Posted by john bickar on October 17, 2001 at 18:46:03:
As most of you
probably know, the state of RF pistol in the US is, to put it mildly, weak. I
believe we had a total of 16 competitors at our national championships. USA
Shooting, with input from myself and several other RF shooters, is trying to
remedy this situation. I personally have led several efforts, and USAS has
initiated several programs, that are geared to induce more participation in this
pistol discipline. The bottom line is that we need more competitors (period),
more developmental (esp. junior) shooters, and more elite shooters if RF is to
continue to be viable in the US.
I would like to pose an open-ended question,
with the aim of initiating discussion on this topic, so I can arm myself and
USAS with more information from the grass roots and we can better direct our
efforts:
*Why do international shooters at the local level seldom choose
Rapid Fire PIstol as their event of choice?*
I would like to exclude air
pistol from any discussion comparing pistol events--airgun is something that
almost everyone starts with and sticks with forever, sometimes branching out
into other disciplines and sometimes remaining strictly an airgun shooter.
However, once a shooter decides to pick up another event (and this includes
airgun shooters and bullseye shooters), why is it almost exclusively a free
pistol and not a rapid fire pistol? Is it cost? Equipment? Lack of ranges? Level
of difficulty? (I have a particularly hard time swallowing that one, as I've
never shot so many in the white in Rapid as I did in Free) Lack of matches? Lack
of proper facilities to train/compete? Lack of support from USA Shooting?
While I admit that I am biased towards RF, and somewhat out of touch with
the challenges that face the typical true civilian shooter, it wasn't too long
ago that I was in that situation, and still tried to find ways to work on my RF
technique. It boggles my mind that such an exciting event can be so
underrepresented in the US while it is so popular overseas. With my background
as a bullseye shooter, I always thought RF was the closest international event
to my strengths in bullseye, which were always at the short line. What prevents
other bullseye shooters with the same strengths from attempting to shoot RF?
I hope this question can start an informative discussion so that we can save
rapid fire in the US. Please give me your honest assessment on the sport, and
don't worry about hurting my feelings or bruising any egos. Regardless of
whether I agree with anyone's opinions on RF, the fact is that hardly anyone
shoots it, and everyone who doesn't has their own reason not to. Right or wrong,
USAS MUST address these concerns if the sport is to continue through the next
quad.
John Bickar
Posted by R.M. on October 17, 2001 at 19:26:48:
John
As you very well
know, there just aren't the facilities around for rapid.
I myself, think it's
a blast. The only problem is that the match is over too soon.
I just got an
old OSP out of Australia, had Arnie make me a set of grips, and am ready to go.
Go where? Yes I am a member of the club at the OTC, but shooting there isn't as
easy as it used to be for an outsider.
What I have done, is made up a target
frame that snaps together for hanging the targets from, and use a timer from
http://www.targettimers.com/
I've been able to get in 3 matches back in
Canada this summer, so I managed to get a classification, and shot the CDN
Nationals (1rst MM). By the way, the CDN Nationals had 22 Rapid-Fire shooters.
I have no idea how a person would get in enough matches to get a
classification here in the states. I've yet to see a match that had rapid, other
than Atlanta and Benning. What a way to get started!!
I've always said that
if you hold the matches, they will come, but well, you saw that at the CO State
Championships we only had 9 shooters, and 3 of you came from the OTC.
Since
moving here from Canada, I've been very disappointed with the state of
International shooting in the area. Back in Ontario, you can take a 100 mile
radius of Toronto, and shoot some sort of match pretty well every weekend. We at
the Arvada Club have been trying to get things going, but it hasn't been easy. I
wouldn't blame Doug (our match director) if he gave up.
What happened to the
PTO's that they used to have at the OTC?
I hear what you're saying, and
understand the frustration, but I think that as ISSF shooters, we all have an
obligation to get off our backsides and make things happen before it's too late.
Look at the state of Wolf Creek!!
Well that's enough ranting for now. I hope
this thread you started can produce some positive results.
R.M.
Golden CO
Posted by john bickar on October 18, 2001 at 18:37:30:
If we have a RF
PTO at the OTC, would there be more shooters than just you and me?
We tried
to set up 5-gun PTOs a couple of years ago, but it's difficult to coordinate
with our travel schedule. As far as I know, the paperwork is still somewhere in
the pile on Erich's desk.
Posted by Raymac on October 17, 2001 at 21:15:28:
I think that the best
thing that the ISSF ever did [although they may not have realized it] was to go
from the turning target system to the light system. Instead of the expensive and
troublesome mechanical turning targets, all a club needs now is a simple
board-fence style target frame to hold five targets at the correct spacing and a
light system to plug into the timer. It will hook up in minutes and the target
frames can be used for others to shoot on as well. The club system does not need
to have all the precision that an ISSF-legal system needs and I think it can be
very simple, easy to install and give our shooters the experience of real
international shooting conditions. Rapid fire shooting no longer needs to be an
expensive installation. Any small club can have one and if someone in the club
builds it you can be assured that the shooters WILL come. Personally I would
like to see someone more qualified than me research it a bit and come up with a
typical "club" level installation plan. What happened to all the rapid fire
shooters? Well, WE aint' giving them a place to shoot and the NRA is still
clinging to the turning target system.
Posted by Warren on October 17, 2001 at 21:26:35:
I for one would be
happy to shoot Rapid on a regular basis. It's a blast, the 4 second series is my
version of taking a lottery ticket, and when it goes right (every seven or eight
matches) - hey, it's the biggest buzz I ever get on the firing line. Speaking
purely as a recreational Rapid shooter, of course.
The rising cost of good 22
short ammo is a fair deterrent I admit. Plus the lack of ranges - yes, that is a
difficulty.
But speaking as a furrener who has seen a lot of shooting in
other countries, I have to say that the most common club shooter I'm used to
seeing is a rarity here. I'm talking about the five match shooter. I was a five
match shooter, and while I took one or two matches seriously, the other matches
were the stress relievers and entertainment. Heck, shooting is meant to be fun!
BUT if you talk $95 per event at the Nationals, Spring and Fall Selection
matches, by korrie, I can't afford nearly $500 in entry fees. Until the fees
become manageable for the personally funded shooter there is no motivation for
civilian shooters to even buy the guns needed to shoot Standard, Center or
Rapid.
Fair enough, it's expensive to run a Nationals. USA Shooting is not
an amateur organization, so it would be unfair to compare with an Australian
Nationals, where we complained about paying $50 for FIVE matches (real dollars,
not Oz). But can't we have a break for a second, a third, fourth and fifth
matches - like a frequent flyer's bonus? Shouldn't we try to encourage
participation?
I know I'm getting off your topic a little, John, but I see
Rapid, Standard and Center as being much closer relatives than Free and Air. Get
more shooters in these and you'll attract more to the Olympic sport of Rapid
Fire.
Posted by JP Paloux on October 17, 2001 at 21:33:53:
Hi John,
First
of all, congratulations for the outstanding results at the CAT Games...
I'll
try to answer your question the bast I can from my view point. I'm a junior
shooter, started up with CF about 6-9 months ago, AP 2 months ago. Reasons why I
got started in ISSF shooting ? My dad had two CF guns, a .38 and .32. I went to
try out pistol shooting, and got hooked at the game. The stance, sights
alignment, triggers control... all challenging elements that are great to work
on.
RF is kind of expensive to get started. There are very few low-budget RF
guns, so for juniors that have neither rich parents nor shooting club help with
.22 short pistols, it is difficult to buy your own. I have my own AP, only
because it is an IZH... But, like most high-end APs, you must have at least $950
to get started seriously in RF.
Of course, if money is not a matter for
junior shooters... let's suppose my club can lend me a decent .22 short anytime
I want). Hmmm how could I shoot ? My local range is rather poor lighted, the
target carriers work 1/2, budget is way too low to get new flashy targets (of
course, we don't stock RF targets), and one must be pretty good with tools to
make his own "clip-on 5 targets on this" thing to place on the carrier... It is
a question of budget priority out here. Cash is going to the PPC guys, shooting
their man-silhouettes, not "dull black circles with a silly horizontal bar on
it".
I'd really like to try out RF. Free would like too much like AP, RF is
really different. In fact, RF and Standard are both very attractive sports, but
since you can get to the Olympics with RF, it makes the choice easier. If only I
had an adequate range to shoot at and a basic pistol... I think I'd be wasting
my time trying to shoot RF with a normal .22. Of course, if I realize I'm really
better in AP, so on the "static" side of ISSF-shooting, I'd probably sell the RF
gun and get to Free. But at least, I'd take a chance and see how "young people"
can coordinate their triggers on 5 different targets ;)
After all, if I suck in RF, I'll just work harder in AP, with plenty of time
left for training (just watching the world top shooters make me feel like I have
soooo much time left :))
Well, to sum up, the main concern for juniors would be: 1- money for a gun 2-
range problems. Otherwise, it'll be great ! Actually, I think I'll get a RF gun
before upgrading to a better AP... Just thinking of it, I'll talk with the range
owner btw to see if there's way to get RF at the range.
I hope it helps, and I'm looking forward to see future success in RF in
America,
JP,Quebec, Canada.
PS: 3 Canadians answering your post, John? Well,
is RF _really_ dead in the States? juts asking :)
Posted by R.M. on October 18, 2001 at 00:11:29: JP
I mentioned earlier
that I got in 3 matches this past summer. 2 of them were shot with my GSP. It
can be done, and is still a lot of fun.
Give it a try. If you've got CF
targets, you've got Rapid-Fire targets.
Posted by geo. anderson on October 17, 2001 at 22:08:34:
How about the
High Standard Olympics? You can get a decent one for under $500 in the US, even
less from Australia. Slant or upright grip depending on age. Integral
compensation. The only negative is that it is hard to get the trigger much under
1 1/2#.
Just a thought. We have no RF range options here in Minnesota at
least right now.
Geo.
Posted by Larry Lohkamp on October 18, 2001 at 20:08:16:
A range is more
of a problem than a usable pistol. Notice I said usable, not optimum. Most
standard pistols will do to get a feel for it and decide whether you want to
invest in an optimized pistol. Conventional pistol shooters that have a
compensated 22 will find them adequate for rapid fire. The most intriguing
possibility that I've seen is a Marvel 22 conversion unit for a 1911 frame. All
of the ones that I've seen are compensated and they are available with iron
sights. I know an individual that had one put on an aluminum 1911 frame. The
sear stuck in the release position during the first session, releasing all 5
rounds at once. All shots hit the NRA B-2 target with several in the black. The
lack of muzzle rise was impressive. The conversion should work with target long
rifle and Bob may be able to supply springs for shooting shorts if asked.
NOTE - I was not the person that put 5-rounds into a pistol for a first test
fire.
Posted by mako on October 18, 2001 at 00:10:54:
I'd love to try RF (since
finding my RF scores the best part of my BE matches) but RF conflicts with our
AP matches on the first Sunday of the month. Someone needs to convenience Sandy
Santibanez, who runs our matches to do something about that. He instead wants to
stop having RF matches since we have so few competitors taking advantage of
those matches. A shame because at the Prado Olympic range in Chino, we have RF
bays left over from the '84 Olympics. Occasionally we get ex-US RF Team members
shooting at the matches ... but it's usually only one of the Cummins and Prough
boys.
Since Lauren (current Jr. Womens AP US Champ) is off at school, Sandy
is starting to wonder why he's going through all of the trouble hosting matches.
We are very grateful to him and the Cummins parents and Don Kennedy for helping
out with the AP and FP matches ... but none of the other shooters seems able to
convince any other friends or family members to help with the matches.
Our
Schedule at the moment is AP and RF at 9 am on the first Sunday of the month and
Sports Pistol and FP at 1 PM. Again, with Lauren gone, there are no Sports
Pistol competitors ... only FP. I'd like to eventually shoot centerfire (which
can informally be shot together with Sports Pistol) but I don't want to miss FP
... :-( It's a drag having to choice between events....
Posted by Rodm on October 18, 2001 at 09:10:13:
John:
First let me
give you my personal situation. Back in my bulls eye days the saying was the
overall match was won in slow fire and lost in rapid. I lost more than I won. I
am a slow fire shooter, not rapid like you. But if given the opportunity without
killing my budget I would play with it.
I think there is a lot of potential
for rapid fire out there. A lot of other postings list the lack of opportunity,
matches and ranges. There is a lot of activity in Pin matches around here. The
basic techniques must be the same in both events. It is a starting place.
I
heard a negative reaction from you up at Grand Rapids MN to the mention of rapid
fire air pistol. You were very negative. But as you said lots of shooters start
in air pistol than go on to free pistol, wouldn't the same hold true if there
were a rapid fire event for air pistol to develop a following and passion for
the rapid fire pistol? It is something that could be set up in a basement,
garage, or back yard. Another advantage is there are relatively inexpensive guns
out there that could be used by the novice. Think about this as an encouragement
to bring new shooters into the game not as competition.
Just some thoughts.
Rod Madsen
Posted by Mike McDaniel on October 18, 2001 at 09:45:58:
The biggest
problem is range facilities. Nowhere to shoot, nowhere to train. International
pistol is scarce in the U.S. to begin with. FP and AP, however, can be shot just
about anywhere with properly reduced targets. RF, on the other hand, demands a
target bay made to precise specifications - and at a cost that is beyond the
means of most shooters. $1,000 for a gun is steep but bearable. $4,000 for a
target bay is unaffordable.
There are several things that can be done. First,
we have got to work with the ISSF on the light system (I'll bet that the
Europeans are having similar price problems). The current rules are written
around either a turning target assembly (expensive) OR the Suis-Ascor electronic
targets (VERY expensive). What's required is a system using a shot timer ($200)
and a single target with five centers (large for 25 meters/yards, but 50 ft is
quite manageable - and it solves the nasty spacing problem). We'd need a folding
target holder, too. Individual shooters have got to be able to afford their own
personal target bays, and the equipment must be small enough to be loaded into
the trunk of a car and taken to the range for a practice session. With such
equipment, it becomes a fairly reasonable proposition for a match director to
ask competitors to bring their own target bays and shoot the entire event in one
or two relays.
Personally, I love RF almost as much as I love black powder
(and I've shot at 3 World Championships with that). But my OSP sits in the gun
vault. You see, I live in the Washington, DC area - and there hasn't been a RF
bay operated within 200 miles of here in over a decade.
V/R:
Mike
McDaniel
Posted by Pradeep on October 19, 2001 at 17:34:06:
US$4,000 for a RF
target bay? Is that for one or two banks? Currently my club in Australia is
replacing our target frames on one range (4 bays) and we will be getting them
constructed for around $2,000 per bay. With the cost of the air rams all up we
will be getting change from AUS$10,000 (around US$5,000) (compressor not
included).
Here are links to pics of a set in operation (in precision set up
so the middle target is removed) at Sydney Pistol Club if you wish to see (we
pinched our ideas from them ;). The ISSF target frames can be pulled out and
replaced with the Service match targets (so the centre height is the same). We
have decided to go with Service size frames, and use a backing board for our
ISSF targets (saves on costs)
Posted by Marilyn on October 18, 2001 at 10:19:49:
two 3/8" x 1 1/2"
pieces of lath hinged together lengthwise
5 large binder clips to hold
targets to lath
2 additional binder clips to attach lath to existing target
setup at our club
1 audio device for 8s, 6s and 4s setup, (e.g. target timer
or tape recorder with voice commands)
In our particular case, the hinged
lath is about 10 feet long, (5 feet when folded). It has pencil markings on each
side to indicate where to hang targets at either 50 feet or 20 yards. It fits in
my compact car to travel and cost less than $10 to make. It's more than adequate
to train with!
Posted by Larry lohkamp on October 18, 2001 at 19:29:08:
Pardon me for
being a bit dense but I don't get the concept. Can you explain the setup better,
or even better, email me a picture.
Posted by Marilyn on October 18, 2001 at 20:31:53:
Take a piece of lath
that stretches from the outside edges of the targets. This is what your targets
hang from. Cut this board in half, and then re-join it with a small hinge.
When you get to the range, unfold your board, hang it at the right hight
fron the existing target holders, and hang your targets from your board with the
binder clips. I don't think clothes pins open enough.
Hope this is
clearer.
Marilyn
Posted by paul benneche on October 18, 2001 at 12:49:20:
This same set up
works for us, but just for practice right now. Jan Claussen of the German
National team has been practicing here while he works part time in the US.
Posted by Bill Demarest on October 18, 2001 at 10:00:36:
Hey John, How
was Florida vacation? Congrats on CAT medals. Always nice to have the hardware.
You've asked for reasons why some of us don't shoot RF. Some of the reasons why
I don't are: 1) difference in routine vs FP & AP,(ie. movt vs non movt)
2)The time I would be spending in RF would detract from AP & FP, and
training time is precious. 3) Range configuration and public range insurance
requirements, (ie. NO RAPID FIRE ALLOWED!!). We see fellow international
competitors like Franck Dumoulin, (FRA), shooting RF from time to time. To tell
you the truth, I haven't followed his RF performance, and I don't know what type
of routine he has for training. I can't quite figure out how he fits in the
training time and still makes decent scores, and make a living too?? I can not
say that if I had all the equipment, time, money and facilities that I would try
my hand at the add'l event. It simply doesn't interest me. Maybe much like a
marathon runner isn't interested in running the 100 meter sprint?? Say hello to
Erich, Mike, Christina, Becki, and Em...
See you in Nov. Bill
Posted by john bickar on October 18, 2001 at 18:27:33:
Dumoulin shoots
570s-580s in RF--unbelievable. Tobar also won free and rapid at CAT but.... I
agree with you that free and rapid are for the most part incompatible. Recent
struggles notwithstanding, if I were you I'd stick to free. However--I have an
extra RF gun if you want to shoot it in November. I'm shooting free at the
match, so you practically have to.
John,
I campaigned RF very hard for
over 23 years, could never get to the elete level required to make a US team. I
was also very involved with Black Mountain Shooting Club in Poway. As I have
pointed out for years, RF (as most international pistol events) is a venue
specific sport. There are just not very many places that have the equipment to
run any match, much less a UIT/USAS section event. This does not bode well for
the future as we showed with Black Mountain, if you have a range, hold matches,
provide support, the sport will grow, but only rifle has the support to do
that.
Regard,Al
Posted by mako on October 19, 2001 at 04:20:56:
Bill, you know Jim can set
up the RF target mechanism anytime over at Prado so you can practice for this
show down (using your old .22 BE pistol?)! :-) I tried shooting on a RF target
for the first time today using the turning target holders at the
Bristow/Commerce range. It's a nice big target ... of course I only had one
target to contend with. :-)
Posted by Pete on October 18, 2001 at 10:06:30:
I am sure there are many
specific reasons for the decline or seeming lack of interest in RF. Overall, I
believe that shooting sports are on the decline, especially anything that could
be considered a precision type. Cowboy action and some others activities may be
growing. I look around the leagues I shoot in and most shooters are gray haired
if they have any hair.
How many have junior programs at all? If you are
concerned about gun rights, we had better think about the junior programs we are
not running.
Specifically to RF, perhaps the problem is the social nature of
shooting or any other recreational activity. We have support groups and
recognition from shooting friends when we do well as a motivation. How man
people shoot and go home with a little BS after or before the match. Some of the
fellows I shoot with get together socially with the families etc.
With a
small following, how does RF fit into that support structure? How does
international shooting fit into that social support structure?
As far as the
gun goes, people can start with a High Standard or Ruger. You would compete for
the national team without a RF pistol, but there is a lot of skill development
before that point. As you build enough of a following, teh ranges will come. Or
if you build it, will they come?
John,You have proposed a valid
question, which I believe is scratching the surface of a bigger problem that
needs to be corrected before growth in this pistol discipline can be seen. The
answer, which I offer is one the big egos of USA Shooting, will not want to
hear. But, it is harsh the truth as to why we have seen a decline in rapid fire
pistol shooting and international shooting over the past 10 years. There are a
variety of factors, which contribute to the lack of rapid fire pistol
participation. Which has been outline by all the other individuals on this
topic. The common denominator is Money.
The big question is how does USA
Shooting correct this. It is my opinion that USAS need to align themselves back
with the NRA. I know this will be a difficult pill for the big egos of USAS to
swallow, because they wanted to break away from the NRA back in the early 90's.
But, I think is necessary for the survival of international shooting here in
this country. Why the NRA?
Reason 1: Money, the NRA has the big bucks to
properly fund the United States Shooting Team, and the National Championships,
PTO Matches, local and regional matches, and junior shooting programs.
Reason
2: Match structure, for those of you who competed at the NRA US International
Shooting Championship (aka USISC), run by the late D.I. Boyd in the 70's, 80's
and 90's. It is easy to attest that the professionalism, which the NRA brought
to the US shooting championship, was by far superior to that of the more recent
USA Shooting. There is no comparison. The difference is all due to money. The
NRA would send out a staff of individuals to Phoenix (site of the World Shooting
Championships) and Prado Dam (site of the 1984 Olympic Shooting Complex) to run
the USISC. These individuals where an efficient team of NRA employees who then
organized the volunteers. USA Shooting has tried to copy this formula, but due
to lack of money and expense, the costs to run the National Championships have
been passed on to the shooters.
Reason 3: Local Matches, Many bullseye
matches, the bread and butter of the NRA conventional pistol shooting, would run
in conjunction with International Matches. For example, San Diego Pistol Club
would run a monthly match program, where on Saturday all 5 international pistol
disciplines would be fired and on Sunday there was a bullseye match. These types
of matches would draw the Military Teams, which then would attract the Civilian
Shooters. (In the late 80’s it was common to see 30 rapid fire shooters, 40 free
pistol shooters, 40 center fire shooters…. then 3 relays of 40 for the bullseye
match)
In conclusion, the success or failure of international shooting here
in America revolves around money. I believe it will be necessary for the NRA and
USA Shooting to work together to promote international shooting. The a goal to
increase participation in international shooting, which will then cause scores
to increase, which will then increase the medal count at the Olympics and World
Championships. Then and only then will, the shooting sports will see more
funding from the US International Olympic Committee, which is where the present
focus of USA Shooting is today. Without shooters, there are no matches, no
scores, no medals, no USIOC funding, no USA Shooting.
Just something to
think about.
Rgds,Rick Eickhoff
Posted by Bruce Martindale on October 18, 2001 at 13:00:32:
This may have
been addressed by someone else, if so, my apologies.
I shot RF for the first
time this year. It was fun but waaaay too slow. We had about 10 shooters for the
state games tryout. It took over 6 hours to get everyone thru two separate 30
shot strings. Meanwhile everyone else is waiting. A " range appointment" to get
in and get out quickly would help.
Need to reduce equipment needs: most
folks willing to try do not own a space gun. best regards
Posted by Matt VDW on October 18, 2001 at 15:08:25:
Lack of range
facilities is a big reason. Access to any sort of range is an issue for many
shooters and finding one that will allow a single shooter to use multiple
"lanes" for practice is even harder. At most ranges, the rule is one target at a
time per shooter, which makes practicing a five target series impossible.
Posted by susan on October 18, 2001 at 15:42:38:
My club holds a Rapid
Fire event once a month. I enjoy rapid fire quite a bit. The only negative
comment that I've heard about it is the waiting time. One local club - DCPA -
holds registered Rapid competition but only one person can shoot at a time. That
equates to a lot of "hanging around"!
Posted by Dean on October 18, 2001 at 19:20:41:
last wednesday i saw
Micky Fowler and John Pride trying out rapid fire at my club in
Sydney...apparently Micky has been asked to give it a try when he gets back to
the United States. They both loved the way there is no recoil..light
trigger...etc...they had big smiles on!! also. good to see lots of response to
this posting..
enjoy,Dean
Posted by JP O'Connor on October 19, 2001 at 01:46:15:
Eric has invited a
number of the very top IPSC/PPC/Action style shooters to the OTC this month to
expose them to the RF event to see if they are interested in it and to see how
they perform in it. Two weeks ago, I briefed one of the invitees on the RF
event. He felt like he would take to it rather quickly. If I had been able to
borrow a gun for him when he was here in town, I would have had him try it at
Wolf Creek. How will he and the others do? We shall see! (I bet they do really
well and enjoy it.)
Posted by Stan Pace on October 19, 2001 at 14:32:54:
There was a story
floating around in IPSC circles after the 1980 Olympics that Mickey Fowler (one
of the greatest shooters this country has ever produced) had tried to make the
Olympic team in RF. The rumor was he missed it by only a few points. In the late
'70's and early '80's, he was an awesome shooter.
I have no idea if this
story is accurate or not, but I believe it Mickey focused on RF for a while, he
would be a formidable competitor in this event.
Posted by Nev Cross on October 18, 2001 at 21:11:22:
The big problem with
rapid fire matches is the time it takes to complete a match. If there are say 10
shooters turning up at a club for a rapid fire match, it would take approx. 3
hours for the 5 relays. This means that every shooter has to sit around for over
2 hours doing nothing. The average club shooter therefore does not shoot rapid,
and so does not purchase a rapid fire pistol, the discipline becomes "
forgotten" at club level. Elite shooters who have access to private training
facilities don't have a problem but at club level the discipline is just not
practical.
Posted by JP O'Connor on October 19, 2001 at 01:55:25:
Hi John,
We are
in the process of working to keep Wolf Creek open... if fully successful (good
progress in last 48 hours), I will have a turning 5 target 10m machine up and
running so that folks can get a feel for the RF and Std events with a 5 shot air
pistol. (At least 3 of us own one.) It will be interesting to see what, if any,
effect this has on getting people interested in RF. Of course, the 25m range
would be operational and we try to arrange for folks to try the events with
borrowed guns. Even if Wolf Creek closes, I will get the machine set up
somewhere in Atlanta.
Speaking of borrowing guns and introducing new
participants... I will be training at the OTC (AP & FP) at the end of this
month for 4 days... maybe you can introduce me to RF with the pistol that you
are going to make Bill shoot with in November? It is one of the few events I
have never fired.
That November match ought to be interesting... you
doing free and Bill doing rapid! :-) Have fun with it!
"Feel Center!"
-JP
Posted by Mark P. on October 20, 2001 at 01:05:37:
I'm workin' on it! I'm
still getting left-handed grips made for my OSP. Once that's done, add me to the
list. I'm surprised more shooters with an IPSC background don't get in to Rapid
Fire. Most IPSC shooters would probably consider all but the 4 sec. string time
limits to be generous! Part of the problem I see is no place to shoot. I'm in
Maryland (DC area) and the closest RF PTOs to me are in upstate NY and Atlanta.
Posted by Stan Pace on October 22, 2001 at 11:58:30:
As a former IPSC
shooter who thought the transistion to RF would be easy, for me, it was not.
Sure, 4 seconds seems like all day for a seasoned IPSC shooter. The hard part is
hitting only 9's and 10's on that string.
I felt like I should have been able
to clean the 8 and 6 second strings. I found I simply could not shoot straight
enough when I first tried RF. So, I started with AP to fix that problem and
never went back to RF
Posted by Mark P. on October 23, 2001 at 00:33:13:
Well, I guess I
probably am a little too over confident, but 6-8 sec. to hit a 4 inch (give or
take) bull just doesn't sound that hard; heck, one would think you'd never shoot
anything lower than a 9. I've got to admit that 4 sec. string sounds kind of
tough. I guess I'll probably have to find out the hard way when my OSP comes
back from Dick Horton Custom Grips. :)
Posted by R.M. on October 23, 2001 at 09:44:06:
This could just be a
typo, but you have 5 bulls to hit in the time period.
Posted by Mark P. on October 23, 2001 at 12:21:39:
Yeah, I know. But
figuring about 1 sec. to bring the gun up and get off the first shot, then
allowing for over a full second to get each of the remaining 4 targets to fire a
shot (6 sec. string) sounds kind of generous. For comparison, good IPSC shooters
can draw from a holster and fire a shot in about 1.0 sec.; world class guys can
probably push into 0.7 sec. For target to target times (assuming same separation
as RF targets), good IPSC guys can probably acquire and fire with about 0.5 sec.
shot-to-shot times; world class guys could probably drop it to 0.35 sec. or so.
Granted, the targets are definitely larger, but the extra time needed for good
IPSC shooters to fire an accurate shot isn't much. . .probably tenths of a
second.
It just seems that most people get the impression that all IPSC
shooters spray'n'pray, but that isn't the case. For a good view of this check
out who wins the Masters pistol competitions (combines IPSC, Bullseye, and
silhouette styles). I'd bet Rob Leatham and Doug Koenig would probably be able
to put up extremely respectable scores in RF.
I'll be content with just not
embarrassing myself.
Posted by R.M. on October 23, 2001 at 12:45:49:
Another consideration is
the fact that RF is shot one handed, with iron sights.
I'm not saying that
you guys definitely wouldn't excel at the game, just that there's more
differences between the two matches than a lot of people are considering.
It'll definitely be interesting to see how they make out when they go to the
OTC.
Posted by prough on October 20, 2001 at 13:22:01:
Here in Southern
California I aware of only one sactioned match that has RP (Chino). This match
is on the the first Sunday of each Month. I ran SP and RP match at our local
club for apprx one year. Only three of four SP shooters and one or two RP
shooters. Issues are 1) We need to have sufficient number of shooters (minimum
4) to be able to hold a match. Since rangetime for our local club is at a
premium. If there is sufficient number of SP/standard or RP shooters in Southern
California I'd be willing request range time to run such a match at Escondido
Fish and Game in Escondido, Ca. Note: this would be a non-sactioned match
(reason: if sactioned all shooters would need to be members of USA shooting).
Posted by Steve Swartz on October 21, 2001 at 12:04:00:
John (and all):
How transferrable do you think other RF disciplines are to the UIT RF
discipline? For example, do Bullseye or IPSC or Bianchi style RF skills really
translate into UIT RF at all?
How big of a transition would a BE shooter
need to make, for example? Is there some disagreement over this?
I've never
even tried UIT RF . . . but it looks fascinating (from what I read in Skanaker's
book)!
Steve
Posted by Claudio on October 26, 2001 at 02:16:22:
Comments from BC
Canada:
We all know that bullseye shooting of any type is in decline. I am
President of the BC Handgun Association and I am trying hard to get it revived,
especially the ISSF five gun event. We give a break to shooters that shoot all
five guns; we have an individual price per event and a discounted price, for as
we say "across the board".
As for guns, all you need is an air pistol, a
.22lr standard pistol and a centerfire pistol. You can shoot all five events,
maybe not competitively but gets you into the game. One shooter mentioned, that
the other events were more of a stress release. We can specialize later but for
now we should encourage all new shooters to buy just three guns, we need to get
them into good quality used ones for now.
As for training, for RF, there were
a few good suggestions for live practice and I can add one more. I have a tape
for rapid fire shooting, (dry firing only of course :) and it tells you the
distance to stand depending on the size of TV you have. It is no loner available
and I can't get a hold of the original producer here in Canada. You can tape a
real good club or National match and calculate the distance from your
TV.
This will keep you in form and timing.
As for ranges, now we have a
problem, when more ranges are closing as memberships falls or lack of money
keeps them going.
For Rapid Fire, the lighting system sounds real nice but
you'd better have a late shot detecting system. I love shooting rapid fire but
not when someone shoots late and beats me by a few points when you know (or
think) they missed, it’s a hard way to loose. The turning target system may be
too expensive but I came up with an idea while reading all these posts.
We
need the three middle targets stationary and have the first and last targets
interchangeable, depending if you are right handed or left handed. The first
target would have a light and the last target would be turning, all you want to
detect is for skid shoots or misses. If interchanging targets is too much to
handle or you have extra money, have the first or last targets turning. I would
like to hear from someone, what price difference there would be for a full light
system with late shoot detector vs. my idea.
The other problem as mentioned
is length of time for the match. The ISSF has made it easier for us now, all
shooters start at the same time. If someone can get that target system going as
I was trying to invent as mentioned, we can have more bays. Instead of having 2
or 4 shooters, we can have 8 or 12 going at the same time, it will be great.
This brings up another problem, volunteers to help score and patch to make it
run smoothly. We should get the cadets or scouts etc. to help; we need more
volunteers as well.
We all have our work cut out for us to get things back
up to where they once were. Lets try to get new shooters into the five gun ISSF
sport. Lets get them the best three guns to start to shoot ISSF and NRA. The
main thing is teaching them the fundamentals and the fun of shooting all kinds
of disciplines. Let them decide what they want to shoot or what to specialize
in.
For those in the position to plan, modify or change ranges, lets get the
best and least expensive range going (target system etc.) and share the
knowledge. Lets get more people into the sport before the few of us that are
left scattered across the world or this big continent get all burnt out.
We
all have to band together, get the news out, have fun shoots and recruit. We
need to link all clubs to a common news and communication system. In BC I
learned there are 150 ranges, I have to find out where the hell they are all at.
Then get our newsletter to them and recruit new pistol shooters.
Any
comments or other ideas others can share? Lets do it! All across North America!
The World! :)
Thanks Claudio
Sponsored by Pilkington Competition Equipment