That would work for me.
registered sporting vs, non registered fun events
- Thread starter Covey Ridge
- Start date
That would work for me.
NZClaybuster
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
If this is the solution....
Then the whole preceding conversation is pointless. This would be a decision made by the host club.
Absolutely nothing to do with the association, and would reinforce the decision to introduce the medals to lower the cost of the shoot and remove the need for prizes.
Thanks to all that contributed to this conversation and viewed the thread.
I still think the answer is bringing more shooters out, shoot more targets, hit more of them and tell better stories when it is all done.
Kind regards
J
Then the whole preceding conversation is pointless. This would be a decision made by the host club.
Absolutely nothing to do with the association, and would reinforce the decision to introduce the medals to lower the cost of the shoot and remove the need for prizes.
Thanks to all that contributed to this conversation and viewed the thread.
I still think the answer is bringing more shooters out, shoot more targets, hit more of them and tell better stories when it is all done.
Kind regards
J
I was in no way bragging about the amount of work I do. I was reacting to Jason's PS comment on the previous post. He also tries to shut down arguments by saying something stupid like the work gets done by those who show up.
Yes I do have a lot of criticism of the association and think they are valid. Since the association is not doing any promotion other than collect money, I think the answer is to have more non registered shoots. Leave the association with globe trotting and attracting to shooters to Canada and bring in a few more costly events that we can not afford to participate in. Like FITASC.
I like your idea about the choice to register or not. I for one do not need prizes to feel competitive.
Last year was the first year I decided not to pay my dues. I only went to one registered shoot where I asked to shoot, but said I was not going to pay my dues or registration fees. I actually won a cash prize because I was best of the protestors. I gave it to the trap help.
Since it has been pointed out to me that the range owners run the shoot, I may ask where the next shoot is being held if I may shoot for targets only.
It would be nice if the was a change of the guard and the new guard could sit down. It may look like two issues but the non registered shoots are our club stemed from the riff. The club decided that the association made a vindictive decision and why bother to continue with getting sanction for registered shoots. This year our club and two others opted out of hosting registered events. I am not privy to the reasons why the club in the pass opted out, but I think the association should do a little soul searching and check if they are meeting the needs of sporting shooters in Alberta before they try to control sporting in Canada.
Bring on those shooters and I am sure they will have a ball, but when they add travel time to the $160.00 cost of shoot and a flat of even cheap target loads I don't many will be back for long. Hope sporting does not go the way of trap. Seems that most are retired with a decent pension. The only young people seen seem to have rich relatives.
Someone mentioned Gil and Vickie. Does the association pay them or does the shooter pay their fee. As much as I would like a few lessons from these two, that does not seem to be promoting the sport to those who really need promotion. Those who can easily afford the shoot fees and travel will easily be able to afford Gil and Vickie. Most can not.
Maybe I was not very clear before...
I think the non registered shoots in Lethbridge and the Pass stem largely from the riff as well (issue 1). Lethbridge was not solely based on that - we were actually going that direction anyway, that just solidified it. The reality is that Mossleigh always provided support through shooting equipment (throwers) and numbers of shooters to both clubs. And we have a similar demographic.
The realization that "fun" shoots are attracting a larger and more diverse demographic is a result of not throwing registered targets(issue 2). Our results with fun shoots this year show where our shooting market is.
And I agree on the soul searching, I think the national sporting group would be the perfect venue to really push the competitive side.
Norskie,
I think when the smoke clears there will be 3 good venues for sporting shooters to attend. Next year, I hope to plan all my away from home shooting at these venues. I am on the low end of AA and not afraid of competition or to have my scores posted no matter how well I did or did not do.. Our league still continues to thrive with 24 squad of shooters. This includes about 4 squads of young shooters, many who also show for other events including our sporting events, Kids and their moms are anticipating our two day sporting event later this month and about 4 weeks of 50 target sporting events after the leaque is finished.
It is no secret that I have split from the association, but I still and often shoot with those who attend registered events. By best wishes go out to everyone who breaks clay and for that matter anyone who burns powder. I think that all shooting facilities need our support. I remember when there was a trap club every second town on the 2 hwy from Calgary to the border. Correct me if I am wrong, but now there are none. I think that sporting clays will go the way as trap did. The ATA will hold registered events, which will for the most part show poor attendance with the exception of the Canadian and Provincials. The small clubs where they exist will still put on fun events which will be better attended. Contray to just getting new shooters out, I think that most new shooters need to be attracted to events that will not break the bank and will will allow them to break enough clay to start with an attitude that they did well.
I think when the smoke clears there will be 3 good venues for sporting shooters to attend. Next year, I hope to plan all my away from home shooting at these venues. I am on the low end of AA and not afraid of competition or to have my scores posted no matter how well I did or did not do.. Our league still continues to thrive with 24 squad of shooters. This includes about 4 squads of young shooters, many who also show for other events including our sporting events, Kids and their moms are anticipating our two day sporting event later this month and about 4 weeks of 50 target sporting events after the leaque is finished.
It is no secret that I have split from the association, but I still and often shoot with those who attend registered events. By best wishes go out to everyone who breaks clay and for that matter anyone who burns powder. I think that all shooting facilities need our support. I remember when there was a trap club every second town on the 2 hwy from Calgary to the border. Correct me if I am wrong, but now there are none. I think that sporting clays will go the way as trap did. The ATA will hold registered events, which will for the most part show poor attendance with the exception of the Canadian and Provincials. The small clubs where they exist will still put on fun events which will be better attended. Contray to just getting new shooters out, I think that most new shooters need to be attracted to events that will not break the bank and will will allow them to break enough clay to start with an attitude that they did well.
You guys don't ask for much, you want to make an expensive sport cheap, and you want the average joe to be able to shoot good scores.
For most ranges I don't see why registered targets need to be so much more money then non registered targets. Seems to me the ranges set the price, not the association. True for a one time shooter the Association membership is an added cost, however besides that $2/hundred targets is my understanding, that is peanuts.
Most of the ranges I attend are commercial operations. I realize not all ranges are, and they may have different realities to deal with. However for a commercial operation I would think they should be pricing it to where they get enough shooters to make it worth their while. If they choose to price at $160 and get 25 shooters or $120 and get 35 shooters, that is their business model decision to make. If they want to charge less and serve chili, or charge more and serve steak, that is also their call. The ones that make the correct decisions will survive. I know we all want to see them have the most shooters possible, as it grows our sport, but it's not our call to make.
To a certain extent I would say the target difficulty is also up to them, the association may set restrictions on visibility and repeatability, but they can choose to set puff targets or challenging targets, and see their attendance react accordingly. That is why I would still like to see the range owners and association get together and discuss a way to level the playing field through modifying pairs or stands based on class, so we get rid of the 40% gap between the M class and E class, because their is no way to take an average guy who shoots 300 shells a year and make him competitive with an average guy who shoots 3000 shells, if they are shooting the same presentations.
Maybe the association and the clubs need to get together, but in many cases, I don't see this being solely an association issue.
I realize Lethbridge does a cheaper shoot, but most of the fun shoots I've been to were no cheaper, maybe even more costly then the registered shoots.
For most ranges I don't see why registered targets need to be so much more money then non registered targets. Seems to me the ranges set the price, not the association. True for a one time shooter the Association membership is an added cost, however besides that $2/hundred targets is my understanding, that is peanuts.
Most of the ranges I attend are commercial operations. I realize not all ranges are, and they may have different realities to deal with. However for a commercial operation I would think they should be pricing it to where they get enough shooters to make it worth their while. If they choose to price at $160 and get 25 shooters or $120 and get 35 shooters, that is their business model decision to make. If they want to charge less and serve chili, or charge more and serve steak, that is also their call. The ones that make the correct decisions will survive. I know we all want to see them have the most shooters possible, as it grows our sport, but it's not our call to make.
To a certain extent I would say the target difficulty is also up to them, the association may set restrictions on visibility and repeatability, but they can choose to set puff targets or challenging targets, and see their attendance react accordingly. That is why I would still like to see the range owners and association get together and discuss a way to level the playing field through modifying pairs or stands based on class, so we get rid of the 40% gap between the M class and E class, because their is no way to take an average guy who shoots 300 shells a year and make him competitive with an average guy who shoots 3000 shells, if they are shooting the same presentations.
Maybe the association and the clubs need to get together, but in many cases, I don't see this being solely an association issue.
I realize Lethbridge does a cheaper shoot, but most of the fun shoots I've been to were no cheaper, maybe even more costly then the registered shoots.
In the 3D archery world people are classed based on their equipment, not their abilities. However they shoot from different stakes, based on that, so the recurve guys are not shooting from the same place as the guys with compounds and target sights. So different shooting locations is not a foreign concept.
For classification on abilities in the US, you can choose to declare yourself amateur, semi pro, or pro. Bigger prizes available in higher classes, but higher entry fee's. Just looked up one US shoot, and amateur entry fee was $37 vs $300 for the pro class. If you declare up to pro or semi pro, you must compete at that level for the entire year. I am not sure if anything can force you into the pro classes or not.
When I shoot in the 3DAA in Canada, there was an option to shoot the shoots for 3DAA or not, as they tracked standings etc. If you just shot your local tournament, you didn't have to join up, if you wanted to, you could join and shoot for 3DAA awards. Been a while since I shot 3D, but it was something like that.
Basically the point is there may be other ways of doing things that can be looked at, and maybe when all is said and done, most prefer the way things are being done. There are only a handful of us discussing this here, so either the rest of the sporting clay shooters don't care, don't belong to gun nutz, don't realize this thread exists, or are happy with the way it is.
I know I'm going to keep shooting all the clays I can, wherever I can, regardless of what happens. But I hope the association stays alive, and can help grow the sport, so I continue to have different places to shoot.
For classification on abilities in the US, you can choose to declare yourself amateur, semi pro, or pro. Bigger prizes available in higher classes, but higher entry fee's. Just looked up one US shoot, and amateur entry fee was $37 vs $300 for the pro class. If you declare up to pro or semi pro, you must compete at that level for the entire year. I am not sure if anything can force you into the pro classes or not.
When I shoot in the 3DAA in Canada, there was an option to shoot the shoots for 3DAA or not, as they tracked standings etc. If you just shot your local tournament, you didn't have to join up, if you wanted to, you could join and shoot for 3DAA awards. Been a while since I shot 3D, but it was something like that.
Basically the point is there may be other ways of doing things that can be looked at, and maybe when all is said and done, most prefer the way things are being done. There are only a handful of us discussing this here, so either the rest of the sporting clay shooters don't care, don't belong to gun nutz, don't realize this thread exists, or are happy with the way it is.
I know I'm going to keep shooting all the clays I can, wherever I can, regardless of what happens. But I hope the association stays alive, and can help grow the sport, so I continue to have different places to shoot.
It's true it costs money to shoot. At a local level we have some sponsorship to league events for youth, and the kids coming out show it. If they get hooked the thought is they will work had to shoot more when the subsidies are gone. The crux is the transition to organized shoots - and sometimes the step is too severe.
I am not one who expects folks to all shoot great scores - in fact at the Crowsnest we had a course at their recent fun shoot that had a HOA of 140/200. Not one complaint - as it was fun. Guys that follow the registered targets would have been outraged at the scores, while as it was we all giggled at how they ate us up.
I think it is expectation. I think at fun shoots no one cares about prizes/tallies etc. The association can talk about the medals and no expectation, but it exists.
A commercial operation is a different deal all together. And I agree Scar - its a business, so they need to charge what they need to - and time will tell whether the market is there.
I like this idea. The problem is increasing workloads on volunteers. I know in our instance anything to lessen that is attractive. I think this idea has merit though and needs to be discussed.
You could be right.
I don't think that is the case down here - At Mossleigh, Crowsnest and Lethbridge the (fun) shoots have all been in the 100 dollar range including a great lunch.
Sounds like I need to move south, your guy's shoots are much more aligned with my budget! I admit I've never been to the three ranges you discuss, I get to shoot Hidden Ridge, Beaver Hills and Silver Willow, used to shoot Clays and Feathers before it closed.
I agree that if you can get people shooting for a reasonable price, it helps make them decide it's worth it. However our local club charges $10/round shells included, for trap or 5 stand, and it's still an expensive hobby that keeps many away. Yet by the same token I know many who shoot in their back yard and won't come to the range, even though there is not much chance they can do it cheaper in the back yard then at our club.
I guess if people want prizes, then they have to pony up on the way in. Mostly I've found fun shoots have better prizes then registered shoots, but then fun shoots tend to have completely donated prizes too. Again this is where I can see a two tier system, pay the base fee and shoot, or pay more and qualify for medals, prizes etc.
I understand an increase on workload on volunteers, but again I shoot mostly at commercial operations, and if having different stands/pairs for different classes gets more shooters out, it might pay. For volunteer clubs, it might get more shooters out, but the volunteers get paid the same either way. Hopefully if it attracts more shooters, that in turn attracts more volunteers in the long run, but I know everywhere is the same, it's always the same 5 guys who do 90% of the work.
I agree that if you can get people shooting for a reasonable price, it helps make them decide it's worth it. However our local club charges $10/round shells included, for trap or 5 stand, and it's still an expensive hobby that keeps many away. Yet by the same token I know many who shoot in their back yard and won't come to the range, even though there is not much chance they can do it cheaper in the back yard then at our club.
I guess if people want prizes, then they have to pony up on the way in. Mostly I've found fun shoots have better prizes then registered shoots, but then fun shoots tend to have completely donated prizes too. Again this is where I can see a two tier system, pay the base fee and shoot, or pay more and qualify for medals, prizes etc.
I understand an increase on workload on volunteers, but again I shoot mostly at commercial operations, and if having different stands/pairs for different classes gets more shooters out, it might pay. For volunteer clubs, it might get more shooters out, but the volunteers get paid the same either way. Hopefully if it attracts more shooters, that in turn attracts more volunteers in the long run, but I know everywhere is the same, it's always the same 5 guys who do 90% of the work.
For as long as I have been shooting clay, the question is asked, what do we need to do to attract more young people or new shooters. The sport is expensive. Young people need to make more money or wait for retirement when there will less demands on their income or be born into a family that has money. I guess the comercial range owners do set the cost. I just read a point of view in the last Sporting Clays that was very interesting. The wise range owner will keep the shooters happy or maybe the cash registers will stop ringing, or not quite ring as often.
What is wrong with the average joe shooting a score that he is happy with? I would say it sure beats, beating him down and humiliating him the first time out. It is my opinion that no matter what class, most of the shooters are average joes with the exception of a small portion of the master class at the top. Set the targets for the average and the better shooters will still prevail. It the super shots want it a little tougher give them a few stations to do their thing, but keep the majority for joe average. If the super shots are still not happy they can set themselves more difficult targets on their own practice time. The association and range owners should not cater only to the tiny few at the top. Let the provincial tournaments and the big shoots south of the border be their thing. Scar, if you are one of the elite few at the top, I hope I have not offended you.
What is wrong with the average joe shooting a score that he is happy with? I would say it sure beats, beating him down and humiliating him the first time out. It is my opinion that no matter what class, most of the shooters are average joes with the exception of a small portion of the master class at the top. Set the targets for the average and the better shooters will still prevail. It the super shots want it a little tougher give them a few stations to do their thing, but keep the majority for joe average. If the super shots are still not happy they can set themselves more difficult targets on their own practice time. The association and range owners should not cater only to the tiny few at the top. Let the provincial tournaments and the big shoots south of the border be their thing. Scar, if you are one of the elite few at the top, I hope I have not offended you.
Covey, first I'm hard to offend, and second I'm anything but the elite few, I finally drug my way up to A class, this after working my way down to E for a while.
Your comment on young shooters is true. It seems to be just a fact, that there are never a lot of young shooters at any range I go to. I've managed to stay single and keep spending my money on shooting, but I'm only starting to see a few people around my age at the range again as I get into my 30's. Most people my age are either too broke or too busy with kids, wives, girlfriends, jobs etc. Seems like mid 30's is when most shooters come back to the sport, many did it as a kid, but just can't do it again till they are in their mid 30's to 40's. While I think it's great to get kids shooting, so they come back again in their 30's, trying to attract the 20 somethings is almost impossible, I spent 10 years trying to get people my age to the range, and it just doesn't happen. Even for those without economic strains, they would rather chase women and get drunk, or else they caught a woman and are chasing kids.
I think the focus for new shooters should be on the 35-45 crowd, and getting them to bring their kids so they get introduced and may come back in 10 years after they graduate.
I don't have a problem with the average joe shooting a good score, I have a problem with them expecting it handed to them. I see new shooters upset because they shoot 15 on trap, or maybe a 10 on our 5 stand. They think they should just have a natural ability with a shotgun, and don't seem to understand that the guys shooting 22+ in trap, and 16+ in 5 stand shoot twice a week, and have done so for a long time.
I'm sorry but sometimes things in life take a little bit of effort and work. I don't want to see them never hit a target, and I have no problem with a few easy stations, as even the top guys can miss them, I just don't feel they should all be fluff targets. I shoot to get better, and practicing the same fluff target doesn't do that.
However maybe that's just me, maybe most shoot to hear the bang, and tell themselves how great they are instead of to learn to shoot.
Your comment on young shooters is true. It seems to be just a fact, that there are never a lot of young shooters at any range I go to. I've managed to stay single and keep spending my money on shooting, but I'm only starting to see a few people around my age at the range again as I get into my 30's. Most people my age are either too broke or too busy with kids, wives, girlfriends, jobs etc. Seems like mid 30's is when most shooters come back to the sport, many did it as a kid, but just can't do it again till they are in their mid 30's to 40's. While I think it's great to get kids shooting, so they come back again in their 30's, trying to attract the 20 somethings is almost impossible, I spent 10 years trying to get people my age to the range, and it just doesn't happen. Even for those without economic strains, they would rather chase women and get drunk, or else they caught a woman and are chasing kids.
I think the focus for new shooters should be on the 35-45 crowd, and getting them to bring their kids so they get introduced and may come back in 10 years after they graduate.
I don't have a problem with the average joe shooting a good score, I have a problem with them expecting it handed to them. I see new shooters upset because they shoot 15 on trap, or maybe a 10 on our 5 stand. They think they should just have a natural ability with a shotgun, and don't seem to understand that the guys shooting 22+ in trap, and 16+ in 5 stand shoot twice a week, and have done so for a long time.
I'm sorry but sometimes things in life take a little bit of effort and work. I don't want to see them never hit a target, and I have no problem with a few easy stations, as even the top guys can miss them, I just don't feel they should all be fluff targets. I shoot to get better, and practicing the same fluff target doesn't do that.
However maybe that's just me, maybe most shoot to hear the bang, and tell themselves how great they are instead of to learn to shoot.
Scar,
I do not think we disagree on too much. I think we may have to agree on a defintion of average joe. My idea of average joe is a fellow that is a hunter and shoots fairly well in the field. If there are oportunities my average joe will often bag his limit and is proud of his ability as a game shot. He likes guns and shoots skeet or trap in the high teens or low 20s but is looking for something more like game shooting. My average joes is what the game of sporting clays was all about. My average joe is the future of the sport.
Your average joes seems to be a newbie and and should be called green as grass joe. He should be told that he needs lessons and that only a few are blessed with what he expects. He should not be invited to a shoot or tournament unless one wants to embarass him and make sure he never comes back. People who care about green assed joe should take him under their care and start him on low 7 skeet or straight away trap til he gets confidence to a least get more than half on a round of trap or skeet and even then he should be introduced to clays without much audience and only when he is capable of bagging the odd pair. I am not sure what will happen to this joe if things do not work out.
I am joining this thread late.
First thing I would like to say is - if the CNSCA is paying thousands for that website and it's administration, then you are paying WAY to much. When I maintained it, it was FREE.
I won't complain about the website on a public forum, as I have had my chance to maintain it, and given it up, but it acts as a detriment rather than an enhancement to shooters new and old.
I have also noticed a great number of shooters not attending shoots because they are registered. These are people that shoot in Master's and AA, shoot 2-3 times a week and have shot for years.
Truth is, I shoot a lot fewer reg targets than I used to - partly because I have a young family and a small business, but also because of many of the reasons noted in this thread.
...and for the record, I was the one that was not invited to the meeting in Hanley.
There may be a difference in what we see as an average joe, but I still think your average joe sometimes has unrealistic expectations too. I'd say an average joe who is a good game shot, would still be happy to hit 50% in the field, yet wants to shoot 80% on clays. Maybe it's how it's explained. I was probably more like your definition of the average joe when I first tried sporting clays, and I was told 50% was not bad, I shot around that and was very happy for my first time out.
Cory
Thanks you for posting this and thank you for your long service in representing the shooters of the association.
cory
thanks you for posting this and thank you for your long service in representing the shooters of the association.
x 2
