Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: Raton??

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Poetry, Tex.
    Posts
    7,013

    Raton??

    Any word and is Britt Robinson still shooting.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Dolores Co
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by Butch Lambert View Post
    Any word and is Britt Robinson still shooting.
    2gun
    Todd Tyler
    Ed Adam's
    Lowell Frei

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Texas Panhandle
    Posts
    1,988
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpeg 
Views:	374 
Size:	1.97 MB 
ID:	17872
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpeg 
Views:	304 
Size:	1.97 MB 
ID:	17873

    Didn't get a photo of the 2 gun. Not as good of a turnout as in the past due somewhat to scheduling conflicts. There was a Gulf Coast match at Denton the same weekend as well as a Southwest region match at Visalia, not to mention the Super Shoot. I'm sure the Rattlesnake will have a better turnout as its a point match for the U.S. World Team.
    Last edited by Mike Bryant; 05-30-2016 at 10:22 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Odessa TX
    Posts
    214

    Good shooting!

    Good shooting Todd, Ed, Lowel, Charles and Mike, I see your still on a roll too! Appreciate the reports!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Poetry, Tex.
    Posts
    7,013
    Quote Originally Posted by hayscott View Post
    Good shooting Todd, Ed, Lowel, Charles and Mike, I see your still on a roll too! Appreciate the reports!


    I agree, great shooting!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Texas Panhandle
    Posts
    1,988

    2 Gun Top 10

    2 Gun
    Todd Tyler .2578
    Ed Adams .2597
    Lowell Frei .2598
    Charles Huckeba .2741
    Bob Brackney .2762
    Mike Bryant .2785
    Larry Baggett .2937
    Jack Childers .2967
    Rodney Brown .2996
    Dennis Martin .3053

    Notice the amount of separation between first and second place in the 2 gun. Think that's the first time I've seen .0001" determine a placing.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    237
    The 2013 Super Shoot was won by Gene Bukys over Jeff Gaidos a .2728 for Gene and .2729 for Gaidos. This years Super Shoot 2nd and third place were separated by.0001 as well. Question for those guys at Rattlesnake. Did you use the new targets on the new paper? And what did you think of them?

    Jim

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,075
    Quote Originally Posted by James A. Kelbly View Post
    The 2013 Super Shoot was won by Gene Bukys over Jeff Gaidos a .2728 for Gene and .2729 for Gaidos. This years Super Shoot 2nd and third place were separated by.0001 as well. Question for those guys at Rattlesnake. Did you use the new targets on the new paper? And what did you think of them?

    Jim
    Jim, I was not at Raton, but we have been using the new targets in The Gulf Coast Region, both in group and score.

    It appears to put a slightly smaller hole in the paper, which is of course no problem as long as the scorer uses the measuring reticle correctly.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Texas Panhandle
    Posts
    1,988
    Jim, Raton wasn't shot on the new targets. One of the UL aggs at Seymour was shot on the new targets. I didn't realize it until the targets were hung. I guess it doesn't make too much difference as long as everyone shoots on the same targets. You certainly don't want to mix them to use up existing target supplies. Just comparing the two types of paper, there doesn't seem to be as much black ring around the tear in the paper. Attached is a photo of a single bullet from each of the two target types. In the photo, the new target paper is a little whiter than the old paper. You'll need to click on the thumbnail and then the photo itself to get a truer look at the photo.

    In my opinion, with aggs being won by so little margin, it just shows the caliber of the competitors that they take the targets as measured and the results as posted without incessant calls for remeasures except in cases of obvious errors in scoring. With placing determined by differences to .0001", we all know that targets can be remeasured and placings changed.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpeg 
Views:	270 
Size:	1.09 MB 
ID:	17897
    Last edited by Mike Bryant; 06-03-2016 at 09:48 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    237
    We noticed several things on new target paper, very little black ring and the holes are smaller than old paper. The 6mm hole measures .208 on new paper and .238 on old paper, a 308 bullet hole is .265 new paper and .295 on old paper. We also found the paper to be hard for the target crew to handle due to plastic type feel and slipperiness. We do prefer old paper over the new. We did some rain tests as well and the target does stand up better to rain, but we never really had a problem with old paper and rain here at Kelbly's.

    One thought on new paper. If someone ever shoots another .0077 group. The overall hole of the five shots would measure less than .243. I know I spoke to Gene Bukys about this and he said no problem and explained how they measure record groups and he is correct in how they measure and although I feel there will be many records broke on new paper by range measurement, I do believe Gene and the records committee will have no problem adjusting to new targets. Probably just more work for them.

    The Super Shoot only had 217 shooters and this is down from 246 last year. See your attendance being down at Best in West really disappoints me as the sport is not growing as fast as it is literally dying. I read off 18 names of people who passed in last year that attended the Super Shoot some time in last 44 years. We normally only have around 6-8 passing in a year. Our total this year is less than first Super Shoot and is the lowest attendance the Super Shoot ever had.

    On the bright side we had more sponsors than ever.

    Jim

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,075
    Jim, Gene is absolutly correct. The Recods Committed will use the measuring tool exactly the way it is supposed to be used, (centering the existing holes with the true bullet diameter scribed on the tool), so records will stay consistant.

    At matches, as long as the official scorers are consistent in their measuring throughout the match, who "wins" should not change.

    And, if a shooter feels his target is not correct, he can always put up the $10 fee and have it remeasured.
    Or, if you think someone got a over generous measurement, you can always put up the $50 to have it checked.
    The same holds for score.

    Of course, you know all of this, but perhaps some on the Forum are not up to speed on this whole process.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Texas Panhandle
    Posts
    1,988
    Quote Originally Posted by jackie schmidt View Post
    Jim, Gene is absolutely correct. The Records Committee will use the measuring tool exactly the way it is supposed to be used, (centering the existing holes with the true bullet diameter scribed on the tool), so records will stay consistant.

    At matches, as long as the official scorers are consistent in their measuring throughout the match, who "wins" should not change.

    And, if a shooter feels his target is not correct, he can always put up the $10 fee and have it remeasured.
    Or, if you think someone got a over generous measurement, you can always put up the $50 to have it checked.
    The same holds for score.

    Of course, you know all of this, but perhaps some on the Forum are not up to speed on this whole process.
    And if they do put up the fee to have their target or another persons target re-measured, if the original target measurement is within .009" then the original target measurement stands. You don't protests happen very often unless it's an obvious mistake. Unless the rule has been changed since my rule book was printed, the $50 fee to protest another competitor's target is only for a National event or World Team qualifier otherwise it's $10. My rule book is the #38 book (January 2013). The fee may have been changed after my rule book was printed. I need to check with Audrey for any updates to the rule book as I'm sure there have been some.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,075
    Mike, Scott Hunter enforced that $50 fee to protest someone else's target at the Crawfish.

    That is how myself and everyone else found out about it.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Texas Panhandle
    Posts
    1,988
    Quote Originally Posted by jackie schmidt View Post
    Mike, Scott Hunter enforced that $50 fee to protest someone else's target at the Crawfish.

    That is how myself and everyone else found out about it.
    Scott, would know. It's probably been changed since my rule book was printed. With a $50 protest fee and it has to be better than .009" in either direction, I'd say it will make a competitor think twice about protesting a target. I'd sure do some measuring on the wall before I spent the $50. I checked with Audrey and the last rule book update is January 2015. The 2015 rule book still has the protest fee at $50 for National events and World qualifiers with $10 for regional tournaments. If it was changed, then it was done at the 2015 annual directors meeting. I'll check with Scott and see if that was changed then. One thing that I noticed in this area of the rule book is that if someone protests another person's target, the protesting competitor's name is to be clearly printed on the protested target. Do that very much and you would sure get a reputation pretty quickly that you probably wouldn't want. Scott said he thought it was changed in 2014, but it hasn't made the rule book if it has been.
    Last edited by Mike Bryant; 06-13-2016 at 12:04 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by James A. Kelbly View Post
    The Super Shoot only had 217 shooters and this is down from 246 last year. See your attendance being down at Best in West really disappoints me as the sport is not growing as fast as it is literally dying. I read off 18 names of people who passed in last year that attended the Super Shoot some time in last 44 years. We normally only have around 6-8 passing in a year. Our total this year is less than first Super Shoot and is the lowest attendance the Super Shoot ever had.Jim
    Jim, it would be interesting to know how many first-time-at-the-SS shooters you've had for each of the past several years. Also, how many of those shooters have not been back within, say, three years.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •