Bracket racing
- Thread starter Wilbur
- Start date
D
DonMatzeder
Guest
Talk about a sandbaggers paradise....the last shot is the only one that would count.
Melvin Calliham
New member
In IHMSA handgun silhouette, in which I compete, we have a system whereby your first two scores determine your initial class.After that, you must fire two scores in the next class in a 12 month period to advance to the next higher class.
Sounds complicated, but it's not. Sandbaggers?? Yes, we have had a few, but overall, not many. Most want to make it to the highest class. Plus, we have what is called"known ability" in which a Regional Director can declare a "sandbagger" to a higher class if he considers someone to be constantly sandbagging.
MOst sandbaggers are called out by other shooters, though!!
Melvin
Sounds complicated, but it's not. Sandbaggers?? Yes, we have had a few, but overall, not many. Most want to make it to the highest class. Plus, we have what is called"known ability" in which a Regional Director can declare a "sandbagger" to a higher class if he considers someone to be constantly sandbagging.
MOst sandbaggers are called out by other shooters, though!!
Melvin
Bill Wynne
Active member
This is an idea worth exploring.
Point handicaps are used in golf and bowling. Brackets are used in Silhouette shooting. There are a lot more participants in golf and bowling. Brackets would work better when used with the largest sample. It is my belief it would work better nationally than it would at the club level.
Maybe take every score shot last year in either 50/50 or ARA and divide the shooters into three or four equal numbered groups for classes.
As I see it, one of the problems with any form of handicap in benchrest is that equipment plays such a large factor.
Concho Bill
D
Doug
Guest
Make it like a Stakes Race and that would weed out a lot of Sleepers.
C
Carp
Guest
Golf has a handicap........only for local (or even just club matches) not a single professional has an applicable handicap.....a stakes race......is taken care of with the money matches available (PSL and a few others), if it were at local matches it would be unaffordable for the entry fee or too little payback.
It's a decision that a lot of folks have to make and STICK to to compete in any of the current forms of rimfire benchrest. It's an individual decision about an individual sport.
Only the PSL could possibly cover the best of the best. But they nor any other can cover the newly introduced competitor. No scaling of shooters by class (ability) or equipment can possibly equal any playing field. There are many, many other very important reasons that this wouldn't work and I'm not opening that "Pandora's Box" nor "can of worms". Most that really succeed at this sport purchase and test ammo to the extreme that any other 10 shooters could possibly do. That's OK. But remember it isn't even close to all equipment when it comes to actual benchguns. There are too many great gunsmiths making a living putting these things together for such a small group and buying and selling is like the marketplace in Shanghai, China. Plenty of used guns are as competitive as any new gun. It's the folks that are FIXATED at the newer equipment (the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence kind of thing) that they can't really see the difference in a concrete way. It's a confidence thing. That's why Erma Bombeck titled her book "The Grass is Always Greener Over the Septic Tank". It's all a ball of $h!t.
John M. Carper
p.s. This is in no way an attack at anybody or anybody's ideas for a new class. It is an opinion of mine that you cannot compare one class to another by shear grading. If sandbagging can happen it will! If only the honest folks competed they would shoot ONE single class to keep out the SINGLE sandbagger. My 2 cents.
It's a decision that a lot of folks have to make and STICK to to compete in any of the current forms of rimfire benchrest. It's an individual decision about an individual sport.
Only the PSL could possibly cover the best of the best. But they nor any other can cover the newly introduced competitor. No scaling of shooters by class (ability) or equipment can possibly equal any playing field. There are many, many other very important reasons that this wouldn't work and I'm not opening that "Pandora's Box" nor "can of worms". Most that really succeed at this sport purchase and test ammo to the extreme that any other 10 shooters could possibly do. That's OK. But remember it isn't even close to all equipment when it comes to actual benchguns. There are too many great gunsmiths making a living putting these things together for such a small group and buying and selling is like the marketplace in Shanghai, China. Plenty of used guns are as competitive as any new gun. It's the folks that are FIXATED at the newer equipment (the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence kind of thing) that they can't really see the difference in a concrete way. It's a confidence thing. That's why Erma Bombeck titled her book "The Grass is Always Greener Over the Septic Tank". It's all a ball of $h!t.
John M. Carper
p.s. This is in no way an attack at anybody or anybody's ideas for a new class. It is an opinion of mine that you cannot compare one class to another by shear grading. If sandbagging can happen it will! If only the honest folks competed they would shoot ONE single class to keep out the SINGLE sandbagger. My 2 cents.
Last edited by a moderator:
B
B. Harvey
Guest
Socialism is also a great equalizer... Is that what you want?
This is BenchRest, the F1 of the shooting sports.
I say run what you brung, and hope you brought enough!
This is BenchRest, the F1 of the shooting sports.
I say run what you brung, and hope you brought enough!
Bill Wynne
Active member
Harvey,
This is not socialism. I believe that Wilbur is considering the rules for FUN-fire. Some shooters will have factory CZs with $4 ammo who will shoot from 238 to 246 and some shooters will have tricked out 40Xs with highly selected $11 ammo who will shoot 248 to 250 with regularity.
Before you officially write the rules you need to try to consider all facets of the game.
My original thinking was to encourage people shooting consistently high scores to move up to the regular 50/50 target but I am seeing reasons to change my thinking.
Concho Bill
This is not socialism. I believe that Wilbur is considering the rules for FUN-fire. Some shooters will have factory CZs with $4 ammo who will shoot from 238 to 246 and some shooters will have tricked out 40Xs with highly selected $11 ammo who will shoot 248 to 250 with regularity.
Before you officially write the rules you need to try to consider all facets of the game.
My original thinking was to encourage people shooting consistently high scores to move up to the regular 50/50 target but I am seeing reasons to change my thinking.
Concho Bill
OK, How about doing it this way?
Put scores from 247 and lower as low as needed for every shooter entered in a hat and draw for your target score. Then every shooter atempts to shoot the score he draws. Arrange winners by how close they come to their target score.
Bill Wynne
Active member
C
Carp
Guest
FredJ,
It's been too long for you to remember shooting a good squirrel rifle at 50 yards at a Benchrest target.
John M. Carper
It's been too long for you to remember shooting a good squirrel rifle at 50 yards at a Benchrest target.
John M. Carper
C
Carp
Guest
FredJ,
Don't fret. I am young and haven't shot my squirrel rifles in so long that I forget that they just aren't up to par to have a zero for no apparent reason. LOL
John M. Carper
Don't fret. I am young and haven't shot my squirrel rifles in so long that I forget that they just aren't up to par to have a zero for no apparent reason. LOL
John M. Carper
John Kielly
Shari's fan club
In Aussie fullbore & elsewhere for all I know there used to be a popular equaliser called a growler's handicap.
You declared you handicap in points before the shoot & they were added to your off rifle score to get your final score, except that for every point you broke the possible score by, two points were deducted from the total.
It was a way of levelling the field without too much sandbagging, and those who might want to try had to have a damned steady hand.
You declared you handicap in points before the shoot & they were added to your off rifle score to get your final score, except that for every point you broke the possible score by, two points were deducted from the total.
It was a way of levelling the field without too much sandbagging, and those who might want to try had to have a damned steady hand.