TargetTalk

Brooks: I shall be glad to respond to your inquiry, but I feel I owe a fair answer to jhmartin's question first :-).

Alexander

Spencer wrote:Despite the availability of ranges, Rapid Fire Pistol is not what anyone would call popular. (...)
Unfortunately, these days most club shooters perceive RFP as being too hard. The need for specialised (.22 Short) pistols with wrap around grips has gone - so it ain't the equipment...

Rapid fire pistol is almost dead here (in spite or because of Ralf Schumann ;->), though *every* 25 metres pistol stand has the moving targets (used for 94-98% sport pistol .22 lr and centrefire, 5-2% standard pistol, and not more than 0,5% rapidfire). People are sceptical whether the recent rule changes will revive it; personally I doubt it.

Alexander

This is a little bit of ramble and rant, so take it at that.

Precision shooting in pistol is not an easy sport in which to achieve success (Obvious Man strikes again). Across the disciplines it takes time, money, facilities, coaching and dedication. Darn few individuals and/or clubs can afford the above, rather putting focus on "scoot and shoot" (sometimes called "spray and pray") games that are more recreational and profitable to the organization.

Let me be sure and add that the highly ranked practitioners of these games arrive at their success by the same means that precision shooters arrive - hard work, practice and discipline, and are accomplished to the same level.

Many of my friends and I have competed in and had a lot of fun at SASS, IPSC/USPSA and IDPA, to name a few. The attraction is the ability to get an adequate achievement in a short time for the average shooter.

Compare those to any of our precision pistol disciplines - Free Pistol (deity help the first timer), Standard, Center Fire or Rapid Fire and the quick satisfaction factor approaches zero.

My home club has started to attract more precision shooters by combining so-called short line (15 and 25 yds) with NRA long line (25 and 50 yds) and are finding a small migration to the more difficult distances.

Finally, there is simple lack of interest, perhaps due to lack of exposure... and I know of no easy answers there.

If you have read this far - thanks for the tolerance.

Tillman
Lifetime Sharpshooter (not Expert, Master or AA) in all Disciplines above as well as Skeet, Trap, International Skeet, Bunker, Double trap, FITASC and anything else that puts lead downrange.

Well, RF IS hard. Hard to shoot well, at least.

But to me, that's part of the challenge.

I'll add that the current rules make RF a pain in the neck to score...shoot a series, go down and score. You spend more time scoring than shooting, unless you have the Suis-Ascor targets. I'd like to see the rules modified to have a full half-course shot before each scoring session, just to speed things up a bit.

But here in the US, it's nearly impossible to train. Target bays are few and far between...I think the nearest to my home is about 400 miles away. And unless you own a personal range, you don't dare buy something and leave it up...the duffers will shoot it to shreds in a weekend or two.

I wish I had an answer. I love RF, but it seems to be in a slow decline.

Mike M. wrote:I'll add that the current rules make RF a pain in the neck to score...shoot a series, go down and score. You spend more time scoring than shooting, unless you have the Suis-Ascor targets. I'd like to see the rules modified to have a full half-course shot before each scoring session, just to speed things up a bit.
.

Mike,
There's nothing to stop competition organisers etc modifying the rules to suit their circumstances, they just won't be able to claim compliance with ISSF rules, but that doesn't matter in the vast majority of cases. As an example a club shoot we did used to shoot both 8 sec series then score etc...

Rob.

An opinion on shooting sports in general, at least my perspective of the USA.

1) Air Rifle, both 3-P and INTL is holding it's own, primarily from the JROTC involvement

2) Smallbore rifle ... fading? Maybe Air Rifle helping it hold it's own. Harder and harder to find indoor ranges. JROTC is out of it here ... most of those ranges are now either storage rooms or locked permanently

3) Pistol programs .... see most of the previous posts

4) Shotgun ..... growing

Now why #4 and the growth in pistol programs such as IPSC, SASS, etc.? Could it be the reactive targets. Not that I advocate a change, but maybe it's a deeper issue that today many folks want to see an instant substantive result. As many have posted before, in this type of shooting (1-4) to be national/world class it takes much work.

If you walk thru a high school and see a 6'3" freshman .... what sport do you think of? If you see a kid standing perfectly still in the hallway, I know you don't automatically think "Rifle or Pistol Team!". OK, maybe there is some talent involved in shooting (especially the clay target sports), but in all cases there is primarily lots of work involved.

The X-Box generation is here

[quote="SpencerIt runs deeper than this - there must be 100+ ranges in Australia with 25m turning targets, + the Sydney Olympic range with Sius ascor and another hopefully to come on line with a set of refurbished Spieth electronics.[/quote]

Although there are hundreds (?) of ranges with turning targets (50 feet and/or 25 yards) in the US, they don't have the ISSF-approved spacing between targets. Although one could run a RF match on these targets it wouldn't be in compliance with ISSF stanards. Even if the NRA adopted a RF course of fire there would be a lot of variability in the target spacing from range to range, and the indoor 50' spacing would not be proportional with the outdoor 25 yard spacing. Additionally, with the paper targets that virtually all of these ranges use the scoring/pasting between strings would be so time consuming that a lot of potential participants would probably say forget it.

I'll admit that this is basically a bad excuse. I think the larger issue is the steady decrease in the number of one-handed-shooters participating in competitions (both international and bullseye). Perhaps if the NRA introduced their own version of RF it might help both the ISSF discipline as well as generate more interest in the shooting sports among casual bullseye participants.

jhmartin wrote:

attitude adjustment

Hmmmm ... I'll ask you to elaborate ... I'll add a bit too.

Yes. And I have to apologize for not answering as swiftly as I should have - sorry!

In lieu of keeping you waiting longer, and of not explaining my point, here at least two preliminary remarks:

0. Training for children and juveniles must be *very* different from adult competitive shooters. Not only in quantity, but also in quality.

1. We may deeply differ indeed as far as "spreading oneself" and applied pedagogics in this respect be concerned. I see over-focussing in young age as the bane of pedagogics, you may see it just reversely.

We may also have very different concepts of reward and success experiences. A training day without at least a small reward or subjective success experience is wasted on young shooters (and, let's be frank, on quite a number of adults too: see corollary no. 1a below). Do you think that they will show up the next Tuesday evening with renewed vigour and zeal, to "make up" for the past blemish? NO ! They will rather wish to skip it altogether and to seek an excuse instead.

1a. "Beatings will continue until morale improves" (Royal Navy of Hornblower's times, apocryphal but credible)

2. One or two aspects of what I feel are indirectly addressed quite lucidly by Charles Reed in his explanation of Progressive Position Pistol, though I feel he exaggerates as far as the desastrous health aspects of raising a heaaaaaavy pistol for young overfed Americans are concerned:

http://www.usashooting.com/youthPistol.php

3. I quite liked this insightful thread of the past (two pages):

http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?t=15534

Alexander

Thanks Alexander ..... this is actually turning into a good discussion

0. Training for children and juveniles must be *very* different from adult competitive shooters. Not only in quantity, but also in quality.

I think we totally agree here. I use a lot of the "trinkets & trash" technique ... well mostly the trinkets.
I start kids off on their first day to the range with an NSSF program, just to get the feel of shooting a competition rifle ("Hey cool sights"). This program rewards shooters with a patch if they achieve 35 points in 5 shots. http://www.nssf.org/JrUSA/
I've never had a kid not make the score. They take that patch home with the target. (Thanks NSSF!)
Next, USA Shooting has a great great program that my 4-H shooters use. It is called the "Passport" program that is pins that the shooters receive as they make their way thru the progression of skills and shooting (self-)discipline. This program keeps the kids going , really until they reach the level (500-520) when they begin to really understand (even if they don't know the word) intrensic motivation.
I'm also lucky that I'm fairly close to the OTC in Colo Springs. I always go to the gift shop and grab a bunch of their $3-$5 tee shirts and we use those in handicap matches (usually a 3x10 where they take their last month average, subtract from 300, and they add that on to their score .... They young-uns like it when they beat the precision shooters.

So here we agree .... it must be fun and they must be rewarded .. things and words.

1. .... I see over-focussing in young age as the bane of pedagogics, you may see it just reversely.

Wow, I sure do. It may be a cultural thing, but kids here in the USA have so many options and many try to do it all. If they are in 4-H (as all of mine are) the list is darn near endless... Dog School, Horse School, meat goats, dairy goats, steers, dairy cows, pigs, welding, shooting (Archery, rifle, pistol, shotgun, muzzleloading), sewing, (that's just some of 4-H), then.... baseball, football, track, cross country, soccer (you know ... the other football), tae-kwon-do, spelling bees .... (Mike Schroeder is laughing here).
I don't force them into shooting, but I do let them know that in order to shoot those scores that get you medals in the tournaments, one practice a month won't cut it. I have no problem if they are the plinkers, they are as welcome as the rest (our pellets and ammo are paid for by our FNRA grants). They can even fill out the teams at our competitions.

1a. "Beatings will continue until morale improves"

I share your sentiment. I'll ask a parent to wait in a car if I see this. No excuse for this. I know I have had some shooters in the past showing up to our practices as an escape from this type of family discipline, and it breaks my heart. Sorry if I gave this impression. (BTW, the Hornblower novels are some of my FAVORITES! ... The made for TV movies were pretty good too)

2. One or two aspects of what I feel are indirectly addressed quite lucidly by Charles Reed in his explanation of Progressive Position Pistol ...

While Charlie and I don't interact much, I consider him one of my mentors. He helps run a great program at the OTC that we go up and shoot his matches if we can. I'm not really a pistol guy, but I know that the IZH-46 is way too heavy for my younger (<15 years) shooters. We have some of the Tau-7 Jr's and even then, my youngest shooters do the supported thing.

So ... all in all, if you were to visit my program and practices, you would feel very comfortable I think. Thx for the reply ... Joel

Check out:
http://www.VC4HSS.com
We also hold "special" practices .... this is a photo from a Halloween shoot where they had to dress up & shoot:
http://www.vc4hss.com/Air_Rifle/2007_Re ... ostume.jpg

jhmartin wrote:Thanks Alexander ..... this is actually turning into a good discussion

Dear Joel, thanks for your long and fruitful reply. I think that a continuation of this discussion (in good spitit, while pointing out the now well visible possible agreements, and the possibly remaining differences of opinions, could be quite fruitful, though our perspectives will be slightly different. Different not only due to the background (Old Europe vs. New Bush USA, maybe different types of youth), but also due to the individual perspective.

a) Our local club, where I compete myself under ISSF rules, has a small youth section, but nothing much to speak of (which may change if we re-activate the many decades-old and long unused large outdoor 10 metres range, and convert it for 10 metres action/falling plate shooting or soft air IPSC).

b) I am not a coach, unlike you, However, in my shooting federation (a smaller one, only about 12,500 shooters, shooting mostly bigbore), where I hold some office within the presiding council and as legal officer, youth work has received an amount of priority in the last 7 years and can now show some successes. I am thus much concerned with building a broad base, garnering wide general support for the shooting sports, and eventually distilling a few more excellent shooters out of such a base. Leisure shooting is not a bad word here (not identical with "plinking" in the US sense though), but the competitive aspect is also nurtured. Many of our shooters are double members in an ISSF-affiliated club and federation.

c) When traing children and juveniles, shooting is usually one aspect in a youngster's life besides many other aspects, which at times may reasonably claim priority (that certainly includes love life). You have yourself stressed the important of school, with good reason, and we certainly agree there.

A typical "trainer's disease" (more endemic with youth trainers than with adult trainers) is the over-taxation of one's activity. Focus is important, but the focus of a young person will reasonably be different. Also, we have far too much competition in out society (notably in the US environment, where it has gained the rank of an over-arching and crushing ideology, often adorned with the epithet "aggressive", and encompassing all aspects of life), and far too little personality-building, culture and leisure. Sport must counter-act this ideology of competition. My position. :-)

d) I fully expect the majority of new shooters (and especially of new young shooters) to drop out or become only "occasionally active" after some time. That is okay. Fully okay, and no reason for coach frustration. What we need, are more gun-owners, more people with a relaxed or even positive attitude towards firearms. I make a point of taking numerous of my GF's university acquaintances to the range (mostly women, because they have more interest). Without an exception, all (also and especially the more progressive and liberal ones, as expectable) were curious and open-minded, and eager to try it out.
One young lady, at the time studying Greek, Arabic and Philosophy, with some personal leftist punk background (who thus was much more likeable than a conservative bimbo, for my taste), progressed within one afternoon from .22 revolver to .22 sport pistol (a 1911 clone with a Kart conversion) and ultimately to a Smith & Wesson Brazilian Mod. of 1937 with full-power .45 ACP 230 grains hardball ammunition (CCI Blazer).
She shot the heavy gun very well at reasonably short distance, and did not find the recoil objectionable (!). She will not become a shooter, but she now knows a range, has handled guns (for the first time in her life), liked it and has gained a relaxed open attitude towards them. She also has experienced first-hand that they are not magic wands, but manageable tools.

I shall continue to work on this draft, just posting the first part of it right now

jhmartin wrote::

0. Training for children and juveniles must be *very* different from adult competitive shooters. Not only in quantity, but also in quality.

I think we totally agree here. I use a lot of the "trinkets & trash" technique ... well mostly the trinkets.
I start kids off on their first day to the range with an NSSF program, just to get the feel of shooting a competition rifle ("Hey cool sights"). This program rewards shooters with a patch if they achieve 35 points in 5 shots. http://www.nssf.org/JrUSA/
I've never had a kid not make the score. They take that patch home with the target. (Thanks NSSF!)

Yes, it is a good concept to start with "real" shooting right at the beginning (because that's why they come), and it is also good to set a small "token of visible success" right at the beginning, as you do -- provided that you can be reasonably sure that everybody will attain it :-).

Next, USA Shooting has a great great program that my 4-H shooters use. It is called the "Passport" program that is pins that the shooters receive as they make their way thru the progression of skills and shooting (self-)discipline. This program keeps the kids going , really until they reach the level (500-520) when they begin to really understand (even if they don't know the word) intrinsic motivation.

Such pins or badges exist here too and are universally shunned and despised among sportive shooters. They only enjoy some moderate popularity with those guilds who mostly exist as traditional societies (founded 1294 AD e.g.), parading shooters' uniforms in processions and beer-fuelled feasts a couple of times in the year, with lots of bling-bling that would make any rapper swoon green with envy.

I agree that intrinsic motivation is difficult (also for adults); that's one of the reasons why most of us need (or at least would benefit from) coaches. Though I must admit that I was tickled purple when I recently managed to climb from 240 (standard pistol half-program, 30 shots) to 259 and 255. Still very low by the standards of *this* board, but a nice achievement for me. I intend to practice especially the 20-seconds and 10-seconds series now, because these are the one where you lose :-).

I'm also lucky that I'm fairly close to the OTC in Colo Springs. I always go to the gift shop and grab a bunch of their $3-$5 tee shirts and we use those in handicap matches (usually a 3x10 where they take their last month average, subtract from 300, and they add that on to their score .... They young-uns like it when they beat the precision shooters.

Very good idea! This is an excellent way to overcome the "rift of separation" between youth group and other shooters, which is often simply due to different training times.

So here we agree .... it must be fun and they must be rewarded .. things and words.

Full agreement. Intrinsic motivation in most shooters (especially youngsters) is hardly strong enough to make up for a lack of fun. This is all the more important when at some days, a training session did not really run, and everybody (the coach most of all) is duly frustrated.

1. .... I see over-focussing in young age as the bane of pedagogics, you may see it just reversely.

Wow, I sure do. It may be a cultural thing, but kids here in the USA have so many options and many try to do it all. If they are in 4-H (as all of mine are) the list is darn near endless... Dog School, Horse School, meat goats, dairy goats, steers, dairy cows, pigs, welding, shooting (Archery, rifle, pistol, shotgun, muzzleloading), sewing, (that's just some of 4-H), then.... baseball, football, track, cross country, soccer (you know ... the other football), tae-kwon-do, spelling bees .... (Mike Schroeder is laughing here).

That is a good thing. They should try out a large number of things, parallel as well (and stay with one try for a few times), regardless of gender, class and race boundaries, until they feel they know what they like and where they will possibly concentrate. Over-ambitious parents can be a problem here when they overload kids, as I agree, and especially if such overburdening is coupled with an aggressive "competitiveness" attitude as the one presented before.

I don't force them into shooting, but I do let them know that in order to shoot those scores that get you medals in the tournaments, one practice a month won't cut it. I have no problem if they are the plinkers, they are as welcome as the rest (our pellets and ammo are paid for by our FNRA grants). They can even fill out the teams at our competitions.

Yep. I like this your wording and presentation now a lot better than your previous comment on the preceding page, Joel, at which I took (and still take) offence.

1a. "Beatings will continue until morale improves"

I share your sentiment. I'll ask a parent to wait in a car if I see this. No excuse for this. I know I have had some shooters in the past showing up to our practices as an escape from this type of family discipline, and it breaks my heart.

Agreed. While a coach most times is not trained as a social worker / developmental psychologist and should not try to play one on one's own (at least not without supervision), sports can be a precious resort and potential "way away, and way out" from a distressing family situation, or from ghetto conditions.

While this is universally acknowledged for some more athletic sports, for basketball, boxing and I don't know what else, such sports as shooting and fencing do NOT profit from the same idea, although they could and should (look at the many young shooters on the nice "Pilk-uns" picture website, and count the absence of black faces e.g.). Why not? Implicit subliminal racism?

2. One or two aspects of what I feel are indirectly addressed quite lucidly by Charles Reed in his explanation of Progressive Position Pistol ...

While Charlie and I don't interact much, I consider him one of my mentors. He helps run a great program at the OTC that we go up and shoot his matches if we can. I'm not really a pistol guy, but I know that the IZH-46 is way too heavy for my younger (<15 years) shooters. We have some of the Tau-7 Jr's and even then, my youngest shooters do the supported thing.

Oh, no disagreement with Charles' basic position, which is fully correct. I only felt he had exaggerated his "the sky is falling!"health warnings a bit :-). I started with a normal FWB 65 (no barrel weights) at about 14 years, being of slim built and had no problems. I then shot an old Walther GSP, a FN 150 and a Hämmerli 208 S as sport pistols in junior class. But I agree that lighter youth pistols in general are a good thing.

So ... all in all, if you were to visit my program and practices, you would feel very comfortable I think. Thx for the reply ... Joel

Well, I would certainly hope so. :-) And thanks for *your* reply, too.

Best regards both in agreement and disagreement,

Alexander

Check out:
http://www.VC4HSS.com
We also hold "special" practices .... this is a photo from a Halloween shoot where they had to dress up & shoot:
http://www.vc4hss.com/Air_Rifle/2007_Re ... ostume.jpg

I have looked up the 4-H Shooting Sports website, so learn a bit. Just FYI, I found a webpage like the following http://www.4-hshootingsports.org/Name_this_sport.php very underwhelming. Ahem. :-)

(look at the many young shooters on the nice "Pilk-uns" picture website, and count the absence of black faces e.g.). Why not? Implicit subliminal racism?

ABSOLUTELY NOT due to racism on our part.

I have never met a competition shooting director who would not enthusiastically welcome minority new shooters!!!!! and women too!

WHERE ARE THEY?!?!?!?!

Why have they not been coming out to our clubs?

Part is family tradition, a LOT of shooters get into shooting from a parent, and about 7 generations ago we didn't allow blacks to participate in the shooting sports, (but one of our nation's LARGEST shooting event held from 1861 thru 1864 was supposed to have resolve that issue),

part of it is politics, a greater percentage of blacks live in cities that violate gun rights (I guess SOME folks still don't like blacks participating in shooting sports, including you-know-who).

so, send me as many non-white faces to Phoenix Rod & Gun Club as you can recruit, we'll teach them to shoot!

Poole

Mike M. wrote: I'll add that the current rules make RF a pain in the neck to score...shoot a series, go down and score. You spend more time scoring than shooting, unless you have the Suis-Ascor targets. I'd like to see the rules modified to have a full half-course shot before each scoring session, just to speed things up a bit.

But here in the US, it's nearly impossible to train. Target bays are few and far between...I think the nearest to my home is about 400 miles away. And unless you own a personal range, you don't dare buy something and leave it up...the duffers will shoot it to shreds in a weekend or two.

I wish I had an answer. I love RF, but it seems to be in a slow decline.

From reading all these posts, there is only one solution that comes to mind and that's the fact that clubs will have to invest in electronic targets in order to improve the situation.

I have no idea as to what kind of numbers most clubs in the US have, but if you take the cost of a single RF bay at about $20,000 then that's a cost of $200 a man for a 100 man club. Is that too much for something that will give a reactive target with instant feedback and no scoring delays?

I don't know, only you guys can answer that, but to me it's a worthwhile investment. It certainly merits consideration.

If we put an electronic rapid fire bay at our club we would have to find some place to lock it up and hide it when it was not being used by competent rapid fire shooters. If we did not it would get shot up with .40, .45 and 9mm by the IDPA and IPSC yahoos so fast you would not believe it. Some of these guys seem to think that anything down range deserves to get shot at until it falls apart and the faster they shoot it the better.

The most popular disciplines at our club are IDPA, Cowboy Action and Conventional High Power Rifle. I think people like them because they don't necessarily take a lot of training and you can come out and shoot a match in 2-3 hours rather than spending all day at the range. If one is going to get moderately good at RF you have got to put a lot of bullets downrange. Plus, for some reason here in the US people seem to want to shoot guns with a bigger bang than .22, even though there is a significant greater cost.

I feel your pain!

Though they're not hard to dismount and store. The Magalink ones we have can be dismounted very quickly indeed. Keyhole slots in the fram make it very easy and quick. The Hardox steel plates are held on by gravity and velcro and can be removed in about 5 seconds (they're the heaviest part).

Storage is possibly the issue, but I doubt anyone would try and remount them without experience.

$200 a man for a 100 man club

you have NO IDEA how STINGY american shooters are!

The same guys who will put $2000 into pimping out an AR-15 for plinking at 25 yds refuse to join a $90/year club because its too expensive.... (and they'd keep going weekly to the $7/day pudlic range). If we told the membership of our 700 member club that we were raising dues by say $30 this year to pay for an electronic target system, we'd see a 40% drop in membership.

Second problem I have alluded to before, in that 700 member club and the 3000 member club down the road or the 60,000 user-days per year pudlic facility up the freeway a ways combined, there are not 10 people interested in shooting olympic pistol.

We have a turning target 25 METER RFP range at Phoenix Rod and Gun I doubt we run more than 6 or 8 times a year. (but we will on 15-Nov, come shoot our state championships!)

Poole

There's barely a 100 in all the US that are interested in ISSF shooting to pony up $200 to actually shoot it. Now if its a mechanical horse that you can ride and pretend you're shooting indians from that would be a whole other matter.

PaulB wrote: ...
The most popular disciplines at our club are IDPA, Cowboy Action and Conventional High Power Rifle. I think people like them because they don't necessarily take a lot of training and you can come out and shoot a match in 2-3 hours rather than spending all day at the range. If one is going to get moderately good at RF you have got to put a lot of bullets downrange. Plus, for some reason here in the US people seem to want to shoot guns with a bigger bang than .22, even though there is a significant greater cost.

Hi, When you say "shoot a match in 2-3 hours rather than spending all day at the range." are you discussing the match times, or practice times. I know I shoot a Bullseye match in about 5-6 hours (including 30 minutes for lunch). Does an ISSF match take that much longer? Because of the lack of shooting positions available? Most of us mere mortals don't have more than 10 hours a week to reload ammuniiton, dry-fire, and shoot.

Thanks

Mike
Wichita KS

I think he was talking about IPSC snd IDPA. Which usually go pretty quick depending on the level of match.

O.K., I know a couple of guys who shoot IDPA and Bullseye. They don't like IDPA because you spend more time waiting than shooting. When you DO shoot, it's exciting, but you only have one person at a time go through the course.

Mike
Wichita KS

At our last 25m pistol match (standard pistol) we had 4 IPSC shooters enter. One of them was pretty good for a beginner (scored about 490) on his first attempt and two others were in the 470 range.

All of them enjoyed the competition, were very impressed with the electronic targets and promised to come again. One has since purchased a Pardini and another a Walther GSP.

You can run a standard pistol detail in about 35 minutes, we have seven points, so you can figure out what the throughput would be in a day. You can think of lots of reasons to not spend the money, but our experience is that it's hugely positive for a club. Our membership has more than doubled in two years and that's with a €200 a year sub. We borrowed money to buy them and will have the loan paid off in half the term.

For guys used to reactive targets, electronic targets are viewed as an improvement. The scoring is instantaneous, the timing lights are impressive and the whole idea of being able to watch the scores outside the range is immensely popular. Guys who would have gone home after their detail are hanging around watching the next details to see if they'll be beaten or if they'll win or just to watch the competition unfold.

It was a leap of faith for us to buy them, but it's been a far better investment than we ever dreamed it would be.