TargetTalk

Athletes and manufacturers can only push ISSF rules so far and they will test the limits. This arms and clothing race is perpetuated in Europe and Asia. We don’t make anything here.
In my opinion you would lose a great many more people if we started going backwards and our community is small enough as it is.

WillB wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2024 4:08 pm I've been a rifle coach for 24 years and I think the jackets and pants are an absolute joke and a huge hindrance to our sport. Needing a $2,000 custom suit to be competitive is absolutely ridiculous.

If safety is the concern (which I don't believe it is) then simply lower the max weight of the rifles.

The suits are a result of shooters trying to get every possible advantage and manufacturers exploiting that.

Want to get people into our sport? Lower the barriers to entry and the appearance that it's crazy gear driven sport.

So to answer your question, "What would happen to air rifle without special clothes?":
-scores would go down
-the sport would become more affordable -> leading to more participants

side effects: elite shooters becoming upset that they no longer have an advantage and obsessive ammo testing would become less important

I would argue that safety is a concern (most recent example of back injury from shooting would be Ginny Thrasher), but lighter rifles or localized back support (i.e. you need a small flexible back brace not an exoskeleton shooting suit) would also be valid solutions.

I'm not sure your big push back would come from the elite shooters. I think they would just adapt to whatever the new ruleset is (would probably be grumbling about buying new rifle/stock for existing rifle, but in 2 years that would all be forgotten). I would say most of the push back is going to come from the lower levels. It's no secret that the average age of air rifle shooters isn't young and some of the older shooters who remain competitive only remain competitive because of the clothes. That's probably where the pushback would come from.

Look at silhouette shooting, all the benefits of standing shooting without the clothes with the benefit of having metal targets fall down

WillB wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2024 4:08 pm I've been a rifle coach for 24 years and I think the jackets and pants are an absolute joke and a huge hindrance to our sport. Needing a $2,000 custom suit to be competitive is absolutely ridiculous.

If safety is the concern (which I don't believe it is) then simply lower the max weight of the rifles.

The suits are a result of shooters trying to get every possible advantage and manufacturers exploiting that.

Want to get people into our sport? Lower the barriers to entry and the appearance that it's crazy gear driven sport.

So to answer your question, "What would happen to air rifle without special clothes?":
-scores would go down
-the sport would become more affordable -> leading to more participants

side effects: elite shooters becoming upset that they no longer have an advantage and obsessive ammo testing would become less important

However, the shooting clothing does present a ridiculous amount of points to the shooter (1-2 points per shot). Everybody wants this advantage, and no one really wants to watch olympians shooting 8s and 9s. At that point air rifle just becomes extremely boring, since the scores don't even seem impressive anymore. The sport itself would lose a great amount of interest among viewers, who are in fact the primary source of new joiners.
Also, just lowering the entry fee by 2000 bucks doesn't really matter anymore, since the price of the rifle is already ridiculously high(4000-8000). If people can already convince themselves to be serious about the sport and spend the big bucks, they won't be just hindered by a mere 1000 to 2000.
Beginners also have the option of cheaper shooting jackets. They can CHOOSE to avoid the BIG brands (Capapie, Kurt Thune, Sauer, etc.), and buy cheaper jackets, whose pricing ranges from $200 to somewhere around $700. Again, if they already bought a rifle, this relatively small amount of expenditure doesn't really matter.
I agree with one of the replies to this same post: the pushback wouldn't be really from the elite shooters, since they already honed their skills so fine some of them can get past 600 or even 610 without jacket. The pushback would prob be from the lower levels, whose skill is NOT THERE yet and some of them literally solely rely on the jacket to boost their score. Without a jacket they would be nothing. So, yeah.

If Olympians shooting 8's and 9's was an issue we could just make the target bigger? I mean that would be a small change compared to what is being proposed.
That is the crux of the issue. Would abolishing the gear result in a massive influx of new shooters and interest in the sport? If I was convinced the answer to that question was yes, then I am all for getting rid of all the gear (I have no real attachment to it). At this point though, I am not convinced.

Eights and nines won't make pistol shooting or archery dull to watch, on the contrary.

One could equate 10m air rifle to drag racing. If your goal isn't to win, then you have no reason to complain about those who do want to win and will do whatever is necessary to win within the rule book. Sporter class air rifle could be equated to factory class stock car and Elite level Olympic level shooters are top fuel dragsters. Still using a combustion engine to get from point a to b as quickly as possible. Each of them are handicapped by a rule system to make the competition fair. Although rifle doesn't offer a head start in points.

The jacket and pants used by precision air rifle athletes has undeniably allowed them to hit the 10 ring more consistently. The undeniable goal of rifle shooting is deliver the projectile as close to the center as possible as consistently as possible. To reach the level where one can do it more consistently than one's competition probably matters more in their desire, discipline, commitment, and sacrifice to expend the time, energy and money to reach that goal.

It's easy to say the suits are the reason for better scores. But until someone or some machine can deliver 60 projectiles with a 10.9 score or better (yes the score can be 10.99999 if you look under the hood) perfection is not obtainable. I would speculate the pellets, barrels, and regulators are not remarkably better than what was found on a Walther LGR side stroker. The point being it's always been an equipment race from within the level of the rules.

If we as a shooting community believe that young shooters are put off by the fact they're not shooting 630's after getting fully equipped with the top end level of shooting gear then they have been lied to about what separates champions from participants. I believe success perpetuates more success but it can done at different levels. There is a reason why there are Marksman, Sharpshooter, Expert, Master and High Master classifications. It allows those competing within the same rule book to compete against a group of similar skills for the chance to experience victory. And that is what will keep someone in the game if they have a desire to compete. As it is right now, within the CMP and NRA rule books, there are multitude of classifications and categories that a match director could utilize to even the playing field and recognize small victories. Will the Scholastic, Under 15, Marksman winner make the cover of a magazine? No, but that kid will remember that victory for the rest of their life. And all the intangibles that come with success, even in small doses could keep them coming back with a goal to be even better.

The suits and pants aren't going to change. New rules may require the athlete to demonstrate some level of flexibility in their suit that a brand new out of the box won't allow. So, by necessity they will need to break in their suits in to be legal. Imagine being zipped up and buttoned up, and being required to pick your rifle off the ground. Or sit down in a chair and stand back up. No need for a machine to measure the stiffness. Either you can do these two tasks or you can't. If you can't then you are illegal. DNF

Just like when we went to light coats from heavy coats the ones that won then will win now, just cooler.

bugman1955 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2024 11:03 am Just like when we went to light coats from heavy coats the ones that won then will win now, just cooler.

I don't think anyone really suggests otherwise. The best shooters would keep winning, just with lower scores. The main thing it would achieve is reducing the cost of entry. All you have to buy is the rifle. The question is whether such a drastic change would cause so many issues with current shooters that it could end up existential for the sport.