Jeff, I know I tapped out, but I want you to know I do respect you and appreciate all you do and have done to further Airgun competitions in the USA.
Same goes for Garrett K.
Thank you both.
Same goes for Garrett K.
Thank you both.
Upvote 0
Slugs for AAFTA matches?
- Thread starter Centercut
- Start date
Glad you two have reconciled your differences. Now I'll stir the pot a little.
IN MY OPINION, the vast majority of rules complaints are rooted in- 1) The self interests of Complainer. 2) Inexperience. 3) Both.
I won't bother to expound on #1 above. It is inarguable fact.
Number 2 is purposely provocative, to get your attention. Though I haven't closely followed this looong thread, at least two contributors meet #2 above with comments about a rule (or rules) not making any sense, or there's no reason(s) for a rule.
FT shooters involved long enough to have WITNESSED why and how a particular rule came about, UNDERSTAND why and how a particular rule came about. Especially folks that were involved in rules-making.
That said, I've stopped explaining by keyboard why and how this, that, or the other rule came about. It's too much trouble for too little reason; and often the reader's self-interests adversely affect their reading comprehension.
So I'll just keyboard, "trust me, very few rules don't make sense or happened for no reason(s)". And as always, I'll offer to answer specific rules questions through conversation.
IN MY OPINION, the vast majority of rules complaints are rooted in- 1) The self interests of Complainer. 2) Inexperience. 3) Both.
I won't bother to expound on #1 above. It is inarguable fact.
Number 2 is purposely provocative, to get your attention. Though I haven't closely followed this looong thread, at least two contributors meet #2 above with comments about a rule (or rules) not making any sense, or there's no reason(s) for a rule.
FT shooters involved long enough to have WITNESSED why and how a particular rule came about, UNDERSTAND why and how a particular rule came about. Especially folks that were involved in rules-making.
That said, I've stopped explaining by keyboard why and how this, that, or the other rule came about. It's too much trouble for too little reason; and often the reader's self-interests adversely affect their reading comprehension.
So I'll just keyboard, "trust me, very few rules don't make sense or happened for no reason(s)". And as always, I'll offer to answer specific rules questions through conversation.
Upvote 0
Thanks for the input Ron, I feel the same about you, even more so, than I stated above about Jeff and Garrett, since I know you personally. I will say however, that there are THOUSANDs of rules throughout history that were made that don't make logical sense and were made for no good reason. Not saying this is the case here, but I'm sure everyone reading this can think of dozens in mere minutes...
Upvote 0
"I feel the same about you, even more so, than I stated above about Jeff and Garrett, since I know you personally." Thanks for that Mike, but I'm undeserving of such excellent company.
I don't know Garrett well, but (aside from setting a 100 Troyer PFT shoot-off at 2017 Nats ;-) ) he seems very capable and astute.
Don't hold it against Jeff that I hold him in highest regard. He's a fine human... despite his less-than-credible, barely-human character witness.
Although your and my opinions clash with some regularity Mike, it's to be expected from two strong-willed, opinionated provocateurs. Nevertheless, I respect your opinion...
But not as much as your shooting talent(s)!
I don't know Garrett well, but (aside from setting a 100 Troyer PFT shoot-off at 2017 Nats ;-) ) he seems very capable and astute.
Don't hold it against Jeff that I hold him in highest regard. He's a fine human... despite his less-than-credible, barely-human character witness.
Although your and my opinions clash with some regularity Mike, it's to be expected from two strong-willed, opinionated provocateurs. Nevertheless, I respect your opinion...
But not as much as your shooting talent(s)!
Upvote 0
Enough hugs, atta boys, spirit talk and reach arounds 
If you don’t like the humor, I don’t care!
Make the rules and twist them to shape. Let’s get it on! Experience will be gained and I’m coming in hot! Protect yourself at all times…….
If you don’t like the humor, I don’t care! Make the rules and twist them to shape. Let’s get it on! Experience will be gained and I’m coming in hot! Protect yourself at all times…….
Upvote 0
It has been interesting to follow this discussion.
As I stated early on, I've got no personal desire to shoot slugs for field target, but I do find it........expected? that the ruling of no slugs was the conclusion.
I've been shooting field target for about 4 years now and I've always scratched my head and raised my eyebrows at many of the rules .I've always wondered if some of them are what they are b/c somebody in power at a given moment in FT's history wanted to make sure the rules favored their preferences in equipment/style/class/etc over any one else's and not what would be best for the "sport" or the entire field target community. From a physics standpoint, the ruling here makes me wonder the same. And don't take that as an attack on the BOG guys, I'm sure they're good guys, but I'd also suspect they asked their inner circle of match directors and friends what they thought about slugs.
19.99fpe is 19.99fpe foiks. The silly riddle that kids like to think makes them clever comes to mind: which is heavier? a ton of feathers or a ton of lead? Or another example, would you rather have 1, 50 pound weight smash your hand, or 2, 25lb weights simultaneously smash your hand?
"Oh but BCs are better with slugs." BCs are dependent on mass, speed, and shape. We're not talking heavy, long slugs or high speeds here, which is where the BCs of slugs start to really pull away from the BCs of pellets.. A 12.5grain.177 slug going at a speed that makes it field target legal is not going to have a BC drastically better than, say a 13.4gr .177 that many of the hunter class shooters are shooting these days. If a match is taking place somewhere that a 12.5grain slug going 840fps is raising safety concerns, then a 13.4grain .177 going 815 should also be raising safety concerns. And I'm not beating up on the 13.4grain guys, a 10.34 grainer going 920 falls into that same boat, because physics (19.99fpe is 19.99fpe).
The safety argument just doesn't hold water.
If competitive advantage is the fear then make a dang sub 20fpe class for slugs. There's no lack of classes in AAFTA field target, why not just fragment the pool of competitors a bit more with yet another class. There may only be 1 or 2 slug shooters at a match but only having 1 or 2 shooting in current classes hasn't made those classes go away, and those guys still come and shoot in the barren class that they like to shoot in.
Just my two cents
As I stated early on, I've got no personal desire to shoot slugs for field target, but I do find it........expected? that the ruling of no slugs was the conclusion.
I've been shooting field target for about 4 years now and I've always scratched my head and raised my eyebrows at many of the rules .I've always wondered if some of them are what they are b/c somebody in power at a given moment in FT's history wanted to make sure the rules favored their preferences in equipment/style/class/etc over any one else's and not what would be best for the "sport" or the entire field target community. From a physics standpoint, the ruling here makes me wonder the same. And don't take that as an attack on the BOG guys, I'm sure they're good guys, but I'd also suspect they asked their inner circle of match directors and friends what they thought about slugs.
19.99fpe is 19.99fpe foiks. The silly riddle that kids like to think makes them clever comes to mind: which is heavier? a ton of feathers or a ton of lead? Or another example, would you rather have 1, 50 pound weight smash your hand, or 2, 25lb weights simultaneously smash your hand?
"Oh but BCs are better with slugs." BCs are dependent on mass, speed, and shape. We're not talking heavy, long slugs or high speeds here, which is where the BCs of slugs start to really pull away from the BCs of pellets.. A 12.5grain.177 slug going at a speed that makes it field target legal is not going to have a BC drastically better than, say a 13.4gr .177 that many of the hunter class shooters are shooting these days. If a match is taking place somewhere that a 12.5grain slug going 840fps is raising safety concerns, then a 13.4grain .177 going 815 should also be raising safety concerns. And I'm not beating up on the 13.4grain guys, a 10.34 grainer going 920 falls into that same boat, because physics (19.99fpe is 19.99fpe).
The safety argument just doesn't hold water.
If competitive advantage is the fear then make a dang sub 20fpe class for slugs. There's no lack of classes in AAFTA field target, why not just fragment the pool of competitors a bit more with yet another class. There may only be 1 or 2 slug shooters at a match but only having 1 or 2 shooting in current classes hasn't made those classes go away, and those guys still come and shoot in the barren class that they like to shoot in.
Just my two cents
Upvote 0
I think just saying that FT is a pellet game and that’s that would have been sufficient.
The game is about reading the wind. The same guys that are always at the top simply have a bigger bag of wind reading tricks.
Personally, I would like to see USA FT limited to 12fpe with pellets…but let everyone use whatever shooting aid they want. The guys that want to go by the world rules can still do so, and the guys that want to go all out unlimited can do so as well. It would be an all inclusive class rather than a bunch of smaller ones. The commonality is that you won’t be able to win without reading the wind better than everyone else.
Mike
The game is about reading the wind. The same guys that are always at the top simply have a bigger bag of wind reading tricks.
Personally, I would like to see USA FT limited to 12fpe with pellets…but let everyone use whatever shooting aid they want. The guys that want to go by the world rules can still do so, and the guys that want to go all out unlimited can do so as well. It would be an all inclusive class rather than a bunch of smaller ones. The commonality is that you won’t be able to win without reading the wind better than everyone else.
Mike
Upvote 0
19.99 ft lbs. is 19.99 ft lbs doesn’t matter in this decision. Almost all the clubs I have shot at in the USA are firearm clubs that also have an Airgun range. The club rules and policies are not made by the air gunners, but by a board of directors that is mostly firearm people.
We have a local firearm /archery club that allowed us to set up a FT course on an existing Field Archery course. After 2 years they voted to close us down because they were concerned about the possibility of pellets traveling beyond the course. We tried every rationale, demonstration, and explanation but were still denied.
The reality is that few gun clubs are Airgun only and most of us must coexist with the powder burners.
It was explained well by Tyler Patner a couple pages back that some of the clubs that host GPs said no slugs allowed. If AAFTA permits slugs, those clubs could no longer host GPs or Nationals. As there are already a very limited number of clubs able/ willing to host these events , the decision was a no brainer.
It was deemed not in the best interest of the sport to allow something that limits our already thin ranks of shoot venues.
Greg Sauve
BOG member
We have a local firearm /archery club that allowed us to set up a FT course on an existing Field Archery course. After 2 years they voted to close us down because they were concerned about the possibility of pellets traveling beyond the course. We tried every rationale, demonstration, and explanation but were still denied.
The reality is that few gun clubs are Airgun only and most of us must coexist with the powder burners.
It was explained well by Tyler Patner a couple pages back that some of the clubs that host GPs said no slugs allowed. If AAFTA permits slugs, those clubs could no longer host GPs or Nationals. As there are already a very limited number of clubs able/ willing to host these events , the decision was a no brainer.
It was deemed not in the best interest of the sport to allow something that limits our already thin ranks of shoot venues.
Greg Sauve
BOG member
Upvote 0
Hi Greg. Found Tyler's comments that you're referring to, and they are why I made that comment about 20fpe being 20fpe. As you're well aware, the fpe is a measure of energy. A 20 fpe 12.5grain slug is not going to carry any further than a 20fpe 13.4grain pellet. They are carrying the same kinetic energy. And the difference in BC (in this particular comparison of staying ft legal by being under 20fpe) is minimal at best. The "best" BC pellets being used in field target are probably the 13.4grain .177s, and the 13.73grain .20s, followed up by the 10.34grain .177s. All three of those have nearly solid skirts. The common NSA slugs have a minimal hollow point, those three examples of pellets have a minimally hollow skirt. They're all fairly solid in their design. (ie, NOT 8.44grain dainty little things with slim waists and very hollow skirts that are easily deformed and stripped of their energy quickly).
If we were comparing 40 grain .22 slugs with BCs up in the 0.1 realm moving at 1000fps, then yes, the argument that the slug could continue on much further than the 20fpe pellet, still retaining enough energy to damage something or someone is valid.
But we're not, b/c of the 20fpe limit. Apples and apples.
Not wanting a war of words, just trying to point out the physics that has largely been ignored in the justification of the no slug rule. And I understand that it is supposedly the powder burner clubs restrictions "forcing this decision." I'd hope that a bunch of firearms enthusiasts could understand a simple explanation of foot pounds and retained energy and BC/etc.
I'm with Mike N (rare for me to side with him, lol) that a simple, "hey now, AAFTA is a pellet game and is going to stay that way" would have lead to much less argument. But, being as how the explanation was one of concerns of retained energy, well that just lead to folks responding with common sense and physics and science and such.
Upvote 0
Whole lotta noise over a democratically elected board of more-experienced representatives than the noise-makers, who considered all pertinent information, opinions, and feedback, then came to conscientious majority consensus, representing the best interests of field target. Continued noise won't change the fact that minority opinion did not prevail.
As it should be.
As it should be.
Upvote 0
Now now Ron, no need to be insulting by bringing up experience levels. Everybody has to start somewhere. Although by your own admission in a recent post I've shot many more field target matches than yourself in the last few years. Here nor there for this discussion though.
And I'm not even in the minority to which you refer, those advocating for slugs in regular field target. I've got a couple ft guns that shoot pellets to my satisfaction and I plan to continue using them to shoot pellets at ft matches.
I was just playing devils advocate a bit with the above comments. Thoughts shared by the BOG members would have us believe that sub 20fpe slugs are dangerous, when in reality they're just a differently shaped 20fpe projectile that has the same amount of kinetic energy as a 20fpe pellet. That's the only point I was making.
And I'm not even in the minority to which you refer, those advocating for slugs in regular field target. I've got a couple ft guns that shoot pellets to my satisfaction and I plan to continue using them to shoot pellets at ft matches.
I was just playing devils advocate a bit with the above comments. Thoughts shared by the BOG members would have us believe that sub 20fpe slugs are dangerous, when in reality they're just a differently shaped 20fpe projectile that has the same amount of kinetic energy as a 20fpe pellet. That's the only point I was making.
Upvote 0
When I see repeated logical explanations that don't really address the issues as explained by BOG members it leads me to think there's something else going on.
Do you want to organize EFT into a club structure under AATFA? If that's the thing, the BOG can probably find a way to do that with a slug carve-out for EFT.
I am wondering how the rimfire end of it will be managed.
Knobs
Do you want to organize EFT into a club structure under AATFA? If that's the thing, the BOG can probably find a way to do that with a slug carve-out for EFT.
I am wondering how the rimfire end of it will be managed.
Knobs
Upvote 0
After thinking this over, I’d have to agree with Mike N as pointed out by Cole.
@franklink I'm with Mike N (rare for me to side with him, lol) that a simple, "hey now, AAFTA is a pellet game and is going to stay that way" would have lead to much less argument.
@franklink I'm with Mike N (rare for me to side with him, lol) that a simple, "hey now, AAFTA is a pellet game and is going to stay that way" would have lead to much less argument.
Upvote 0
I hope not! EBR/EFT is in the process of generating some new excitement and fresh blood into a dying sport in the US. The same can be said for the hunter class, the bastard child of AAFTA. I love my fellow FT shooters and the sport itself, but in the 8+ years of running a field target club in the Sacramento Area I cannot think of a single thing that AAFTA has done that has promoted the sport or helped my club to grow the ranks.
We spend all of our time arguing over what amount to trivial rules issues like this. To me the solution is to make slugs allowable in Hunter and Open and illegal in WFTF. Franklink is right, coming up with illogical reasons for the ban is a joke. Actually MikeN has the best solution of all.
Jim in Amherst
Upvote 0
This a self quote from earlier in this thread ... Still feel the same. It ALWAYS HAS BEEN a Pellet Gun game. Leave the Slugs for the evolving SLUG Gun games.
So friggen simple !!!!
Scott S
Upvote 0