Ok, so instead of changing the rules, what about a handicap for older ages?
My 70-80+yr old friends say they like it as is as they aren't out there to win anyway, they don't care.
Upvote 0
Time to combine Open and Hunter?
- Thread starter Franklink
- Start date
My 70-80+yr old friends say they like it as is as they aren't out there to win anyway, they don't care.
I see it every time I go to a FT match - that it doesn't matter the division as to who gets the high match score - because it comes down to mental mistakes, getting the wind estimations correct, and who did better at the positional lanes. That's the truth, especially the latter.
There are tripods nowadays that are within a few percent of how steady a cement bench is so that would be the main aid I wouldn't want legal if unlimited became a recognized division.
I think I'm equally steady with harness and thigh rest as compared to bucket and sticks.
BUT don't think a LRF is a advantage compared to a high magnification scope. I prove this true at every match. In fact a 16x scope ranges better at the closest distances than a LRF does, at least with me using my $1800 LRF. The Hunter shooters have proven that perfect scores are attainable, like our friend Van has, with two back to back 48/48 in our club but that doesn't mean I think they should be constrained by magnification.
Except for WFTF I'd like to see Open, Hunter without scope restrictions, and Unlimited - however offhand support by sticks not allowed, all combined as a AAFTA experiment because at this point I see no difference in scores.
Also our WFTF shooters have shot perfect scores as well as only missing a point or two but that is noticeably less often than that of the other divisions. It really depends on how windy it "isn't" that day.
There are tripods nowadays that are within a few percent of how steady a cement bench is so that would be the main aid I wouldn't want legal if unlimited became a recognized division.
I think I'm equally steady with harness and thigh rest as compared to bucket and sticks.
BUT don't think a LRF is a advantage compared to a high magnification scope. I prove this true at every match. In fact a 16x scope ranges better at the closest distances than a LRF does, at least with me using my $1800 LRF. The Hunter shooters have proven that perfect scores are attainable, like our friend Van has, with two back to back 48/48 in our club but that doesn't mean I think they should be constrained by magnification.
Except for WFTF I'd like to see Open, Hunter without scope restrictions, and Unlimited - however offhand support by sticks not allowed, all combined as a AAFTA experiment because at this point I see no difference in scores.
Also our WFTF shooters have shot perfect scores as well as only missing a point or two but that is noticeably less often than that of the other divisions. It really depends on how windy it "isn't" that day.
Upvote 0
The only thing I'd like to change about hunter is being allowed to click my scope instead of using hold over. I'm unsure of the reason for the restriction. But hey, I'm new to the sport.
Upvote 0
I'm not a competitor, but I did some Hunter Class CF rifle shooting years ago. One thing that has always struck me regarding the AAFTA Hunter class is, it just isn't. In the class I remember from years back, the Hunter class rifles had a substantially lower weight requirement, a 2 lb min trigger pull, stock dimensions that generally defined a sporter style, max 12X scope, rifle had to be a repeater (although it could be single loaded), etc. In other words, would you take this thing in the field? Don't call it something it's not, or drop it.
Upvote 0
So I'll be the second guy who likes the 16x Hunter scope limit. It is definitely more challenging which is the fun factor, everyone making a near perfect score is pandering to egos.
While a perfect score is great goal, having the top three shooters separated by 3 or less points is a dismal tool for ranking. The courses are too easy to demonstrate differences in skill of shooters which has become a forced position contest.
While a perfect score is great goal, having the top three shooters separated by 3 or less points is a dismal tool for ranking. The courses are too easy to demonstrate differences in skill of shooters which has become a forced position contest.
Upvote 0
I agree. High scores from Hunter/Open/Unlimited shooters at the matches we attend are always pretty close.
Upvote 0
I have had this conversation multiple times with Rex J. He runs the Southwest Airgunners matches in a couple places along the AZ/NM state line.
If guys are getting perfect scores, or even nearly perfect scores, then the course was simply not difficult enough for the typical equipment being used in field target today. We set hard courses at his matches.
Upvote 0
Like a golf handicap system?
That's a deep rabbit hole but I'd think a handicap based on skill like in golf would be better than age-based. And skill would be determined by past performance at matches.
Handicap system for field target isn't something I'd get behind though. Participation is already so limited... No need to create additional deterrents to attend matches.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
As a person that prefers to keep everything simple and skill oriented in my shooting, it pains me to have witnessed the "devolution " as Ron mentions. There are some that have been in the sport longer than me (1991), but it's been a fun and personally challenging ride...
We shot pumpers and iron sighted springers predominantly in our beginning... all one class. That was quickly changed with the AA 100 series and some like the Sportsmatch then Daystate jumped in and by 1993, the wife and I were in pcp's and a lot of the guys had dropped out because of the equipment race. She and I did well and stayed with a Huntsman and an LR90 till about 2000 - 2001 when I gave her a ProTarget and a CRX ST for me. Up till around this time, it was all one class but subdivisions of A, B, and sometimes C were in there. Sometime about that 2001 era, a Piston class was requested and voted in because the pcp's had too much advantage. Not too long after, a Hunter class was suggested to try to get more participation because the average price of most of the rigs had gotten so high. It was voted in with limitations intended to keep "match" rifles and high dollar scopes out. In only a year or so, there was so much complaining about not being able to use "the only" rifles owned that just happened to be Open class that changes were voted in and gradually, through that same sequence, became what they are today. So now you can use a Thomas with Kahles in "Hunter", even though it's unlikely anyone would choose that to go hunting...
I served on the BOG for one stint and that was enough. I never understood the scrap for every advantage possible in your equipment vs having a good rifle and practicing but I DO UNDERSTAND that everyone can be different. It's the "let's change the rules to suit me" vs the practice "within the rules" that frustrated me and basically ended my belief and support in the AAFTA based game. I've held many matches at my place and was MD on SO many more, or assisted. One could observe that we had our own rules at my matches... loosely, but not strictly, based on the AAFTA rule book.
I'm definitely not picking on @Franklink's suggestion... Open has been dying here and he's looking for ways to accommodate current and future shooters. I imagine that most of us that shot Open are aging out of the low position(s) but still want to shoot... that was the original logic for the allowing of the harness...
So... all the grousing done, I'm not sure I'd support combining the classes but I DO see the reasoning behind it.
Bob
We shot pumpers and iron sighted springers predominantly in our beginning... all one class. That was quickly changed with the AA 100 series and some like the Sportsmatch then Daystate jumped in and by 1993, the wife and I were in pcp's and a lot of the guys had dropped out because of the equipment race. She and I did well and stayed with a Huntsman and an LR90 till about 2000 - 2001 when I gave her a ProTarget and a CRX ST for me. Up till around this time, it was all one class but subdivisions of A, B, and sometimes C were in there. Sometime about that 2001 era, a Piston class was requested and voted in because the pcp's had too much advantage. Not too long after, a Hunter class was suggested to try to get more participation because the average price of most of the rigs had gotten so high. It was voted in with limitations intended to keep "match" rifles and high dollar scopes out. In only a year or so, there was so much complaining about not being able to use "the only" rifles owned that just happened to be Open class that changes were voted in and gradually, through that same sequence, became what they are today. So now you can use a Thomas with Kahles in "Hunter", even though it's unlikely anyone would choose that to go hunting...
I served on the BOG for one stint and that was enough. I never understood the scrap for every advantage possible in your equipment vs having a good rifle and practicing but I DO UNDERSTAND that everyone can be different. It's the "let's change the rules to suit me" vs the practice "within the rules" that frustrated me and basically ended my belief and support in the AAFTA based game. I've held many matches at my place and was MD on SO many more, or assisted. One could observe that we had our own rules at my matches... loosely, but not strictly, based on the AAFTA rule book.
I'm definitely not picking on @Franklink's suggestion... Open has been dying here and he's looking for ways to accommodate current and future shooters. I imagine that most of us that shot Open are aging out of the low position(s) but still want to shoot... that was the original logic for the allowing of the harness...
So... all the grousing done, I'm not sure I'd support combining the classes but I DO see the reasoning behind it.
Bob
Upvote 0
Whats the difference? Anyone could shoot hunter but everyone that wants higher mag or to dial or whatever with bucket and styx shoots open. Why create so many rules as to deter people shooting. I mean fine have rules when there’s $10000 on the line but i don’t know of any ft match that has a payout. I think its all about fun and bragging about beating your buddys
Upvote 0
That would work for me. If I could do that in open with bucket and sticks I would come back and get another scope wheel and set it up and shoot
Upvote 0
I sent out texts to 17 field target friends that havent and probably wont comment in this discussion.
The question wasn't about combining Open and Hunter but rather which of them would like to keep the 16x limit for Hunter or allowing unlimited magnification and dialing the turret in Hunter.
So far 8 have responded...
4 would prefer no scope restrictions in Hunter class.
2 would prefer to keep the 16x
2 responded essentially neutrally
I'll update the tally if/when the others respond.
The question wasn't about combining Open and Hunter but rather which of them would like to keep the 16x limit for Hunter or allowing unlimited magnification and dialing the turret in Hunter.
So far 8 have responded...
4 would prefer no scope restrictions in Hunter class.
2 would prefer to keep the 16x
2 responded essentially neutrally
I'll update the tally if/when the others respond.
Upvote 0
Next season I'll be running 4 test matches. The format will be 20fpe pcp, 20fpe springer, 12fpe pcp, 12fpe springer. There will be two targets per lane, two shots per target. They will be 40 shot matches. Timers will be used with 4min on the clock. The only restrictions are power level, really. You can bring any support equipment and accessories but only have 4min to set up and shoot. If you don't complete your lane in time no points for you!(might take that out).
I believe these types of trials are the way to vet changes to the game without the pressure or rules of an AAFTA match.
As a side, we'll established organizations have many concerns and considerations. After the hot and heavy rule change days(20??-2017), aafta seems weary, and very cautious about changes(good thing). So if you want to change or rearrange field target, start your own league. AAFTA won't change for You.
This is not finger pointing or a call out. It is an avenue for change. Thanks for the thread Cole.
I believe these types of trials are the way to vet changes to the game without the pressure or rules of an AAFTA match.
As a side, we'll established organizations have many concerns and considerations. After the hot and heavy rule change days(20??-2017), aafta seems weary, and very cautious about changes(good thing). So if you want to change or rearrange field target, start your own league. AAFTA won't change for You.
This is not finger pointing or a call out. It is an avenue for change. Thanks for the thread Cole.
Upvote 0
I think I would be fine with leaving even at 16x but to allowing dialing because that more along the lines of hunting for me. The higher mag definitely helps with ranging but I wouldn't shoot at that higher mag just because I like to watch my surroundings a little before I shoot for wind changes.
Upvote 0
I agree with all of that and really like your ideas for the test matches. Please let us know how they go.
Upvote 0
Thank you for your service, Bobby. Glad you escaped with only PTSD, and your sanity partly intact. That's why you make so much good sense (even in 2024).
FWIW, I never wanted to be a governor. So you ask, then why are you a match director?
GSDD, I reckon.
(Good Sense Deficit Disorder)
.
Upvote 0
Ron after talking with you this is a solid idea on weight limit, price limit in this sportsman class. Just take gun as it comes from the factory with no extra weights. A lightweight hunting rifle and a scope and do it the old fashion way, no scope wheels,no range finders. Walk up to lane look at target guess distance and shoot.
Upvote 0
Sounds like this would be the beginner class that I've always heard Hunter was supposed to be.
Upvote 0
I think you're right I'm new to field target or was new I guess I should be correct since I don't actually participate Much anymore. Like Ron and I discussed and he said in his conversation he said Hunter class was originally intended for the beginner so they wouldn't feel overwhelmed by how much work they've got to do to get better. Basically not worrying about getting your butt kicked so bad. By putting those limitations it allows for someone to come in and participate with a marauder and UTG like Hepler did and some people still do not feel ashamed that they only got half and not the 50s the other people. But now in Hunter class as a new shooter who shows up and see guys running red wolves and crowns impacts raws with a S3 on top make some scratch their head
Upvote 0
Thanks Ron,
Just in case anyone thinks I'm a crusty old f*** that hates change... well you're partly right... in this case I just hate the perversion away from the game as it was conceived... a practice competition for actual airgun hunting. I know that was pretty much gone by 1991, but with the creation of the Hunter class, supposed to be back to its roots (more or less)... Now equipment has come a long way since then but a large amount of that "development " has been on gadgets for shooting aids. No rifle now is really more accurate than that period, just maybe more dependable and convenient.
I would be supportive of an actual limited class like Ron suggested for Sportsman but everything else is kind of arbitrary... just a shame to segment groups already not too numerous...
An idea that LD proposed many years ago is to define what CAN BE USED, not can't... if it isn't in the rules, it can't be used... period... The rule book would be much smaller... most of the current rules were attempting to address an attempt to gain an advantage...
Bob
Upvote 0