Did you know there has never been a Lady GM?

[ima45dv8]

If there never is a woman GM, I would rather have that than lose the camaraderie, and joy for the sport you gals have, you are a much better example to the world to see than many who are GM (at the cost of everything else.) Keep rockin' Athena, Renee and all you other gals who are a shinning example of what sport should be.

Amen to that. I was on a squad of mostly women at the 2004 Nationals (they could fit only so many of them onto the SuperSquad, and this was the spill over). Because I was travelling with GAPeach I was squadded with them and got invited to the Babes With Bullets banquet that week. I had the pleasure of meeting many of the top female shooters in the sport (and a few of their husbands/boyfriends). Watching their interaction that week made me think more of a large, multi-celled organic entity than individuals competing against each other for the same rewards and prizes. The way they encouraged each other, always trying to pull each other forward was great to witness.

[Flexmoney]

And now for boynty77.....

I have got to assume that you were kidding when you said Jessie's looks would help her make GM. Surely you're not saying that she could some how use her assets to better her placement?! When I was single, I was dating an "M" shooter. And I heard the gossip of "does she think she can sleep her way to an M card." You would never, ever hear that rumor of a male D class shooter dating a lady of higher rank. I quit dating shooters shortly there after because I just got tired of it.

Now don't get me wrong, women like to be appreciated for talent and for looks...No problem. You can tell me I'm gorgeous all day long! But how could it be anything but an insult to say that my rank is related to my looks.... <insert tsk tsk head shaking emoticon here> That would be like saying that <Super Star Male Shooter> only has his GM card because he has cut abs and a...er...um...an impressive piece of equipment.

and now back to the topic....

Carina made the point rather well.

Just in case though...we can (and will) do without any further such comments. - Admin.

[BritinUSA]

I know I've said this before but this whole classification system is just a joke. Take a look at the scores from Nationals, that's really the only valid indicator that we have of national trends in our sport.

In Open

GM scores range from 100% - 25%

M scores range from 89% - 20%

A scores range from 76% - 11%

B scores range from 71% - 26%

C scores range from 56% - 12%

D scores range from 42% - 20%

Look at the low end numbers. GM's and M's scoring 20-25%.

Obviously not everyone gets an opportunity to shoot at Nationals and so the classification system is used to grade shooters. But it simply has no value. The stages we shoot for classifications bear little or no resemblance to most stages shot in Local/Area/National matches therefore the classification system is not indicative of skill level.

Where you finish compared to the best in the world is the ultimate classification system.

This also has an impact on the discussions of Men vs Women in Shooting, you can't compare ability based on a flawed classification system, you can only compare results in major competitions.

To give some idea of this;

The 100m sprint in the Olympics: In 1940 the best time for men was 10.2 and women had 11.6 seconds (difference of 13.73%)

Leap forward 60 years and the best time for men 9.9 and women 10.49 (difference of 6.5%). Over that 60 year period men improved by 3.66% and women improved by 10.58%.

IPSC has been going on for a while but significant numbers of women shooters have not competed in the sport for very long. As the years roll by the scores of women shooters will start to close the gap, there is a trend already starting to develop and some have already mentioned female shooters that are moving closer to the top guys in terms of score.

It will be great when a woman wins the overall title at a Nationals, it will be like a woman winning the Masters or the US Open. At some point it will occur (at least I think so), but it should be that win that holds the merit and not just some piece of paper that says you can shoot classifiers really well.

[Flexmoney]

The joke is ...trying to apply percentages like they are the same thing.

They aren't. They don't correlate (well, not one to one).

Classifier score...for all the derivative reasons (we've probably been over that a zillion times in past threads)...bias upward.

Major match scores...bias downward.

The rankings are what correlates. Not the percentages.

Look at match results and the correlation is generally clear (sure, there are some that fall out of the data/curve...but that can likely be attributed to the small samples, in general). Grand Masters tend to be toward the top or the score sheet and D-class shooters tend toward the bottom.

[RTJ]

As a lady shooter that has been around for a while now, two thoughts came to mind when I read these threads. The First: "This is not worth responding to". The second is:

I agree with Athena (congrats world champ!) and some others that the classification system we have is not a true gauge. It should be based on Nationals/major match scores. And if you look, there are only a handful of guys that consistently shoot in the top 5% year after year. Personally, the classifiers we shoot don't cater to my strengths and I don't think they cater to most women's strengths. I do believe that the greater upper body strength of men is a large factor as to why they are often more successful than women at matches. Classifiers tend to be speed shoots without much or any movement and frankly, I don't think that is a fair test of overall shooting ability. That and I do believe there is a lot of corruption of classifiers being shot over and over at the local level, just to achieve that paper GM status.

My personal desire has nothing to do with my classification - it is to go to matches and shoot to the best of my ability. I'm not sure who honestly thinks that the top lady shooters are not shooting "high enough" percentages or are "mediocre" competitors. I know that I had to work extremely hard to not only beat the other top ladies at the Nationals this year, but also the other 80% of the people I shot against, most of who were men. 2nd and 3rd A class in open was won by ladies. I certainly did not see my performance as sub-par and certainly did not do it for any other reward than shooting to the best of my ability against world class competitors - men and women. And as someone else also pointed out, just the sheer ratio of men to women helps to explain why more women aren't at the top of the page.

I don't know of any sport in the world that does not have separate divisions/competitions for women and men. There is a reason that women golfers aren't competing against Tiger Woods. There is a reason that there is a handicap in bowling. People (men or women) do have different abilities and I believe that's why USPSA has a classification system in the first place...regardless of the flaws I may see in that system. If you take away the plaque for high lady, take it away for all divisions and classes and see what result it will have.

Lastly, I think it's unfortunate that folks are criticizing women for not doing better when we should be encouraging any and all women to get involved and stay involved in the shooting sports. Now more than ever.

Rebecca Jones

[Athena]

As a lady shooter that has been around for a while now, two thoughts came to mind when I read these threads. The First: "This is not worth responding to". The second is:

I agree with Athena (congrats world champ!) and some others that the classification system we have is not a true gauge. It should be based on Nationals/major match scores. And if you look, there are only a handful of guys that consistently shoot in the top 5% year after year. Personally, the classifiers we shoot don't cater to my strengths and I don't think they cater to most women's strengths. I do believe that the greater upper body strength of men is a large factor as to why they are often more successful than women at matches. Classifiers tend to be speed shoots without much or any movement and frankly, I don't think that is a fair test of overall shooting ability. That and I do believe there is a lot of corruption of classifiers being shot over and over at the local level, just to achieve that paper GM status.

My personal desire has nothing to do with my classification - it is to go to matches and shoot to the best of my ability. I'm not sure who honestly thinks that the top lady shooters are not shooting "high enough" percentages or are "mediocre" competitors. I know that I had to work extremely hard to not only beat the other top ladies at the Nationals this year, but also the other 80% of the people I shot against, most of who were men. 2nd and 3rd A class in open was won by ladies. I certainly did not see my performance as sub-par and certainly did not do it for any other reward than shooting to the best of my ability against world class competitors - men and women. And as someone else also pointed out, just the sheer ratio of men to women helps to explain why more women aren't at the top of the page.

I don't know of any sport in the world that does not have separate divisions/competitions for women and men. There is a reason that women golfers aren't competing against Tiger Woods. There is a reason that there is a handicap in bowling. People (men or women) do have different abilities and I believe that's why USPSA has a classification system in the first place...regardless of the flaws I may see in that system. If you take away the plaque for high lady, take it away for all divisions and classes and see what result it will have.

Lastly, I think it's unfortunate that folks are criticizing women for not doing better when we should be encouraging any and all women to get involved and stay involved in the shooting sports. Now more than ever.

Rebecca Jones

AMEN and high five to that

[j1b]

I was in the "This thread isn't worth replying to" camp as well.

I feel like it's disrespectful.

I've met many of the Women that post on this forum, and I've learned from every one of them. Because most work harder at the game than I ever dreamed.

I won't post on this thread again. I will leave with my personal thoughts on the matter. When I'm good enough at this gig that I am no longer able to question how I can personally get better, I'll begin entertaining thoughts on how others can improve in the sport. But I'm not there. I'd imagine Athena, Carina, Calamity Jane, Julie G, and a whole host of other lady's on this forum will help me achieve goal number one quicker. (goal number one is to be a better shoot BTW )

J

[99gski]

As Renee pointed out, we've had this discussion before. Athena and Rebecca have hit the nail on the head. Women in the shooting sports are performing better than ever in all the divisions. It's because we are passionate, we are driven and we do give it our very best. We push that envelope harder every time we head to the range.

Yep, we sure know that there has never been a lady GM. I can't speak for all the women out there, but I can speak for myself when I say it doesn't matter to me that much as an A class lady shooter with 9 USPSA national titles. If it happens along the way, great. That's coming from a lady who shot her way to the men's super squad at a nationals one year.

I will say this. Men and women are different. Take your favorite top GM who has won a nationals - Rob, Todd, Jerry, Dave, Travis, Max.... Take those men and compare them to (in no particular order) the tiny-terrific Athena Lee, the graceful Rebecca Jones, the tenacious Kay Miculek, the agressive Doni Spencer, the determined Jessie Abbate, the quick-footed Lisa Munson, the intense Randi Rogers, the focused Kippi Leatham, on just physical characteristics alone. Start with the size of their hands, their weight, how strong they are, fast they are, etc. Rob will joke that he is an old fat guy, but he isn't TGO for nothing. Some of the women above are even older. All of these women are champions in MANY ways, and I only named a few of them. There are plenty more out there I have missed. We are different. To speculate and say that we are not is like a man saying he knows what it's like to give birth.

If/when a woman makes GM - it will be wonderful. In the meantime though, trust me, the lady shooters out there will be push to do their very best.

Julie

[J-Ho]

I was in the "This thread isn't worth replying to" camp as well.

I feel like it's disrespectful.

I've met many of the Women that post on this forum, and I've learned from every one of them. Because most work harder at the game than I ever dreamed.

I won't post on this thread again. I will leave with my personal thoughts on the matter. When I'm good enough at this gig that I am no longer able to question how I can personally get better, I'll begin entertaining thoughts on how others can improve in the sport. But I'm not there. I'd imagine Athena, Carina, Calamity Jane, Julie G, and a whole host of other lady's on this forum will help me achieve goal number one quicker. (goal number one is to be a better shoot BTW )

J

I don't think it is disrespectful. Jason's post was an honest question with no ill will meant toward anyone. I believe he is trying to do something good. The subject matter is one of those non-pc questions unfortunately. I think most people have tried to keep this civil and not offensive. PM him and ask why the question came up and I think you'll see he meant well by asking the question.

[J-Ho]

If/when a woman makes GM - it will be wonderful. In the meantime though, trust me, the lady shooters out there will be push to do their very best.

As long as we can continue to grow the shooting sports and the number of women shooters increases, I don't think it will be 'if'.

[kgunz11]

Personally, the classifiers we shoot don't cater to my strengths and I don't think they cater to most women's strengths. I do believe that the greater upper body strength of men is a large factor as to why they are often more successful than women at matches. Classifiers tend to be speed shoots without much or any movement and frankly, I don't think that is a fair test of overall shooting ability.

Rebecca Jones

Ma'am, please know that I ask this with the utmost of humility and respect, but I have a few questions about what you posted that I personally could use some clarification on.

I am in the mentality that one should walk before they run, and I think the classifiers we have instill gun handling and accuracy. If the gun handling and accuracy is not one of the strengths of women shooters... what is? Is it how fast you can run through a stage? Is it hand eye coordination? What would be a universal strength of women shooters that a classifier would hurt or does not feature? In heart alone, Kay, Eva, Lisa, and Jane have earned GM status in my opinion. I only name those ladies because I have shot with them and I know how hard they train. If the GM card could be earned by desire, they'd all have one.

I think IPSC style shooting is a sport dominated by men only because of the physical differences between the sexes. That's not meant as a slight to anyone. The big problem I have with the classification system is that is attempts to quantify the abilities of a man against those of a woman, while their is a multitude of men out there driving the limits to higher peaks. The only solution to that is to start a separate scale for women. Compare them against each other. Then there would be some women that would not like that as they might see it as a "gimme" or charity. Many many games have handicaps to level things out, look at golf and bowling.

My wife is a new shooter and is in the process of getting classified. Whatever it may be, in my heart she IS the GM! She and I could care less about the title of GM, this is about something we enjoy doing together. I admire (and have the utmost respect for) the drive some of you women have displayed in this sport, not just in your own shooting but the help you offer to women such as my wife. She's completed one "BWB" camp and has already signed up for the next one in La.

I can't wait to see a female GM!!!

[RTJ]

kgunz,

I agree with you totally. The classifiers we shoot are often speed shoots, which require fast splits and due to the nature of upper body strength, men are typically better at this. My strengths lie in things like figuring out how to shoot a stage (which is part of the game), shooting on the move, and precision - where I don't have to have as fast of splits. As I said in my previous post, my personal desire has nothing to do with classification, but about shooting to the best of my ability. I think that's all anyone should strive for and I'm glad to hear that you and your wife agree!

I do agree that much of the reason men dominate is the physiological differences. I don't mean that as a slight either, but it is true in the upper tier of men competitors. As we know there are plenty of guys that women regularly beat, but it's those top guys that have set the bar so high.

All that being said, I am proud to be among the top lady shooters - after all I am a lady, and as Julie said, ladies and men are different for a reason! Thank goodness

[j1b]

I was in the "This thread isn't worth replying to" camp as well.

I feel like it's disrespectful.

I've met many of the Women that post on this forum, and I've learned from every one of them. Because most work harder at the game than I ever dreamed.

I won't post on this thread again. I will leave with my personal thoughts on the matter. When I'm good enough at this gig that I am no longer able to question how I can personally get better, I'll begin entertaining thoughts on how others can improve in the sport. But I'm not there. I'd imagine Athena, Carina, Calamity Jane, Julie G, and a whole host of other lady's on this forum will help me achieve goal number one quicker. (goal number one is to be a better shoot BTW )

J

I don't think it is disrespectful. Jason's post was an honest question with no ill will meant toward anyone. I believe he is trying to do something good. The subject matter is one of those non-pc questions unfortunately. I think most people have tried to keep this civil and not offensive. PM him and ask why the question came up and I think you'll see he meant well by asking the question.

I get it. And don't need to PM Jason to understand the question. I'm not devoid of perspective on this. I just wouldn't contemplate the original post myself.

My issue isn't an issue of political correctness. It's an issue of respect.

I used to shoot with Kippi Leatham (then Boykin). I was there when she won her first national title. I don't know how I placed in the match to her. And I don't know what percent she was of the match winner.

I know she was a national champion. I wasn't. That seemed particularly relevant to me at the time. Still is today . . .

It's just perspective. I can't contemplate taking anything away from what most of these champions have accomplished.

J

[JasonK]

I am coaching/mentoring a young female shooter and this is what caused this line of questioning for me. I did not intend anyone to think I was critical of female shooters of any and all skill levels. I mean no disrespect. Perhaps I should have worded my questions better but I was trying to narrow the discussion. I would expect from many of the recent responses that I am getting skewered in the ladies forum. This is obviously not what I intended also. I am extremely sorry that many consider this a topic not worth responding to.

Coming from a position of ignorance, I am a man after all, I was under the misimpression that practical shooting was one of the areas that gender was not a performance issue. I am still not convinced that the sex of a shooter is a major determinate of their potential ability.

[kgunz11]

Jason, I don't think any of the ladies are taking it the wrong way, but then I cannot speak for them. There is nothing wrong with your question, I asked it when getting into this sport and was the one that brought it up in the other thread that spawned this one.

The women here responding to this are all tough women and ain't gonna take no crap off of anyone. While you might have struck a nerve, I don't think you have offended anyone. Besides, I don't think a person has responded in this thread that would want to face Kippi, Lisa, Kay, Julie, Jessie, or Athena in any kind of shooting match where ego's were involved. They'd most likely get their butt handed to them.

[SA Friday]

I am coaching/mentoring a young female shooter and this is what caused this line of questioning for me. I did not intend anyone to think I was critical of female shooters of any and all skill levels. I mean no disrespect. Perhaps I should have worded my questions better but I was trying to narrow the discussion. I would expect from many of the recent responses that I am getting skewered in the ladies forum. This is obviously not what I intended also. I am extremely sorry that many consider this a topic not worth responding to.

Coming from a position of ignorance, I am a man after all, I was under the misimpression that practical shooting was one of the areas that gender was not a performance issue. I am still not convinced that the sex of a shooter is a major determinate of their potential ability.

After two threads and three pages into the second discussion on gender specific questions, there had only been one green colored font entry. Not even sure that was required, carinab pretty much spiked this already. That's IMO amazing. I never saw it going that far with that much respect on both sides. This would have digressed to a free-for-all on any other shooting forum by now. Your question was fine Jason. It's been a worthwhile discussion. I have a daughter that has already shown interest in shooting. I can easily foresee a discussion on this topic in my future. The responses are useful. Until now, I had not thought about strength training for my daughter. She can become very competitive in her hobbies. If she takes her shooting to that level, I now know that strength training is something I may have to recommend to her.

[Athena]

This December is my 17th year competing actively in this sport. I will be turning 30 as well by December.

The reason why I posted was that I had just come back from Bali after shooting and fighting my butt off for that Ladies Open Title only to see that some people didn't think my performance (not you, Mr. OP, this comes from the other thread) wasn't good enough. Or any of our performances at a Nationals/Area match was good enough. I was tired, I was cranky and I should have just stfu, slept and left this alone.

But I couldn't leave it alone till I got my point across and in doing so, stepped on some toes, and I repeat, I apologize. Being a female shooter is not easy. Not only do you need to have skill to stay on and work twice even three times as hard, but you have to have the guts and the heart and the thick skin to stay on. If I wasn't the determined 13 year old back then, my Dad's fellow gun club members in the Philippines should have made me quit and run off crying a long time ago. But I persevered and plotted my revenge to beat them. And I did, fair and square until they all quit because they got beat by a girl. Repeatedly. There have been many new female shooters who got on but fell off the wagon because of how they were treated at their clubs, not being taken seriously, etc. and that's pretty much how Kay's BWB came into existence, to show women a different side of shooting. Our side and how WE do it.

But as usual, I digress. I would love to see a female GM kicking butt and taking names at big matches someday. My point was that I consider being a GM to be: 1) kick butt at Nationals i.e. place Top 16 or higher, 2) plain Awesome. And like I said, it can be done NOW. On paper. I have shot 100% classifiers before and I quit shooting them at club level because I DON'T want to be GM because I KNOW I don't deserve it. Same thing goes with my M card. I believe I should be A class but I guess winning A class at Area matches enough will make you get kicked out of A class.

But for now, I am proud of what we female shooters (from here and from all over the world) have accomplished.

I hope that clarifies things (and I'm not cranky anymore)....

Edited November 7, 2008 by Athena

[MarkS_A18138]

I have been watching this thread for a couple days and have thought about it some. Living in a house of 2 women shooters I truly believe it has something to do with upper body strength. I know it’s not about mental game or aggression; some of the toughest competitors are women! As some of you know we have crossed over to the world of clay shooting. In that world women are very equal to men!!!! I have seen on a number of occasions that a women was HOA of the event and there were pro’s at the event. At the sporting clays nationals this year there 3 lady’s in the top 50 shooters overall! One was in the top 38! That’s awesome when you consider there were 1580 shooters of which only 149 were women! A lady GM is around the corner!

Also Congrats goes out to Athena (World Champ) she is awesome!

[JThompson]

This December is my 17th year competing actively in this sport. I will be turning 30 as well by December.

The reason why I posted was that I had just come back from Bali after shooting and fighting my butt off for that Ladies Open Title only to see that some people didn't think my performance (not you, Mr. OP, this comes from the other thread) wasn't good enough. Or any of our performances at a Nationals/Area match was good enough. I was tired, I was cranky and I should have just stfu, slept and left this alone.

But I couldn't leave it alone till I got my point across and in doing so, stepped on some toes, and I repeat, I apologize. Being a female shooter is not easy. Not only do you need to have skill to stay on and work twice even three times as hard, but you have to have the guts and the heart and the thick skin to stay on. If I wasn't the determined 13 year old back then, my Dad's fellow gun club members in the Philippines should have made me quit and run off crying a long time ago. But I persevered and plotted my revenge to beat them. And I did, fair and square until they all quit because they got beat by a girl. Repeatedly. There have been many new female shooters who got on but fell off the wagon because of how they were treated at their clubs, not being taken seriously, etc. and that's pretty much how Kay's BWB came into existence, to show women a different side of shooting. Our side and how WE do it.

But as usual, I digress. I would love to see a female GM kicking butt and taking names at big matches someday. My point was that I consider being a GM to be: 1) kick butt at Nationals i.e. place Top 16 or higher, 2) plain Awesome. And like I said, it can be done NOW. On paper. I have shot 100% classifiers before and I quit shooting them at club level because I DON'T want to be GM because I KNOW I don't deserve it. Same thing goes with my M card. I believe I should be A class but I guess winning A class at Area matches enough will make you get kicked out of A class.

But for now, I am proud of what we female shooters (from here and from all over the world) have accomplished.

I hope that clarifies things (and I'm not cranky anymore)....

First of all, there is nothing for you to apologize for, either in your post or your shooting ability. The same goes for the other women who have chimed in.

I don’t think anyone meant to imply you ladies don’t work as hard as anyone out there.

As to the classification system being flawed… we are in full agreement there and I have started, and participated in many threads regarding the system.

Physiology, does play a part in, and is an advantage for, men, but I think that gap is closing as it is in many sports. Will it ever close to the point where a woman will score HOA? I doubt it, but that’s not important… what is important male or female, is to shoot to the best of our ability at that point in time and to continue to improve.

I will make Master class and I think I can do that by next summer if this old body of mine doesn’t give up on me. I will have a hard time making GM and if I do I will never be competitive at the national level. I’m 44 and started shooting USPSA late in my 42nd year. There is just no way I would ever be able to keep up with the kids at GM… M will be tuff enough. Now, if I can make GM on paper some time, that would suit me just fine. You are thinking in terms of national level matches, but there are a lot of people out there that don’t have the money, time, physically will never be able to compete at that level in a run and gun national.

Hey, at my age, making GM on paper would be a hell of an accomplishment. Am I worried about it enough to shoot every classifier 20 times and send the best in? No. I wouldn’t do that, but I have and will reshoot one if I hose it badly, or I leave a lot on the table. In a match you can have a bad stage and still win the match… The class system doesn’t work the same way… you hose that and there is no redemption, so if I want to shoot one a couple of times and send in the best, I’m not going to feel bad about it. That’s not the same as running it 20 times until you get a great HF. Some of the classifiers are crazy… I’ve seen some the top GMs have a hard time shooting 100% and I think that is, in part, due to lots of people shooting the hell out of a classifier and sending in the highest one.

Don’t forget that some of us are older, or have physical problems which prevent us from shooting those top scores with the younger crowd. We have a different set of goals and those are no less valid than your not wanting to be classes above where you can compete at a national level.

I’m thinking steel challenge matches would be good for me and others like me. We can stand and blast much like a classifier.

This was a good thread, if for no other reason than it motivated your ladies to come in and join us. For that I am thankful… I look forward to seeing you ladies in the range… don’t beat the old fat guy (me) to badly will ya. 

Best,

JT

Edited November 7, 2008 by JThompson

[rgkeller]

>>I will make Master class and I think I can do that by next summer if this old body of mine doesn’t give up on me<<

Don't aim so low.

I made open master this year at age 63.

[JThompson]

>>I will make Master class and I think I can do that by next summer if this old body of mine doesn’t give up on me<<

Don't aim so low.

I made open master this year at age 63.

AWESOME!!!

I've got a few other issues besides age, but thanks for the inspiration.

[kgunz11]

I think we should have more of the gender related questions, if that is what it takes to get the likes of Renee, Julie, Athena, and Rebecca involved then by all means!

I'm glad all remained civil and hopefully the OP understands some of the hurdles faced by women shooters in IPSC/USPSA.

[carinab]

I would expect from many of the recent responses that I am getting skewered in the ladies forum.

Uhm...actually no...this thread and the other one hasn't been a topic of discussion in the hen house. As I mentioned in the first thread, I don't see any harm in asking the question. It's not science until you analyze the data. There are a myriad of reasons, everyone who has posted has their view of those reasons. Naturally, some posts have been more respectful than others.

Most certainly, we women operate differently. While men tend be heirarchical, we tend to be inclusive. That is something very noticeable if you compare the ladies squad and the other top squads; we do try to drag everyone forward. With some of the ltd super squads I've been on at area matches, it was every man for himself. There was one where the tension and animosity sure sucked the fun out of it for me - you didn't dare crack a joke.

So to answer the question, what will it take to get a lady GM (not a paper one); it will take a woman who is physically strong, naturally quick, mentally tough, who will put in the effort, and who has the support/encouragement to make shooting her sole focus. Doesn't sound like a gender specific description does it? However, the more women who shoot the sport, the more likely this goal will be reached.

ETA: After thinking on this a bit longer, I realize I left out one trait; consistency. What separates out the top shooters from the rest is that they are consistent on each stage rarely blowing one up completely. When you can post a good stage every stage in a match, you can't help but be in the top.

Edited November 7, 2008 by carinab

[hopalong]

I think Carina about got that nail on the head that time.

Oh, and I know a few GMs (some paper and some not) and they all had those same characteristics.

Hopalong (See tag line about opinions)

[gregoryd]

here is my two cents....I have a small part in the starting of this thread. The young girl Jason is coaching/mentoring is my 12 year old daughter. He has been working with her when he can for over a year. He has gone as far as customizing her gun to fit her small hand, and all the trigger work. (he is a fantastic gunsmith) My question to him a while back is how good do you think Jessie could be?? If I supported her shooting 100%, guns, money, training ect. After our long discusions, and the positions presented by the femal shooters, I have come to this realization..She will be as good as she chooses to be. Sorry for any trouble this may have caused, but what I have learned is well worth more than any hurt feelings that it caused, because it is about MY daughter. One day maybe she will be a topic of conversation on the forums, for her great acheivements, maybe not........its up to her. thanks Jason