P
Pa Mountain Boy
Guest
Keep the .6 Rule
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
New .6 rule POLL
- Thread starter Jeff Walker
- Start date
S
Scott Fletcher
Guest
I have a few thoughts that I would like to share. These thoughts come from someone who saw a club implode from over 100 members to about 30. One of the primary issues associated with this implosion was IBS points, and allegations that folks were somehow cheating to obtain those points. For any organization to succeed and grow, there must be an intrinsic “fairness” associated with any kind of reward, whether it be money and promotion up a corporate ladder or awarding performance points at a club. When the folks in any organization believe that the process is not fair or is bias in some way, they move on….but not before some measure of disruptive finger pointin’ and jack-jawin’ occurs. Sound familiar?
I believe it is beneficial to remember the first time all of us set foot on a 1000 yard range, swallowed hard, and hoped we wouldn’t embarrass ourselves too badly. Even so, the Walter Mitty in each of us believed that we could somehow win. That belief and the knowledge we picked up at that first match fueled our competitive furnace. We wanted more, and by God we were going to win one day.
Then the reality sets in. Match after match the “ringers” kick our a$$. We look up and down the line and say “No way, I haven’t been livin’ that good”. Simply put, the larger the number of shooters in the relay, the more chance for a ringer or 3 to be included. Granted, the ringers don’t always win, but the odds still favor them. It’s tough for the Newbees to persevere in that scenario and still maintain a positive attitude.
I have been privileged to shoot against some of the best 1000 yard shooters that ever will be. The only saving grace was that when I first started , the relays were limited to 8 competitors or so. Sometimes the computer spit me out in a “tail-end Charlie” relay that had only 6 or 7 competitors with only 1 shooting god….and I dared to think that maybe I had a chance to win score. Every once in a while I was in a relay with no shooting gods, and was really pumped at the prospect of having a good chance to win either group or score instead of relying on livin’ right. That “every once in a while” teaser kept me coming back, paying club dues and match fees. It also had be singing the praises of my club, and I willingly recruited my friends to come join in the fun.
We ultimately had 15 benches, but chose to limit the relay participants to about 8. As the club grew, the relay number slowly increased, but we tried to limit it to about 10 or so. The extra benches were used for the shoot offs. If we couldn’t squeeze the entire group and score winners into one shoot off for all, we had a separate shoot off for group, and a separate shoot off for score. The net result was that if I ever won a shoot off, I did so against 5 to 7 of some of the finest 1000 yard benchrest shooters in the world….and lordy that was a trip! The points reward was commensurate with that almost unfathomable accomplishment: I was a shoot off winner.
I believe a relay with “lots” of folks puts the points emphasis on winning a relay rather than winning a shoot off….something that doesn’t seem right to me. In that context, I believe the 0.6 rule has merit.
Right or wrong, old school or progressive, the approach I just described produced a club with over 100 members. Even though the competition was fierce, the "smaller" relays allowed just enough window of opportunity to keep the Newbees thinking success was just around the corner. They hung tough and voted with their pocketbook.
In my view, this is really a philosophical issue regarding which should have more merit in terms of points: a relay win or a shoot off win. If the group can reach concensus on that "simple" question, any "rules" necessary for implentation can be judged in terms of meeting that philosophical objective. The process becomes far more linear (less side bar issues) with less acrimony.
I hope these thoughts have been of benefit. The long range bunch has always had the perspective to comfortably get along, unlike our short range brethren. I am confident this group can reach an amicable and fair resolution concerning this issue.
Scott
I believe it is beneficial to remember the first time all of us set foot on a 1000 yard range, swallowed hard, and hoped we wouldn’t embarrass ourselves too badly. Even so, the Walter Mitty in each of us believed that we could somehow win. That belief and the knowledge we picked up at that first match fueled our competitive furnace. We wanted more, and by God we were going to win one day.
Then the reality sets in. Match after match the “ringers” kick our a$$. We look up and down the line and say “No way, I haven’t been livin’ that good”. Simply put, the larger the number of shooters in the relay, the more chance for a ringer or 3 to be included. Granted, the ringers don’t always win, but the odds still favor them. It’s tough for the Newbees to persevere in that scenario and still maintain a positive attitude.
I have been privileged to shoot against some of the best 1000 yard shooters that ever will be. The only saving grace was that when I first started , the relays were limited to 8 competitors or so. Sometimes the computer spit me out in a “tail-end Charlie” relay that had only 6 or 7 competitors with only 1 shooting god….and I dared to think that maybe I had a chance to win score. Every once in a while I was in a relay with no shooting gods, and was really pumped at the prospect of having a good chance to win either group or score instead of relying on livin’ right. That “every once in a while” teaser kept me coming back, paying club dues and match fees. It also had be singing the praises of my club, and I willingly recruited my friends to come join in the fun.
We ultimately had 15 benches, but chose to limit the relay participants to about 8. As the club grew, the relay number slowly increased, but we tried to limit it to about 10 or so. The extra benches were used for the shoot offs. If we couldn’t squeeze the entire group and score winners into one shoot off for all, we had a separate shoot off for group, and a separate shoot off for score. The net result was that if I ever won a shoot off, I did so against 5 to 7 of some of the finest 1000 yard benchrest shooters in the world….and lordy that was a trip! The points reward was commensurate with that almost unfathomable accomplishment: I was a shoot off winner.
I believe a relay with “lots” of folks puts the points emphasis on winning a relay rather than winning a shoot off….something that doesn’t seem right to me. In that context, I believe the 0.6 rule has merit.
Right or wrong, old school or progressive, the approach I just described produced a club with over 100 members. Even though the competition was fierce, the "smaller" relays allowed just enough window of opportunity to keep the Newbees thinking success was just around the corner. They hung tough and voted with their pocketbook.
In my view, this is really a philosophical issue regarding which should have more merit in terms of points: a relay win or a shoot off win. If the group can reach concensus on that "simple" question, any "rules" necessary for implentation can be judged in terms of meeting that philosophical objective. The process becomes far more linear (less side bar issues) with less acrimony.
I hope these thoughts have been of benefit. The long range bunch has always had the perspective to comfortably get along, unlike our short range brethren. I am confident this group can reach an amicable and fair resolution concerning this issue.
Scott
Since the Long Range Marksmanship program would require an agenda item to change the points system for it, are you going to have different points for Shooter of the Year than for the Long Range Marksmanship program?
I don't thnk the LR committee thought this through very well. I am sure Phillip is really excited to keep 2 sets of books for this.
James
I don't thnk the LR committee thought this through very well. I am sure Phillip is really excited to keep 2 sets of books for this.
James
H
hesse
Guest
Wow Guys!
No to the new .6 rule.
No to the new .6 rule.
4
4Mesh
Guest
Again, I got a laugh here. It never ceases to amaze me how decision making doesn't seem to take into account the record keeping required to make it all happen. And, while someone might say a computer program would be a great idea for this, it needs re-written every time the people change their minds. So that tends to discourage any would-be programmer from taking on the job. They know their time and effort, (usually provided free-gratis) will be flushed down the toilet the next time someone comes up with an idea to change it, and somehow they think the programmer has nothing better to do than re-write the crap on their every whim. lmao... Gotta love it.Since the Long Range Marksmanship program would require an agenda item to change the points system for it, are you going to have different points for Shooter of the Year than for the Long Range Marksmanship program?
I don't thnk the LR committee thought this through very well. I am sure Phillip is really excited to keep 2 sets of books for this.
James
Since the Long Range Marksmanship program would require an agenda item to change the points system for it, are you going to have different points for Shooter of the Year than for the Long Range Marksmanship program?
I don't thnk the LR committee thought this through very well. I am sure Phillip is really excited to keep 2 sets of books for this.
James
Are you sure? I imagine what Phillip does is to take the points from the SOTY standing, and add them to prior years points. It would be a lot of trouble to go & dig up the rule, but there is a good change LRM points are based on SOTY points, however they are calculated...
Charles,
You have it backwards. Up until now SOTY points have been based on LRM points.
From the IBS rule book:
2) IBS Awards and Recognition - IBS sanctioned 1000 yard competition only.
a) IBS 1000 yard shooter of the Year program and points will be determined by the Long range
Committee on an annual basis.
4) Long Range Marksman Awards and Recognition - IBS sanctioned 1000-yard competition only.
a) IBS 1000 Yard Long Range Marksman awards will be based solely on points accumulated in
1000-yard registered IBS Benchrest matches.
(i) IBS registered match must have 2 or more competitors.
(ii) The total number of shooters in a class will be divided as evenly as possible into relays.
(iii) In the case where there is only one relay, the winner of that relay must shoot another target
that would be scored as there shoot off target.
(iv) It is the responsibility of the individual 1000 yard clubs to submit a schedule of points
awarded to each shooter (relay and match) per match to the Long Range committee which
will designate one individual to be Keeper of the Points who will submit a report to all shooters
of the results periodically during the year.
(v) Class relay winners .05 points for every IBS shooter in the relay.
(vi) Class shoot-off winner .03 points for every IBS competitor in the class.
As you can see the LR board can change the SOY points system each year but the LRM program is controlled by the general IBS 1000 yard rules which require an agenda item to change.
I would not be surprised to find that the current IBS board has chosen to ignore this though.
James
You have it backwards. Up until now SOTY points have been based on LRM points.
From the IBS rule book:
2) IBS Awards and Recognition - IBS sanctioned 1000 yard competition only.
a) IBS 1000 yard shooter of the Year program and points will be determined by the Long range
Committee on an annual basis.
4) Long Range Marksman Awards and Recognition - IBS sanctioned 1000-yard competition only.
a) IBS 1000 Yard Long Range Marksman awards will be based solely on points accumulated in
1000-yard registered IBS Benchrest matches.
(i) IBS registered match must have 2 or more competitors.
(ii) The total number of shooters in a class will be divided as evenly as possible into relays.
(iii) In the case where there is only one relay, the winner of that relay must shoot another target
that would be scored as there shoot off target.
(iv) It is the responsibility of the individual 1000 yard clubs to submit a schedule of points
awarded to each shooter (relay and match) per match to the Long Range committee which
will designate one individual to be Keeper of the Points who will submit a report to all shooters
of the results periodically during the year.
(v) Class relay winners .05 points for every IBS shooter in the relay.
(vi) Class shoot-off winner .03 points for every IBS competitor in the class.
As you can see the LR board can change the SOY points system each year but the LRM program is controlled by the general IBS 1000 yard rules which require an agenda item to change.
I would not be surprised to find that the current IBS board has chosen to ignore this though.
James
H
hpasquet
Guest
A good rule would not cause this much conflict and division. Anyone, IBS or not, can vote in the online pole, it seems. The new rule seems to be in error.
First of all, I believe The IBS can determine the SOTY particulars every year. There certainly seems to have been controversy in the point-blank score game.
But more important is this rule:
(ii) The total number of shooters in a class will be divided as evenly as possible into relays.
As long as the "approximately" ten shooters per relay is adhered to, we don't need any new rules. Whether a relay fires simultaneously or sequentially is not specified.
The patch, that as you say has not been well thought out, came about because one or two clubs decided it was in their interests to do things other than the historical method. This apparently got the dander up of people who believed "well, it's not in *my* interest." I imagine there is no rule against huge relays -- but I don't really know -- reading the rule book is not my idea of of fun. Never mind that it's been handled differently in the past.
So as you say, unless clubs voluntarily follow the precedent, a new rule will be needed. Either way, it's no skin off my nose -- total number of points available for the LRM program remains the same. For those that do care, and there seem to be a lot of people who do, it is disheartening to see such a flap.
But more important is this rule:
(ii) The total number of shooters in a class will be divided as evenly as possible into relays.
As long as the "approximately" ten shooters per relay is adhered to, we don't need any new rules. Whether a relay fires simultaneously or sequentially is not specified.
The patch, that as you say has not been well thought out, came about because one or two clubs decided it was in their interests to do things other than the historical method. This apparently got the dander up of people who believed "well, it's not in *my* interest." I imagine there is no rule against huge relays -- but I don't really know -- reading the rule book is not my idea of of fun. Never mind that it's been handled differently in the past.
So as you say, unless clubs voluntarily follow the precedent, a new rule will be needed. Either way, it's no skin off my nose -- total number of points available for the LRM program remains the same. For those that do care, and there seem to be a lot of people who do, it is disheartening to see such a flap.
M
mike in co
Guest
and if this single issue does not prove beyond a doubt that there is a large error in how this organization is run, nothing ever will.
the process is setup to default to eastern wishes period.
untill they are willing to become a "national" organization and give up thier strangle hold, nothing will change..it will be an east coast club with west coast members...with NO SAY IN THE PROCESS.
JUST LIKE NOW......
mike in co
the process is setup to default to eastern wishes period.
untill they are willing to become a "national" organization and give up thier strangle hold, nothing will change..it will be an east coast club with west coast members...with NO SAY IN THE PROCESS.
JUST LIKE NOW......
mike in co
M
mike in co
Guest
i do not believe you can "qualify" a win in br by the number of shooters anymore than you can by the conditions during the win.
a win is a win and the points should not vary on the number of shooters anymore than we vary them based on conditions.
relay or shoot off.....
mike in co
a win is a win and the points should not vary on the number of shooters anymore than we vary them based on conditions.
relay or shoot off.....
mike in co
4
4Mesh
Guest
Well Mike, clearly opinions vary eh...
Back when I got involved with 1K BR, I paid my membership, was handed a rulebook, and not only expected to read it, but to understand it and follow what it said. They did not give me a reader response card, no survey, and nobody asked my opinion on the rules. Here's what they are, this is how we do it. That was it.
Truth be told, life was simple, and it was nice that way. There were those who said the range was run like "A Dictatorship", and in hindsight, not only were they right, but I'm glad they were. Nowadays, there's all this "input" from the membership, and imo, the shooting sports are better off without it.
Back in those days, there were rules that many disagreed with, but it didn't come to anything like this. If something was challenged, once the vote was taken, the people who lost grumbled a bit and then shut up and went back to shooting. I was on the opposing side of a few decisions, and they are what they are. If the majority wants it that way, then so be it. My biggest issue of all time was simply the process of bringing something TO a vote. I just didn't want the club divided, regardless if I thought the change was good or bad. Some things are best left alone, and I think anyone who's been around the sport a while can attest to the fact that when people in shooting feel strongly about something, they're likely to leave when it changes for what they perceive to be the worse. Some actually want an excuse to leave.
Scott Fletcher above makes great points about making people feel they have been treated fairly. Most don't put nearly enough emphasis on that point when making decisions or casting their votes. Perception is everything. Using one example, if some shooters perceive the relay draw at a match is unfair, then it does not matter if it is or not, it is a problem. If a person thinks they have been singled out on a rule violation, it is a problem. Things like this cause terrific animosity. Especially from one club to another. For the most part, shooters I've known don't have any trouble with getting beat. But they certainly don't like feeling cheated tho. I fall in that category proudly, with many others.
Here though is this .6 thing, and how can anyone appease the people who think one method or the other is so unfair? Every possible contingency has been addressed, yet they still are not happy. Here we are, back to where a dictatorship is not such a bad thing after all.
Change is a slow thing, and thank gawd it is. The IBS system of rule changes has MANY good things about it. If your club has not been affiliated long enough to have gone through the process, then why not simmer down a bit and watch how things work. It's really not so bad. Shoot a season or two with the old rules, and low and behold, new ones take their place. If it didn't work out as planned, no trouble, it changes back with just a vote.
I wonder how many past winners of this award are here complaining about the changes? I didn't notice any but I don't know them all. My guess is, the guys who've won before probably figure they can win again, regardless of what math gets used.
The whole "Rule by committee" idea has never worked in history. Get 500 voices together, and you end up with something like Congress. Everyone is pulling on the rope, but too many in different directions. Or, as I also like to say, too many people sitting in the cart, and not enough pulling it.
Back when I got involved with 1K BR, I paid my membership, was handed a rulebook, and not only expected to read it, but to understand it and follow what it said. They did not give me a reader response card, no survey, and nobody asked my opinion on the rules. Here's what they are, this is how we do it. That was it.
Truth be told, life was simple, and it was nice that way. There were those who said the range was run like "A Dictatorship", and in hindsight, not only were they right, but I'm glad they were. Nowadays, there's all this "input" from the membership, and imo, the shooting sports are better off without it.
Back in those days, there were rules that many disagreed with, but it didn't come to anything like this. If something was challenged, once the vote was taken, the people who lost grumbled a bit and then shut up and went back to shooting. I was on the opposing side of a few decisions, and they are what they are. If the majority wants it that way, then so be it. My biggest issue of all time was simply the process of bringing something TO a vote. I just didn't want the club divided, regardless if I thought the change was good or bad. Some things are best left alone, and I think anyone who's been around the sport a while can attest to the fact that when people in shooting feel strongly about something, they're likely to leave when it changes for what they perceive to be the worse. Some actually want an excuse to leave.
Scott Fletcher above makes great points about making people feel they have been treated fairly. Most don't put nearly enough emphasis on that point when making decisions or casting their votes. Perception is everything. Using one example, if some shooters perceive the relay draw at a match is unfair, then it does not matter if it is or not, it is a problem. If a person thinks they have been singled out on a rule violation, it is a problem. Things like this cause terrific animosity. Especially from one club to another. For the most part, shooters I've known don't have any trouble with getting beat. But they certainly don't like feeling cheated tho. I fall in that category proudly, with many others.
Here though is this .6 thing, and how can anyone appease the people who think one method or the other is so unfair? Every possible contingency has been addressed, yet they still are not happy. Here we are, back to where a dictatorship is not such a bad thing after all.
Change is a slow thing, and thank gawd it is. The IBS system of rule changes has MANY good things about it. If your club has not been affiliated long enough to have gone through the process, then why not simmer down a bit and watch how things work. It's really not so bad. Shoot a season or two with the old rules, and low and behold, new ones take their place. If it didn't work out as planned, no trouble, it changes back with just a vote.
I wonder how many past winners of this award are here complaining about the changes? I didn't notice any but I don't know them all. My guess is, the guys who've won before probably figure they can win again, regardless of what math gets used.
The whole "Rule by committee" idea has never worked in history. Get 500 voices together, and you end up with something like Congress. Everyone is pulling on the rope, but too many in different directions. Or, as I also like to say, too many people sitting in the cart, and not enough pulling it.
4mesh,
In this case, there was no rule in the rulebook against large relays. Even if we did read the rulebook, there was nothing in it about this matter. In this case there was no chance to vote. In this case the decision was SWIFT with NO chance for discussion...kinda like your beloved dictatorship.
In this case, there was no rule in the rulebook against large relays. Even if we did read the rulebook, there was nothing in it about this matter. In this case there was no chance to vote. In this case the decision was SWIFT with NO chance for discussion...kinda like your beloved dictatorship.
D
David Wheeler
Guest
Wow, a lot of pissin and moaning in the House. Or is it the Senate? Sounds like an election year to me. Just shoot and enjoy it for what it is or take up politics. This pastime of ours was supposed to be fun from what I remember!
Damn...
Damn...
Bob Pastor
New member
Good Evening Gentlemen, Hey Davey, Carol sends a big Hello!,
Just to put a little perspective on this whole discussion, from an old persons point of view. You guys do realize that you are arguing about points that will earn you a $50.00 jacket and bragging rights. Now, to earn enough points to get that jacket, you will spend between $30,000.00 and $50,000.00. Yes, those are the right numbers. Plus you have to be good or real lucky at the same time. Between rifles and all the junk needed to support them, time from work, gas, lodging,food and the years of doing this, the price goes up. What you can't put a value on is the fellowship and fun. I'd like to believe that the friendships I've made over the last 12 years was worth so much more than a jacket. During the last 12 years I've witnessed some of the finests sportsmanship exibited anywhere on this planet, at 1,000 yd. matches. No points were awarded for a jacket. I've seen a few people burn themselves out driving all over the country for a jacket. The point I'm trying to make is: The points don't really matter all that much in the scheme of our sport. They are a bonus for competing. I'd much rather spend a day with friends and a mason jar "Steve", or eat peanuts from a 50 lb. bag, "Davey", than fight over how many points I need for a $50.00 jacket.
Just to put a little perspective on this whole discussion, from an old persons point of view. You guys do realize that you are arguing about points that will earn you a $50.00 jacket and bragging rights. Now, to earn enough points to get that jacket, you will spend between $30,000.00 and $50,000.00. Yes, those are the right numbers. Plus you have to be good or real lucky at the same time. Between rifles and all the junk needed to support them, time from work, gas, lodging,food and the years of doing this, the price goes up. What you can't put a value on is the fellowship and fun. I'd like to believe that the friendships I've made over the last 12 years was worth so much more than a jacket. During the last 12 years I've witnessed some of the finests sportsmanship exibited anywhere on this planet, at 1,000 yd. matches. No points were awarded for a jacket. I've seen a few people burn themselves out driving all over the country for a jacket. The point I'm trying to make is: The points don't really matter all that much in the scheme of our sport. They are a bonus for competing. I'd much rather spend a day with friends and a mason jar "Steve", or eat peanuts from a 50 lb. bag, "Davey", than fight over how many points I need for a $50.00 jacket.
Bob Pastor
New member
Good Evening Gentlemen, Hey Davey, Carol sends a big Hello!,
Just to put a little perspective on this whole discussion, from an old persons point of view. You guys do realize that you are arguing about points that will earn you a $50.00 jacket and bragging rights. Now, to earn enough points to get that jacket, you will spend between $30,000.00 and $50,000.00. Yes, those are the right numbers. Plus you have to be good or real lucky at the same time. Between rifles and all the junk needed to support them, time from work, gas, lodging,food and the years of doing this, the price goes up. What you can't put a value on is the fellowship and fun. I'd like to believe that the friendships I've made over the last 12 years was worth so much more than a jacket. During the last 12 years I've witnessed some of the finests sportsmanship exibited anywhere on this planet, at 1,000 yd. matches. No points were awarded for a jacket. I've seen a few people burn themselves out driving all over the country for a jacket. The point I'm trying to make is: The points don't really matter all that much in the scheme of our sport. They are a bonus for competing. I'd much rather spend a day with friends and a mason jar "Steve", or eat peanuts from a 50 lb. bag, "Davey", than fight over how many points I need for a $50.00 jacket.
Just to put a little perspective on this whole discussion, from an old persons point of view. You guys do realize that you are arguing about points that will earn you a $50.00 jacket and bragging rights. Now, to earn enough points to get that jacket, you will spend between $30,000.00 and $50,000.00. Yes, those are the right numbers. Plus you have to be good or real lucky at the same time. Between rifles and all the junk needed to support them, time from work, gas, lodging,food and the years of doing this, the price goes up. What you can't put a value on is the fellowship and fun. I'd like to believe that the friendships I've made over the last 12 years was worth so much more than a jacket. During the last 12 years I've witnessed some of the finests sportsmanship exibited anywhere on this planet, at 1,000 yd. matches. No points were awarded for a jacket. I've seen a few people burn themselves out driving all over the country for a jacket. The point I'm trying to make is: The points don't really matter all that much in the scheme of our sport. They are a bonus for competing. I'd much rather spend a day with friends and a mason jar "Steve", or eat peanuts from a 50 lb. bag, "Davey", than fight over how many points I need for a $50.00 jacket.
M
mike in co
Guest
bob
if it is so insignificant,
WHY WAS IT NECESARY TO MAKE A CHANGE , WITH NO INPUT FROM "ALL" THE CLUB MEMBERS ???
( and in case you have not figured it out yet, it is the unsportsman like behavior of east coast members complaining about the points that started this. they want thier version of "fair", but that does not include allowing the WHOLE membership to make club desisions. think about that for a while).
mike in co
if it is so insignificant,
WHY WAS IT NECESARY TO MAKE A CHANGE , WITH NO INPUT FROM "ALL" THE CLUB MEMBERS ???
( and in case you have not figured it out yet, it is the unsportsman like behavior of east coast members complaining about the points that started this. they want thier version of "fair", but that does not include allowing the WHOLE membership to make club desisions. think about that for a while).
mike in co
Good Evening Gentlemen, Hey Davey, Carol sends a big Hello!,
Just to put a little perspective on this whole discussion, from an old persons point of view. You guys do realize that you are arguing about points that will earn you a $50.00 jacket and bragging rights. Now, to earn enough points to get that jacket, you will spend between $30,000.00 and $50,000.00. Yes, those are the right numbers. Plus you have to be good or real lucky at the same time. Between rifles and all the junk needed to support them, time from work, gas, lodging,food and the years of doing this, the price goes up. What you can't put a value on is the fellowship and fun. I'd like to believe that the friendships I've made over the last 12 years was worth so much more than a jacket. During the last 12 years I've witnessed some of the finests sportsmanship exibited anywhere on this planet, at 1,000 yd. matches. No points were awarded for a jacket. I've seen a few people burn themselves out driving all over the country for a jacket. The point I'm trying to make is: The points don't really matter all that much in the scheme of our sport. They are a bonus for competing. I'd much rather spend a day with friends and a mason jar "Steve", or eat peanuts from a 50 lb. bag, "Davey", than fight over how many points I need for a $50.00 jacket.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob Pastor
New member
bob
if it is so insignificant,
WHY WAS IT NECESARY TO MAKE A CHANGE , WITH NO INPUT FROM "ALL" THE CLUB MEMBERS ???
( and in case you have not figured it out yet, it is the unsportsman like behavior of east coast members complaining about the points that started this. they want thier version of "fair", but that does not include allowing the WHOLE membership to make club desisions. think about that for a while).
mike in co
Dear Mike,
As always, your postings and responses are argumentative and abrasive. Insignificant? Absolutely, as far as the real reason for competing in the first place. "Testing ones own ability to put all 5 or 10 shots into the smallest group or best score."Fair? Nothing will ever be fair enough for everybody. If you don't like the way rules are made, there are ways in place to change them. East, West, North or South, in the end, it's just a damn rifle match. Family, friends and personal satisfaction are what every shooter is really trying to get out of any sport. Mike, all this fighting doesn't do anything to advance shooting. I personally think the points should be eliminated all together. Not one person, in 1,000 yd. bench rest has ever made money. Why do they keep throwing money away? Because it's fun. If the IBS wants to eliminate all the internal fighting, Do away with the points system. The points system in itself can't be absolutely fair. If you or anyone else really needs a $50.00 jacket so badly, that they are willing to tear apart a great sport with bickering,we can take up a collection and get you one. Oh, and my one abrasive comment for you. Please do not comment on any club East of where you are until you actually spend the time and money competing and getting to personally know each and every club. These are the clubs that gave us the ability to test our skills and they deserve to be spoken about in a better light.