Junior Investment - Is it worthwhile?

[blaser f3]

EHH!!....... THAT SHOULD BE 2013

 

[blaser f3]

Very very true, the lure of ale and the female form has ended many a good young shooters interest in the sport.

Phil*

They'll learn ........!!

 

[newbie]

Oh and another thing, it is not neccasarily the case that any shooter needs teaching or mentoring in order to progress to the highest level. Many of us have never had any money or lessons and some of us have done ok. Some have even gone all the way with home made styles and old guns held together with bailing twine my point is that money, lessons etc are not the only way to achieve.

but how much quicker would you have got to your current level if you had had structure and support?

Coming from other sports at a high level, shooting is in the dark ages for structure and support to athletes, there isnt any. Maybe we should copy the Russians or Americans....

 

[ips]

Fair point. My point was made with one thing in mind and that was for new shooters not to think that spending lots on equipment and or lessons is the ONLY way to achieve a good standard. Lots of determination and time shooting as often as your wallet allows and a little common sence and self analysis (off the range not on it) CAN and has worked for many.

 

[John Green]

...Wrong post, sorry

 

[ips]

Oi ... Get back to your vodka

 

[blaser f3]

Newbie spot on , i hate to think how much money i have spent on myself and my sons shooting so far ,in retrospect im sure that rather than spending untold money on rounds and cartridges and firing in the air, if a small percentage of these monies had been spent from the outset with a good instructor/ coach, myself and my son would reached a reasonable level of shooting a lot sooner and probably at a lot less overall cost but saying that i think most people be they young or old get into shooting as a pastime and it's only further (in my case a lot further ) down the road that competition rears it's ugly and expensive head ,by which time you've fallen into various bad habit's which means it's a lot harder therefore more expensive to iron out these habits before you can (hopefully ) improve.

 

[ips]

These are all valid points.

When i started in 86 no one mentioned a coach i didnt even know there was such a thing. You were lent a club gun and had a trusted shooter stand behind you for a couple of rounds then off you went to buy a gun and just got on with it. Spose things have changed since then

 

[PhilS]

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:

I'm sorry, I know this was posted a good couple of weeks ago but this is important - what do you mean "alternative" to bacon sarnies - IT SHOULD, NO MUST BE AS WELL AS!

On  serious note, surely we need to create as large a 'pool' as possible to give the best chance of getting the 2 or 3 shooting genii out of it?

 

[Hamster]

I've read through this thread but have to say find it surprising that people don't know the reason why the CPSA or any other body or trade related source don't go out talent spotting and nurturing those who show early promise - money. There isn't any in it to be precise. It's all very well a youngsters or more mature person for instance showing talent but to be blunt so what? 

There is an interview where GD gets asked the question of sponsorship and his reply is as usual on the money and brutally honest. Ask yourself this he said, what's in it for the sponsor? Can you repay them in other words; he himself being an exception in that he has a globally recognised name and unmatched results, has without question paid back his many sponsors over time. Perazzi have sold more guns because of him as have his cartridge manufacturers as have HyDef etc. To be in his league is but a pipe dream, there's one like him every generation and that's not enough odds to go talent spotting and throwing money around for.

Early promise is just that, it does not mean future podiums and titles are a matter of course so long as the person is helped with expenses. I have known many many people who showed promise, even the odd one that didn't look particularly hot early on but who through sheer perseverance and 4000 shells per month got to a pretty fantastic level but very few make that transgression into the big time ever. If I was talent spotting for instance, it wouldn't be the scores I'd pay particular attention to but the mental make up and will power. The winners instinct. That's why I don't personally believe you need a coach to make it big as I believe those who do make it big have that inner something that'll get them there. 

You could spot, support and nurture someone who may not only never make it but give up close to the top anyway. I've asked people before now why they stopped and reading between the lines it was obvious it was performing and turning it on every Sunday that they couldn't cope with. 

Clay shooting is nothing like televised sports, even if you do make it up the ladder there is no monetary return for either party, it's a pastime not a profession.

 

[newbie]

I've read through this thread but have to say find it surprising that people don't know the reason why the CPSA or any other body or trade related source don't go out talent spotting and nurturing those who show early promise - money. 

incorrect. There is money, Sport England and olympic funding based on Number of golds aiming for. Exactly what British Cycling did (16) and also managed to secure commercial sponsorship too in support of that aim. BC secured £16M initial which was a step change from the original £2-3M based on Sport England (?) funding prior to that. Now they have £30+M, pretty good ROI. They balanced olympic development with raising participation in the sport to good effect. You need both. You need a large population to be able to spot and develop talent from. You need structure to identify, select and then develop that talent further at all stages. 

National bodies are there to balance the longevity/regulation/safety etc of a sport and national competitive achievement/recognition. Simples.

 

[John Green]

Newbie,

Agreed and good points made.

In terms of return for sponsors and the sport in general, a youngsters enthusiasm is infectious and there is no greater sales machine than that. My boy now has a fair few friends from his School looking to take up the sport as they see and feel his passion for it, the school also fully support him and don't shun his interests He's also receiving enquiries via his website on what cartridges he uses. .. I think that says a lot.

 

[PhilS]

incorrect. There is money, Sport England and olympic funding based on Number of golds aiming for. Exactly what British Cycling did (16) and also managed to secure commercial sponsorship too in support of that aim. BC secured £16M initial which was a step change from the original £2-3M based on Sport England (?) funding prior to that. Now they have £30+M, pretty good ROI. They balanced olympic development with raising participation in the sport to good effect. You need both. You need a large population to be able to spot and develop talent from. You need structure to identify, select and then develop that talent further at all stages. 

National bodies are there to balance the longevity/regulation/safety etc of a sport and national competitive achievement/recognition. Simples.

I agree. As I said a couple of posts above we need the large pool to get the few from.

I also agree with Newbie that the sponsors do get their return by way of publicity.  It provides a better return for them than far more spent in magazines on adverts.

 

[newbie]

To clarify re publicity and ROI, there are many forms to generate return, it's measuring t that's hard when not in column inches or hard copy. Sponsors would look for advertising equivalent returns (AERs) which make it easy to financially justify investment.

In the case of sport, there are two routes to money: hard (.commercial) and soft (government e.g., sport England, lottery etc). Either way you need to generate a return in participation or coverage/sales. Whilst shooting remains a small sport in numbers terms (and largely not a popular one in the current media) then the return isn't good unless from within.

 

[PhilS]

To clarify re publicity and ROI, there are many forms to generate return, it's measuring t that's hard when not in column inches or hard copy. Sponsors would look for advertising equivalent returns (AERs) which make it easy to financially justify investment. In the case of sport, there are two routes to money: hard (.commercial) and soft (government e.g., sport England, lottery etc). Either way you need to generate a return in participation or coverage/sales. Whilst shooting remains a small sport in numbers terms (and largely not a popular one in the current media) then the return isn't good unless from within.

Isn't that the bit that the shooting fraternity can, or at least help, do something about? 

The more people that we can get involved and the more publicity it gets the better - with the obvious publicity exceptions.

We can all play a part in the promotion side of things - organise events at your local grounds (I am sure the SG owners will participate as it only helps them) - maybe to support your favourite charity - and get the local press involved. 

So long as its on the positive side ALL publicity has to help.

just my thoughts.

 

[ips]

I've read through this thread but have to say find it surprising that people don't know the reason why the CPSA or any other body or trade related source don't go out talent spotting and nurturing those who show early promise - money. There isn't any in it to be precise. It's all very well a youngsters or more mature person for instance showing talent but to be blunt so what?

There is an interview where GD gets asked the question of sponsorship and his reply is as usual on the money and brutally honest. Ask yourself this he said, what's in it for the sponsor? Can you repay them in other words; he himself being an exception in that he has a globally recognised name and unmatched results, has without question paid back his many sponsors over time. Perazzi have sold more guns because of him as have his cartridge manufacturers as have HyDef etc. To be in his league is but a pipe dream, there's one like him every generation and that's not enough odds to go talent spotting and throwing money around for.

Early promise is just that, it does not mean future podiums and titles are a matter of course so long as the person is helped with expenses. I have known many many people who showed promise, even the odd one that didn't look particularly hot early on but who through sheer perseverance and 4000 shells per month got to a pretty fantastic level but very few make that transgression into the big time ever. If I was talent spotting for instance, it wouldn't be the scores I'd pay particular attention to but the mental make up and will power. The winners instinct. That's why I don't personally believe you need a coach to make it big as I believe those who do make it big have that inner something that'll get them there.

You could spot, support and nurture someone who may not only never make it but give up close to the top anyway. I've asked people before now why they stopped and reading between the lines it was obvious it was performing and turning it on every Sunday that they couldn't cope with.

Clay shooting is nothing like televised sports, even if you do make it up the ladder there is no monetary return for either party, it's a pastime not a profession.

well said, agree with all. Some people however are not realists like you and i

 

[altnipper]

Interesting topic. I was a junior in the late 90's, I was quite good - AA class and placed at championships in juniors. Reached the point where I had to pay for it myself and stopped! Wasn't viable to continue at the level I wanted to, it was a shame but I didn't want to carry on half harted - very competitive. So I decided to stop completly and didn't pick up my gun until a couple of years ago, then put it down again as I was depressed I was not that good any more(but still in AA class, thanks cpsa!), picked it up 4 months ago and am now trying to get form back. Very up and down though. I think money is the big issue as in most things in life. To really compete well you have to invest a lot into it and someone leaving juniors leaving home having to fund themselves it's seldom do-able. I think it's good to have juniors around though, anyone coming to the sport is good for the sport, but the bulk of ongoing talent and shooters will come I think from older members who start later on in life, unless the juniors parents are minted. Take a look around the next shoot - middle aged men generally, there's a reason for this.

Money makes the world go around -I went to the world champs in 1997, visited the then junior world champions home and shooting range, he had a walk in gunroom, also for practice he would shoot 300 a DAY! slightly difficult to compete.

 

[Hamster]

You make an excellent point there regarding the almost overnight transition into adultdom (I know) and having to pay out your own pocket. It's great that a lot of grounds do free entries with a paying parent and stuff but really they're just casting out their own net for the future; for a sponsor to fund juniors for many years hoping they don't give up, improve, become regular podiumers (I know) and pay the company back in increased sales without deserting them for pastures new................well it's a big ask.

 

[altnipper]

Maybe making it cheaper for anyone under 30? Cheaper entry fees, membership etc. (I'm 32 so have no real vested interest in this suggestion!) It would be interested to see the age demographics from the cpsa.

 

[Nicky T]

IMHO, investment in juniors is worthwhile as they are the potential future of the sport and often have the most potential. I'll be doing what I can to ensure that my two get into shooting as and when they are old enough and ready, that is of course if they want to.