How is team USA sel...
 

How is team USA selected for the worlds?  

Page 1 / 2
  RSS

Jacob W Sumner
(@jacob-sumner)
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 35
2018-11-09 18:42:23  

I am not trying to make the team, as my results are not worthy I feel. (yet)

My questions are, how do we make sure the best of the best is sent each year to represent USA? How are team selections made? 

How are they funded by our membership fees? What fees do they have to pay out of pocket?

In 2021 if we do host the worlds how many shooters are we allowed?  

I bring this up to shine light on a subject that I hear at every large match. But never get an answer to.

It has been said you either have to know someone and / or pay your own way. If this is the case it is wrong. 

I will suggest that starting this year we send only our best shooters. Say we take a look at the GP scores for top 6 or we hold the Nationals before the Worlds. Placing in the top 3 of WFTF classes wins you a spot on the team. 

Sponsors from the industries should be covering fees for top shooters. Not employees, I won't use names but you companies know who you are. 

Nothing personal against anyone but if you are not a top shooter you should not be going to the worlds.


Quote
Scott A.
(@scott-allen)
Moderator FT
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 106
2018-11-09 19:59:41  

This is the last published info on the selection process that I'm aware of:

https://aafta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=286

 

You might want to contact Greg Sauve directly if you have other question about that process. 

 

As far as numbers for 2021 it's too early to know.    It's barely out of the gate on planning.  

 

 


ReplyQuote
Kerndtc
(@kerndtc)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 99
2018-11-09 20:10:28  

This was sent to us by Greg,

"For all WFTF'ers, 

This is the criteria that are presently being used to qualify Team USA members for World's participation. It is criteria based, so if a shooter meets criteria #1 he/she is qualified, then those that meet criteria #2, and so on. In the case of a tie, the shooter meeting the criteria most recently would qualify first. The shooter must shoot in WFTF to qualify (exception, committee selection).

At present, there are 8 PCP spots and 6 Springer spots. That could be decreased as we now have 40 countries in the WFTF and have been adding about 2 per year. 

1. Top 10 in one of last 4 Worlds 
2. Top 5 in one of last 3 US Nationals 
3. Top 20 *last 3 Worlds 
4. Top 10 *last 3 Nationals 
5. Committee selection (a committee appointed by AAFTA may select a shooter who does not qualify under the above criteria, based on past performance, experience, or success in a related division) 
6. Top 20 finish *last 4 Worlds 
7. Top10 finish *last 3 US Nationals 
8. Top 5 in *last 2 US Grand Prix finals 
9. Committee selection 
10. Top 30 finish *last 4 Worlds 
11. Top 15 *last 3 US Nationals 
12. Top 10 *last 3 Grand Prix finals 
13. Top 40 *last 3 Worlds 
14. Top 20 *last 4 US Nationals 
15. Top 15 last 4 Grand Prix finals = one of

Greg"

People/ companies aren't lining up to throw money at an airgun team. The fact that a Pyramyd Air was generous to help with team uniforms was very much welcomed in my opinion.

I did accept that this was going to be on my dime. Between flight, rental car, food, and hotel it cost about what a 6 day vacation to Europe should.  It's a hobby, not a career. If someone wants to help I'd be interested.

Maybe now that we have had some gold brought home a few other companies would be interested if the teams would sport hats, or have iron on adverts for them on our shooting attire or uniforms. 

"Nothing personal against anyone but if you are not a top shooter you should not be going to the worlds."

A lot of top US shooters don't have the time/ means to travel to a worlds event. That's why we have a criteria set by AAFTA for choosing team members. I was really only able to be a part of the team because a team member dropped out and being recommend by a team member. I was signed up as an individual, and crossed my fingers that I'd make it on the team. From what I heard AAFTA helps support the team by covering some of the costs, but I was already paid up as an individual and didn't pursue any type of reimbursement. 

I believe anyone should be able to attend worlds, not everyone is cut out for the team but like the criteria shows, it is not a simple task. If a spot on the team opens, and someone shows interest then I see no problem making exceptions. 

Hope some of this info helps brother man!

Cam

 

 


ReplyQuote
Jacob W Sumner
(@jacob-sumner)
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 35
2018-11-09 21:24:35  

Thank you for the info gentlemen.

I would make the argument that #2 should be GP scores. It is just an opinion, the Nationals being a weekend event. Any one person could have a good day / weekend if you will. And win or place in that slot, the GP score shows consistency.

Again nothing personal against any of the shooters from any of the years I have looked back on. But should there be a year hold on selection for the next Worlds if you do not perform? The loss of equipment being one of a few exceptions. Unless you can prove your equipment failed, it was a bad performance and should not be rewarded with another attempt. The next top 5 shooters should get a chance to make the trip.

The BOG would have to decide on what a cutoff would be. I feel it should be if you do not make the top 20. Or maybe by percentage.

Other than that I agree with the selections.

 "At present, there are 8 PCP spots and 6 Springer spots. That could be decreased as we now have 40 countries in the WFTF and have been adding about 2 per year."  

This makes me feel like the worlds team should get love from sponsors like NRA and such. If the higher uppers go through the proper channels there will be supporters. Need to get team USA springer to do a tour lol sorry Cam.

Again thank you for the info.


ReplyQuote
Greg Sauve
(@greg5850)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 20
2018-11-09 22:18:22  

Jacob,

So far we have not had to use the selection criteria to determine who can go or not go to Worlds.  Everyone who has signed up has been able to go each year, including this year.  The criteria does decide who's scores count for the team competition.

The reason the GP's don't count higher is that the GP's are varied in difficulty and participation. Some have 3-5 shooters in WFTF, some have 35 shooters.  The way that percentages are assigned if you shoot in a GP that has a stand out hunter or open shooter your WFTF GP percentage is based on that score.  So you may win WFTF but only score 90%, while another shooter wins WFTF in a GP that doesn't have the highly competitive open and hunter shooters.  That shooter could get 100%.  Also, some parts of the country have multiple GP's, while others have to travel extensively to get to just one.  Nationals is a straight "head to head" competition that has most of the shooters, and to score at Worlds, you must be really on your game.  

There are 35 countries participating in Worlds 2019 in England.  England has 450 spots for shooters.  They divided the spots by the number of countries, with the host country getting double.  Each country received 11 spots for round 1 of registration, but only 11 countries paid for all 11.  For registration round 2 the 11 countries that paid for all spots received 16 more spots.  Those that pay for those will receive an allotment of the spots left for round 3.  Bottom line, all 27 USA shooters who indicated an interest in attending Worlds can do so.  We will have additional spots available for round 3, but have no one interested at this point.  The selection criteria will only determine who's scores count for the team competition. 

Thanks for the interest and input into the process, it's new and not perfect and I expect it will be tweaked some along the way.

Greg Sauve, WFTF USA RGB rep


ReplyQuote
Bill Day
(@bill-day)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 149
2018-11-10 08:03:09  

Greg, Excellent explanation! I was told by a U.S WFTF competitor that a couple years ago it cost him about $3500 to attend a world game. That's a big hunk of change for the average FT shooter. How much does out AFFTA org assist in this cause? I know it can't be much because they don't take in that much.  Any plans for AFFTA to attempt to get sponsors to help our the US qualified competitors that attend, or would that be on the individual competitor? 


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-10 09:27:11  

Greg,

As you said, it looks like any FT shooter from the USA that expresses an interest (and has the time and financial resources) can have a spot at the next World WFTF match. So the selection criteria is not so important at this time. If there were more people that wanted to go, then the selection process should change.

 

In the Worlds selection criteria, items 7 and 9 are repeats of items 4 and 5, so those items could be removed. Also, once you get to item 5, the remaining items (6 through 10) should not even be there. If there were enough people actually vying for spots, and item 5 were employed, it ends up looking like favoritism to those that meet the subsequent criteria.

 

As far as the GP standings as a qualifying criteria, you said:

“...So you may win WFTF but only score 90%, while another shooter wins WFTF in a GP that doesn't have the highly competitive open and hunter shooters. That shooter could get 100%. ...”

 

A GP match usually attracts the best shooters in a region. Scores among top national shooters are about the same in all Divisions. The top score sets the standard for a GP match. If the WFTF shooter beats the best in the field at a GP match, why does it matter which Division those OTHER shooters chose to shoot in?

 

“...Also, some parts of the country have multiple GP's, while others have to travel extensively to get to just one. ...”

 

That problem is even more pronounced for the National match.

 

Looking at the WFTF shooters performances, the top GP standing each year shows a strong correlation to performance at the Worlds, at least as much correlation as the National match shows. The piston team won the worlds this year. If the team were based solely on National match performance in the last few years, that team would not have existed. Based solely on GP performance, they would all have been able to attend.

 

The “committee” should try to add the AAFTA GP as at least one of the main qualifying criteria. Before the worlds match comes to the USA.

 

For World match qualification, AAFTA uses the World match as the main qualifier. Were USA teams to become very successful, that criteria has the potential to become a closed loop.

 

I think that England uses it's own GP as the only criteria for their selection.


ReplyQuote
Greg Sauve
(@greg5850)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 20
2018-11-10 11:58:31  

Scott

Thanks for the input!  You seem to have a great eye for these things.  

You are correct on the criteria redundancy.  I believe I erroneously sent a draft to the shooters, I will fix it.

The committee selection was put in to allow selection of top Lady, Junior, or Veteran shooters who have a chance at placing at Worlds. Or for the special circumstance such as a shooter who is receiving a WFTF Service Award etc.

As for the GP’s, percentages are awarded to shooters based on their score as compared to the match high score regardless of class.  For example,shooter A scores 50/60 and wins WFTF and shooter B scores 55/60 to win Open and have match high score.    Under the present system the 55 is considered 100% and all other scores from all classes are calculated from that.  So shooter B’s 50, which won WFTF, gets a 90.9%.  Shooters who attend a GP with a couple of “heavy hitters “ in Open  or Hunter  (usually the bigger matches) will have lower percentages than those  who went to a GP where those few names did not participate ( generally smaller, more local GP’s. ) We should probably take a look at this system, but need an alternative.

In England there are only two classes, PCP and Spring,  and they also must attend certain qualifying shoots. Some countries use one shoot for qualification.

I understand your concern about using Worlds results for Worlds qualifications becoming a “closed loop” but we have had only a few shooters over the years make top 10 or 20 or even 40.  

Finally, if we manage to pull off hosting Worlds in the US, I believe all interested US shooters will be able to participate.  

 

Greg

 

 


ReplyQuote
Jacob W Sumner
(@jacob-sumner)
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 35
2018-11-10 12:57:42  

Here is a link to the NRA sponsor info and stuff.  https://competitions.nra.org/

I am not sure how we would go about it. Or what if any control of competitions and stuff they would want. This would cater to a centrally located Nationals and level playing field for all.

As for the GP scores two suggestions. Percentages are done by the highest score in WFTF  for springer and pcp. Open, Hunter, freestyle or any of the other groups by high score in a separate bracket. 

I know this would be hard at most if not all matches. Because the attendance of each class varies so much. And I understand the majority of people in the USA shoot in Hunter or Open. This is an issue of us trying to change the game to what we like. Or disabilities forcing shooters to choose a position they are able to shoot in.

So what should be our best selection tool again in my opinion. (GP) scores are hindered by high scores in hunter and open classes. 

Bare with me! Might I suggest we lower all power levels to 12 ft lbs. in competition. Take restrictions off scopes and level the playing field. Having shot off of a bucket with sticks, and a bum bag with a hamster. I can say shooting from sticks is not easier. I would even say shooting up hill is tougher from sticks and bucket. 

A 20 ft lb gun can knock down a target with a split at 100y. It is not fair to have a normalized scoring system with such an unfair advantage.

If I am correct the first worlds match was between USA and England? The furthest distance was 35y and guns were way far behind what they are now. Progression is a beautiful thing but we should have a limit on things. The world has picked 12 ft lbs as the limit for competition. So who are we to try and change the game?

Like where this discussion is going and happy it has been cordial.


ReplyQuote
kevinkunkle
(@kevinkunkle)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 26
2018-11-10 16:57:14  

You do not need to worry about changing the rules. Shoot better and you'll be fine.

FBD "The Legend"


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-10 17:53:54  
Posted by: kevinkunkle

You do not need to worry about changing the rules. Shoot better and you'll be fine.

Assuming you mean rules for selection criteria. Currently, there is no worry as anyone is welcome. That may not always be the case. When/if that time comes, the selection criteria should be such that it is open to the best new shooters, and does not become an exclusive club that requires a legacy to enter.


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-10 17:58:59  

Greg,

You said:

"Shooters who attend a GP with a couple of “heavy hitters “ in Open or Hunter (usually the bigger matches) will have lower percentages than those who went to a GP where those few names did not participate..."

 

There is a minimum standard for GP participation (15 competitors), and looking at this last year, almost all of them had one or two past National champions in attendance, and even more top 5 from the three Divisions. That's enough heavy hitters to set a reasonable scoring standard at each match. I don't see the problem matches that you describe. Also remember that the GP is a series, not just one match. You'll usually need to shoot consistently well at multiple GP matches in order to make it into the top three in the GP series.

 

"I understand your concern about using Worlds results for Worlds qualifications becoming a “closed loop” but we have had only a few shooters over the years make top 10 or 20 or even 40."

 

Just this years piston team had 3 in the top ten. That's already half the available piston team spots. It's certainly possible that three more USA piston shooters could make the top ten at a Worlds match. That would effectively lock up all piston team spots making them only available to people that already shot in the worlds match.

 

I did a little more research on England's criteria. Besides the GP standings, anyone that makes the top 3 in the prior Worlds match is automatically offered a team spot. Even if that were to happen, it always leaves spots open for new blood to qualify.

 

All stuff to think about should the BOG decide to formalize any selection criteria.


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-10 18:19:02  
Posted by: Jacob W Sumner

"...

As for the GP scores two suggestions. Percentages are done by the highest score in WFTF  for springer and pcp. Open, Hunter, freestyle or any of the other groups by high score in a separate bracket.

..."

We have GP matches where only two or three are in WFTF. There is often not enough WFTF competitors to set a reasonable scoring standard (same for piston). Drawing on all Divisions (Hunter/Open/WFTF) is a good way to have reasonable numbers.

I don't buy the argument that the "heavy hitters" in Hunter and Open set too high a standard for WFTF shooters. They are shooting the same course and the scores are usually close enough. Even when a Hunter or Open shooters sets the high match score, the competition for World spots would still only be the other WFTF shooters.


ReplyQuote
Jacob W Sumner
(@jacob-sumner)
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 35
2018-11-10 19:11:08  
Posted by: kevinkunkle

You do not need to worry about changing the rules. Shoot better and you'll be fine.

Thank you for the tip. Can you tell me a few to make my scores better?


ReplyQuote
Jacob W Sumner
(@jacob-sumner)
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 35
2018-11-11 21:19:24  

Can anyone else think of other sponsors? That could be contacted to help support sending a team to the worlds. As well hosting the worlds if we get the chance?


ReplyQuote
Ray Apelles
(@ateamray)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 19
2018-11-12 04:37:45  
Posted by: Jacob W Sumner
Posted by: kevinkunkle

You do not need to worry about changing the rules. Shoot better and you'll be fine.

Thank you for the tip. Can you tell me a few to make my scores better?

Buy more pellets. When I find pellets that work I usually buy an entire Lot number which is usually 50 tins at a time. I specified to Pyramyd Air that I want all the same Lot number. I've even asked Tyler to make sure that happens. And I often do this multiple times a year. Then comes the most important part of the entire process. Use them all (in the same gun) in a short period of time.  Hit every match you possibly can between the beginning of the season And the start of the Worlds. I went to a match every single weekend this year prior to the world's to be prepared. There is nothing like practice during competition. So you need to practice and also compete. I don't get stressed out at competitions anymore because I've been to so many. I've been in shoot offs at  Nationals and at Worlds multiple times. I've shot off against national champions and World Place finishers . There's nothing like constructive experience.


ReplyQuote
Hector J Medina G
(@hector-j-medina-g)
Member of Trade
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 302
2018-11-12 14:26:54  

Jacob;

I do not know ANYTHING about you, nor have you let us know anything that would be relevant to the discussion, so forgive me if I write down some obvious or trivial things, they come out not of condescension, but out of MY self declared ignorance of your abilities/experience/character.

Having clarified that, I'll make some comments:

1.- Being a good shot is only PART of what it takes to perform well/medium well at a large Match. There are exceptions, mostly in the teenage bracket that can go into a World's and be so oblivious about the competition itself that they perform very well, like the WFTF  PCP Champion in New Zealand. MOST other shooters need a lot of CONSTRUCTIVE experience (as Ray told you above) to really perform even to their normal standards. I've seen more than a few top shooters, from many countries, "melt" at a World's. Partly the reason is that the World's usually entails a long flight, a foreign language, living in a hotel off a suitcase, eating unusual food and keeping unusual hours. Just consider that Physiologists recommend one DAY of adjustment for every hour of time zone change. So, going to New Zealand (as an example) needs an 18 day adjustment period PRIOR to the match. England should be allowed 5 days of adjustment. ¿Are there ways around this? yes, but not really feasible for most of us. On top, the FORMAT is different. I've heard of a few US shooters loose a point (or two) at their first World's because habit makes them shoot TWICE the same target, OR shoot out of order (WFTC's are shot BY THE NUMBER, not left to right, or near to far). The shooting order in a squad (sometimes fixed, some times cycling), the long distances involved in MOST shots (as opposed to tiny kill zones near/up close).  Different rules and, above all, different Marshalling practices (Warnings, then Points Off), makes for an interesting experience. Add to that the THREE day aspect where you MAY be a good ONE day shot, you could even shoot well the second day, if you melt on the third, it's a disaster, you really need a special kind of mental stamina to just keep on going to the best of your abilities after two days of punishment (and believe me the MD's WILL offer you a punishing challenge on EVERY lane). SO, my point is that, paraphrasing some financial booklets: Past performances are no guarantee of future yields. Even so, AAFTA has defined some criteria and we are all subject to them.

¿Do I agree with AAFTA criteria? Hell No! LOL! For example, we do agree that the GP should be among the DOMINANT criteria to be used, but we disagree on what a GP is. MOST countries that HAVE a GP scheme, have a number of matches that are COMPULSORY within the GP (usually one by region). And that sets the tone for all other GP matches. Under our current regime, some regions have enough GP Matches that the travel aspect is severely curtailed and the STYLE of the matches becomes more homogeneous, in detriment of the WFTF style of matches.

¿Should we all start shooting at sub 12 ft-lbs? NO. Pushing the limits of technology is one of the more interesting aspects of FT and setting the power limit to 12 ft-lbs would curtail that aspect. 

¿Should we all shoot the WFTF STYLE of matches with only 3 KZ sizes (3/4", 1", and 1 1/2") and a lot of longer ranges? YES. There is enough diversity in just using those hole sizes to make everyone happy and still prevent the courses from being cleaned. And just to give you a great example: Up to a few years ago, what is now the Crosman All American FT Championships was shot with ALL targets at full size (1.5"/40 mms). NOBODY ever came even close to cleaning the course. And that was using just one KZ size, using three well. . .   you can imagine! Another good example was Poland, this year. The average distance was not so long, but the positioning of the targets and the use of the smaller KZ's for forced position targets at the legal limit of distance, created a very tough course. In the rest of the world, our difficulty calculating system has very little meaning.

2.- The link you posted to the "NRA Sponsoring" is not really about sponsoring SHOOTERS to go elsewhere to shoot. It is about those shoots WITHIN the USA where part of the costs of organizing and running the shoot is borne by the NRA. In order to have a shoot fall into that category, the "modality/style/rules"  of the shoot has to be an NRA recognized specialty. FT is NOT one of them. Perhaps you were thinking more of "Shooting USA" which is an organization dedicated to helping the shooters of OLYMPIC specialties train, prepare, and travel to the OLYMPIC games. Again, FT is not one of them. There HAVE been SOME approaches to manufacturers to get some financial help, but then there are "ties" between the manufacturer and the shooter. Undoubtedly, as FT progresses, there will be a "professionalization" of the sport and we will see MUCH more than just jackets, shirts and hats (like Air Arms and others). Where will it end? I don't know, and let me give you one more difference between the USA and some other countries: SOME countries (not the majority, or even many by any stretch of the imagination) DO give the shooters in the Team a financial "help". In a FEW cases, that "help" covers uniforms, flight, hotel, meals, local transportation (car rental), and includes a person to "manage" the Team, freeing the shooters from a number of chores.  Do note that I am saying "countries" not "governments".

Will Team USA ever achieve that level of sponsorship? I doubt it VERY much. To achieve that level of sponsorship the shooters need to give up some of their independence. A properly sponsored Team: TRAINS together, TRAVELS together, LODGES together. Has specialists supporting the Team but, above all, those Teams have true "Captains" that, most of the time ,do not shoot but are very alert to anything that can affect the score of the shooters. I've seen other countries' Captains argue with Marshalls to the point of reversing a penalty,  or getting a piece of gear approved. And with the current state of affairs where the PCP's shoot mostly in the mornings and the springers shoot mostly in the evening, the Captain has a 14 to 16 hour day of hard work for every day of the competition.

Team USA is VERY thankful to the AAFTA for fronting/re-imbursing the entry fees (depending on the procedures established by the host country) , we are also VERY grateful to Pyramyd Air for all that they do, not only for the sport in general, but also for the Team in specific (they sponsor part of the uniforms).  Team USA has received in the past  additional partial sponsorships from LL Bean, The Flag Shirt Company and JSB. If you add the value of those sponsorships, you might end up with about $400, out of a total needed expenditure of about $3-4,000, all-in, you still need to come up with a fair chunk of cash.

And last, but not least, not everyone has the 1.5-3 weeks needed to get in on one of these ventures.

3.- No human endeavour is perfect. IMHO, FT comes close because the shooters are a special breed. Yes you find the occasional "bad apple" here and in all other countries as well as in the WFTC's. But the vast majority of FT shooters are really good persons. SO, we'll take it one day at a time, one WFTC's at a time, we'll work internally to improve the understanding and communication between ourselves and we will try to slowly start creating that "Team" spirit that is what, in the end, not only clinches the Team medals, but also makes the sport grow because the younger generation sees a group of people doing something that is  not only fun, but also rewarding.

My conclusion is that until FT grows to the point where you can REALLY pick shooters from a LARGE pool of GOOD shooters and then decide who among all of them has the best chances of performing well in the WFTC's, the system we have is "good enough".

Where MOST improvement can come, is in getting more sponsors lined up, and/or in participating on the organization of matches that are designed specifically as training-grounds for WFTC's (see Keith Knoblauch/Mike Niksch efforts with the support of some very worthwhile MD's).

If YOU really want to get into this, AAFTA is collecting volunteers for the organization of the WFTC's in the USA in 2021, maybe you can put down your name as "Sponsor promoter"? Write to bog@aafta.org

Keep well and shoot straight!

 

 

 

 

HM

 

 -


ReplyQuote
doug bruestle
(@doug-bruestle)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 93
2018-11-12 14:56:46  

Well said. I learned somethings from your post myself. Thank you Hector. 


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-12 18:23:11  

Hector, all good info, but is this correct?:

"(WFTC's are shot BY THE NUMBER, not left to right, or near to far)"

I know they don't always follow their own rules, but I would expect that targets are supposed to be by the number AND arranged left to right. At least that is what their course rules imply.

From the WFTF Core Rules:

2.5.4 All targets shall be clearly numbered (per course from left to right) at the target and the firing line


ReplyQuote
Hector J Medina G
(@hector-j-medina-g)
Member of Trade
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 302
2018-11-12 19:34:32  

Scott;

While the rules are correct, and the order is fairly recent, once a target is laid out, and shot for the first time, it stays there for the three days, so if inadvertently the order is reversed, or if the numbers are wrongly placed, YOU still need to follow the numbers.

Also if the targets are up in the cliff, it is hard to tell what is right or left.

Lastly, do remember that there are THREE courses on the same real estate, so a number and a target may be visible from more than one lane, creating confusions.

😉

As any good Boy Scout, "Be Prepared".

 

HM


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-13 20:44:33  
Posted by: Hector J Medina G

Scott;

While the rules are correct, and the order is fairly recent, once a target is laid out, and shot for the first time, it stays there for the three days, so if inadvertently the order is reversed, or if the numbers are wrongly placed, YOU still need to follow the numbers.

Also if the targets are up in the cliff, it is hard to tell what is right or left.

Lastly, do remember that there are THREE courses on the same real estate, so a number and a target may be visible from more than one lane, creating confusions.

😉

As any good Boy Scout, "Be Prepared".

 

HM

Good advice as I was recently looking at the Poland course details and noticed that many the course setting "rules" are not really rules:

2.5.1
Targets (Max distance)
Positional targets 40mm - 40 metres

2.6.1
The total number of targets with reduced diameter hit zones may not exceed 25% (12 targets) of the total targets on a 50 target course.

poland2018 black course 00

I see a kneeling shot at 48 meters (not 40 meters) and I count 17 reduced targets (not 12).

Edit: looking deeper, that kneeling target may actually have been 38m but was listed incorrectly as a 48m. But there were definitely more than 12 reduced targets. If they had something like our AAFTA spreadsheet, those mistakes would be automatically flagged for correction.


ReplyQuote
CanadianFT
(@canadianft)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 11
2018-11-14 18:34:55  
Posted by: Scotchmo

From the WFTF Core Rules:

2.5.4 All targets shall be clearly numbered (per course from left to right) at the target and the firing line

I am relatively sure that the left to right refers to the movement of shooters between lanes.  On the lane you shot the lower number target first and higher number target second, regardless of the distance or placement left to right.  When you are finished in a lane, you always move right to the next lane.

That is the way I set my WFTF type courses up.

Tim

 

 


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-14 20:27:13  
Posted by: CanadianFT
Posted by: Scotchmo

From the WFTF Core Rules:

2.5.4 All targets shall be clearly numbered (per course from left to right) at the target and the firing line

I am relatively sure that the left to right refers to the movement of shooters between lanes.  On the lane you shot the lower number target first and higher number target second, regardless of the distance or placement left to right.  When you are finished in a lane, you always move right to the next lane.

That is the way I set my WFTF type courses up.

Tim

 

 

Obviously, the targets are shot in numerical order. When I watched videos from Wales, and looked at pictures from Poland, I did NOT see a single lane where the targets were arranged right-to-left. The targets are always left-to-right. As far as I'm concerned, that's what the rules say, and that's how they intended them to be. I signed up for the course-setting and course-marshaling seminars at the England WFTF Worlds so hopefully, I'll learn more.


ReplyQuote
Kerndtc
(@kerndtc)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 99
2018-11-15 05:05:25  

Targets weren't left to right, it was definitely numerical. 

It certainly would have been nice to have you with us in Poland Scott, your talent for rule retaining and knowledge is always beneficial.

From my calculations just by collecting the top scores from all three courses the black course was harder than the white and blue. Black was hardest, white was the middle and the blue was the easiest just based on the top piston scores. Out of the top ten piston shooters there were only two who had shot the black course. 

I'm almost done converting the course/ target info over to troyer. So far I have the white and black done, I only used the inline/ decline multiplier on targets that were greater than 10°.

White: 35.52 T

Black: 35.39 T

The white and black were the only two courses I shot. They are extremely close as far as Troyer rating, but the black had 17 reducers and the white had 15. The total combined angles for the white course added up to 115° and the black added up to 190°. Maybe black seemed harder due to more incline shots. 

It's 12:03am Friday the 16th here in Queenstown, NZ. Can't seem to get the airguns out of my mind while on vacation haha. I guess I'm in the future. 

Message from the future, no new sponsors for the airgun team. Dangit! Lol

 

Finished blue.

35.87T, apparently I was 100% Incorrect. Blue course average was the most difficult, then white, then black. All three were within .48 troyer. I think the designer did a very consistent average course difficulty.

Blue: 35.87t

13 reducers

9-25Mtr : 7 targets

26-40Mtr : 15 targets

41-50Mtr: 28 targets

9 targets at an angle totaling 161°

6 kneeling/ 4 standing

White: 35.52T

15 reducers

9-25Mtr : 6 targets

26-40Mtr: 18 targets

41-50Mtr: 26 targets

8 angled targets totalling 115°

6 standing/ 4 kneeling

Black: 35.39T

17 reducers

9-25Mtr: 12 targets

26-40Mtr: 14 targets

41-50Mtr: 24 targets

11 angled targets totalling 190°

6 kneeling/ 4 standing

Cam


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-15 14:31:31  

Cameron,

Average Troyer is one comparison. But it's not the average targets that get missed very often. It's the difficult targets. The White course had about half as many "expert" targets, and consequently, a lower SD associated with it's average. Also the I think the Blue course had one free target which throws off the  Troyer average and SD somewhat, and raises the average score slightly.

I know that the targets are shot in numerical order, but did you see a single lane where the targets were NOT also left-to-right?


ReplyQuote
Kerndtc
(@kerndtc)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 99
2018-11-15 15:39:00  
Posted by: Scotchmo

Cameron,

Average Troyer is one comparison. But it's not the average targets that get missed very often. It's the difficult targets. The White course had about half as many "expert" targets, and consequently, a lower SD associated with it's average. Also the I think the Blue course had one free target which throws off the  Troyer average and SD somewhat, and raises the average score slightly.

I know that the targets are shot in numerical order, but did you see a single lane where the targets were NOT also left-to-right?

I totally agree, averages are only averages. I wanted to put that together because I didn't see anyone else do it. 

There were multiple lanes that weren't left to right, they kept you on your toes.

The best way would be to average the top scores for each and see what course had more hits.   

Ten scores were collected starting from the top shooters  from each course (piston).

White
39 39 39 42 37 36 33 31 32 34 = 362 (36.2 hit average)
Black
40 32 30 30 34 30 29 33 33 30 = 321 (32.1 average)
Blue
42 39 34 38 39 41 41 39 35 35 = 383 (38.3 average)

 

 


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-15 19:32:13  
Posted by: Kerndtc
Posted by: Scotchmo

Cameron,

...

I know that the targets are shot in numerical order, but did you see a single lane where the targets were NOT also left-to-right?

..

There were multiple lanes that weren't left to right, they kept you on your toes.

..

Is there ANY evidence of that?

Looking at these videos from Wales, they always shot left-to-right. There are no lanes with targets arranged right-to-left.

From Poland, there are lots of pictures of targets arranged left-to-right:

I even see some that look to be almost in a straight line:

I can't find a single one that is obviously right-to-left. Can you?


ReplyQuote
Johninma
(@johninma)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 55
2018-11-15 19:46:00  

Cameron didn't shoot the Wales Worlds. Why are you trying to compare that event to Poland?


ReplyQuote
Johninma
(@johninma)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 55
2018-11-15 19:47:27  

I think you need to put away the analysis and work on how to shoot at Worlds, not how to fight it Scott.


ReplyQuote
Scotchmo
(@scotchmo)
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 129
2018-11-15 20:33:17  
Posted by: Johninma

I think you need to put away the analysis and work on how to shoot at Worlds, not how to fight it Scott.

I'm not fighting it. I want to learn it. And I hear/see too much conflicting info.

The comparison I was making on this issue is that both courses appeared to follow the left-right rule. Some people believe that has nothing to do with the rules.

The left-right "rule" appears to have been followed at both matches (Wales and Poland) . The left-right requirements of that particular rule only really matters to me if I am setting a course. There are some other rules that were obviously not followed (number of reducers for instance). Those other rules might actually affect a shooter.

As far as "work on how to shoot at the Worlds", for me that involves a full analysis of what to expect. I am doing that, and am already making changes to my setup to be more conducive to a course that is set to World rules (and England expectations). It's good to know which "rules" are really followed for course design/layout.

I looked at the Wales course as much as I could find. After reading the BFTA course setting guide, I would expect the England course to be closer to the Wales course as far as layout. I did not shoot at Wales, or at Poland, but I'm still going to compare them, for my own education.

Many people will say to just practice more. Until I determine a setup (including pellets) that I believe to be optimal for the expected course/conditions, more practice can be a waste time for me.


gokidd thanked
ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2

Please Login or Register