Possible Attendance at Next Nationals

Linzie,

I agree with the intent behind what you and others are saying about incorporating a Qualification process into the system and creating a By Invitation Only Nationals by forcing those of us wanting to be at the Big Show to first attend any of just a few (soon to be 2) Regionals (there were only 3 Regionals nationwide this year: Northeast, SoCal and Oregon). And I also agree that no matter what method is followed, there is no perfect answer. But, there are a few major problems with requiring Qualification over using an open registration system.

First, would shooters like Gert from So. Africa, or the writer from Airgun World Magazine, who by the way did a splendid job with his write up and accompanying pictorial of this years Nationals, or any other shooters from around the world who may be willing to go the distance to be there be turned away? Would an exception be made for just a few? Or would they simply be told: No thanks, we don't need the exposure. Sorry, but you didn't Qualify, so go away? or Maybe next year?

Also, it has been strongly rumored that next year here in the Northeast there may not be another Regional Match held, meaning now there will only be 2 places in the entire country to Qualify: SoCal and Oregon. That would mean for any of us wanting to attend the Nationals would first have to spend a large wad of all that extra cash we all have lying around, not to mention scheduling the extra plus or minus week away from our jobs and families, to first travel more than a few thousand miles in order to Qualify, and then turn right around and do/spend it all again in order to attend the Nationals.

So, what if a half dozen or so of us decided to do just that and showed up at Joe's range for next years Regionals? From what I've been told, it's a great place to shoot, and I, as well as Paul Bendix, Todd Banks, Dan Brown, Mark Normandin and Bill Day, have always wanted to come west for a visit and shoot with you guys. Would there be enough seats to add 6 more into next years Regional mix? I don't see that happening. Or what about Oregon? Do they have enough extra seats to handle their group of regulars getting that much larger? Plus, this would also mean there will be that many more shooters from all around the country wanting to find seats at Regionals so they too can attend the Nationals.

Let's go back to that matter of doubling the cost. For some of us older, retired folk who may be living on fixed incomes it also becomes a matter of needing to be very conscientious about where we are spending all that "extra disposable" income, and how much of it we can justify spending annually on our obsessions, rather than whether or not we would be willing to travel the distance - twice - or spend the money - twice.

Just something to think about.

Dave Shattuck
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wonder if pulling qualification from the Scoreline would be a better option? It's kind of a more well rounded view of what happens over a longer period of time, anyway.

That would only require shooters to get off their rears and just participate in their local matches. Maybe qualification based on 3 match aggregate?

The actual lack of Regional events does seem to pose a problem.

Mike
 
Dave Shattuck said:
Linzie,

Let's go back to that matter of doubling the cost. For some of us older, retired folk who may be living on fixed incomes it also becomes a matter of needing to be very conscientious about where we are spending all that "extra disposable" income, and how much of it we can justify spending annually on our obsessions, rather than whether or not we would be willing to travel the distance - twice - or spend the money - twice.
Click to expand...

Being retired and on a fixed income, my sentiments exactly. Back 25-30 years ago when I started doing this my only concern was coming up with those three and four day weekends to get away and compete regionally. Now, can I afford the costs associated with attending matches at distance on top of the escalating cost associated with everything else in everyday life now. And, shooting reagonally is no longer a matter of being able to go to a bunch of ranges within a two to thtee hundred mile distance because most of the ranges that were hosting sanctioned events in my region have stopped for one reason or another. Actually, the closest sanctioned range to me now is not in my region and the closest sanction range of the few left in my region is now 8 hours away.

I would love to go to the Nationals. I have been twice before many years back. I didn't do any good but that's not why I went. I went to meet and see people of legend that I had read stories about, who made the toys that I buy and use and to learn from the masters. YES, if I can afford to, I will go to the Nationals. But having to travel great distances to regionals in order to qualify will eat a lot of those funds up needed to attend the Nationals which just may put me in a financial position of not being able to attend the Nationals.

Regards,
 
Nationals

Mike perhaps has the answer to the problem Gentlemen...

This suggestion is smart and the best of both worlds. Local matches, less travel, less money and still be viable.

I would assume the scoreline would be from outdoor shooting........unless the the Nationals are inside, then indoor would apply.
Shooters could participate for a specified length of time and use their 3 highest scores for consideration. This gets tricky here as some ranges are better than others and this disparity to be fair must be filtered out.
If the score places a competitor in the allotted number of shooters for a given Nationals range they are on the list to shoot. If they for some reason cannot make the trip then the next qualified shooter slides into that slot.

Sounds like a win-win to me and it needs discussion.

Frank Tirrell
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I respect the responses given on this subject matter, and hope it does not get out of hand.

Here are my personal feelings on this matter: If there is a qualification for next years Nationals there should not be a qualifier at a Regional's to get in. That would be difficult, since there might be 2 Regional's possible for next year as it looks now. It should be the match directors responsibility to hold a qualifier at their local club.

This years Nationals was a spectacular event that Garrett and his crew put on, the overall support from the locals and support from the vendors will not be duplicated elsewhere next year. This is Reality.

When I crunch the numbers, the competitors outside of Phoenix, excluding the participating countries, I come up with around 13 shooters. These names were taken from the active shooters from our Scoreline.

When I crunch the numbers of active clubs posting scores to the Scoreline, it's not good either.

If any of you want to fork out the funds to have it in St. Louis and are willing to take the ball and run with it, please let the Board know. We will support you, otherwise we may either have to compromise to a smaller venue, or not have any Nationals for 2015, which I feel would be a mistake.

I will agree to an extent that a central part of the country would be more suited, but again looking at the number of competitors who are actually competing it's not good either. How many more would show, including new to the game, I honestly don't know. Either way there's going to be expenses, and feel most die hard's will show no matter where it's held. New shooters mostly likely if it's a reasonable driving distance.

I'm also tired of folks comparing our Air-Rifle Nationals, to a Centerfire Nationals, there are completely different elements involved and hopefully you can figure out the main one.

I have calls and emails to various clubs, including St. Louis to get quotes. I will also be speaking with vendors for their support.

I personaly will not get into anymore discussion on this matter. The Board will weigh out it's options and report back, so please have patience. Bottom line, we have to be realistic in what we have to work with.

Regards,
Joe
 
Last edited:
Joe,

Thanks for stepping in on this issue, if only this one time.

Regardless of location for a national event, travel and expense is required. I hear about all the consequences that are possible due to the use of a qualification process. The USA Scoreline is now suggested as a substitute for a regional qualifier. Now the rumor is floated that the Salem regional is history.

The real issue is not to turn SHOOTERS away. The press is welcome but their job is to report, not to shoot. International shooters should be welcome.

Easy solution. It can be done.

Investigate the possible venues. Determine the feasibility of acquiring enough resources and the proper volunteers. Get an estimate of costs involved. This will get you to how many benches you have to offer and most importantly, where. Determine classes and the number of days. Make an announcement that is to gauge interest and is NOT a commitment. Any announcement should include the number of slots available and that it is time sensitive. Have a deadline. Give it 60 days. A post on the forum is great, have Wilbur make it a "sticky", so it stays at the top.

Now, you will have some sense of how many are coming and from where. If you have too many that would be turned away, then qualifying in some fashion might be necessary. Things now get tough, locals, defined by some distance from the chosen venue, should qualify, maybe at a regional event. Those not local might need to submit scores, plural, at sanctioned matches. Match directors, in both cases, should have input on who would receive invitations, AFTER a commitment to travel. International shooters could submit scores that could be considered by the board for invitation, again, with a commitment to travel. Have a waiting list.

If not, then get back with the initial responders and tell them you need a FIRM, as in entry fees, commitment to travel. Give them 30 days. Make up a waiting list. There are always things that come up to cause cancellations.

Nothing is perfect, few things are but for you and the board to make a decision, it seems that more information about how many REALLY want to come is required.
 
Ok I still don't see any response to the question

Everyone has put lots more ideas out but the organizers of the nation wide matches haven't answered the question I asked . It would simplify lots if we knew how many from all the clubs there are out there . And my calling it a qualifier doesn't mean regional , it means all you clubs can do what ever you deem fit to set list of your shooters who you feel should represent your region at a national . And if the 6 foreign shooters show up again I'm sure they would be welcome .

Lets be realistic we're not talking a hundred shooters in the whole country as near as I can gauge from looking at match results . So if your allowed to set your own list no one who wanted to come would most likely not be excluded. Scoreline , match series points , whatever you can control your own priority . But let's see a number of how many there are .
 
Four guys here in Montrose, Linzie.

I'm pretty sure that there are only two from here that would possibly attend. One for sure (me).:)

Mike
 
Thoughts on 2015 Nationals

Here are some of my thoughts on the 2015 National Championship.

We need to have one!

We need to make every effort to insure that the best Airgun Benchrest shooters in the US participate, period. Attracting lots of new shooters is a nice idea, luring them in with thousands of dollars worth of prizes and a gala event is a nice idea, but it won't happen this year. If you got rid of the prizes and the festivities at last years nationals you would have had about 30 or 40 shooters attend, most of whom would have been local AZ shooters who spent no money to attend other than the entry fee and gas money. Let's make 2015 about the championship and not the frills surrounding the event. If we don't attract the best shooters in the country, then the championship looses something. The best shooters want to compete against the best shooters.

The USARB Board of Directors has to be completely in charge of the conduct of the match, including scoring (whatever the method used), rules interpretation and managing the execution of the match.

We need to figure out how to have the 2015 Nationals at Open Grove. I would guess 75% of the top benchrest shooters in the country are within a days drive of Open Grove. We need to work with the other 25% and figure out how we can get them there. If I was going to travel a long distance to a match I would rather travel to the Southern CA coast than to someplace in the Midwest. You could bring the family and make it a vacation that everyone would enjoy. Joe has the facility, the support team, the food vendors, reasonably priced lodging within a couple of miles of the range, all the equipment to hold a first class National Championship and the desire to do it. There is only one stumbling block, the number of benches which is now 10. If we would hold the competition over three days rather than a weekend I think we could shoot LV, HV, Open 25 & 50 for up to perhaps 40 shooters if we staggered lunches and shot as many relays as light would allow. If more benches were added we could accommodate more shooters.

I think the top 20 shooters in the counthry as determined by results in the 2014 Nationals and any regional matches shot after the 2014 Nationals and perhaps Scoreline should automatically qualify for the 2015 Nationals. Any remaining slots up to the maximum capacity should be open on a first come first served basis. Slots not taken by the top 20 would go into the general pool.

I think some of us are incredibly optimistic about the current status of Airgun Benchrest in the US. On average the major regional matches draw between 10 and 20 people. When the 2011 World Championships were held in the USA, 15 US shooters competed 11 of which were from the West Coast or the North East. I looked at the results for the 2014 National Centerfire 100-200 yard Benchrest Championships (one of the premier centerfire matches in the country) and 65 shooters participated. Talking about 1000 shooters paying $10 to join the organization is getting ahead of ourselves, If we could get 50 people to pay $10 I would be elated. Airgun Benchrest will never be a sport that attracts large numbers of shooters. The cost to compete is prohibitive, and the facilities to hold matches are limited. Let's keep things in perspective.

Airgun Benchrest in the US is what it is because of the dedication, incredible work and monetary contributions made by a handful of people (and I do mean a handful) who love to compete and hold competitions across the country to try and attract people to the sport.

If I could compete in a 2015 National Championship at Open Grove with 40 of the best shooters in the Americas competing, I would be one happy camper (and so would everyone else who attended).


Jim in Sacramento
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nationals

Steve called me today to reminding me he just returned from colorful Maine and how well the lobster rolls and native blueberry pie tasted. I shall not defame the forum with my response.

However he did make a very good point when we discussed the amount of benches potentially available per range that might host the Nationals. This figure dictating the number of shooters a given range may accommodate.

I commented on the range difference, some easy and some hard stating I did not how to make the playing field level. His statement and solution follows, this with a bit of paraphrasing and my input where deemed necessary.............don't call me Steve I won't take the call.

First qualify the number of benches available, Second divide that number by the number of USARBR sanctioned clubs. The resulting number would be the amount of shooters that each club may send to the Nationals. This taking care of both the range disparity issue and number of shooters.
Match directors then holds shoots determine the qualified shooters Next confirm the probability of each shooter attending the Nationals. For example if out out of 3 qualifying shooters at a particular sanctioned club only one can and will attend the Nationals, lesser scores in line now qualify to fill the available slots using the same commitment process. In the case allotted slots are not filled by some board specified date, the remaining unfilled slots are reverted back to a National pot or open drawing for anyone who is willing make the Nationals............I like the concept as it allows both the skilled shooter to attend yet allows us regular guys and gals a chance to attend also ...if we are lucky.

Frank Tirrell
 
Last edited by a moderator:
An Update at Open Grove. We will have 4 more benches up and target stands finished in a couple months.

We will have 14 benches, we can host 42 competitors, 3 relays per class.

As I said in my earlier post, at least 13 competitors outside of Phoenix participated in this years Nationals. It's hard to see 29 more competitors signing up no matter where it's at except in Phoenix.

Regards,
Joe
 
Joe,

If the national event is at your place, you could be pleasantly surprised at the turnout.
 
sgeorge said:
Joe,

If the national event is at your place, you could be pleasantly surprised at the turnout.
Click to expand...

Joe,

Read the above! Steve's got it absolutely right! And glad to hear about the 4 new benches. I'll do my best to be there while bringing along possibly 3 or 4 others.


Jim,

I agree 100% with everything you suggested. Let's do it that way for 2015, then decide where we go from there.


Sounds like everything may be falling into place for the 2015 Nationals. My only suggestion would be to try and schedule all future Nationals, no matter where in the country they are held, for sometime either in the early Spring or late Fall when it's not overwhelmingly hot and before or after most ranges Outdoor seasons are in progress. That is, unless a particular area has some usual Regional conditions, like Monsoons or Santa Anna winds, or in Joe's case, the harvest, that could strongly impact the match.

After being at the 2011 Worlds in South Carolina when it was ±106° all week, I had little interest in going to Phoenix last spring while knowing it would again be 100+° every day. I have always been extremely heat-sensitive, and am finding the older I get, the more sensitive I'm becoming. To use a line from one of my granddaughters favorite songs: "The cold never bothered me anyway!" And I am sure there are others who feel the same.

I want to thank Joe, Ron, Bob Z, Craig, Todd and Steven, along with everyone else who over the years have added their comments, ideas and for doing everything you have done to help promote our sport. It's good leadership along with a dedicated members who make an organization strong and carry it forward.

Dave Shattuck
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"The USARB Board of Directors has to be completely in charge of the conduct of the match, including scoring (whatever the method used), rules interpretation and managing the execution of the match."

Not that it matters in the least...but I don't agree with any part of the above statement. You have rules...so follow them and all will be OK. If it ain't OK, you need more rules. Follow the rules - always!
 
Wilbur,

I agree with you. Match directors should be given the right to run their matches as they see fit, which includes electronic scoring. If the board wants to endevour to write rules, specific to a national event, they will find that then trickles down to regional, then local matches. Before you know it, the USARB rule book will be as ridiculous as the WRABF version.

Match directors for any large event will make an announcement which spells out the course of fire and how scoring will be done. If shooters don't agree, they can show their displeasure by NOT attending. More rules is the wrong direction. Better, more specific rules is always the preferred way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rules

Wilbur I think you and I are saying the same thing. I don't want any more rules, I just want the ones we have equitably enforced. My point was that in a national championship the governing body of the sport and its representatives should have the final say in all matters relating to the conduct of the match and the interpretation of the rules.

Steve, I couldn't disagree with you more. In order to have a national championship you need an organization that sanctions the match and provides the guidelines and rules for its execution. The local club and staff provide the needed support to the national organization and help as directed by the national representatives. You cannot have a local match director change the rules of the sanctioning body to suit their personal preferences. To carry your position to the extreme I could announce that I was going to have a national championship match in Sacramento, and all scoring was going to be done by eyeballing the targets only and no one could see the targets until after the awards presentation.

Jim in Sacramento
 
Jim,

Yes, we disagree. Fortunately, you are not on the new board and you have not sanctioned a club. Was there one air rifle benchrest match in Sacramento? Was it unsanctioned? Sounds like a franchise of that place in Temecula. Therefore, the rest of us need only be concerned about your opinion when you post on the forum.

Continuing to bring up the mistakes in Arizona is a poor way to make your argument. Yes, we disagree.
 
steve your wrong

I have been to a regional held at sac. And Jim was very much a one man show doing almost everything him shelf .he's one of the most humble and honorable guys in this sport .And works hard to participate and promote it .
I think you should do your homework before poping off .
Linzie
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Linzie,

I am sorry, not "popping off", just stating facts, no emotion. I am aware of the match you refer to. Ask Jim if it was sanctioned. Look on the Clubs page of the web site. Sacramento is listed but it is not sanctioned.

Jim is not on the board and he is not a sanctioned match director. As such, his opinion, my opinion, your opinion does not mean much. His being humble or honorable has never been in question. Everyone in your area appreciates his promotion and hard work. Those things don't make me wrong. As I said, we simply disagree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top