Is there a difference between the two? In my opinion, yes, there is! In the airgun community, we discuss all the events as competitions for various reasons. It’s simply easier to categorize them as all the same. But, I suspect that there is a difference between an event which is advertised as a challenge vs. one that is advertised as a legitimate competition.
A competition is fair and balanced for everyone involved. Each competitor is held to the same standard, given the same information, and held to the same rules in every way in an attempt to level the playing field for all involved. Of course, there are some differences between classes at a competition but, those classes are all held to the same standard, etc.
A challenge, on the other hand is just that, a challenge. “I challenge you to try to, (fill in the blank).” The playing field at a challenge does not necessarily have to be level across the board because it’s a challenge. The scales of equality can be, and often are, tipped one way at a challenge.
Take for example the TV show “Pro’s vs. Joe’s” where average people were put up against retired professional athletes. The athletes have been given every advantage you can think of during their career from specialized equipment, to the highest levels of training, and even their diet. The average people were not exposed to any of these advantages and then put up against the pro’s head to head. The question begs to be asked, do the “pro’s” also get a leg up with time to practice the events that the TV show is going to put on? Do they get insider information on how or when to perform certain strategies or tactics?
I look at field target events and the rules that need to be followed. Those competitors are all held to the same standard with forced positions, scope power limitations, target sizes, etc. There’s not many ways to make a FT match unfair or cheat at one. It is possible though. Having teammates or buddies with questionable honor keeping score for each other might cause a shot to be called a clearing shot and go uncounted. At a professionally run event, there’s usually an RO at each stage so, this scenario is only possible at events where that’s not the case.
At other events, the ability to tilt the scales are much higher. Like the “Pro’s” mentioned above, is the home team given special advantages over everyone else that shows up to the challenge? Are they given the advantage of seeing the targets set up on the range? Are they able to shoot the targets and practice in real time (as rumor would suggest)? Are the people involved with designing the course also competing? Those special advantages may go beyond the surface level. What really happens during the scoring? If the officials who make the final decision about who wins and who does not are rooting for the home team, are they really scoring fairly? I have heard rumors of rules being changed AFTER scoring which resulted in a change on the podium. This supposedly happened the very first year at, what is now, a major event. I have actually seen where the rules have been “bent” for a shooter which, again, affected the outcome. I can only suspect that this shooter was “on the A list.” Please don’t get me wrong, there are amazingly talented shooters out these events and I don’t mean to take anything away from their skills and abilities!
Side note: Can rules be “bent”? In my opinion, rules are black and white. If someone says they’re bending the rules, I believe they’re actually breaking the rules. Debatable? Maybe. Loopholes are little different. If someone finds a loophole they can take advantage of, it’s fair game. It might not be a nice thing to do and it might make everyone angry but, I still think it’s fair game.
The ability to weight the scales one way increases at such events as PRS. This goes back to whether the home team is able to design and shoot the courses ahead of time and whether or not the RO’s are “wink, wink” on the home team. But, it also extends to teammates or buddies shooting together and scoring or not scoring fairly. I reference a lot of thisin this post from last year. And, what’s interesting is that you’ll hear the announcers talking about how “cheating will not be tolerated” and “if you’re found to be cheating, this will happen” and on and on. But, does that count for the home team? I mean does it reeally? Or, does it count but, not quite at the same level as everyone else? But, the trump card is the officials in charge and what happens behind closed doors. If those officials are motivated by greed, fame, glory, exposure, etc., are they really scoring with unbiased honesty?
From what I’ve seen at some events, I no longer have faith that the scales are not tilted. I no longer believe that the outcome is based solely off the skills of the shooters but, that it also depends on someone’s opinion of whether or not those people are “acceptable”. While I know that 2nd and 3rd hand reports of cheating don’t make them true. The fact that they come up over and over again, year after year, from different and reliable sources, really makes you question the honesty of such an event.
A competition is fair and balanced for everyone involved. Each competitor is held to the same standard, given the same information, and held to the same rules in every way in an attempt to level the playing field for all involved. Of course, there are some differences between classes at a competition but, those classes are all held to the same standard, etc.
A challenge, on the other hand is just that, a challenge. “I challenge you to try to, (fill in the blank).” The playing field at a challenge does not necessarily have to be level across the board because it’s a challenge. The scales of equality can be, and often are, tipped one way at a challenge.
Take for example the TV show “Pro’s vs. Joe’s” where average people were put up against retired professional athletes. The athletes have been given every advantage you can think of during their career from specialized equipment, to the highest levels of training, and even their diet. The average people were not exposed to any of these advantages and then put up against the pro’s head to head. The question begs to be asked, do the “pro’s” also get a leg up with time to practice the events that the TV show is going to put on? Do they get insider information on how or when to perform certain strategies or tactics?
I look at field target events and the rules that need to be followed. Those competitors are all held to the same standard with forced positions, scope power limitations, target sizes, etc. There’s not many ways to make a FT match unfair or cheat at one. It is possible though. Having teammates or buddies with questionable honor keeping score for each other might cause a shot to be called a clearing shot and go uncounted. At a professionally run event, there’s usually an RO at each stage so, this scenario is only possible at events where that’s not the case.
At other events, the ability to tilt the scales are much higher. Like the “Pro’s” mentioned above, is the home team given special advantages over everyone else that shows up to the challenge? Are they given the advantage of seeing the targets set up on the range? Are they able to shoot the targets and practice in real time (as rumor would suggest)? Are the people involved with designing the course also competing? Those special advantages may go beyond the surface level. What really happens during the scoring? If the officials who make the final decision about who wins and who does not are rooting for the home team, are they really scoring fairly? I have heard rumors of rules being changed AFTER scoring which resulted in a change on the podium. This supposedly happened the very first year at, what is now, a major event. I have actually seen where the rules have been “bent” for a shooter which, again, affected the outcome. I can only suspect that this shooter was “on the A list.” Please don’t get me wrong, there are amazingly talented shooters out these events and I don’t mean to take anything away from their skills and abilities!
Side note: Can rules be “bent”? In my opinion, rules are black and white. If someone says they’re bending the rules, I believe they’re actually breaking the rules. Debatable? Maybe. Loopholes are little different. If someone finds a loophole they can take advantage of, it’s fair game. It might not be a nice thing to do and it might make everyone angry but, I still think it’s fair game.
The ability to weight the scales one way increases at such events as PRS. This goes back to whether the home team is able to design and shoot the courses ahead of time and whether or not the RO’s are “wink, wink” on the home team. But, it also extends to teammates or buddies shooting together and scoring or not scoring fairly. I reference a lot of thisin this post from last year. And, what’s interesting is that you’ll hear the announcers talking about how “cheating will not be tolerated” and “if you’re found to be cheating, this will happen” and on and on. But, does that count for the home team? I mean does it reeally? Or, does it count but, not quite at the same level as everyone else? But, the trump card is the officials in charge and what happens behind closed doors. If those officials are motivated by greed, fame, glory, exposure, etc., are they really scoring with unbiased honesty?
From what I’ve seen at some events, I no longer have faith that the scales are not tilted. I no longer believe that the outcome is based solely off the skills of the shooters but, that it also depends on someone’s opinion of whether or not those people are “acceptable”. While I know that 2nd and 3rd hand reports of cheating don’t make them true. The fact that they come up over and over again, year after year, from different and reliable sources, really makes you question the honesty of such an event.