New .6 rule POLL

Maybe we need a little history from 2006. We always had 20 benchs in VA. and O., N.C. did not. But all three clubs ran 10 to12 man relays in respect for one another. Then we had a midwest club with 20 benchs ran 5 man relays. The result was a bus load of N.C. shooters at the winter meeting and the new point system. No one ever expected 20 man relays because of the market value of getting more shooters and a gentleman's agreement after the meeting.
 
Was the problem 5 or 20 man relays? We average 12-15. No big deal. Do you remember how many points you won when you shot with us? I think enough has been said. Let those in charge decide and we can all live with it.
 
It seems to me that the ONLY FAIR system is to award points based on the number of shooters per realy...weather that number is four or forty. Your chances of winning a realy go down as the number of shooters goes up. It is simple math. Get a scratch paper out and figure it out for yourself.

Now, that being said, I think that GROWING the sport should be at the top of the IBS's aganda. It should be at the top of ALL of our agendas. The solution.....MORE SHOOTING. More people making the shootoff. Increase the chances of a new shooter making the shootoff. He will be hooked for life!!!

So...and here is where I may cross my own wires a bit. There is no RULE against having big relays... I don't care about "gentalmans agreements". They won't stand up in court, and they won't stand up with an angry mob. OK, we are not an angry mob...yet, but some strong feelings are comming out, including mine. I like to make shootoffs...I like to shoot, but I also like to get throiugh two matches a day and not be at the range till 8PM. So if the answer is more shooters and more shooting......

Keep the old system of XX points per shooter.

Lets take the top TWO shooters (2 for group and two for score) in relays with more than...what...say 10 shooters...maybe 12...the two smallest groups and the two top scores...regaurdless of which bench you are on. Now, to go back to the "make it fair" part....if you do take the top four shooters from the relay instead of just two, then the number of shooters used to figure the relay win would be cut in half. If you have 16 shooters and take the top four, then the points used to figure your SOY points is based on EIGHT SHOOTERS. Not SIXTEEN.

Does this make any sence to anybody?

Is this system even possable?

Can we at least agree on the fact that it is harder to win a relay against 19 other shooters as apposed to nine other shooters.

If it is harder to win against more shooters, then shouldn't we be awarded for it?

I just can not get into my head why this is even an issue. How can a shooter from out east, from a club with 10 benches, be upset that I get more points than him for beating 19 other shooters to his 10. I just don't get it.


On another topic entirely.....I pulled my posts on the original thread. They were not pulled for me. Too many negative emails and PM's. I have had a slew of people ask me about it.

Thanks, and we now take you back to the regularaly schedualed programming,
Tod Soeby
 
Last edited:
Bob, I don't need a history lesson. MN was never part of a gentlemans agreement. Stop trying to justify the reason for new rule. We have a chance to fix this. Do you like the new rule or not? Do you honestly think LR commettee made a good decision, based on all ranges and to better the sport.

Gordy Mitchell
 
Yes I do. and it is not fair to your shooters in this point system to run 5 man relays, they should be 10 to 12. But under the old point system you would get .5 for a 5 man ralay. Do you think it is right to run 4, 5 man relays at the same time. A fair playing feild between all clubs is all we want. If you won a relay and a shoot off with 40 shooters in W.Va, you would get 1.7 points. If you won a relay and one shoot off in Minn. you would get 2.2. Do you think that is fair? Next year you will have 3 clubs in Mo. and one in Minn ,so we should not hear any more crying about not enough matchs in your area. Two of these clubs have 20 benchs and one 15. Not encluding Minn. with 20. So what are we to do, tell clubs with less than 20 benchs, sorry but you will never have a member in the top 20 again unless you go to the midwest. How many midwest shooters are coming east? I can tell you NONE, for the same reason you gave . It is to far for a weekend and cost too much money. I say again this problem will not go away. I hope we can all get together and fix it before we let one or two clubs ruin our sport.
 
Concur with Tod and Gordy. This is 2012, not 2006. Let's do what is best now. I didn't even know my 2011 SOY points until someone told me at the nationals. I shoot for fun. This should be what is best for the sport. I can sleep just as well at night with or without SOY points. I just want a fair system for all.
 
Ok Guys back to the post! The PA. rules on figuring out points for the Hall of Fame go by the average number of shooters per match, not per relay. At the end of the year this average is figured out and then people earn points based on their standing in the aggregates (6 match and 10 match aggregates, in both heavy and light gun and in both score and group). So it doesn't matter if you shoot in a realy with 8 other people or a relay with 11 other people, since the match number is what counts.[example.20 x 94 shooters=18.80 points]

Joe Salt
 
Well Bob, I can't help that you are sensitive to the subject. I can't help that you didn't take it, or comprehend it, in the way it was written or intended. I'm not into the politicly correct BS. I was warned a couple of years ago to be carfull in a PM by a friend because I called myself retarded...comparing myself to Rainman or Forrest Gump...because I did something stupid. Evedently someone else who posts here takes offence to that whole thought process because he was "sensitive" to it....and had gone after someone else for saying the same thing. Well...tough cookies... !! I , too , have a special needs kid. If someone wants to spout off some self depricating remarks..in jest or not....he has every right to. I am smart enough to comprehend the meaning of what he is saying or has said. I am smart enough to know that he was not talking about anyone in perticular. I certainly wouldn't think any less of him. It would be different if he was standing next to my kid and yelling RETARD to his face. THEN IT'S FIGHTS ON!!

The comments I made was to debunk the "right and wrong are a matter of perception" statement. This statement was, and is, NUTS. If I "preceve" it right to "boink 13 year old girls", does that make it right?.....HELL NO ... NOT EVER!!! I also brought up punching him in the face and murder. If it is "precieved" to be ok by someone, does that make it right? Again....HELL NO... NOT EVER. Those were my points. Now, if you read it wrong, or didn't understand, or I was unclear in my writing, why-N-L didn't you ask me to clairify my position. I would have had no problem with that. Neither would anyone else.

Like I said...I don't do touchey-feely with my speach or what I write. I don't do politicly correct.
I won't NOT talk about cancer because someone has it..I won't NOT talk about drinking because somone in the group is/was an alcholic. I probaly could have worded it a little differently....but would DEFANITLY have used that analagy to debunk the "preception" statement. That statement is wrong to the core. There ARE people who "precieve" these things to be OK. That is why they do it. IT ISN'T.....that is why they are illegal.

Now, you can be all pissed off at me and we can discuss it at nationals, or we get over it and have a beer at nationals. I'M ALL FOR THE BEER THING!!

If there are any alcholics out there who are sensitive to my last statement....well...TOUGH COOKIES!!

Now, lets go shooting!!!!!
 
Last edited:
Tod Soeby said:
Well Bob, I can't help that you are sensitive to the subject. I can't help that you didn't take it, or comprehend it, in the way it was written or intended. I'm not into the politicly correct BS. I was warned a couple of years ago to be carfull in a PM by a friend because I called myself retarded...comparing myself to Rainman or Forrest Gump...because I did something stupid. Evedently someone else who posts here takes offence to that whole thought process because he was "sensitive" to it....and had gone after someone else for saying the same thing. Well...tough cookies... !! I , too , have a special needs kid. If someone wants to spout off some self depricating remarks..in jest or not....he has every right to. I am smart enough to comprehend the meaning of what he is saying or has said. I am smart enough to know that he was not talking about anyone in perticular. I certainly wouldn't think any less of him. It would be different if he was standing next to my kid and yelling RETARD to his face. THEN IT'S FIGHTS ON!!

The comments I made was to debunk the "right and wrong are a matter of perception" statement. This statement was, and is, NUTS. If I "preceve" it right to "boink 13 year old girls", does that make it right?.....HELL NO ... NOT EVER!!! I also brought up punching him in the face and murder. If it is "precieved" to be ok by someone, does that make it right? Again....HELL NO... NOT EVER. Those were my points. Now, if you read it wrong, or didn't understand, or I was unclear in my writing, why-N-L didn't you ask me to clairify my position. I would have had no problem with that. Neither would anyone else.

Like I said...I don't do touchey-feely with my speach or what I write. I don't do politicly correct.
I won't NOT talk about cancer because someone has it..I won't NOT talk about drinking because somone in the group is/was an alcholic. I probaly could have worded it a little differently....but would DEFANITLY have used that analagy to debunk the "preception" statement. That statement is wrong to the core. There ARE people who "precieve" these things to be OK. That is why they do it. IT ISN'T.....that is why they are illegal.

Now, you can be all pissed off at me and we can discuss it at nationals, or we get over it and have a beer at nationals. I'M ALL FOR THE BEER THING!!

If there are any alcholics out there who are sensitive to my last statement....well...TOUGH COOKIES!!

Now, lets go shooting!!!!!
Click to expand...

Interestingly enough Tod, it would appear that there are many different perceptions of how SOTY should be handled. See, different opinions mean different perceptions. Now, you're welcome to go off on some rant about how you are right and everyone else is wrong, and use whatever dumbass analogy you wish to show it. But, that doesn't make you and your perception 'right'. It just means you have a different perception than someone else.

There have been court cases heard for 1000's of years now, all because people have different perceptions of right and wrong. Sometimes even after they are decided, the sides still can't accept it, and go to court again...

Sound anything like you and the SOTY points? Nationals location? Etc...

PS. My statement was quite correct, weather you like it or not. And btw, Thank you for proving it so.

To add something on topic, imo, the IBS soty system needs changed. If it were my decision, it would get localized.
 
Keep in mind that "the points" are used for more than determining SOTY. They are also used for the Long Range Marksman program, which, I suppose, is our equivalent of the PA's Hall of Fame?

I could care less about SOTY. I care quite a bit about the (lifetime) Long Range Marksman program.
 
hpasquet: For your information your IBS. asked me when I was president of the PA. club how we determined or points, I believe I sent Dave Tooley or rule book. So what I think you need to grow your clubs like WV. has been doing and get more shooters.If your a member of the WV. club SORRY!

Joe Salt
 
Your right Charles About LIFTIME it only took me about 38 years to make or hall of fame. And I believe I have some IBS, points somewhere in the mess. What I can't figure out is why does everyone care so much about winning a relay, its the average that counts. Keep your agg. down in the single digits then I'm impressed. I can't count the times I've had 4 or 5 inch groups and got beat in a relay. But when it all averages out you have your winner! But you guys do what you want, or rule book is on our web sight. 44 years at it something must be working!

Joe Salt
 
IBS is still not Pa. and we are growing rapidly. We do not have to submit to Pa. rules.
 
You are shooting PA. rules and don't even know that! Were do you think all the IBS rules came from, ORIGINAL PA. 1000 yard Club. Get A life

Joe Salt
 
Wrong. We have our own rules and can modify them. They may have used Pa as a start, but that does not limit us. I have a wonderful life, thank you, but personal attacks do not make your case. I will not show you any disrespect. Thank you for your work with the Pa club.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top