IBS Annual Meeting Summary
- Thread starter Jeff Stover
- Start date
Sorry Pete,
I'm done with you. This is a Bull Durham conversation...." like a martian talking to a fungo". You make my head hurt.
We will respond and get all the paper work ready for next year it's just to bad that we all dont have a $ 1000.00 bucks and a weeks vacation to burn to make it out to the east cost to be at the winter meeting so that our votes can be cast maybe the IBS could just move the winter meeting to the midwest closer to the center of the USA but then that may be to hard on everyone out there to come here you get my point. it's time for some changes the IBS is not just on the East side of the USA anymore it's growing and having growing pains change is good and if things dont change with the times they are sure to go down hill and fast we were the first to change the format for the Score Nationals and were told NO it took a bunch of talking to get the change made because it was not the way we (IBS) has done it before and no one likes it that way after it was all said and done I was told by almost all the people that did not want this format that they were wrong in the way they were thinking and that it was great. PS I still have all the emails about it. not all of us think the same so we must all find what is best for all and not just for a few. we all come to Match's to have fun and shoot the best we can and enjoy the people we shoot with lets dont turn this sport into a game where there are so many rules that we forget to enjoy what we came here for. Rick Thanks for standing up on this rule maybe with some luck changes can be made
Ronnie Berg
Ronnie Berg
mwezell
Mike Ezell
Ron, I'd like to thank you for your input. Thank you! In this day and age there is no reason why the meeting can't be held anywhere, and anyone who wants to take part can by video conferencing. It would take a little work to get that set up and approved as well, but as I understand it, the provision is there within the existing system. In this age of technology, it's rediculous to expect members to travel thousands of miles to make sure of representation when it can be done from home or pre determined locations to accommodate each clubs members. You can't expect the majority of people to go that far to attend regularly. There are other, more traditional ways to address the problem, but they don't fit within existing procedures. Conference calls or video conferencing(better) can. We don't need different regions like the NBRSA in this day, but that's how they address this issue. For now, we have options, and it's time for the IBS to get with the program if it wants to move forward.--Mike
pbike
New member
I don't want to start or end any arguments. Here are my thoughts take them as you wish think them over or throw them in the trash. They’re just my opinions, of the way I see things.
*Score Targets are scored and verified by using the target (1st), the shooters word (2nd), and the stationary backers (3rd). Without any of the 3 there is reasonable doubt.
*Group targets are scored and verified the same way, by the target (1st), the shooters word (2nd), and the moving backer (3rd) with the addition of a stationary backer for cross fires (4th). Why differ from an excepted norm for score?
* A Score Match is 5 targets, An Aggregate is 5 matches, a Grand Aggregate is 2 Aggregates with the same gun, and a Two Gun is 2 Grand Aggregates with different guns (1 6x and 1 VFS). Not LV and HV.
*Likewise a target can be a max of 10 points and an x tie breaker, a match can be 50 and 5x Max., and an Aggregate is Five matches and the beginning of importance for a shooter to be a pronounced a winner. At what point are backers important? You can’t have and aggregate without a match, you can’t have a match without a target, and the stationary backers keep track only of each target. How can you award a winner of a Grand Aggregate, if you can’t be sure who won the Aggregate because of lack of Backers? Backers are needed for each shot fired.
*Group shooters think nothing of going away for the weekend, settling in at a club and shooting a 2 gun Aggregate. It allows for 4 Aggregate winners, 2 Grand Aggregate winners and 1 “2 gun” winner. That’s 7 first places finishes for firing 4 Aggregates, the other 3 firsts are only in the method of arranging the scores.
*For this the club gets 4 Match fees from every shooter and the shooter gets most bang for the buck traveled miles. Clubs too can benefit from charging campers, and meals.
*Too Many clubs Too Close Causes Too many scheduling problems, In the event 2 clubs try to schedule for the same weekend within a certain range one should be granted and one not.
*Score shooters need to get in on this Game. 10 minute matches and a Warm-up make this tough, removal of the full Warm up would solve some time issues. The advent of the tuner almost requires the 10 minutes not changing to 7. Shooting one gun on one day and the other gun the next day is one way, but the easier way for the club is to shoot 100 one day and 200 the next day it also shortens lunch and less time required for flags etc. It is the way I consider most advantageous for the serious shooter. I consider a serious shooter a shooter that shoots both guns at both yardages… a “2 gun”. Rules shouldn’t be bent or schedules changed to cater to the less than serious shooter. If a shooter is only going to shoot one gun and wants to shoot both yardages, he will find that his afternoons are less hectic. I am serious and I am there for the whole weekend and paid up for the whole weekend, the schedule should cater to me and my peers, the majority. When you cater to the minority, the majority will not be pleased, and may go away. Would a club rather lose a majority of its shooters or a slight minority of the minority of shooters? There should be an Aggregate in the am with one gun and one in the pm with the other gun. Jumping relays with a 6x and a vfs gun is ridiculous. There is a lot of differing equipment and differing places to use it. Juggling a 6x and a LV is similar to juggling a Sporter and a Rail, it doesn’t make sense. The more we shoot 6x separately the more we can convince other shooters to join in. At first 6x will be a spectacle to be seen, soon it will be something to join in on. The promotion of 6x will promote BR.
*In the event a shooter wants to shoot a LV and a HV he would shoot one in the am and one in the pm. This would not qualify him for the “2 gun” but his best score would qualify for the VFS Grand.
*The sooner serious shooters get used to shooting four Aggregates in a weekend, and not juggling guns between relays, the sooner shooters will warm up to the idea of a 4 day Score Nationals 2 days for one gun, 2 days for the other. It would be a glorified weekend shoot “2-gun” event with the Award of a National Champion. 4 day matches would allow for time for a full warm up match, a privilege really only needed at an Event as large as “The Nationals”. Shooters could plan to travel across the Nation and shoot a nicely paced event. Not like going down the road for another weekend shoot.
*Shooters can be assured that every weekend that they go away to shoot and be a contestant in a 2 gun event, it is like a “mini” or “local” nationals, a (regional) naming events like the “Harry Hoppy”, or “Bud Prior”, or “Firecracker” would promote BR locally and regionally, i.e. Everyone wants to be the champion of the Harry Hoppe.
This is just a gathering of off the wall thoughts late at night.
*Score Targets are scored and verified by using the target (1st), the shooters word (2nd), and the stationary backers (3rd). Without any of the 3 there is reasonable doubt.
*Group targets are scored and verified the same way, by the target (1st), the shooters word (2nd), and the moving backer (3rd) with the addition of a stationary backer for cross fires (4th). Why differ from an excepted norm for score?
* A Score Match is 5 targets, An Aggregate is 5 matches, a Grand Aggregate is 2 Aggregates with the same gun, and a Two Gun is 2 Grand Aggregates with different guns (1 6x and 1 VFS). Not LV and HV.
*Likewise a target can be a max of 10 points and an x tie breaker, a match can be 50 and 5x Max., and an Aggregate is Five matches and the beginning of importance for a shooter to be a pronounced a winner. At what point are backers important? You can’t have and aggregate without a match, you can’t have a match without a target, and the stationary backers keep track only of each target. How can you award a winner of a Grand Aggregate, if you can’t be sure who won the Aggregate because of lack of Backers? Backers are needed for each shot fired.
*Group shooters think nothing of going away for the weekend, settling in at a club and shooting a 2 gun Aggregate. It allows for 4 Aggregate winners, 2 Grand Aggregate winners and 1 “2 gun” winner. That’s 7 first places finishes for firing 4 Aggregates, the other 3 firsts are only in the method of arranging the scores.
*For this the club gets 4 Match fees from every shooter and the shooter gets most bang for the buck traveled miles. Clubs too can benefit from charging campers, and meals.
*Too Many clubs Too Close Causes Too many scheduling problems, In the event 2 clubs try to schedule for the same weekend within a certain range one should be granted and one not.
*Score shooters need to get in on this Game. 10 minute matches and a Warm-up make this tough, removal of the full Warm up would solve some time issues. The advent of the tuner almost requires the 10 minutes not changing to 7. Shooting one gun on one day and the other gun the next day is one way, but the easier way for the club is to shoot 100 one day and 200 the next day it also shortens lunch and less time required for flags etc. It is the way I consider most advantageous for the serious shooter. I consider a serious shooter a shooter that shoots both guns at both yardages… a “2 gun”. Rules shouldn’t be bent or schedules changed to cater to the less than serious shooter. If a shooter is only going to shoot one gun and wants to shoot both yardages, he will find that his afternoons are less hectic. I am serious and I am there for the whole weekend and paid up for the whole weekend, the schedule should cater to me and my peers, the majority. When you cater to the minority, the majority will not be pleased, and may go away. Would a club rather lose a majority of its shooters or a slight minority of the minority of shooters? There should be an Aggregate in the am with one gun and one in the pm with the other gun. Jumping relays with a 6x and a vfs gun is ridiculous. There is a lot of differing equipment and differing places to use it. Juggling a 6x and a LV is similar to juggling a Sporter and a Rail, it doesn’t make sense. The more we shoot 6x separately the more we can convince other shooters to join in. At first 6x will be a spectacle to be seen, soon it will be something to join in on. The promotion of 6x will promote BR.
*In the event a shooter wants to shoot a LV and a HV he would shoot one in the am and one in the pm. This would not qualify him for the “2 gun” but his best score would qualify for the VFS Grand.
*The sooner serious shooters get used to shooting four Aggregates in a weekend, and not juggling guns between relays, the sooner shooters will warm up to the idea of a 4 day Score Nationals 2 days for one gun, 2 days for the other. It would be a glorified weekend shoot “2-gun” event with the Award of a National Champion. 4 day matches would allow for time for a full warm up match, a privilege really only needed at an Event as large as “The Nationals”. Shooters could plan to travel across the Nation and shoot a nicely paced event. Not like going down the road for another weekend shoot.
*Shooters can be assured that every weekend that they go away to shoot and be a contestant in a 2 gun event, it is like a “mini” or “local” nationals, a (regional) naming events like the “Harry Hoppy”, or “Bud Prior”, or “Firecracker” would promote BR locally and regionally, i.e. Everyone wants to be the champion of the Harry Hoppe.
This is just a gathering of off the wall thoughts late at night.
Last edited:
'Morning, Paul. Your proposal would make for less work, that's true. But for the shooter who doesn't contest the Two Gun, it's a problem.
Webster City has a unique way of addressing this: On Saturday, along with the 100-200 6 Power (VH/Hunter) Grand, they also run a VfS 100-200 Grand. For those that have only a VfS gun, they can shoot two Grand Aggs in one weekend or have the option of shooting only one day. There are several shooters there that do this and it seems to work well.
Shooting the 200 yd. in the afternoon is what I prefer. The conditions are harder and because of this, many times it goes down to the last shot as to who wins...just as it should be. Lots of people are still 'alive' in the Grand right to the end. This goes double for the Two Gun. A 200 shot in poochy morning conditions will many times close the door on a lot of competitors that may have a chance when the tougher conditions in an afternoon 200 are in play.
I remember winning a Two Gun once where Sundays VfS started off with the targets at 200 yds and then moved back to 100 in the afternoon. I fired a solid 250-8X at 200 to win the yardage and a 250-23X at 100 for the VfS Grand and the Two Gun win. But...it sure wasn't as satisfying as a win when I've slugged it out with snotty mirage and sassy wind flags and ended up on top.
Firing the 200 in the morning makes the 100 in the afternoon pretty anticlimatic. A shooter that does well at 200 just isn't going to make the kind of mistakes that open the door for others at the 100.
Couldn't agree more. It's interesting that the people that consider this "...no big deal" are the ones that don't shoot both classes.
I'm a big proponent of the Four Day Format. We've seen it work two years in a row, now...first at Webster City in 2009 followed by Holton in 2010. So now...faced with back-to-back successful Four Day Formats...we're back to a two day shoot for what's supposed to be the biggest event in Score Shooting?
The average BR schmuck like me is faced with a tough choice: I'd love to drive from South Dakota to Maine in August to shoot the IBS Score Nationals. But how do I justify that kind of commitment to shoot only two days? And if I decide to do it...do I shoot only one gun and try to do my best? Or shoot the 6 Power and VfS guns in the same day...and compromise my performance with both guns? Or accept a compromised Two Gun score and be happy with how I place in the Two Gun...knowing that everyone else contesting the Two Gun has faced the same compromises?
Oh, wait....the Two Gun isn't a recognized National Championship....
Things that make you go "Hmmmmm ?!?!".......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_Y50hE5ri8
Last edited:
Dan H
New member
How about if all the members that can remember their names and what day it is hash this backer thing out over the next year and then all the members that still remember what they are bitching about put a piece of paper in the mail to the EBoard stating how they are voting on the issue at hand. That way it should be a true majority vote, God help me I'm not even into the gin & tonic yet this year. Now if I could only find reverse.
Dan Honert
Paul,
Bless your heart, you just don't get it do you?
For brevity, I'll just address Gallatin & Buck Creek, although there are others that do similar things. We begin in April and go through October and we each have a match every month. For most months, that means a match every other W/E. A majority of the competitors shoot both matches. We always shoot 100/200. Virtually no one shoots LV, although there has been some talk about it. None of us has any interest in having a two day event twice a month. We don't have a scheduling problem and we aren't looking for new things to add. What we do want to do is get rid of unnecessary work and expense. In all the years we've put on matches we've had not one single incident that required looking at a backer. If you've been making love to the same woman for 30 years, it's unlikely you'll need "protection".
I have asked repeatedly of those of you who shoot one yardage, if you put up backers for each of these. To this point, I have had no replies. OK, I'll ask you directly. I noticed in the results that you folks had at least one match in April with three shooters, you being one. Did you put up backers? And, if you did, didn't you feel a little silly about it?
Anyway, I'm sure most are getting tired of this thread and it's clear that those it doesn't affect couldn't care less. We do have other options. We'll just have to consider them.
Rick Fox
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Mr Rick,
With all dues respect, it's you who doesn't seem to get it. I think all of those folks who don't like the rules and format of IBS matches SHOULD explore other options. Go ahead and have 5 or 6 clubs acting as an Orginizations and set it up. Perhaps you will feel a part of it then but don't think the rest of us are going to be terribly upset. We'd love to have ya stay with us man but I am only interested if you buy into our program. Either love us or leave us.
Good Luck,
Pete
With all dues respect, it's you who doesn't seem to get it. I think all of those folks who don't like the rules and format of IBS matches SHOULD explore other options. Go ahead and have 5 or 6 clubs acting as an Orginizations and set it up. Perhaps you will feel a part of it then but don't think the rest of us are going to be terribly upset. We'd love to have ya stay with us man but I am only interested if you buy into our program. Either love us or leave us.
Good Luck,
Pete
Dan H
New member
mwezell
Mike Ezell
Pete, closed mindedness is what has us here. You only mention one option. I can see 6-8 different options expressed or implied just in this thread alone, and we're just getting started. It's only been a few days, so far. We'll have all year to plan and decide which option is best, among many. Some that come to mind will take more than one year to bring to fruition. Some may be implemented immediately. It's way premature to assume going to another organization is the best option. Right now, I'd say it's well down the list. --Mike
E
Edwin D
Guest
Mike,
well thought!
well thought!
Pete Wass
Well-known member
With all due respect Mike, I don't see any reason to change anything. I don't see any burning need to either grow the orginization or to placate anyone. I believe the org is fine just the way it is and if folks want to be part of it, fine, if they don't than that is fine too.
I don't consider that to be closed minded. New members should either accept things for the way they are or go elsewhere. As I have said previously, efforts have been made to accomodate folks and I believe it was a mistake to do so. People are never satisfied until they have changed things to the way they want them to be. They have no respect for the people who made accomodations or for the orginization that accomodated them. There should never be any accomodations made with regard to rules and proceedures. It only leads to what we have here, folks pushing to turn thing upside down. I don't see that as productive.
Pete
J
JackieStogsdill
Guest
Pete. Would you like to see clubs use backers when they only shoot one yardage?
mwezell
Mike Ezell
Yes Pete, to lie there and just take it, is also an option, just not a very good one. Do you realize that more than half of the non-championship matches scheduled for this season won't be required to use the "needed" backers? How many feel they are needed badly enough to uses them anyway?--Mike
David Apple
Member
Must be WINTER
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Hi Jackie,
I wouldn't mind if it was required. The Group folks do it at every yardage. They get through their days ok. The range I am responsible for running the matches at has a good backer system that is easy to use so it won't be a problem for us. The man who designed the system thought it out very well and executed it well.
Perhaps I shouldn't speak out as strongly as I have but it's how I feel. None of it is meant in a personal way but strictly as a business matter. " A house divided against itself can not stand". This is my thinking with regard to allowing exceptions and deviations. I think it has played out to be just that, a house divided.
In the grand scheme of things I am sure what I have to say about any of this isn't important. I don't have that many years of shooting competatively left so I probably should just be silent. Sorry I don't live closer to your range, I enjoyed shooting there.
Regards,
Pete
I wouldn't mind if it was required. The Group folks do it at every yardage. They get through their days ok. The range I am responsible for running the matches at has a good backer system that is easy to use so it won't be a problem for us. The man who designed the system thought it out very well and executed it well.
Perhaps I shouldn't speak out as strongly as I have but it's how I feel. None of it is meant in a personal way but strictly as a business matter. " A house divided against itself can not stand". This is my thinking with regard to allowing exceptions and deviations. I think it has played out to be just that, a house divided.
In the grand scheme of things I am sure what I have to say about any of this isn't important. I don't have that many years of shooting competatively left so I probably should just be silent. Sorry I don't live closer to your range, I enjoyed shooting there.
Regards,
Pete
Last edited:
steve stanley
Well-known member
Jackie, check your p/ms
J
JackieStogsdill
Guest
True George. And, if ranges would space the targets out as far apart as the benches are that would help too. I have been to some ranges that have the targets very close to each other, and that isn't good. If a simple "make sure you are on the right target" anouncement was made at the beginning of each relay, that would help also.
Last edited by a moderator: