Top shooters dropping down the pecking order

[TonyL]

The standard of shooting was a lot better in the 80's.
There was no high powered sights and only spring powered rifles (until the late 80's when pcp started too appear).and they still cleared a course with a well tuned HW 77 and anything from a 4x40 to a 3-9x40 scope,the most popular was the tasco AG 2-7x32 AO with a duplex ret .
So it goes to show you don't need the high power scopes or the expensive pcp to compete .

I do not, however, think that the standard of shooting was better in the 80s. Yes, technology has improved but you have to take into account the fact that target and course specifications have also changed. I wonder how many people would not agree that a UKAHFT course is now more difficult due to smaller kill zones etc than it was 20 years ago? I do not know about FT. Harder courses with smaller kill zones and terrible but impressive use of 'range traps' could well be affecting the scores of older competitors as their eyesight begins to play tricks on them.
Grow old gracefully is clearly the thing to do.
Cheers, Phil

Sorry, Ray. You're talking twaddle.

Yes, I must say, I was a better shot ears ago. That's easy for me to say. And they're just words and taken on trust. But I can't substantiate that claim. However, I KNOW I was a better shot back then as I had the opportunity to shoot and practice more often. Sometimes, these days, weeks can go by between sessions. And I mostly shoot seated now whereas, years ago, I practised from different positions. I am, however, as you know, a fan of The Boinger and low mag scopes.

I agree with Phil about the specifications of modern courses - distances, range traps, kill zone size etc.

[transporter]

Sorry, Ray. You're talking twaddle.

Yes, I must say, I was a better shot ears ago. That's easy for me to say. And they're just words and taken on trust. But I can't substantiate that claim. However, I KNOW I was a better shot back then as I had the opportunity to shoot and practice more often. Sometimes, these days, weeks can go by between sessions. And I mostly shoot seated now whereas, years ago, I practised from different positions. I am, however, as you know, a fan of The Boinger and low mag scopes.

I agree with Phil about the specifications of modern courses - distances, range traps, kill zone size etc.

Ok ,your right

[Muskett]

Loads of good comments.

Most shooting practices have changed which reflect the equipment being used and the progress in that equipment, all reflected in the targets and course of fire. A lot of equipment has been made to overcome the type of courses of fire encountered. Basically it's an arms race

Was marksmanship better in the 1970/80s? The answer is that it was as highly competitive and the courses of fire and equipment used were different.

In my teens I shot .22LR 25m at a County level. It was all about heart rate control.
In my 20s I shot Service rifle, firstly with iron sights (SLR) and later with optics (SA80/Susat). A load of handgun too. Service Rifle then age did matter, not only for eyesight but also straight forward fitness. Advance to contact. running between target encounters, and timed target exposures, with 50% of targets being from the standing positing, meant youth counted as much as experience. They made the targets smaller with the introduction of optics, but range/drop, wind, and light, all took experience to counter. The rest was how to control any huffing and puffing, in a pressure induced environment.

When targets get too small then heart rate matters. A lot of target shooting has reverted to small targets to make it all the more difficult, so heart rate is a big one; the rest is a steady position and correct let off. The pin point accuracy demanded is such that equipment has to be exceedingly precise too, and has given real progress in rifle accuracy; todays rifles are more accurate and consistent than yesteryear. However, a less accurate rifle means a perfect shot needs a bigger target, so as much is expected of the shooter as a more accurate rifle and smaller target. Basically to get a "possible" with either is just as hard. However, shoot too small a target with a rifle that doesn't match the size of target and scores will fall (Theory of the Group). Whatever, targets size they need to be achievable and not left to luck; a perfect shot will get a bull.

Do people want to shoot actively or passively styled shooting? Inactive pure target or physical more practical? Nothing physical, and no real time limits, favours the old, if they can do "stable".

One bug bear I have is Range Estimation. I just don't understand why have a scope system range finder when progress is lasers. Scope rangefinding takes yonks and a very dependent on equipment, plus getting familiar with it all in varying light conditions. Its still machine/equipment dependent. It is doable but outmoded. True skill would be no rangefinding aid bar no:1 eyeballs. But that can't work with the tiny targets that are presently being used.
Snipers range find with the use of optics, laser rangefinders, maps, and GPS. Hunters keep ranges short, are often familiar with their ground, and can use lasers.
Most target shooting is contrived. Made to suit a competition level playing field. I just say be careful that it doesn't lose its fun factor, or worse any real human input/skill.

[gsxrman]

Courses and FT/HFT have to change rules to challenge the shooter and not the kit.
For instance a rifle like Air Arms 400 will produce half inch groups at 45 yards. People will pay thousands for a top rifle and scope to shave 1-2mm off that group size.
At the end of the day both kits are well capable of clearing a course at any level.
Its the shooter that needs challenging. Like I have said many times, there is a lot of people who can shoot pellet on pellet on practice range.
Put them on a course where they have to judge the range, the angle, the temperature and the wind and they miss a 40mm kill zone with rifle capable of 10mm groups.
ChrisC is one of the best HFT shooters out there, but HE makes the difference and not his kit. Age and eyesight are definitely factors though in shooting ability, and in many other disciplines.
Shooting, especially FT/HFT is an age friendly sport, it is not overly competitive i.e. shear numbers just aren't there, unlike Golf, Football or even Boxing/Martial arts.
Its great to hear people still enjoy this hobby/sport into their 80s, even if not at a high competitive level, just for pure enjoyment purposes. Keep going until you cant.

[Muskett]

Don't get me wrong I think all shooting sports are fantastic. FT/HFT superb, as it is shooting at some most enjoyable targets. No reason it can't keep growing in the number of participants. All credit to those who organise and run clubs.

One of the great difficulties with shooting shorts is the business model and how to keep clubs financially viable. Insurance and the ground to shoot over let alone any staff. Much relies on good will and volunteers which isn't a bad thing, but that can only go so far.
Bums on seats, or shooters on the points, does count for every hobby sports. And how to get the scale to keep it all going? Like so many things, outdoor sports, they have to compete against TV/Sofa; and in all weathers.

Frankly, I can't understand how so many million are missing out on such great fun as shooting sports. FT/HFT are just so much fun. Sure tricky to start, but soon fast to show any application and effort put in. Unlike any computer game its real.

(Sadly I can't shoot FT/HFT as I have a compressed spine and the positions required would put it in spasm. Still doesn't stop me shooting, though often I pay for it later (ton of painkillers). I just can't do lengthy practice sessions.)

[ChrisC]

Don't get me wrong I think all shooting sports are fantastic. FT/HFT superb, as it is shooting at some most enjoyable targets. No reason it can't keep growing in the number of participants. All credit to those who organise and run clubs.

One of the great difficulties with shooting shorts is the business model and how to keep clubs financially viable. Insurance and the ground to shoot over let alone any staff. Much relies on good will and volunteers which isn't a bad thing, but that can only go so far.
Bums on seats, or shooters on the points, does count for every hobby sports. And how to get the scale to keep it all going? Like so many things, outdoor sports, they have to compete against TV/Sofa; and in all weathers.

Frankly, I can't understand how so many million are missing out on such great fun as shooting sports. FT/HFT are just so much fun. Sure tricky to start, but soon fast to show any application and effort put in. Unlike any computer game its real.

(Sadly I can't shoot FT/HFT as I have a compressed spine and the positions required would put it in spasm. Still doesn't stop me shooting, though often I pay for it later (ton of painkillers). I just can't do lengthy practice sessions.)

Well said and i'm sorry to hear that you struggle these days....getting old is a real turd.

I think there is still the apprehension from some shooters upon hearing the word 'competition'......if you heard the chat and banter, even at the worlds, then minds may be changed. I've always said that as soon as my shooting gets too serious and not fun...that's when i go back to fishing.

[Phil Russell]

Well said and i'm sorry to hear that you struggle these days....getting old is a real turd.

I think there is still the apprehension from some shooters upon hearing the word 'competition'......if you heard the chat and banter, even at the worlds, then minds may be changed. I've always said that as soon as my shooting gets too serious and not fun...that's when i go back to fishing.

I think you are right about 'apprehension', Chris
Many years ago I did a lot of cycling, mostly longish, fastish, solo runs. I thought I should try a 'club' so joined up and decided to go on a longish, maybe 80 mile, day run. One of the stipulations was that my cycle should have mudguards. The only cycle I had with guards was my old Raleigh Record Ace (or was it Road Ace?), a superb quality bike that was top of the range in its day. But it was not all bright and shiny. I turned up at the start, not knowing anyone. The place was full of shiny bikes and lycra clad posers. I could sense they looked at my bike and immediately put me in an unworthy category. Conversations could not be started; the organiser just said 'hello... wait over there', or some such remark. We set off and I teamed up with another chap on an older bike. We had great fun and were soon in front of everyone else. We came in first but were generally ignored as the lycra crowd talked to themselves. I never did go on another run with them but continued my solo, lycra clad, fast rides.
So it was when I went to my first HFT meeting that I was apprehensive. It could not have been more different from the cyclists. Club officials welcomed me, introductions to other members followed and I could not have felt more 'at home'. The day was superb and I continued to return.
Not sure of the point of this tale now ... but all I can say is 'try it. You won't regret it.'

Cheers, Phil

[Muskett]

ChrisC, thanks for the kind words. I still shoot, but it's the next generation that counts. My son is a cricketer, but shoots Often wipes my eye on a high pigeon.

Funnily my best man is a fisherman first and shooter second. I'm shooter first, fishing second. Frankly, it's all about getting outside and doing stuff thats enjoyable, best done with fellows of similar nature.
Competitions should be fun. Really a test of your own skills under match no excuses conditions. The banter adds to the fun. But once in position, safety off, its all you and the target. Nothing betters that zone where all the world is irrelevant, it's your time alone. Once over its back to banter and relax. Whats not to love?

Best times of my life were probably sun on my back on Bisley Century Range Point, just before "targets Up".

[zephyr]

Although I go back to early '80s shooting, I struggle with an erratic memory - like, remembering all the target distances on the newly built HFT course for about 5-6 weeks afterwards, yet I can't remember what I watched on TV last night (pretty sure was a sandwich of TV/snooze/TV), or when I last put petrol in the car.

So, can I say with confidence that HFT courses are more difficult now than the FT courses of the early '80s? Here comes the memory problem, I recall, back then, all the targets being 2" kill zones and sitting down to shoot everything. I've no idea if the aggregated length of an '80s course is longer than an HFT course of today. But unarguably the target kill zones are smaller now, as are the faceplates. So, yeah, I'd say courses are more difficult now. But I don't recall people shooting prone and resting their gun butt on the floor for more stability back then either.

But then I'm just a forgetful old fart, that doesn't particularly like change for change sake!

[ChrisC]

I've been shooting HFT comps for 20 years now and shot FT before that. The courses for both have got considerably more difficult with 15 and 25mm now present in FT and increased distances for smaller kills in HFT, then take into account weird faceplate designs, reduced/increased faceplates to mess with rangefinding and reduced kill sizes and increased distance for some of the standing/kneeling shots. These days you really struggle to find a course clearance, even on regional/club courses.

[gsxrman]

I've been shooting HFT comps for 20 years now and shot FT before that. The courses for both have got considerably more difficult with 15 and 25mm now present in FT and increased distances for smaller kills in HFT, then take into account weird faceplate designs, reduced/increased faceplates to mess with rangefinding and reduced kill sizes and increased distance for some of the standing/kneeling shots. These days you really struggle to find a course clearance, even on regional/club courses.

To me, that all sounds like a good thing. Without being challenged we don't improve. Puts pressure on Manufacturers to make kit better, and puts pressure on us to improve. Pushing the boundaries is how we develop and evolve.
Good point made about "competition" making people apprehensive. Never gave it a thought as I have always competed from age of 11 in one sport or another. Our sport is fun, and should have many more participants than it does. There are many more shoot clays or fish than shoot FT/HFT. Why? Air rifle shooting is one of the cheapest, most fun, grass roots shooting we can do. It should be more popular at club level than it is.

[Muskett]

I don't shoot FT/HFT, so take whatever I say with a pinch of salt.

I do worry when a course of fire is beyond the capabilities of good equipment from a good shot. A hit should be achievable by deliberate marksmanship and not down to any luck. (On a calm day.)
First off: target size should be well within the capabilities of the rifle/combo.
Then, is it reasonable to have the same target for standing as for prone/more stable platform? Competitions should never end on the result from one position that is so difficult what result is chance.

Top shots make their own luck by ensuring they are that good they can hit more. But I would add that any winner is due to their ability and not luck on the day. When targetry gets beyond all abilities, then thats gone too far. Tricky is good, impossible bar luck not so clever.

I'm sure many a club discussion covers these points. I'm not involved, so probably talking buncombe.

Lastly, people like recognition for their achievements. I always loved winning a shooting badge when going up a class, or getting a HPS. Does FT/HFT have such? Different club badges, and different score achievements for hitting par on a certain shoot. Well, something to get collecting, goals to make, and something to take home from all the travel???
Maybe already done?

[Phil Russell]

I think there is no doubt that over the years HFT courses have got more difficult. It may have been 6 or 7 years ago (not sure, open for correction) that there was a major revision of kill zone size allowable at which distance... I can't remember the details but was told it was to avoid too many top shooters getting the same scores in a UKAHFT competition and so avoid lengthy shoot-offs. The effect was that most people's scores went down, mine included. Top shooters still stayed top shooters though and it is debateable whether there were fewer shoot-offs. But there was to some extent another effect that I suspect happened in places but have no information about it being universal. It was that newcomers to the sport were finding it very difficult to get a score high enough to keep their interest, so they turned up for 1 or 2 shoots then disappeared. At this time it was also fairly clear (or so it appeared) that course setters would set the most difficult course they could within the UKAHFT rules. I hope I am forgiven in suggesting that there was some sort of competition between setters and venues to set the most difficult course.
But hey ... it was still fun.
Cheers, Phil

[gsxrman]

It is an awkward one. New shooters should not be discouraged but it does happen when they score low. Maybe we need a different approach to the Grading, maybe something like a golf handicap. AA graders start at zero, A grade start with a point, B grade start with 2-3 etc. All decent kit is capable of HFT targets. Its the shooter that is properly challenged. We all say that if we are shooting game then we should be able to keep shots within a 5 pence piece!!!! Most targets are larger than this. I'm sure the 15mm targets are restricted to max. 25m. Still quite a challenge for majority of shooters.
If we make the courses easier then good shooters will clear them on regular basis, so how do we separate them?

[Muskett]

When I shot .22LR 25m, my average was 99.2. That is after they moved from 5 Bull to 10 Bull. It all came down to heart rate control. I moved on to another discipline where a fag or coffee before couldn't effect my score. I didn't want to go Olympic level, which becomes a "life choice of dedication". I ended up shooting Service Rifle for 13 years.

A HPS should be doable on a good day by a top shot....just.

Certainly Classification Levels could help keep people interested. Professional Class and Amateur as in cricket? Amateurs can take a second shot on a miss! Or a 5 or 10 second shots, noted on card, for a handicap system like in Golf.
A great issue is fitting in time for shoot offs, as what time prize giving and the light?
I'm all for Badges for hitting a class target. HPS Amateur, HPS Professional for each Club??? Heck, have Manufacturers provide them for using their rifle! Well, something to go for?

How about? Get Amateur Badge when shooting AA and achieving Club Par. Another shooting a BSA. Another a Webley. By the time anyone has those they might want to go Professional and do the same. Or just try to repeat on a different Club/Ground.
Manufacturers would get feedback.
Clubs would get visitors.

Badge to have Club, Class of shoot, and Rifle manufacture. Could have some fun and interesting badges.

No I haven't thought it through. Just playing with ideas. I just want more people to take up shooting sports, as they are great.