Patrick Sweeney Posted October 15, 2001 Share Posted October 15, 2001 We have two problems, keeping shooters interested in shooting, and getting spectators interested in watching. We can't go after sponsors (even stuff shooters use) if there aren't any spectators to see the sponsors logos. Luring shooters means value for money. Forget the prize table, cut the entry fee and give the shooters fun courses. Our club stopped paying prize money years ago, and our matches are bigger than ever. (The extra ranges for more stages sure helped.) Time plus scoring IS comstock scoring. On some stages shooting a single "C" hurts your score too much, so you have to shoot all "A" hits. On other stages, just getting two hits on paper is all you need, provided you shoot at warp speed. We can adjust the time added (keeping it simple, none of this "A C hit is a plus .473 seconds, while a D is plus 1.79 seconds")so it reflects the general scaling and standigns of a comstock match. Make it simple and shooters will love you. As for luring spectators, they want action, There must be running they can see (few vision barriers to the spectators) lots of steel, and targets without heads. Yea, yea, I know all the aguments about losing our roots, but check what the roots are. Those of you who have one can pull down "Cooper on Handguns" and check the Colonel himself: "Provided the target is reasonably relevant, and all competitors have an equal opportunity to engage, the actual target design itself doesn't matter." We lose the heads, and a whole bunch of otherwise outraged viewers could be hooked. I live in a very Liberal town, and have had people take a step back when they find out I write about guns for a living. For the most part, they don't care about magazine capacity, hollowpoints or rapid-fire shooting. "Black guns" give them pause, but targets with heads give them apoplexy. If we shoot splatter-paint guns and use headless targets, a whole lot of them wouldn't give a squat about us, and wouldn't generate a protest. Then we could start talking to Miller and Ford et al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 15, 2001 Share Posted October 15, 2001 I clearly see Patricks point. I might be a bit off topic, but I am flatly against changing the targets to make them more politically correct. I think we have a duty to stay true. It might be a harder road for us to take. We will have to continue to educated those that can be educated. There is a certain reality to life that many will never understand. Lets not let them dictate to us. Lets show them the "truth" about life. Targets have heads (and , in real life, faces). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted October 15, 2001 Share Posted October 15, 2001 Patrick, give us an exampel or two of a *spectator friendly* shooting discipline. By this I mean one that a) *lots* of people attend (you are free to define *lots of* yourself) and one that attrackts significant numbers of non-shooters (others than family and friends of shooters). Sorta like "let's go down to the range and watch the IPSC match" as opposed to "let's go down to the race track and watch the NASCAR race". Maybe then I'll understand better what you mean. My personal opinion is that we are fooling ourselves if we are hoping to ever be *spectator friendly*. IPSC or any weak resemblance of it has never made the cut for either one of these two criteria (my definition of *lots of* is a couple of thousand, and that's pretty low, isn't it? No IPSC event in the US ever made it... --Detlef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted October 15, 2001 Share Posted October 15, 2001 Just a few thoughts. 1) There's nothing wrong with keeping the heads on the targets, if you want "the sport" to remain at a grass roots level. 2) Unfortunately, "the sport" will never be big, meaning attracting a large number of spectators, thereby sponsors, unless it gets on TV. (Real TV, not at 3:00 AM, on an obscure cable channel.) 3) The sport will never get on TV with heads on the targets. So the question becomes - what does "the sport" want. I don't think IPSC or USPSA wants to "be on TV." The only way it could ever happen is for someone with an incredible amount of cash/time/backers to start a completely new sport. If the cash is there, it will get serious. (Meaning the sport would attract heavy hitters.) be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Thompson Posted October 15, 2001 Share Posted October 15, 2001 This whole head/no head target got some serious debate on the USPSA page a couple of years ago. I agree that we shouldn't try to change things to avoid trouble with the anti-gun groups because it would just delay the enevitable. On the other hand I think an exception should be made when it comes to using targets w/o heads. Clearly in this instance, although not fool proof, it would have definite benefit that out weighed the symbolistic cost. I don't think shooting is a spectator sport or ever will be. I don't like to watch shooting and I love to compete. Someone who doesn't shoot ain't going to want to watch it. Also I worry that a lot of media exposure can be turned around and used against us in the long run. The VPC has has made viscious anti-gun videos showing kids shooting IPSC and then tried to blame the action shooting sports for the "training" one of the Columbine shooters had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Dunlop Posted October 16, 2001 Share Posted October 16, 2001 Its pretty hard to believe that shooting, and IPSC in particular could never be spectator sports when you concider that millions watch countless frames of snooker and Darts on TV. Those tapes of the Challenge in the early 90's were great viewing, despite Lenny!! The antis already have all the negative propaganda they could want on our sport, the VPC used info from our IPSC Nationals to illustrate its 'Gold Medal Gunslingers ' report that chocked the Olymipic Committee. I have always explained the sports roots to people, always described its origins in 'combat shooting' always described the various attempts to 'cleanse' the sport as just that and I have never had a negative reaction yet. I mentioned before that I even convinced National News to cover last years Nationals, they followed a competitor through a field course and gave us a minute and a half of prime time coverage. There was no negative response. The Aussies have got rid of stage names and use the headless targets. They no longer design practical 'scenarios', instead more abstract challenges, despite this and some of the best shooters in the world they are faced with continuing calls for bans on handgun ownership. Publicity will save the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted October 16, 2001 Share Posted October 16, 2001 "A spectator-friendly shooting sport." Hmm lets see about some designs here. How about the Steel Challenge, with some twists? All plates are falling plates, with multiple plate arrays and multiple shooting boxes for each stage? Or, a single shooting area, but hard cover non-falling steel to mask the shooters view (the cameras could be a few feet higher, seeing all) so the shooter has to move within the shooting area to see all the plates? Sensors on a plate rack, and until all the plates are down the window/door/whatever doesn't move, preventing going to the next plate rack/array? Add one or two paper targets (at least on the stages intended for the viewing audience) of the "Classic" or Bianchi style, and add .1 or .2 seconds for non-A hits. The plate-total method (maximum number of plates in a par time) would also work, but you can't mix plate-total and time-plus scoring in the same match without using some sort of conversion factor. Arrange the shooters so the top dogs know the scores they have to beat, and spread over three or four squads so the last stage has several squads of suspense for the final scores. Portable signs keep the spectators up to date, shooter by shooter, and the announcers (for tv) can have the whole thing on a spreadsheet that lets them know standings. The Steel Challenge has some of these elements, as does the Bianchi Cup and IPSC. None can be modified enough and still look like the old match, so a new organization would be needed. We know how, we just need some Daddy Warbucks to jump-start it. (Now, if I win the Big Game Lotto, 200+ Millions dollars worth.....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted October 16, 2001 Share Posted October 16, 2001 Spectator-friendly: Shoot-n-C type IPSC targets. The kind that reveals a larger-than-bullet-diameter bright yellow splotch around the bullet hole. They even have pasters which do the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted October 16, 2001 Share Posted October 16, 2001 I'm with you Pat and Erik, I've thought of many things like that over the years myself. Also, I think it would be a bonus to have a really colorful, experienced commentator, like myself, giving the play by play. I actually feel like you could get people interested who had no experience with firearms. Daddy, where are you? be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 16, 2001 Share Posted October 16, 2001 Lots of people watch golf. There is downhill skiiing, etc. on T.V. Brian & Angus...Ipsc commentators. (Edited by Flexmoney at 6:26 pm on Oct. 16, 2001) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Capizzo Posted October 17, 2001 Author Share Posted October 17, 2001 O.K. So now I've got to televise Area 4! I'm gonna get right on that. Come to think of it, Johnny Rowland ( a local cable show I think, I don't have cable or satelite) filmed some of the Texas Open. But I need to contact ESPN right? Or to get on Network T.V. we'll pitch it as "reality based". Thats all the rage now I hear. Won't our IDPA friends be jealous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Capizzo Posted October 17, 2001 Author Share Posted October 17, 2001 What was I thinking. I forgot about cheerleaders. We'll need cheerleaders in inappropriate costumes. Or inappropriate cheerleaders in any costume. Any volunteers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 17, 2001 Share Posted October 17, 2001 Don't I remember someone from the forum coaching the Swedish Bikini Team models? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted October 17, 2001 Share Posted October 17, 2001 Now you guys are working! be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Capizzo Posted October 17, 2001 Author Share Posted October 17, 2001 Brian, Can you shoot in a speedo? We've got to think about rating here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooter Grrl Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 Just don't ask me to be a cheerleader - It's very difficult to shoot with pompoms! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 No speedos please! Under dressed gun bears and brass pickers wanted Must be female, No transtesticles need apply! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 Quote: from Chriss Grube on 9:17 pm on Oct. 17, 2001 Under dressed gun bears and brass pickers wanted Must be female! Chriss, Then what's Shooter Grrl going to look at? Or is this a ploy to distract all of the guys so she can win the match? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 OK, so we run the match on two cable venues, ESPN and HotTv. On ESPN we have all the shooters except for the Special Teams. On HotTv we run the match and show the stages of the Swedish Bikini Team, the XFL Cheerleaders, the Chippendale Thong Team and Retired Olympic Gymnasts Speedo Team. Have I left anyone out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooter Grrl Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 I'm happy with that one Patrick, how DID you know that I drool over gymnasts :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 Nik, She's not in my class anymore so bribes are welcome! I figure all the women will be watching you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooter Grrl Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 So Chriss, ya got bumped didja? Good job!!!!! Did you skip over B class and go straight to A???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 Chriss, Only the ones who believe size matters...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 No A, yet just up to "B". I got the card and the letter from Nationals yesterday in the mail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 Congragulations Chriss!! That's great. Next stop A Class! 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