You are looking at the sport differently than most.
There is nothing wrong with trying to make up a game where equipment is irrelevant. It’s just that it’s practically impossible when the game heavily relies on a piece of equipment to do the work.
A gun isn’t a gun. Not even the same brand and model. It cannot be successfully argued that a red wolf that shoots 1 moa is the same as a red wolf that shoots 2 moa. What’s the difference? Usually it means that someone has taken the time to make it as good as it can be. Can everyone do that? Does everyone have the resources to pay for someone else to do that? Can everyone even afford one to begin with?
What about pellets? Is one tin of pellets the same as another of the same brand and model? Only if you are ignorant to the fact that they are not.
You are contesting a game of accuracy. That accuracy comes from many components including the shooter.
Believing you can make it only about the shooter is not reasonable. Trying to make a shooting contest where accuracy of the rifle is out of the picture is impossible unless you are just going to eliminate the projectile and use a laser beam.
People like accurate rifles. People like projectiles that defy the wind. As long as those two facts remain...you will have people seeking them out to use in shooting sports that depend on accuracy to win. That is actually part of the component that makes it fun for many people. There are plenty of poor shooters with top notch equipment...and probably plenty of good shooters with poor equipment. It takes both to be successful at the a shooting game that depends on accuracy.
As I said before...if you want to make this sport appealing to people that don’t want to get into an equipment race...your best chance is to put all the targets beyond the reasonable accuracy range of a pellet. Accurate pellet guns are very evident under 75 yards...but the difference between a top gun and a mediocre gun at 100 and beyond is much smaller. Make the kill zones big so people can shoot 80% or better.
You will probably find that the fun factor for folks that like fun games will go way up. You will also find that serious competitors probably won’t bother playing the game which will likely make it even more fun for the others less competitive folks.
The problem with your concept is that you believe that the way things are allows undeserving people to win. What you are missing is the guys that win FT matches at higher than clubs levels ...are doing so because they put more into it than the next guy and it’s not the equipment doing all the work. Everyone has good equipment.
I often hear guys moaning about the cost of good equipment. In almost all cases those same guys have spent more money on a dozen other rifle and scope combos that don’t help them do what one good setup would have.
I have also raced short track dirt oval and found that the overwhelming number of racers could not begin to afford what they were doing...often going without electricity at home to get a new set of tires or some other part. Competitive people always find the money to do what they love. People that play for fun will likely never understand that.
As for slugs...how long do you think it will take after the first competition for someone to copy a slug that outperforms all the others if such a slug exists? My guess is a week to a month. The end of the world won’t come between those two times.
Mike
I agree with a lot of that too.
Do you not feel that better equipment (and I mean more expensive for the most part) automatically places its owner at an advantage?
The competitive part is much of what makes it fun for me. You make it sound like guys that are having fun aren't serious competitors. I hope to never get to that point with airguns. Yeah I play for fun, but I also want to win. I've spent big chunks of money on this silliness, even though its mostly just fun for me. But I enjoy it and can afford it without "going without electricity."
Field target,at least the part of it that I have experienced, seems limited to mostly old retired guys that are fairly well-to-do in a financial sense. If we don't get some younger folks, like myself, interested and involved, I can kinda picture it dying out as these old-timers pass on. That's a sad situation that I'd like to avoid. A lot of my desires to make this more appealing to people with less disposable income can be seen throughout this conversation.
The idea of a production class of guns was floated by Ben at the last match-something with a dollar limit for the rig, scope and gun. And perhaps that class is where a lot of my beliefs about what is or isn't fair and what should or shouldn't be allowed will find a home.
As previously stated, it'll be fun to see how this all shakes out.
Mr Nisch, and Mr. Hull, I'm going to use this space to apologize, publicly, to both of you. I've said and implied some unfair, unkind, and simply untrue things about both of you. I let my temper allow this to happen and it should not have. I respect both of you and your accomplishments more than nearly all of my comments suggest. While I don't agree with some of your means and methods and opinions, I do hope to see both of you at some of these Extreme Field Target matches.
. Hahaha 
as are a lot of the shooters that attended the matches. Also hunters don’t typically carry a bag to sit on, a harness to shoot in, or a belt attached benchrest. They do sit on rocks and carry sticks in their packs. They do have range finders. They do have lighter scopes and guns. They don’t have all day to get comfortable to take a shot. Please let’s not recreate what we already have with other competitions. It’s ok to miss every now and then. Rant over. 
