The airing of grievances and the response.

[LRdasher]

The PRS and shooters like Jon Pynch are missing the point. If they want to Precision Rifle to be a "sport" they need to grow the numbers substantially. And whether true or not they are creating perceptions that are turning folks away.

When I first got in to precision rifle shooting I was gung-ho and joined both the PRS and NRL. But after one season I realized that I got little to nothing in return for my membership fees. If you are not a top 100 national shooter AND plan on shooting 3 or more matches in each series there is no incentive to join. Then when you see top shooters "gaming stages" and also complain about nice prizes given to random shooters or ROs, there is even less incentive to become a PRS member.

I would be curious to see the number of paying PRS members over the last few years. My guess is the numbers are pretty flat or even decreasing at time when precision rifle shooting is exploding. The PRS might want to ask why this is the case. We can argue whether this is a sport or a hobby but you can not argue that for the VAST majority of people shooting matches this is absolutely a hobby. So if you want to grow the "sport" you need to look at things from their perspective. What can you do to entice them to join the series? What can you do to make them want to pay $250 plus expenses to shoot national matches? Jon Pynch has said he uses his prize winnings to pay his expenses for future matches. Well what about the middle of the pack shooters? What about their expenses? Their expenses are even bigger as they don't get comped equipment and components.

Having the #1 shooter in the country doing a podcast entitled "Airing of Grievances" when the grievance is "it is not fair that sponsor gave a nice rifle to a non top tier shooter" is certainly not going to help to grow the "sport".

So I am no longer a member of the PRS and instead shoot primarily local matches as I no longer wish to support the series as they are currently structured.

My 2 cents.

 

[Lowlight]

You won’t see it, but they say it, and more and more openly, just listen.

It’s easy to miss this stuff, you are squaded with others, you finish and go home, you never see the shooter call MHSA and ask for the cash instead of the prize, but they do it. Just because you only see one side of the story doesn’t mean you can dismiss the other. The facts are hard to dispute, but it’s easier and more convenient to blame the messenger.

Things are changing and not all for the better. Sure the issues may only have a small reach and effect, doesn’t make it right, nor has any series attempted to manage it. They run away from the bad press and instead conduct stealth campaigns to make people calling them to act look worse than they do. But it’s definitely having an effect as their numbers are not as solid as they would lead you to believe. What is said in private does not match the public face.

We have more matches, sure, but bigger is not better. How many failed attempts have taken place for the PRS alone, how many sales that went nowhere ? It’s only been around since 2012 and it’s changed hands 5x - sorry if I am looking to invest in this business I would walk away. No plan, no future, the plan is “grow the sport” with zero ability to scale. Inmates running the asylum is not a model, and only serves to fracture the sport more.

Watch how many big PRS matches are NRL in 2019, they are clearly the disgruntled wing of the sport and it shows.

Yes shoot the matches, but ignore the series. You do not have to be a member and pay $100 for a patch and to see your name on a failed website. Nobody cares, show up, shoot, go home and learn your own lessons to improve for next time. Wash, Rinse, Repeat comes to mind.

It has to support more than the 15% they think matters, it started as a Ponzi scheme and nothing changed. The bottom pays the top, and the only ones winning are guys who have the chairs when the music stops. If you don’t have a chair or your own, don’t buy in.

PS, perfect post above, read and take heed it’s the truth and we hear this same story every week.

 

[Tx_Aggie]

The PRS and shooters like Jon Pynch are missing the point. If they want to Precision Rifle to be a "sport" they need to grow the numbers substantially. And whether intentional or not they are creating perceptions that are turning folks away.

When I first got in to precision rifle shooting I was gung-ho and joined both the PRS and NRL. But after one season I realized that I got little to nothing in return for my membership fees. If you are not a top 100 national shooter AND plan on shooting 3 or more matches in each series there is no incentive to join. Then when you see top shooters "gaming stages" and also complain about nice prizes given to random shooters or ROs, there is even less incentive to become a PRS member.

I would be curious to see the number of paying PRS members over the last few years. My guess is the numbers are pretty flat or even decreasing at time when precision rifle shooting is exploding. The PRS might want to ask why this is the case. We can argue whether this is a sport or a hobby but you can not argue that for the VAST majority of people shooting matches this is absolutely a hobby. So if you want to grow the "sport" you need to look at things from their perspective. What can you do to entice them to join the series? What can you do to make them want to pay $250 plus expenses to shoot national matches? Jon Pynch has said he uses his prize winnings to pay his expenses for future matches. Well what about the middle of the pack shooters? What about their expenses? Their expenses are even bigger as they don't get comped equipment and components.

Having the #1 shooter in the country doing a podcast entitled "Airing of Grievances" when the grievance is "it is not fair that sponsor gave a nice rifle to a non top tier shooter" is certainly not going to help to grow the "sport".

So I am no longer a member of the PRS and instead shoot primarily local matches as I no longer wish to support the series as they are currently structured.

My 2 cents.

Agreed. That podcast is definitely not going to do anything to attract someone who is on the fence about giving PRS/NRL a try.

 

[nfoley]

Lowlight - why not start your own series? I know part of the reason NRL started was because they saw things they felt they could improve on. I think they did a great job. With your knowledge of all the bad going on and your finger on the pulse of what shooters want seems like you could only start an incredibly successful league.

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

@nfoley
LL already replied to that topic in this discussion.

Sincerely,
Theis

Lowlight - why not start your own series? I know part of the reason NRL started was because they saw things they felt they could improve on. I think they did a great job. With your knowledge of all the bad going on and your finger on the pulse of what shooters want seems like you could only start an incredibly successful league.

no way, I lost interest in being the tip of the spear with this kinda stuff. I have no time and too much on my plate to begin with.
I wrote a model a few years ago, the MoST series uses much of it. Successfully as a small local series.

 

[pitdog85]

I don't know If anyone else noticed in that podcast that when they were talking about that "other" podcast that went for 60mins about this topic. The guy asked are these guys (frank) the top shooters or something to that affect and the answer was basically along the lines of no it's just a couple of people that are sour.

I don't know that guys background but last I checked this is just a game where a 300lb guy can compete. Last I checked frank was a marine sniper. Not sure if that guy knows that or not. I just got the feeling the frank was being put down because he is not competing with these guys so should shut up. Playing it down as if it's a few guys. Clearly frank has a small army behind him that guy shouldn't make so many assumptions.

 

[Lowlight]

Nope done,

the Industry can’t handle another series, not without removing one.

I heard what they implied about me, joke. A guy who shoots a match is a pimple compared to my resume. Time grade alone would make it irrelevant.

As it is they stack as many matches they can on the weekend we host ours, every time they try to suppress others to make themselves feel better about the game they are running.

One day they will figure out my roots run deep and at least one person in that crowd is gonna call me and let me in on the plan.

 

[lht645]

Agreed. That podcast is definitely not going to do anything to attract someone who is on the fence about giving PRS/NRL a try.

Yea that would be me. I feel like I am the target demographic for the sport. I have the means to participate and, with adult kids, now the time. I've been listening to the complaints on the everyday sniper and so thought I'd get the other side. I started listening to the PRS pod cast and first episode they are talking about gaming the stages. Implying (tongue in cheek) that it isn't "cheating" with giggles in the background. Then I hear about John Pynch "airing his grievances" so I give a listen and he reminds me of the 12 year old across the street talking about being a "professional video gamer", he's complaining about what it costs him to compete and how his sponsors aren't doing enough to foot the bill. Guess what, it's because you are not a professional athlete, it isn't your profession it's a hobby. I'd like to get paid for doing what I love as well but life doesn't work out that way for most of us. As an emissary for the sport, he's terrible. I've got gear and I've gotten training but I no longer have any interest in PRS. I watched some of the You Tube videos on the competitions and it just isn't a very spectator engaging sport, though I like to watch. With that it means, to me anyway, that the sponsors need to sell within the sport. Again to me that means customers need to see gear being used by the top guys. What purpose does it do to have them give expensive equipment to the top guys just to sell off? I wouldn't do it. If I give a top shooter a gun, I would expect to see him using it. Their individual sponsors should be equipping them to compete if that's the gear they are being seen with, Team AI or Team Remington or what ever. It left me feeling like the source of their complaints is that they aren't being treated like professional athletes. Well until it's your living you are not.

And what's his deal with the military, to listen to him, the military is just a full time shooting club, The services don't get paid to shoot full time, that's only a small portion of their responsibilities, they have a complicated and diverse job.

Anyway, I might get into NRL-22 or something but I don't think PRS is for me.

 

[Tx_Aggie]

Anyway, I might get into NRL-22 or something but I don't think PRS is for me.

You might try shooting some one day club level matches, if there are some in your area. You will probably find that they are a completely different environment than the 2 day PRS series events. Generally no prize table, everyone is there to have a good time and hang out. Around here top shooters just get bragging rights and maybe a trophy. They are a ton of fun.

The 22lr precision stuff is a blast also.

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

LOL..did he really say his sponsors were not doing enough to foot the bill?

It won't take too many "pro" shooters with that mindset to watch ALL the sponsors pull out the PRS completely.

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[Mormegil87]

Hi,

LOL..did he really say his sponsors were not doing enough to foot the bill?

It won't take too many "pro" shooters with that mindset to watch ALL the sponsors pull out the PRS completely.

Sincerely,
Theis

I honestly can't say I heard him say that. Although I could not make it through the entire podcast.

 

[lht645]

He didn't make it a defined statement, more complaining about how expensive it is for him and that the sponsorship he does have isn't enough to cover the cost of competing as a justification for top tier shooters getting the high dollar prizes and selling them off. His "I love the military but...line of conversation just pissed me off as a vet. I might try a local match as Tx_Aggie advised.

 

[LH_Gina]

I haven't listened to Jon's podcast. I saw the title and felt like it gave a pretty solid description of what it was about. I don't share the same mentality as some of those types of top shooters, so I figured if I listened I'd just end up pissed off. When I started shooting matches, I was happy to pick up a rear bag. As I progressed, I was even happier to pick up gear I'd seen on the internet but couldn't afford and wanted to try out. These days I have gear I trust, I already spent my money to get to the match with zero expectation of recouping perceived losses (I wouldn't go to a match if I couldn't afford to get there), so I've never looked at prize tables as a vending machine or an ATM. I watched top level shooters of old pick people to walk in their place and admired them for doing so. I thought it was a classy move and something I wanted to be able to do someday. Is that the right thing for everyone? Nope. But for me it is.

I miss the days of experienced shooters consistently sitting out a match to RO one. The top shooters at a match don't bully those experienced guys into imaginary edge hits (misses) on targets and the guys and gals sitting out the match to RO have big enough names that no one is going to question their spotting ability. We have whole groups of top shooters these days who've never RO'd a 2-day match for either the NRL or the PRS but they sure do have a lot of ideas how to "change" things, usually to their own benefit.

Also, sponsors for matches have the right to decide to whom and where their donation goes. Because it's a donation. If you don't like that a company donates a prize that they wish to be given to a particular class, division, or need, then the problem lies with you. I've yet to see a prize table where the top 10 haven't "made their money back" and then some. The sport grows where the money is and that's obviously not with the top 5-10%.

 

[HomeyDClown]

Good reply.
I dont see the growing club matches as mentoring though,
mentoring to me is Shannon Kay starting a squad of younger shooters, donating prize rifles and scopes won by him, working with them, and entering them in those matches you speak of, and travelling with them to those matches, coaching them through them.

Your second paragraph describes the pushback against the top dogs dominating the major matches - the cutthroat - and unequal distribution of prizes, it describes people wanting the PRS to grow, growing it, in a manner the less equipped and experienced shooters can compete in and have fun.
I've got several of my normal shooters participating in those matches and base my reply here on their feedback.

I applaud the match directors who are starting these clubs, even though it might detract from "the major" matches, because its bringing up that 90% to where they will want to participate in a major match for the better prizes.
Those smaller clubs are good for the sport.

Now, how can this effort improve on the issues discussed in the podcast ??

I’m in almost every state and regional club FB group. Mentoring happens at every match in every state. Shooters that started just under 1.5 years ago are now getting better. People only get a periscope view sometimes of what is going on.

 

[Mormegil87]

I haven't listened to Jon's podcast. I saw the title and had a pretty solid idea of what it was about. I don't share the same mentality as some of those types of top shooters, so I figured if I listened I'd just end up pissed off. When I started shooting matches, I was happy to pick up a rear bag. As I progressed, I was even happier to pick up gear I'd seen on the internet but couldn't afford and wanted to try out. These days I have gear I trust, I already spent my money to get to the match with zero expectation of recouping perceived losses (I wouldn't go to a match if I couldn't afford to get there), so I've never looked at prize tables as a vending machine or an ATM. I watched top level shooters of old pick people to walk in their place and admired them for doing so. I thought it was a classy move and something I wanted to be able to do someday. Is that the right thing for everyone? Nope. But for me it is.

I miss the days of experienced shooters consistently sitting out a match to RO one. The top shooters at a match don't bully those experienced guys into imaginary edge hits (misses) on targets and the guys and gals sitting out the match to RO have big enough names that no one is going to question their spotting ability. We have whole groups of top shooters these days who've never RO'd a 2-day match for either the NRL or the PRS but they sure do have a lot of ideas how to "change" things, usually to their own benefit.

Also, sponsors for matches have the right to decide to whom and where their donation goes. Because it's a donation. If you don't like that a company donates a prize that they wish to be given to a particular class, division, or need, then the problem lies with you. I've yet to see a prize table where the top 10 haven't "made their money back" and then some. The sport grows where the money is and that's obviously not with the top 5-10%.

Regina I've only met you very briefly at the GAP Grind this past year but you're thoughts on competition and the example you have set for others is always one that a lot of us lesser known shooters hold in high regard. It's good to see a high level shooter remember where they came from.

 

[lte82]

I haven't listened to Jon's podcast. I saw the title and had a pretty solid idea of what it was about..

Being a top tier shooter, you should really listen to the first 40 minutes of it. It's not as negative as a lot of the comments make it out to be. It sounds more like an open and honest debate on how to grow the sport. Sure, some of it might be controversial, but he's not wrong on a lot of the points he makes.

 

[LH_Gina]

Being a top tier shooter, you should really listen to the first 40 minutes of it. It's not as negative as a lot of the comments make it out to be. It sounds more like an open and honest debate on how to grow the sport. Sure, some of it might be controversial, but he's not wrong on a lot of the points he makes.

I don't know man. I've listened to him and Vibbert quite a bit over this year on their viewpoints on prize tables and how items on them should be distributed. If I listen and waste my time, I'm blaming you. LOL.

 

[Lowlight]

That was him being PC too, you want the real truth as Regina said, stand there and listen to them in person, the picture is even more vivid in person.

 

[Mormegil87]

Being a top tier shooter, you should really listen to the first 40 minutes of it. It's not as negative as a lot of the comments make it out to be. It sounds more like an open and honest debate on how to grow the sport. Sure, some of it might be controversial, but he's not wrong on a lot of the points he makes.

Throwing the "socialist" and "millennial" labels out there because an individual didn't get the prize he thinks he deserved is not an open and honest debate. It's complaining.

 

[lte82]

I don't know man. I've listened to him and Vibbert quite a bit over this year and their viewpoints on prize tables and how items on them should be distributed. If I listen and waste my time, I'm blaming you. LOL.

LOL. Well I don't know the back stories so you probably have a better idea than I do. I'm just a club shooter that occasionally shoots the bigger matches so I don't know many of the non-Texas folks that well.

 

[LH_Gina]

LOL. Well I don't know the back stories so you probably have a better idea than I do. I'm just a club shooter that occasionally shoots the bigger matches so I don't know many of the non-Texas folks that well.

Don't get me wrong, he's an extremely nice guy and a great shooter. I just disagree with some of his positions/beliefs.

 

[Sheldon N]

I'll go on record saying that regardless of whether people disagree with his opinions or want to vilify him, Jon is a good dude. When I was just a beginning club shooter struggling with a 308 he invited me to his place to train with him and has given me great tips. He's donated free stuff to me that I didn't expect or ask for, and he has always been positive about the sport.

People like Jon are why I'm as invested in the sport as I am today.

 

[Lowlight]

Nobody didn't say he wasn't a nice guy, I spoke to him for 2 hours after, and before when he called me out at Gunwerks.

But, don't crank your head back and give me the Invasion of the Body Snatcher Face when I point out stuff we all see and hear acting like I am crazy.

Being nice is not the issue, there are plenty of nice guys and girls out there.

Everyone pretends it's about growing the sport and doing positive things, yet nothing changes, it only supports the top 15% and they know it, but because those same shooters guide the rules, the rules have never changed or adapted to the growth. It goes against these guys self-interest to see it change, which is why it has refused to change.

What is the definition of insanity again?

 

[lte82]

Throwing the "socialist" and "millennial" labels out there because an individual didn't get the prize he thinks he deserved is not an open and honest debate. It's complaining.

What it sounds like happened is that people may have put shooting budgets together based on winnings from the prize tables, but then all of a sudden their budgets didn't work out quite as planned when what they thought they could win went to other lower placing shooters. I can see how they would be salty about it, but then again those prizes were never guaranteed so...

Cost and time are the largest barriers to entry. You want 5000 registered PRS shooters? It needs to get cheaper and there has to be more winnings to go around. Guys will go broke chasing golf because the prize at the end is millions, and there's even decent money in the regional level stuff, college scholarships, etc. How many guys are going to go broke chasing a new scope or half off cert or the thrill of posting a cool pic on Instagram of their match win? I love the sport, and will continue to shoot what I can afford, but if the prize pool was millions of dollars rest assured I'd be figuring out how to afford more of it as would most of us.

Trust me, I am not sticking up for guys that feel entitled, and I don't know the back stories, but on the surface I didn't it seem *that* bad especially for a guy that legitimately thought he was on the cusp of "going pro" and seemingly being able to do it full time.

 

[Long Range 338]

I listened to the podcast and Jon cast himself in a poor light, specifically by bagging on other shooters (the ones who don't finish top 10), the military guys, and the sponsors themselves. He's at the top of the game right now and even then struggling to pay for the cost of participating in the national matches..... Sounds like a hobby to me! In the podcast they mention other sports such as archery and golf with the winners taking home millions of dollars and being sponsored as professionals. There is your distinction, pro golfers don't have to go out and sell their prizes donated by the sponsors to pay their travel expenses. If these guys want to go down that path they are going to have to generate the revenue for the sponsors to be able to pay them to shoot, end of story.
By all accounts Jon must be an awesome shooter and doesn't sound like a bad guy he's just upset that the way he has been financing his hobby is no longer going to pan out the way it has in the past. If I were in his shoes I would probably be bitching about it also. His argument doesn't hold water in the end as it is obviously bleeding the sport dry as it is - demonstrated by the sponsors.

 

[Tx_Aggie]

I'm sure Jon is a nice guy. He seemed to be aware that it would be an unpopular opinion and was trying to be "PC" in how he said it, but he was pretty clear as a top shooter he feels entitled to prizes he can sell to help fund his match attendance, and he feels rewarding folks who aren't highly ranked is unfair to him and others at the top.

He made that point several times, including the comments about Mil/LE and 308 shooters not deserving to be rewarded unless they're also top shooters overall, even suggesting rewarding anyone but the top is bad for the growth of the sport.

The host, Aron, made several comments I thought included constructive solutions, using archery and even mountain biking as examples, but they almost serve to point out how entitled Jon really sounds. For example, Aron pointing out Pros in the archery series he competes in pay higher entry fees than amateurs, because they are rewarded with bigger cash payouts. And that competitors are divided by equipment selection and skill level to even the playing field and encourage competition.

Jon could've mentioned that "308 shooters" are a lot like Aron and his re-curve bow, and they are rewarded separately because the cartridge is a handicap (compared to a cutting edge compound bow or Jon and his 6 Dasher), but he didn't.

He also could've pointed out he and other Pro shooters compete directly with amateurs and first timers, and there is almost never a separate Pro Division, at least partly because match attendance is still really small compared to something like archery or mountain biking.

Instead he just said he feels rewarding anyone other than top finishing shooters, even with a nice prize given as a raffle or door prizes, is weird, giving out participation trophies, or akin to socialism. It seemed he was implying those folks are being rewarded to the exclusion of shooters who are winning matches, something that I don't think is actually happening.

 

[j-huskey]

Having been in the "game" over 30 years, competitor, range officer, range owner, and match director, I have a different perspective on a couple of things here.

So, if the "big" match attendance is dropping off (stated in these posts)...

The smaller regional matches without big prize tables are growing (exponentially per these posts).... (growing the sport - as stated in these posts).

The "big" match directors have to find a selling point to bring back the attendance, and prizes going to a wider group of shooters is one method, tried and true.

The "big" match directors have a big investment at this point in the sport and they want a return on their investment. Raising match fees is one way, but in sales, you reach a point very few are buying the Lamborghini...

A lot of Chevy sales beat one Lamborghini sale, so the MD has those time proven sales techniques to bring in his revenue.

This phenomenon is in the background of all of this, how a MD can make money to recover his investment, grow his portion of the series, and the total series as well.

The sponsors see it as well, and they want the audience that's going to put the most $ in their pockets as well, so if prizes go to lesser shooters and their profits go up, they will (and ARE) supporting this method.

A top tier shooter who has sponsors who provided him gear, who has won enough gear to supply himself, and sells it to finance his travel expenses is not a good investment to the MD's or Sponsors at some point, because he brings in a match fee, and with a podcast, some controversy, which makes him a lesser desired advertisement. He eventually loses out on a lot. Time has shown us that.

The top shooters in other venues, Tubb, Tompkins-Gallagher, et al, branched out, creating sellable items their winning reputation created. That would be Jon's next step in the known shooting world progression.

The shooting world isnt racing, golf, or archery. The shooting world is shrinking as seen in the time honored National Matches, NRA style. And they have the biggest organization behind them.

PRS doesnt have that.

Can PRS grow there, sure, if enough like minded people grow it, but, it's a long hard road ahead.
The negativity of that podcast didnt help anybody. It's not the end of the world either. It's not Jon's total personality either, but it wasnt his best moment. Beating that podcast is like beating a dead horse.

The sport IS growing, with the smaller matches and increasing attendance at them.
How it will grow after that is how well the Match Directors want to work together to support the series up to the "big blowout" world cup end of year match.

And therein is a problem nobody is discussing but, it's the elephant in the room, the organization, the board, and the Match Directors have to get in line. It back to that elephant named Lamborghini in my useless humble opinion.

As a cold blooded match director, I have removed annoyances because their single match fee is but a drop in the bucket for the other 99 who will appear each time for the whole year if the annoyance is removed.
There are lots of ways to deal with it, BUT for match directors, continuing growth is an absolute necessity.

Jacob B once said, in any business, if you cant grow 15% a year, the business wont make $.
I asked, what happens when the market caps and there is no more room to get that 15%.
That was several years ago, and PRS is at that point.

How about some suggestions on how to grow this, moving on to something positive ?

 

[MarinePMI]

I've given this thread quite a bit of thought. Some of it driven by an offline conversation where it was said "myname=Frank" as to my views on this thread, and I flippantly responded "LOL! Well, we are about the same age".

After making that comment I began to think about it though, and wonder if age/maturity really are the distinguishing differences here? This was coupled with my recent hunting trip, and the realization that as I have grown older, my desire for big bucks has completely vanished, and passing on a large buck this year was just a way of ensuring it was saved for the landowner to offer to that young hunter going for his/her first buck. Hell, I didn't even get a tremor of excitement at possibly pulling the trigger on that big bruiser; I just sat back and enjoyed watching him butt heads with a younger buck, and then go chasing does around the field. I guess I figured the memories of the view were worth more than a pair of antlers on my wall. I'm sure they'll look better on some young hunter's wall.

This natural progression as a hunter was explained to me years ago, by an older gentleman/mentor, and he stated it as:

"Every hunter goes through phases in life. At first it all about getting a buck. Then it's all about getting the biggest buck possible. Eventually though, it becomes about the sport and the companionship. In that last phase, it also becomes about ensuring that there is something there for the younger generation, so that the sport continues to be passed down to the next generation. We pass on big bucks as we age because it's no longer about us. The hunt is no longer about ego or the kill, but rather about others. It's just the normal cycle of things."

As I watch this thread, I wonder if this sport is having the same challenge. There seems to be some sage advice being given about growing the sport, based on many years of experience, that is being ignored or criticized by those that seem to still be concerned most about winning (and thereby getting prizes). The comments about "socialism" or "participation prizes" clearly miss the point, and I would argue, show a lack the wisdom needed to understand the why. They are still in that "biggest buck" phase, where ego and public perception drive them to excel. I don't say that as a pejorative, only that it is the natural phase that most folks go through, and it is where they are at.

I also hear the "Well, that's just a bunch of guys who never finish in the top 10, bitching about it because they suck." a lot. This statement tells me two things:

1. The people who say this, make it pretty clear they're all about winning; i.e. it's all about them (or their close circle of "winner" friends) and their individual or collective egos. Not about the sport (or at a minimum, it is a distant second to the priority of winning). Again, that is not necessarily a bad thing, it's just where they're at in life. I mean, let's face it, most of us here either are (or once were) alphas of some sort, and can remember the overwhelming drive to succeed, conquer and dominate...and do so publicly. I think that's why you hear Frank say "I get it!" when he talks about some of the shooter's desires and motivations. Eventually though, as you age and/or mature (they obviously are not tied together) you take a broader, longer term view. This view is hard, or even impossible, for the younger people to understand. It's like having that hard headed, strong willed child that swears "the old man doesn't know shit" and proceeds to angrily charge off and do things their own way, in spite of the parent seeing the train wreck that the decision will be, and attempting to constrain the child in the hopes to save them the pain of learning the hard way. Often pain that they themselves have experienced first hand, by being just as hard headed and making the same mistakes. But sometimes (as a parent) you have to let them earn their wisdom the hard way...with pain. This can be demonstrated by the PRS being sold how many times now? Lotta pain there I'd wager.

2. The second point on the statement, is that is shows arrogance and a lack of critical thinking. It assumes that if someone doesn't finish in the top 10, they lack the skill to achieve that and that they are also some how "lesser" than the top shooters. Honestly, I chuckle when I think about this point. As mentioned in a previous post, I'm a "middle of the pack shooter". But what many in the top finishing slots fail to understand, is that many of us consciously choose to remain middle of the pack shooters, not because of a lack of skills, but because many of us forego additional training that would put us in the top 10...because we really don't give a shit about winning. It's nice if it happens (when you're just in the bubble and everything is clicking), but that isn't our drive to shoot or RO these matches. I have no doubt in my mind that if I wanted to finish top 10, I could. No doubt at all. None. But prizes and ego are not what motivate me (and many others). What motivates many of us (many more than the top 10 finishers) is seeing the sport grow, seeing the excitement of success of a new shooter, seeing the confidence grow in shooters as they push themselves past what they thought they were capable of. Many of us were once those young shooters, who were fortunate enough to have mentors that took the time and effort to show us the ropes. To put us in a position to be a top 10 finisher. Because we spend more time RO'ing, or working with other shooters, or focusing on debugging someone's challenges, it often comes at a cost of being competitive. A cost many of us are more than willing to pay. But again, that is a difference of priorities and perspective. To say that those who disagree, do so because they are not Top 10 finshers is egocentric horseshit and shows an arrogance and ego that is mind boggling, as well as shows a depth of character that is about as shallow as piss on concrete.

I'm not sure what the answer is to all this, but I think there is a divide. A divide that is not based on "Top 10 finishers" versus everyone else, but rather a divide between the takers and the givers. The bigger picture folks and those consumed with the myoptic view of winning as the highest priority. If this sport is to survive and flourish, I think some wise decisions will need to be made, and they will likely not favor the "top 10 finisher" crowd.

Anyways...the ramblings from an older guy that has been an alpha minded competitor, and now just wants to shoot for the joy of shooting ; and maybe see some wisdom develop in the next generation of competitors.

Something to think about anyways...

 

[Mormegil87]

Thank you @MarinePMI, you put it more eloquently than I could of.

 

[leftyk82]

Guardian Long Range matches. Growing the sport while doing something positive.

 

[Lowlight]

I think age/experience is part of it. I always try to look at the big picture and from all sides.

The funny thing that gets told to me often in these private conversations is the fact I keep getting told to stop making waves.

Even talking to Jon, at Gunwerks and after, he said to me to straight up, "stop complaining, stop pointing out these issues". The translation is:

Just sit down and be quiet and let us do our thing. They feel the status quo is working so anything negative needs to be quelled. They hate the fact I have a voice and platform and will wish out loud I would shut up. It's why they have the shoot the messenger mentality and put me down in order to make themselves feel better about it.

It's been made clear to me the attention I bring is not welcome regardless of the validity of the charges. They just want a cheerleader and have no interest in the critical eye or improving the series. Never once do they offer to fix anything, instead, it's all about sweeping this stuff under the rug. If they did offer me up a viable change I would be all for it. I have reached out several times in hopes of seeing the changes made, instead, it rolls back to badmouthing me every chance they get.

The guys who defend them would be amazed at how often we (me) and they talk about this stuff and the answer is the same. Yes, we see it but Be quiet about it. When I was promoting them and winning all the Unofficial Salesman of the Year awards it's all good, once I stopped cheerleading I became the bad guy. How many businesses got over the hump selling on SH, once their brand got established I became less than useful. I'm the asshole.

I probably would have gone away a long long time ago about this, however, the 1/2 that decided to go on a Fuck Frank Crusade has convinced me otherwise. Since they let people speak without correcting the record, and telling their audience how they really feel, I will do it for them. They are choosing to ignore much of this because their self-interest does not align with the corrected courses of action. The clues are there if you are savvy enough to look and see, unfortunately, many default to the argument, "But he is a nice guy, so fuck Frank it's all just sour grapes".

Sour grapes would mean I would just walk away, no matches, which I never stopped doing, no interactions of any kind, I would not waste my time. The fact I continue to use my time in these areas is your first clue. All it has really done has made me their complaint department since they won't address it themselves, so people reach out to me in order to vent their frustrations. I get hit up weekly as I am seen as the only sympathetic voice.

 

[mkollman74]

Having been in the "game" over 30 years, competitor, range officer, range owner, and match director, I have a different perspective on a couple of things here.

So, if the "big" match attendance is dropping off (stated in these posts)...

The smaller regional matches without big prize tables are growing (exponentially per these posts).... (growing the sport - as stated in these posts).

The "big" match directors have to find a selling point to bring back the attendance, and prizes going to a wider group of shooters is one method, tried and true.

The "big" match directors have a big investment at this point in the sport and they want a return on their investment. Raising match fees is one way, but in sales, you reach a point very few are buying the Lamborghini...

A lot of Chevy sales beat one Lamborghini sale, so the MD has those time proven sales techniques to bring in his revenue.

This phenomenon is in the background of all of this, how a MD can make money to recover his investment, grow his portion of the series, and the total series as well.

The sponsors see it as well, and they want the audience that's going to put the most $ in their pockets as well, so if prizes go to lesser shooters and their profits go up, they will (and ARE) supporting this method.

A top tier shooter who has sponsors who provided him gear, who has won enough gear to supply himself, and sells it to finance his travel expenses is not a good investment to the MD's or Sponsors at some point, because he brings in a match fee, and with a podcast, some controversy, which makes him a lesser desired advertisement. He eventually loses out on a lot. Time has shown us that.

The top shooters in other venues, Tubb, Tompkins-Gallagher, et al, branched out, creating sellable items their winning reputation created. That would be Jon's next step in the known shooting world progression.

The shooting world isnt racing, golf, or archery. The shooting world is shrinking as seen in the time honored National Matches, NRA style. And they have the biggest organization behind them.

PRS doesnt have that.

Can PRS grow there, sure, if enough like minded people grow it, but, it's a long hard road ahead.
The negativity of that podcast didnt help anybody. It's not the end of the world either. It's not Jon's total personality either, but it wasnt his best moment. Beating that podcast is like beating a dead horse.

The sport IS growing, with the smaller matches and increasing attendance at them.
How it will grow after that is how well the Match Directors want to work together to support the series up to the "big blowout" world cup end of year match.

And therein is a problem nobody is discussing but, it's the elephant in the room, the organization, the board, and the Match Directors have to get in line. It back to that elephant named Lamborghini in my useless humble opinion.

As a cold blooded match director, I have removed annoyances because their single match fee is but a drop in the bucket for the other 99 who will appear each time for the whole year if the annoyance is removed.
There are lots of ways to deal with it, BUT for match directors, continuing growth is an absolute necessity.

Jacob B once said, in any business, if you cant grow 15% a year, the business wont make $.
I asked, what happens when the market caps and there is no more room to get that 15%.
That was several years ago, and PRS is at that point.

How about some suggestions on how to grow this, moving on to something positive ?

I like this post a lot. You spent more time than I did making (in my opinion) the same point. As a matter of simple economics, the truth (from my perspective) is the top shooters aren't much of a draw. The prize table may be. If all the top 10% represent is a match fee, then who cares what they think. Yes, I just said that.

 

[mkollman74]

While I am thinking about it, I'll double down. If any of these guys thinks they should be able to make a living off of shooting, they need to look to other shooting sports to see how that is done. To my knowledge, Jerry Miculek, Taran Butler, David Tubb, Rob Leatham, Doug Koenig, etc. don't survive on flipping prize table awards. If I am wrong - show me, I'll admit it. To think that a competitor should be able to make a living based on the match fees of the 90% and the VOLUNTEER work of match ROs is beyond arrogant.

 

[morganlamprecht]

the issue is you have probably 10% who want this to be elite level competition, best of the best (and its no where near big enough or enough money for that to succeed right now)

then probably 30-40% who want to be at the elite level, and are trying to get there

then the remainder who are in the "afternoon shooting with buddies mode"....and theyre all paying the same fees and getting the same prizes

everyone is comin from a different path then meeting in the middle and shocked everyone doesnt see eye to eye

 

[plt228]

Does anyone know who all sponsors Jon? I finally listed to him and I would love to hear what the sponsors think of him. Especially the ones that aren’t doing enough to make him a professional that he thinks he can be. I can say that anyone sponsoring him better be the best in their category, ie action, chassis, ammo, etc because I’ll take the other company if Jon is one of your “spokesmen”. Being a better at sportsmanship and helping teach and bring along new/younger shooters are more important than Top 5 finishes.
I don’t have the time or money to think about being a pro but a 1 day match and enjoying a day of shooting is where most people are at. And I bet is where the sponsors will get the biggest ROI.

 

[leftyk82]

the issue is you have probably 10% who want this to be elite level competition, best of the best (and its no where near big enough or enough money for that to succeed right now)

then probably 30-40% who want to be at the elite level, and are trying to get there

then the remainder who are in the "afternoon shooting with buddies mode"....and theyre all paying the same fees and getting the same prizes

everyone is comin from a different path then meeting in the middle and shocked everyone doesnt see eye to eye

Agree. The PGA Tour has a few events each year where the regular joe's, assuming they qualify, can play in big tournaments (US Open, AT&T Pebble Beach Pro/Am). But those events are few and far between in an already vibrant and storied professional tour. To have, if not weekly, double digit national events across two leagues where pro's and joe's mix ranks is a bit.......well, overcooked. The sport just isn't that big. No shooting sport is.

 

[Milo 2.5]

Does anyone know who all sponsors Jon? I finally listed to him and I would love to hear what the sponsors think of him. Especially the ones that aren’t doing enough to make him a professional that he thinks he can be. I can say that anyone sponsoring him better be the best in their category, ie action, chassis, ammo, etc because I’ll take the other company if Jon is one of your “spokesmen”. Being a better at sportsmanship and helping teach and bring along new/younger shooters are more important than Top 5 finishes.
I don’t have the time or money to think about being a pro but a 1 day match and enjoying a day of shooting is where most people are at. And I bet is where the sponsors will get the biggest ROI.

Focus on the situation and not the individual, it's a good rule of thumb. By your own admission you have not or never will walk in a top shooters shoes. In fact, you've made an assumption of a guy you have never been around.
We all live in the spirit of fairness to an extent, and when you reach a summit of sorts, you come to expect the rewards of past achievers. No one would like to finally become ceo of a company to be told that yes the position is yours, but our ceo pay package has been way too high and you are now here.
I'm not defending anyone here and have no solution here, lol, I just know anytime something gets commercialized the chute opens and the rodeo begins.

 

[lte82]

http://precisionriflechannel.com/evolution-of-precision-rifle-matches-ep-16/

A pretty recent podcast that is worth listening to... touches on some of the same subjects debated in this thread.

 

[DP425]

Fairness does not exist

Without classifications there is no "Fair" when it comes to finishes and prizes ...

Resentment is an interesting word, and correct. Why is anyone bothered by under-funded, under-Training LE/ MIL shooter who has 10 other things to worry about, scoring a prize, in most cases it's just a trophy. If you feel slighted you are the problem, Type A or otherwise. Thought we were supposed to be Pro LE/MIL ?

When the Series did a Bait and Switch and dropped the prize money were was the revolt or the outcry, you pay them, they advertise as being the Top Series in the country yet do absolutely NOTHING but put their name on other people's work. There is no standard, there is model, it's the same model we used at Rifles Only 15 years ago and never changed.

Why has it not changed, because you are being SCAMMED.

Do they support the new match director, do they send a team over to help run things. Maybe if you are chosen friend, otherwise they just want the numbers to say, look at us. They don't advertise, they don't support, they barely get out of their own way. But sit back and let hard working MDs take the heat. Some MD lose money putting on matches, and still have to pay the series to email a score sheet.

The guarantee is the Trophy, If you want a guaranteed prize, come in the Top 3. That is all I have ever seen mentioned, Trophies awarded to:

This will never be fair, it wasn't designed to be fair.

Agreed. It also shows just how ignorant he is on what the military does (hell, maybe most people are ignorant of this?). "Paid to shoot"- I've NEVER shot as much in the military as I have on my own dime. As a sniper or otherwise. Hell, add in the MG rounds I've fired in my career... I've still shot more of my own ammunition than the government's, and that's in my 15 year career before med retirement.

There's a VERY select few getting "paid to shoot" (AMU, etc). Everyone else is paid to PT, run battle drills constantly, practice first aid and trauma care, practice air ops, review writing op orders, writing op orders, running training missions, maintaining equipment, and least we forget- area and installation beautification. Most grunts, even MG crews, won't shoot annually, what that guy shoots monthly.

So yeah, if they are able to break away from all that, use up some of their leave time, and come in 50th out of 120, that might be worth congratulating. These guys aren't burning through several thousand rounds of precision rifle ammunition a month; they wouldn't have the time to even if it were actually paid for.


I mean seriously, if you're that upset, that the military/LE segment get's their own little side competition, go sign up and quit bitching. I doubt anything outside of his own control is preventing him from joining the military or putting on a badge. Then he can compete in that classification as well.

Otherwise, its prob best to shut your mouth and move along.

 

[MarinePMI]

Nevermind that whether its Weds or Saturday, military folks are burning leave to be "out of bounds". As civilians, weekends don't count against vacation time. Not so in the military (unless things have changed drastically, or they want to chance not being able to make it back in time for Monday morning formation and get Article 86'ed for it).

 

[DP425]

Nevermind that whether its Weds or Saturday, military folks are burning leave to be "out of bounds". As civilians, weekends don't count against vacation time. Not so in the military (unless things have changed drastically, or they want to chance not being able to make it back in time for Monday morning formation and get Article 86'ed for it).

If anything, it's tightened up on the Army side from my understanding.

 

[DP425]

I'll also point out- if it's that easy to pick up a .308 and clean house in tactical, why aren't these guys doing it? Complaining about that is just obnoxious. Does anyone really think Buck Holly can easily place top 20, running .308, but would be unable to take first, second, or third running a 6mm? If anything, competitive tactical guys have more to lose by making that divisional choice. If they don't take 1st place tactical, they are almost certainly, walking at whatever over-all position they took; which is likely a good number of spots below where they could have been with a more forgiving cartridge.

 

[morganlamprecht]

Not taking anything away from Buck’s skill...308s main disadvantage is recoil, and he purposely put together a 30lb 308 to compete better with the 15-20lb 6/6.5s

Of course he’d be competitive with a 6/6.5, but his tactical class rifle isn’t exactly set up anything like a mil/Leo duty rifle that would be a large disadvantage against the open class guns

 

[240Weatherby]

I've seen a lot of good helpful shooters in PRS and NRL. I also have RO'd multiple 2 day matches in order to get "my feet wet" and see what really goes on. Some of the behind the scenes topics definitely fit in everything I have read in this thread and mentioned in post above. Another issue I've seen is the "super squads" it is almost guaranteed these squads take 1-10th, It's hard for new guys or even good shooters to compete in these events. I do pick the matches I shoot based on location/friends and prize tables. I also do my best when I do get a chance at the table to get something I can actually use, being this is my second year there's plenty I can use.

 

[FatBoy]

^ not trying to be a dick, but that sounds like every day life.

What I take out of your post is you're driven, and you Improved yourself at a personal cost. That makes you a better shooter and a better a person. Leave the season behind you with that in mind. It's worth more than a scope or a barrel certificate.

 

[mahlv]

Holy fuggin depressing. If anyone should be pissed about not winning that AI rifle, it’s me. The guy that won it is my buddy, we drove 8hrs up to Craig for that match and had a blast. We both shot identical scores, but he beat me on a timed tie-breaker by like 12 seconds.

We both have young families and put in as much time as we can chasing a sport/HOBBY that we are passionate about. I assume there’s plenty of paying participants in the same situation that are mainly involved to this extent to measure our craft and have a good time with a fun group of guys. It’s disappointing to say the least to hear the top dog complaining like this.

Many thanks to Mike and MHSA for genuinely contributing to the overall growth of the sport. It’s sad that this is gonna alter the amount of donated stuff from MHSA to the sport, but I can’t blame them after crap like what’s been sprayed around by the very beneficiaries of the contributions they (and many others) have made.

 

[chavezz556]

What is the "other podcast" ? Is the guy from NRL/conex podcast?

 

[lht645]

The "other" podcast was "Kifaru".

 

[mahlv]

Here’s a link to the Podbean app version.

https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-yvvgt-9cc137

 

[Lowlight]

The only reason other podcast is me

The everyday sniper podcast.