OzFclass

Looked like some pretty tough competition took place as usual.we may get some comments on the new targets used ?.

There's every possibility that these targets will shake out the wrinkles. I was RO on the U25 side of the range, where conditions (based on results) were kinder. The show-and-tell scoring process was used where each shooter has an integrated plot sheet & score card for the check scorer to use, all 5 cards visible - and the process is not kind to coaches.

We has the contrast of two brilliant opening shooters (NSW & WA I think), one getting up with a 50.8 & the other a 47.8, the latter with one high V & the other nine shots virtually on a line across the bullseye, including the bird one side & the inner the other.

Shooters who's elevation wandered controllably on the old target were paying for it on the ICFRA. I suspect that this will impact on F class grading & may well concern some lesser credentialled shooters, TR & FS alike.

By the way, the semaphore protocol for ICFRA - I guess we'll adopt it - is:

1 - left centre of target
V - right centre edge
2, 3, 4, 5 across target bottom from left to right.

John Kielly

johnk wrote:...By the way, the semaphore protocol for ICFRA - I guess we'll adopt it - is:

1 - left centre of target
V - right centre edge
2, 3, 4, 5 across target bottom from left to right...

Hmm - don't like that already. On a 300 target, the marker wouldn't have to be far out to cause confusion between 2 and 3 or between 4 and 5. Was the person who devised this system "altitudinally challenged"?

Alan

Hi
I agree with Allan about this scoring,keep it simple all is needed is a 1 on the top left hand side of the target,2 at the middle of the top of the target,the 3 remains the same,4 remains the same annd the v in the middle of the bottom of the target and the 5 remains the same....how simple is that?
Cheers Rich

richard, that would be way too simple,these people that dream up these changes are by the way from queensland and as we have noticed can do what ever they like!
now you should of checked out the sha-mozzle with the flags, thats another story!

When you laddies get your heads out of the sand & consider what I reported on, you may yet come to realise that I was discussing the team competitions contested under ICFRA rules under the auspices of the NRAA. Other than manage a bloody fine shoot, Queensland had no input into the scoring protocol.

johnk wrote:When you laddies get your heads out of the sand & consider what I reported on, you may yet come to realise that I was discussing the team competitions contested under ICFRA rules under the auspices of the NRAA. Other than manage a bloody fine shoot, Queensland had no input into the scoring protocol.

Well said John, a bloody fine shoot and to you personally a job well done!!!!!!

johnk wrote:By the way, the semaphore protocol for ICFRA - I guess we'll adopt it - is:

1 - left centre of target
V - right centre edge
2, 3, 4, 5 across target bottom from left to right.

John Kielly

Same as UK. The 1 and V are red paddle, the rest black.

I'm not criticising the running of the State Teams event, just
querying the wisdom of having 4 paddle positions across the bottom. Does it get confusing when paddle position is not precise on the small targets James?

Alan

AlanF wrote:Does it get confusing when paddle position is not precise on the small targets James?
Alan

We only shot 900 and 1000

Hi All,
I shot in the National teams on the new ICFRA target. These are my personal thoughts only and not a concensus of the South Australian team.
1. I liked having the paddle come up with the target.
2.I liked the position where the V was indicated although it was above the midway position on the RHSide.
3.The size of the paddle was small, so I think scorers will need to have telescopes in a fixed position if this idea comes in.
4. I think the ICFRA targets are good at the elite level for State team and Queens events only where a high skill level of pit staff are used.
5. I don't agree with having 4 values across the bottom of the target especially if wands are used.
6. I think the inner 4 ring is too narrow for Fullbore and should extend to the edge of the aiming mark at 900 and 1000.
7. I think the ICFRA targets are too hard at club level and will result in the loss of many members here in SA. Our membership in South Australia is made up of around 60% in C grade and their opinions do count, not just the opinions of the top 50 in Australia that travel to every Queens event.
8. Decimal x,10,9,8,7 is a better way to score.
Cheers Bill Naismith

Can any one shed some light on the flag debacle?

I competed at Belmont in F class. I thought they were some of the best flags i have seen on any range in Australia. Four rows of flags for 47 targets. Variable height - half mast for the close ranges and then full height for the longs - brilliant ! As for a debacle - well i must have missed something. Congratulations Queensland.
RobH

All the combinations listed except the long range teams version, down the pole tip dragging on the ground.

David B wrote:All the combinations listed except the long range teams version, down the pole tip dragging on the ground.

Tragic, but all jokes aside, the wind had to move something.You are champions, you are expected to be able to adapt, somewhere along the road, this is supposed to be fun.
Mike.