RobertBeard
Moderator
See also the section on Policies on the British Shooting website where the selection criteria and world class funding programme criteria are set out
Junior Investment - Is it worthwhile?
- Thread starter Jan Powell
- Start date
Help Support Clay, Trap, Skeet Shooting Forum:
E
Emmsy
Guest
they would be better off giving juniors free entries to the majors than trying to sponsor a select few through the ranks.
9 out of 10 times those who get the sponsorships/limelight have the funds available to do it anyway.
9 out of 10 times those who get the sponsorships/limelight have the funds available to do it anyway.
Well I reckon all us old buggers, those of say 55+, should get get a better deal, never mind them there young uns! We want free bacon sarnies at shoots, free CPSA membership, half price round fees, half price shells, free certificate renewals and certificates that have big enough writing on them, so that we don't need arms six feet long so as to be able to read the bloody things! We want better photograph technology too, because every time I see my photo on my certificate, the picture looks like my Dad! :lol: :lol:
Guerini Guy
Well-known member
ok - so here is my opinion : -
I think we most certainly should be doing the right things to encourage younger people, but there should be stages of assistance.
Initially I believe that the bulk of the cost for that assistance must be borne by the parents, BUT colts and juniors should continue to get either free, or considerably reduced practise fees from ground owners in the hope they will be their customers of the future, and competition entry fees which should be assisted by County. Other than that, if an individual does start to show some genuine potential, then parents should seek private sponsorship for coaching or cost of shells because as had been said before, MANY of these young people will simply walk away from the sport once they reach a certain age . . . . . . . you know what I mean. Now what is that proverb? Oh yes . . . . . . one hand in the bush is worth two on your shotgun.
I think you get the idea !!!
Main help in the form of grants from Sport Direct or CPSA itself, should come only after a certain age and only for those who have shown a genuine talent and interest (and not just a parent's dream) in being committed to the sport. For instance, I do know blaser3 from an earlier post, and his son has already reached the age of finding girls, booze and night clubs. Quite right too, its a part of growing up. But I can tell you he still has a passionate desire to succeed at the highest level of our sport.
This major level of funding should be there for those showing the greatest potential rather than those with the prettiest face, or nicest figure, or of a specific age. That way we might as a nation get to see more gold medals?
Just my opinion but happy to hear alternative points of view
I think we most certainly should be doing the right things to encourage younger people, but there should be stages of assistance.
Initially I believe that the bulk of the cost for that assistance must be borne by the parents, BUT colts and juniors should continue to get either free, or considerably reduced practise fees from ground owners in the hope they will be their customers of the future, and competition entry fees which should be assisted by County. Other than that, if an individual does start to show some genuine potential, then parents should seek private sponsorship for coaching or cost of shells because as had been said before, MANY of these young people will simply walk away from the sport once they reach a certain age . . . . . . . you know what I mean. Now what is that proverb? Oh yes . . . . . . one hand in the bush is worth two on your shotgun.
I think you get the idea !!!
Main help in the form of grants from Sport Direct or CPSA itself, should come only after a certain age and only for those who have shown a genuine talent and interest (and not just a parent's dream) in being committed to the sport. For instance, I do know blaser3 from an earlier post, and his son has already reached the age of finding girls, booze and night clubs. Quite right too, its a part of growing up. But I can tell you he still has a passionate desire to succeed at the highest level of our sport.
This major level of funding should be there for those showing the greatest potential rather than those with the prettiest face, or nicest figure, or of a specific age. That way we might as a nation get to see more gold medals?
Just my opinion but happy to hear alternative points of view
RobertBeard
Moderator
So we must be in the majority then. So in that case we have not a leg to stand on, because it is only minority groups that get listened to these days Robert! We need a specialist association for the older shooter I think! It could be called "TOSA", The Old Shooters Association! :lol:
All this talk about spending or not spending CPSA fund's on junior's/colt's .The way it is being talked about it's as if your talking about thousand's, leaves me all a bit bemused because as stated in my earlier post ....there is no money being spent by the CPSA on youngster's the only occasionally tiny bit of help seem's to be given by some local CPSA region's (their choice) i.e my son recieved £100 a couple of year's back at the AGM ,he,s turned out for the county every time when needed at county and intercounty shoot's up and dowm the country for the last 5/6 year's .
The only funding seem's to be from sport u.k which basically cut most if not all funding after Bejing ,although after Peter Wilson's success this funding i hope will return .
(Going back to a much discussed earlier thread ) I think shooter's should recieve funding (as meager as it is ) by their performance's /averages or a selection procedure . As this seem's to work (as bourne out by our success rates) in most disciplines except olympic disciplines ...why are they different ??
The only funding seem's to be from sport u.k which basically cut most if not all funding after Bejing ,although after Peter Wilson's success this funding i hope will return .
(Going back to a much discussed earlier thread ) I think shooter's should recieve funding (as meager as it is ) by their performance's /averages or a selection procedure . As this seem's to work (as bourne out by our success rates) in most disciplines except olympic disciplines ...why are they different ??
Oh yes dear boy, pies would be an alternative to bacon sarnies! As for 48 years of age, you probably would need to have a proposer over 55 years of age who could show "good reason" for membership. "Good reason" could be any one of a number of things such as; not remembering why you are at a shooting ground, not being able to remember the word "Pull" when calling for the bird, having the need to leave the squad for a pi$$ and taking half an hour to find your way back, shooting whilst wearing your reading glasses and then wondering why you shot so badly. :lol: :lol:Les
Please can we include members of 48yrs old with a caveat that they have been shooting over 25yrs
PS I like the idea of free bacon sarnies and possibly a pie thrown in at lunch time.
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
Probably not,
historically young or youngish shooters who have done good have IMO been from what we could describe as a "comfortable" background therefore no ammount of cpsa investment would have made any difference. If you want a shooter of any age to progress to the levels of olympic or world standard then you would have to invest "huge" ammounts of money at them to enable daily practice and worldwide travel. Anyone who watches issf OT for instance and compares there performance or lack of to the italians russians yanks etc etc need to realise that unless they too shoot 200 targets every day and dont need to worry about work the next day then a comparison is ridiculous.
My point is this, shooting is and allways will be a sport for people able to finance it, many other sports are the same, polo for instance do you think that polo players are in it because they were picked as youngsters as showing promise ....... no its because of the environment they were born into. Its a fact of life that most of us and I use the term "most" do the best we can with what we have and anyone lucky enough to play polo or improve at shooting because they or there father can afford to pay for it I for one wish them all the best but I would rather not fund it via my cpsa subs. Unless we are prepared to pay for that youngster to shoot full time as a proffesional which would run into many many tens of thousands a year per shooter then it wont make a bit of difference.
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
Damm it I just realised that I have become political and expressed a view of what cpsa should do with my money. :mellow:
Damm it I wish I could retract some of the things I posted in earlier cpsa related threads now, as I now realise that sometimes just sometimes I do have a view on cpsa finances. damm damm and more damm
Damm it I wish I could retract some of the things I posted in earlier cpsa related threads now, as I now realise that sometimes just sometimes I do have a view on cpsa finances. damm damm and more damm
Well that's it then Ian, in view of the above I guess you can now be sponsored by me, you can now join TOSA. :lol:Damm it I just realised that I have become political and expressed a view of what cpsa should do with my money. :mellow:
Damm it I wish I could retract some of the things I posted in earlier cpsa related threads now, as I now realise that sometimes just sometimes I do have a view on cpsa finances. damm damm and more damm
As already stated most successful juniors come from a shooting family.
Being as it is an expensive hobby we can assume that possibly the youngster has a comfortable lifestyle.
We also know that as soon as possible they will be chasing the opposite sex and alcohol and any other diversion.
So possibly the only way to channel funding is through shooting ground scholarships? Where grounds identify and nurture a chosen number of candidates that a selection panel feel show true potential to make the grade and sufficient dedication to attend shoots and training days.This way the ground owners benefit by having the income from the youngster and their attendant friends and family. It's just a thought.
Being as it is an expensive hobby we can assume that possibly the youngster has a comfortable lifestyle.
We also know that as soon as possible they will be chasing the opposite sex and alcohol and any other diversion.
So possibly the only way to channel funding is through shooting ground scholarships? Where grounds identify and nurture a chosen number of candidates that a selection panel feel show true potential to make the grade and sufficient dedication to attend shoots and training days.This way the ground owners benefit by having the income from the youngster and their attendant friends and family. It's just a thought.
chubby
Well-known member
My little Poppet still shoots very well at 24 and he started at 12, I had to give up for 3 years but we were really helped by Bornargi then Mary Arm cartridges and also Blazer Germany. He shoots Fitasc sporting and English Sporting.
I will say that they did gain out of their Sponsorship as People did not mind asking a Lad if they could have a go with his F3, whereas they would not have asked an Adult, the same with Mary Arm, we used to give people a box to try.
But the only way to progress is to shoot an Olympic Discipline which kids find boring so no amount of funding would change the fun factor.
I will say that they did gain out of their Sponsorship as People did not mind asking a Lad if they could have a go with his F3, whereas they would not have asked an Adult, the same with Mary Arm, we used to give people a box to try.
But the only way to progress is to shoot an Olympic Discipline which kids find boring so no amount of funding would change the fun factor.
Last edited by a moderator:
clayclouter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2012
- Messages
- 645
One of the main issues here could be the vastly increased amount of "other pursuits" which young people are now exposed to at a very early stage, The choice is mind boggling as an example my son now 24 was quite a keen English Sporting shooter when he was 13/14 he then with his mates got into snowboarding, Bmx biking, free running, laser.and paintballing team competitions etc That is without all the computer and electornic distractions and finally when he got a bit older he discovered wine women and song not necessarily in that order. He now regards shooting as a very much Middle age pursuit /sport How quite we change that image I think is the key to attracting and retaining young people. JMO
RobertBeard
Moderator
The trouble is that most shooters are middle aged and there are are not enough of their contemporaries in the sport.
IMHO There is also a phase they go through when they want to do their own thing, not what Dad does as he always tends to know best. They need to work through their own successes and failures without us saying I told you so. They come back to want to do things again with you later on in life!
clayclouter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2012
- Messages
- 645
Bloody hell Robert !! I though I had got rid iof him!!!
it will cost me a fortune again!!
it will cost me a fortune again!!
