Richard59
Well-known member
Now I missed this first time of reading, CPSA have announced that all of the major events for 2021 will be competition only.
CPSA Majors “Competition Only”
- Thread starter Richard59
- Start date
Help Support :
paul b
Well-known member
It was in the board minutes from the cpsa a good month ago and theres some more interesting stuff in the latest minutes.
Jonny English
Well-known member
I think that's the best way to go, they are the major championships after all, not some run of the mill registered.
Charliedog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2016
- Messages
- 460
Hardly going to break the bank
Will Hewland
Well-known member
I don't quite get that. With maybe 200 entries in each class, the chances of being in top ten are fairly slim. These big events- even more than a normal shoot - financially rely upon the cannon fodder of a large entry, most of whom realise they are there for a personal test/ day out, not a chance of the title or a huge prize. I’m not too worried about it as it’s very little money over the seasons shooting, but seems a bit blunt to me.
Principles. Not cash. The other year the cpsa made a big song and dance about targets only being allowed at the majors. Now it seems that attendances are up they don't need these entries. Taking away choices.
Jasper.
Jasper.
Last edited by a moderator:
Charliedog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2016
- Messages
- 460
I may be wrong but I cannot think of any other competition sport where you have the option to pay a different fee to enter, why should those at the top of the sport not be better rewarded for winning (they dont get a lot really)?
Will Hewland
Well-known member
Fair point in one sense, but in which sport do the other competitors put up the winners prize money?
I may see it differently from most but I'd scrap targets only completely.
Paying for competition currently costs about £5 extra with the chance to win peanuts because so few people pay into the pot. If it was mandatory it wouldn't need to be as much. Probably £2 because everyone would contribute (Similar to the cost of the coffee you have when you get there).
I don't get the argument that some folk have no chance of winning. If they're classed correctly then surely they stand as much chance as anyone?
I've seen C class results with virtually no competition entries because "I've got no chance", well someone has to win!
The argument regarding the championship may hold water due to the increased cost to start with. Plus, if you win your class at a championship, are you really bothered what's in your envelope?!
PM.
Paying for competition currently costs about £5 extra with the chance to win peanuts because so few people pay into the pot. If it was mandatory it wouldn't need to be as much. Probably £2 because everyone would contribute (Similar to the cost of the coffee you have when you get there).
I don't get the argument that some folk have no chance of winning. If they're classed correctly then surely they stand as much chance as anyone?
I've seen C class results with virtually no competition entries because "I've got no chance", well someone has to win!
The argument regarding the championship may hold water due to the increased cost to start with. Plus, if you win your class at a championship, are you really bothered what's in your envelope?!
PM.
Charliedog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2016
- Messages
- 460
Agree its quite unique, its got to come from somewhere, not many spectators going to pay to watch like most other sports, I kind of understand the principle piece as well but the additional cost in the scheme of a seasons shooting is almost irrelevant, people will make their own decisions on whether to attend or not but i doubt it will have much impact.
In a nutshell for me
Will Hewland
Well-known member
C class is a bizarre thing really. It’s largely full of people who are progressing rapidly, so viewing shooters “as C class” is very unreliable. (There are some perennial C class of course, but the winners won’t be from this sector). I bet every C class winner at a major is promoted to A or AA at the next classification. (B class isn’t a lot different). Even at a normal registered shoot, C is often won by a BO entry who got it all together and surprised themselves. AA shooters are a lot more stable and constant of course. That’s how I know I won’t be British Champion. 
tiptop
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2012
- Messages
- 1,799
People will still be logged in on 31st January at 8pm, finger poised to get booked In for the weekend. Hopefully getting their preferred day and time. At least they won't have to sit up until midnight, but I will bet that the Sunday will nearly be sold out by then.
Jonny English
Well-known member
You've only got to look at the popularity of the non cpsa shoots where there isn't a birds only option to see that demand is still very high when it's competition only. The essex masters, Jack Pyke, clayshooting classic to name a few, never seem to struggle for entries.
So the the English and British open etc will be cheaper to enter this year then ????
Dream on.
Jasper.
Richard59
Well-known member
ehb102
Well-known member
The trouble with forced contributions to prizes is that under some ethical beliefs it's gambling, and some people believe gambling is wrong. Therefore it's wrong to exclude people from shooting because they won't gamble. There would be zero problem with setting the entry fee and setting the prize money, but making the prize money linked to entries apparently makes it some kind of lottery.
The CPSA board used to be aware of this, but changes in personnel have obviously meant other agendas are being prioritised.
The CPSA board used to be aware of this, but changes in personnel have obviously meant other agendas are being prioritised.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2012
- Messages
- 1,723
I'm not so sure removing a 'targets only' entry is the way to go given the rising costs of the sport. I totted up the cost of attending a major event last year and found there isn't much change from £1000. That makes it an expensive three days away. For goodness sake, I could enjoy an overseas holiday for less!
Sure, the difference between the two entries is marginal but, as they say, every little helps. The governing body ought to be looking at how to reduce the cost of participation for the non elite and non sponsored competitor, not increasing it for the benefit of the few.
Sure, the difference between the two entries is marginal but, as they say, every little helps. The governing body ought to be looking at how to reduce the cost of participation for the non elite and non sponsored competitor, not increasing it for the benefit of the few.
Last edited by a moderator:
I would add that in some cases, mine included, gambling on a win in a competition has a very low probability of success.
I can understand the CPSA decision, and I would simply pay the additional money. I don't however shoot to win anything but for the grading and feeling of progression so, unless forced, its birds only for me & my daughter. I do look at the results and find the same names often appearing at the top of the scores - they are all good people I am sure, and all have worked hard to get to the level they are at (and thus deserve their success) but the CPSA may have to look at carefully at how their decision affects the numbers attending at the bottom of the grades if it is implemented on a wider basis.
The problem with some organisations - and I'm not saying the CPSA is at that level by any means - is that they can start to treat the sport they manage as a business and the high profile events are run for profit and not for the members. The most important members are not those who have been shooting for some time - or won on a regular basis - but those still learning. In my view it's essential that those who are just starting can enter the same competition, and shoot at the same time, as those with a chance of winning.
I can understand the CPSA decision, and I would simply pay the additional money. I don't however shoot to win anything but for the grading and feeling of progression so, unless forced, its birds only for me & my daughter. I do look at the results and find the same names often appearing at the top of the scores - they are all good people I am sure, and all have worked hard to get to the level they are at (and thus deserve their success) but the CPSA may have to look at carefully at how their decision affects the numbers attending at the bottom of the grades if it is implemented on a wider basis.
The problem with some organisations - and I'm not saying the CPSA is at that level by any means - is that they can start to treat the sport they manage as a business and the high profile events are run for profit and not for the members. The most important members are not those who have been shooting for some time - or won on a regular basis - but those still learning. In my view it's essential that those who are just starting can enter the same competition, and shoot at the same time, as those with a chance of winning.
