Agenda items 1 & 2 - shooting style age subcategories.

[Grizzly Dave]

 

1) Should we institute the following standard for all style/costume categories

when breaking them down by age?

The regulations for the base category will be applied first; THEN the age

limits.

Reasons to do so:

"any legal revolver" is the criteria for the basic AGE-based categories ...which doesn't

apply to FRONTIERSMAN (requires percussion ignition); CLASSIC (which has

a caliber restriction), and GUNFIGHTER (which requires FIXED sights)...as does

DUELIST

Other categories have restrictions regarding rifle model/caliber and additional equipment

regulations.

...Senior Duelist currently being the only anomaly specifically listed as such (i.e. a

"subcategory" of SENIOR instead of Duelist) Example:

(Senior GF would be a Gunfighter 60+ years old, subject to Gunfighter category

regulations)

2)Should we change Senior Duelist to comply with that standard?

Shooting STYLE = #1 determinant

Shooter's AGE = #2 consideration

 

To me, this is only one question - should senior duelists have to conform to the requirements of duelist.

 

The only difference I see is that a senior may used adjustable sight revolvers, and duelist may not.

 

If #1 is passed but #2 is not, then we've grandfathered in an exception, not a good thing to keep a clear understanding on what is allowed and what isn't IMO.

 

So simple yes or no on each. Never mind the argument that adjustable sight revolvers offer little to no advantage and some think should be allowed in all categories. Also never mind the position that we have too many categories.

 

We already have the categories, basic questions of allowed arms is another discussion entirely. So with apologies to any Senior Duelists who don't have fixed sight revolvers, my votes would be yes and yes to standardize the rules and make them uniform.

 

What says the fire?

 

[Cheyenne Culpepper 32827]

age based shud follow the same rules as the regular cat.... imho....

[Moose Wesson]

age based shud follow the same rules as the regular cat.... imho....

+1

 

Moose

[Fillmore Coffins, SASS #7884]

While I agree that age based categories should follow the base category, why not allow adjustable sites in all categories?

 

Fillmore

[Rex M Rugers #6621]

I'm thinking that changing equipment rules after several years of previous standardization could be an unnecessary hardship on some shooters with shallower pockets. Don't think I am alone in this line of thinking , either. If I was suddenly faced with a rule change regarding what sixguns or rifle that I shoot , might be an uphill battle to continue.

Dos centavos , Rex

[Cheyenne Culpepper 32827]

Rex, that shudn't be an issue, if the shooter shot duelist before he was 60 then he wud have had the correct firearms anyway....

 

if someone wants to shoot GF with adj sites they cud shoot BW, and yes they wud nede a marlin or such then too....

[Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217]

About Blackhawks, Hipshot recommended a year's grace period in implementing the change to Senior Duelist.

[Charlie Whiskers]

I shoot SD and sometimes just Duelist. I don't use adjustable sight pistols mainly because I don't like them. Do I care of someone wants to use them in SD...NO. I've had one cowboy pistol with adjustable sights. Didn't like it so I sold it. That was back when I was shooting 49'r. I don't see an advantage of having one type over another. If a person started out with BH's and that's what they like and/or can afford I say let them use them.

[Lou Graham, # 26112]

Wouldn't be the first time we woke up and found a specific gun we had and used at every match was no longer legal.

(APOMO)

[Randy Saint Eagle, SASS # 64903]

It seems like a bad idea to me to ban a gun in a certain category (Senior Duelist) that has been legal. What if someone has spent 2 grand in a set of full race Blackhawks and soon cannot use them in their category of choice? It seems odd to me that when Modern Category was dropped adjustable sights were then allowed in all age based categories, plus B-Western, but now we're saying that Senior does not make a category age based?

 

I'm sure I'm in the minority but I think age should be first, by the grace of God we've lived long enough to be Seniors, then style, ie: Duelist, Gunfighter.

 

My vote would be age first.

 

Randy

[Charlie Whiskers]

It seems like a bad idea to me to ban a gun in a certain category (Senior Duelist) that has been legal. What if someone has spent 2 grand in a set of full race Blackhawks and soon cannot use them in their category of choice? It seems odd to me that when Modern Category was dropped adjustable sights were then allowed in all age based categories, plus B-Western, but now we're saying that Senior does not make a category age based?

 

I'm sure I'm in the minority but I think age should be first, by the grace of God we've lived long enough to be Seniors, then style, ie: Duelist, Gunfighter.

 

My vote would be age first.

 

Randy

 

 

+1

[Elk Creek LeMieux]

It seems like a bad idea to me to ban a gun in a certain category (Senior Duelist) that has been legal. What if someone has spent 2 grand in a set of full race Blackhawks and soon cannot use them in their category of choice? It seems odd to me that when Modern Category was dropped adjustable sights were then allowed in all age based categories, plus B-Western, but now we're saying that Senior does not make a category age based?

 

I'm sure I'm in the minority but I think age should be first, by the grace of God we've lived long enough to be Seniors, then style, ie: Duelist, Gunfighter.

 

My vote would be age first.

 

Randy

 

+2

 

I honestly don't see why adjustable sights are an issue in any category that isn't trying to be sort of historical. Frontiersman, FC, FCGF, CC...

[Possum Skinner, SASS#60697]

I vote category first, then age. Why have one category that is an exception?

[Clueless Bob]

I'm going to live up to my alias. My wife shoots Ladies Senior, and will be moving up to Ladies Silver Senior next year. She currently shoots Black Hawks, and has been for the past 8+ years. Will this effect her?

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

I'm going to live up to my alias. My wife shoots Ladies Senior, and will be moving up to Ladies Silver Senior next year. She currently shoots Black Hawks, and has been for the past 8+ years. Will this effect her?

 

NO

[Dutch Coroner]

I vote category first, then age. Why have one category that is an exception?

+1

[Oklahomabound]

The style/costume category('s) requirements should always govern first. Then if further division by age is done then all is the across the ages...

 

YES to 1 & 2

[Anvil Al #59168]

I vote category first, then age. Why have one category that is an exception?

 

 

 

+1

[Clueless Bob]

Thanks PaleWolf!!

[Rancho Roy]

I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but sighted revolvers just don't look right!

 

Blackhawks are a modern interpretation of a SAA...........Fine in one or two categories to get folks involved, but hopefully they switch to true pre 1898 style shoot'n irons.....

[Anvil Al #59168]

I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but sighted revolvers just don't look right!

 

Blackhawks are a modern interpretation of a SAA...........Fine in one or two categories to get folks involved, but hopefully they switch to true pre 1898 style shoot'n irons.....

 

Sorry. But that is one of the reasons I hear.

 

They don't look cowboy enough.

 

They are legal in one or two categories???? Better count again.

[Desert Pete SASS #42168]

I fail to understand the fix/adjustable sight discussion. I have shot both and can miss with either equally easily.

 

This is not a period authentic sport. It is more like a representation of how we interpret the old West if that interpretation suits us. So, the sight question is all up to us and our interpretation.

[Beartrap SASS#57175]

I vote category first, then age. Why have one category that is an exception?

While it may cause some "discomfort" for a very small percentage of shooters I think it's better to bring SD in line now, rather than later, when the problem could grow worse. Let's standardize the cats now.

[Rancho Roy]

The whole sport is up to our interpretation.......Point well taken.

 

And this is why Winchester Model 12 shotguns and other "Look Alike" firearms are not allowed?

 

I'm just asking as I really don't know the answer or how these decisions are arrived at.

[Tom Bullweed]

I had a great time at the Givhan's Ferry SE Regional last week. The match was well-run and it seemed that all participants had a good time. That said, the award ceremony took over an hour and awarded probably half of the shooters with plaques and buckles, even I got a buckle with seven misses for the match. It seemed to award the majority of the shooters and lessened the rewards for the best shooters, in my opinion.

 

We can further split GF into senior GF, left-hand start GF, right-hand start GF and FCGF so that everyone can 'win' and the costs to shoot at such matches escalates, or we can have meaningful categories where most of us shoot for personal satisfaction and fun.

 

If'n I was in charge (a very scary thing indeed), there would be six categories: under-20, men 21-59, men 60+, women 21-59, women 60+ and BP-all. No adjustable-sight pistols (they are not part of the cowboy history). No 97s. Every club would be required to have a set of club guns that could be used if a cowboy did not have guns that fit the rules. You can see why I will never be on the rules committee. I enjoy SASS but see a real danger of further dividing the categories until everyone can 'win'.

[Grizzly Dave]

I had a great time at the Givhan's Ferry SE Regional last week. The match was well-run and it seemed that all participants had a good time. That said, the award ceremony took over an hour and awarded probably half of the shooters with plaques and buckles, even I got a buckle with seven misses for the match. It seemed to award the majority of the shooters and lessened the rewards for the best shooters, in my opinion.

 

We can further split GF into senior GF, left-hand start GF, right-hand start GF and FCGF so that everyone can 'win' and the costs to shoot at such matches escalates, or we can have meaningful categories where most of us shoot for personal satisfaction and fun.

 

If'n I was in charge (a very scary thing indeed), there would be six categories: under-20, men 21-59, men 60+, women 21-59, women 60+ and BP-all. No adjustable-sight pistols (they are not part of the cowboy history). No 97s. Every club would be required to have a set of club guns that could be used if a cowboy did not have guns that fit the rules. You can see why I will never be on the rules committee. I enjoy SASS but see a real danger of further dividing the categories until everyone can 'win'.

 

Interesting observations, but has nothing to do with TG Agenda items 1 and 2 that pertain to existing categories.

[Oklahomabound]

...imho, we need to keep the SASS style/costume requirements as primary. If a style/costume category needs to be further broken down by age fine, but the style/costume requirements should govern..... ....maintains consistency across the ages...

[Steeldust Dan, SASS #2631Life]

Our whole shooting category system needs overhauled. We have age-based categories. We have shooting style/costuming categories. And we have style/costume categories subdivided by age. Or are those age-based categories subdivided by shooting style/costuming?

[J-BAR #18287]

I don't like age-based categories. I RARELY shoot in one. I am usually in Frontiersman or Classic Cowboy. It's hard to explain to my son why it is fair for geezers to compete with him in Wrangler, but unfair for him to compete with the same folks in an age-protected category....I would prefer to eliminate age-based categories altogether.

 

 

However, I do think it stinks to tell folks who have been shooting Senior Duelist with adjustable sighted revolvers that they have to go out and buy new guns.

 

So I think number one and number two should be No and No.

 

Who is behind this and why?

 

Few things in life are consistent. Why is it so goldanged important to crap on some of our fellow shooters?

[Most Wanted]

It makes zero sense for a SD to not play by the same rules as a D. Should a SGF get to shoot two handed on a split pistol stage ? That being said I would rather see adjustable site guns available in all catagories. But that is not what we get to chose at this time so I must refer back to my first statement.

[Wicker Nash]

Quick question....Other than FC, are there any current categories that shoot two-handed that don't allow adjustable sights? If not, we are talking about allowing any two-handed shooter to use fixed or adjustable (FC the exception because they have the option to shoot duelist), but any one-handed shooter (other than B-Western) being required to use a fixed sighted revolver. Is this correct?

[Anvil Al #59168]

I fail to understand the fix/adjustable sight discussion. I have shot both and can miss with either equally easily.

 

This is not a period authentic sport. It is more like a representation of how we interpret the old West if that interpretation suits us. So, the sight question is all up to us and our interpretation.

 

 

The easiest and best fix is just allow them in Duelist and GFer. There. We are now done. Please go about your day.

[Ruff Cobb]

Reference the proposed rule changes affecting Senior Duelist. I want to make sure I have this proposed rule change correct as it applies in my instance. I started shooting Senior Duelist 12-13 years ago when the category was created & I used adjustable sight revolvers in compliance with SASS Rules pertaining to Seniors and this category. I now sometimes alternate between SD & ES depending on arthritis issues.

 

As I understand it, if this proposal is passed, I would be prohibited from using my revolvers in the SD category but could continue to use them in ES & this change after 13 years will benefit SASS because it provides the appearance of hardware consistency in a style category that happens to have one age based break point.

 

On the other hand this Style Category does not offer the full range of age categories, Silver Senior, Elder Statesman & so forth except as match directors may consider to enhance the bottom line, example, EOT "Silver Senior Duelist".

 

In my opinion the Senior Duelist category has bigger consistency issues than hardware because the shooter may use any SASS legal shotgun at their discretion.

 

I just have to wonder & ask if we aren't trying to fix an issue that nobody gave a hoot about in the 1st place. I don't think I've ever heard a comment at a match or seen a wire thread expressing outrage about the existence of adjustable sights in any Senior category let alone duelist.

[Rio Brazos Kid]

Reference the proposed rule changes affecting Senior Duelist. I want to make sure I have this proposed rule change correct as it applies in my instance. I started shooting Senior Duelist 12-13 years ago when the category was created & I used adjustable sight revolvers in compliance with SASS Rules pertaining to Seniors and this category. I now sometimes alternate between SD & ES depending on arthritis issues.

 

As I understand it, if this proposal is passed, I would be prohibited from using my revolvers in the SD category but could continue to use them in ES & this change after 13 years will benefit SASS because it provides the appearance of hardware consistency in a style category that happens to have one age based break point.

 

On the other hand this Style Category does not offer the full range of age categories, Silver Senior, Elder Statesman & so forth except as match directors may consider to enhance the bottom line, example, EOT "Silver Senior Duelist".

 

In my opinion the Senior Duelist category has bigger consistency issues than hardware because the shooter may use any SASS legal shotgun at their discretion.

 

I just have to wonder & ask if we aren't trying to fix an issue that nobody gave a hoot about in the 1st place. I don't think I've ever heard a comment at a match or seen a wire thread expressing outrage about the existence of adjustable sights in any Senior category let alone duelist.

 

+1

Just another knee jerk way of irritating the older shooters. Making them buy different guns than what they have been using for years. Just another way of thinning the herd.

 

My biggest concern is, "Who comes up with this crap anyway"?

 

RBK

[Goliath, SASS #41359]

It seems like a bad idea to me to ban a gun in a certain category (Senior Duelist) that has been legal. What if someone has spent 2 grand in a set of full race Blackhawks and soon cannot use them in their category of choice? It seems odd to me that when Modern Category was dropped adjustable sights were then allowed in all age based categories, plus B-Western, but now we're saying that Senior does not make a category age based?

 

I'm sure I'm in the minority but I think age should be first, by the grace of God we've lived long enough to be Seniors, then style, ie: Duelist, Gunfighter.

 

My vote would be age first.

 

Randy

+3