Age Based categories

[Cheatin Charlie]

I am amazed I was sober enough to remember it, too.

 

 

Jackalope

 

Jedi Gunfighter Lucky #7

Champeen of the Hillbilly Nation 2010, 2011

Jackalope and Noz,

It was my great pleasure meeting you two gentlemen that fateful weekend. It was my first and alas my last Possum Trot. My biggest regret is that I had not made it down sooner. Fond memeries

 

indeed. Ohio Cheatin Charlie

[Ace_of_Hearts]

The category breakdown you have listed amounts to 76 categories.

I can hear the match directors screaming from here!

[Ace_of_Hearts]

Deleted..... Double post

[Most Wanted]

How does a shoot "get enough shooters" for an 'unofficial category' if it's not even offered on the match application in the first place because it's not "officially recognized"??

 

 

 

FCGF comes to mind as a category that wasn't and maybe still isn't a recognized SASS cat that often has enough people to shoot and when not they got rolled into GF . I guess the people that ran the shoot got the word out . Kinda the same thing in the other direction when they put the word out they needed more women for (classic cowgirl ? ) or they would drop it at winter range .

Don't know how my answer got in your quote . I must be sloppy on the keys

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

FCGF comes to mind as a category that wasn't and maybe still isn't a recognized SASS cat that often has enough people to shoot and when not they got rolled into GF . I guess the people that ran the shoot got the word out . Kinda the same thing in the other direction when they put the word out they needed more women for (classic cowgirl ? ) or they would drop it at winter range .

 

Don't know how my answer got in your quote . I must be sloppy on the keys

 

Classic Cowgirl (and Lady Gunfighter) are both "officially recognized" SASS categories.

 

The proposed FCGF category has been on the TG Summit agenda more than a couple of times...each time failing to gain the 66% approval required.

 

FCGF is NOT being offered at WR...and never has been, due to the fact that it is not a recognized category.

 

FWIW - The OREGON STATE match will be offering both Frontiersman GF and Frontier Cartridge GF...with no minimum number of entrants required.

[Most Wanted]

never mind

[J-BAR #18287]

I like the Professor's matrix also.

 

Question for the Professor:

 

Presently adjustable sighted revolvers are legal in any age-based category. The matrix essentially turns every category into an age-based category. Does this mean that under the matrix system adjustable sighted revolvers could be used by anyone in any category?

 

I know this resurrects the previously deceased equine about whether or not adjustable sights are an advantage, but the subject naturally comes up anyway because the present rules make the distinction.

[Cowboy Rick, SASS #49739L]

Classic Cowgirl (and Lady Gunfighter) are both "officially recognized" SASS categories.

 

The proposed FCGF category has been on the TG Summit agenda more than a couple of times...each time failing to gain the 66% approval required.

 

FCGF is NOT being offered at WR...and never has been, due to the fact that it is not a recognized category.

 

FWIW - The OREGON STATE match will be offering both Frontiersman GF and Frontier Cartridge GF...with no minimum number of entrants required.

Since there are no age based BP categories, FCGF would really only add one more category. And what is more cowboy than shooting BP with a gun in each hand? For the life of me, I cannot understand why this was not part of the recent makeover.

 

CR

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

Since there are no age based BP categories, FCGF would really only add one more category. And what is more cowboy than shooting BP with a gun in each hand?

For the life of me, I cannot understand why this was not part of the recent makeover.

 

CR

 

REF: post #11

 

FWIW - IT would add 2 more categories since a "Ladies Only" version is generally added to ALL categories.

In 2010 a "stand alone" proposal to add the category recieved 63% approval...a bit short of the required 66%

A category rewrite in 2011 (which included FCGF) also attained a simple majority of 53%...again, falliing to gain a 2/3 "Yes" vote.

[J-BAR #18287]

PWB:

 

I would also like to get your perspective on post #42, if you care to.

[JudgeBagodonuts]

I think the Professor's idea of filling categories for a match is pretty good, with one exception. It appears he's lumping all women together in each category, while men get the option of moving into an age category if there are enough.

 

While it may be radical, I think the women should have their own age categories if there are enough, or given the option to join the appropriate men's age category, or stay in the "all women" category.

 

That said, I wouldn't want to be the match director if this is implemented. There's a near infinite number of possibilities as people are shuffled from square to square as you attempt to fill the matrix with the minimum number.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

PWB:

 

I would also like to get your perspective on post #42, if you care to.

 

Discussion item at the 2013 Summit addressed the criteria for additional age-based breakdown of BP, shooting style, and "costume" categories.

General opinion appeared to be in favor of applying the existing firearm/equipment regs for the base category, rather than the "age based" allowances re: "any SASS-legal firearm"...which would mean adj-sight revolvers and '97 shotguns.

...which is in direct opposition to the long-approved "Senior Duelist", which is specifically listed as a sub-cat of SENIOR, instead of DUELIST.

Previous Summit agenda items included allowing "adjustable-sight" revolvers in all categories...that one has historically FAILED to pass on a regular basis.

 

I think the Professor's idea of filling categories for a match is pretty good, with one exception. It appears he's lumping all women together in each category, while men get the option of moving into an age category if there are enough.

 

While it may be radical, I think the women should have their own age categories if there are enough, or given the option to join the appropriate men's age category, or stay in the "all women" category.

NOT radical...that is current policy.

 

That said, I wouldn't want to be the match director if this is implemented. There's a near infinite number of possibilities as people are shuffled from square to square as you attempt to fill the matrix with the minimum number.

 

FWIW - Under the current category system (such as it is), there are NO "Men's" categories.

[Lucky R. K.]

I think fondly about that match often. One posse with 9 Frontiersmen, #1 in the world and 3 morre in the top 10 in the world. Only one smokeless shooter on the posse and that was Buck D Law. Gallons of Copperhead Juice, keg of beer on the porch and piles of excellent food. I still dream of the fish fry.

Poker at night and then "Milkbone".

Of all the posse photos I have purchased, that is the only one on our wall. It's enclosed in the picture frame Miss Lorrie got for SOG.

 

Good times!

 

No matter where my birthday throws me, I'll be shooting Frontiersman for the forseeable future.

Noz,

 

I don't think we will ever see another posse like that, or for that matter, a match like that. Possum Trot was a special place.

 

And like you, I pretty much see cap & ball pistols in my furture.

 

Lucky

[Prof. Fuller Bullspit]

I like the Professor's matrix also.

 

Question for the Professor:

 

Presently adjustable sighted revolvers are legal in any age-based category. The matrix essentially turns every category into an age-based category. Does this mean that under the matrix system adjustable sighted revolvers could be used by anyone in any category?

 

I know this resurrects the previously deceased equine about whether or not adjustable sights are an advantage, but the subject naturally comes up anyway because the present rules make the distinction.

 

The issue of sights further complicates things doesn't it! But if you were to extend current rules into a new system, that would be the effect unless certain categories were exempted from that rule by agreement.

 

 

I

think the Professor's idea of filling categories for a match is pretty

good, with one exception. It appears he's lumping all women together in

each category, while men get the option of moving into an age category

if there are enough.

 

While it may be radical, I think the women

should have their own age categories if there are enough, or given the

option to join the appropriate men's age category, or stay in the "all

women" category.

 

That said, I wouldn't want to be the match

director if this is implemented. There's a near infinite number of

possibilities as people are shuffled from square to square as you

attempt to fill the matrix with the minimum number.

 

Not really. The way women's categories work in the matrix follows the same logic that is used now: There are no men's categories. The matrix adds a woman's division (and by extension age brackets) to every category but only in shoots where the numbers were warranted.

 

The matrix was developed a long time ago to try to show how I thought a flexible age bracketing could work. The idea was to get people to stop thinking of an age as a category and to think of category difference based on equipment, powder and other factors that were more universal. The concept is to make age bracketing flexible and workable over the long term as our age demographic changes each year. I saw this as more practical than having new categories based on age proposed year after year.

 

It is true that such a category system fixes one headache for match directors, but creates others. It also means that in smaller matches where there are not enough shooters of a given age, those shooters are going to suffer by getting rolled down into a lower age bracket. This idea wouldn't work if shooters won't accept this and insist on being grouped by age in a category even if there is only one person signed up for that bracket.

 

The idea of the matrix was to try to create a system that makes age-based categories as fair (according to age) as possible, but still large enough to be considered a competition. The thinking at the time (on the wire) was that competition was key to the game, and fairness was key to the age based categories, but to be a competition a category needed some minimum number of competitors. The matrix also recognizes that our demographics are changing (getting older) and that there would likely be a call for more age-based categories as long as this demographic trend continued.