Is Open class suffering a slow death?

[Franklink]

ok, harness, back pack, knee winch, whatever. Like I said, may try one before it's over, and, just for you, will do my very best to refrain from the use of the term "girdle"

Ha ha, wasn't offended. Just an oft-used term for it, and I've never seen the correlation. Especially cuz they don't really slim down the figure much, like an actual girdle does.

"Wearable bench" as in benchrest, would be a more appropriate descriptor.

 

[Centercut]

"Wearable bench" as in benchrest, would be a more appropriate descriptor.

Yeah, that makes sense. You can attach the support equipment to yourself in Open, but not to the gun. Seems like an attached bipod for prone would also fit into the Open Class since the girdle is already allowed….

 

[Franklink]

Yeah, that makes sense. You can attach the support equipment to yourself in Open, but not to the gun. Seems like an attached bipod for prone would also fit into the Open Class since the girdle is already allowed….

Bricker, don't you ever get tired of stirring stuff up? I made a completely innocuous comment, no dig nor disparaging remark to anyone or anything, just commented on how much stability a harness can give, and somehow.........

On a more serious note.....yes, an attached bipod could be used in the prone position in the Open class, as far as I understand the rules. Traditionally, most Open class shooters sit on a bumbag and use a harness (most, not all). But "Open" really does mean pretty much wide open, use whatever shooting aides you want.

I think there's a seat height requirement is all, and that the seat can't be propped under the gun as a shooting bag. But otherwise, go to town!!!
Here, rules from AAFTA handbook for Open:

"Open Division Rules
The Open Division shall abide by the Common Division Rules defined in this Handbook, as well as by the following rules.
Equipment
A. Rifles shall not exceed 20ft-lb of energy measured at the muzzle.
B. All forms of clothing are permissible.
C. Body support straps or harnesses are allowed, if they do not provide any means of support to the gun.
Sights Any form of sighting system may be used.
Shooting A single rifle sling is permitted that shall be attached to the rifle at a minimum of one and maximum of two points when a shot is taken.
Seating
A. The maximum height for any form of seat is 6 inches from the ground to the highest point of the seat, measured with the shooter sitting on the seat.
B. The seat can only be used as a seat and not any other means of shooting support, EXCEPT to support the rear instep/ankle in the kneeling position, or as back support on free-position extreme angle targets."

Really, very few restrictions.

Might be a chance for you to shoot from prone position and see how it works.

 

[Centercut]

Bricker, don't you ever get tired of stirring stuff up? I made a completely innocuous comment, no dig nor disparaging remark to anyone or anything, just commented on how much stability a harness can give, and somehow.........

On a more serious note.....yes, an attached bipod could be used in the prone position in the Open class, as far as I understand the rules. Traditionally, most Open class shooters sit on a bumbag and use a harness (most, not all). But "Open" really does mean pretty much wide open, use whatever shooting aides you want.

I think there's a seat height requirement is all, and that the seat can't be propped under the gun as a shooting bag. But otherwise, go to town!!!
Here, rules from AAFTA handbook for Open:

"Open Division Rules
The Open Division shall abide by the Common Division Rules defined in this Handbook, as well as by the following rules.
Equipment
A. Rifles shall not exceed 20ft-lb of energy measured at the muzzle.
B. All forms of clothing are permissible.
C. Body support straps or harnesses are allowed, if they do not provide any means of support to the gun.
Sights Any form of sighting system may be used.
Shooting A single rifle sling is permitted that shall be attached to the rifle at a minimum of one and maximum of two points when a shot is taken.
Seating
A. The maximum height for any form of seat is 6 inches from the ground to the highest point of the seat, measured with the shooter sitting on the seat.
B. The seat can only be used as a seat and not any other means of shooting support, EXCEPT to support the rear instep/ankle in the kneeling position, or as back support on free-position extreme angle targets."

Really, very few restrictions.

Might be a chance for you to shoot from prone position and see how it works.

Reardon, I was just joking. Sorry you took it that way. Kinda like your joke about the GP events not sorting out the best shooters. That’s why I put a large smiley face there since I knew it was a joke. Lighten up man!

 

[Scotchmo]

…

On a more serious note.....yes, an attached bipod could be used in the prone position in the Open class, as far as I understand the rules. …

Open Division rules do not allow an attached bipod that touches the ground while shooting. So, even though you could have one on your rifle, you cannot use it while shooting. Only Hunter “specifically” allows bipods, and they cannot be attached.

In AAFTA common shooting rules:

B. Other than using aids permitted by specific AAFTA Division Rules (slings, bipods, etc.), the gun must be supported solely by the shooter's hands and body.

 

[Franklink]

Thanks for the clarification. Felt like that section of rules I C&P'd was not every thing but i didn't think to go look in the "Common Division Rules" area.

I wasnt intentionally/knowingly proposing something contary to rules.

So maybe that's why people are trending away from Open, cuz you gotta support the gun "solely" with your body in that class.

 

[Airgunoregon]

I think the major loss from Open class is/was into the 12fp WFTF class for at least two reasons.. One as a competitor gets better or even wins the Open class GP, they sometimes then want more challenge and have a go at 12fpe WFTF.. if their body allows it.

Second is the fact the worlds is coming to the USA in 2024, so folks want to attend what might be a once in a lifetime chance for them.
Others, leave open because they get older or hurt themselves and can't get on the bum bag anymore, so move to Hunter.... Overall, I think AAFTA is not loosing competitors, their just moving around... so it's really not an issue as I see it.

People often talk about how we need to work harder at growing the AAFTA membership.... but one thing seldom considered, is the fact that there are very few venues in the whole country that can handle even 120 competitors and so, could host a National Championships. That's the limit too. 30 lanes with 3 shooters per squad = 90 on the course at a time... 30 waiting and on the croney lane.

Setting three 15 lane courses might be an option, but again not many clubs have the space or targets to do so... or the support to host such a large event. The Nationals is hard enough for the BOG to find clubs to host it now.. how many different places has it really been? I don't know but it seems like just a few.. maybe 5 or 6 tops

We could have "qualifying" like some countries to get the the Championships, but that idea hasn't ever got traction.. For these reasons... I think there is little motivation at the top to "grow" the number of competitors, just keep about the same numbers we have now... Just my opinion

Wayne

 

[K]

I used to shoot on a 60 acre farm before it sold. The owner let RC guys fly their drones there. Most of those guys had Marauders, usually .25.

There's a whole lot more airguns out there than most people realize.

 

[dayjd]

Wow! A lot has been mentioned in this subject but which class has the best shooters is objective. From my perspective the two biggest factors to knocking the most targets down is distance to the target and the wind factor. With the Hunter class only at 16 power creates ranging problems for me beyond 45 yards. At the same time if the wind is blowing the conditions have to be perfect to recognize mirage at 16 X which can significantly assist how to hold off for the wind. So, the higher power scopes create a definite advantage over our 16x class. Being able to shoot the forced positions with a shooting jacket greatly benefits the ability to hold steady while aiming. The ability to click and use the center dot as the point of aim instead of having to use hold over is also a advantage for both the WFTF and Open class. The ability to use 20 ft lbs is a big advantage to shooting a flatter tragectory for the Hunter and Open class but there is a few key elements that should be taken into consideration before claiming the Hunter class is the easiest class to shoot. Most certainly the buckets and bipods make it easier to get into position and shoot from a physical standpoint but overall the class has a lot of obstacles to overcome as does the WFTF shooting at 12 ft/lbs. JMHO
Bill Day

 

[K]

People often talk about how we need to work harder at growing the AAFTA membership.... but one thing seldom considered, is the fact that there are very few venues in the whole country that can handle even 120 competitors and so, could host a National Championships. That's the limit too. 30 lanes with 3 shooters per squad = 90 on the course at a time... 30 waiting and on the croney lane.

Hi Wayne

You right about the land problem. FT eats up a lot of ground. JMO, but it really helps if you can leave your course up all year as it cuts down on the workload of the volunteers. That's even tougher to find.

Knobs

 

[dayjd]

Years back when I was hooked on 3-D Bowhter Archery which eventually become the IBO I could go to New Hampshire every weekend and compete in a match with 300 to 400 shooters on a 30 target 15 lane course. We would start about 9am and the course would be completed by 2:30pm. We averaged 4 shooters per group with one shot per animal. Yardages were the same as FT and after lane completion we had to walk to the target and score / pull our arrows. If someone missed the target or passed through and had to look for their arrow which occurred frequently we would all help out finding it or not for at least a couple minutes before we would journey to the next lane. For two day events the targets would be moved for the second day (same course) and I never heard anyone complain about that. We had five classes and four divisions (Release aids, Fingers, Barebow, and Traditional). The game was much more family oriented than our Field Target which I think made something a family could do together on a weekend for $25.00. Now since leaving the game in 1995 I have heard the numbers are not what they use to be but for the 15 years I participated it grew almost every year. The cost of equipment back then was very similar as todays FT entry equipment and upgrades were of course much more. About the time I left the game top bows were close to $1000 and a heck of a lot longer that they are today. As FT is today the same 4 or 5 people did 90% of the work with occassional extra help for the bigger events.
I'm not sure exactly what my point was but a lot more people enjoyed about the same amount of real estate we use today in FT.
Bill Day

 

[Airgunoregon]

One interesting observation I’ve made over the years is that most all the complaints about AAFTA come from the Hunter division….and mostly about scopes.

Hunter shooters compete against other hunter shooters. No matter what the rules are….they are fair across the particular division. Many shooters want to be recognized as the best overall shooters without actually competing in the other divisions against that divisions best shooters. This is accomplished in their minds by shooting the high score overall. AAFTA did away with high overall awards for this very reason….but some areas still cling to this tradition. It’s this desire that fuels the continuous demand for scope power upgrades in Hunter. The upgrade from 12x to 16x didn’t improve the competition in the Hunter division….it just gave them a better chance of getting the high overall score. Forgetting about the high overall score wouid be beneficial to everybody….but it’s unlikely to happen.

Following in the footsteps of the UK….and having separate organizations would take care of that problem, but would cut attendance numbers here drastically.

The reality is that the US is just too big geographically and getting people together from across the country requires alot of travel. The UK is about the size of Colorado….and people can participate countrywide with far less travel.

None of my WFTF peers that I can think of hunt and use FT as a means to improve their hunting skills. FT is simply a game….with a worldwide set of uniform rules. If you want to play that game….you abide by its rules. Wftf will always be very popular worldwide.

Mike,
The AAFTA Grand Prix rewards the highest score with 100%. That motivation is very high and there is no way with that in place to keep folks from going for the overall high score... and IF they are competitive in the GP, then caring very much if they get it or not.

For that reason, it's kind of important that the different classes are competitive among themselves. I think the rules are just right as they are. The classes seem very close to each other as it is. Hunter is winning sometimes, WFTF PCP sometimes, and Open sometimes.... Hell we even have some piston shooters like Cameron who whoop the PCP shooters sometimes.

All is good, let us just chill and enjoy...

PS...I've shot all the classes in my 15 years in AAFTA and no doubt WFTF is the hardest class as one gets older and less able to be comfortable in the legal positions. For younger or more fit competitors, it is about the same difficulty as the current hunter rules IN MY OPINION....


Wayne

 

[thomasair]

My observation still stands. I doubt you can find any threads about WFTF or open guys complaining about their class rules. It’s a broken record with Hunter.

Remove the incentive to be 1st overall….and 99.9% of the complaining will go away. That’s the fix. Everybody seems to want to pursue the band aid instead..

Mike

 

[Airgunoregon]

Mike,
Why is complaining an issue... folks should have the right to voice opinions.... America and all.

Hunter class rules have been a work in process from the beginning anyway, so there is reason for debate, that you are calling complaining.

If we remove the incentive to be first overall by changing the Grand Prix in some way. I Believe that will hurt or kill AAFTA in the long run. AAFTA is about the National group of clubs... that will suffer for sure if the GP falters. Local clubs will continue, but a fair percentage participate in the Grand Prix and that method of scoring has been with us from the start of the GP series in 2009 I think it was.

How would you "Remove the incentive"?

Wayne

 

[thomasair]

Remove the incentive by normalizing each class individually. You win Hunter….you get 100%. The guy that wins open also gets 100%.

Nothing else needs to change….and it would not do anything to harm the Gp series.

Public complaining and the constant hum of AAFTA impropriety buy some does nothing to uplift the sport.

Mike

 

[Scotchmo]

Remove the incentive by normalizing each class individually. You win Hunter….you get 100%. The guy that wins open also gets 100%.

Nothing else needs to change….and it would not do anything to harm the Gp series.

Public complaining and the constant hum of AAFTA impropriety buy some does nothing to uplift the sport.

Mike

Mike,
The GP matches do not have sufficient numbers for that to work well in all Divisions/Classes. As it is now, the rules require at least 15 competitors in order to qualify as a GP match. That gives a sufficiently large sample to make the 100% score meaningful. What would be a sufficient number of competitors in a single class to still have a statistically meaningful scoring system? Even with a 10 competitor minimum, Hunter/PCP would be the only viable GP class. The lesser attended classes need the other shooters to get a meaningful comparison for matches spread across the USA.

Without a qualifying number of competitors, a scoring system such as you suggest would give a huge advantage to WFTF GP competitors in the West. When compared to many of the matches in the East, Cajuns for instance, that have a high number of WFTF competitors.

Focus range finding is a standard component of FT. Hunter is the only division where AAFTA puts limits on it. So it's expected that they are the only ones that might "complain" about it.

 

[qball]

All really great points!

I dont shoot HFT but I have no problem lift the magnification limit for HFT. I’m tired of hearing the “excuse” my scope is limited so I can’t range like you people!

To be fair there aren’t many reasonably priced scope that would range really well at 16x to my knowledge. I chose WFTF because of the challenge so no need to limit other classes because of my choice, I don’t compete with them directly anyways. Plus if I beat them then they won’t have scope limit excuse anymore!

 

[thomasair]

Ok….since Hunter is always the big class….how about we just let them normalize their scores separately? The rest could just stay the same.

If Hunter only worried about competing with other Hunter shooters….there would be no problem.

Wftf guys don’t complain about being limited to 12fpe…so the argument doesn’t really stand up.

Mike

 

[Kdog]

I have a pretty good example of what would happen if you had no magnification restriction in Hunter class. Here in Ohio we have a few people shooting unlimited using bipod and seat and unlimited magnification. They went from a mid 40-50 shooter on avg when they use to shoot Hunter PCP to high 50s every match shooting unlimited magnification. They are also using a bipod on their standing shots. Don't really see the challange here if Hunter class was to use unlimited magnification plus shoot off a seat and use shooting sticks. As a regular open shooter which has shot Hunter as well as WFTF matches this year all three divisions have their challanges.

 

[thomasair]

Scott….there is already a huge advantage to wftf shooters in the west. I doubt it would make any difference.

Mike