ACT QUEENS

[AlanF]

Matt,

I think 2 targets is a possibility at Canberra (if not this year then definitely next year with the teams beforehand) - if that does happen I hope they make them side by side.

Alan

[Tiger]

All I can say is "baby steps".

I'm hoping that Canberra hasn't bitten off more than it can chew in going to the Super-V target for Open, because I was the one who proposed it to the Committee. I don't feel like being hung, drawn and quartered.

I reckon that with the Super V, which is pretty small, a person who shoots a 59.9 who is beaten by a 60.1 would be gutted, and justifiably so.

Imagine shooting 9 super-v's and a 5, only to be beaten by somebody who shot 9 x 6's and 1 super-v?

The equivalent on the Open target would be a 98 being beaten by a 91, as in the shooter shooting 9 x 10's and 1 x 8 with the other shooter hitting 9 x 9's and 1 x 10.

I'm still advocating that the Open target be scored out of 70. We will see how it works out.

Cheers.

[RDavies]

When you put it like that Tiger, then yes, I would much rather be scored out of 70. With the high standards in F standard, I think it could even go that way.

[Matt P]

I guess we'll see how it turns out at Canberra, but I still think we need to look at the big picture and if scoring the same as FS brings the numbers up isn't that what we want ????
Over the coarse of a Queens the 59.9 beating 60.1, I'd bet that the shooter with the 59.9 would beat the shooter who shot the 60.1, so you might be "gutted" for that range but over the agg I doubt it would be a problem.
I've won 10 FO Queens and never gone thru the Queens without shooting an 8 and in most cases shot a 7 along the way and I doubt if the scoring used a count out ring things would have been much different, so I think the best shooter will still win on the 60.10 target.

Matt P

[AlanF]

The old 49.9 vs 50.0 argument (I'll discuss this in relation to the TR target) keeps coming up doesn't it? But you can look at it in more ways than one e.g. 47.4 vs 50.0, or 43.8 vs 50.0?

And I think the status and purpose of the V ring must be understood. It is not there as a scoring ring. In TR the highest scoring ring is the Bulls-eye. It is of little extra value to hit the V ring - everyone knows that - it is only there to reduce the need for shoot-offs. If a shooter happens to get a huge number of V bulls, they should only look on it as something that could prove useful in the event of a tie on points. However they should put extreme importance on not dropping points i.e. keeping it in the bull.

So back to our current dilemma, if we adopt a Super V out of 60.10 for Open, the main game will be the 6 ring - a hit in the Super V will be a minor bonus. If anyone thinks the 6 ring is too big as our maximum scoring ring, could I ask them what problems that will cause? It certainly won't cause too many shoot-offs - the Super V will see to that. It will mean that possibles will become quite common, even for the battlers. And for the sharp end shooters, there will still be the 60.10 to dream about.

Alan

[Razer]

Are ACT scoring FO as 60=10? In the "Super V Implementation" on their web site where they show the graph on wand positions, a possible for TR is the usual 50-10, for FS 60-10 and for FO the possible is a 70. I don't shoot FO but I hope it is out of 70 as I firmly believe that the centre should always be rewarded.
They also mention that they are using the 60-10 in FS as the tie breaker because they only have 20 targets and wish to avoid shoot-offs,so FS is still out of the usual 60 and the SV is the tie breaker.
I may be wrong but the way I read it is FO is out of 70.
Ray.

[AlanF]

Razer,

Yes that's right. 70 at Canberra. I was thinking more about a proposed rules change for F-Open, bringing the Super V target into the SSRs.

I think the Canberra scoring will be fine - in fact it will be the first time I have shot the Super V as a 7 - I've been in several shoots with it as either 5.1 or 6.1, so I see this as a good trial.

Alan

[Matt P]

Alan
Which side of the fence are you on the 60.10 or the 70 ???
I plan on shooting Open at Canberra but would have liked Open spread across the range like FS and it scored 60.10, a good comprimise would have had Open on the same target and scored 60.10, but using the Super V target is step in the right direction.

Matt P

[Chopper]

As above but 50.10 across the range and i would be there in a heart beat, as you say Matt a step in the right direction.

[AlanF]

Which side of the fence are you on the 60.10 or the 70 ???

Matt,

I'm definitely leaning towards 60.10 with 2 sighters. BUT, having never shot with the super v scored as 7, I'd like to try it. Regarding squadding, its probably best for F-Open if we squad with everyone else, and be more sociable. But I enjoy the way F-open has been squadded on its own target particularly at Queens. I'm trying to imagine what it would be like here in SA if we were squadded everywhere. As it is we're having a ball - I'll ask the shooters tomorrow - we have 12 on the one target, and have actually been finishing the ranges last .

As above but 50.10 across the range and i would be there in a heart beat, Alan

Paul,

50.10 scoring means that every wand position will have a different score for F-Open (too big a change for scorers and asking for trouble with mistakes), or alternatively having the markers change all their wand positions for F-Open (again asking for trouble IMO).

Alan

[RDavies]

So is Canberra going to be 2 sighters for FO?

[Chopper]

You keep doing what you doing and Yul keep getting what ya getting.

[AlanF]

I said I'd ask the F-Open shooters at the SARA Queens how they want to be squadded at Queens if the super V makes it possible for us to be easily squadded with TR and F-Std. We had a very quick meeting of all 12 (plus B Moulds who dropped in to say gidday) behind the 800m mound today, and the vote was unanimous that at Queens shoots, we should be squadded on our own target(s).

[Triplejim]

<snip>the vote was unanimous that at Queens shoots, we should be squadded on our own target(s).

The Super Vee was supposed to allow FO shooters to be squaded with FS and TR shooters. Why continue to segregate yourselves? JC

[AlanF]

The Super Vee was supposed to allow FO shooters to be squaded with FS and TR shooters. Why continue to segregate yourselves?

James,

The main advantage of the Super V for F-Open is in my opinion that its much cheaper and easier to provide than the Open target, particularly for OPM organisers. As you point out, it also gives the option of squadding all categories together. This I would expect to be done at OPMs where the flexibility would be good for organisers who could put any shooter on any target as they arrive. However at Queens shoots, there is more certainty about numbers, so I wouldn't expect organisers to be too concerned about it - e.g. Canberra seems to be happy with separate squadding.

As far as the shooters wishes go, I can tell you it was not a "push poll" at Adelaide - I ran the poll, and specifically mentioned the advantages (social interaction) of combined squadding, but the feeling among the F-Open shooters was clear cut. They felt there was plenty of opportunity at Queens shoots for socialising off the mound, and for various reasons they preferred being squadded on our own target. I suspect the main reason is that some good friendships have developed over the years, and as a group we have some good laughs - splitting us up across the range would take that away.

It could be argued that squadding us with TR and F-Std might improve relations between us, and attract a few shooters into F-Open. However that isn't really helping overall numbers - its just "shifting deckchairs". Better for us to bring in new people from outside full bore, and make the Queens such an enjoyable experience they'll come back for more.

Alan