TargetTalk

It would seem that there is someone in the IOC who is a big fan of Duckhunt. A technology perfected in 1984 for the NES.

I wonder if some part of the board member coup/dust-up isn't stemming from this?

If Only......

No, this is IOC driven, certainly not USAS driven.

In section 10.1 of the report, it looks like they want to do away with 50M pistol.
Gort

About 18 months ago I decided I wanted to try shooting as a hobby. After a quick look online most of my local clubs offered open days in various disciplines. 50m prone appealed to me given the fact that I could turn up and be instructed on the day, the club provided the basic equipment, AND it was an Olympic discipline. After about 5 sessions I was hooked and it was clear to me that this was a discipline easy to pickup but difficult to master. Down the line I am shooting prone well and starting to look at 3P and air rifle.

Had it not been for the fact that this was an olympic sport, I might not have decided to a) come and try it in the first place, and b) stick with it after a few sessions.

Just my 2 cents but removing prone from the olympics will have a negative effect on the appeal of this discipline for new shooters (especially younger shooters), which will then have an effect on new shooters such as myself making their way to other disciplines, resulting in lower competition numbers, lower club membership numbers overall, etc across smallbore shooting. Not everyone wants to start off shooting air rifle pellets, and I think 50m kneeling and standing would be way too difficult for a newcomer.

My point is that prone is an appealing simple olympic sport for newcomers to pickup which can feed into other disciplines. Prone has been an olympic sport since 1912.

I had no interest in shooting lasers since I was a kid. How about whilst they take out prone they also remove all the individual sports that are included in the mens decathlon and womens heptathlon?

Metookevin wrote:Regards lasers, I do believe lead projectiles are problematic & one day in the long term future they will be dealt with. You could also throw in firearms security, customs & freight, insurance and firearms licensing into that same pot. Would be a sad day though.

Compared with shipping a horse the problems of shipping firearms are nothing.

Its always seemed strange to me that equestrianism is included in the Olympics.

The firearm and the ammo are a huge part of the challenge of the sport. Take those away and replace with lasers it changes the entire sport unless the battery goes dead you are all 10.9s.

The original Olympics as well as the Ancient Greek games were concerned with the skills of the warrior, which is why we have things like javelin and equestrian events, but contemporary ISSF officials seem hell bent- excuse me, heck bent- on removing anything identifiable as related to armed conflict. Maybe we'll eventually see the 50 meter ring toss.

mikeyj wrote:......but contemporary ISSF officials seem hell bent- excuse me, heck bent- on removing anything identifiable as related to armed conflict.

I think you must have been reading a different document to me as I get the impression that you think the laser idea is being promulgated by the ISSF. That is definitely not the case.

MikeyJ ---- if your statement was IOC officials, it would be more correct ... but they would not admit to that

jhmartin wrote:MikeyJ ---- if your statement was IOC officials, it would be more correct ... but they would not admit to that

Absolutely right. I should have written IOC, not ISSF.

What bewilders me here in this thread, is that nobody - not a single one - of the commentators seems to have even remotely tried to understand the challenges under which the IOC operates, and the concerns that the IOC expressed. Some of which are rather unreasonable (e.g. laser), and some of which are VERY reasonable.

Instead, discipline myopia reigns supreme. This is a rather sad testimony for shooters; and not for the IOC.

Alexander

At what point does our sport become a video game? 300M rifle is long gone from the Olympics. Many of us see the march toward a firearms free Olympics, if we don't even protest, we might as well hang it up now.
Gort

The principal reason for the demise of 300 metres rifle in the Olympic Games events calendar are probably the enormous costs for an Olympic range. The last one to be built was in Munich for1972, and more recently, I happened to save its endangered 300 metres part for lasting legacy. It was an interesting lawsuit before the BayVGH. We tried to squeeze the utmost of usability out of the situation, in view of the exigencies of noise protection.

Alexander

Alexander wrote:What bewilders me here in this thread, is that nobody - not a single one - of the commentators seems to have even remotely tried to understand the challenges under which the IOC operates, and the concerns that the IOC expressed. Some of which are rather unreasonable (e.g. laser), and some of which are VERY reasonable.

Instead, discipline myopia reigns supreme. This is a rather sad testimony for shooters; and not for the IOC.

Alexander

I'll play the "I have myopia" game ... pray tell which are "VERY" reasonable that are not part of death by a thousand (small VERY reasonable) cuts? The Olympics are not the X-games, nor professional sports venues .... or are they?

In terms of the costs ... the enormous costs apply to any Olympic venue these days, it seems that they have to be more spectacular than the last venue used. I don't think the athletes care that much about the venue ...

I know ... I'm naive

Reading the original memo, it seems to me that the entire laser-toy push is coming from the IOC, with ISSF pushing back hard against it.

I'll add that the laser-toy has a BIG problem...targets. A laser powerful enough to burn holes in a paper target would be considered a weapon. A target sensitive enough to pick up a laser pointer-strength beam will increase cost. Paper targets are cheap, ISSF needs to push back on that front. Shooting needs to be a sport cheap enough to enter.

They're pushing hard for equal participation by women. Not sure how this will play out. The obvious moves would be to either have parallel men's and women's events across the board, or all events mixed. The former would probably be the preferred option.

What I find the most intriguing, and the most disturbing, is the pressure on free pistol. On the one hand, FP and AP duplicate each other to a significant degree. On the other hand, Rapid Fire requires a specialized target bay that is very expensive. I don't think there are more than a dozen operating RF bays in the entire United States, and I suspect the same is true everywhere outside of a handful of European countries.

BTW, I long ago concluded that Rapid Fire Air was a potential growth area - though I'd structure it with 3 targets, and turn them horizontally. This produces a setup small enough to be portable.

Two other points about the IOC. First, I find myself gritting my teeth more and more at the obsession with the Spandex Sports. Second, they really need to break the Summer Games up into a Spring, Summer, and Autumn Games. Indoor sports in the Spring, water sports in the Summer, outdoor sports in the Autumn. The logistic challenges of mounting a Summer Games with the current size are daunting.

Mike M. wrote:What I find the most intriguing, and the most disturbing, is the pressure on free pistol. On the one hand, FP and AP duplicate each other to a significant degree. On the other hand, Rapid Fire requires a specialized target bay that is very expensive. I don't think there are more than a dozen operating RF bays in the entire United States, and I suspect the same is true everywhere outside of a handful of European countries.

Rapid Fire needs a 25m range, and that is also used for 25m Sport Pistol. If RF is dropped then that will leave only Sport Pistol on the 25m range. What Olympic host will build a range for one event? But you can't drop Sport Pistol, it's a women's event. So, if you put aside personal preferences and just think logically, then Free Pistol is the one to go.

j-team wrote:
Rapid Fire needs a 25m range, and that is also used for 25m Sport Pistol. If RF is dropped then that will leave only Sport Pistol on the 25m range. What Olympic host will build a range for one event? But you can't drop Sport Pistol, it's a women's event. So, if you put aside personal preferences and just think logically, then Free Pistol is the one to go.

True. On the other hand, the number of RF competitors in the world - not at the Olympic level, but total - I think is significantly lower than the total of FP shooters.

Make no mistake, I love rapid. But I'm mindful of how much money it takes to buy an RF target bay.

My personal preference would actually be to do the three-way-split of the Summer Games. Which would allow the addition of new events while keeping the logistics a lot more manageable. Toss in black powder MLAIC events...That'll turn heads. :-)

Mike M. wrote:

j-team wrote:
Rapid Fire needs a 25m range, and that is also used for 25m Sport Pistol. If RF is dropped then that will leave only Sport Pistol on the 25m range. What Olympic host will build a range for one event? But you can't drop Sport Pistol, it's a women's event. So, if you put aside personal preferences and just think logically, then Free Pistol is the one to go.

True. On the other hand, the number of RF competitors in the world - not at the Olympic level, but total - I think is significantly lower than the total of FP shooters.

To follow the ideal of universality, 5.2, they could always drop RFP and include Standard Pistol.

David Levene wrote: To follow the ideal of universality, 5.2, they could always drop RFP and include Standard Pistol.

RFP is just about the ONLY exciting rifle and pistol event that is TV worthy.