Proposed New Format for National Teams Event

[ShaneG]

At the presentation dinner after the F Class Teams the NRAA called for any proposals regarding the F Class Nationals. It was difficult to hear this at the time especially towards the back of the room.

Through our region I have proposed that we align our National Teams event with the international format - IE 8,9 & 1000 yards each day. 15 shot matches except last 1000 being a 20.
This will only get up if the majority of regions support the concept.
Thus should you agree with this logical advance please agitate for change through your state association.

Following on with this I propose we combine an Open Team with an F/TR Team to give dual coaching practise.
This is our biggest task - enabling coaches to work together on the line is the key to future success!

Shane

[GregW]

Shane,

I have sent a recommendation to the NRAA, almost exactly as you say, except that I didn't ask for 20 shots at the end. I also asked for a full days practice. I sent this from the NSW "F" Class Association.

Greg Warrian.

[ShaneG]

Thanks Greg
We are on the same page then

The only other point is that if we are to run our Teams in conjunction with a State Queens we get a days rest before a lead up begins.

You agree with the the joint coach format I propose?
Only way we wil get that practise.
Shane

[pjifl]

I have always felt that the teams should be after the other shooting rather than before to allow more familiarization with the Range and local conditions.
Whichever, a day's rest would be nice.

Peter Smith.

[AlanF]

I agree with Shane's idea of an international "course of fire" for the teams, and with Peter's preference for teams AFTER the Queens. But we must be careful not to try to push it onto F-Std if they don't want it - after all they probably still outnumber both the International F-Classes combined. I'm wondering if there's room for a standalone meeting for F-Open and and F/TR which would not only have Teams, but be preceded (separated by a rest/practice day) by an individual 2 day event again using the same course of fire as the FCWC. And in the years leading up to events such as Canada 2017, it could be shot Bisley style. After trying Bisley style for the first time a few weeks back, I am more convinced than ever that if our shooters don't get a decent amount of practice at Bisley style, then they won't be competitive in the FCWC individuals.

[pjifl]

If the format involves only the very long ranges, there is no need for practices at each of the many distances as is done now.
A lot of time is now spent rushing to a new mound rather than practicing the procedure. If 800, 900, and 1000 were the competition ranges, two practice sessions (800 and 1000) would in my opinion be quite adequate. Even one may be enough. Especially if the teams follows the main shoot where most people will acquire accurate elevations. In any case, accurate velocities and ballistic programs makes short work of minor distance changes.

But time available should be very lengthy at each one. Considering that many states find it hard to bring their shooters together for practices, the day of practice before the actual teams shoots has to partly fill this role. Final selection of shooters can be difficult and is also a skill we need to practice.
This should not be rushed.

Peter Smith.

[DaveMc]

This is an important step forward but should definitely NOT be F standard exclusive. The state TR teams are on this larger team system.
We need to be practicing at state level in this sort of format to allow coaches to develop synchronised techniques. We need it for training as well as innovation and development. As evidenced in the last National teams we are developing great individual coaches but not really exploring the power of the larger team and synchronisation.

Support of this approach needs to go to your state governing body as a submission. Shanes was tabled and supported at the CIDRA and will be put to the NQRA by the District Rifle Association accordingly

What we can do on this site is discuss how to put this into practise so our submissions make sense to the NRAA and have everyone's support.

Currently the challenge would be for all states to put forward 8 shooters, 3 coaches etc in each F class discipline. Quite simply I feel this will fall flat before it takes off and we desperately need it. What format would see support from all states and F class disciplines?

Firstly distance. I agree wholeheartedly that a National teams 300m event is a waste of time. To be competitive most team members have to travel with 2 rifles (in F open). It means very little regarding wind reading and "teamwork" but more shows how accurate your rifles are at 300 (this has little to do with how accurate they are at 1000). We waste a practice session and a match on this that could be better spent time at longer distance..

Wind reading, teamwork and rifle accuracy at 1000 yards are the pinnacle of this sport and should be what National events are judged by (The US has adopted 1000 yard only). 800,900, 1000 yard or metric equivalent is the international standard and for good reason. Imagine how many shooters can put in exceptional accuracy at 300 and how hard that would be to differentiate at the top level. It becomes a game of luck. Lie down at 1000 at the same time over a few matches and the best will certainly emerge.

Secondly team format: We need to be practicing and developing 3 coach, 8 shooter systems. This encourages coaches to work together and will develop better teamwork all round. This is also the international team format and without it our National teams will fall well short of the practice and possible innovation that will come from all states trying.

SO - How do we put state teams together in this format so that all states can field teams.???? That is the true challenge.

[Quick]

Dave,

I agree 100% with what your saying. The only way I think all states could do a 8 shooter, 3 coach team would be to combine F/TR and F-Open teams. The smaller states like WA wouldnt be able to field a 8 man F-Open team. We just dont have enough shooters I think.

[Matt P]

Hi Dave
As Quick said the only way (in the short term) would to combine Open and FT/R, the issue I see with this is the NRAA giving it the OK.
Another option is 6 shooters and 2 or 3 coaches as I think the NRAA are more likely to OK it and most states could find another shooter and coach (I know some may struggle but with plenty of notice this should be doable).
Matt P

[bartman007]

I like Matt's idea of 6 shooters with 2 coaches, as it is more achievable at this moment in time.

The shooting time needs to be reduced to address that 3 shooters are competing. Which of course speeds things up for the organisers. HOWEVER, it doubles the number of targets/markers/scorers/check scorers required per round of competition.

It will come back to splitting up the disciplines per range to accommodate. This can be a good thing, as within each state, we can rely on our other classes to score and check score for each other. (a minor challenge at Brisbane this year)

It would be great if the competition changed to the international course of fire. That way there is no confusion, and all members will understand what is required when competing at the Worlds.

Dave, don't underestimate the benefit of shooting 300 yards (can be left to team practise sessions). It puts pressure on all involved Everyone is implying that it is "so easy". Then why did only 2 State teams clean sheet that range at Brisbane We all shot at the same time

I see benefits for 300 or 600 yard shooting:
1. proves shooter ability to tune their equipment
2. proves shooter technique
3. proves shooter ability to perform when under pressure (and normally 300 yards is the first range of the day)
4. proves coach ability to perform when under pressure (conditions are readable, then they should all go in)
5. proves coach ability to get the best out of the individual shooter

It would have been a good exercise to identify why 5 teams did in fact lose points when 2 teams didn't. It will assist in identifying what needs to be worked on.

[GregW]

Some time ago, I suggested that "F" Class teams could be 4 standard and 4 open. This of course " went through to the keeper". Now we have FTR, it would be a "must have" from my point of view. (5 of each, rather than 4).

I still prefer the teams first with a rest day. One reason for this is, if there is inclement weather, the spare day is available, rather than have a shortened or bodgied program. This happened in Match Rifle in 2010, and it was a big letdown.

Greg Warrian.

[bartman007]

I too believe it would be better to hold it before the Queen's event. I would prefer to be fresh for the Teams competition, rather than tired and run down at the end of a 5 day Queens series.

Joining 2 teams together could work. FTR and F Open together would provide the ability to practise the 3 coach technique, and not have too much impact on the competition format. FTR with its coach, working in parallel with the F Open with its coach, overseen by a master coach. With the only concern for NRAA being the sharing of the Master coach. After all there is some difference in ballistics, so the ability to ask the other team how much wind is on is not that great an advantage to either team.

A lot of time is now spent rushing to a new mound rather than practicing the procedure. If 800, 900, and 1000 were the competition ranges, two practice sessions (800 and 1000) would in my opinion be quite adequate.

Peter may I suggest that you use your practise session differently, as the Vic F Open team did the following at Brisbane:
1. All shooters fire a couple of shots at 300 to get true zero for that location.
2. 2 or 3 shooters fire (x shots) at the next range for coach familiarisation of conditions.
3. 2 or 3 shooters fire (x shots) at the 3rd range for coach familiarisation of conditions.
4. All shooters fire a couple of shots at 1000 to get true zero before the first match.

[ShaneG]

300 to 800 yards prove nothing as to load / equipment performance at 1000 yards
Anyone who has competed at our game will acknowledge it is won and lost at the longs.
900 is a different game to 800 and 1000 is another league.
It becomes exponentially more difficult!

I have seen this year rifles capable of 60.10 at 600 yet could not hold the 6 ring at 900.
This holds for rifles drilling 300 yet just holding 6 ring at 900 and falling apart into 4 ring at 1000.

As far as my personal assessment of a team it should / would all be at 1000.
I have never had a load which performed at 1000 which did not also work at shorter ranges.
However the norm is the REVERSE!!!!

When I witness shooter / gear / ammo performing well at 1000 then I have the confidence to say we have a competitive team.

To add some emphasis to a joint FO + F T/TR dual coached team - UK , Canada, and USA are already doing this at Connaught this year and next year! Even they found it difficult to field full World Team style entries in Canada so they combined the disciplines.

This is all about providing a platform to build a competitive International F Class representation by Australia.

Alan also makes the point we raised 2 years ago that we need to be shooting Bisley style for the individual competition.

For those supporting this proposal - thanks and please be vocal and positive wherever possible.
Shane

[Cameron Mc]

I agree with a point made by Shane. Rifles that perform really well at 1000yds will shoot at the short ranges.
I can now use my 7mm's confidently at 300yds because of the development done at the longs over the last few years.
Yes they (7mm's etc) are a little harder to shoot, but accuracy is there when tuned correctly.
My preference is for the longs only 8/9/1000

Cam

[DaveMc]

I see benefits for 300 or 600 yard shooting:
1. proves shooter ability to tune their equipment
2. proves shooter technique
3. proves shooter ability to perform when under pressure (and normally 300 yards is the first range of the day)
4. proves coach ability to perform when under pressure (conditions are readable, then they should all go in)
5. proves coach ability to get the best out of the individual shooter

It would have been a good exercise to identify why 5 teams did in fact lose points when 2 teams didn't. It will assist in identifying what needs to be worked on.

Do any of the above 5 points not hold for the longer ranges??? ie what can be proven at 300-600 that is not proven at longer ranges?


On numbers, I do believe small number teams could work certainly (6 shooters and 2-3 coaches, or 2 coaches and Captain etc),

Another alternative - could we have an added match that we shoot current format but allow 3 days for the competition - 1 practice and 2 team. At the end of the final day we have 2*1000 yard 15 shot 8 man teams - mixed f class - no more than 4 shooters from F open or FTR. e.g. 4 FO, 4 FTR or 4 FO, 2 FTR 2 FS etc.