New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer

jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

I have voiced my complaint to our (USA) ISSF Rep .... glibly responded that there were only a few at world class comps.
I asked him about our program here in the US. He responded that the US does not have to adopt all the rules, specifically the 140mm one.

We have events where Juniors can qualify in our selection matches under USA Shooting Rules ... but are expected to meet ALL ISSF Rules when they go to the international competition, sometimes only a few weeks away. What stupidity to think a JUNIOR is going to be able to buy (OK ... maybe borrow) a conforming rifle and be able to shoot it well in that international comp.
Pretty much met with a shrug that this is a USA Shooting problem ... even as he sit on the USAS board.......

Not to even comment about how the same applies to our NCAA program .... this is only driving a wedge further into the separation of ISSF events and the local/regional/national junior and open programs. ....ok, time to take the blood pressure meds.....
randy1952
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:48 pm

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by randy1952 »

jhmartin wrote:I have voiced my complaint to our (USA) ISSF Rep .... glibly responded that there were only a few at world class comps.
I asked him about our program here in the US. He responded that the US does not have to adopt all the rules, specifically the 140mm one.

We have events where Juniors can qualify in our selection matches under USA Shooting Rules ... but are expected to meet ALL ISSF Rules when they go to the international competition, sometimes only a few weeks away. What stupidity to think a JUNIOR is going to be able to buy (OK ... maybe borrow) a conforming rifle and be able to shoot it well in that international comp.
Pretty much met with a shrug that this is a USA Shooting problem ... even as he sit on the USAS board.......

Not to even comment about how the same applies to our NCAA program .... this is only driving a wedge further into the separation of ISSF events and the local/regional/national junior and open programs. ....ok, time to take the blood pressure meds.....
Although Gary has retired his influence is still alive and well. These kind of rule changes will eventually make this sport only for the well healed and as a result it will die a slow death. The Marie Antoinette attitude when the starving crowds at the gates of the palace supposedly said "..Let Them Eat Cake.." is still being used. The participation levels will eventually give the Olympic Committee the chance to drop the shooting sports in favor ballroom dancing.
User avatar
SlartyBartFast
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:04 am
Location: Montreal, Québec, Canada

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by SlartyBartFast »

Playing devils advocate:
RobinC wrote:If people rest the stock on their chest, why not just act against that person!!!!!!
And how do you propose they enforce that? And deal with all the complaints from shooters who think that another shooter is illegally resting their rifle and think the judges aren't doing their job?
If there's been pressure for a rule change it will be precisely because enforcing the current rules, or keeping up the appearance of enforcing the rules, has become difficult.
randy1952 wrote:They institute rules against the whole population.
As it should be. Everyone is equal before the rules. But if the results aren't the same for everyone or the results are difficult to achieve through enforcement of the rules, the rules need to change. For everyone.
jhmartin wrote:What stupidity to think a JUNIOR is going to be able to buy (OK ... maybe borrow) a conforming rifle and be able to shoot it well in that international comp.
And how many gifted prodigies do you encounter that shoot up through the ranks of junior competition in rapid succession to unexpectedly attain international level?
In the progression from local/regional/national isn't there some period between regional and national that the decision to evolve in equipment choice to equipment meeting the international level starts becoming clear?
- Smith & Wesson SW22 Victory
- FAS SP607
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

Don't believe the "retired" deal ... he is active on the USAS board still and within ISSF.
That was Bob Mitchell and he is "moving on" to more lucrative pastures .... ISSF
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

SlartyBartFast wrote:And how many gifted prodigies do you encounter that shoot up through the ranks of junior competition in rapid succession to unexpectedly attain international level?
Ginny Thrasher is the most current example.
User avatar
SlartyBartFast
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:04 am
Location: Montreal, Québec, Canada

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by SlartyBartFast »

jhmartin wrote:Ginny Thrasher is the most current example.
Proves my point.
http://www.usashooting.org/12-the-team/ ... y-thrasher

If someone performs well and does well in competition, there is much more than a panicked few weeks to realise they need equipment that conforms to the higher level competitions.

If she had never shot before 2014, she that entire season to decide whether she had a chance to go further than national. Then she had all of 2015 up to the qualification for World Cup to decide if she risked having non-conforming equipment in the Nationals before going on to the World Cup. Only if her performance and potential was ignored for those two seasons could she have arrived at a point of not having the right equipment for the next season.

It amuses me that people are complaining that the rules will make World Cup and Olympic shooting too rarefied and expensive. World Cup and Olympic sport already _IS_ rarefied and ridiculously expensive for most.
- Smith & Wesson SW22 Victory
- FAS SP607
randy1952
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:48 pm

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by randy1952 »

SlartyBartFast wrote:
jhmartin wrote:Ginny Thrasher is the most current example.
Proves my point.
http://www.usashooting.org/12-the-team/ ... y-thrasher

If someone performs well and does well in competition, there is much more than a panicked few weeks to realise they need equipment that conforms to the higher level competitions.

If she had never shot before 2014, she that entire season to decide whether she had a chance to go further than national. Then she had all of 2015 up to the qualification for World Cup to decide if she risked having non-conforming equipment in the Nationals before going on to the World Cup. Only if her performance and potential was ignored for those two seasons could she have arrived at a point of not having the right equipment for the next season.

It amuses me that people are complaining that the rules will make World Cup and Olympic shooting too rarefied and expensive. World Cup and Olympic sport already _IS_ rarefied and ridiculously expensive for most.
I am already seeing the cost factor having an affect on junior participation in our area of the country. I would say the participation level has dropped at least by half or more depending our of the Northwest.
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

The point is that MANY of our junior shooters here use rifles that do not conform.

Some will be selected in December to to World level events ... Some will be selected in April to events in Suhl only 3 weeks later .... Ginny is one who came into the game with pretty good equipment. Many of our others are shooting older club rifles and will have to do the quick 2 step change.
USA Shooting will not provide the gear, they must come up with it.

Making the sport more rarefied does not help it ... as Randy mentioned, making it a sport with fewer folks interested in it will only make it easier for the Olympic Committee to keep >>MAYBE SHOTGUN<< and dump the rest for a more "Visual Broadcast Friendly" or more "PC" activity.

As an American living in the Western US (as does Randy), the fewer rules I have to live with the better.
If some nitwit drives 100mph down the highway, that is no reason to lower the already 75mph limit to 60.
This is exactly what ISSF has done with all the rifle rules ... they WILL NOT enforce the rules already on the books, especially if that enforcement is broadcast, instead they will continue to over-regulate the equipment.
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

randy1952 wrote:I am already seeing the cost factor having an affect on junior participation in our area of the country. I would say the participation level has dropped at least by half or more depending our of the Northwest.
We see this with the sport that was "supposed" to be the great feeder program ... CMP 3-P Air ... a 3-Position airgun event. (Note: a great program championed & pretty much put together by Gary Anderson)
It has huge participation, especially in the JROTC programs, throughout the USA. However, the participation follow-on after high school drops to almost NIL. For the most part, our junior shooters moving to the open/international levels still come from our local junior club programs. Why? The cost of owning your own equipment.

In the club programs, shooters can acquire world class equipment over 4-6+ years of shooting, a little at a time. Going from club gear to their own, and then even their own gear better. ISSF changing the rules EVERY SINGLE DAMN QUAD in a major fashion makes it difficult for a club shooter, and just about impossible for a JROTC shooter using school gear, to make the investment in constantly changing gear requirements.
It's really a shame how many really good high school program shooters we lose after they graduate.
(Again, speaking of the USA)
randy1952
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:48 pm

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by randy1952 »

jhmartin wrote:The point is that MANY of our junior shooters here use rifles that do not conform.

Some will be selected in December to to World level events ... Some will be selected in April to events in Suhl only 3 weeks later .... Ginny is one who came into the game with pretty good equipment. Many of our others are shooting older club rifles and will have to do the quick 2 step change.
USA Shooting will not provide the gear, they must come up with it.

Making the sport more rarefied does not help it ... as Randy mentioned, making it a sport with fewer folks interested in it will only make it easier for the Olympic Committee to keep >>MAYBE SHOTGUN<< and dump the rest for a more "Visual Broadcast Friendly" or more "PC" activity.

As an American living in the Western US (as does Randy), the fewer rules I have to live with the better.
If some nitwit drives 100mph down the highway, that is no reason to lower the already 75mph limit to 60.
This is exactly what ISSF has done with all the rifle rules ... they WILL NOT enforce the rules already on the books, especially if that enforcement is broadcast, instead they will continue to over-regulate the equipment.
I wholeheartedly agree the only reason any support will remain viable and it is all about marketing is to increase the number of people willing to support and participate in the sport. For example, shooting in this country used to be the most participated sport in the country during the last century were even Chicago held one of the biggest shooting events in the country. Fast forward over that time period to know were participation is way down from those participation levels support for the sport is struggling. A major factor in that lower participation levels has been the increased regulations and cost imposed by our governments. The majority of our schools in our state at one time had competitive shooting programs and overtime they just went away and with it the support for competitive shooting programs. Their has been attempts to bring back into the schools, but the last state education superintendent that tried to reintroduce the sport back into the schools got kicked out of her job because of the general population negative attitude about guns and our state has one of the highest per capita of gun ownership. Highest per capita ownership is a misleading statement our state at that time was only about 46% and up until two years ago the state was heading down to California levels of under 40%. Another example, football and basketball are two most popular sports know and if a government tried to impose those same regulations and costs on a sport like football or basketball I will guarantee you that those politicians pushing them would be out of a job just because of the sheer number of people involved in the sport. For those of you who don't think numbers don't matter then long term this sport will suffer the consequences.
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

ITEM 13 - Weights

Post by jhmartin »

Going back to item #13 -
No taping weights to the stock ...

A link to a solution in the Buy & Sell forum:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=53503
TenMetrePeter
Posts: 603
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 10:59 am

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by TenMetrePeter »

This is the diagram which must be of a style at least 40 years old used in the 2013 regulations, but with the new heights on.
I wonder what the 2017 diagram will actually look like?
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

Probably not much different than you have shown.....
User avatar
Grzegorz
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:44 am
Location: Lublin, POLAND

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by Grzegorz »

I dream about that moment when Technical Committee starts to realize that rifles and pistols are 3-dimensional, not 2-dimensional objects :-)
RobinC
Posts: 369
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:34 am
Location: Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, England

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by RobinC »

jhmartin wrote:The point is that MANY of our junior shooters here use rifles that do not conform.

Some will be selected in December to to World level events ... Some will be selected in April to events in Suhl only 3 weeks later .... Ginny is one who came into the game with pretty good equipment. Many of our others are shooting older club rifles and will have to do the quick 2 step change.
USA Shooting will not provide the gear, they must come up with it.

Making the sport more rarefied does not help it ... as Randy mentioned, making it a sport with fewer folks interested in it will only make it easier for the Olympic Committee to keep >>MAYBE SHOTGUN<< and dump the rest for a more "Visual Broadcast Friendly" or more "PC" activity.

As an American living in the Western US (as does Randy), the fewer rules I have to live with the better.
If some nitwit drives 100mph down the highway, that is no reason to lower the already 75mph limit to 60.
This is exactly what ISSF has done with all the rifle rules ... they WILL NOT enforce the rules already on the books, especially if that enforcement is broadcast, instead they will continue to over-regulate the equipment.
Incidently these are now official rules as of this week as they are now approved changes for 2017, see the ISSF website, so thats it, we are stuck with them!

I whole heartedly support you, I have two junior girls I'm working with, one with a wooden stock, on a tight budget, who has gone from never having shot to 390+ in four months, with a wooden rifle, and now I have to work out a way to make it legal, as she simply can not afford a new one or a new stock. The other had a new wood stock rifle on order and fortunately we have been able to change it to an alloy.

The jacket seam rule was in the same vein and crazy, but this change is madness! On the ISSF site they say they consulted the manufacturers, that is a down right lie, a major manufacturer I'm close to has stated categorically that they were NOT consulted, they found out through the internet and have object strongly, and to only recieve a justification from Anderson, about stopping people resting the rifle.

As for the guy that sarcastically who said how do you stop people resting then? By looking of course, if they rest its b****y obvious!

As for the UK, we shall have to see how much lee way we get for our Air Championships in Feb, if the last change was any thing to go by, none, the only concession will likely be to have no EC for non championship shooters, i.e. those doing the class aggregates, but I suspect the Championships will be strictly enforced as they are national team qualifiers. Good old GB, worst shooting facilities in world, and the strictest EC seen!

As a 70 year old working hard to develop, mentor and coach young shooters to reach top level, I despair of the constant desire of the old men, ex champions, in the ISSF heirachy, to change the rules, which then hampers young shooters and achieves nothing else at all, the scores will not go down, the same people will win, why make change, other than to justify their own positions.

And at short notice!!! How can rules be changed at just over two months notice, they are announced but still not in print!!! This is total madness!!!
What about the manufacturers who may be still making rfles which now will not conform in 10 weeks, do they stop producing? Redesign? Do they scap certain models? What about their produced stock not delivered? What about shops with stocks of now non compliant models? Any change of this magnatude should have at the minimum a year lead in, if not much more.

I dispair at our national bodies who allow the ISSF to continue, its taken many years for the various national bodies to get to grips with FIFA, its about time the ISSF was revised or shut.

Rant over, I'll return to the workshop and try and devise a simple way to modify a wood stock to comply!
randy1952
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:48 pm

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by randy1952 »

RobinC wrote:
jhmartin wrote:The point is that MANY of our junior shooters here use rifles that do not conform.

Some will be selected in December to to World level events ... Some will be selected in April to events in Suhl only 3 weeks later .... Ginny is one who came into the game with pretty good equipment. Many of our others are shooting older club rifles and will have to do the quick 2 step change.
USA Shooting will not provide the gear, they must come up with it.

Making the sport more rarefied does not help it ... as Randy mentioned, making it a sport with fewer folks interested in it will only make it easier for the Olympic Committee to keep >>MAYBE SHOTGUN<< and dump the rest for a more "Visual Broadcast Friendly" or more "PC" activity.

As an American living in the Western US (as does Randy), the fewer rules I have to live with the better.
If some nitwit drives 100mph down the highway, that is no reason to lower the already 75mph limit to 60.
This is exactly what ISSF has done with all the rifle rules ... they WILL NOT enforce the rules already on the books, especially if that enforcement is broadcast, instead they will continue to over-regulate the equipment.
Incidently these are now official rules as of this week as they are now approved changes for 2017, see the ISSF website, so thats it, we are stuck with them!

I whole heartedly support you, I have two junior girls I'm working with, one with a wooden stock, on a tight budget, who has gone from never having shot to 390+ in four months, with a wooden rifle, and now I have to work out a way to make it legal, as she simply can not afford a new one or a new stock. The other had a new wood stock rifle on order and fortunately we have been able to change it to an alloy.

The jacket seam rule was in the same vein and crazy, but this change is madness! On the ISSF site they say they consulted the manufacturers, that is a down right lie, a major manufacturer I'm close to has stated categorically that they were NOT consulted, they found out through the internet and have object strongly, and to only recieve a justification from Anderson, about stopping people resting the rifle.

As for the guy that sarcastically who said how do you stop people resting then? By looking of course, if they rest its b****y obvious!

As for the UK, we shall have to see how much lee way we get for our Air Championships in Feb, if the last change was any thing to go by, none, the only concession will likely be to have no EC for non championship shooters, i.e. those doing the class aggregates, but I suspect the Championships will be strictly enforced as they are national team qualifiers. Good old GB, worst shooting facilities in world, and the strictest EC seen!

As a 70 year old working hard to develop, mentor and coach young shooters to reach top level, I despair of the constant desire of the old men, ex champions, in the ISSF heirachy, to change the rules, which then hampers young shooters and achieves nothing else at all, the scores will not go down, the same people will win, why make change, other than to justify their own positions.

And at short notice!!! How can rules be changed at just over two months notice, they are announced but still not in print!!! This is total madness!!!
What about the manufacturers who may be still making rfles which now will not conform in 10 weeks, do they stop producing? Redesign? Do they scap certain models? What about their produced stock not delivered? What about shops with stocks of now non compliant models? Any change of this magnatude should have at the minimum a year lead in, if not much more.

I dispair at our national bodies who allow the ISSF to continue, its taken many years for the various national bodies to get to grips with FIFA, its about time the ISSF was revised or shut.

Rant over, I'll return to the workshop and try and devise a simple way to modify a wood stock to comply!
Hopefully for the shooters currently at the local and maybe national levels USAS will at least not enforce the new rule on rifles. I know this is very little consolation, but trying to persuade people like Gary is a waste of time. He is only concerned about the upper level of competition and is out of touch or doesn't care about growing this sport at the lower levels and so it would be like talking to a brick wall. What you are witnessing is the slow death of the international shooting sports and the wounds are being self inflicted. I have heard our national coaches complain about the small pool of shooters available in this country compared to their major competitor countries. The constant raising the cost of getting into the sport because of rule changes is not going to help. Cost is a major factor, which seems to lacking in consideration by the rule makers (sounds like our government) can make or break a sport or any business.
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

randy1952 wrote:Hopefully for the shooters currently at the local and maybe national levels USAS will at least not enforce the new rule on rifles.
I've fixed for you Randy....
Hopefully for the shooters currently at the local and maybe national levels USAS will at least not yet enforce the new rule on rifles.
randy1952
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:48 pm

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by randy1952 »

jhmartin wrote:
randy1952 wrote:Hopefully for the shooters currently at the local and maybe national levels USAS will at least not enforce the new rule on rifles.
I've fixed for you Randy....
Hopefully for the shooters currently at the local and maybe national levels USAS will at least not yet enforce the new rule on rifles.
I didn't say never yet.
jhmartin
Posts: 2620
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Valencia County, NM USA

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by jhmartin »

Have you looked at the other topic for the rules?
Look at the "Coaching" section.

They must have come up with some of these after they started hitting the hard stuff at their meetings.
randy1952
Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:48 pm

Re: New ISSF Rules - Partial Summary

Post by randy1952 »

jhmartin wrote:Have you looked at the other topic for the rules?
Look at the "Coaching" section.

They must have come up with some of these after they started hitting the hard stuff at their meetings.
Yes, I read that and so why not just get rid of the coaching rule all together. I can come up with hand signals just like baseball.
Post Reply