Speaking as the cause of the issue about material additions to factory stocks, I'd prefer for everything to be left along for a while, too. If things can't be left alone, I'd prefer to just hear about it instead of being in the middle of it. I'm even a little leary of asking for clarifications now, as that's what started the "discusion" before.

I wish they would leve the rules alone for at least 5 years and it's only an equipment race because everyone thinks they can buy a few points but they can't. If I can shoot my way into AAA Hunter with a 10-22 what ever made me buy a new 1712 and then watch my scores goe down? I guess I got suckered in too.

Yes there are a lot of shooters setting their heavy guns aside and just shooting their hunter. It cuts the hassle in half. One set of sight settings, one brand of ammo, one trigger to learn, and the best od all, you only have to carry the lightest of the two from your car to the firing line.

In every competitive sport that I am familiar with any attempt at leveling the playing field through rules that restrict equipment have failed. College sports limit scholarships, pro teams have some type of salary cap, Auto and motorcycle racing restrict equipment, competitive shooting does the same and in every case the same thing happens. People build to the limit of the rules. Does a faster car,faster bike, or a more intensely built rifle make a winner out of a loser? Nope, won't happen. Dave Imas is currently conducting an experiment with a Marlin model 60 and a cheap scope and I understand he is doing quite well. Silhouette shooting for 99 percent of us is a hobby. We enjoy the competition, we enjoy the fellowship, we enjoy trying to shoot the best score we can. Some like to travel and shoot, some see no need to shoot outside their immediate area, some have more money to spend some have less. Life just works out that way. I think it is a great thing that you can compete in our sport with a CZ, 10-22, or the latest greatest by the hottest gunsmith. Money won't buy you scores in your book. Money will buy you a fine firearm that will bring you much joy in use and ownership.

Shoot what you enjoy and can afford. So long as the firearm meets the rules now in play you can be assured that practice and mental preparation will be the deciding factor in who wins and loses.....

In the line of equipment about the only thing that can bring you a distinct advantage is a muzzle cover like Spottin Kitty. Besides being someone to talk to on those long road trips, you won't lose your rifle on the line and miss your call to shoot........

I think John is correct in what he is saying. There have always been problems when trying to create or control the "equipment race". I am always curious when someone is giving a new shooter advice like, you dont need that good of ammo or you dont need that good of gun. Those statements are true but I believe that the shooter should buy as good of a gun and ammo he or she can afford. They may not need it but some will want it. I started with a CZ452 this spring when I started the sport, and i quickly realized I wanted a 1712. I now shoot the 1712. I use the best ammo I can find with in reason (Wolf match extra, Eley target rifle etc.) I know that my abilities are not up to that equipment and may never be there but it gives me peace of mind while shooting and not wondering if i missed because of ammo or equipment or whatever. Besides I like and enjoy nice guns. So just tell people what is the best in our opinion and then let them know that they can still win with a $300.00 rifle and $200 scope. They will eventually try and buy nicer equipment and that is ok.

by the way thanks for all the advice all of you have given me..

Kevin

I think the equipment race can be summed up in this way. We all like to have new toys. The newest, the best, something that noone else has. I have one rifle. If I had the money... I would have several. Not because I think I could shoot better with a specific one, but because I like features specific to them.
Let's face it ... we are big kids and we always want a new toy.

Don't try to convince me that a newbie with a $75 Marlin is on the same level playing field as a vetran with a $2,500 Annie, minus a little practice and good ammo. Is that rain I feel in here?

Why not do what the benchrest association has done?

Institute a plinker/light sporter class. The winner of plinker must be willing to sell his rifle for $200 or highest bid over $200 at the end of any match. No strawman bids.

Equipment race ended! Newbies on a level field.

You could use the CMP rimfire sporter rules as setup standard so a new shooter could use the same gun for both silo and CMP.

You could do the same in hunter class. $1,000 buyout or forfit the match. Equipment race again ended!

"But I hunt with a $2,500 gun!" you say.

Good for you, but you arn't normal. You are .01% of the shooting population, not the norm. Sell or move your scores to standard rifle.

Establishing good rules is not rocket science, it simply requires the elimination of anyone with a vested interest from the decision making process.

KY Ratshooter,

I have tried to stay out of this but your comment:

"Don't try to convince me that a newbie with a $75 Marlin is on the same level playing field as a vetran with a $2,500 Annie, minus a little practice and good ammo. Is that rain I feel in here? "

Is such a line of BS that I had to get off the porch.

To even insinuate that a newbie as you state it shows up and is expected to compete with master class shooters is so far off the mark it is laughable if not insulting. We have classes in this sport to seperate the abilities of each shooter. You may have heard of them B,A,AA.AAA and Master. I guess you would have Tiger Woods play with a $100 dollar set of golf clubs so as to not offend or make the other players not feel good about themselves. Maybe we should hand out participation certificates so no one feels inferior. He would still wipe the floor with them. If people spent more time on pratice and less time mulling over sour grapes, this would be a lot better sport.

And as far as that rain goes, no thats not rain it's your own tears you are trying to cover us with.

Very rarely will a newbie be on a level playing field as a veteran, no matter what the equipment. Compare newbies to newbies vets to vets and the field levels out. We all know that the average Wally World 100 dollar gun and 12 dollar scope is as far away from an Anschutz or equivalent as it is in dollars spent to acquire said gun. When you put the same class (B through Master) shooters together with the same gun the deciding factor will be inherent skill, practice, and mental preparation. Put a better gun in the hands of one or the other and the person that has the higher skill level, spends more time in quality practice, and is better prepared mentally will still have a decided advantage. Typically the higher skill level of the shooter the better he or she will be able to utilize a "better" gun. As far a instituting a "claimer" rule in which the winning gun could be bought by anyone who would put up the funds, it won't work with the gun laws we have in place in this country. It's tough enough in some areas to just buy a gun, let alone "claim" a winning gun.

It would be great if firearms manufacturers would build a 200 dollar gun with a crisp 2 lb trigger that shoots great groups at 100 meters right out of the box and it would be wonderful if the scope makers would give us a 50 dollar scope with the optical clairity of a Zeiss and the tracking of a Weaver T series, but it ain't happening. Take a good hard look around at what is available for sale that meets the criteria abover and you will find guns and scopes that are expensive. You can take a cheaper gun and make it shoot "like and anschutz" (we've all heard that term before) but an honest accounting of what goes into said gun and an honest evaluation of its shootability will reveal that the premium guns such as the Anschutz are a good dollar value.

It would be great if you could legislate equality, but I just don't see it happening. I like fine guns and truely enjoy an accurate dependable rifle. I have fortunate enough to be able to buy what I want and shoot it. I shoot with a lot of folks that spend less than I do on their guns as well as a lot of folks that spend more. We all seem to be able to shoot together and have fun doing it.

As a match director I agree with Ernie. I don't want any more confusion to deal with, or any more hairs to split. Shoot and have a good time or go home.

John

John,

Guess you are more PC than me,

shot high their heads are in the clouds

I have always thought that a fun match would be to take four different shooters rifles have each shooter sight the rifle in for an animal from the bench then have a match where all competitors have to shoot the rifle sighted in for that animal. In other words a competitor would shoot four different rifles, one for each animal.
That would sort out the good shooters and those that depend on what they can purchase.


Innocent

Dawg, you and I must have been typing at the same time, you hit send before I did......

Don't think I'm more PC, we just provide a good balance to each other.....And there was a time that I got paid by the word, so being long winded was profitable, now it's a bad habit that's hard to shake....BTW you going to Chattanooga to shoot the Tennessee State Match?

Seems as if we're talking about different things and don't realize it.
There is no more "level" a playing field in sports than in silhouette shooting. Joe Nobody can pay a (quite modest) entry fee at Winnsboro or at Benton, Arkansas and shoot his very first match shoulder-to-shoulder with the World Champion. Surely nobody would suggest that he's somehow entitled to an equal chance to win. Or that the best equipment in the world would give him that chance.
And I can't resist saying just one more time that the guy who thinks he'd like to compete but decides he's "intimidated" by a $2500 rifle really doesn't want to compete very badly at all.
The people who want to shoot silhouette are doing it. Those who ain't don't want to. Those who can afford nice equipment have it. Those who can only afford Marlins shoot Marlins. Those who can't afford either can shoot my rifle. But don't tell me you'd be shooting but for the expense because it's not true.

Mary,

That'll work so long as you let me pick the rifles....

John,
I don't care who picks rifles, I can only recall the time Troy went into a shootoff a nationals saying, "I've put my rifle up, who has one out that they can loan me?" and still winning the shoot off.
That is a good shooter.
Innocent

Innocent wrote:I have always thought that a fun match would be to take four different shooters rifles have each shooter sight the rifle in for an animal from the bench then have a match where all competitors have to shoot the rifle sighted in for that animal. In other words a competitor would shoot four different rifles, one for each animal.
That would sort out the good shooters and those that depend on what they can purchase.


Innocent

Something similar to this happend to me the other day at the range. I was shooting with a new shooter (Super nice guy BTW)on a windy day (just stick with me here, let's not get the "thats not wind" discussion going again here...LOL). We went to rams and I shot 5/10 with my Pharr rifle. He shot 0/10 with his $200 CZ trainer with a used BSA he got off of e-bay.

He looked at me with that "if you were shooting this rifle..." look... I asked him where his rifle was shooting and he said it seemed to be missing HIGH but he was not 100% sure of his ZEROS... First one I broke high and it missed high, second one I shot low and it missed low.. I told him the zeros looked good, but with (2) straight misses, it didn't make much sense... I broke the next (3) on the Ram and they floated straight back, reloaded and shot 4/5, baisicly shooting 7/8. He mentioned how I had done MUCH better with his rifle than with my own and inquired on that fact...???

I told him it's simple... I was not concentrating with my own rifle, with his rifle I had something on the line. I was trying to help him determine if his zero's are good and at the same time provide the confidence he needed to shoot that Rifle / Ammo / Zero ...

Heres the rub guys... When I started shooting there were 1710's, Win52's , 541T's, and a SAKO on the line. All had Leupold/Weaver $500 scopes on top. I was looking at $1,000 to $1,500 out of pocket to get one of those rifles. I chose not to, I went with a 10/22 with a 3-9 scope with no turrets that I already had... Did I complain about the equipment of others? Nope... I found out right away this was a sport with some of the GREATEST people in the world. I also found out that THOSE TYPE of people are addicted to the PERSONAL challange that comes along with it, and those were the type of people I wanted to be around! At matches we are competing against others, but mainly we are trying to achive that new class, or not blow up when everything is going right, etc....

New shooters will come and go. Some like me will stick, others will have any number of excuses to leave. No time, too hard, I saw expensive equipment on the line, etc. We can not change that... Are we to water things down and make the targets larger? I think not, no more than we can take away the Anschutz, Winchester, Remington, SAKO, Kimber, Leupold, Weaver, etc. from the game. This is a game of precision ladies and gentleman, it can be shot with less than precise equipment, but why?

I would simply suggest not pushing your opinion of acceptable precision onto others. Shoot what you care to shoot and I will do the same.

There is one other fact that needs mentioned. I was told that Greg mentioned the number of 5,000+ silhouette books being sold in 2006. The sport, our passtime, is growing under the current rules... Why would we want to change that? How can it POSSIBLY be growing if we are running all the new shooters off that MANY of these posts seem to be defending...?

Thanks for hearing my rant,

Cluck Cluck