Windmills & Stars & Bubble Yum

[Sherwyn]

When I started looking at this, I probably agreed with a lot of the "not the same for everyone" theory.

But as I read the comment about why it is not fair, I had to ask myself, how is this any different from almost any other prop.

A drop turn activated by a door, can be opened slowly or fast - definitely changes the difficulty of the following shots. Drop turn activated by popper will change with shot placement, not to mention the amount of change possible when the shooter is capable of double or even triple tapping the popper to create the timing he wants.

Or I could even twist this to - how is it the same for challenge for everyone when I (6'4") have to kneel in the same 2' box as someone 5'6".

Everyone is different, different stages, targets, challenges then become different for everyone.

If we wanted everything the same all the time, guess we could only shoot steel challange type matches.

Still not going to say I like Stars or windmills, but another challenge "I" need to overcome. They are very intimidating to newcomers, but I would guess that most aspects of USPSA matches can be as well.

[Ron Ankeny]

Alex:

I give up, you win.

[Chriss Grube]

Come on Ron don't be a quiter, think of the children and push on! Let's all have a poll and vote if Ron should surrender or continue on for with the good fight for the little Johnnies out there. I vote go on!

[chuckbradley]

I dont have a problem with a prop such as the star if it presents the same rpoblem to every shooter and it works. Now that being said.

The star doesnt work all the time. The plates can get knocked off one pin and be left hanging on the other. The plate can fall knocking other plastes off without being hit by the shooter. The plates can come off and jam the wheel. I have seen all this happen more than once.

As far as presenting the same problem. We all know weather can have an affect on the rate of spin. The temperature on the steel and grease and the wind resistance. Although those are things we deal with in the game other factors are the weight of the plates and location of those plates upon the start. If you mark each arm and put the same plate on each arm every time and start with the arms in the same position everytime for the most part it will react equally with the same stimuli from each shooter, of course stimuli will be different for each shooter.

I beleive that if it reacts the same for each shoot given the same stimuli then it presents the same rpoblem for each shooter but the prop has to be made precise and be operated precise to achieve these results.

Given all these considerations I personally choose to have the opinion that they do not have a place in any match larger than a local match or shall I say in a competition we want to be fair. Now for fun lets bring em out because they are a blast to shoot and give plenty of opputunities to rib and get ribbed by your buddies.

[Wakal]

Darn, I hate it when one side in a perfectly entertaining, reasoned, discussion gives up. I can't shoot (competition) here, so all I can do is talk about shooting (sigh). Chuck, Sherwyn, and Liota hit my main points again anyway so I'm extraneous to the discussion anyway

Thank goodness for Airsoft; my slothlike draw is marginally less slothlike

Hmmm...I wonder if I can build an Airsoft Texas Star copy out of cardboard boxes and Duct Tape...

Alex

[Liota]

Chuck,

Terry clears up the problem of the arms/plates being inconsistent by weighing and balancing them during production. Linda and Terry both told me about it on separate occasions. The arms and plates are truely interchangeable on THAT Star. Since the Star does have a normal stop point, simply put two pieces of tape, one on the center and one on a reference point. Line them up every time and you are in business.

Alex,

Damn. Damn. Damn. You get to play airsoft???? You lucky dog. I get NOTHING. Pfftt... Darn.

Liota

[Steve J]

Konkapot,

I think you're ignoring the Fun Factor. A lot of new shooters find the Texas Star a fun target array to shoot. It's different from anything they've ever seen before. The best way to encounter the Texas Star is in a non-threatening environment. We put them in our little fundraisers for Crimestoppers. Non-Shooters and Shooters alike enjoy them.

For the record, the first time I shot a Texas Star, it took me 3+ magazines to clear it. Friends were loading magazines for me while I shot. The first time I shot one clean 5-for-5 I asked Linda Ashton if it was broken.

Liota

Liota

+1

I run a club that consists mostly of D minus, minus, minus shooters. We bought a Star from Terry last October. The first couple of months I used it as a side match. They all loved it. Then I started using it in scored stages. They still love it, and what's more, THEY ARE ALL GETTING BETTER AT SHOOTING IT!

[XRe]

The star doesnt work all the time.

All of those things should be considered range equipment failures, and as previously discussed, the ROs in question on those stages blew it in not stopping the shooter... Other common props fail in different ways, too, for various reasons - we don't stop using them due to their pitfalls, we just do our best to make sure they work consistently, etc...

I beleive that if it reacts the same for each shoot given the same stimuli then it presents the same rpoblem for each shooter but the prop has to be made precise and be operated precise to achieve these results.

I don't know exactly who's star we have at our club - but it's a very well made prop, on a good bearing, etc. I agree that a poorly made prop isn't going to function right - especially one like the star. And if it's not operated appropriately, or allowed to operated in a "failed" state, that's also a problem...

[JFD]

Range equipment failure covers any star problems. I agree a crappy, failure-prone star shouldn't be at a major match, but problems have been rare in my limited experience.

A new shooter can easily ask anyone how to shoot the star and get the right answer. I always asked how to shoot any new prop I saw at a match, and answers were always freely given.

I can hit what I'm aiming at and cleaned the first 9 or 10 stars I shot as a beginner. If we have to dumb down stages to account for crappy shooters, then I don't see that we have much hope of the sport continuing. Those who will quit because they couldn't handle a star can't have much of a future in USPSA anyway.

[smokshwn]

Chuck,

We have a member in our club who routinely shoots his deparment issued loads in L10. He shoots a SS .45 so I would guess his pf easily hits 190-195. Yesterday he shot the first plate of a plate rack and two other plates went down with it. This isn't a rare occurrence and it is usually met with a little ribbing.

However following your logic in your last post regarding props not working, would the plate rack now be grouped with the star and its use be avoided?

Craig

[Flexmoney]

Any moving prop or apparatus that holds props has to be well maintained.

I know, at the muddy Ohio match a few years back, I was running a stage that had two drop-turners in it. With the weather, it was a stuggle to ensure those turners stayed consistent throught the match. The activating poppers wanted to sink into the mud, the activating cables would get caked with mud (getting heavier, wanting to hold the pooper up), the bases of the drop-turners wanted to sink in the mud (tilting the DT's a bit sideways), wet cardboard changes the weight, bags change the action, ect.

Pimpin' ain't easy.

I think I would have had an easier time keeping a good Texas Star running.

[chuckbradley]

Chuck,

We have a member in our club who routinely shoots his deparment issued loads in L10. He shoots a SS .45 so I would guess his pf easily hits 190-195. Yesterday he shot the first plate of a plate rack and two other plates went down with it. This isn't a rare occurrence and it is usually met with a little ribbing.

However following your logic in your last post regarding props not working, would the plate rack now be grouped with the star and its use be avoided?

Craig

I will let you answer that yourself. If extra plates fell then did it operate properly? IF one shooters only has to shoot 4 plates while the other guy shooting had to shoot 6 is that the same problem being presented to each shooter?

I am all for props since they add to the fun of shooting but in competition matches they must work properly or not be used.

[Shooter Grrl]

Personalizing the analogy with your kid's name was bush league. BTW, both kids are in the same class and taking the same test because of the No Child Left Behind Act.

I am blaming this whole mess on Ron Avery. I refuse to take responsibility for my own actions.

I am blaming this whole mess on Ron Avery. I refuse to take responsibility for my own actions

Oh Gawd Ron - I'm running out of room in my signature - but this is going in there somewhere!

[smokshwn]

Chuck,

I think you and I are very much of the same mind on this, my only point was to show that even the very common props can become "carnivalesque" in nature. I don't have any qualms about shooting anything as long as the presentation is consistent.

Take care, Craig

[chuckbradley]

Do i hear an echo in hear?

[caspian38]

It speeds up if you shoot slow or miss that's the problem . I get to shoot at 5 or six plates that are barley moving if at all. The next shooter who happens to shoot slower gets to shoot a whirling monster. It would be like moving a target further back every time you missed. I think they are a great prop but something in the scoring needs to change so that a poor shooter is not penalized... If they were no penalty mike's as a poor shooter you can

just say forget it when it starts whirling out of control and not lose that many points over all(20-25) and a good shooter will still have to get that 20-25 points to win. maybe ONE mike penalty for the whole rack. just to keep anyone from skipping the last plate on purpose.

C-38

Almost every other target we use is SLOWING down or doing the same action for every shooter even if it is harder for some than others.

Ron shouldn't give up especially when he is Right although instead of not using them fix them ! make it fair ... like windmills could be up to speed before they could be engaged by placing them in another array from the activator. that way the slower you shot the slower it would be going when you got there but the masters would still be looking at a whirling monster.

[Flexmoney]

I'm not sure that I get the "don't penalize poor shooting"...which is the same as "don't reward good shooting." Isn't that what we do...we compete, right?

We have a rule in Section 1 of the rulebook (stage design section) that addresses difficulty. A smart match director will know his/her customers well enough to keep the match/stages at a difficulty level that is appropriate to their abilities.

We want to be fair. We want to be fun. We want to be social. But, we are talking about shooting competitions with a basis in "practical", right?

What is practical/tactical? How many opinions on that are there? How many blades of grass are in the typical lawn?

[diehli]

What is practical/tactical? How many opinions on that are there? How many blades of grass are in the typical lawn?

And who really gives a f@#$ about any of those answers (other than for being able to say they were "right")?

I read the Avery article and got all set to write a response. Then it occured to me I really don't care. I like my game the way it is. If he and Ara put on a match based on the "philosophy" he espouses in his article, I probably wouldn't show up. It's as simple as that.

[mikegot38]

I no longer have much fear of the star but I am not thrilled that I get to shoot one as my first stage at Double Tap. And that is after beginning with “both hands in YET TO BE DETERMINED SUBSTANCE with Palms Flat on bottom of Sink…”

I have the luxury of being able to practice on a Terry Ashton star but I have shot at several poor imitations of Terry’s design that required numerous re-shoots. Even the real deal must be clean and lubricated to get consistent results.

New shooters usually can take the star if they get a little coaching. And if we want to encourage the new guys to come back we ought to be helping out with those sorts of basics.

David C

A well maiintained Star such as the one the fine people at Area 8 used is not difficult to shoot if you pay attention to what you are doing and shoot it logically. I was terrified when I first saw it but had no trouble witn it.

[Liota]

What is practical/tactical? How many opinions on that are there? How many blades of grass are in the typical lawn?

And who really gives a f@#$ about any of those answers (other than for being able to say they were "right")?

I read the Avery article and got all set to write a response. Then it occured to me I really don't care. I like my game the way it is. If he and Ara put on a match based on the "philosophy" he espouses in his article, I probably wouldn't show up. It's as simple as that.

Cullen, You're my hero, you big ape!

Liota

[Singlestack]

If this sport was easy I bet very few of us would be interested.

If a new shooter gets his lunch eaten by a prop (I have had mine eaten more than I care to admit) and it hurts their feelings so bad they don't come back, I bet they are not the type of person who would be driven to figure out how to do it anyway.

[EricW]

[With all due respect to Ron and Ara - because I do know and respect them both]

Before I head back out again to the shop to work, I'd really like to know the following:

What part of knowing how to lead a moving target is "impractical?"

From the few times I've shot a TX*, that seems to be the key skill: shooting the leading edge of the plate generates solid hits. For all the griping over the star, I could probably write a PhD dissertation as to why the TX* is a more valid shooting test than virtually all of the other moving targets used in the sport.

If the gripe-a-thon is going to be over realism, then allow me to throw down the gauntlet and challenge the tacticians to show me "real world" examples of drop turners, swingers (no, not your neighbors), clamshells, beartraps and running man targets that move in perfectly straight line at a constant speed. My "real world" experience is only bird hunting, varmit hunting and clays, but I'm pretty damned sure that the TX* is far more representative of a "real word whactical" shooting challenge than props that work like clock pendulums. In fact, I'm building my own swinger target right now to practice on because I've NEVER seen a swinging anything that I was supposed to shoot at - and probably won't until there's a chimpanzee season.

If we're going to analyze all targets for fairness, then y'all just better buckle your safety tbelts, because I *will* go around with a video camera and a stopwatch to major matches, and I doubt that I'll have to work terribly hard to call into question the "fairness" of almost every dynamic target in the sport. There is so much variation in how targets activate - primarily with poppers that activate other targets - that all the dissing on the TX* is just laughable. If every target has to work EXACTLY the same then somebody had better start writing some standards in the rulebook with regards to target construction and timing tolerances.

I'll start with poppers. If all those have to work the same every time (something I've NEVER seen) - and they SHOULD if they're activating something else - there damned well needs to be a mandate they be hinged into shielded, greasable pillow-block bearings. Should I talk about the platforms on which they rest? I'll bet I can at least double to triple the cost of every target in the sport given enough time.

Plus, I can game the popper activators by deliberately shooting the "head" of the target to speed up the activation of a target coupled to it. When I do that, is the presentation "the same for all shooters?" Hell no. But nobody's raising a ruckus over activators, just the TX* - a target that I feel VERY confident that I can document exhibiting VERY predictable movent when set properly and shot the same manner (when one uses a well-constructed prop).

And for the record, my calculations show there to be 5.134345x10^5 blades of grass in the lawn and that exactly 1 mole of angels can do the Lindy on the head of a pin.

So there. Back to the coal mine...

Edited March 7, 2006 by EricW

[Ron Ankeny]

I could probably write a PhD dissertation as to why the TX* is a more valid shooting test than virtually all of the other moving targets used in the sport.

Is that a figure of speech or are you really that knowledgeable about construct validity of performance assessments? No, I am not trolling, I really want to know if I am misapplying the research.

[EricW]

I could probably write a PhD dissertation as to why the TX* is a more valid shooting test than virtually all of the other moving targets used in the sport.

Is that a figure of speech or are you really that knowledgeable about construct validity of performance assessments? No, I am not trolling, I really want to know if I am misapplying the research.

Ron,

Hyperbole. I have not studied the issue. It was a sarcastic reference to all the nonsense written as to what is and isn't "tactical."

I could also write a PhD dissertation on fractals, chaotic behavior, and the Lyapunov Exponent and their application to IPSC course design. None of it would mean diddly. (Like most PhD dissertations. )

[Vlad]

I've always thought of the TX* (I love that abrev) makes a great simulation of two types of moving targets, one being human heads bobbing and weaving trying to avoid gunfire, the other being headlights of a car trying to run me down. Both react to your shots, good shots making a difference, bad ones making the problem worse.