and the outside world this image, or an image of shallow entertainment-oriented actionism, prone to change with every call for something more shiny.
Alternative solutions to split up the midfield
It is actually not the very top of the list that is causing result understandability and
communicability problems, but the midfield with up to 10 shooters occupying the same position with the same results. To make these differences more visible, two major approaches are possible. But do not forget the impact of the resulting necessary reset of valid world records.
Keeping the 10 size, reducing ring distance
This appears to be the universal solution for both smallbore and air rifle. Since the size of the 10 ring in smallbore is already on the physical limit of ammunition accuracy, reducing only the ring distance will result in lower scoring of shots that are obviously outside the group and that are most probably caused by an error in shooting technique.
Decimal scoring
Decimal scoring is possible only in the air rifle and air pistol disciplines, because of the precision of contemporary smallbore ammunition. The smallbore target 10 ring is already an area where random factors caused by ammunition may significantly influence the decimal part of the result. In other words, the precision of measurement allows for introducing a significant amount of noise in the result.
----------------
Financial Impact
The interpretation of the rule change proposal in terms of profit / loss draws the observations rather to the loss site. Although the probability of all following scenarios becoming all real at once is low, it leaves the shooter in a state experiencing a sudden loss of values which can not be compensated.
The Need for Lighter Rifles
One possible scenario is that due to the fact that the lower back will be more exposed to load, shooters start to look for lighter rifles, leaving their old rifles without any chance to be sold in an vanishing market. Rifles for young and beginning shooters, usually bought second-hand, will not be available that soon. A short term boom and long-term decline of business is the consequence for the rifle manufacturers.
Cost of Clothing Replacement
Custom-made jackets are fit to the shooter with trousers on; now at least rework will be necessary. This is a minor issue, involving only the loss of some time. The major issue is that the market for second-hand equipment, providing supply for junior and beginning shooters (and also shooters with lower income), will disappear completely for a few years. New jackets will not be bought for insecurity of change and for saving on investment; trousers will not be bought for obvious reasons.
Average high quality trousers change their owner 2-3 times per lifetime, same applies to jackets.
Wasting Values as Demotivating Factor
There must be a clarification in the meaning of "expensive equipment". Quality equipment might be expensive, but it is worth the money in terms of low wear-off, high robustness and low long-term change of mechanical characteristics. The willingness to invest in a good equipment is very high even in countries with low income population. Shooters are ready to pay the price of a good equipment even if it means to invest a multiple of their monthly income. They expect a long-term pay-off, that for the difference between a new price and the price of selling the equipment to the successor, they get a long period when they are able to train without any need for replacement or repair.
An abrupt change in the rules may destroy the motivation of these people; they do not repeat such investments twice or more. They will perceive the rule change as if someone had destroyed a valuable piece of their property. Without any solution for this target group, they become lost for the Olympic rifle shooting.
Loss of Business
There is a common misunderstanding that the proposed rule change follows the interest of the market and of the manufacturers. In fact, most of the clothing sales are jacket/trousers combinations, which will almost fall to a half from the very moment the decision will become official. The manufacturers will try to catch up with increasing jacket prices and introducing special shooting trousers, but the damage was already done. As a collateral damage, the jacket market is also expected to shrink.
For small companies relying on revenue will that mean to consider deep cuts on the cost side of running the business. Some may reduce employees, some may close. A consequence is a raised cost of purchase for shooters forced to order at remote locations. If this was meant by making shooting cheaper, it can go in the opposite direction.
----------------
Medical Opinions
There is no known research proving the hypothesis of protective support, this is a fact. But taking the non-existence of an evidence as a supportive argument for an action obviously raising the risk of pain or injury shall be considered non-professional and non-ethical. If there are numerous voices of shooters and coaches, even medical doctors pointing out this risk, the issue shall be handled with scientific approach providing a statement based on a well-designed research. In doubt always for the benefit of the shooter.
The strongest voices are heard from top-level national and international shooters. This is natural since they have to bear the immense load of a full-time preparation to top events.
Several hundred shots a day, tens of thousands shots per year is the price for being on the top and aiming for the highest awards. They do it for our sport. They deserve to be supported.
Please listen to them. There is no fear of losing world records. There are not that many world records as there are concerned shooters and coaches.
Thermal Protection
One major missed fact is that shooting trousers, as defined by the 1988 rule, provide thermal protection. With first competitions starting in early spring, it is inavoidable to train in the cold (indoor facilities are rather an exception). There is a permanent threat to the urogenital system, especially with female shooters. Trousers provide for some protection. Keeping this attribute on the list of requirements reopens the special trousers question again.
Extreme Positions
This area is the one where the most damage shall be attributed to bad coaching, as Gary Anderson put it right. But there is a danger that coaches do not change their view on the so-called extreme positions despite the proposed rule change. Experience shows that shooters are more ready to abandon these bad practices than coaches. Complaints of shooters on the proposed rule change is a signal that this situation might be on the edge and that more medical, orthopedical engagement in this area is required. Physicians are commonly accepted authority among coaches and shooters.
Prevention of permanent damage
Public discussion among shooters/coaches/medical doctors missing on:
Scoliosis
Misdevelopments of the L vertebrae
Other irreversible spinal column deformations
Hip bursitis
Inflammatory diseases
Learning from other sports
Weighlifting belts are for one single purpose: is it to increase performance? What looks obvious may have other reasons. Is there some research done on weightlifters? What can we learn from them?
Probable Reactions
Switching to Other Shooting Disciplines
Rifle shooters have the tendency to switch to following disciplines:
Benchrest
Muzzleloaders
Shotgun
Practical Rifle
Only one of them belongs to the Olympic family, but the probability of restarting a career is quite low. Other migration is directed outside the scope of ISSF disciplines.
Switching to Other Sports
Switching sport is highly probable, rifle shooters behave quite proactive. It is estimated that this probability almost equals the probability of switching to other shooting discipline.
------------
Legal Issues
Clarity of Formulating the Alternative
The major problem of the new rule proposal is the wording of Article 7.4.7.9.1 "No special trousers are permitted". This unprecise formulation allows for many interpretations and perhaps some more misenterpretations as well. In fact, if a shooter decides to use a particular pair of trousers for shooting, that pair becomes special from the very moment because of its dedication to a special purpose. The lack of specification of what might be generic trousers for shooting will bring even more problems and disputes as the competition officials have nowadays with substantially more precise defined equipment. We are entering a vicious circle which may show up at the end with some weird overspecification of a plain product for which guaranteeing compliance to the rules may be in the same order of magnitude on spent effort and funds as we have now with ordinary shooting trousers.
The question is what to choose for an alternative? Commercial off-the-hook products, if the specifications will be formulated this way, provide a tremendous variety on designs and materials, underlying permanent short-term saisonal changes driven by the fashion industry.
Custom-made products contradict the recent requirement of non-specialty. Following this path of development means opening a Pandora´s box of endless disputes, revoking nad rewriting rules and decisions, ending up with loss of authority necessary for long-term development of the sport.
The instability of the consequences of such a decision can be easily demonstrated on examples.
Training Pants
Training pants have generally no belt loops, so any added loops might shift the classification of the pants to the illegal "special shooting pants" category.
Material Specification
It is not clear what materials will be allowed and/or forbidden. There may be some considerations about slippery or sticking materials on a proper place allowing for better repeatability and stability of assuming the shooting position. It is also not clear what fastening devices (zippers, velcro etc.) and where will be allowed.
Popular Style Pants
If the use of casual style pants will be implicetly or explicitely allowed, the juries will have to cope with numerous and fast changing fashion trends. For example, recent popular style pants have zippers in the ankle area. Another example are cargo pockets on jeans providing the opportunity for carrying weights or some stiffening material. Low-rise tight jeans for women with the proposed belt would benefit the shooter even more than current pants and belt due to the optimal location of the support line. The consequence is that the equipment control, range officers and juries will have to spend at least the same (if not significantly higher) effort on supervising compliance of far more heterogenous pieces equipment to the rules and specifications.
The Impact on Behaviour
The rule change - if accepted - will not remove the shooters and manufacturers from the pursuit of their goals. Usually, designing a brand new rule bears an increased risk of introducing a legal loophole.
Shooters
Shooters always look for a good comfortable position. Experiments are to be expected in the area of jacket modifications and trousers modifications with major focus to the belt. After a short shock period juries will have to spend much more time to evaluate the legality of all new and modified equipment.
Manufacturers
After a short period of shock, new special jacket models with higher prices will appear on the market. "Special trousers" - inavoidable - will follow soon. One battle was lost, but the war is on instead of a constructive dialogue.
Probability of Litigation
There is a non-zero probability of a collective lawsuit of shooters (long-term) suffering from back pain, hip pain or injuries against the ISSF for being negligent in consulting the topic with specialist in medicine, orthopedy, with experienced coaches and other specialists; negligence means also not initiating an appropriate research.
There is a non-zero probability of a collective lawsuit of manufacturers (short-term) for compensation for loss of business. Sponsorship agreements might be reconsidered in some cases.
----------------------
The Decision Procedure
Transparency of Decisions
On 21st January, an article appeared on the ISSF News website, claiming the rule change as a common decision of the members of Rifle Committee, Technical Committee, Executive Committee and Administrative Council. Other official ISSF sources say (personal communication) that the final decision will be made at the ISSF Administrative Council meeting during the pre-Olympic World Cup in Athens this April.
There is really no need to present things as already decided.
The arguments provided by Gary Anderson are consistent and depict the considerations of persons in charge to run the ISSF and take care of the future of sport shooting as a member of the family of Olympic sports. But if decisions enter the private zone of shooters, officials and manufacturers making the sport run, they have to be incorporated in the dialogue preceding the decision or the process of drafting a proposal to the decision body. The membership base is not passive; it is also considered about the future of Olympic shooting. The worldwide membership is estimated to be in the order of magnitude of millions - the probability of finding talented, proactive, creative persons willing to help the ISSF to create a new vision for the future and also to draw the roadmap and milestones to get there is very high. The proposal is, instead changing the rules by trial and error, to invest some time into a dialogue about the future.
Gary Anderson provided an excellent presentation of how we got to where we are. The decision on where we should move from here shall to be made by all passengers on this boat. And the decisions shall not favorize only the 300+ athletes participating in the Olympic Games, but have to comply with the wishes of athletes preparing themselves in every remote village in the world. The ISSF shall not resemble a multinational stock company driven by shareholder value. It is based on membership and prevailing voluntary work. If share prices of a multinational company fall, employees are fired; if they rise again, employees are hired. But if members, which dedicated decades of voluntary, non-paid work to activities they love get frustrated, they will leave and will never come back. Multinational companies know that keeping a customer is 10 times easier than acquiring a new one.
All shooters, coaches, physicians and other shooting sport practitioners are and will be encouraged to send their opinion to the ISSF as well. The Administrative Council shall be supported in the decision by opinions of active members.
Closing the Communication Gap
Gary Anderson states in his article that the ISSF shall be "responsive to today´s athletes and trainers". Trainers and athletes invite the representatives ISSF to an open discussion in order to find a solution that will serve the positive development of rifle shooting and will respect the opinion of the majority of shooters, not the majority of a small group or a small forum. The ISSF should more open the decision processes to the membership in order to allow for more active participation on topics requiring a creative approach; decisions and proposals for decisions
shall be available to everybody to follow in the spirit of a modern open society. The technological means are already available.
---------------------
Proposal For Solution
To keep things in a constructive context, there is a proposal for solution. It will require some effort from the side of the Rifle Committee, the Technical Committee and the Judges Committee, but the outcome will solve the problem without any further escalation of the tension between rifle shooters and the ISSF. Moreover, the proposed procedure, if proved effective, may be used for handling any other necessary major changes in equipment.
Agreement on a Standard Pant Design
The solution can provided by thoroughly handling the issue, learning from past mistakes and misunderstandings. The proposal is to put representatives of elite shooters, experienced coaches, manufacturers and members of the Rifle Committee together in a professionally moderated workshop figuring out all issues in a direct communication. The presence of the Secretary General in the role of legal and media adviser would also help.
The one and only objective shall be a common agreement on a design for shooting pants that allows for fair competition while providing sufficient protection. (Example: Single thickness throughout all pants except double thickness on belt, "V" insert on back and fly opening only. Agreement on the maximum number of components/fields that will limit the number of seams. Placement and thickness of patches shall also be revised.) The proposals shall be sent in and redistributed early at least two months in advance to allow for eventual experiments. The entire procedure shall be transparent to the public and allow for input from any other shooter or
official.
Time of introduction of the new rule shall be agreed as well. If the new rule shall take effect in 2005, the "wearing out" period shall be extended to 2007. "Wearing out" means that the use of old double thickness type trousers still will be allowed provided the inner lining is cut out on places where single thickness will be prescribed in the future. Starting from 2008, only new type of trousers will be allowed. This will provide for continuity of usage and reducing the waste of resources, allowing the old type pants to be pased from top-level to regional type shooters and youth shooters like it was up till now.
Investing Effort in Measurement and Specification
Having an agreement on a standard pant design, there remains the open question of selecting of the most suitable set of parameters to be measured on the shooting trousers. The solution (extendable to the jacket in the future) can be a list of measuring points with indicated physical values and intervals to be measured. The measurement procedure itself shall be subject to standardisation as well. National federations may provide experts with adequate educational and practical background to participate on the process of designing the standard which will be later incorporated in the special technical rules ("Rifle Rules").
The necessary skill and responsibility for drawing these standards lies with the Rifle Committee; a close co-operation with the Judges Committee is recommended for the need of specifying the enforcement procedures.
Another measurement procedure may be to define a set of body postures and movements to be executed by the completely dressed shooter with all fasteners closed (sitting on a chair, raising arms, crossing arms...).
Better Supervision of Compliance
To avoid overcrowding the equipment control section at major competitions, the proposal is to assign the task of authorizing equipment for use in major competitions to selected individuals with an ISSF license, equipped with the appropriate approved measurement equipment and authorised to mark critical pieces (to be defined) of equipment with an ISSF seal. The presence of an ISSF seal (with a certain expiration date) will be then considered a sufficient indicator of compliance to the ISSF rules at any following major competition. For the case that it will not be possible to create a sufficiently covering network of regional approval points, such approval points (one person is sufficient) shall be established temporarily, but on a mandatory basis, on each World Cup, Continental Championships and World Championships. The Equipment Control on the Olympic Games shall also have this authority.
Another solution is to ask manufacturers to submit samples of new models to the Rifle Committee for homologation and approval. Then a particular model will be approved and released to the market provided that variable parameters (like button placement) may be checked anytime.
Consequent Enforcement of Rules
The shooters and officials shall be made aware that compliance to clothing rules will be consequently checked and enforced. The example of trigger weight checking in pistol disciplines shows us that it can be done with low effort and that acceptance can be obtained if it is for the purpose of ensuring fairness of competition. Provide for enforcement procedures allowing for checking at specified time spots during competition. Consider eventually changing the consequences of not complying to the rules.
Jaroslav Liptak
Chairman, Committee for Coaching and Methodology
Slovak Shooting Federation
Written in Kuortane/FIN, 22.01.2004
-
guest
The real problem
Focus on removing the gerontocracy and you won't have to continually deal with this kind of thing.