tiptop
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2012
- Messages
- 1,799
Last edited by a moderator:
Should we abandon 'Bird Only'
- Thread starter Salopian
- Start date
Help Support Clay, Trap, Skeet Shooting Forum:
RobertBeard
Moderator
You only shoot the clays once so it would be like birds only price plus £5 say for open, £5. For vets, £5 for ladies and £2.50 for juniors
Not sure we should be making the people we really want to encourage into the sport pay more. If they have worked hard enough and are good enough to win class fair play to them but give the category to the next one down.
Only problem I see with this is in the majors, 4th in class may well be the higher prize money than 1st in juniors for instance. Do we give the kid in question the higher prize money of 4th in class and make them miss out on a medal or a cup? When I was a kid I would rather have the medal and get to stand on the podium than the money, Hell, I still would now :.:
Only problem I see with this is in the majors, 4th in class may well be the higher prize money than 1st in juniors for instance. Do we give the kid in question the higher prize money of 4th in class and make them miss out on a medal or a cup? When I was a kid I would rather have the medal and get to stand on the podium than the money, Hell, I still would now :.:
Adam
Well-known member
Generally the ladies, juniors and vets only have trophys or maybe sponsored prizes up for grabs its rare for there to be cash prizes but when there are you normally have to select to shoot in either class or category when you enter
If were not careful, registered/competition shoots will be the domain of the 'rich' in the end. Poorer folk will just have to make do with the local club. As Fuzrat said we need to encourage MORE people to the sport, not keep them away. There are many very good shooters now, who never get the chance to shoot at the 'top' due to the expense.
As for knitting fog. very fine needles, and quick hands i have been told. Very similar to stichting a button on a fart!!!!!!!
As for knitting fog. very fine needles, and quick hands i have been told. Very similar to stichting a button on a fart!!!!!!!
optima
Well-known member
Sadley it,s already becoming a sport for the rich, going round the shoots you see very few young shots coming through, especially colts, there are a handfull of shoots that encourage youngsters with free shooting with paying adult and others that give a discount etc but sadley these grounds are in the minority, so it works out quite expensive for a father and son shooting together every weekend,probabley as much as a morgage!!
So according to the general concensus of opinion on here we can never sort it out. In the case of where there are more B/O than Comp entries we cannot agree to to abandon B/O and go Comp only because the poorer will have to pay more, and in the case where there are more Comp entries we cannot abandon B/O and the richer pay less and the groundowners run the risk of losing revenue rather than run the risk of having a more popular sport and therefore more entries, all be it at a lower tariff.
Has as been said by many if you want to compete maybe we should all pay Comp entry only and leave B/O to the club shoots?
Has as been said by many if you want to compete maybe we should all pay Comp entry only and leave B/O to the club shoots?
I believe that ALL shooters who enter a competition shoot to the best of their abilities, if you want to gamble on winning money then it's up to the individual, it should not be compulsary.
The CPSA only recently changed the rule on birds only to allow more shooters the option of shooting in a competition.
The CPSA only recently changed the rule on birds only to allow more shooters the option of shooting in a competition.
Perhaps i am missing something (the odd brain cell probably) but surely B/O shooters cover the cost of them shooting, its the EXTRA amount that goes into 'the pot' for prize money thats at question. This should not go into the 'grounds funds' . Sounds to me as though you only want the 'elite' to shoot and sod the clubmen, but i may be wrong.
Les Graham
Well-known member
That's how it sounds to me too. I really can't see what the problem is, as others have said it's up to the individual to shoot what he/she wants so long as the ground is paying it's way. By enforcing competition only it could drive good customers away and that's no good for any ground, far too many have closed down already.
ianmaney
Well-known member
Ok shall we turn it around, lets abandon competition and make it all B/O then we'll see who still does it for enjoyment and who does it for the money?
If competition only was ever enforced, I'd shoot only straw bailers, as I've said in this thread already, I'm not giving a stranger £40 a month form my earnings, I'd also not rejoin the CPSA if the directive came from them, I'll shoot what I want and not what I'm told to !!!!
If competition only was ever enforced, I'd shoot only straw bailers, as I've said in this thread already, I'm not giving a stranger £40 a month form my earnings, I'd also not rejoin the CPSA if the directive came from them, I'll shoot what I want and not what I'm told to !!!!
Les Graham
Well-known member
That's fine by me, let's all shoot birds only and drop the entry fee accordingly.
Now listen to the howls of protest from the ground owners.
Remember, we already have a thread running where the ground only paid prize money out on the cards handed in, NOT the number sold.
Frankly I don't have any axe to grind against Competition shooters or birds only, except I would like shooting to be promoted, I am against the wealthy having 22 goes at an open shoot, but that is their perogative and good look to shoot promoters if they can attract those types. What I cannot understand is how a shoot can put on a 100 birder for say £25 with referees and another charges £35 but only pays out say £100 high gun and dreadfully small amounts for class wins if at all.
Now listen to the howls of protest from the ground owners.
Remember, we already have a thread running where the ground only paid prize money out on the cards handed in, NOT the number sold.
Frankly I don't have any axe to grind against Competition shooters or birds only, except I would like shooting to be promoted, I am against the wealthy having 22 goes at an open shoot, but that is their perogative and good look to shoot promoters if they can attract those types. What I cannot understand is how a shoot can put on a 100 birder for say £25 with referees and another charges £35 but only pays out say £100 high gun and dreadfully small amounts for class wins if at all.
I think thats the point Salop, all birds only wont drop the entry as (supposedly) the extra comp fee goes into the pot and is paid back to the comp entries.
I go comp and will keep doing so as I back myself to get a draw every now and then, I have been fortunate enough to win a few bigish envelopes so even if I dont get another for a little while my extra fivers are covered, Mrs Fuz on the other hand always goes bo as to her she isnt gonna get near a class payout but enjoys the challenge of improving her average shooting decent targets at grounds that have good facilities. She would rather shoot an extra shoot every 6 than pay in a fiver she is never gonna win.
Yes you could say she should only shoot "club" shoots but around here if you want quality targets and decent facilities its registered all the way.
Maybe the way forward is for the cpsa to give more support for the smaller "club" grounds. The clubman league so far seems to be a very good initiative to get club shooters into a competitive environment but more needs to be done at a grass roots level to entice the many club/straw bale shooters into the competition circuit.
I go comp and will keep doing so as I back myself to get a draw every now and then, I have been fortunate enough to win a few bigish envelopes so even if I dont get another for a little while my extra fivers are covered, Mrs Fuz on the other hand always goes bo as to her she isnt gonna get near a class payout but enjoys the challenge of improving her average shooting decent targets at grounds that have good facilities. She would rather shoot an extra shoot every 6 than pay in a fiver she is never gonna win.
Yes you could say she should only shoot "club" shoots but around here if you want quality targets and decent facilities its registered all the way.
Maybe the way forward is for the cpsa to give more support for the smaller "club" grounds. The clubman league so far seems to be a very good initiative to get club shooters into a competitive environment but more needs to be done at a grass roots level to entice the many club/straw bale shooters into the competition circuit.
GlenPresley
Well-known member
Should not be allowed!!! This DISGUSTS ME! You pick the class you wish to shoot in at the start and that's it! Why the heck should everybody else get an advantage of two bites at the cherry and I only have one!!! DISCRIMINATION!!!
Y'see this is where I get confused. My understanding is that the fee difference for competition is to fund a prize pot and to pay the CPSA levy. Is that correct? I can't see how your maths arrive at "drop the entry fee accordingly"? No doubt it's a numbers game, but surely it's increasing the total numbers shooting that would put downward pressure on costs per shooter rather than B/O percentage.
B/O seems fairly cheap anyway when you think that there's a ref on every stand to launch the clays & mark the card and perhaps 12-14 stands of (hopefully) testing targets. Compared with a certain shooting school which charges £34/100 (and you have do your own buttoning & marking), shooting B/O at say Westfield seems good value. Similarly there's a straw baler which charges visitors £13/50, and most weeks only has 5 sporting stands set up with never more than 1 properly tough stand (sometimes none).
I could well be wrong but it seems to me that an increase in B/O percentage would mean a reduction in the prize pot resulting in serious competitors shooting elsewhere and that would actually put upward pressure on costs per shooter.
Or am I missing something?
RobertBeard
Moderator
Surely this is a bit like asking why one restaurant is 50% dearer than the next - it's either about quality, profit or higher costs or some combination of these. A business will charge what it can get so if people are happy to pay £35 then he's going to be happy.
Chard
Well-known member
No I don't think it has anything to do with quality at all.
It is purely down to the amount of entrants in the competition. If a ground puts on a competition for £25 and gets 100 competition entrants, that's about £500 into the prize pot (100 x £5).
The ground that charges £35 may only get 25 entrants into the competition, so assuming they also put £5 per entrant into the prize pot, they've only got £125 for the prize pot (25 x £5)
Rocket science or what?
None of this tedious old argument will make any difference to grounds' profits etc. It's just certain shooters, probably understandably, trying to force compulsory competition entry so that there is more in the prize pot. As far as they are concerned, birds only shooters are merely cluttering up the ground and are not contributing to their potential winnings. :yell:
I can see where they're coming from, but it's a load of old cock. It'll never change. Grounds are not interested in enforcing competition entry, because it makes absolutely no difference to their profits. The extra cost of competition entry goes straight back out in prizes, theoretically. They're not going to be willing to try and force people to pay more to shoot, when it's not even going to help their profit, anything that might turn entrants away is not going to happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
RobertBeard
Moderator
I can see where you are coming from Chard but look at the numbers for the ground in your argument. Exclude the £5 for the prize pot and the ground gets 100 @ £20 = £2,000 whilst the other ground gets 25 @ £30 = £750. Where is the sense in that as far as the ground is concerned? Are you sure that there is such a disparity in the numbers?
