Hello Bullseye - L (Disscussion of Camp Perry and other from the NRA Shooting Director

First topic message reminder :

Greetings fellow bullseye shooters, from NRAHQ Competitive Shooting.  I have finally found time to register and join the forum. 

In years past I was a very active member of this forum, although it was in a different format then.  I also was a co-host of the annual picnic, which went by the wayside some time back.

I am now the Director of Competitive Shooting for the NRA, something that this lowly competitor never thought would happen.  However, it has changed my life dramatically.  Although I managed to get to one bullseye match early in the year, the needs of competitive shooting in the many disciplines that I oversee prohibited me from attending additional events.  I will try to do better next year.  As an example of my schedule, between July 1 and August 31, I had 3 days off.

I'll give you a short update on a couple of things related to pistol.

I am still working on electronic targets.  The main difficulty with this is that, because we are on a military base, nothing permanent can be done to the ranges, so the system we purchase must be totally portable and easy to put up and take down each year.  I have made contact with Oakwood Controls, Sius-Ascor, and Kongsberg target systems.  I am constructing a business model to present to the NRA on what the system will cost, what NRA's savings will be, and how long it will take them to recoup their investment.  I'm trying hard to get a system up and running for 2015.

Coupled with the electronic target system comes a question.  Because we will be able to run through the course of fire in a shorter time frame, we can shorten the number of days that it takes to complete the National Championships.  In a previous competitor's meeting and in some side talks with competitors, I was told that shortening the events is NOT what they want, because they want to take full advantage of their once-a-year opportunity to meet with friends and go to dinner with them.  Your opinions?

Budget.  I've looked over some comments before I signed up here regarding what the NRA should do to make things easier and better for competitors.  Believe me, that's exactly what I want to do.  However, the NRA is NOT a giant pot of unrestricted money that can be spent any way that I want to.  Like every business model (just like where you probably have at work), I have a budget and I'm expected to work within that budget.  There are lots of things that I would like to do at Camp Perry but I'm restricted by the fact that we don't own Camp Perry so must always take into account what the military will let us do, and restricted by how much money I have available.  I may be further restricted by how much money the military has available to support us.

When looking at what it costs to run Camp Perry, my budget far exceeds the entry fees that I take in, so the NRA actually ends up subsidizing each and every competitor, even after sponsorship is figured in.  When looking at the costs involved at Camp Perry, please consider the per diem, housing and travel costs of volunteers; consider the hourly pay costs for the range staff that keeps the trash emptied, arranges for porta potties and cleaning, maintenance of the equipment, and provides coffee, water, etc.; consider the hourly rate of the  target crew that pastes all those targets on cardboard and delivers the targets to the range; consider the cost of supplies like targets, cardboard and glue to make sure that you have targets available; and consider the hourly rate costs of the people in the Stat Office to compile and produce results for almost 700 competitors and the costs of their equipment like computers, printers, ink, etc., and this is only a partial list.

Would I like to do more at Camp Perry for you?  You bet I would but I have to find a way to pay for it.  But please also remember that our support consists of more than Camp Perry.  I need to look at how I can better serve the local matches, sectionals, and regionals as well.

Pistol Committee.  The Pistol Committee will be meeting on October 26th here at NRAHQ.  Many suggestions were made either at the competitor's meeting or via email and additional suggestions can be sent here at NRAHQ or to any committee member.  Suggestions sent here should be directed to the National Manager of Pistol, Tom Hughes, thughes@nrahq.org  Your Pistol Committee this year is; William Allen (Chairman), Ted Carter (Vice-Chairman), Kenn Boyd (Chief referee National Matches), Jim Lenardson, Il Ling New, Tim Pawol, Brian Zins, and your secretary is Tom Hughes.

That's a brief statement regarding pistol but I will stand for questions and try to answer them on a timely basis.  However, most of my days lately have been focused on the 2015 World Palma Rifle Championship that we will be hosting at Camp Perry.  Talk about a lot of work!!!!!!!!!!!

Dennis (Denny) Willing
Director of Competitive Shooting
National Rifle Association

Denny,
Did lights and horns make it through the rules committee? Is NRA going to provide lights and horns for all of the local matches? This plan is stupid. If the NATIONAL MATCH is nothing like the sport, then what the hell is it?
You are creating a new sport. If this conversion of the National Pistol match includes targets that don't turn, I predict 200 less participants next year. I wont go. If Canton remains the same, I'll shoot that instead. There has to be continuity from the grassroots level all the way to Nationals.
I shoot NRA Conventional Pistol--not some Olympic/Bullseye hybrid.

As with any leader who makes a command decision, if this proposal is a horrible expensive flop, Denny will be a villain. If he is right and Conventional Pistol with turning targets is somehow "obsolete" and low tech, and behind the times, well Denny will be a hero. I'm sad to say I don't see any course that leads to glory for anyone involved here.

Olympic shooters can see the lights because their gun is down when the light changes. I'm not focused on the target frame when it's time to start shooting. I'm concentrating on the black....

On second thought maybe I can talk some of the HM shooters to go to nationals and see how many lights we can shoot out....

I'm glad that I shot at the last National Conventional Pistol Match ever held at Camp Perry. I should have bought a shirt...

My club has 24 firing points with turning targets. I'm sure the club will not spend the money for a change to electronic targets. Ever. Will any?

I have received the minutes of the Pistol Committee meeting there are a couple of things that I can share with you.

The Made in America program has been discontinued.  Replacing it is a .22 caliber only 2700 match.  Results will be reported and used for a .22 only classification.  National records are not authorized for this event.  Match sponsors are encouraged to host this event along with their usual events.  It is hoped that this will draw in more junior shooters and perhaps keep some seniors shooting for a while longer.

The committee also adopted three firearm categories, Open, Metallic, and Production.

More details on these items will be forthcoming as the changes make their way through the approval process.  These changes must be approved by the Competitions Rules and Programs Committee that meets on December 8th, and the Board of Directors, who will meet in January.

Will each category then be separated into High Master, Master etc.?  I am guessing yes but asking.

Probably, but I want to check with the Pistol Department Manager yet.  The Pistol portion of the 2014 program was just completed this morning but it did not include the new categories.  I need to see what his intentions are with that.

DirComp wrote:It's clear that something must change.  So few new shooters are entering the game that we can't even get 5 juniors to attend the National Junior Pistol Camp, which has already been cancelled for 2014 for lack of interest.  I'm afraid that we'll have no game and no shooters if we can't stir some interest somewhere.

Well the fact that more and more laws are making it illegal for a non permitted shooter to even touch a pistol, and no one under 21 being able to get a permit... that doesn't help. 

But the fact is electric targets will not build the sport at all. New people build the sport, and turning, or electric targets mean nothing to them at all. It comes down to the fact that there is no push to get bullseye out to the people. Without getting people to KNOW it is even a sport, your merely changing it for the people already shooting it. You need people knowing about it, people asking the local ranges to support it, and people creating a buzz with their shooting buddys. Once the people know, and want it, they will push more of the ranges to put on the meets. The word needs to get out before it totally dies out with the older generation of shooter!  People knowing+ those people asking for meets+ local ranges putting on meets= more people in a now growing sport!!!

Ever wonder why Cowboy Action, IDPA, Handgun Silhouette, etc. aren't sanctioned under the NRA's big "tent"? We're witnessing why.

Probationary two handed shooting with mixed 25 - 50 yard targets on the same line; Bells, Whistles, Horns, Flashing lights; Contrived mish-mash of Open, Metallic, Production categories... this is complete baloney.

We don't want 25 yard Pitch 'n Put mixed into our Conventional Pistol Matches... We don't want Drag Race Staging Lights or Horns - we're not Pavlov's Dogs... We don't want superfluous Categories.

Unless I'm mistaken I detect a whiff of revolution, particularly if the NRA deploys their considerable strong arm tactics to hammer us into something we don't want to be.

Please understand the process here.  Changes to the rule books are recommended by the Pistol Committee.  The committee is composed of several active competitors, including two National Champions, and two members of the Board of Directors.  These changes are NOT added to any rule book without the committee passing a motion recommending their implementation.  We cannot change the rule books except through committee action.

Here at the NRA, and I've only been in this job about 1.5 years, I DO NOT see growth in our shooting games.  Every year I see fewer and fewer competitors attending our events.  Something needs to change.

When I ran 2700s in Michigan years ago it was not unusual to see 40-60 competitors at an event.  Today those same events at the same club bring in fewer than 20.

No one here is looking to cram anything down anyone's throat.  What we are looking for is ways to increase participation before the sports die a natural death.  One of those ways is to add more options that might increase attendance and draw more sponsors to offset costs.

Increasing awards hasn't helped one bit.  When I was very active I can remember that I was in 7th heaven if I could walk away with 25 award points at Camp Perry.  The National Champion won a whopping 50 award points.  Today our Camp Perry award schedule is around $300,000 and all we have to show for it is decreased attendance.

If someone elects to shoot a production firearm, while you continue shooting your open firearm, it shouldn't bother you one bit.  Much like it shouldn't bother you that you shoot an out of the box Ruger Mark II while someone else is shooting a $2000 Hammerli.  At least the person is out there shooting and what he's shooting doesn't affect other competitors one bit.  Now if we were forcing you to shoot a firearm that you didn't want, I could see why there should be a complaint.

Given the fact that not one suggestion was received from readership here on this site on how we can attract more competitors, I think the Pistol Committee did a fine job.  At least they tried.

As far as letting people know the sports exist, I do not know what more we can do.  The NRA has trained instructors and coaches to help new shooters, we have a web site (albeit it could be better and we're working on that) that shows all of our available sports, we publish Shooting Sports USA where I write an monthly article to try to help keep you up to date, and that also has a listing of our sanctioned competitive events, we have the NRABlog where articles on competition are placed, a Facebook presence with 61,000+ followers, we have a sanctioning system, a classification system, we are heavily invested in junior and collegiate competition, and we host National Championships. 

What we can't do is go door-to-door and drag someone to the range - and cram that down their throats.  That's your job.  You are an integral part of keeping the sport alive.  When I started shooting, I was recruited by another shooter.  I have since recruited shooters myself.  The cycle needs repeating.  How many new shooters did you attract to the sport last year?

It takes more to keep these games going than sitting back and criticizing what someone else is doing.  It takes getting off your butt and putting your enthusiasm to work.  I applaud Corregidor for being a Match Director.  It also takes letting us know what you want, not so much about what you don't want after someone did something.  Most people here were silent until someone else actually did something, then they felt free to let the criticism flow.  How about letting the ideas flow rather than the criticism?

The sport has evolved over the years and will continue to evolve.  How many rapid fire strings do you think they fired in 1871?  Things change and will always continue to change.  The question is do you want to lead the change and have a say in how it happens, or just sit back and complain?

I am here to keep you appraised of what we are doing and I am ALWAYS ready to receive your recommendations and your criticism but remember, we all have problems.  When you contact me about those problems I would also like to hear your solutions.

IMO its hard to say the sport isnt growing in these bad times of obama. This season i encountered many shooters who sat out matches due to the cost to travel, not having enough 22 ammo or powder and primers to shoot everything they would like too. In my area we have recruited at least a dozen new shooters this season and about the same last.
I did not go to perry cause i could not afford too plain and simple.Others did not attend because of the broken down equipment. The military shooters are a big part of this sport and they are being stopped from normal participation because of cutbacks. When the economy is in turmoil so is this sport. I would like too see camp perry, rebuilt with cutting edge conventional setup, it could be done at less cost, faster and with less headaches, a electronic system would take years to implement. Nothing will change much till the white house changes hands and then only if America smartens up and puts someone with leadership skills in . Thanks for your help Dennis,

DirComp said: wrote:Here at the NRA, and I've only been in this job about 1.5 years, I DO NOT see growth in our shooting games. Every year I see fewer and fewer competitors attending our events. Something needs to change.

Yes "something" needs to change--but the sport isn't what needs changing.  If we are going to get more competitors, we need more local matches, with more promotion to the new shooter.

Any action that that consumes resources that don't lead to more local matches and more competitors should be avoided.

Changing the National Match to be different than the local Matches doesn't help.  It drives a wedge and consumes resources.

DirComp said: wrote:The committee also adopted three firearm categories, Open, Metallic, and Production.

This change does not help create more local matches--it creates a headache for the match organizer.  The metallic catagory is easy to judge, but how the hell am I going to figure out if that's a production 1911 or an open 1911? The owner isn't going to let me take it apart to check!!! How is it fair for the guy with the $700 production Springfield vs. a $5000+ "production" Cabot or even a $2000 "production" Clark?  It's certainly not fair for the guy with the reworked springfield that "looks" factory to compete against the stock gun!  The guy with the $2000 production Hammerli vs. the $400 production Ruger doesn't do the sport any good!  This proposal is crap.

DirComp said: wrote:Increasing awards hasn't helped one bit. When I was very active I can remember that I was in 7th heaven if I could walk away with 25 award points at Camp Perry. The National Champion won a whopping 50 award points. Today our Camp Perry award schedule is around $300,000 and all we have to show for it is decreased attendance.

I don't think there is a consensus that additional awards are the answer.  I think you would find a consensus that most of us don't care about $300,000 worth of awards--only a handful of shooters go home with all of the awards anyway.  That's not why we go.

DirComp said: wrote:Given the fact that not one suggestion was received from readership here on this site on how we can attract more competitors, I think the Pistol Committee did a fine job. At least they tried.

DENNY, you are really rubbing me the wrong way here.  There have been plenty of suggestions on this forum.  I also submitted them to TOM.  HE said that the pistol committee can only make motions to change the competion rules.  TOM SAID THE PROGRAM CHANGES ARE IN YOUR AUTHORITY ALONE!!  SO DON'T GIVE US THE BS THAT WE ARE THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR NOT ENACTING EFFECTIVE CHANGES.  THOSE CHANGES ARE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. DON'T PASS THE BUCK.

TO GROW OUR SPORT, WE DON'T NEED TO CHANGE THE RULES, OR CHANGE THE GAME.  THOSE ARE GOOD AND WORKING FINE FOR 100 YEARS.  THE RULES ARE NOT WHY THE PARTICIPATION COUNTS ARE DOWN.

THE NRA WEBSITE SUCKS!

JUST SO YOU CAN'T SAY WE HAVENT GIVEN SUGGESTIONS:
--Fix the NRA website so people can effectively search for Pistol Competitions.
--Print brochures that we can give to our gun stores that direct people to the fixed website.
--Help us find/use your lobbyists to get the states to build more places to conduct these matches so new match directors can host more events.
--Don't change the sport to something different to fracture participants we already have.

None of these suggestions have anything to do with rules.  These are things that the sanctioning body of the sport should have been doing the whole time.  These aren't suggestions for the rulebook they are suggestions--demands for you to execute.

This is a passionate debate but remember we are all friends here and in this sport together so Please lets keep this conversation on a friendly level.

Rob,

I cannot create more local matches.  That falls to the competitors and club members.  We have everything in place to help but we simply cannot run matches for you.

You need to learn more about how to write a program.  Just because something is in a rule book doesn't mean you need to include it in every match you run.  If you wrote a program that said "Open category firearms only.  Metallic and Production categories will not be recognized in this tournament", you would be fine.  No change to the old way and we would still sanction the match.  Look at rule 1.8 and you will see that you can even run a single firearm match, like revolver only.  We didn't make the process harder or in any way more complicated, we only opened it up to more people, at the Match Director's discretion.  If you don't want it, don't include it.

I never said you were responsible for enacting changes, because you are not.  However, neither am I.  Do the rule books fall under my authority?, Yes, after all I am the Director of Competitive Shooting.  However, that does not mean that I can change them at will.  Only the Board of Directors can change a rule book.  It starts with proposals to the Pistol Committee, who reviews the proposals and may or may not recommend changes to the rule book.  Recommendations passed are sent to the Competition Rules and Programs Committee, who can delete the recommend change, alter what it says, or pass it and recommend the change to the Board of Directors.  The Chairman of the Comp Rules Committee during the Board of Directors meeting, formally proposes changes to the various rule books as recommended by the various competition committees.  The Board of Directors can refuse to pass the changes, change the wording, or pass it.  Once the Board passes it, it becomes a formal rule.  Your proposal to the Pistol Committee is currently following this exact route after being passed by the Pistol Committee.  Any recommendations for changes to any of our sports, by anyone, including me, must follow this route.

What I would like to see is more formal recommendations to the Pistol Committee that would enhance the sport.  I will give any and all of your recommendations to the committee for review, just send them to me in a email to dwilling@nrahq.org.  And I pass everything to the committee.  When I was Chairman of the Pistol Committee, when I was still on the Board of Directors, we even reviewed a proposal to change bullseye to all 2 handed shooting because "no one uses one hand any more."

The website is in the works.  If you look at the 3-Gun Nation website, you'll a sample of what our website might look like.  We are in talks with the same company that produces the 3-Gun Nation and IDPA websites to do our web site. I don't like our website any more than you do and I'm not sticking up for it, because it's terrible at best.  I'm working on changes so please bear with me.  If I could change it instantly I would.  However, I do not have the authority to enter into contracts on behalf of the NRA, but my boss does.  I need to work through him and I am on his agenda for this very topic next week.

So we're fixing the website;
We can print brochures, but probably shouldn't until the new website is up;
When it comes to lobbyists you might as well be speaking Martian to me.  Competitive shooting doesn't have lobbyists, but the NRA Foundation already provides funding for range construction, especially to those that offer public access;
and lastly, we didn't fracture the sport, only made it accessible to those that don't have or wish to purchase open class guns.  

FYI, a year ago I contacted Mike Doy at Springfield Armory and told him that I was thinking of implementing a Production match, not a change in the rule book, just a match.  I did not yet even have a course of fire in mind  Mike instantly told me he would give me $5,000 for awards.  Manufacturers love having events where their out of the box guns are used.  By making our sport available to those without open class guns, but only have Production guns, we can make a whole lot of people happy - all without changing anything for the competitors that we have now.

Ok, now that we have that settled we just have to convince you not to change the National Match to a different sport with blinky lights and targets that don't turn.

That WOULD be a change for the competitors we have now.  The blinky light non-turning targets are what will fracure the sport.  The people who have ranges that have the lights vs. the ranges that don't.

I would much rather see two turning target lines at Perry.  Rather than two firing lines.  Plus raised, drained, gravel? paths for conditions like last match. 
 
I like the idea of a production category.  Something like the 4 point leg match but using most any production gun.  My own experience with stock 92, 228, 220, PPQ is that they are good for in the black at 25.  At 50, not so good.  And it will be a challenge to zero a fixed sight gun for both distrances.  Perhaps the production guns should stick to 25

Jack,
The problem with a "production" class is there is no easy way for a match director to verify weather a gun is "stock" or just "stock appearing". It's never good to create a competition that is easy to cheat in.

Rob Kovach wrote:Jack,
The problem with a "production" class is there is no easy way for a match director to verify weather a gun is "stock" or just "stock appearing".  It's never good to create a competition that is easy to cheat in.

+1 Agreed very hard to verify.  The upside might be some really accurate "production" guns coming out of Remington, Ruger, Springfield, etc....

Dave

Mr DirComp

To the eyes of someone new to this sport(who really enjoys it) and with exposure to the other pistol sports. The NRA has no Branding of Bullseye whatsoever.  It has been proven time and time again in this day and age, If one doesn't' get their Brand out into the public domain one will disappear from the pubic conciseness and cease to exist.  If one doesn't then deliver on one's brand you cease to exist. 

BE has a 12 time champion; Zins, a dynasty, if you will ,that rivals any other sport.  Furthermore the Champion is gregarious, plays well to the camera and could be used to help promote the brand in many ways.  You have the rivals, Zurek and others to the Champ.  You have the rich history of the sport that is exceptional.  You have story lines.  You have several good bullets to load your Branding Gun (pun intended) if the NRA so chooses.

IMHO the NRA/Bullseye has been out distanced by the branding the other R&G events have been able to pull off.  Im sure there are other areas that need improved but if no one knows about your product what good does it do to tinker with it.

dronning wrote:

Rob Kovach wrote:Jack,
The problem with a "production" class is there is no easy way for a match director to verify weather a gun is "stock" or just "stock appearing".  It's never good to create a competition that is easy to cheat in.

+1 Agreed very hard to verify.  The upside might be some really accurate "production" guns coming out of Remington, Ruger, Springfield, etc....

Dave

You guys are looking at matches like the family jewels are at stake.  I am just trying to get people to the line at the grass roots level.  Until we agree what page we are on this discussion will go nowhere.

Corregidor wrote:Ever wonder why Cowboy Action, IDPA, Handgun Silhouette, etc. aren't sanctioned under the NRA's big "tent"? We're witnessing why.

Probationary two handed shooting with mixed 25 - 50 yard targets on the same line; Bells, Whistles, Horns, Flashing lights; Contrived mish-mash of Open, Metallic, Production categories... this is complete baloney.

We don't want 25 yard Pitch 'n Put mixed into our Conventional Pistol Matches... We don't want Drag Race Staging Lights or Horns - we're not Pavlov's Dogs... We don't want superfluous Categories.

Unless I'm mistaken I detect a whiff of revolution, particularly if the NRA deploys their considerable strong arm tactics to hammer us into something we don't want to be.

I believe that the powers that be need to carefully consider *and research with decent market research, not just some oversimplified survey that's mailed out* whether this particular level of resistance is from a hide-bound traditionalist market segment that is not growing and is unlikely to grow.

Tradition and stability do have a role in this sport, but sticking to it while everyone else wanders off or dies off and the sport's format fails to attract or keep new shooters could be equivalent to honoring maritime tradition while the Titanic slips under the waves.

On the other hand, there does seem to be a dearth of data on who effectively the sport as it currently exists COULD be promoted to increase the numbers.

Making something so demanding in accuracy standards could be made more popular by advancing the notion that it should be taken on *because it's hard*. Some PC-language compliant development of the idea to not be a p***y could be part of the copy for a few promotional messages.

I haven't yet looked up the international targets, but I've long had the impression that for as hard a Conventional Pistol is, it is still less demanding than the international stuff. I found that 24-minute showing of the Women's finals in London numbingly BORING and the up/down, up/down course of fire silly and at that pace quite unlikely to attract any US shooters of any age, IMO. The 10-ring looked like about 10 cm/4 inches, and the distance IS 50 meters, right?

Off to Wikipedia again. I do remember international smallbore pistol slow-fire targets in the 1980s being insanely difficult--10 ring was smaller than our X, IIRC, and shot more than 4 yards further away...

No disrespect to Corregidor, but we might need to consider whether we are the last of the breed.

Even before reading everything after Corregidor's post, I saw a valid point in his opening.

Maybe two years ago on a tacticool precision rifle type site, I participated in a little thread about NRA sanctioning of something a little less boring and prone-benchrest style than what F-Class rapidly morphed into.

I wandered off from that discussion for several reasons. One was the sissy/traditionalist/whatever total rejection of muzzle brakes.

Years ago, it also bothered me that --???forgot his name???-- was running a completely separate IHMSA from the NRA centerfire pistol Silhouette game. "Action Pistol" got off to a good start but rapidly got mired down.

Then there's the 2+ decade catfight over Jeff Cooper's 3 Rules/4 Rules and the NRA's version. Though it would seem more appropriate for the NRA as the oldest and largest shooter's organization to sorta be the "final word" on how safety rules should be phrased, it looks to me like the Cooper Camp is dogmatic and gramatically challenged on Rule 1, while the NRA is a bit stodgy and geeky and maybe arrogant on the other hand. If I understand correctly, NRA pretty much has to water things down to Action Pistol because they refuse to let us act like grownups and have a "hot range", among other things.

I looked up Service Rifle the other night and it appears that even the 29 Palms match in November each year is down to about 40 shooters lately. Never been, but that was always described to me back when as a really, really big deal.

So declining numbers in a time of increasing population is NOT a good thing. I'm not convinced that we can reverse the tide with BE Pistol without doing some things carefully chosen from BOTH "Column A" and "Column B".

A. Promote what we got

B. Find out the most important obstacles to new shooters and change them.
   B.1. Try to do B without driving away all of the existing shooters.

So, are there ANY ranges WITH turning target systems that are NOT having any BE competitions at all?

I also believe that putting the important bits into a very, very well-protected area at good 12-18 inches below the bottoms of the targets should become the current design standard. Follow the IPSC lead and just put cheap 1x2s into those protected upright holders, and let the tyros splinter them. Plan on it being a maintenance item, and allow NO "range alibi" for any shooter who blasts his own exposed uprights.

That would avoid NRA following the international crowd into their silliness.

Done this way, and with appropriate wingnut lockdown of the furring strips, a modern electric turning target system could be used WITH electronic scoring. One of the disadvantages of being a lesser shooter would be coping with all those holes in the white through the 900 points being fired. Just don't paste 'em until it's all over. We still should reap some time savings and staff reduction benefits even with that.

OK..  so still not seeing how employing pricy electric targets is increasing shooter numbers over less pricy turning targets...  but beyond that...

OK... so I AM that "new shooter". I knew about bullseye shooting because my dad shot it back in the 60's-70's, and now that im Dads gone, and I have his old BE guns, I figured I would give it a shot. So what do I do? I go to the NRA website, and look for info on it. Hmmm... strange I see no talk of bullseye at all...  Hmmm.. is it no longer a sport?? Poke around more... MAN there is a lot of shooting sports... here is one for 22's... nope, its rifle.... OK... distingised revolver?? hum  whats that??... ok, lets look in the down load section for a rule book... hmmmmm... Im more confused then ever... back to the main page... lets look for matches.. OK..  lots of diferent matches.... how do I find my aera?... hmmmm.... here is one local.. opps... no website listed... opp found it... hummmm.. info is 2 years old.... back to main NRA page... Strange I still cant find Bulls eye listed anywere.. lots of other shooting sports though. ........  [searches google....] Well I do find a site called bullseyeL... [reads site for a few weeks...] Ahhhhhhhhh  OK... Bullseye is realy called conventional pistol... AHHHHH!!  ok... lets go back.... Hmmmm.. well that clears up a little.... I still cant find any real usefull current info other then major matches... no grassroots info....

OK. so thanks for lasting this long. This is how my first few months of looking for info on Bullseye shooting went. how was I, as a new shooter going to EVER find out not only where to go to matches, but if the sport even exists???  My saving grace was that 1) I knew it did at one time because my dad shot it, and 2) finding this site right here. Any info from the NRA site just confused the matter more. its not that the site doesn't work right... its that the whole layout is wrong. You say your not going to grab people from there living room, and drag them to matches.... BUT THATS WHAT A GOOD SITE SHOULD DO!!!  That web site should wake people up, get them excited, and give them the info they need to get up, drag their butts off the couch, and get to a local match. So yes. we DO expect you to drag them to matches. That's what a good web site does. Ive given up for months at a time looking for info. Maybe im stupid, but I still want to give it a shot, so I keep coming back. How many people like me know about BE... but give up looking? Or eaven more how many shooters have never heard of it before.... and never will??

Step #1:

Put a bunch of search results pages and redirects for ANYTHING with "bullseye" and "pistol" to link on over to "Conventional Pistol."

OR

and IMNSHO, this is better:

Re-name everything "Bullseye Pistol" and have all the links and redirects and data filters get the "Conventional" and "Pistol" inquiries over there.

One should NOT be required to be among the super-secret Cogniscenti and have the Secret Squirrel handshake and password to find anything on this sport.

Now there remains a more global inquiry about how to reverse the declining numbers for all of the NRA sanctioned events in general.  I think I know why my son wandered away from Highpower Rifle (really, we shot only Service Rifle) to the kinda informal tactical rifle matches several years ago. Is there really, ANY valid reason for NRA to have absolutely nothing to do with the TPRC Series, which last year seemed to have several well-attended events across the country?

I wonder about "cross-pollenization" and local clubs running dual events like two stages of a (NOT boring!) Action Pistol thing on one part of the range, and a shorter  600-point single-gun BE event on the other part of the range. Sort of a "Try them both today" club match.  There could be special awards for the "most improved" from the first 300 to the 2nd 300. Yes, shoot only one half first, go shoot the other stuff, have a short clinic available, and see how much better you do.

A lot of people, I suspect, retain this fear of being embarrassed in front of those specialized hotshot experienced shooters who do this stuff all the time. When HP was being fueled by DCM Garand sales in the 1980s and you could easily pull 60-80 shooters to a 200-yard reduced course match several times a year, there was a LOT of clinic/competition activity which I believe brought out the newbies.

+1 to the complaints about how hard it is to dig out the match schedules.  Go over to the USA Shooting site - it's plain as day.  The NRA really needs to make competitive shooting a front-and-center item again.

GrumpyOldMan wrote:Making something so demanding in accuracy standards could be made more popular by advancing the notion that it should be taken on *because it's hard*. Some PC-language compliant development of the idea to not be a p***y could be part of the copy for a few promotional messages.

I haven't yet looked up the international targets, but I've long had the impression that for as hard a Conventional Pistol is, it is still less demanding than the international stuff. I found that 24-minute showing of the Women's finals in London numbingly BORING and the up/down, up/down course of fire silly and at that pace quite unlikely to attract any US shooters of any age, IMO. The 10-ring looked like about 10 cm/4 inches, and the distance IS 50 meters, right?

Off to Wikipedia again. I do remember international smallbore pistol slow-fire targets in the 1980s being insanely difficult--10 ring was smaller than our X, IIRC, and shot more than 4 yards further away...

Yes to both.  The precision disciplines are a challenge.  

And the International disciplines are the toughest.  The 10-ring on the precision target is about 1.5 inches, and you shoot it at 50 meters for Free Pistol, 25 for Standard and the slow-fire portions of Sport Pistol and Centerfire.  We shoot the same target for almost all international muzzle-loading events.

Mike M.

I've been poking around on US Shooting and although it's easier to find their matches, it's impossible to find out what the courses of fire are.

They are as bad, if not worse, than NRA on having their stuff oriented towards only those who already know all about their programs.

Getting used to and actually remembering the latest iteration, ISSF. I was smallbore rifle back before the split from NRA, when it changed from ISU to UIT (****ed French language standards!).

Does anyone have numbers on how many people are participating in USA Shooting stuff? I can't imagine them being more than the NRA stuff, especially in pistol.