Trap and Field

I see where Trap and Field list new ATA members this month. Has the news in the Trap World gotten so slow that they have to print names? It ranks right up with the 10 ways to make taco salad or whatever is filling space this month.

 

Maybe it's time to list the members who failed to re-join. Those are important too.

 

That is the only way some people will get their name in it. LOL

 

Try not to get your name on the back page.

 

What ever happened to the "Field" part of the publication?

 

Bama,

The magazine was a very good news source prior to the purchase of it by the ATA. I have not been shy about pointing out the unethical practices of many of the EC and the ATA management team.
When I shot my 100,000 doubles target at Tucson a couple of years ago, my picture was taken getting my pin with the current ATA President, another shooter did it on the same day, his picture was published, mine was not. A ask about why, they took another picture, it was not published. That year at the Grand I spoke to a person, and was told they would find out why it was not published. No response, I ask the trap & field rep. again at the Grand in Tuscon , was told they would look into it. Some how I feel they were told to sit down and shut up. It was not going to happen.
Moral of the story, it seems they are very small minded people that think my feeling have been hurt. I only kept asking to twist their tails Roger C.

 

Hey Roger....

Quote: No response

Looks like YOUR questions went into the NEED TO KNOW file.. < >

 

It really hurt my feelings that they would not publish my achievement. But now we know for sure that they do edit this site.
They should take their obligation to the ATA as seriously as they do of ignoring members.
I would be happy if the ahose would try and enforce the rule book on target flights or just get rid of the rule book all together.
I just returned from the Arizona Hall of Fame shoot. I shot 5 events, three of them were interrupted with problems on the squad. Targets were set at a very nice 10 ft. level. On three events there was a problem of a shooter wanting to shoot higher targets. After about ten min. of heated discussion the targets were raised well above the rule book limits, doubles targets were in the 14 ft.+ range. The person responsible for the change shot 30 on first field and 34 on second, and he is an expert on target setting. Four shooters had to shoot the targets that one person liked, it is time to enforce the rules of competition. Maybe this is this is one of the many reasons registered shooting is loosing members. At $35. to $40. per hundred for targets we should get a little direction from the rules of the game. Set the targets and do not let shooters change them unless they are deemed by management to be illegal. They should also mandate that every field have a bench mark to set the height from. Registered shooting is FAST BECOMING A THING OF THE PAST.
Roger C.

 

Exactly.

 

Many venues are guilty of catering to prima donnas-Cardinal Center and PSSA included. It's about time it ended. Set the targets properly and shoot 'em as long as they are legal! Just because a target is 6" below the crossbar doesn't make it illegal. No wonder registered trapshoots take so long to finish

 

oleolliedawg,
These whiners were not the prima donnas, they were C and D shooters. Many clubs do not question when anyone wants to raise targets they just do it. I had one guy in Phoenix that wanted high targets, go over to the score keeper and said something to him, I watched the scorer go out to the trap house and go in. when I called to see a target it went about 6 ft. higher . I stopped and told the kid to go out and set the machine back to where it was. When we came off of the field I read the riot act to the shooter. He no longer likes me. BOO HOO
Still waiting for one of them to ask to lower the targets. Roger C.

 

6'-c'mon Rog-not likely.

 

Roger you forget there are no rules just a book of suggestions.

 

@BRAD DYSINGER
@Roger Coveleskie

Brad:

I understand the “Book of Suggestions reference” of which you speak. Most setters these days........ well....ah.... I would just rewrite the rule. I may even run it up the flag pole with the ATA Delegate who serves in my state when in Sparta. He has a good reputation as an out of control renegade in a good way. He does not vote to prevent ripples in the water.

Roger:

When I observe EEE class alter the targets; I just think and laugh privately. It may be they want to acheive additional height to keep them in the air longer. The radar rule is flawed for doubles in all but still air. If they would only get over the more spring is bad mindset; they could gain more time and break a better score, in my view.

I think the small font child size book will consume 200 pages in my lifetime. The last few generations of “Rule Committee” have no clue regarding clarity and/or precision. KISS Principle? What is that and where can it be found?

My take on 2A and 3A adjustment of flight is this: the clubs and the shooters share the burden. I summarize the target resetting clause as follows:

Illegal target (tested as if setting from cold start) or markedly different from other traps are the only traps eligible for readjustment. Pretty simple. Other than that vote with one’s wallet.

Shooters are not likely to file written complaints. The ATA has notoriety for making most complaints against shooting venues evaporate. Some clubs using Brad’s rule book suggestion view are reluctant to alienate customers. $$$$$$

I would have an interest in any comments from the brain trust here. Now Mossberg for the challenging targets of Guadalajara? That dog don’t hunt!

 

Most clubs don't want to alienate local shooter. Many don't attend any shoot outside there own club.

 

Brad hit it on the noggin !

At a State shoot (won't mention) a few years ago, at the request of an All American I snapped a few pictures of a shoot off shooter NOT wearing any eye protection.

One of my friends approached the State Delegate during the shoot off with the fact that the shooter had no eyewear, and the Delegate's comment ~~~~

"That's just another unenforceable rule in the book Bill. He is entitled to wear, or not wear what he wants to".

And so went another safety rule down as a "Suggested rule"

I still to this day don't really know the answer to this as I have seen this same thing several times since then.

 

Ever try to wear glasses in the rain? Doesn't work out to well. At any rate, that when I haven' t worn them. Generally don't wear them duck hunting either.

 

Heck, I watched a guy nicely blow up a BT-99 who never wore shooting glasses either. He died but not from the accident. Only problem he had after was no one would loan him a gun.

 

Under SAFETY in the rule book.

16. All persons including competitors, referee/scorers, and trap personnel must wear appropriate eye and hearing protection while on the trap field. Failure to comply may result in disqualification.

Heck, we see scorers all the time without this protection.

To each his own I guess.

 

Some clubs have there own rule, that they enforce. A person on my squad was disqualified because he refused to wear glasses. This was at the Southwestern grand