Time to combine Open and Hunter?

[cavedweller]

I feel the current limitations in Hunter allow for a challenge. All the classes have their challenges and it seems making a class without any just ruins any type or sportsmanship to me. Whats the point of doing something if its so easy? I personally haven't cleared a course in Hunter yet, been close but haven't. I just feel the current rules are set to allow a good variety of abilities and still keep it challenging at the same time. WFTF and Piston classes are a whole other animal and have their own inherit challenges. I just feel of the current classes that exist people should be able to find one they prefer and shoot in it.

What are the long standing gripes? By how many people? Are we talking the .01% of the current shooters or 60% of the shooters have this gripe?
Ill ask my fellow shooters next time their opinions of Hunter class. I shoot with all ages.
Is it maybe people aren't aware of other classes?

I think the challenges of HFT will remain regardless of removing scope limitations, forced position lanes are tough. If they wanted to make it tougher all they need do is reduce KZ size or increased number of forced lanes. Humans as a rule, hate change. That said, we must always ask why we do the things we do. First question on the plate is why do we use a scope to do something it wasn't designed to do = range finding? We should take full advantage of the human condition which seeks to improve our equipment,,,,,,, not antiquate it simply because it's the way its been done in the past. My thoughts, right or wrong... i own them. Mind you i have absolutely the BEST most stellar equipment and i still suck because it's not about the equipment or the rules.... it's about daily practice, that's what makes winners win!

 

[Bramezy]

I think the challenges of HFT will remain regardless of removing scope limitations, forced position lanes are tough. If they wanted to make it tougher all they need do is reduce KZ size or increased number of forced lanes. Humans as a rule, hate change. That said, we must always ask why we do the things we do. First question on the plate is why do we use a scope to do something it wasn't designed to do = range finding? We should take full advantage of the human condition which seeks to improve our equipment,,,,,,, not antiquate it simply because it's the way its been done in the past. My thoughts, right or wrong... i own them. Mind you i have absolutely the BEST most stellar equipment and i still suck because it's not about the equipment or the rules.... it's about daily practice, that's what makes winners win!

I get that but I still think testing needs done first. Need to test thresholds and see the effects. 20x, 24x, 30x, 50x etc and see how that changes the outcome. I personally am going to setup a wheel for 30x on my current setup and see how it differs. I know it ranges the long yardages exactly so theres that. Less error should equate to more hits but we wont know unless we test. Ill shoot a match at 30x or other higher values and see how I do compared to the others. The MDs wont count it towards the hunter class I normally shoot but that doesnt really matter.
Thats the other thing, if there is a handful of people who want to shoot differently, go for it, it just wont count against the other classes. Nothing stopping you.

 

[Franklink]

I shoot a marauder and a $600 scope and tied for 2nd at the Burning River GP. If I could go back and fix one thing I know I could have shot better. Its not always the arrow but the indian that matters. I was in a shoot off between a red wolf and a thomas. Nerves got me not the gun. I love that gun actually.

So you're saying somebody with better equipment won the match?

I tease but I do understand what you're saying. There are instances where someone is capable of being competitive with budget equipment. Hepler winning nationals "with a Marauder and a UTG scope" or some such always comes up in these discussions. Okay, sure, but Hepler is an exceptional shooter. And he now shoots a Red Wolf and a much more commonly used price range scope (Athlon I believe)

As @AirNGasman pointed out yesterday, a $3000 rig in Hunter class is pretty much the norm.

 

[Franklink]

I get that but I still think testing needs done first. Need to test thresholds and see the effects. 20x, 24x, 30x, 50x etc and see how that changes the outcome. I personally am going to setup a wheel for 30x on my current setup and see how it differs. I know it ranges the long yardages exactly so theres that. Less error should equate to more hits but we wont know unless we test. Ill shoot a match at 30x or other higher values and see how I do compared to the others. The MDs wont count it towards the hunter class I normally shoot but that doesnt really matter.
Thats the other thing, if there is a handful of people who want to shoot differently, go for it, it just wont count against the other classes. Nothing stopping you.

If the 16x scope mag rule for Hunter was removed it wouldn't change scores much.

@steve123 talked about this earlier in the discussion. For 5 or more years your test has been running at the monthly Airgunner of Arizona matches. Between Hunter, WFTF (on less windy days) Open (less frequent as participation has gone down), and Unlimited (laser rangefinder) the high scores are always right there, neck and neck. Last time I shot with a laser rangefinder was to assess the Ghost in that platform's first showing in a field target match anywhere. I wanted to eliminate the scope as a possible cause of misses so used a laser rangefinder. Three of us tied for high score with 47/48. Me in Unlimited, Kent G in Hunter, and Garrett K in WFTF. That would be a laser rf, 16x scope, and probably 80x scope for the WFTF guy.

 

[thomasair]

Long before I ever made a gun of my own, I was captivated by the beautiful and technical rifles I saw in pictures of guys shooting FT in Europe. I thought the EV2 was the coolest thing I had ever seen and wanted to participate in FT just because of the awesome equipment that was used.

Had I saw pictures of guys using guns like @AirNGasman I would not have ever gotten into FT. Im being as truthful as I can be when I say this.

When I show pictures of one of my FT guns to people that have never even heard of FT..,they all make a comment about how amazing the guns are. A lot of guys love the equipment and would not be interested without it.

As for the opening post....who really cares if there isn't a lot of participation in a certain division? What is the cost of that for a club match? Pretty much nothing. For a GP....it's the cost of a couple of awards.

If low numbers is a reason to get rid of a class and change another....get rid of the piston classes too. At most clubs you only see a couple piston guys at most.

Mike

 

[Bramezy]

So you're saying somebody with better equipment won the match?

I tease but I do understand what you're saying. There are instances where someone is capable of being competitive with budget equipment. Hepler winning nationals "with a Marauder and a UTG scope" or some such always comes up in these discussions. Okay, sure, but Hepler is an exceptional shooter. And he now shoots a Red Wolf and a much more commonly used price range scope (Athlon I believe)

As @AirNGasman pointed out yesterday, a $3000 rig in Hunter class is pretty much the norm.

I would agree there, seems people, myself somewhat included, feel the need for high quality to try and buy accuracy to equate to more hits. I know it does help, but its not 100% as I have seen and proven myself. Just how we humans are. I like shiny too!

 

[Bramezy]

If the 16x scope mag rule for Hunter was removed it wouldn't change scores much.

@steve123 talked about this earlier in the discussion. For 5 or more years your test has been running at the monthly Airgunner of Arizona matches. Between Hunter, WFTF (on less windy days) Open (less frequent as participation has gone down), and Unlimited (laser rangefinder) the high scores are always right there, neck and neck. Last time I shot with a laser rangefinder was to assess the Ghost in that platform's first showing in a field target match anywhere. I wanted to eliminate the scope as a possible cause of misses so used a laser rangefinder. Three of us tied for high score with 47/48. Me in Unlimited, Kent G in Hunter, and Garrett K in WFTF. That would be a laser rf, 16x scope, and probably 80x scope for the WFTF guy.

Interesting.
Maybe its just perception then.

 

[Bill Day]

The Open class has never been in favor of Hunter class shooters joining their ranks. Frankly, I say we don't need them. Let them fade away as their Piston Class did. If they want to comply with our rules they can join Hunter PCP or Piston anytime! How's that for a "About Face" I'll even throw in a salute.

 

[Bramezy]

Long before I ever made a gun of my own, I was captivated by the beautiful and technical rifles I saw in pictures of guys shooting FT in Europe. I thought the EV2 was the coolest thing I had ever seen and wanted to participate in FT just because of the awesome equipment that was used.

Had I saw pictures of guys using guns like @AirNGasman I would not have ever gotten into FT. Im being as truthful as I can be when I say this.

When I show pictures of one of my FT guns to people that have never even heard of FT..,they all make a comment about how amazing the guns are. A lot of guys love the equipment and would not be interested without it.

As for the opening post....who really cares if there isn't a lot of participation in a certain division? What is the cost of that for a club match? Pretty much nothing. For a GP....it's the cost of a couple of awards.

If low numbers is a reason to get rid of a class and change another....get rid of the piston classes too. At most clubs you only see a couple piston guys at most.

Mike

Our club hardly ever sees piston shooters. Shouldnt gauge on one or two clubs. Like you say, leave them be and let people participate where they can.

 

[Lgwoodworker]

Long before I ever made a gun of my own, I was captivated by the beautiful and technical rifles I saw in pictures of guys shooting FT in Europe. I thought the EV2 was the coolest thing I had ever seen and wanted to participate in FT just because of the awesome equipment that was used.

Had I saw pictures of guys using guns like @AirNGasman I would not have ever gotten into FT. Im being as truthful as I can be when I say this.

When I show pictures of one of my FT guns to people that have never even heard of FT..,they all make a comment about how amazing the guns are. A lot of guys love the equipment and would not be interested without it.

As for the opening post....who really cares if there isn't a lot of participation in a certain division? What is the cost of that for a club match? Pretty much nothing. For a GP....it's the cost of a couple of awards.

If low numbers is a reason to get rid of a class and change another....get rid of the piston classes too. At most clubs you only see a couple piston guys at most.

Mike

Ron winning matches and championships with ”Frankenguns” from the 70’s is what gave me hope that my skill as shooter would be part of the equation, rather than just the equipment. I don’t say this to be contrary, but just to illustrate the contrast. That said I do shoot one of those $3000 BB guns and I do go down the rabbit hole of trying to buy accuracy.

 

[Motorhead]

As to the piston guns ... In our average "Club Matches" we have @ 22 shooters and in this group of WFTF Piston or Hunter Piston we see on average @ 6-7 shooters.
Now SVFTC also is fortunately to have the reigning WFTF Piston World Champion in our ranks and with that folks who like piston gun shooting get compelled to see what they got & challenge themself

Currently we have ZERO open class shooters at our club events

 

[carey54]

First off, this isn't pitchforks. Nor is it demands to the BOG. Nor do I want it to become a BOG bash. Let's see if we can discuss this in a civil manner.

While nothing compared to many that have been doing it for multiple decades, I've been involved in ft since the 12x Hunter class days. Around the time the rules changed to 16x was the time I started shooting in Open class. I shot there a couple years, and about 2 years ago switched to mostly Hunter when the Open class participation got nearly non-existent at the monthly matches of the 3 clubs I attend. I prefer Open, feeling slightly more stable from the bumbag/harness position, and the unlimited scope power, and the ability to dial the turrets. But I can also hold my own from the Hunter class position and rules.

The recent Pyramyd Air Cup is what prompted this post. Somebody shared some photos of the scoreboards on Instagram. If I'm reading it right, I'm counting 58 Hunter class shooters, and 5 Open class shooters. At an 11.6:1 participation ratio, I think we're at the point of bringing the combining of the two classes up for discussion.

So how do we all feel about a combined Open/Hunter class?
The way I envision this is that the 16x scope restriction for Hunter class is lifted, allowing Hunter class to use any scope they want, at any magnification level. While the no-harness, no-straps, etc rules are lifted to allow the typical Open class position to shoot with the Hunter class. For the "new" class, essentially: keep the no attached bipod rule, and keep the no tripod rule, and keep the no laser rangefinder rule. In other words, change the rules so that current Open and Hunter class positions and equipment are all one class.

Hunter class gets what they want with the removal of the scope restriction. And the few remaining Open class shooters can still shoot from their favored position and actually have a class in which to do so.

Hunter class guys....Would you be mad about this? Quit the game/sport?
Open class guys....Would you be mad about this? Quit the game/sport?
WFTF class guys.....Would you....nevermind. This doesn't affect you in any way whatsoever.

From my perspective, combining the two classes sure wouldn't alienate any newbies, since Hunter is no longer a new-comer class but rather the largest field contested. ie Hunter is not a new-comer class, whether it was ever meant to be at inception or not, it simply isn't now.

What say ye?

Am I missing some valid reason why we should keep the current situation and not consolidate Open and Hunter? I'm only seeing this as a win-win for both classes and field target as a whole, but I'm just one person.

 

[carey54]

Ron winning matches and championships with ”Frankenguns” from the 70’s is what gave me hope that my skill as shooter would be part of the equation, rather than just the equipment. I don’t say this to be contrary, but just to illustrate the contrast. That said I do shoot one of those $3000 BB guns and I do go down the rabbit hole of trying to buy accuracy.

My proposal would to keep WFTF as it is The only other classes would be PCP or Springer. Any position/any scope adjustment.

 

[AirNGasman]

How do you make FT better for all?

Have enough divisions and classes so every shooter has his own division or class, of course.

 

[Franklink]

Have enough divisions and classes so every shooter has his own division or class, of course.

This came up in a discussion a while back. Is the elephant in the room about why we have all these classes simply so that we can give out more participation awards? Ie more people can say they "won" the match.

 

[Franklink]

My proposal would to keep WFTF as it is The only other classes would be PCP or Springer. Any position/any scope adjustment.

I like it. Might need something like no tripods/no laser rangefinders/no attached bipods though.

 

[AirNGasman]

Had I saw pictures of guys using guns like @AirNGasman I would not have ever gotten into FT.

Thanks for your honesty, Mike; it's admirable in 2024.

Truth is, one reason I use practical hunting equipment in competition is to aggravate equipment freaks. But I could also win with superfluous equipment...

If I could afford it...

And felt the need for every possible equipment advantage to be competitive.

That said, I should repeat myself that I can't hold it against ANY competitor for using the best equipment possible (within rules parameters). And that said, I'll repeat myself yet AGAIN with a plagiarization from a book-

"At what point does the supplanting of shooting skills with shooting aids, accessories, gadgets and gizmos actually defeat the purpose of competition or recreational shooting; that point being improving and exercising One's shooting skills."

I'll close this post with this-



.

 

[cavedweller]

I would have to whole heartedly agree

 

[PowderBurnt]

It sounds like aafta and aarp are interchangeable. Lol

 

[Lgwoodworker]

I have been following this thread (and others like it) and i keep coming to the same place with all the discussion(s)…is this just a lot of solutions looking for a problem? I have not really seen a clear definition of an existential problem yet. I have seen complaints about things that some shooters don’t like about the current state of FT, i.e. scope magnification limits, ranging with parallax, clicking vs holdover, bumbag vs bucket, supported position vs unsupported offhand, and the list goes on, and on, and on…Complaints are not necessarily problems. If we change rules every time someone complains, then we might as well have, as Ron said, a separate category for every individual.





Someone might say (has said) FT is dying, citing that participation is dropping at their local matches. That might be a problem, if it is true on a wide scale. Show me the stats that are more than just from a club that might not be doing a good job of promoting their matches. Many of the MD’s that have weighed in to this, and other, threads have cited steady and even growing participation. So is that really a problem that needs solving? Scott C. hit the nail on the head, IMO, when he said, “field target is keeping people from shooting field target. It’s slow, a little boring, and brings out the argumentative nature in old men.” And yet, I read a boatload of announcements in this forum of events all over the country (except in NM). People, mostly older, are still shooting FT, in spite of all their griping. And I also see a healthy number of young(ish) people in the game. I am not sure that the slow nature of FT is an existential problem to solve. Granted, it has not taken off like, say, pickleball (another sport frequently played by the older generations). But that is a more stimulation-rich game…and, if LeBron James invested in FT like he did in pickleball, perhaps it might. On the other hand, FT has been around for a much longer time than pickleball, showing that it is not just a passing fad. We’ll see how long pickleball sticks around.





I am mostly in agreement with those that say this is not an issue needing a change. I have yet to attend a match where the MD refused to let a shooter play in the class of their choosing…instead they say, “Go for it! Have a good time! You won’t be vying for the big prizes, but you will have FUN!” I am also completely unopposed to any changes that the powers that be might make. After all, this is just a game, and participation is completely voluntary.