OzFclass

AlanF wrote:... However that's not what this thread is supposed to be about. My understanding of the original post is that its asking for discussion on how to implement a new class i.e. F/TR. ...

My main suggestion in implementing it is to not piss off the people you want to shoot your class of shooting. Alienate your potential shooters and you will fail.

The easiest way to alienate your shooters in the current climate is to come on too heavy (and bossy) and to attack the category they're currently shooting.

Use the carrot and not the stick. You just have to find a carrot though...

well said alan
bruce moulds

AlanF wrote:I'm not sure whether FT/R with its severe weight restriction is likely to succeed. However that's not what this thread is supposed to be about. My understanding of the original post is that its asking for discussion on how to implement a new class i.e. F/TR. I think it deserves a fair go - I don't think it should be discouraged because it may take numbers away from F-Std

Good call, Alan.

Not to long back I spoke to a FS shooter who was considering nominating for Raton. He saw no issue replacing his rest with a suitable bipod, and why not?

As I said in an earlier post, Britain's TR's only similarity with Palma is the calibre they shoot. Rifle & trigger weight, ammo type & target - they're all different from ICFRA specifications. Neverthewless they manage to kick arse internationally with monotonous regularity. Hey, Palma's attended by between 8 & 11 entrants fielding 16 shooters & fewer than half of those countries shoot anything close to ICFRA rules any other time but when they're up for their 4 yearly visit to Palma.

If I thought I could nominate for Raton as well as Bisley MR 2012 & keep my soft bits, I'd put my Leupy 24x back on the rifle, drop it into my wood stock, suitably Brazilled, & fenestrate my Larkin bipod until I made weight. Might even do it anyway, just for the heck of it - as long as I can shoot FS when I want to. That rig would be an advantage to me, as it would to any shooter using a front rest - an extra allowable ¼ kg of weight to soak up the recoil.

The New Zealand version of F/TR is interesting. Any type of 308W or 223R projectile or ammo can be used, providing it is safe to shoot in the rifle.

The weight limit with a bipod (or without) is lower than ICFRA at 8.0kg but all you FS aficionados would be happy to migrate there as they allow front stands.

Interesting NZ have allowed the free ammo selection like ICFRA but like Australia have not moved onto the updated ICFRA implementation of F/TR.

Check out their Technical Rules here: http://www.nranz.com/

When we eventually migrate FS onto the ICFRA F/TR standard all you shooters with front stands can move into FO and with your heavy projectile shooting 223s and 308s show us just how much difference there is in the current FO class.

Happy New Year!

IanP

IanP wrote:...When we eventually migrate FS onto the ICFRA F/TR standard ...

I'd make that an "If".

Happy New Year to you too.

Alan

IanP wrote:The New Zealand version of F/TR is interesting. Any type of 308W or 223R projectile or ammo can be used, providing it is safe to shoot in the rifle.

The weight limit with a bipod (or without) is lower than ICFRA at 8.0kg but all you FS aficionados would be happy to migrate there as they allow front stands.

Interesting NZ have allowed the free ammo selection like ICFRA but like Australia have not moved onto the updated ICFRA implementation of F/TR.

Check out their Technical Rules here: http://www.nranz.com/

When we eventually migrate FS onto the ICFRA F/TR standard all you shooters with front stands can move into FO and with your heavy projectile shooting 223s and 308s show us just how much difference there is in the current FO class.

Happy New Year!

IanP

According to the F/TR proponents the entire world is shooting ICFRA F-T/R and we're the only holdouts; but now it seems NZ isn't either...

My understanding is that in the rest of the world (UK, US, South Africa, Germany, NZ, not sure about Canada), F Class Open is the main game - i.e. numbers wise its the reverse of Australia. The relative popularity of F-Std in Australia says something for the particular formula we have, although I suspect there have been other factors at work in the past that have held back F-Open here.

Alan

ALAN NUMBER ONE HERE, WHERE HAVING ENOUGH TROUBLE GETTING PEOPLE TO ATTEND PRIZE MEETING , AND UR UP HERE PORKCHOP SAYINGTHAT WHERE NUMER ONE AND WE ARE GETTING HELD ,BACK WHAT DO U THINK IS HOLDING US BACK.HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM I WONDER

VickiMcc wrote:ALAN NUMBER ONE HERE, WHERE HAVING ENOUGH TROUBLE GETTING PEOPLE TO ATTEND PRIZE MEETING , AND UR UP HERE PORKCHOP SAYINGTHAT WHERE NUMER ONE AND WE ARE GETTING HELD ,BACK WHAT DO U THINK IS HOLDING US BACK.HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM I WONDER

AlanF wrote:

Good.

I thought it was just me!

Sort of got away from promoting F/TR again have'nt we?

My interpretation of the NZ rules for FS ( or F/TR ) is that the weight of 8 kg applies whether Bipod is used or not--ie 8kg with Bipod or 8 kg without bipod. --bit like Aus rules but a couple of kg lighter. One would have a problem as such complying with ICFRA with 0.25 kg for a bipod!!
Wonder what they will do?
Barry

VickiMcc wrote:ALAN NUMBER ONE HERE, WHERE HAVING ENOUGH TROUBLE GETTING PEOPLE TO ATTEND PRIZE MEETING , AND UR UP HERE PORKCHOP SAYINGTHAT WHERE NUMER ONE AND WE ARE GETTING HELD ,BACK WHAT DO U THINK IS HOLDING US BACK.HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM I WONDER

Trouble getting people to attend prize meetings??? What's holding us back???

Perhaps it's the FACT that the majority of F-Class shooters are not ex T/R shooters and for them Prize Meetings are a completely alien concept.

Perhaps it's the FACT that prizes for F-Class at prize meetings are typically lower than for T/R shoots and people just aren't motivated to enter.

Perhaps it's the FACT that F-Class has not been graded and because it's a sport that lets you have fun with whatever equipment you have, you get a lot of shooters that are really just B Grade shooters. They have no interest in competing against a pool of A Grade shooters.

Perhaps it's the FACT that your average Saturday shooter has zero interest in prize meets or competition of any kind. The reason we can have 20 people turn up to shoot F-Class weekly but cannot put together two 4 man teams for a grade shoot.


Perhaps the thing holding us back is the people who cannot recognise these issues; that F-Class is not made up of people who have a long history of active competition.

Perhaps it's the FACT that no one takes the time to promote the sport for newcomers and everyone assumes that people already know everything that they need to know. How the hell does a newcomer develop and interest in OPM's when no one actually takes the time to explain what the abbreviation OPM stands for?

There are plenty of web sites out there. How many of them devote space to actually explaining anything in a way that a beginner can understand?
And that only gets the ones with net access.

How many publications have you seen explaining OPM's and prize meets? Hell, it was poorly communicated that the NSW Queens was going to be graded this year. I know a few that would have gone in had they know that it was going to be graded.

There are a lot of reasons for lack of attendances at OPM's and there is a lot of factors holding us back.

But not having F/TR is not a reason for either.

I won't be surprised to see people reasoning that not having F-TR is the reason for bindies in the grass on the mound and the real reason we couldn't get 4kg bottles of ar2208.
Its also the reason for those unexplained fliers and the reason why some match barrels are dud's. I'm pretty sure that the guy I saw with some pierced primers a while back was because of he wasn't shooting F-TR.
What else can we attribute to the lack of F-TR?

M12LRPV all too true, in some instances, sadly.

Barry Davies wrote:Sort of got away from promoting F/TR again have'nt we?
Barry

Barry I'm not sure that too many of us who like living where we are should consider promoting F/TR. As those of us who don't believe in the inevitability of the impending failure of F Std to be superceded by F/TR, have been told to find another planet or subsequently to move to another country, neither of which I have any intention of doing.

johnk wrote:Rod,

It's difficult to discount that your interest is largely commercial & the interests of Aussie shooters secondary.

John

Not having read this for a little while I see there has been some interest in the topic.

The question had to be asked (about F/TR), it may as well be someone (a shooter) that could not care less what discipline was what, or who else shoots it. That would be me.

John, you have got it wrong this time. The suggestion is narrow minded, and is typical of shooters that only see what they want to see.

Back to the topic itself...

Bow and arrows were used by countries to defend / attack for over 1000 years, but we don't see them used for that any more (not in the mainstream anyway). What history shows us is that change is just the way it goes....like it or not.

I am not proposing F/TR be transposed directly over FS as we know it. I think the posters so far have made some pretty good observations and sensible thoughts.

We should allow people to shoot in F/TR if they so choose, as it is a legitimate discipline in terms of ICFRA, our adopted overarching standard. This does not automatically include it in schedules of course, but if there are people that want to compete internationally, or in preparation for F/TR for some reason, they should be allowed to do this. If this means they have to shoot in F Open for reasons of bullet weight etc, then so be it. I have no doubt anyone thinking about this has the obvious answer of using FS bullets for the comps, and their ICFRA stuff otherwise. I know people that do this now.