Joe Duke
Active member
I believe we have been asking the wrong question or perhaps considering the wrong solution when we address modifying the hunter class rifle requirements.
We have been discussing perhaps modifying the scope requirements or rifle weight to take advantage of more modern variable scopes and thus overcome the fact that there is no suitable 6 power rifle scope currently in production. And this does bear merit. All the scopes currently in use are probably 20 or more years old and are subject to breakage just as any scope is. Additionally, as far as I know, there is only one business doing repairs on them. Their stock of parts must be old as well. One day, all this equipment will be used up. Whether soon or later, I cannot say. But it does have a finite lifetime.
However, the larger question in my mind is how to ensure that new shooters join the Hunter class in order to keep it as a viable competition. It is the older and more venerable of the two classes that we currently shoot and in my mind, it certainly is worth preserving and growing.
But, changing the rules or equipment requirements will not preserve the class unless we figure out how to attract new shooters to the class. Currently, there are just not enough participants in the class. At the recent score nationals, we had only 46 shooters compete in the Hunter class. This has been close to the average participation for the last few years. When I look at the Gulf Coast region, I count 13 Hunter shooters who attended the Nationals this year. Three of those were shooters who built or acquired a Hunter class rifle specifically for the Nationals competition.
Further, in all the discussion to date, many have voiced the same opinion that they would like to see more ranges and matches in their area.
Now, attracting new shooters to Benchrest has been beat to death in recent years with it seems no real consensus on how to get more people into the sport. It just seems like there are no good answers. But, Mr. Randy Robinett set me to thinking recently. Reviewing the Nationals, he proudly pointed out that folks in his region had taken all of the top five placings in the Two Gun Agg. Hmmm. Stirred my competitive side a bit and so I looked at the Gulf Coast results. Not bad. Our top five took 9th,10th,11th,12th, and 17th. But clearly outclassed by their performance. And that set me to thinking about the origins of score shooting way back when.
To boil it all down, there was an organization / group called the Trans Continental League. In a nutshell, when each club held their scheduled matches, they submitted their top five scores as their team of that match to the TCL which then tabulated all the scores and issued a publication showing who won what that match. Mr. Robinett and others can supply more details but the gist is a regular competition at the club level to get and hold the interest of shooters. Combine that with a mentor program whereby new shooters can be introduced to the game of score shooting and we might be able to bring back some of the deep interest that score shooting enjoyed in years past.
So my idea is to form a league like structure of local clubs to participate in regularly scheduled Score matches with results to be submitted to a central collection point. The scores then could be tabulated, winners determined, and results posted for all to see and enjoy. This organization would not be affiliated with any of the major groups but would be open to club participation from all clubs sponsoring score matches shot on common NBRSA or IBS style score targets. Clubs would also conduct the matches following either IBS or NBRSA rule of competition.
The TCL relied on written score submission and written publication of the results. In today’s world, the scores could be submitted electronically and all results published electronically. Additionally, this need not be limited to Hunter class. If the number of shooters were there, we could contest Hunter, VFS, and possibly Two Gun. Just have to figure out what the rules are and how it could be administered.
Eventually, if we build enough interest, then we may have to look at Hunter rifle requirements in order to make equipment readily available to everyone. That would be a good thing.
What say you? Any merit to any of this?
We have been discussing perhaps modifying the scope requirements or rifle weight to take advantage of more modern variable scopes and thus overcome the fact that there is no suitable 6 power rifle scope currently in production. And this does bear merit. All the scopes currently in use are probably 20 or more years old and are subject to breakage just as any scope is. Additionally, as far as I know, there is only one business doing repairs on them. Their stock of parts must be old as well. One day, all this equipment will be used up. Whether soon or later, I cannot say. But it does have a finite lifetime.
However, the larger question in my mind is how to ensure that new shooters join the Hunter class in order to keep it as a viable competition. It is the older and more venerable of the two classes that we currently shoot and in my mind, it certainly is worth preserving and growing.
But, changing the rules or equipment requirements will not preserve the class unless we figure out how to attract new shooters to the class. Currently, there are just not enough participants in the class. At the recent score nationals, we had only 46 shooters compete in the Hunter class. This has been close to the average participation for the last few years. When I look at the Gulf Coast region, I count 13 Hunter shooters who attended the Nationals this year. Three of those were shooters who built or acquired a Hunter class rifle specifically for the Nationals competition.
Further, in all the discussion to date, many have voiced the same opinion that they would like to see more ranges and matches in their area.
Now, attracting new shooters to Benchrest has been beat to death in recent years with it seems no real consensus on how to get more people into the sport. It just seems like there are no good answers. But, Mr. Randy Robinett set me to thinking recently. Reviewing the Nationals, he proudly pointed out that folks in his region had taken all of the top five placings in the Two Gun Agg. Hmmm. Stirred my competitive side a bit and so I looked at the Gulf Coast results. Not bad. Our top five took 9th,10th,11th,12th, and 17th. But clearly outclassed by their performance. And that set me to thinking about the origins of score shooting way back when.
To boil it all down, there was an organization / group called the Trans Continental League. In a nutshell, when each club held their scheduled matches, they submitted their top five scores as their team of that match to the TCL which then tabulated all the scores and issued a publication showing who won what that match. Mr. Robinett and others can supply more details but the gist is a regular competition at the club level to get and hold the interest of shooters. Combine that with a mentor program whereby new shooters can be introduced to the game of score shooting and we might be able to bring back some of the deep interest that score shooting enjoyed in years past.
So my idea is to form a league like structure of local clubs to participate in regularly scheduled Score matches with results to be submitted to a central collection point. The scores then could be tabulated, winners determined, and results posted for all to see and enjoy. This organization would not be affiliated with any of the major groups but would be open to club participation from all clubs sponsoring score matches shot on common NBRSA or IBS style score targets. Clubs would also conduct the matches following either IBS or NBRSA rule of competition.
The TCL relied on written score submission and written publication of the results. In today’s world, the scores could be submitted electronically and all results published electronically. Additionally, this need not be limited to Hunter class. If the number of shooters were there, we could contest Hunter, VFS, and possibly Two Gun. Just have to figure out what the rules are and how it could be administered.
Eventually, if we build enough interest, then we may have to look at Hunter rifle requirements in order to make equipment readily available to everyone. That would be a good thing.
What say you? Any merit to any of this?
