Ok, so some of what I'm about to say may upset some people but it's my opinion, based on my experiences so I don't expect everyone to like it or agree with it. Say what you will but the following are my thoughts on the matter. (I'm also not going to comment on Pistol/Shotgun since I know nothing about them).

1. Range scoreboards/internet service. Awesome idea. Definitely a way of bringing the sport into the 21st century... but I think it says a lot about the people in charge that it's taken them this long to think this up.

2. Sighting time. I actually think this could be made to work and I can see the logic behind it. My only question is how they're going to make it work in 3P. I would not object to them splitting it so that you had prep/sighting time and then x amount of time to shoot each position (kind of like how the guys do it). Although I like being able to just get on with my match, I can see that the way the men's 3P is currently shot makes it easier to follow for spectators.

3. Ties. Glad they got rid of the shoot off. It was just an added complication to an already complicated sport. Although it was fun and added an extra element, they're right - it's difficult to schedule and therefore difficult to prepare for as an athlete.

4. Rifle rules. Thankfully, these are just a summary so we can't expect to understand exactly what they're on about because they're pretty much gibberish at the moment. But depending on the interpretation there could be some major (and expensive) problems in this. Vibration reduction system. At best, people will have to get rid of some accessories. At worst, almost every air rifle and a number of the stocks currently on the market are illegal. Could be very expensive. Air rifle pistol grip. Once again, the ISSF are proven to be run solely by old men. I had to ask myself if any of them have every actually looked at a woman when I read this rule. We have these things called breasts and while I'm very attached to mine, they do have a tendency to just get in the way. And I'm not that well endowed. I hate to think of the problems larger chested women are going to have if this rule comes in to play - it's not like they're detachable. Chest rests. Well, there's an easy way round this. Old wooden stocks anyone? Pathetic attempt to meddle and hasn't been thought through at all. Clothing stiffness and thickness testing (minimum area measurement). This rule is going to suck if you're really small... great for getting juniors involved. Not. Normal walking test. Define normal. Morons. Shoe sole contour. So new boots for everyone. Manufacturers will be pleased. My bank balance won't be. Shooting jacket left side panel (for right handed shooter). So that's a new jacket to add to my new boots and new air rifle... except that with my figure, there's no way on this planet that I'm going to be able to get a jacket to fit me if there isn't a seam there. Once again, proof that the ISSF bigwigs have never seen a woman. We have these things called hips. Along with breasts, they make tailoring shooting jackets for us a bit of a challenge. Take out those seams and it's going to become damn near impossible. Time limits. Personally, I think that's great but that's because I shoot fast so I fully appreciate that other people might struggle with the new time limits... which, from a selfish point of view is awesome Overall, I feel like the changes to the rifle rules are the ISSF just tinkering because they can. There's no real need for any of it and as I've pointed out, it's going to cause major issues for women in particular as well as causing massive financial issues for everyone involved. Nobody benefits - not even manufacturers or dealers because they are going to be left with a whole load of stock that they're not going to be able to shift.

5. New finals rules. Now this could take a while. Firstly, I disagree completely with their reasoning. "Olympic sports today must become more dynamic, attract more fans, engage the public with more drama and provide great shows for youth, spectators, television and the media". I'm wondering if any members of the ISSF were actually at the London Olympic Games (I know they were, because I saw them... maybe they walked around with their eyes closed). In case they hadn't noticed, it was sold out. The venue was full. So there's clearly the potential there. Yes, media coverage could have been better. But I don't think it's got anything to do with the format of the matches. The broadcasters just don't have the knowledge or the experience to be able to show shooting in the best way. ISSF TV is going in the right direction but it's still missing something (maybe a commentator who knows what she's actually talking about). Now, I don't normally watch ISSF TV - most of the time, I don't need to see the finals again because I was in the range watching them live in the first place. But after I made the final in Munich, I decided to watch my final back again (the whole thing was a bit of a blur to me and my boyfriend had said that the commentary was good). So I sat down to watch it and low and behold, who was commentating but my good friend Petra Zublasing. Her commentary was brilliant. There was so much personality to it - she talked about the personalities of the shooters, their strengths and weaknesses (she was quite disparaging about my standing as well, if I remember correctly), their history (or lack of in my case). And that's when I realised what was missing. Personality. Because our sport is so introverted and so self-contained, to the outsider there's no personality in it. But there is. And that's why it's fun to watch finals if you're a shooter. Because you know the history and the personalities. And if you had a commentator who could pass that knowledge on to the spectators, it would become a lot more interesting.

But I've gone a bit off topic... the new finals format is unfair. Some people may think it's a great idea because it gives more opportunity to shooters who didn't do quite so well in the qualification. And as a shooter who has been in that position, I can understand the appeal. I'd have got bronze in Munich under the new rules. Sure, there was some element of skill involved in that, but I finished 2 points behind 3rd - not the 0.2 points I would have been ahead under the new rules. The best three shooters on the day won the medals. That's what it's all about. You're not good enough to win a medal by shooting a good qualification? You don't deserve a medal. Under the new rules, Nicco wouldn't even have medalled in London - despite shooting a score 8 points better than the guy in 2nd and 12 points better than the guy in 8th. Sport is about the best person winning. There's no two ways about that. And what the ISSF haven't realised, in the obsession with trying to attract media attention, is that they're making it even harder for grassroots sports. This new format of final demands to be shot on electronic targets which many clubs (and even some countries) don't have the facilities for. Much as we may like for there to be electronics in every club/range in the world, that just isn't the case and this rule would make the sport even less accessible to new shooters. Also, at domestic level, the gap between first and eighth can but much greater than the one or two points that you see at World Cups. But is it really fair that at a national championships, someone can go in ten, twenty or even thirty points in front and that count for nothing?

http://www.petitiono...F/petition.html

I have signed this petition and I think it makes an interesting point.

"We as the shooters and coaches around the world, appreciate the effort of the ISSF in order to make shooting a better sport but at the same time we believe that such important decisions should not be taken without the agreement of the majority of shooters and coaches."

This is our sport and as such we should have a say in how it's run. I encourage anyone and everyone to sign this petition - or at least, to read the rather eloquent points made my Nicco and Rajmond. Ours is one of the oldest sports in the modern Olympics... let us try and keep the essence of it in tact

Thirdfox wrote: »

Any developments on this?

RobinC wrote:

My wife and I have just returned from shooting in Germany and Austria (this morning!)and including time spent at MEC for coaching. These proposals have been about over there last week and have caused a bit of a bombshell. There is a lot of opposition, and almost no one there seems to understand the meaning or interpretation, one rule even mixes English and German language!
The drafting is poor and ambigious, the vibration reducing system is a complete mystery, it says "rifle" but does not define what type, if air they believe it will ban all recoiless rifles including the old ones such as the FWB 300 and the Original 75 and would be un enforcable with out dismantling to verify! The people I saw believed it referred to smallbore rifles, and Maik Eckhart told me that Anschutz had seen the drafts and were not concerned so they think its smallbore.
The German federation has seen the drafts and has stated that if the rules become official they will not use them for domestic events and championships for at least a year.
My personal view is that they will make no difference to the small number of elite, but will drive the club shooter further away from national championships.
Robin

KennyB wrote:

I spoke to Dave Goodfellow about the Vibration Control section and he said he was as surprised as anyone when he read about it - it hadn't been discussed in committee and seems to come straight from Willi Grill.

RobinC wrote:

for those that have not seen it, there is a communique from the ISSF to national bodies worded that these proposals have been agreed by the excecutive committee, etc, and it is being distributed to those national bodies so they may prepare how they comply with them!!!!!

So as far as the ISSF is concerned these are the new rules!!!!

I have just returned to the UK from a shooting trip in Germany and of all I met including two major gun manufacturers, a major accessory manufacturer,shooters and prominent people in German shooting none who had been consulted or knew about these proposalss until they appeared on the internet last week. All disagree with most of these proposals. I was told that the German federation has said that it will not enforce these proposals in their domestic competion next year.

If this proposal is allowed to become rules it will do nothing to improve the sport for the elite or for TV but will aid the decline in lower levels of club and national shooting.
The petition is only against the finals procedure, to protect our sport we must all object and swamp the ISSF e mails with objections, just leave the rules as they are and enforce them correctly.
Robin

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the new ISSF rule prohibiting "vibration reduction systems."

The ISSF is still working on the final wording of this rule, but the ISSF intent is to prohibit the use of any device or system that would artificially reduce, slow or control the movements or oscillations of a rifle or pistol before the shot is fired. This rule is intended to preclude the application of anti-vibration technology now used in photography, for example, to rifle or pistol shooting This rule will not affect passive means of controlling gun movements such as barrel weights and it will not affect any existing technology that stabilizes the rifle or pistol after the shot is fired. It should also be noted that ISSF Pistol and Rifle Rules already prohibit the use of compensators, muzzle brakes or other similar devices that could control how the rifle or pistol recoils during the shot.

On this basis, the compensators on air rifles and pistol are not activated until the shot is fired and would remain legal. Barrel tuning and bedding systems have nothing to do with rifle movements before the shot and would not be affected. Passive systems like barrel weights are specifically excluded. Barrel ports on rapid fire pistol have been illegal for several years and this new regulation would not change that.

With best regards,
Gary Anderson
ISSF Vice President

REPORT ABOUT ISSF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND ISSF ADMINISTRATIVE COUNCIL MEETING

On 12 and 13 November 2012 the ISSF Executive Committee and the ISSF Administrative Council met for their second meetings this year in Acapulco, MEX. These meetings dealt with the completion of the Technical Rules for the next Olympic Cycle 2013 to 2016. During these very important meetings the detailed rules for the Finals in all Olympic Events as of 1 January 2013 were discussed and finalized. Many discussions with athletes and coaches regarding the new rules helped to develop excellent solutions and some compromises that will help the shooting sport move forward in reaching one of his goals in becoming a more spectator and media friendly sport. We are very pleased that all decisions to approve the new technical and Finals rules were unanimous. This once again shows that the shooting sport is united and works for the benefit of the sport and the Olympic Movement.

The new rules will be published in the next days on the ISSF website and ISSF looks forward to using the new rules in all 2013 Championships.

...continues

Sheffield, 29 November 2012

Dear shooters and coaches,
First of all I would like to thank you for your support to the ISSF “back to zero rule” petition: more than 2000
signatures and almost 20 Olympic champions. It was a great result. Our aim was to make our voices heard and become an
active part of the changing rule process, and thanks to your tremendous help we succeeded. In this regard I would like to
apologize for my late communication of recent events but unfortunately I could not extrapolate all the email addresses
from the Petition website and get in touch with all of you. I am thankful to President Lisin that allowed me to use the
European Shooting home page.

As you probably know, a couple of days after I put the petition online I was invited by ISSF to participate in the new
3p final test in Munich that had previously been scheduled for 10th-12th October. I accepted their offer as I felt that,
as well as gaining first hand experience of the new format, I would also have the opportunity to meet with and exchange
views and opinions with the ISSF leaders. Those present included Secretary Franz Schreiber, Vice-President Gary Anderson
and some members of the Technical Commission. Also present were other invited international shooters including myself,
several from the German team, the American Jason Parker, the Belarus Shcherbatsevich and the Swiss shooters Beyeler and
Loretan.

Although the meeting was constructive, our main concern with the new format was the “back to zero rule”. The reason
for this is because of the imbalance it creates between luck and skill. However the ISSF would not negotiate their
position on the “back to zero rule” telling us that such decision was already made and out of the question. In
view of this we pressed for an increase in the number of shots in the final since the more we shoot the less the luck
component is decisive.

After two days of frank and open discussion this consensus was hard won with both sides compromising on positions on
which they felt strongly. The final decision was the following:
3p final: 45 (15x3) shots, increased from 30 (previous proposal)
All other disciplines: 20, increased from 10

At the meeting in October I also suggested the following changes might improve participant and spectator experience -­

‐ FOR THE SHOOTER: introduction of the decimal scores in the qualification round. At present the qualification process
in order to gain access to the final is not sensitive enough for air rifle and prone. For example the difference between
making the final and not making the final is often so small that it is as likely to have arisen by chance as by skill.
The final score could just be the difference between shooting a 9.9 rather than a 10.0. In order to provide evidence
for this proposal I collected all the World Cup rankings of the last Olympic cycle and calculated the average number of
shooters that did not qualify for the final but scored within 1 point from the last finalist. Air rifle men and women and
prone were by far the most problematic events (an average of 10 shooters out of the final but within 1 point in air rifle
and an average of 7 shooters in prone, all the others event had less than 5 shooters).

‐ FOR THE MEDIA: implementation of technology such as a heart rate monitor and/or tracking devices for showing the
aiming trace. The way we present ourselves is as important as the format we use, and so far we are not particularly
engaging on television, regardless of the format.

Mr. Schreiber and Mr. Anderson appeared interested in both the above proposals, admitting that these two points have
already been taken into consideration by the ISSF council.

The 2013 will be a very interesting season in order to evaluate pros and cons of the ‘decimal’ qualification round
and hopefully introduce new technologies. However, I would like to propose that this is just the beginning of a new phase
of development in competition shooting in which the evaluation of the proposed changes over the coming years results
from the assessment of participant, organizer, media and spectator experiences. In this regard I believe that a solid
collaboration between athletes, coaches and the Federation is essential for the future of our sport.

Thanks again for your support and I wish everybody a successful (and fun) 2013 season.
Sincerely,
Nicco Campriani