Classification Update

[GregG]

DavidABQ,

You mean just like every other shooting sport does? Gosh that would be too much to ask of the NRA

Greg

[Jerry G]

We join the NRA and very few pay annually, I would guess most serious silhouette shooters are life members or more. We pay for the book every year and there is a NRA fee for state matches or regional matches. I would guess that most would pay a little more for the book but for someone that shoots 30 or 40 matches a year, a $5 or more extra match fee is stretching it a little. I do think you would see the number of shoots and number of shooters drop off. If that is the goal of the NRA, have at it but don't expect a shoulder to cry on when attendance drops off.

[GregG]

Where did $5 come from I heard 10 or 15 or 20..... I still think we need to wait and see and not brow trouble.

[Jason]

Not that I really want to stick my head in this hornets nest, but I'm just dumb like that. It is different 100 shooters vs 10x10. But for anything the NRA cares about it is the same. They get paid for 100 shooters either way. They have to post 100 scores either way. Whether they charge 100 people once or 10 people 10 times they still get 100 fees. As far as the NRA is concerned there are 100 fee paying entries in this class (SB,HP, BP).

It actually does matter to them if they want to grow the sport, which they obviously do or they wouldn't be bothering to change anything. Having 100 shooters shoot one match each means that they are getting lots of new shooters to come to matches but it was such a terrible experience that none of them came back. Having the same 10 shooters shoot 10 matches mean that they are retaining the shooters that actually come to the match but aren't reaching any new ones well enough to have them come out and try shooting a match. I agree that we should have heard something about fees by now, but that doesn't mean that fees are the only thing to consider here.

<the rest below not aimed at OldRanger>
It really seems many of those who post here are failing to see the forest for the trees. If you complain about the NRA not supporting silhouette as well as other sports and then complain when the NRA actually do something to modernize and support silhouette, then you're fully worthy of being ignored as nothing more than a complainer. If too many of the voices that the NRA hears regarding silhouette fit this scenario, then the NRA would be likely to view silhouette as more trouble than it's worth.

To explain this a little more plainly, I'll give two examples.

• In every industry, there are customers that companies don't want to be their customers because they cost more in support/returns/PR damage than they actually add in terms of profit/PR enhancement. Most big companies actually develop strategies to get rid of these customers, often by reaching out to "listen" to them but not actually doing anything about their concerns until they get bored and leave or by just outright ignoring them if the damage to the company's reputation is judged to not be large. Sometimes these customers actually think they're entitled to the way that they act ("They shouldn't allow me to return it multiple times if they won't want me to do it!", etc.) and think that it's the company that's the problem.
• In business, there are employees who are very qualified to do their jobs and may perform the jobs adequately well but are always negative about everything. They complain about situations but don't offer solutions to problems, and usually say why any new idea won't work without suggesting what changes might make it work. These employees tend to "plateau" at one level and settle in there, often causing organizational strife because other teams that work only with that employee view the employee's team/group as difficult to work/innovate with. These employees are royal pains for managers to deal with because they are competent enough at their own job but drag down the team/organization with their attitude issues. Many times, these employees aren't aware that they are perceived as "always negative about everything" and get more offended/negative when they are "stabbed in the back" by coworker feedback. Good managers have direct conversations with these employees about the issue, but if that doesn't work sometimes there's no alternative except to convince the employees to find alternative employment (usually through a team change or through low evaluations, as it's hard to fire these) or just stick them on a project that doesn't involve working with other teams and that no one actually cares about.

There are multiple individuals on this thread that appear to fit one or both of these examples pretty clearly. I try to believe the best about people's intentions until they prove otherwise so I don't believe that it's on purpose, but the effect is still the same.

If enough of us silhouette shooters are perceived as negative no matter what, then the sport will rightfully be determined to be "more trouble than it's worth" by the NRA and marginalized until it effectively dies on the vine. If enough declare that silhouette is special and we won't stand for changing the classification system to the same system that the other sports use, that will massively complicate any efforts that the NRA undertakes to modernize and adds more "trouble" into the "more trouble than silhouette is worth" equation. Complaining about fee changes when the only comment so far is saying that there doesn't appear to be any reason "why the NRA would need to" add a lot of fees adds yet more "trouble" to the equation. There has to be a finite limit of "trouble" that will result in the NRA saying "Due to complaints from competitors, we have decided to not change silhouette classifications or add silhouette to our upcoming online registration and reporting system at this time." When you hear/see that, you should translate that as "silhouette and silhouette shooters have been determined to be more trouble to deal with than the participant group and participation level is worth given the limited resources of the NRA competitions division."

This will be followed by no changes (a.k.a. attempts to improve) and increasingly lower response rates from NRA competitions leadership to shooter concerns. This will lead to very little promotion of silhouette events and lower support and attendance levels at events like the national championships. This is the previously-mentioned "dying on the vine" phase. Sound familiar? It should. It's what many silhouette shooters have been complaining about for years and quite a number of these same people appear to be doing everything that they can to convince the NRA that it's the right way to handle silhouette.

[DavidABQ]

DavidABQ,

You mean just like every other shooting sport does? Gosh that would be too much to ask of the NRA

Greg

Here I thought "it must be me beinging selfish again."

[GregG]

Jason, well said.

[Jerry G]

What is the purpose of the NRA??????????????????????? Is it a suppose to be a for profit business? If so, it cannot be tax exempt. True', it must be self supporting. It has become a huge DC bureaucracy just like the US government. Why do the dwindling number of shooters have to support all the ventures the NRA does? Is the firearms museum self supporting? Why don't the shotgun shooters have the NRA as their sanctioning body? Why do they have to revise the rule book every year? It worked just fine in the 70s and 80s but has been revised MANY times since then. I do have a lot of questions about our NRA. I would not mind a reasonable increase in cost for the book but I will not pay the NRA a couple hundred dollars a year to shoot silhouette.

The NRA is not for the political fight.................... The NRA-ILA is. I am a Benefactor in the NRA and I give to the NRA-ILA every year. Now they want more blood. When is there enough?

[Jason]

Again, what does that rant have to do with this thread? It definitely had nothing to do with my post. It's focused only on the guess with no basis in data that the NRA is going to massively increase fees for silhouette matches.

[Jerry G]

My 'rant' as you put it is to enlighten you to the fact the NRA is not the NRA of your daddy. They have become all political and really don't cater to the competitive shooter anymore. I do realize that if we loose the political battle there will be no more shooting but.................... How many competitive shooters can you afford to get pissed while you call yourself the National Rifle Association? There are other gun organizations around that need donations also. And, there are silhouette shoots around that are not approved by the NRA that we can shoot at. I guess if they want to make it a 'rich man's sport' they can have at it.

It seems to me this roomer has been around for a long time and it is about time they let us know what is going on. All this guessing is doing them no good.

[DavidABQ]

It seems to me this roomer has been around for a long time and it is about time they let us know what is going on. All this guessing is doing them no good.

Jerry, I think you give the NRA too much credit. Someone made a suggestion about changing the class names and to do away with the books. Everyone said the was a great idea and now they dumped onto someone else who is still trying to figure out how to do it. I doubt they have much to tell us about to dispel any rumor. I suspect they will have it figured out in about another 5 years.

[Jason]

Again, claiming that the NRA is going to make silhouette a rich person's sport with no data at all to support the claim and saying that the NRA isn't supposed to be political aren't relevant and aren't contributing anything to this thread. It's not enlightening. It's just complaining. The NRA ILA and PVF are not the only political efforts of the NRA.

This change is being done only by the competitive division of the NRA with no mention at all of fee changes. You can continue to threaten to "leave" and not shoot NRA-sanctioned matches anymore, but I am not sure why you'd consider it a threat if you actually read my post above, specifically the problem customers example.

You're right that all this guessing is doing them no good. It's also not doing the sport any good.

[Jerry G]

"You're right that all this guessing is doing them no good. It's also not doing the sport any good."

My point exactly............................. WTF is going on?

[cslcAl]

Ok, listen up. I just got word from my local committe member that there will be no changes to the current classification system till at least 2018 or 2019.
So for everyone who got all fussed up over this, if you want to wring your hands for two more years go right ahead. My hands will be firmly holding my rifles as I enjoy shooting our fine sport.
Al Foust

[Bob259]

Ok, listen up. I just got word from my local committe member that there will be no changes to the current classification system till at least 2018 or 2019.
So for everyone who got all fussed up over this, if you want to wring your hands for two more years go right ahead. My hands will be firmly holding my rifles as I enjoy shooting our fine sport.
Al Foust

Thanks for the update Al!! Good news for sure.

[Jerry G]

I am sure glad the NRA stepped up and clarified this rumor. How long has this been going on?