TargetTalk

j-team wrote:OK.

If you think you are bashing your head now, wait until international "shooting" is done on lasers. If they can eliminate a discipline like free pistol, which has been around almost unchanged for 100 years, the IOC will destroy your sport if you let it. No amount of all caps posts or GIFs will save it.

Look at the bright side. Losing fr50pr and FP in the Olympics means those two events going back to the WCH without having a need for finals anymore. The IOC always tweaks the rules. We might ended up preserving the two events in its original state for many years to come from now on. CFP and STP are pretty stable over the years. Reading the historical documents, I lost count how many times they made changes in AP, here and there, like target changes, amount of shots, time allowed, and finals format, etc. I rather see the event be out of the Olympics than staying in and ended up like a NASCAR event, all in the name of entertainment. Don't be pushed around by the IOC and ended up like modern pentathlon.
I would love to see ISSF doing a little reform by having all the non Olympic events being mixed, just to slab the IOC's face. On two posts I have done some extensive analysis on men and female performance on virtually equal equipment (especially 300FR vs 300STR, with the difference being the 1.5kg rifle weight, an accuracy advantage for male and a weight advantage for female, but in reality everyone uses the same equipment) using WCH data, women came up just fine. That will be a even more progressive way to do things: instead of equality by having two events and artificially create quotas, we demonstrate equality by mixing and show the results.
I stopped watching the Olympics years ago exactly because of the artificial changes made by the IOC. If they want rock climbing being an Olympic event in 2020 vs a 120 years old event like free pistol, I have no interest in this farce. Some sports are really meant for circus acts, target shooting should not be one of them. The only Olympic event that I watch is biathlon in the winter Olympics.

Olympics is about showing your strength, agility, speed needed in war battles.
Archery, shooting, fighting, spear throwing, biathlon.

And then, there's gay sports like curling, golf, soccer, badminton, BMX, curling, snowboard
which don't belong anywhere near Olympics.

"I am an Olympic champion in soccer (or BMX)!!!" it doesn't even sound right...

conradin wrote:CFP and STP are pretty stable over the years. Reading the historical documents, I lost count how many times they made changes in AP, here and there, like target changes, amount of shots, time allowed, and finals format, etc.

Since 1980 (or it might have been a couple of years before) CFP has had 3 target changes and a timing change.

And a trigger weight change.

(Finally, I can point out something that David knew but forgot)

JamesH wrote:And a trigger weight change.

(Finally, I can point out something that David knew but forgot)

Grrrrr ;-)

David Levene wrote:

conradin wrote:CFP and STP are pretty stable over the years. Reading the historical documents, I lost count how many times they made changes in AP, here and there, like target changes, amount of shots, time allowed, and finals format, etc.

Since 1980 (or it might have been a couple of years before) CFP has had 3 target changes and a timing change.

Were those changes made for sport pistol too?

hundert wrote:Olympics is about showing your strength, agility, speed needed in war battles.


And then, there's gay sports like soccer, badminton, which don't belong anywhere near Olympics.


"I am an Olympic champion in soccer (or BMX)!!!" it doesn't even sound right...

Actually soccer left the Olympics exactly because it was not professional enough. Olympic soccer essentially are junior national team members. If you watch world class level, there is nothing wimply about soccer. It also depends on which countries or which league. I have seen some extremely violent and tough leagues over the years. I was a rugby player in high school, so my view of toughness may be different. I consider American Football wimpy because people wear helmets..

Also, being gay has nothing to do with sports. So I have no idea what you mean. I'm not even gay...

conradin wrote:... If you watch world class level, there is nothing wimply about soccer...

What!!?? Just the other day I saw a bunch of English soccer players lying on the field crying! That looked pretty wimpy to me.

conradin wrote:Were those changes made for sport pistol too?

Yes, except the trigger which was always 1000grams.

j-team wrote:

conradin wrote:... If you watch world class level, there is nothing wimply about soccer...

What!!?? Just the other day I saw a bunch of English soccer players lying on the field crying! That looked pretty wimpy to me.

A majority here would refute any claim that those actually were football players.

Tim S wrote:A majority here would refute any claim that those actually were football players.

Well, apparently your team played about as well as you stood by them. A perfect match.

shaky hands wrote:Well, apparently your team played about as well as you stood by them. A perfect match.

I think you might be under the misaprehension that I like football.

Tim S wrote:

shaky hands wrote:Well, apparently your team played about as well as you stood by them. A perfect match.

I think you might be under the misaprehension that I like football.

I'm with you Tim. Can't stand the game.

Now if you're talking about Rugby, no , we mustn't mention that for fear of upsetting our Australian friends ;-)

Tim S wrote:

shaky hands wrote:Well, apparently your team played about as well as you stood by them. A perfect match.

I think you might be under the misaprehension that I like football.

Rather, I was under the misaprehension that "a majority" was not a synonim of "I".

shaky hands wrote:Rather, I was under the misaprehension that "a majority" was not a synonim of "I".

Indeed not, however since the English language does not differentiate between the pronoun you in singular or plural form, I took your remark to be directed at me rather than at the people of England.

My personal disinterest aside, the team is well supported; that blasted tournament is all that half my office can talk about, and cars are festooned with the flag of St George. However it is our God given right to criticise our national sports teams when they play badly, as indeed they did.

The people of England should not be too hard on their team. Think about the Dutch or the Russians. Besides, dating back to at least when I started paying attention to football, which was around Mexico 1986 WC, the English team has been screwing up every Euro and World cup pretty consistently.

I cannot disagree that England are not particularly good at football. However I think most fans are justified in being annoyed at one win in four matches, even if we ignore those who cherish somewhat unrealistic expectation of success.

Still I'm with David. Within a year of an ignominious early ejection from the RFU world cup, the England rugby team won a grand slam in the six nations and an historic series win abroad.

Tim S wrote:Still I'm with David. Within a year of an ignominious early ejection from the RFU world cup, the England rugby team won a grand slam in the six nations and an historic series win abroad.

Pfffft... Let's see how you go against the ABs (or the Boks).

j-team wrote: Pfffft... Let's see how you go against the ABs (or the Boks).

The Boks are not a worry. No team wants to, but there is no disgrace in losing to the ABs (of whatever vintage).