ima45dv8 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 How do you determine who's sponsored and who's not? You're joking right? If you receive money for your participation, your expenses and fees are paid by someone other than yourself, you wear logos of companies or act as representatives of a sponsor by using their products in return for compensation or other considerations, a member of a company shooting team and on and on. I don't think he's joking at all. I have a good friend who has a Miller Light logo on his shirt....at his own expense....just because he prefers that horse-piss to a decent beer. If I didn't know that in advance, how would I be able to tell he's not a Miller-sponsered shooter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reshoot Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 How do you determine who's sponsored and who's not? You're joking right? If you receive money for your participation, your expenses and fees are paid by someone other than yourself, you wear logos of companies or act as representatives of a sponsor by using their products in return for compensation or other considerations, a member of a company shooting team and on and on. Okay, so I am wearing a shirt that came form Springfield Armory. Across the back it says "Team Springfield". My name is on my chest, and my gun is, of course a Springfield. I speak nothing but Springfield all day long. Now, it is up to you to prove / disprove I am a sponsored shooter. Good luck with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supermoto Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 (edited) How about no special categorizes, no class system. You show up, you shoot. You want to be top (whatever), be HOA. I don't want affirmative action in the work place, why would I want it in USPSA. Edited January 29, 2012 by Supermoto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40S&W Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 I'd like to see USPSA do a post showing how many members belong to each catagory, they have the data. I think this would show some interesting trends about membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha-charlie Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 How about no special categories, no class system. You show up, you shoot. You want to be top (whatever), be HOA. I don't want affirmative action in the work place, why would I want it in USPSA. +1....mostly For the most part I can see getting rid of the categories. Earlier in this thread MarkCo had a really good post about the Ladies category, and I agree with what he said. Shooters like Julie do bring a lot of women into the sport and that's good for USPSA. However, let's not water down accomplishments by declaring someone a National or World Champion because they're in a certain category. If you're the National Production Division Champion that means you finished 1st. Finishing 38th means you finished 38th and should not let you claim to be a National Champion. Of course this is done to help with marketing in order to get more female shooters into the sport, but it's inaccurate. It's a falsehood. We're all on the same score sheets so there can only be one Champion, unless the categories get separated into their own groups. The only reason I use the Lady category as an example is due to that being the one that gets the most attention. I highly doubt there is a Super Senior out there with major sponsorship who appears on shooting shows, magazines and has a webpage touting to be a 8 time Super Senior National Champion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoshidaex Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 How do you determine who's sponsored and who's not? You're joking right? If you receive money for your participation, your expenses and fees are paid by someone other than yourself, you wear logos of companies or act as representatives of a sponsor by using their products in return for compensation or other considerations, a member of a company shooting team and on and on. Not joking. Just because you wear a shirt that has a companies logo on it doesn't mean you're sponsored. I wear a plain shirt because I'm not sponsored. But I have people that support my hobby. How do you as a MD determine I'm sponsored or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Something else to think about: I have a small firearms school where I teach classes in my spare time. As such, when I go to matches I "sponsor" myself by advertising my school, which means that the match fee is a tax write-off. Thus, I'm certainly a "sponsored" shooter. So----I go into the category with the S&W team, Team Glock, and Team Springfield if we are separating sponsored and non-sponsored shooters? Yes, that makes sense. Quite frankly, the sponsored/non-sponsored thing doesn't mean much to me, because it is the person's ability that we measure. Sure, top sponsored shooters get to practice more than I do. Okay, so what? They are better than I am. (Currently. I'm working on it.) If I happen to be in a similar category, the factor that they are "sponsored" doesn't change that---and in the end, the only thing that matters is the score. I must admit, I like the divisions for the Pro-Am, with their "professional" and "amateur" divisions---but that is for the Pro-Am. I see no reason whatsoever to do the same for USPSA matches. I also note that while I like the category ideas for USPSA, I too think they are on a completely different scale compared to the actual ranking/finish placement. After all, how many people advertise that they are the Production Senior National Champion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 I am NOT a sponsored shooter, unless you count the fact that I have a family that gives up time and vacation to allow me to shoot. In fact they work some of the matches and consider it something akin to a vacation. I don't have a logo on my shirt but I have no problem speaking out in favor of a product that I feel is superior. So if I were to someday receive a free pair of glasses some brass, powder or bullets, would I suddenly be a 'Sponsored Shooter' and be subject to some odd new rule and placed into a 'Pro' category? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supermoto Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 we should have a "excuses" category. you can write in any excuse you want next to your name. I'm too old, too young, he's sponsored, she practices more. Then when the scores come out, everyone can congratulate you for doing so well with you handicap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoshidaex Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 we should have a "excuses" category. you can write in any excuse you want next to your name. I'm too old, too young, he's sponsored, she practices more. Then when the scores come out, everyone can congratulate you for doing so well with you handicap Nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 I would say yes. Let match results show ladies against ladies, juniors against juniors, seniors against seniors and so on. But then, to be perfectly honest, I probably take this position because I am a senior. You can do that now. It's just a different set of reports under ezws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Stoeger Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 My personal view is that all categories should be treated equally. The situation we have at the US Nationals is strange and borders on silly. The Women’s category gets put on near parity with the overall results. They get an equal trophy and a “women’s stage win” medal. None of the other categories get anything of the sort. I think we should pump the brakes on the Ladies category. Give one plaque for every 5 participants or whatever the guideline is. That is what every other category gets and it seems appropriate to me. Also, I think LE and Military categories should go. Having a category based on some perceived physical limitation is one thing, but having it based on profession makes no sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA-LEE Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 How about the Fat Ass category? You need a BMI of 35+ to qualify Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 How about the Fat Ass category? You need a BMI of 35+ to qualify I've been trying for several years to entice Mr. Noyes to code in an "Fat, Old, Bald, Ugly, Slow-Guy" division. I think he has the talent and I know I have the credentials. We could call it "FOBUS". (I wonder if that would cause any heartache with patent/copyright infringements?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBoyle Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Now if we could find some manufacturer to sponsor the FOBUS division. I would have no problem if we got rid of the military and law enforcement category, and I still qualify for one of them. The sad fact is that there is very little participation at major matches from them, unless they do not register to be recognized. Getting rid of the class system and just shooting for overall would detract from the sport and cost us a lot of shooters, IMO. Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 I would have no problem if we got rid of the military and law enforcement category, and I still qualify for one of them. The sad fact is that there is very little participation at major matches from them, unless they do not register to be recognized. Some LE do not register as LE because their job require them to work undercover or stay as as anonymous as possible. Consider secret service, air marshals, drug enforcement, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocMedic Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) Hmm I guess I fall in one of those "special" categories ie Military. Yea it's a bit silly I'd admit, I received so many high overall military awards last year in conjunction of my high placement, I kinda felt bad. It's one thing if someone from the military just started out, they win a little plack it makes their day. Were as someone like me who takes it a little more seriously then just a hobby might not feel as "genuine" As it once did. But u have to realize that those who(military community) that don't compete in the sport don't really have a true understanding of what it takes to place 1st in a class. But when u say you took high military at an large event, it gives most the idea what it takes to get that type of achomplisment. There have been several times that I present my "high overall military" award to my unit on order to justify why I need to take time off to go shoot these larger matches, presenting them a award that said high overall A class just doesn't mean anything to them. Also I've been asked several times to write up a little something about the shooting sports and how they can improve a soldier readiness and skills for my local PAO's So I don't see it so much as a award I win only for myself, but something I can use to premote the sport outside of our small circle. Edit: iPhone typed, bad grammar expected Edited February 4, 2012 by DocMedic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now