Parker Wins Challenge

[Mike of the Mountain]

Parker won with the format of top 5 vs top 5, the way it should be. Parker won with top 2 plus random 3 vs top 2 plus random 3 with a lesser format. I’d rather see it go back to the original format instead of having it more a “luck of the draw” process. And yes, I missed an unprecedented 5 targets, four of them being a lazy right to left crosser!! I felt bad for the Parker shooters who shot mid-40s in qualifying and were left out because it was deemed better to have a lucky draw instead of performance dictate the squads. That’s my two cents worth. I know there are plenty of shooters from both organizations who prefer the original format. Just sayin’.

[Mark Kircher]

Perhaps We should consider a format of just more shooters on each team.
Perhaps 10 or even 15 on each.
I watched the entire event and it took less than 45 minutes.
I agree with the competitive shooters that it should be best not random.
Having 10 or 15 shooters might solve the problem of more inclusion and the problem of the best against best that day.

[Mark Kircher]

Maybe even have 5 big bores for each team and 5 small bores for each team with total combined for winner.

[Mike of the Mountain]

Originally Posted by MARK KIRCHER

Perhaps We should consider a format of just more shooters on each team.
Perhaps 10 or even 15 on each.
I watched the entire event and it took less than 45 minutes.
I agree with the competitive shooters that it should be best not random.
Having 10 or 15 shooters might solve the problem of more inclusion and the problem of the best against best that day.

Mark, with 10 shooters it took 45 minutes to an hour. Doubling that will just be a problem. Now you need two hours late day Friday (which I liked. Friday works better than Saturday) and most shooters and the range help have other things to do. This isn't the Smith-Parker where you have hundreds of qualifying rounds shot and there is a culture of participation among both groups.