Revive the Rankings?

Post by **AlanF** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 11:21 am

higginsdj wrote:I see no overseas competition results taken into account! So those who compete O/S (ie the recent US and World Championships) and miss local events as a consequence are disadvantaged in the rankings?

Marty got second in a field of over 200 - now let's see, if we extended the table, that would give him around 250 points :shock:

.

Seriously, we have enough shooters already who don't get enough opportunities at Queens. I can defend the current situation, but not that.

DaveMc · Post by **DaveMc** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 11:56 am

It would be interesting to add it as another queens though Alan - just consider the Australian contingent only. Yours and Marty's efforts deserve some recognition on the rankings and by placing first and second in the group of 14 or so Aussies would bring it back into line with the others despite the fact that a lot of our best shooters were there.

I have seen Marty really put his mind to two major events in the last few years. One was the world championships and the other was last years Mackay Queens. In both those events he was a different man to that you see in a "normal queens" with all the festivities and socialising. On his day when he really sets his mind to it (and with good preparation) he is a hard man to beat!

gone · Post by **gone** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 11:56 am

hi Alan,

fair call! I did look at the other sheet post my last reply and thank you.

I would still say that even giving the same points to someone coming 22 in a very big event as to the person winning the a queens with (from memory 10 or 20 people in it seems unfair) but am happy someone is doing something I just need to lift my game.

Daryl.

Post by **AlanF** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 1:05 pm

Dave,

You underrate your own individual effort in the FCWC. You were only 1 point off the lead with 2 ranges to go. And I think Marty's and my relays probably got slightly better conditions later on day 2.

Daryl,

You are right - the best way of addressing any doubts about the rankings is to go to some Queens and get some points. I'm not used to being down the order, so need to make a few more appearances myself - those Braund brothers can't be allowed to remain that high :lol:

.

Alan

bartman007 · Post by **bartman007** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 1:58 pm

I see no overseas competition results taken into account! So those who compete O/S (ie the recent US and World Championships) and miss local events as a consequence are disadvantaged in the rankings?

What events should we consider for our AUSTRALIAN rankings?

1. Queen's - yes.
2. Lead Up's - yes.
3. State Champions - maybe?
4. OPM's - why not?

It comes back to what is the purpose of the ranking system. If it is to recognise those that are actively competing in Open competition within Australia, then maybe we should leave out the US National's and the like.

The fact that the US National's coincided with other Queen's events in Australia may not be of consequence, due to those participants probably not travelling from NQRA/QRA to SARA or WARA for those events.

Remembering, that not all Aussie shooters have the finances or time to compete in those OS events, so it could be seen as disadvantaging those that can't travel abroad to get other shoots in. e.g. NZ Queens in January.

FWIW: keep the records local, and include only the major events (2 days or more in duration)

I may not agree with weighting the value of points given to place getters, based on the entry levels. Is a 180/180/120 shot in an event with 3 shooters any less valuable than it being shot against 40?

Is a perfect score shot at an easy range any more valuable than dropping 20 points at a difficult range (e.g. SARA)?

Bindi2 · Post by **Bindi2** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 2:40 pm

I see the difficulties of travel for some ( E/W/E as well ) but no reason to discount O/S events.
But question your right to put people on a list without asking them first.

Post by **AlanF** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 3:42 pm

Bindi2 wrote:...But question your right to put people on a list without asking them first.

Bindi,

Have you thought that statement through? So how about the leaderboard at a Queens? Do we need to ask everyone's permission for that???

When you enter a public competitive sport you can reasonably expect results, commentary, etc. to be published. How do you think the media would manage sports reports if they had to ask everyone's permission to publish their name?

Alan

bartman007 · Post by **bartman007** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 4:04 pm

Maybe we could look to F1 Grand Prix for a parallel to our sport.

We could run a Constuctor's Championship

Maybe we could get sponsorship from companies like Barnard / Bat / RPA / etc, and Border / Krieger / Lilja / etc.

Along with the Driver's Championship

He who drives his/her rifle the best, be the winner :idea:

Winner of what may you ask :?:

Maybe a Yearly Championship Cup, presented by the NRAA. Based on shoots during that Year of competition only.

Bindi2 · Post by **Bindi2** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 4:23 pm

AlanF wrote:
Bindi2 wrote:...But question your right to put people on a list without asking them first.

Bindi,

Have you thought that statement through? So how about the leaderboard at a Queens? Do we need to ask everyone's permission for that???

When you enter a public competitive sport you can reasonably expect results, commentary, etc. to be published. How do you think the media would manage sports reports if they had to ask everyone's permission to publish their name?

Alan

No that is only the results of that event.
What you are doing is compiling history and presenting it in a manner that can be used against people for others gain.
Hence my Q. CYA

DaveMc · Post by **DaveMc** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 4:33 pm

I am sorry Bindi but I think Alan has only compiled results that are already on the public domain - no contemplation of your suggestion needs be entered into.

Post by **AlanF** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 4:58 pm

DaveMc wrote:I am sorry Bindi but I think Alan has only compiled results that are already on the public domain - no contemplation of your suggestion needs be entered into.

Good point Dave.

Bindi. I'm wondering if you're the reason why the full results of the WARA Queens haven't been published?

DannyS · Post by **DannyS** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 5:35 pm

Alan, you must be getting to the stage of pulling out your hair. We seem to be a fickle bunch.

For what it is worth, I think you have done a good job.

=D>

Cheers
Danny

Brad Y · Post by **Brad Y** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 5:53 pm

Alan- the WARA results are here. The sad thing about them is there are no full lists- just winners and thats about it. Not sure what WARA are doing up there, but its near on impossible to get anything out of them at the moment. I have been sweating on some of their membership drive paperwork for my club and its been met with nothing but the sound of chirping crickets. I wouldnt hold your breath for full results. Probably easier to just do it without WA for the time being

http://www.wara.asn.au/files/files/344_ ... Scores.pdf

Im personally not a fan of gradings purely for the reason I dont look at them. Seeing my name up there on the NRAA list after last years queens meant nothing to me really as I know I only had ever been to one queens and that was it (no prize shoots) Seeing my name above guys like Marty and Matt Paroz isnt a true reflection at all. To me instead of worrying about gradings, I prefer loading ammo or getting trigger time. But thats just me. They must mean more to others, but I see there as being more issues in shooting that need a bit more attention than getting gradings right. Thats just my opinion. If you need someone in WA to gather all the scores at as many prize shoots as possible just let me know and Im happy to oblige- you know im all for doing anything that can help the sport.

Post by **AlanF** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 7:47 pm

Brad,

Yes, that's just the badge winners, and was put up about a fortnight back, but of little use for the rankings. Its actually a good looking website, probably quite impressive to first-time visitors. Anyway, we live in hope - it does say more information to come about the Queens.

But if we can't get the information soon, we may have to exclude all past WA results and just acknowledge in the explanation that the WA Queens does not participate (due to geographic impracticalities

). I wouldn't expect it to cause any great concern in WA or elsewhere.

Thanks for your offer of help. If the new website idea takes off, that's when I might call on you. We'll need an "agent" in the west to keep club details etc. up to date.

Alan

Bindi2 · Post by **Bindi2** » Wed Nov 20, 2013 8:46 pm

AlanF wrote:
DaveMc wrote:I am sorry Bindi but I think Alan has only compiled results that are already on the public domain - no contemplation of your suggestion needs be entered into.

Good point Dave.

Bindi. I'm wondering if you're the reason why the full results of the WARA Queens haven't been published?

No input from me on that front. As i said i have no problem with results just the Q on the other matter C Y A.

Revive the Rankings?

including other events?

NRAA ?