Alot of things are region dependent but from talking to buddies who shoot all over the country, match numbers are higher than ever. Now certain weeks there are 2 or more matches scheduled and they can cannibalize each other. PRS got real good at doing this during NRL bolt gun and hunter matches which was a dick move. I have just as much dislike for PRS ownership and their antics as anyone in here, BUT to most shooters that doesn't even matter or exist. FENIKS POINTED THIS OUT AND I AGREE.
You are never going to make everyone happy, someone is always going to bitch. SO WHY TRY TO MAKE ANYBODY HAPPY?
I see new shooters at every match. All these Long range games are intimidating. There is a ton of shit to juggle, gear needs to be good and you need alot of reps to get proficient. Does PRS do anything to bring in new shooters? No, neither does NRL or any of these other leagues. It's local MD's, shooters and friends who get new people shooting. People have to have some amount of self start to get into this as well. NO COMMENT!
NRL hunter hasn't even posted the scores from the match this weekend. Nothing on facebook, nothing on practiscore. A national 2 day match and still nothing on who won. They have been circling the drain for 2 years and I wouldn't be surprised if they dissolve next season. I am actually shooting the match next weekend so we will see how it goes. They already cancelled the helicopter and moved the match from Leupold's private range which were the 2 big draws after everyone signed up. So instead of a 2.5 hour drive its now a 5+ hour drive. COOL
Our matches this year have higher participation then ever. In a shit economy, people are still spending tons of money to shoot matches. We are seeing more clubs starting PRS sanctioned matches which is what people want. QUANTITY VS QUALITY
Here is the issue - once a shooter is able to influence a director to make any change in a rule they are reinforced that bitching will get them what they want. Also, other people who see this then say to themselves "if I bitch like that guy I can get what is good for me" on and on and then you have a cohort of [INDIVIDUALS] who are continuously whining about the direction of the wind, the fact that
they pressed the trigger instead of knowing that big gust in their face meant the shot probability just tanked so should just back off - knowing your limits...
You speak of "growing the sport" but all PRS seems to really care about is keeping the money flowing by 'doing what [everyone] wants.' Youre emphasizing quantity(<$now) over quality(>$later); then you package that as 'what everybody wants.' its a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy. I agree the sport isn't getting smaller - but it could be growing much faster and better with a few simple changes..."but why try if [its] working well enough, now" is the feeling I get.
Every match is very similar (10-12 round 90-120sec 1.5-2MOA stages (1-3 at the extremes)) and as a result people have adapted and optimized to those conditions, and as a result of that competitors from 1-30%-ile (thereabouts) have so few points separating them that you are asking for complaints regardless.
I wouldn't mind it if every PRS match had a different set of rules; what I do mind is the continuous alterations to rules/exceptions that only serve 1 purpose in truth - to decrease negative feedback from mid-high level competitors 75-85 percentiles (the ones on the verge of breaking into top 15). That'll technically increase participation as the bottom 85 pay for the top 15 really top 10 to actually compete, in the contrived manner already described. Feniks makes a good point on this - doesn't matter what you do the top 10 will pretty much always be top 10, thats why they are currently top 10. Its the effort to breakthrough that barrier that starts the snowball effect, then the 50%ers say wtf why dont I get the same treatment...and you get endless complaints then the directors/owners play the 'woe is me' cards and all that is a sort of publicity
that brings in 15 new shooters for every 10 thatr lost. "its growing!"
All the other side is saying is quit bitching out and caving to pressure from any competitors (im still hung up on reshoots lol but applies to this KYL point loss stuff too) - dont run KYL at your specific match if you disdain it so, but another match/MD who likes KYL shouldn't be banned from including it their own way; score it the way that director wants AND STICK TO IT!
"Inmates running the asylum" is a perfect phrase for what Ive seen at PRS - not all day everyday but that is the general flavor you get here and there. Even if you want to argue that the [rule altering] isn't for manipulating profit per match fine, it still doesn't serve a purpose regarding individual proficiency or making the sport better. A shooter is responsible for every shot they take, and every shot they decide not to - and I think that is a part of being a good marksman (being good-at or in-the-position-to successfully argue for exceptions here and there is not a part of being a good marksman).
-------------------------------------------
You dont need nationwide universal rules - that is what has created this 'contrived' bland/repetitive aspect - give us
[flavors] and then stick to it. Have monthly matches with
emphasis on certain aspects based on the location....emphasize positional breaking/forming
as a match, emphasize wind calling
as a match, emphasize conditioning AAM, emphasize accuracy all 1100yd+ AAM, emphasize no dialing AAM, emphasize multiple movers AAM, emphasize high angle AAM, etc..... and put those matches in the areas that compliment their emphasis. The universal rules should only really apply to safety; the rest should be flavors per each match, like a 'circuit' would be in racing (with no rule negotiations day of).
Then individual strategy starts to show more when you track the top 50%ile shooters and which competitions they thrive in which they avoid etc and design yearly (regional - finale like) matches around those observations. You'll have kings of long range (drag race), kings of the wind (drifting), kings of positional (auto-x) - you'll have more kings! they can quibble over shying away from XYZ style matches...and it/attendance would be non-uniform initially, so would be difficult to justify keeping all of them afloat initially (however with right planning can be done (investing in steeper growth curve/bigger payoff later), but that leaves opportunities for a 60%er to go to less frequented matches and win/place high, which then will attract 75-85%ers for simple fact they know they are better - so attendance would shift all around first couple years; but sets up for a lot more growth opportunity years 3-5+
because not only would you have competition for a top spot (like now), you'd have multiple top spots (flavors) to compete for.
