Looking for feedback on the rules of grading for outdoors as still am not clear why my 1st year shooting outdoor EVER I have been graded as B Grade

For the record I believe C Grade would be a fair grade for me as the wind is a big part of outdoors! Like last week I shot my 1st Aggregate Club Champ it was raining and the flags were not moving so I pinged them of as quick as I could got to 30 shots looked at the rain and it was coming down on a difference angle however the flags SAID there was no wind! so I learned to look at the rain not the flags on wet days! all the same I shot 570 and was happy to get a higher score than my last 4 shoots.

What are YOUR thoughts on this?

Hello Liz

There has been some confusion regarding what grade I should be shooting in and how that grading should be set and to avoid any further confusion, I need a executive ruling on my grade for the current outdoor season.

I have been told by my club they will take my grade from my last 60 match competition. I have never shot any kind of outdoor competitions before this season and for that matter have never been a member of any firearms organisations before I started shooting smallbore in 2008. It would appear that they are wanting to use rule 10.12 to set my official grading for the season. Rule 10.12 states; An ungraded competitor may enter any competition upon provision of a certificate, signed by the member’s Club Secretary of the last four thirty-shot official scores prior to the competition.

I was graded indoors as D Grade for 2008 and subsequently got new rifle, jacket and built a shooting range at home and shot 2009 as a D Grade averaging 97.7, this will have me shooting next year in A Grade.

Rule 10.11 states A first year competitor shall automatically be D Grade - subject to Rule 10.18 I know my shooting is better than D Grade however this is my 1st year doing outdoors and my grading for the 2009 season was D.

I have been entering competitions in D grade in line with 10.16 which states; TSNZ, Associations and Clubs reserve the right to grade a member who wishes to enter a championship but who has not yet obtained an official TSNZ grading or membership card. A currently graded indoor competitor wishing to enter an Outdoor competition without having obtained an official outdoor grading, may enter as per the following schedule:

Indoor Master or A grade = Outdoor B Grade
Indoor B Grade = Outdoor C Grade
Indoor C and D Grade = Outdoor D Grade

By "current grading" I understand that it would by my 2009 season indoor grade as the 2010 grading will not be applied untill the beginning of the 2010 indoor season.

I have competed at two championships:

Marlborough Outdoor Champs, 24 - 26/10/09
Saturday Sweepstake D Grade 578 Re-entered C Grade 575
Sunday Champs 565

Nelson Outdoor Champs 14 - 15/10/09
Saturday Sweepstake D Grade 556 Re-entered C Grade 558
Sunday Champs 567

1st Club Score 570 22/11/09

Your urgent attention would be much appreciated as I am heading to Otago - Southland Combined open Championship this weekend.

Also there are are couple of other shooters here in Canterbury who may fall into a similar situation: Natalie Colvile and Adam Pottinger, both entered the Marlborough champs in D grade, Adam pottinger I am told has represented NZ in smallbore shooting.

Best Regards
Danny de Hek

> Hello Danny
>
> The club is correct in using Rule 10.12
>
> We have worked it out and it doesn't matter which way you go you will be B
> Grade outdoor.
>
> Ruling 10.11 is not for you, sorry.
>
> Kind Regards
> Liz

My Reply

Liz,
Are you sure that my grading is to be B grade. As a first time outdoor shooter I feel that is grossly unfair? Did you refer this matter to the Executive for their consideration as I requested?

I ask that this decision be reviewed for the following reasons:

If I was to be graded under rule 10.9 using all official scores shot outdoors so far this season (and supplied to you), my average works out to 94.5 which equates to C grade for an outdoor grading assuming that C grade is average scores of 92.5 thru 94.99. E.g. 7 X 60 shot matches totaling 3969 divided by 42 = 94.5

If I was to be graded under rule 10.12 using the last 4 X 30 shot official scores shot outdoors, my average works out to 94.75 which equates to C grade for an outdoor grading. E.g. 2 X 60 shot matches totaling 1137, divide by 12 = 94.75

If I was to be graded under rule 10.16 using my official current indoor grading which I shot under for the 2009 season, which was D, I should be graded as a D grade outdoor shooter. It is my understanding that the new grading which I attained during the 2009 indoor season should not be applied to an outdoor grading because that indoor grading is not effective until the beginning of the 2010 season and is not the current indoor grade for 2009, so should not be applied in this instance.

It is my understanding from reading these rules that rules 10.12 & 10.16 should only applied when entering a competition when no official grading has been given to a new outdoor shooter.

There appears to be no rule adequately covering a shooter, (albeit recently rapidly improving), who has shot a couple of indoor seasons and deciding to shoot outdoors when setting a grading for that shooter to carry for the ensuing outdoor season except maybe rule 10.16 using the grade used during the indoor season just completed.

All things being equal and I had not made such a dramatic improvement during the 2009 indoor season, this question would in all likelihood not have arisen and I would probably have been accorded a grading under rule 10.16 as I understand it and everyone would be happy. To use my grading which is to be applied for the 2010 indoor season does not take into account my inexperience of the more trying outdoor conditions, as evidenced by the widely ranging scores (556 thru 578), and as I said above, should not be applied as it is not the current 2009 indoor grading.

Best Regards
Danny de Hek

> Hello Danny
>
> I did not make the ruling or decision.
>
> The Grading is done on your last 2 official shoots on your first outdoor
> championships at Marlborough.
>
> i.e. 575, 565 = 1140 divided by 12 = 95
>
> That is your grade for Outdoor.
>
> Kind Regards
> Liz

My Reply

Evening Liz

Just been thinking about this a little bit more... as one does.

So what you are basically saying, if I shot like cr@p at Marlborough, I could've got a lower grade for the outdoor season?  Kinda seems like you can  use this to ones advantage, if you were that way inclined.

The other thing, is my last 2  competition cards were shot at Nelson and I shot 556, 558 and then 567. Therefore, when I rock on up to my outdoor club (whom have asked for my scores from my last 2 competition shoots), they will grade me as a C grader. So which outdoor grade am I? Seems there is a few grey areas and basically this could be my whole point of these questions as it does seem unclear.

To be honest, I don't really feel I should be a B Grade, I simply had beginners luck on my first shoot!

Best Regards
Danny de Hek

I wrote to Tenpointnine

You shoot outdoors? what are your thoughts on this?

Tenpointnine Reply

Hi Danny, Welcome to your first clash with the rules. As you have so rightly pointed out it is confusing. But one must try and ascertain the INTENT of the rule before applying them willy nilly.

10.11 means you are not a first year shooter. That is debatable because you are a first year OUTDOOR shooter but 10.18 screws that 'cos you have been a member of ANY club beforehand.

10.16 came into play for Marlborough. You not having any scores meant that since you were D grade indoor on you CURRENT grading (your next Indoor grading does not come into play until 2010) and if there were any Indoor matches before the end of 2009 then you would still shoot D grade regardless of your average in the allocated timeframe for Indoor grading.


This means that 10.12 MAY come into play. There MAY be grounds that suggest you should/could have been regraded after the first 2 60 shot matches. So for Nelson you could/should have shot B grade.

However, and it is a big however. I believe that there are two parts to the rules. The first part (and its intent) deals with grading and regrading for CURRENT outdoor shooters who have shot at least a season. This season may only be 4 x 30 shot matches as per rule 10.8. In other words, if you are already an outdoor shooter then a minimum of 4 shoots (30 shot) is required for your grade to be calculated at the end of the time of the outdoor grading period ready for next year.

The first part of the rules goes up to 10.10. Up to then it is talking of shooters who already are outdoor shooters or have only shot the minimum 2 30 shot matches over a season. AND it is referring all the way through for scores that are recorded on the SPC. This nails it for me as referring to existing outdoor shooters.

Another way to look at it is: If you did not shoot any more matches after Marlborough, you would be graded for NEXT year as a B grader.

Now we come to the second part of the grading rules. The intent of all these ones from 10.11 onwards refer to shooters who are new to the sport of OUTDOOR shooting - subject to 10.18.

So which one should take precedence now? I suggest that you could not provide a certificate of your last 4 30 shot scores from your secretary as per rule 10.12. - Am I presuming correctly here?? Did you shoot any outdoor before going the Marlborough at all? Whatever, you did not have a certificate.

You are not a returning competitor so rules 10.13 and 10.14 don't apply.

So that leaves 10.16. You are a CURRENTLY graded Indoor shooter so shooting D grade was legit at Marlborough. It was within Nelsons right to grade you from your Indoor grade as well if you did not have an official grading. You did not so therfore you could shoot D grade legit there as well.

10.12 and 10.16 are the confusing parts as both are referring to "officially ungraded shooters". 10.12 refers to a shooter who HAS shot some outdoor and 10.16 refers to someone who has NOT shot any before hand.

Now the crux is how do you get the official grade?

If rule 10.8 is invoked by TSNZ then the killer words here are "MINIMUM of 4 30 shot cards". Since you have now shot in Nelson AND you still do NOT have an official grade - in fact you have did not even apply for it until AFTER Nelson, I would strongly argue that you can now present 8 30 shot scores with which to get your Official Grading.

Note the places where ONLY 4 cards are counted are for returning shooters. You are not one of those. Rule 10.8 refers to a minimum of 4 cards.

I think that sums it up. But is does need clarifying. There was a move last year to get new outdoor shooters graded on their average for the current year, rather than their current grading, but it was withdrawn and is not in the rules.

I phoned Liz today and I got the feeling that I should just shut up and not question my B Grade I was also told that she was not going to reply to my last email.

Liz said "you got a PART executive ruling" so I said you mean Grant looked at it? Liz also said "She had to shoot B Grade for her 1st year outdoors and that is the way it is and as my 2010 grade is A so I should be shooting in B Grade!

It did not matter what I said or how nicely I said it Liz was not happy with me questioning the PART executive ruling! I was not trying to rev her up but she was very defensive and them said right "I am taking this to the executives for a ruling"

So two get the "executive ruling" that I asked for in my 1st email this is how you need to go about it!

My question for the executives is

If I have 6 cards shot at competitions before I became a member of a club (Last Sunday) why can I not get my avg from those cards "MINIMUM of 4 30 shot cards"

When she said "I am going to get a "executive ruling" on this matter" (I felt like saying why didn't I get this in the 1st place) it sounded like a threat more than I see your point and I will get them to make a ruling for you.

It is such a shame I got this responds I love this sport and until now have only had good feeling about it all now I feel like I have upset management and will think twice before I request a "executive ruling" on any matter!

Hey Danny, good on you for you tinacity and I think Tenpointone and I are on the samre page with this one but he has a more methological and unemotive way of putting it (the scientist comming out here) and you should cast his aspertions to memory for future reference.

Anyone got a wheelbarrow LOL.

We can all guess who the "partial executive" were.
How dare you question authority, HeHe. The very reason that the question of which rule should apply and how, really does need proper informed debate by the full executive where an exchange of ideas as to where the intent of the rules lay is paramount and you can't get that with just one or two parties. If nothing else was to come out of all this it does highlight the inadequacies of the current rules which need tidying up so that personal preferences/influences cannot be brought in to play.

Above all else, a well developed sense of fair play should prevail which is what any sport is about ............ apart from winning of course.

As I said yesterday if they still insist on B grade then treat it s a challange but in the meantime go with what the club says about your grading and hope they haven't been got at by Liz or you can still legally us that rule that puts you in D and also you could upgrade to C.

Good on you for Highlighting the inadiquacies of the rules.

Lets have some fun ;-) A Poll! good for users who like to have a quiet say.

I've just replied to Danny about the intent of the rule.
The problem with the rules in any sport, the people who wrote them move on. The intent is forgotten, and those who are unfamiliar with the way rules are generally composed, tend to make the wrong assumptions. If read correctly, giving each clause priority in sequence, the rule is not inadequate.
Danny is no longer a first year shooter.
Danny is not asking to enter an event without having completed 4 x 30 shot matches so the ad hoc Master and A are B clause does not apply.
Until Danny receives an "official" TSNZ grading based on Championship and Club scores, he is fully entitled to enter any event and be graded on the basis of a certificate verifying his last Four official 30 shot matches. This means his grade can in fact change from event to event depending on his form.
This was deemed by those who wrote the rules to be the most equitable manner of allowing new Outdoor shooters to participate at an appropriate level until an "official" TSNZ grading was obtained. It now appears the only provision lacking in the rule is at what point the member is required to submit scores to TSNZ to receive an "official" grading.

Kero I agree, and it makes logical sense. I feel a remit comming on to perhaps tidy the situation up a little; maybe there should be a requirement for new outdoor shooters in sutiations similar to Danny's to submit all qualifying scores after a particular point ( being a reasonable number of matches to gain a fair indication of the shooter's ability) to TSNZ for consideration and to do the calculations for an official grading. Untill that time the intent of the rules as you descibe above should apply. -------- Something along those lines to provide guidence for those who have not had the benifit and/or the understanding of the original intent of the rules as/and when they were drafted.

Kero is right. But I think we could quibble a bit on the "Last 4 cards" interpretation.

As Kero says, at what point can or should scores be "assessed" for an "official grade".

I do think that there is a split in the rules as they are writ. That is, existing shooters and "new" shooters. And once they are read with that "intent" the existing shooters part is pretty clear but the new shooter part ain't.

So would you call a new shooter someone who is new to shooting or someone that has never shot before.

As I could have done clay shooting in the past and this could be my 1st time using a 22

I think there need to be a new rule for 1st year shooters who have shot indoors specially ones like me as I can think of 4 shooters in Canterbury who have shot there 1st year outdoors as D Grade who were D Grade indoors and heading to A the following year.

The difference may have been my 1st time shooting was at Marlborough Outdoor Champs.

If you look at the results of the Poll you can see there is many different votes and it is not clear.

I do not clear about the my Grade however would like to be in the right Grade.

I just going to rock on up to my club on Sunday with my last 2 60 shot scores and let them set the grade!

A first year shooter is well defined in the rules.
A first year shooter is one who has not been the member of a rifle club of any calibre. Clay target doesn't count. NZDA membership possibly could, but as far as I am aware, prior membership of a rifle hunting organisation has never precluded anyone from being considered a first year smallbore shooter.

The rules don't need changing. We just need people at the top who are not reluctant to consult with those who wrote the sodding book.

And Remember : Rules are for the guidence of wise men and the adherence of fools.

Kero

It is obvious to me (Fool I am) that the rule IS confusing. I am reading it and it is NOT clear what someone needs to do to "make sure they shoot in the proper grade when they decide to CONTINUE shooting outdoor".

All I tried to do was interpret them with (hopefully) undersanding the "intent". And the intent to me is that there appears to be room for a first year shooter to be interpreted as someone new to "outdoor".

And to me the intent that appears to be "the fairest" is to use your Indoor grade as the first step until "you proceed to get your official grade".

When you NEED to do this and how many cards can be counted is open to discussion.

And one finds oneself being the guines pig, so let me tell you my story.

I tried outdoor once or twice a year through the 70s and 80s. Usually the Mana and Pautahanui Champs and one time at Te Puke for the NI champs. In all those events the only grade I used - and was accepted - was the transition clause from Indoor Grade.

In the 90s I shot the Nationals in 1992 (I think) in auckland and had to shoot A grade 'cos I was master Indoor. My grade the following year was deemed to be C. I then shot the Nationals in 1993 and entered as a B grade (my choice) and won a few trophies and Grand Aggregate Champion.

The point being, I did not send 4 30 shot card scores away for the 1992 Nationals - or even afterwards. The secretary was efficient and collated the few scores (I did shoot at Club a couple of times afterwards) I had to get to get me the official grade.

To me, this bullshit of "having" to send in 4 scores to get an official grade has crept in over the last 10 years or so.

Either we have a rule based purely and simply on outdoor or we don't. If we don't then it need to be clear. It is not.

I agree with your sentiment but when those who wrote those sodding rules are not there anymore?????
We need rules that are absolutley clear in their intent with a minimum of room for interpretation. I understand your position from bitter experiences of my own, and yes it IS bloody hard to acheive those objectives to which I refer. You have had a little more insight than the rest of us in formulating those rules and as such have the familiarity which we are missing and therefore you perception if the intent is far more clearer than ours.
There will always be a situation sometime down the line which just can't be predicted and as they arise then fine tuning is in order to avoid or at least minimise confusion.
In smallbores case there was confusion as to what rule really should apply so the question was put and it was requested that the committee debate it and come up with the answer but rightly or wrongly, for whatever reason the request was ignored and someone who thought they knew better, took it upon themselves to make the decision.
The intent is reasonably clear, the application of how to achieve it is not quite so. At the end of the day, the decision needs to be both fair to the shooter so that they at least have an outside chance of reasonable success in their given grade, but at the same time fair to others in that same grade. Nobody wants to have a burgler in their grade but at the same time nobody wants to be put in a grade where there is little or no hope of acheiving some success at some time - otherwise why would you even bother.
Take a look at the Marl Champs results and I'm sure you will find more than just one inconsistancy in the application of the rules where grading is concerned and I'm reasonably sure that no certificate with scores was presented to the match officials.

Hey Guys, lighten up a bit. I am perhaps understandably defensive about the application and intent of the current rules, but they are a work in progress, and always will be. From the moment I became uninvolved in TSNZ admin, I have been advocating setting up a Rules Revision Section for the reasons outlined by Grumpy. There is nobody in the current TSNZ administration, or Executive, who are familiar with the intent of many sections within the Constitution and Rules. The two people who drafted the originals are still around, IN from Wgtn and myself. The Executive of the day included JS,BM,VW,JT,ST any of whom I am sure would be willing to sit on a Rules Committee to provide assistance when required.

Hey Kero,that sounds like a good plan! NOW,how do we go about allowing the optical help we oldies use in indoor shooting to be able to be used(after scrutiny)for outdoor. This is the one thing that prevents me from shooting outdoor as Im not going to go to the trouble of obtaining knobloks etc when Ive already got my setup for the indoor 25 yard range! Who do I talk to? I think outdoor shooting needs to be encouraged and this may help to sway some of the shooters to have a go.

Gidday Graeme, This is an old and knotty issue. I started with the old "lens in the rearsight" trick myself, but quickly changed to shooting spectacles when TSNZ aligned the outdoor rules to ISSF requirements. Now we also have foresight diopters and the like. I'm told one of the accessory makers has developed a rearsight kit that you can adjust as your eyesight requirements change. Until the ISSF change the "no gizmos on the rifle" policy, TSNZ would have to set up a separate section, aligned with the optical allowances in the indoor code, so the "olds" could shoot alongside the ISSF compliant competitors but competing in a different section. But .. it just so happens I have two pairs of shooting frames for sale. A pair of knobloks with the large lensholder no blinder $80.oo and a pair of Champions with a small lensholder c/w blinder $60.oo.

Graeme, There is a way that you may well be able to use your setup outdoors. You will probably need to get a note from your optician stating that you need what you already have and then apply for dispensation to use your settup to TSNZ Excutive, they are able to give that dispensation for non ISSF type matches which means that you would not be able to use the settup for matches run under ISSF rules but everything else would be fine. I haven't heard of anyone being refused. I know Leon Grieble has used a diopter for years under dispensation and there are a few others that do also.

You can shoot in any outdoor match with a lense on your rifle. Rule 8 covers extra optics. But note the bit in Rule 8.9. Not allowed in ISSF events.

I suspect you may still shoot but not win any prizes if it advertised as ISSF. That implies - although I would have to check with TSNZ - that all events at the Nats ar non ISSF other than the advertises ISSF mens, womens and jumiors, 3p and ISSF air rifle. The 'graded events' are not necessarily deemed to be full ISSF. ....in my humble opinion.

Well, that would suit me!
I definitely have a sight deficiency on the 50m range but I'm reluctant to go down the knoblok path too.
I would like to try a diopter before investing in one though.

Just been checking through the listed Outdoor events and it seems pretty clear which are shot under TSNZ rules and those shot under ISSF rules.

And the dispenstion detailed in rule 8 seems clear enough also. Just have to get Opt. certs. Shouldn't be a problem.