Classification Query

BountyHunter

Hi all,

What is the method of classifying people? As in A, B, C or D? For 50m smallbore..

Cheers,

BountyHunter.

NTSA

Hi BountyHunter

People are classified on the basis of their two last recorded scores indoors. If they've only shot once their classification is provisional.

Classification is updated after each indoor competition.

It wasn't me!

Outdoor scores don't count? Awesome, my woeful outdoor scores won't drag down my ever so slightly less woeful indoor scores so.

IRLConor

I get a better crack at picking up some crystal in class B for a little longer then.

It wasn't me!

Yeah, but come the Autumn you're going to have to start doing some work! :pac:

IRLConor

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yeah, but come the Autumn you're going to have to start doing some work! :pac:

Yeah. If I don't bring home crystal it's harder to get a day pass for the next competition.

Seriously though, are there any plans to start including outdoor scores in the classification?

It wasn't me!

Yeah, it seems odd that the outdoor nationals wouldn't count towards your classification.

IRLConor

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yeah, it seems odd that the outdoor nationals wouldn't count towards your classification.

I think previously it was due to very irregular attendance at outdoor matches coupled with poor reporting of scores. Or maybe my mind is playing tricks on me.

Making a combined indoor-outdoor classification could be hard, it's a bit of an apples and oranges thing.

rrpc

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yeah, it seems odd that the outdoor nationals wouldn't count towards your classification.

If outdoor scores counted many people would be in a different class every month!

The classification is based on actual averages achieved in indoor competition. Remember that classification is just a means of classifying competitors as fairly as possible for class prizes.

You win a competition, you win - wherever it is. You don't, you may get a class prize or not, but at least you're comparing apples with apples. You shoot in a selection match, you make the grade or not: class doesn't matter.

Sparks

It's a pity we couldn't have some sort of system like DURC uses (the ladder cards) for classification in all disciplines, but you'd have to report scores in from all over the shop every day. We don't have any system for that (which isn't to say we couldn't develop one if we had manpower enough), and not everyone would shoot a ladder card every time they come down to train either, so competitions always got used instead. And people just don't shoot enough competitions.

To be honest, I'd rather see work done on a national rankings system before we worked too much on the class system. And I'd rather we worked on running more matches before we worked on the national rankings

Correct me if I am wrong here but when I started:

Indoor and outdoor rankings were seperate.
Indoor was based on your last three (or something) scores but outdoor had a series of targets, eg once you shoor higher then 570 you went into A and you stayed in A. To go down, you need to ask NTSA.

That system was better as it was not possible to bandit a class.

Sparks

That's how it used to be run (except for the one-way trip into class A, I dont' remember that, and I do remember dropping out of A once or twice). Then we had a foot-and-mouth scare and to be honest, outdoor shooting still hasn't fully recovered from that. Certainly the number of 50m matches is nowhere near where it used to be. At the same time, don't forget, we've lost ranges since - Fassaroe had to move and aren't able to run competitions yet. BRC is running the nationals and hopefully we'll see more matches from there, same with the midlands and fermoy, and maybe we'll sort out the NI-ROI problem one of these days, but for now, we're way down on numbers.

IRLConor

Sparks wrote: »

And people just don't shoot enough competitions

Indeed, for the competitions I have data for (the last 9 25yd and 50m competitions with published scores on the net) only 50% of the shooters shot more than 2 matches. Only 1/3 shot more than half of the matches.

Here's the distribution:

Number of competitions|A|B|C|D|Unclassified|Total
9|0|1|0|0|0|1
8|2|0|2|1|0|5
7|2|1|0|0|0|3
6|1|2|2|0|0|5
5|0|1|1|0|0|2
4|1|1|2|1|0|5
3|1|1|1|0|0|3
2|2|4|2|3|1|12
1|0|0|0|7|5|12

Sparks

Yup. The problem's not trivial, it's a fundamental activity level problem.
Maybe we could try to run a national postal league or something of that nature, but again, you're into the manpower problems there. I tried to run a postal match before and it was sadly a disaster, the workload was just too high to run the match and be on the club committee and try to do the day job as well. You'd need a volunteer who wasn't doing anything and didn't mind spending four or five hours a week just scoring cards and collating results and sending a spreadsheet in to the NTSA.

Sparks

Sparks wrote: »

Yup. The problem's not trivial, it's a fundamental activity level problem.
Maybe we could try to run a national postal league or something of that nature, but again, you're into the manpower problems there. I tried to run a postal match before and it was sadly a disaster, the workload was just too high to run the match and be on the club committee and try to do the day job as well. You'd need a volunteer who wasn't doing anything and didn't mind spending four or five hours a week just scoring cards and collating results and sending a spreadsheet in to the NTSA.

The UCESSA league works very well with only one admin person in the RoI.

Sparks

One in the ROI; several in NI; and somewhere around two decades of experience running the match. It's not trivial. Still though, were a volunteer to come forward...
...or maybe we should be sensible and just say "feck it, let's not reinvent the wheel" and really push people into the UCESSA league down here as well.

Sparks

Sparks wrote: »

One in the ROI; several in NI; and somewhere around two decades of experience running the match. It's not trivial. Still though, were a volunteer to come forward...
...or maybe we should be sensible and just say "feck it, let's not reinvent the wheel" and really push people into the UCESSA league down here as well.

DURC had 10 entries or so this year, with the top shooter putting in the third highest score in the competition.

Over half of the shooters picked up some prizes.

Sparks

I know we usually have high numbers in the UCESSA Zara, we've done so since before I started shooting even, but 10 is way too low to try to help with the classification scores issue. I meant we'd have to have every shooter who ever even looked at a match entered into it, and preferably more. If you want classifications to follow a shooter's training and performance levels closely, you need more data points sampled, there's no way around that, it's a basic math thing. The more data points, the more accurate the classification.

IRLConor

The other problem with the UCESSA winter league is that there are only two ranges that I know of in the country that cater to that type of shooting, DURC and RRPC. Since DURC only has 2 lanes and is only available to students, staff and alumni you're really looking at RRPC as the only option for someone who wants to shoot the winter league from the RoI.

It's a fantastic place to shoot your cards, but not everyone can make the round trip frequently enough to make it worth their while.

Personally (my view on this):

Classification should come from matches and matches alone as it is very easy to alter scores in a postal shoot. Secondly, if people are being classified by matches, then everyone faces the same conditions and thats more fair then playing 'who has the best range'.

I shoot much better in postal leages because I am on my home range and much more relaxed then a match, plus its easier to do well for 10 shots rather then 60.

The way I see it - more matches, simple as.

Both air rifle and .22 matches are decreasing each year since I started shooting, and I see this as a NGB issue (although they say it isn't). I know a popular past time here is to take a pop at NGBs, but this is one area where I think the NTSA really fail (and I know they read this and I know they know who I am but **** it).

More matches, more experience, better scores.

Would a member of the NTSA be willing to come out (or email me) with the number of times that this issue has been discussed in the minutes of NTSA meetings?

Sparks

I know it was discussed every two or three meetings when I was on the committee, but the problem was always the same - the NTSA cannot order a club to run a match, their role is coordination of the calendars, collation of results, production of classification lists and so on. The NTSA has no range of it's own, so it can't run matches every weekend (the Nationals are the only matches the NGB runs, and it depends on hiring ranges from the clubs for those).

It's a case of both sides needing to push more, not just one.

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

I know it was discussed every two or three meetings when I was on the committee, but the problem was always the same - the NTSA cannot order a club to run a match, their role is coordination of the calendars, collation of results, production of classification lists and so on. The NTSA has no range of it's own, so it can't run matches every weekend (the Nationals are the only matches the NGB runs, and it depends on hiring ranges from the clubs for those).

It's a case of both sides needing to push more, not just one.

It's not often I find myself agreeing with you wholeheartedly Sparks, but this is one of those rare occasions

The calendar is a big issue in all this as well. Sparks knows the kind of data we have to assimilate into the equation in order to avoid clashes with just about everything thrown into the pot. We still haven't got the timing right on the Air Nationals despite numerous attempts. It's still a problem (in my view) when the colours match gets more entries than the nationals.

In terms of the number of matches, it's slowly increasing as we bring more clubs on line. Myself and Kieran Barry brought back the Fermoy shoot, yet (take note those who are complaining) only six turned up to shoot in it.

As for the classification system, Conor is right. You just don't get enough reliable data from 50m shoots to classify on that basis and in any event it's only classification: A method of giving someone a chance to get a piece of glass or whatever. The more level the playing field, the less people that will feel hard done by.

Incidentally, the classification gives a national ranking, and has done since this time last year with changes highlighted with each issue.

But this is a good discussion and the type of one which I'd like to see more of on this forum. I'm always open to suggestions and when a good one comes along, I'm delighted to give it a try.

I agree that we need more matches, but we also need the kind of turnouts we saw at the last two in DRC for clubs to be motivated to run them.

Sparks

rrpc wrote: »

It's not often I find myself agreeing with you wholeheartedly Sparks, but this is one of those rare occasions

Though to be honest, we're usually at about 90% agreement and differ over the final 10%. It's rare for me to know you're utterly wrong

The calendar is a big issue in all this as well. Sparks knows the kind of data we have to assimilate into the equation in order to avoid clashes with just about everything thrown into the pot. We still haven't got the timing right on the Air Nationals despite numerous attempts. It's still a problem (in my view) when the colours match gets more entries than the nationals.

It is, but the colours isn't actually under the aegis of the NTSA at all anyway, it's solely the domain of the college clubs (it only shows up on the NTSA calendar for completeness, same as some club shoots like the RRPC Turkey Shoot do). It's an interesting look at a different way of running matches and it highlights the problem - in the colours, you have two clubs that commit to that match from before the start of the academic year and train towards it for about four to six months or so, taking in complete newbies as well as experienced people to form two teams per club for the match. It's well-known within the club membership that this is going on - there's a block of time booked every week for training and that's visible to any other shooter who's booking a detail to shoot on. There's a lot of time and effort invested into the teams and a lot of bragging rights on the line. Which rather proves the point that the push has to come from the clubs and the high-level admin stuff just won't drive things along (it's necessary but not sufficient).

Incidentally, the classification gives a national ranking, and has done since this time last year with changes highlighted with each issue.

How does that handle the decay rate? (ie. how do you prevent someone shooting a 590+ score in one match and then holding the number one spot throughout the year even though they may not fire another shot in competition or training in all that time?)

RRPC - just got a tonne of worked dumped on me so this will be my last post until after 6!

This is a bit of chicken and egg situation.

The NTSA can't force clubs to run matches (allthogh it can stop them as DURC found out), but it can run them themselves.

RRPC - its great that you got the Fermoy shoot on but given that;

the majority of shooters are based in teh Dublin / Wicklow area, holding a match on in say, Balbriggan, would have probably have had a better result in terms of numbers.

I get really angry hearing people in the NTSA saying that 'scores are going down and matches are going down, but what can we do?'
Its the NTSA's job to try and fix this. I heard a lot of very, very good suggestions in a meeting in UCD two years ago and haven't seen any of them implemented appart from raising the qualifying score (which I agree with).

Where are the squad shoots gone? Where are the regional level coaches?

[RANT] When I was captain in DURC I was talking to the NSTA and saying that I have around 100 shooters who are reasonable plinkers and a very large number of air rifle shooters who were competitive shooters. I was asking was there anything the NTSA could do to help them - any plans for junior squad etc. No. Nothing at all. no contact from NTSA, no one from NTSA asking where there any good, potential new Susans among them, I heard nothing from NTSA apart from where was the clubs membership that year.

I was given out to by UCD for 'booking too many people in' and as result, half the squad couldn't shoot at matches.

I have heard much more from one club (no guesses which one) in terms of support and help in one year, then I have ever heard from the NTSA.

Now you can sit there and say 'what can we do', but when every shooter in our squad new the name of one club, and was greatful to that club for help and supprt, and where asking who the hell are the NTSA, that shows that something isn't quite right
[/rant]

Sorry for having a go but that really pissed me off at the time and is one of the reasons why I haven't been around for the last while (before the exam revision started)

IRLConor

rrpc wrote: »

But this is a good discussion and the type of one which I'd like to see more of on this forum. I'm always open to suggestions and when a good one comes along, I'm delighted to give it a try.

I've been playing around with some of the scores having a look at different ranking mechanisms.

So far I like weighted averaging (and not just because it tends to rank me higher! ) because it takes "trajectory" into account. Someone's recent form makes a bigger difference than their old scores. I've been using a pretty simple version. For example if a shooter has shot 4 matches: 570, 574, 581, 585 it would be calculated as follows:

((570 * 1) + (574 * 2) + (581 * 3) + (585 * 4)) / (1 + 2 + 3 + 4) == 580.1

A simple average would be 577.5. The higher weighted average reflects the fact that the shooter is on the way up in terms of scores.

A shooter with the following scores: 579, 580, 576, 565 would get a weighted average of 572.7 where their simple average was 575.

It still needs something in there to deal with people who don't shoot all that regularly. For example, there's at least one class A shooter who I haven't seen shoot since the last 50m nationals. He's a talented shooter, so bumping him down a class would be unfair on the class B shooters if he comes back. On the other hand, it's also unfair if he gets to stay artificially high in the list.

rrpc wrote: »

I agree that we need more matches, but we also need the kind of turnouts we saw at the last two in DRC for clubs to be motivated to run them.

Indeed, a big fear (certainly for DURC in the past) is that too few people turn up and the club makes a loss on the competition.

He's a talented shooter, so bumping him down a class would be unfair on the class B shooters if he comes back. On the other hand, it's also unfair if he gets to stay artificially high in the list.

Why - he just sits at the bottom of A then and doesn't start picking up B glassware.

Sparks

Deleted User wrote: »

Its the NTSA's job to try and fix this. I heard a lot of very, very good suggestions in a meeting in UCD two years ago and haven't seen any of them implemented appart from raising the qualifying score (which I agree with).

I might answer one or two of these since I was one of the people pushing for that whole process to happen.

Where are the squad shoots gone? Where are the regional level coaches?

Squad shoots have collapsed. No argument there. However, the regional level coaches are incoming. Matt and Geoff have completed their NCTC coach tutor courses and are putting together the coaches course. That's going to be run before october this year and those who complete it will then be NCTC-qualified coaches. They're also working on a club instructor level course (The idea is that the instructor course is a subset of the coaches course) and that would produce people able to do basic instruction (think of one of DURC's Range Officers. They wouldn't be ROs though because outside of UCD and TCD, Range Officer is a safety role and Club Instructor isn't - it's only in the college clubs that they're combined).

[RANT] When I was captain in DURC I was talking to the NSTA and saying that I have around 100 shooters who are reasonable plinkers and a very large number of air rifle shooters who were competitive shooters.

And no transport. I remember having 400-odd shooters in DURC as well, but it's nearly impossible to transport them and the kit to any other club. Even UCD's a push. Getting everyone out to WTSC for colours was a major logistics effort. Even getting ten people out to DRC is an accomplishment worthy of a medal in its own right. And on top of that, no competition in DURC or UCDRC ever gets pushed to the level of the colours match.

I heard nothing from NTSA apart from where was the clubs membership that year.

The membership thing is a problem, but it's really a seperate one. Students can't afford much, so asking for 150 quid for a year's membership (which is the WTSC membership fee for adults this year) is out. Unless they have the Junior's setup (ie. Mommy and Daddy pay), you're down to asking for what they have in their pockets right there, and there are concerns over fairness if you have 400 people getting a vote in the AGM for the same price as ten people getting a vote anywhere else. It's a problem that's been there for years. There are possible solutions; I don't think they're going to happen fast because the FCP's sucking up too much manpower and fundamental problems like the membership take time to sort out - do it fast and you risk totally screwing everyone.

I was given out to by UCD for 'booking too many people in' and as result, half the squad couldn't shoot at matches.

That's not really down to the NTSA though
And if there's an Open run by a club and you've got 50 people showing up to shoot, it's the fault of the club running the match if they can't cope, not the NTSA. (You did book in at least a week early, right? ). And in fairness, I did say I'd put together a course on how to run the stats office back when I was running one every other week or so and that's never happened; but we've been overtaken by events with the introduction of electronic targets now in UCD and RRPC, and they reduce the workload by a degree that anyone who never ran a full match scoring everything by hand (as in, with gauges, not the scoring machine) just doesn't get on a visceral level.

Sparks

IRLConor wrote: »

So far I like weighted averaging

It also has the advantage that it's simple to explain and simple to do. Everyone thinks that there's no problem with using very complicated systems (hell, why not use an extended kalman filter to predict what the shooter's expected score is and use that as a classification? :rolleyes: ) but in practise, the simpler the better.

Indeed, a big fear (certainly for DURC in the past) is that too few people turn up and the club makes a loss on the competition.

Yes, but in DURC's case that's an artifically-imposed condition of the club's existance (for those outside colleges, if DURC ever finished a year in the red, even by a few cents, the college rules called for the club to be immediately disbanded, and their other accounting rules made - and still make - the financial operation of the club an exercise in advanced mathematics and theology).

IRLConor

Deleted User wrote: »

IRLConor wrote:

He's a talented shooter, so bumping him down a class would be unfair on the class B shooters if he comes back. On the other hand, it's also unfair if he gets to stay artificially high in the list.

Why - he just sits at the bottom of A then and doesn't start picking up B glassware.

In the current classification scheme of things he sits in A artificially increasing the pool of "A" shooters.

rrpc

IRLConor wrote: »

In the current classification scheme of things he sits in A artificially increasing the pool of "A" shooters.

Not artificially Conor. He or she has shot well enough to merit the classification and if they don't make the grade in the next competition they're out.

But really, classification is just a means to an end. It doesn't make you shoot better, it really exists as a means for shooters lower down the scale to measure their progress (or lack of it).

I don't think you could look at any of the classification lists over the last two years or so and see someone who doesn't deserve to be in class A. Sometimes people miss the cut to go up a class, but if they're going in the right direction, they'll get there.

Ideally, you win the class before you get promoted, but that's not always possible when you get banditas from DURC jumping straight into class B or A on their first competitive outing.

In the end, so long as it's fair and transparent, there's not a whole lot that would make it fairer or more transparent.

There's a time factor here as well. I use data for over a year in order to keep the classfications up to date. As it is, I have to have control totals and other checks to make sure I'm not including the wrong scores or have left something out. If you add more complexity, it will get easier to make mistakes which will cost time and effort.

At least I can get the classifications out the day after a match.

Sparks

We probably should put those classification lists up on the NTSA website, y'know...

IRLConor

IRLConor wrote: »

In the current classification scheme of things he sits in A artificially increasing the pool of "A" shooters.

I would see that as a less problem then him ticking off B shooters by stealing their silverware..

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

We probably should put those classification lists up on the NTSA website, y'know...

:eek:

Hold on now while I find that email where I asked you to set that up for me.....

Ah, here it is....

05/11/07

Mark

I was wondering if it were possible to add a link on the right hand side of the webpage under Agenda and Upcoming Events for the classification list? Rather than sending it out by email, this would make it a lot more accessible.

It's in pdf format, so it would be easy for everyone to read.

Oops

rrpc

Sorry, that was low

I'll delete it if you like.;)

Sparks

Arf!
Check your email there RRPC, I fixed the Agenda problem on the NTSA website today so I can fix that problem next.

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

Arf!
Check your email there RRPC, I fixed the Agenda problem on the NTSA website today so I can fix that problem next.

OK I'll email you about it now.

Sparks

It was a bit low, but then again, you've not mentioned that since then I've changed jobs twice and had to totally strip out the WTSC website and rebuild it thanks to some nice lads from Russia who hacked the site every other day for a fortnight (they weren't quite as bad as the ones who hacked it and redirected it to a militant, death-to-america style jihadist site :eek: ).
It's not like I'm slacking off over here y'know

IRLConor

Deleted User wrote: »

I would see that as a less problem then him pissing off B shooters by stealing their silverware..

I know, it's not an easy problem to solve. The only issue I have is that the classification seems to be "rank the shooters, then split roughly into four parts". If someone inactive is hogging some "slots" in a higher class then is it fair to let them prevent someone from a lower class progress?

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

It was a bit low, but then again, you've not mentioned that since then I've changed jobs twice and had to totally strip out the WTSC website and rebuild it thanks to some nice lads from Russia who hacked the site every other day for a fortnight (they weren't quite as bad as the ones who hacked it and redirected it to a militant, death-to-america style jihadist site :eek: ).
It's not like I'm slacking off over here y'know

Y'know I'd be a lot more sympathetic if you weren't given to telling people that I was

Sorry, sense of humour overload again. I'm away on hols next week, and with a Nationals being held, finishing only 14 hours before I fly out I'm getting a little hysterical. :rolleyes:

rrpc

IRLConor wrote: »

I know, it's not an easy problem to solve. The only issue I have is that the classification seems to be "rank the shooters, then split roughly into four parts". If someone inactive is hogging some "slots" in a higher class then is it fair to let them prevent someone from a lower class progress?

That's not quite how it works Conor. First of all I try and maintain a cut-off. I'm very loath to change them unless it's upwards.

Secondly, the hoggers in class A got there by shooting good scores. There's only one person who has maintained a position in class A with only one competitive outing, but no surprises when he hit the required score at his next appearance.

Others have been in and out depending on their record (me included). You unfortunately started going well after the last indoor shoot, but being in B is absolutely no bar to future success nor is it a bar for international selection. That's done purely on qualifying score in a selection match.

So keep collecting the glassware until September

rrpc

Just to add that people get dropped off the list once they go past roughly 12 months without a score.

That means that the list only includes people who have shot in the last year or so.

IRLConor

rrpc wrote: »

Ideally, you win the class before you get promoted, but that's not always possible when you get banditas from DURC jumping straight into class B or A on their first competitive outing.

It's not our fault that we have talented shooters who make an effort to train!

rrpc wrote: »

In the end, so long as it's fair and transparent, there's not a whole lot that would make it fairer or more transparent.

rrpc wrote: »

At least I can get the classifications out the day after a match.

I do appreciate that. It wasn't too long ago that I'd turn up to a match and ask "what class am I in?" and have the response "I dunno, what class are you supposed to be in?"

rrpc

Deleted User wrote: »

RRPC - its great that you got the Fermoy shoot on but given that;

the majority of shooters are based in teh Dublin / Wicklow area, holding a match on in say, Balbriggan, would have probably have had a better result in terms of numbers.

Sorry Zaraba, missed your post there (must have had my peril sensitive sunglasses on )

Chicken and egg is right. We can't tell people to hold shoots, they decide for themselves. The issue about the DURC shoot is before my time, so in the age old way of politicians, I'll kick to touch on that one.

I take your point about the geographic location of shoots, but on the other hand if you were one of the few shooters in Dublin and all the shoots were in Munster, what would you say then?

We can't be seen (nor should we want) to implement a system of apartheid. The club makes the effort, we support the effort, the club grows, our sport growas and everyone benefits.

I get really angry hearing people in the NTSA saying that 'scores are going down and matches are going down, but what can we do?'
Its the NTSA's job to try and fix this. I heard a lot of very, very good suggestions in a meeting in UCD two years ago and haven't seen any of them implemented appart from raising the qualifying score (which I agree with).

Everything in your first sentence is actually wrong at the moment and I've posted and said so here. Scores are going up, numbers are going up and competition is on the increase.

In the last twelve months, the number of people scoring above 570 has increased from 31% to 45% of the total and the total has increased by 34%.

Why is this happening? I believe that it has a lot to do with what I said in the last paragraph about supporting each other to grow the sport. We are doing everything we can to bring the people in the outlying clubs into the centre so that they can be allowed grow in the sport. If that means that we travel to Fermoy or Tullamore to support their matches, then that's what we do.

Where are the squad shoots gone? Where are the regional level coaches?

I think Sparks answered this. The squad system is still being worked on and I'm still not sure what value it has when you're talking about an active population of 40. Ideally that's your extended squad right there and when the lads have finished their NCTC score (you forgot Ray, Sparks) we'll see the coaching going around.

When I was captain in DURC I was talking to the NSTA and saying that I have around 100 shooters who are reasonable plinkers and a very large number of air rifle shooters who were competitive shooters. I was asking was there anything the NTSA could do to help them - any plans for junior squad etc.

Zaraba. You have to get these shooters out to matches to get them involved in the sport. There are obvious logistical problems, but we need to hear them to come up with solutions... together.

It has to be a two-way street otherwise there's no investment from either side of the equation.

If 100 air rifle shooters turned up to the Nationals, Geoff would think he'd died and gone to heaven

Now you can sit there and say 'what can we do', but when every shooter in our squad new the name of one club, and was greatful to that club for help and supprt, and where asking who the hell are the NTSA, that shows that something isn't quite right

Sorry for having a go but that really pissed me off at the time and is one of the reasons why I haven't been around for the last while (before the exam revision started)

You know where I am Zaraba, I don't think any problem is insurmountable, provided everyone is willing to put their shoulder to the wheel.

It wasn't me!

A possible issue is the ratio of plinkers to competitors in clubs. With over 500 members in DURC, and probably most of a hundred who turn up to shoot a few times a year, and maybe half that who do it reasonably regularly, those signing up for matches is still a small fraction of that again. I mean, if DURC had those fiftyish people who shoot on a semi-regular basis all competing at least a few times a year, and if UCD had a similar number, at any given competition you could probably double the numbers competing right off the bat. Hard to see how you get those people to turn up and compete though really, but with them already signed up as a potential huge pool of new shooters, it seems the obvious first step.

rrpc

rrpc wrote: »

Sorry Zaraba, missed your post there (must have had my peril sensitive sunglasses on )

Gotta get me a pair of those!

Chicken and egg is right. We can't tell people to hold shoots, they decide for themselves. The issue about the DURC shoot is before my time, so in the age old way of politicians, I'll kick to touch on that one.

Grand - before my time as well, I just dug out all the correspondence recently.

I take your point about the geographic location of shoots, but on the other hand if you were one of the few shooters in Dublin and all the shoots were in Munster, what would you say then?

We can't be seen (nor should we want) to implement a system of apartheid. The club makes the effort, we support the effort, the club grows, our sport growas and everyone benefits.

I think its great that you got it done. However, for myself (and many of the regulars) getting to Fermoy is practically impossible as we can barely get enough cars to get to WTSC or DRC on a good day.

Everything in your first sentence is actually wrong at the moment and I've posted and said so here. Scores are going up, numbers are going up and competition is on the increase.

In the last twelve months, the number of people scoring above 570 has increased from 31% to 45% of the total and the total has increased by 34%.

Can you post up the number of air and .22 matches for the past 4 years?

They have picked up recently allright, but (it feels like) air is down quite a bit from 2004/2005

Why is this happening? I believe that it has a lot to do with what I said in the last paragraph about supporting each other to grow the sport. We are doing everything we can to bring the people in the outlying clubs into the centre so that they can be allowed grow in the sport. If that means that we travel to Fermoy or Tullamore to support their matches, then that's what we do.

And that is very good - however, as I said before. There are a lot of us who can't travel that far.

I think Sparks answered this. The squad system is still being worked on and I'm still not sure what value it has when you're talking about an active population of 40. Ideally that's your extended squad right there and when the lads have finished their NCTC score (you forgot Ray, Sparks) we'll see the coaching going around.

Personally, this is one of the biggest failings that I have seen in the NTSA.

When I started there was a training on once every month in UCD for air.
That gave a focus for each of your training sessions, you got coaching from an independent coach* and it gave people like me a chance to see people like Richy and Declan training. I learned 75% of what I know today from those few sessions.

RRPC - this is an issue I have heard the shooters ask for again, again and again.

*Lets not get into the good/bad of this coach. Personally, I learned quite a lot from him.

Zaraba. You have to get these shooters out to matches to get them involved in the sport. There are obvious logistical problems, but we need to hear them to come up with solutions... together.

I was told pretty much to get lost as soon as I started brining this up. these shooters went to matches, and we suffered the usual high drop out rate.

However, I started asking around for advice and help and the only place I got it from was the aforementioned air rifle club.

It has to be a two-way street otherwise there's no investment from either side of the equation.

Investment was lacking from the other side when I tried that approach.

RRPC - have a chat with me on Sunday about some of the responses I've gotten in the past.

You know where I am Zaraba, I don't think any problem is insurmountable, provided everyone is willing to put their shoulder to the wheel.

RRPC - I put my shoulder up during my year as captain, and got **** all but a headache as a result back.

You are right - we have talent, we have people and there is will. It just doesn't seem to work out.

BountyHunter

Thanks for the info lads, very informative...


Bountyhunter.

Sparks

rrpc wrote: »

when the lads have finished their NCTC score (you forgot Ray, Sparks) we'll see the coaching going around.

Didn't forget Ray, he couldn't get the time off to do the NCTC course so he's not allowed to give the course under the NCTC rules (or at least not all of it). He's put a lot of work into the back end with Matt and Geoff, putting together the course syllabus, it's just that we were talking about when it'd be delivered.

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Hard to see how you get those people to turn up and compete though really

The best results we've had there have come from the solutions that were at the lowest level - ie, talk to them. The lack of information is a killer here - I mean, I was a member of DURC for four years before I learnt even that there were other clubs in the country and that there were competitions against them, simply because noone told me about them and we had no website or anything where I could go look - you cannot overestimate how important it is to push information out there. Newbies are often reluctant to go chase the information. You have to grab them, talk to them about matches, tell them what they're like, lay out exactly, down to the minute and cent and point what level of shooting they need to be at to go, when people are going, what's involved, how much it costs, what the craic is like, all of that.

Incidentally, are shooters told about this place or the other websites these days when they join the club? Should I stick those URLs into the membership leaflet for next year?

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand - before my time as well, I just dug out all the correspondence recently.

Actually, if that's the deregistered DURC air open, noone stopped it from being run, it was just judged afterwards that it wasn't run well enough for the scores to count towards national averages (and it was a shambles, we were using the Luce hall gym and the pony club boxes and the tension in the lines kept pulling the tables towards the boxes and they kept having to stop the match to fix it and pick up the cards that fell off as a result).

They have picked up recently allright, but (it feels like) air is down quite a bit from 2004/2005

It is, but it's always run in cycles. We're in a slump at the moment - right as most of the high scorers for the past few years hit the leaving cert and college, which is not a coincidence I think. And look a the scores - for a slump year, this is pretty good. There is progress from where we were.

Personally, this is one of the biggest failings that I have seen in the NTSA.
When I started there was a training on once every month in UCD for air.
That gave a focus for each of your training sessions, you got coaching from an independent coach* and it gave people like me a chance to see people like Richy and Declan training. I learned 75% of what I know today from those few sessions.
*Lets not get into the good/bad of this coach. Personally, I learned quite a lot from him.

I really can't agree with that.
The problem was that those sessions were only good if you weren't past 520ish or were over 570ish in air rifle (or the equivalent in smallbore). Every one of the shooters who were in the middle range and looking to progress couldn't do so and didn't do so. At least not because of those training sessions. And the high-level shooters all said the same thing to me at some point or other over the years that those sessions were running. And it's not because Barry was bad, or Jock before him or Barry again before that. It was because you cannot fix a major fundamental problem - ie, we had no competitive coaching at all - by bringing in an outside expert for one and a half days a month. Coaches need to see their shooters to progress them in that range of scores. They need to work on training plans and see them shoot under stress in matches and a dozen other things that Barry simply couldn't do because he wasn't there all the time. He said so himself so often I lost count. That was the problem, despite all the ****e that was said about what the "real problem" was by some rather viciously small-minded people at the time. Coaching is a personal, one-on-one sort of thing. It's dependant on a lot of trust in the coach and trust in the shooter and time spent working together. This "get an expert in" idea has been tried, and the inverse (going to an expert for a weekend a month or doing it remotely) has also been tried. Both approaches simply failed.

That's not to say training camps don't work, by the way. Those are a wholly seperate kettle of fish. I've done the training camp thing in Kuortane with the guys winning the medals, and it was a magnificent experience and worth every minute, but it would have been useless to me if I hadn't had Matt and Geoff back home to work with. Training camps are an additional training tool, that's all.

What we need is a coach in every club. Look to N.Ireland - their commonwealth team cleared up all round them thanks to them having a local coach (and that the NTSA hasn't sent him to get ISSF-certified is a failing that ought to be rectified to be honest). That's the whole point of the coaches course - to get volunteers from every NTSA club to train to be coaches, with domestic coach tutors. That way, every club can train teams with properly accredited coaches (and probably get local sports partnership funding to help if they play their cards right).
Once that's been running for a while, and we have people training regularly again, then we had a plan on paper to bring back the national coaching again, with a different structure (domestic coaches again, ISSF-certified, seminars like we were running with guest speakers and so forth on things like sports nutrition, training techniques and so on, and technical training and training plans and so on). But the domestic coaches course has to be done first.

You are right - we have talent, we have people and there is will. It just doesn't seem to work out.

There are things that are broken and need to be fixed. That's a given. But other things are actually in pretty damn good shape, or are set to go but are waiting on things. The main problem I can see is that noone knows this because communications are not great.

Which is actually a bit depressing because that's precisely how it was a decade ago as well

Sparks

By the way, I've fixed the NTSA website again and you should see the classification lists available to download from there as soon as rrpc gets them uploaded.

Had a good old chat with RRPC about shooting;

net result, we solved the problems of global warming, world hunger and devised a solution about world peace. However, Irish shooting was still not solvable.

Interesting points made on his behalf and I will be editing some of my posts when I get back tonight.