Yet another selfless contribution to the FT and AGN community

AirNGasman said:

I'm having the same (target damage) problem now with my extreme field targets from 100 foot pound .30 cal rifles, Bobby. Wasn't a problem when I had an 80 FP limit; but since raising it to 100 to align with national EFT rules the damage is obvious. Can't go back on it now, though.

.

Click to expand...

Does the damage coincide with the new harder lead AEA .30s being used?

I have to agree with TP here in that the fact the BOG even opened up the floor for input from registered clubs is a good thing. Meaning they want to hear the voice from the shooters. What happens to that voice is another thing but if they are opening things up like this, now is your chance to get your opinion into your clubs rep. I highly doubt it will fall on deaf ears. It would be interesting to see how each club responded on these proposed rule changes. That would tell you everything you need to know.
I have no idea how all the discussions and voting go and just hope all decision are made to help keep the sport fun, for all.

Arzrover said:

"BTW, the other Scott makes good points (above) about slugs."

I agree with that as well, Ron, but the MOST damage to our targets was CPH's @ 20 ft lb. The closer targets were always peened into funnels and had to be hammered back or welded after a couple of years of abuse... brand didn't seem to matter except HOW LONG that took.

Bob

Click to expand...

That is GOLDEN info right there for lots of reasons.

AirNGasman said:

Friends, I gift you (all) the following tool to immensely reduce the amount of clutter, clamour, confusion and contention on/in the Field Target section of this forum. Given the sheer volume of (often contentious) debates over AAFTA rules, why this or that one exists, and especially, HOW THEY COME ABOUT, this tool I gift you (all) can be used to abort many, if not most, such rules threads soon as they raise their ugly heads.

Of course that assumes One cares to abort ugly rules debates, and understands a simple outline format. Regardless, feel free to copy and save the outline below, and wield it as an effective learning tool/weapon as needed.

You're welcome.


1. A potential rule change is communicated to the BoG through email by:
a. a club,
b. an individual,
c. a Board Member, or
d. an issue that arises during a match that requires the BoG’s attention.

2. The potential rule change or issue is presented to the BoG along with any information supporting the argument for a rule change.

3. The BoG meets and discusses the potential rule change or issue.
a. If the BoG determines that no rule changes are required, the issue is closed and the club or individual who suggested the rule is informed of the decision.
b. If a rule change is needed, the BoG develops the rule change wording.

4. Once the BoG has the wording for the proposed rule change, it will be sent out to the member clubs in good standing via email along with a description of why the rule change is being considered.

5. The communication to the clubs should include a rationale, “From: rule” and “To: rule” format, so they can easily see the change being proposed.

6. The clubs are given 30 days to respond via email directly to the BoG.

7. Suggestions by the member clubs will be discussed by the BoG and the proposed rule change will be updated accordingly.

8. After the club updates, the proposed rule change will be shared to the AAFTA email subscription list.

9. The airgun community is given 15 days to respond via email directly to the BoG. Posts on any of the forums about the rule change will be ignored.

10. Suggestions by the airgun community will be discussed by the BoG, and the proposed rule change will be updated accordingly.

11. The final proposed rule change will be voted on by the BoG. If the rule change passes the BoG vote:
a. The rule is formally announced to member clubs in good standing (so competitors / industry can prepare for upcoming changes)
b. The rule is added to the following calendar year rule book and is effective after the Nationals


To close, I feel compelled to confess that, having been involved in this AAFTA rules-making/rules changes process for many years, I've simply been too lazy to go to aafta.org, locate the proper link to the rule-book ('handbook' in AAFTA vernacular), comb through the 28 page rule-book ('handbook' in AAFTA vernacular) to locate the outline quoted above, copy and paste it to this forum; until now. I beg your forgiveness for my laziness, and offer this post in reparation(s).

Happy Shooting,
Ron

P.S.- In proof-reading this post for errors, I visited aafta.org . Sure enough, I mis-stated the length of the AAFTA rule-book ('handbook' in AAFTA vernacular). It's 31 pages.

.

Click to expand...

I doubt that I will need any of this data presented, but I do applaud you on doing a good job and knowing you will take some shots along the way. if everyone put this kind of effort in, image what can be accomplished and who will benefit!

Just for poops and giggles how did the new rule in Janurary make it to the rules book to allow a club hosting a National to change it's venue to favor the WFTF class? The Match Director put a stop to that BS and was the right thing to do. Quick rule changes like that one doesn't help place trust in our leading Organization. Think about how many clubs have dropped out of AFFTA in the last five to seven years. That hasn't been a very good sign that things have been in order looking back. Maybe this new blanket of rule proposals is a set in the right direction but only time will tell.

Bill,

I assume that you are talking about having lanes with 1 shot per target rather than 2. The rules were clarified in 2017 to allow a maximum of two shots per target and 2 targets per lane at the Nationals. I’ve shot a number of AAFTA GP matches with only 1 shot per target. Though the AAFTA Nationals have traditionally been 60 shot courses, 2 targets per lane, 2 shots per target, I think the rules were setup that way so that the Match director could set a course more like WFTF if they wanted to. So there was really nothing new added to the rules in that respect.

What is unusual this year for AAFTA is having Hunter shooters shoot a different course of fire at the Nationals.

AirNGasman said:

Good question, Cole. However the damage started before the new AEA pellets started catching on. Suffice to say 56 grain Zans at 99.9999901 foot pounds are hell on targets. Hopefully AEAs aren't worse!

.

Click to expand...

Oops, my bad. But I was only shooting 96 fpe, unless there was a tail wind.

Scotchmo said:

Bill,

I assume that you are talking about having lanes with 1 shot per target rather than 2. The rules were clarified in 2017 to allow a maximum of two shots per target and 2 targets per lane at the Nationals. I’ve shot a number of AAFTA GP matches with only 1 shot per target. Though the AAFTA Nationals have traditionally been 60 shot courses, 2 targets per lane, 2 shots per target, I think the rules were setup that way so that the Match director could set a course more like WFTF if they wanted to. So there was really nothing new added to the rules in that respect.

What is unusual this year for AAFTA is having Hunter shooters shoot a different course of fire at the Nationals.

Click to expand...

Scott, This seems like another "Who came first the chicken or the egg" The hunter class has been the biggest class in AFFTA for many years now. To expect some of the oldest Hunter competitors to run a 25 target course shooting two shots per lane at our Nationals is a little presumptuous. Some of our friends up this way would find it a hardship at minimum. To have a club match setup that way is fine but to put our Nationals on the line did not go over well with most of the hunter class up this way. We were blindsided about this proposition. Back in January someone from AFFTA mention a change coming that was taking place. The exact intent puzzled me at first then I realized it was to give the WFTF some extra practice and I addressed it at the time on Airgun Warriors. We knew we had the 2024 Nationals coming up our way but wasn't expecting to have to play the game differently than we always have. I don't mean this to sound like we don't support our WFTF shooters because we do. It sounded nice to have a National come up that would only take me a couple hours to get to rather than fly or drive 2000 miles as I have in the past several times.

It has been settled and unfortunately I expect we will likely have the lowest National attendance in AFFTA history but with two big games going on a month apart one would expect that.

Bill Day said:

Scott, This seems like another "Who came first the chicken or the egg" The hunter class has been the biggest class in AFFTA for many years now. To expect some of the oldest Hunter competitors to run a 25 target course shooting two shots per lane at our Nationals is a little presumptuous. Some of our friends up this way would find it a hardship at minimum. To have a club match setup that way is fine but to put our Nationals on the line did not go over well with most of the hunter class up this way. We were blindsided about this proposition. Back in January someone from AFFTA mention a change coming that was taking place. The exact intent puzzled me at first then I realized it was to give the WFTF some extra practice and I addressed it at the time on Airgun Warriors. We knew we had the 2024 Nationals coming up our way but wasn't expecting to have to play the game differently than we always have. I don't mean this to sound like we don't support our WFTF shooters because we do. It sounded nice to have a National come up that would only take me a couple hours to get to rather than fly or drive 2000 miles as I have in the past several times.

It has been settled and unfortunately I expect we will likely have the lowest National attendance in AFFTA history but with two big games going on a month apart one would expect that.

Click to expand...

When it was announced the OREGON S.O.F.T. sponsored GP was to be a 50 shot 1 per target X 2 day event I quickly lost interest. Had this been a 60 shot per day my feelings would have been a tad different as 1 shot is fun and challenging ..... just driving 650 miles for a 100 shots with the current FUBAR GP rules just did not sit well so i passed.

Scott S. and Bill Day,

I agree. I also prefer the 60 shot/day, 2 targets/lane, 2 shot/target course. That should be the AAFTA National course. I think all GP courses should be that format.

I was just pointing out that the option for 1 shot/target was put in the rules years ago.

Ive shot a few courses where they were a single shot per target in the Hunter class and didnt mind it. We also had the older shooters attend and they didn't seem to mind it either. Its fun for a different course. I get though only having 50 shots per course over the 60. I want the most for my money as well.
There were a lot of very upset people about nationals in the format and how it was being ran. I have no clue the attendance but it seems for some reason they are getting more financial support this year than ever. Im not driving out there, its like 15 hours, its not worth it in any capacity. I only know of a few people going that ive shot with this year but most of my local shooters are not attending.
Im sure the single shot formatting is setup just with worlds in mind this year, doesn't seem any other reason why as again, way more hunter shooters than wftf.

Scott H, Please don't let my rambling reflect on you. You have always been one of my favorite FT people. I just can't find in the rules Common or GP rules that a match course can be set up for the WFTF class and the other two classes must shoot it. In 2016 a revision was made listed as the 8th revision that year. It mentions shots per targets and targets per lane but under GP Rules I cannot find that referenced. As I get older I not only can go out to the garage for a tool and forget what I went out there for. Sometimes I do recall what I went out there for and can be looking right at it and don't see it. So please indulge me on exactly where it is.

Scott, searching for the rule change you mention I managed to get connected to Airgun Warriors. (Yesterday I tried numerous times but got a message that the website had a critical error message) After doing some searching I found this announcement on Jan 2, 2024. At the bottom of this post find the rule changes effective in 2024. This is the first notice of the forementioned rule change I could find and likely the reason it isn't in the current version of AFFTA rules.

For those complaining about "one shot per target", the first issuance I can find where the AAFTA clarified the number of shots per target at a Grand Prix is in 2016.

https://www.aafta.org/uploads/1/2/7/6/127666620/aafta_handbook_2016.pdf, page 29, section "Qualifying Rules (Rifle Match)" part E.

Nothing changed in 2024 regarding the ability to have a course that is one shot per target. It seems it has always been allowed, but only in 2016 the rule now stated the maximum allowed targets per lane and the maximum allowed shots per target. A MAXIMUM of 2 shots per target means you can have ONE or two shots per target. ONE is less than two. Two is the maximum whole number when comparing one to two.

The 2024 rulebook, similar text can be found on Page 19, section "Qualifying Rules - Rifle Match" part D. https://www.aafta.org/uploads/1/2/7/6/127666620/2024_aafta_official_field_target_rules.pdf



Just because you are unhappy with the fact that someone chooses to run a match with one shot per target doesn't mean anything changed in the rules that would have prevented a one shot per target match from occurring in the last 8 years (and likely longer). So, if we weren't upset about this eight years ago, why are we upset now?

The rule addition that actually occurred in 2024 is to state a target does not need to me moved between day one and day 2 if there hasn't been at least two shots made on the target. This can be interpreted as making it easier on a club to run a one shot per target course, because now in 2024 they can be lazy and run the same course both days without the burden of repositioning targets between day one and day two.



Just because the rules made it easier does not mean one shot per target was not possible in ALL the years prior 2024. Just because someone didn't do it, doesn't mean it wasn't allowed.

shootermeb said:

For those complaining about "one shot per target", the first issuance I can find where the AAFTA clarified the number of shots per target at a Grand Prix is in 2016.

https://www.aafta.org/uploads/1/2/7/6/127666620/aafta_handbook_2016.pdf, page 29, section "Qualifying Rules (Rifle Match)" part E.

Nothing changed in 2024 regarding the ability to have a course that is one shot per target. It seems it has always been allowed, but only in 2016 the rule now stated the maximum allowed targets per lane and the maximum allowed shots per target. A MAXIMUM of 2 shots per target means you can have ONE or two shots per target. ONE is less than two. Two is the maximum whole number when comparing one to two.

The 2024 rulebook, similar text can be found on Page 19, section "Qualifying Rules - Rifle Match" part D. https://www.aafta.org/uploads/1/2/7/6/127666620/2024_aafta_official_field_target_rules.pdf

View attachment 501741

Just because you are unhappy with the fact that someone chooses to run a match with one shot per target doesn't mean anything changed in the rules that would have prevented a one shot per target match from occurring in the last 8 years (and likely longer). So, if we weren't upset about this eight years ago, why are we upset now?

The rule addition that actually occurred in 2024 is to state a target does not need to me moved between day one and day 2 if there hasn't been at least two shots made on the target. This can be interpreted as making it easier on a club to run a one shot per target course, because now in 2024 they can be lazy and run the same course both days without the burden of repositioning targets between day one and day two.

View attachment 501743

Just because the rules made it easier does not mean one shot per target was not possible in ALL the years prior 2024. Just because someone didn't do it, doesn't mean it wasn't allowed.

Click to expand...

It was really silly to not allow the second shot on a target to be on day two....

Shooting one shot per target is way more difficult than two shots per target. The competitor has to have better endurance because they have to address 25 lanes instead of 13-15 lanes. That's why older competitors that are a little more frail complained about the nationals being one shot.

You also have to range find twice as many targets and don't get to adjust after a missed first shot.

If we keep the new GP scoring system, we should add to the environmental factors a plus factor of 10-15% for shooting one shot per target instead of two... in my humble opinion... As well as, a sliding scale for wind, elevation and shaded targets... not on or off..

Airgunoregon said:

It was really silly to not allow the second shot on a target to be on day two....

Shooting one shot per target is way more difficult than two shots per target. The competitor has to have better endurance because they have to address 25 lanes instead of 13-15 lanes. That's why older competitors that are a little more frail complained about the nationals being one shot.

You also have to range find twice as many targets and don't get to adjust after a missed first shot.

If we keep the new GP scoring system, we should add to the environmental factors a plus factor of 10-15% for shooting one shot per target instead of two... in my humble opinion... As well as, a sliding scale for wind, elevation and shaded targets... not on or off..

Click to expand...

One rule that could be getting in the way is the maximum 2 targets per lane (or 3 targets per lane). This prevents a setup where you have 4 targets on a lane with one shot per target.

Maybe the rule should be change to state a maximum 4 (or 6) shots per lane, and we still keep the max 2 shots per target rule. This could help with the balance between using one shot per target and limiting the amount of necessary "endurance" - assuming you mean getting up and down from position for each lane.

Still wouldn't prevent someone from running a one shot per for 25 lanes, but at least would open the options to use one shot per in a more endurance friendly course.

I agree there is probably a slight reduction to overall score shooting one shot per, but it is likely to be seen more on days where the first shot is a likely miss, like having switching winds and such. Not sure what that should really mean for the difficulty calculation.

From prior statements online and such, it seems the difficulty calculation originated as a guideline or tool to help course designers keep their relative difficulty in check. However, this year the calculation was promoted as truth. There have been many statements in prior years indicating the Troyer calculation is not accurate enough to correctly compare one course to any other course. A reason for that is because it lacks the input precision necessary to have a result that accurately captures all the difficulties involved I don't think there has been any real mathematical study regarding the accuracy of the difficulty result such that it should have been promoted as a member of the GP scoring calculation.

Our club has people constantly indicating our course seems more difficult than other clubs' similarly numbered difficulty courses. I assume we are kind of like Nevada in this case. We have capabilities to setup fairly extreme up/down hill shots. I believe an uphill shot is harder than a downhill shot due to the positioning required for the uphill (shooting from WFTF position it's much harder shooting up, but it doesn't affect me much shooting hunter because I do not put my elbows on my knees.) We have uneven shooting pads in some spots. If the wind is blowing at least 5 mph, you will struggle at our club - we shoot in all 360 degrees of rotation available, so you can't sight in for the wind. We have some places where you think the wind is blowing left to right, but your shot will impact to the left. So, I do not think the value of the wind is the real measure, but rather the variability of the wind. The only time our course is on par or comparable is when we are in rainy day mode, the entire course is on a covered range, all shooting in the same direction, every shooting pad is perfectly level, and if you are lucky it's not too windy. We certainly see higher scores when shooting all lanes from the range.

shootermeb said:

For those complaining about "one shot per target", the first issuance I can find where the AAFTA clarified the number of shots per target at a Grand Prix is in 2016.

https://www.aafta.org/uploads/1/2/7/6/127666620/aafta_handbook_2016.pdf, page 29, section "Qualifying Rules (Rifle Match)" part E.

Nothing changed in 2024 regarding the ability to have a course that is one shot per target. It seems it has always been allowed, but only in 2016 the rule now stated the maximum allowed targets per lane and the maximum allowed shots per target. A MAXIMUM of 2 shots per target means you can have ONE or two shots per target. ONE is less than two. Two is the maximum whole number when comparing one to two.

The 2024 rulebook, similar text can be found on Page 19, section "Qualifying Rules - Rifle Match" part D. https://www.aafta.org/uploads/1/2/7/6/127666620/2024_aafta_official_field_target_rules.pdf

View attachment 501741

Just because you are unhappy with the fact that someone chooses to run a match with one shot per target doesn't mean anything changed in the rules that would have prevented a one shot per target match from occurring in the last 8 years (and likely longer). So, if we weren't upset about this eight years ago, why are we upset now?

The rule addition that actually occurred in 2024 is to state a target does not need to me moved between day one and day 2 if there hasn't been at least two shots made on the target. This can be interpreted as making it easier on a club to run a one shot per target course, because now in 2024 they can be lazy and run the same course both days without the burden of repositioning targets between day one and day two.

View attachment 501743

Just because the rules made it easier does not mean one shot per target was not possible in ALL the years prior 2024. Just because someone didn't do it, doesn't mean it wasn't allowed.

Click to expand...

It is strange to me that AFFTA would call out the one shot per target at a GP in 2024 and label it 2024 rule changes. The fact that the rules use to say no more than 2 shots per lane which is not exactly explicit. Over the years much verbiage has been changed to make the rules easier to understand. The Hunter class was never consulted as to how this would affect their class. We don't expect the WFT class to use 16x scopes so why should their rules be inflicted on us especially at a National! It wasn't really thought out that well IMHO.