Getting a hard leg (not 22)

I am not suggesting that they (CMP) set a minimum score to get a hard leg. What I would like to suggest is that they figure out a score that would get a person an 8 (or 6H) point leg even if there were only the 6 shooters at the match to make it an official point winning match.
  We now have a minimum score of 250 that a shooter has to make to get any points. Why not carry it another step further. We all know how hard it is at a local match to get enough shooters on the line for a 6 pointer. Getting 16 non-distinguished shooters to a hardball match (whatever we call it now) is almost impossible.
  Why not have a minimum score that would/could bump any match up to a hard point match. It would not even have to be 8 points but you could earn a score like 6H. Meaning it was worth 6 points but counts as a hard leg.
  I am not suggesting that the "hard" score should be easy. I think it should be a number however that is obtainable with practice and dedication. I don't know how this new softball ammo and weapons are going to work when figuring this hypothetical minimum score and that initial number might have to be adjusted. I think initially a score somewhere between 270 (Expert) and 285 (Master) should earn a person hard leg points. If we didn't have new ammo regulations I would have suggested a score of 275. With the new regs maybe they should be looking at a score of 280+.
 Again, I am not suggesting these are minimum scores to earn a hard leg. This would give shooters a chance to leg out without having to spend the big bucks traveling and a reason to keep shooting at their local matches. The local matches are what keep this sport alive.

Len

If they want to have more competitors at more matches, then they would leave it the way it is and have more shooters "chasing the leg".  

You can only shoot a limited number of matches per year anyway. 

Since the CMP does not have classifications for shooters to work through; the logic of leg points for "keeping shooters coming back" is a little flawed.  It works as an incentive to shoot, but not necessairly to keep shooting after the golden ring is caught.  So they have the hard legs designed to keep the ring a little further out reach.

My "logic" was based upon personal observations. There are a number of shooters at our local matches that prefer to not waste the ammo in a match that there is no chance of getting a hard leg. There seem to be a number of shooters scattered across the country with 30 plus points or getting close that will not get the Golden ring because that hard point match is not available (without travel). They are non-distinguished and would add to the total of eligible shooters if they shot. However, most of them pack up their guns and go home when the 2700 is over after checking out how many shooters signed up. Or, they stay and shoot. And add 6 more points to their total. This is of course frustrating to the new shooter that has been dreaming of getting his/her first points. It is a problem that should be addressed in this sport sometime. If the shooter with a lot of points stays and shoots and does poorly he makes someone happy. If he stays and shoots and just keeps piling up points he doesn't make anyone happy. If there was a goal that this shooter could be trying for, he wouldn't just be there making it frustrating for the new shooter. I understand why we have hard legs. It worked great in the 70s with 30,000 shooters. Not so well in 2015.

Len

Make it 285 and the winning score including the distinguished.  And make it 10 points.

But if they are as you say "shooting only for the hard leg" then they would still only be competing for basically that one additional match (getting the leg or score).  That does nothing for keeping the matches going (past that one for the shooter).  Sounds like the need is for more participation (shooters) not necessairly for a way for a shooter to leg out.  

Its not just a good score for a match; its getting a good score on a day when there are a significant number of competitors shooting.  As it stands now, the shooter has to get the better score of all the competitors that day, not just crossing the fininsh line (shooting a certain score).  And that is a siginicant difference in the level of stress and competition when that is on the line. 

Just my thoughts.

Len,
Just lend out some of those extra guns to new shooters. Fill the line, get more shooters hooked!

This is where I'm at as well.  I've got my Distinguished Revolver, but I'm at 28 points for Distinguished Pistol.  I need my hard leg.  It won't be a local match as there are not many non-distinguished pistol shooters around here.  Definitely not enough for a hard leg match.

marlin1881 wrote:there are not many non-distinguished pistol shooters around here.  Definitely not enough for a hard leg match.

Colorado has 5.36 Million people living there.  I can't believe that there aren't plenty of non-distinguished shooters that you can encourage to try our sport--even if it's with a borrowed gun and borrowed ammo.

And, 5.29M of them are already distinguished!       We have a lot of 2700 shooters, and enough shooters for a 6-point EIC match.  Hard leg?  Nope.  Not even at the 2-day state match.  Lots of EIC shooters, and yes, a lot of distinguished EIC shooters.  We have fun!

Every CMP match last season was a struggle to get enough ND to have points, they put guns in any warm hand that could pull a trigger, the new rules might get more people since they can shoot about any gun, just have to wait and see

Yeah let's hope this works.

The 250 minimum is not needed. Remove the minimum and the "hard leg" and replace it with a "Camp Perry" leg. You can get all the points needed and then you have to travel to Perry to leg out. That, to me, would be nerve wrecking and difficult to pull off, and would increase attendance at Camp Perry.

Legs based on how many and who is there worked long ago on the Military base using issue arms and ammo.  But times have changed.  Now, despite recent changes,  there are tuned firearms and tested ammo.  And local EIC matches are a far cry from Nationals or all military events.  Distinguished status should change to be based on your skill set and resulting score.  Score is the only thing that can be evenly applied to all EIC and NTI matches.

Ghillieman wrote:The 250 minimum is not needed. Remove the minimum and the "hard leg" and replace it with a "Camp Perry" leg. You can get all the points needed and then you have to travel to Perry to leg out.

I agree there should be no minimum score to get a leg, hard or otherwise. Everybody in a match shoots under the same conditions no matter what they are. Kind of like the old joke about not having to run faster than the bear just faster than the other runners. I don't agree about replacing the hard leg with a Perry leg. I thought all legs awarded at Perry except the ones for shooters who take the SAFS were already 8 pointers. There are people who will never shoot at Perry and getting an 8 or 10 pointer at a local match is their only hope of becoming distinguished. I guess what I am saying is why change anything even though it appears to be too late for that.

I remember in the 1980s that many rifle legs I shot there were two legs awarded.  One was always a 10 point leg for high ND shooter.  I know I got one. At Perry, civilians were awarded 10 point legs for any score above the cut.

The problem with a Perry leg is many will never go there due to expense or time restraints so why would they even bother to compete  knowing they could never leg out.

You need 16 non-distinguished for an 8 point Hard Leg. That should not be an insurmountable number. Though from looking in CO, NM, and AZ I  only see one match that had 16 (Phoeniix, Feb 2014). 

How far is the travel to the western Games from CO for you?

I guess I could say that if a shooter is not committed enough to train, compete, spend (time and money) and commit to the extent needed to get the points and legs, should they really get Distinguished?   

I guess I could say that its not just about shooting a certain score, but actually competing in an environment where you just might not know what score would get you points, or not?  

I guess I could say that in order to get more shooters, you need more people to put on more matches and where are they going to come from?

I guess I could say those things, but I won't since it might hurt someone feelings.


Be yourself.  It’s better to be disliked for something that you are; than to be liked for something that you are not.

CR10X wrote:I guess I could say that if a shooter is not committed enough to train, compete, spend (time and money) and commit to the extent needed to get the points and legs, should they really get Distinguished?

I agree with that statement. That is where I was at with the Camp Perry leg. It's my opinion that by the time a shooter has invested the time and money competing to earn all their required leg points a trip to compete in Camp Perry and possibly leg out would definitely be on their mind. It would also raise the attendance at Camp Perry and keep the Pistol Distinguished Badge a coveted prize that aren't handed out like candy at a parade. If a shooter gets all their points and does not want to travel to the historic National Championship Matches to possibly leg out, then that is up to them.

I do my best to bring new shooters into the sport. It was difficult in previous years unless I let them use my pistol and ammo. Most people don't have a 1911 or M9 that meets the rules of previous years EIC pistol rules. With the rule changes this year I already have several people interested in trying this sport out. But, the 250 minimum, in my opinion, will only discourage new shooters from competing by guaranteeing they will not receive any leg points unless they shoot a 250 or better.

The 250 minimum needs to be removed, it's only discouraging new shooters.

A required Camp Perry leg to go distinguished will root out any shooters that got "easy" points.

I think the 250 minimum is easier to obtain now that service pistol match is really a powder puff wad match. I'm in favor and quite pleased that there is a minimum score now. Last year I saw a 10 point leg go for a 217. Absolutely pathetic.
Jon

Deleted

Jon Eulette wrote:I think the 250 minimum is easier to obtain now that service pistol match is really a powder puff wad match. I'm in favor and quite pleased that there is a minimum score now. Last year I saw a 10 point leg go for a 217. Absolutely pathetic.
Jon

+1.

Jon Eulette wrote:I think the 250 minimum is easier to obtain now that service pistol match is really a powder puff wad match. I'm in favor and quite pleased that there is a minimum score now. Last year I saw a 10 point leg go for a 217. Absolutely pathetic.
Jon

Where?

A 10 point leg for a 217! Where was this at?

Jon Eulette wrote:I think the 250 minimum is easier to obtain now that service pistol match is really a powder puff wad match.

Jon I thought the same, but I tested my 185 JHP's today and there really was not much difference in recoil between those and my 230's.

Actually, most everyone shoots 230's so soft that they barely operate the gun anyway.

Maybe I will see more difference when I shoot a rapid fire match....