Why not? Golf will be soon, canoing, Kayaking, and BMX biking already are....

Lets asuming we convince the IOC to add our beloved game... What rules would be shoot under? Classes? Killzones in Millimeters? Power levels at host country levels ,WFTF or 12 ftlbs like the Brits have?

dr_subsonic's pneumatic research lab

the Lunatic Fringe of American Airgunning
Southwest Montana's headquarters for Airgunning Supremacy
Proud Sponsor of team_subsonic

.

Now that would be a great achievement for Field Target! If our sport were picked up as an Olympic event, I do foresee it being done under WFTF style rules with a max power level of 12 fpe. Contrary to most U.S. ideology, the rest of the world is already playing by WFTF rules below 12 fpe.

This would certainly help to grow the sport. Just think about the competition that we would see at "qualifying" marches prior to an Olympic event.

Harold

Harold, Doug Miller, Greg S. of BAGA, Ateam Ray.... for pcp WFTF

It would be WFTF....but as the world fell in love with FT of course all the other classes would fall in line...



Dutch



Self proclaimed shootinist sumbitch...there ever was almost!!
Its hard bein shootinst sum bitch...welp not its not.
started @ 227 compressor fills in 6/22/08
180 compressor fills and I have broke even
And aaain't it grrreaaat to be livinnn in the USA.
I never whacked a pigeon, starling, or sparrow that didn't deserve it!!!
1544 and countin....on pigeons..
starling count started 14--

An Olympic shooting event would be packed with truly great shooters, and I seriously doubt ANY seasoned American shooters could make the cut. Right now, its a casual game populated by lots of old guys who do ok against each other, and against typical plinkers ... but were it to become an Olympic event, none of us would be remotely competitive. I have little doubt that many current young children in several countries could train for a few months and beat all of the top FT shooters in the Western World, were the impetus be similar to doing well in other Olympic games.

Fortunately, there is little chance a Carnie game like this would be seriously considered by the IOC, because the true fun part, which is the freedom and originality of ranges, positions, and equipment would likely be sucked right out of it.

Admittedly, it's going to take some time for the USA to hang with the big boys overseas.
You may not have noticed, but our WFTF ranks are growing, with some of our top shooters migrating to it.

Anyway, I'm optimistic about the future... And IMO, it's a work in progress.
Best to our shooters at the Worlds!
HookEm

And for sure most of those ranks are NOT going to be World contenders, or even CLOSE to Olympic level.

I think there ARE some great shots in this country, but not many would mess with FT til they are over the hill in other sports. WERE there to be an Olympic airgun FT event, the ranks wold be drawn from more skilled shooters than we are normally shooting with, is all I'm saying.

In my estimation, Field target is a HARDER game than most shooting sports, yet there are substantially no rewards and recognition for excelling in it. This means that truly great shooters are more likely to be drawn to other more conventional and popular events with greater recognition.

I feel top Olympic contenders need the GENES for it first, then incredible training and drive to persevere week in and week out for years. There are huge pools of likely candidates in many countries ... but not so much in ours.

.

But I feel some folks have inborn natural traits that enable them to be better at the some games than others. I feel folks that believe every individual is born with equal genes is simply unaware or unable to accept the truth.

Or is it perhaps possible for any human, either here or abroad, to have those "good shooting genes"?

IMHO, shooters abroad do better because:
1) There's a larger sampling of their population shooting airguns
(whereas here we have all kinds of other shooting sports)
2) They're forced to shoot 12fpe, and opt to do without straps & such
(whereas we're spoiled with higher power, and opt for using all kinds of shooting aids)

That is, I don't think it's a "gene" advantage at all; and the more WFTF shooters we get into the fold, the better our chances will become.
Again, I don't expect an overnight transformation; but with time and dedication, we should eventually be competitive.

Call it wishful thinking on my part, but I'm simply not willing to accept mediocrity justified by lack of "good shooting genes".
Whatever happened to good old American values, like achieving whatever you set your mind to, if you're willing to put in the "hard work"?

HookEm

I have an opinion, and so do you. And, if you thought it out a bit, you might even swing over to mine more.

Yes when there is a much Larger pool of potential shooters in a given country, they might have an edge. And if there are good coaches available, and strong motivation on a NATIONAL level to put together a winning airgun shooting team, thats a plus. And when a country has the habit of selecting young children from huge pools of candidates, and giving STRONG incentive to the parents of those children for them to do well, thats a plus for their Olympic hopes too.

NOW, lets say you canvassed thru around a MILLION potential young shooters for your airgun program and selected a thousand. Then you gave them all preliminary training, and picked the best 100 ... then you trained them all some more, and tested them ... finding (of course) that there were a few at the top, lots n the middle, and a few at the bottom.


And with this, you don't think genes played a part in the reason why there were a few at the top and a few at the bottom, with many in the middle?

And .. wanna BET there were no midgets, giants, huge obese kids, weakling skinny as a rail kids even making the FIRST cut? Why IS that?

you are right. Thats why someone like me with absolutely no tallent has to practice his brains out as you witnessed saturday.

and we would get our clock cleaned on the international level just like we did in Biathlon in the 60s but we did field a team in the 60's and have done better in recent years.

we would field a team. it might very well be old farts. we would have an Olympic trials and a team would be chosen. it might be composed of a lot of old guys but there would be a team. would that be the start of an explosion of field target activity? I don't know. I doubt it. If we look at the record of biathlon, maybe not. It is still an obscure sport in the US.

Since its inception (Olympic Biathalon games), the USA has had its collective clock by about any and every country that bothers to go for it.

Maybe if we could get the sport of US style bowling into the games ... we can get some old farts in for the first season.

I do see a few things that would make it a hard sell in its current format.

1.- There is little spectator appeal. All other sports mentioned have strong spectator appeal. We need to remember that the current state of affairs require that Olympic Organizing Committees obtain most of their funding from the rights to transmission/broadcasting and branding of products. It is so important to them that the banning certain posts, tweets and flicks by athletes in their personal pages/sites/addresses has been relatively common in these London games.

2.- Look at archery. 3D or some other form of field archery could be an Olympic sport. After all, people can see from afar where an arrow falls, but it is almost impossible to see where a pellet strikes. There is a certain thrill to seeing the arrow fly to the target butt. Not so with a pellet. Still, field Archery is not an Olympic sport. What is an Olympic sport is a relative variation of the old French and British competition games from Medieval times. What is for sure is that the "hunting" aura would have to be removed. IIRC, Archery was an Olympic sport from the 1900 to the 1920's Olympics, then it was dropped and picked up again at the 1972's games in Munich.

3.-Perhaps a new game like the shooting part of Biathlon, married with the Archery format can be concocted. Where you have teams and individuals squaring up by batches in round robin type of elimination bouts till there is a semi-final and a final.
Where the distance to the bank of 3/4/5 targets would be unknown for each round. The opposing parties would approach the firing line, then take their three/four/five shots in alternating fashion. This would be a "set", 2 points per set won, 1 point per set tied, 0 points per set lost.
In the same fashion that compound bows are ruled out of Olympic Archery competition, I would propose that PCP's would also be ruled out. On the power side, I think that 20 ft-lbs would be doable because most Olympic shooting teams already have the expertise to navigate international customs with smallbore rifles and pistols. Remember that this new game will be playedout to a maximum distance of 70 meters (77 yards), so 12 ft-lbs might be a tad low.
If you think that this too much power to cock manually all the required times, look a the draw weights of Olympic bows and compare to the minimum advised hunting draw weights. You will be surprised. AND the usage of springers would be one of the strong arguments in favour of declaring this a sport.

4.- If you really want to try the concept out, next shoot you organize, just run it by lanes, serialized from the easiest to the hardest.
3 targets to a lane. One shot per target. Person 1 takes a shot at target 1, then person 2 takes a shot at target 1, they repeat 2 more times. That is a set. Points are awarded.
Then they shoot alternately target 2 in the same fashion.
Then target 3.
The winning shooter advances to lane 2 and waits for another winner to pair up, then repeat the process of elimination till only the best shooters reach the last lanes.
If you really want to speed things up, set three identical starting lanes "1", then two identical lanes "2", and from there on single lanes that will feed the more advanced lanes.

I can guarantee that by lane 9 or 10, only the very best shooters will be competing directly against each other.

From lane 6 or 7 onwards it would be almost a permanent shootoff, and let's face it, we all LOVE to watch shootoffs!

That is what drives spectator appeal, that is what brings understanding of the game to the TV audiences, that is what could make this whole idea of airgun shooting at unknown distances at small KZ's palatable to Olympic audiences.

JMHO

"Sitius, Altius Fortius" anyone?





Un Abrazo!




H�ctor

Honestly, the typical mass of spectators has so little shooting knowledge they could care LESS if the distances are known or unknown.

Want a REAL airgun spectator sport? One that would draw huge discussions and generate larger viewer interest than about ANY precision shooting sport? American Paintball team tourneys, held in a smallish field, but with less body armor and pump action guns with small magazines.

Might be be fun but I don't know that the Olympic shooting community would take to the inter squad socializing that most of us enjoy or the fact that we often talk dirty to the targets well they don't fall. Still, I would love to see it happen.