Until someone comes up with a simple, streamlined, intuitive, unambiguous, method to manage SFTS, I'm for canceling the program. If it can't be done in six or less one sentence bullets that anyone can understand - it ain't worth doing. Comments invited.
Sudden Death at the Annual match. All categories honored but Minimum 3 in category to qualify for Silver. That's pretty simple. Oh, one more rule: Bender has to do the cooking for lunch.
I was under the impression we were not having an annual match starting in 2020. If so, why not have a tie breaker for SFTS by a one pistol shot with the highest velocity wins. Hells Comin will definitely lose.
How about doing something like, putting it to a vote of the "ANNUAL MEMBERS" whether or not to continue doing SFTS. This is a "MEMBERS CLUB" and I think they should have a say so in how the club is run.
That is what this forum thread is for ... soliciting input from the members.
Just curious - if we cancelled the SFTS program altogether, would people no longer shoot at ACSA? Or, to put it a different way, is the big silver buckle the only reason people choose to shoot at ACSA?
What do other clubs offer that keep their customers coming back?
Not looking to dramatically change ACSA but, as I am still new to southwest clubs I am interested in knowing what the other clubs are doing well that we could incorporate into our plans.
I am curious, do other ranges who host cowboy matches also have members? Do those clubs require input from all of their members before making any decisions?
Cowtown, Prescott, and Cottonwood Cowboy clubs, to the best of my knowledge, are not 501C Corporations with an elected board of directors. Cowtown and Cottonwood have memberships, but it is just a discount program. Prescott Cowboy club only has discounts if you are a member of the Prescott Action Shooters main club. Since ACSA has a set of bylaws and formally elects people to the board and has in the past put up changes to the club by having it's members vote on changes, I believe any changes such as SFTS should be put to a vote of the members.
Jeez, as much as I hate to admit it, I absolutely agree with Lone Spur about a members vote on such a major decision.
Actually to the contrary of some things I am hearing, as I mentioned to Red today (Sunday) and Birdie previously, since this a club that supposes to care about its members, I believe a 1st place buckle should be awarded even if there is only 1 member in a category.
It is never a members fault that no one else signs up in his or her category, and many times members are NOT aware of that fact until the results are identified after the March match . So you get members that come 9-11 or 12 months a year in cold and 112 degree heat to shoot as supporters of the club. While Red argues that it is a competition, and I understand that, with the amount of gold that ACSA has in its war chest, I say an extra 2,3, 4 or even $500.00 would be worth it to reward members for their loyalty. We could even put a criteria of having to shoot a minimum number of matches, say 9.
On a separate note, we drive 2 1/2 hours each way to get here, stay in a hotel so we can be at the range on time, especially in the summer, and after all is said and done it costs us between $250.00-350.00 to shoot a monthly match. That's EVERY month. We came here years ago after hearing about the magnificent buckle presented to the annual winners and the great shooters that come to this club. I believe our shooters are some of the best in the world actually. Think about all the world champions that have shot here past and present . Birdie asks if there is no SFTS would the club loose members. I believe yes, it could.
Asking the members to vote on SFTS I believe it's the right thing to do, too often in the past few years decisions were made by the board without asking for member input. The club is made up of it's membership, the membership should have some input as to how it's run. I agree with Windy, if you eliminate SFTS or dramatically change the rules members will vote with there feet. I know it's an incentive to me to shoot down there all year long, I have no control as to who shoots in my category. I also drive an hour and a haft all year long to shoot in hot and cold weather. Birdie asked if ACSA eliminates SFTS how many members will choose not to shoot. My comment was I will reconsider my decision to participate if SFTS is eliminated.
WOW !!!!! Thank you Windy and Bill. I hadn't given much thought about how much ACSA "ANNUAL MEMBERS" who are the heart and soul of this club sacrifice in time and money to support this club. I have been freaking cold sometimes in the winter and had heat stroke once in the summer to get in as many matches for SFTS and most Clean Matches as I could. If there was no SFTS I would probably not shoot in crappy weather winter or summer. Just my opinion.
So how would such a vote be conducted? We first vote on whether to have SFTS or not? Then vote on each rule individually? Who writes the proposed rules? Ken
Be aware that what Dusty Eagle posted as Proposed Rules, is light years more complex what I wrote and I do not suggest that as a starting point.
Here is what Kenny Reds provided. Gotta start somewhere, or just cancel as some board members desire.
So how would you like to take a shot at writing new rules? Here is what I've written - comment, write from scratch? Ken
Rational: This is a member benefit.
Rational: there are 13 matches each year and you must shoot more than half of them in the same category in order to qualify. Otherwise, you could shoot 6 in one category and then 6 in another category to potentially win two buckles.
Rational: This is a competition, not a give-away. The current system of allowing qualification with a competitor shooting only 2 matches against you degrades the significance of winning the buckle.
Rational: More than half. See above.
Rational: Eliminates arguments of unfairness. Each competitor wins or loses on their own. No complaints of who gets to call first and no complaints of someone else flipping a single coin unfairly.
More thoughts – When do we enact new rules? If we start this in 2020, a few days from now, we could delay #1 and allow membership by march 1 and the January and February matches would count – for 2020 only. If new rules are delayed until 2021, who cares, I'll be gone.
Or here's my other alternative, the easiest one of all to understand, Simply take the existing rules and add clarifications to codify the “unwritten” rules we've always used. The “clarifications” are underlined.
You must be a member for your 1st shoot to qualify.
Pay your full yearly dues by the March match, and January counts.
You must declare your SFTS category at that first shoot.
Your category is whatever you put on your Match Application.
You must shoot 6 Matches in your SFTS category.
Your SFTS category would be 6 Matches in the same category.
You must beat the shooters in your category and they must be members .
The category must have at least two shooters.
They don’t necessarily have to shoot 6 matches.
But they must shoot at least 2 matches in that category.
You can not win the Silver Buckle in the same category two years in a row.
You can still shoot in that category and win a buckle but not the Silver.
It's apparent that this may change year-to-year if the number of matches varies and may change during a year as a match may be canceled for one reason or another.
How about taking input via E-mail from Annual Members, let's say, starting in May on what they think about keeping SFTS the way it is or changing it to something different. Maybe getting rid of it and using the money for say, new targets, or lowering match fees, or in May, mothers day month, all ladies shoot for free, and in June, fathers day month, all men shoot for free, or in Nov., Veterans day month, all Veterans shoot for free, or some other ideas on spending the extra money from not buying the buckles for SFTS. Put together the top most opinions into a ballot sent out to the members and see what the results are by say Sept. Of course if the members don't care one way or another then they can't complain about the way things are being done.
Without Buckaroo and Junior, there are 42 possible categories (M/F) for SFTS. We don't have enough members to have 2 people in each category offered. Dangerous as it sounds, that got me to thinking.........
It seems to me that before we start creating rules, some thought and discussion about the purpose of SFTS should take place. Windy suggested that only one in a category should still get a buckle as it's more about loyalty and belonging than competition. Is that the purpose of SFTS?
We have members that can hold their own at any SASS match in the world. They have spent many hours of their lives in practice and much of their children's inheritance in guns, gear, ammo components, etc. Even with the addition of All Around Cowboy and Shootist, we still struggle to provide meaningful SFTS competition for them. Should good competition for top shooters in a monthly match environment be the point of SFTS?
As we move down the abilities scale, careful category selection can often yield a buckle for a shooter that isn't likely to win at a major match. Is that why we do SFTS?
The purpose should dictate how the rules get structured.
I agree Lou. If we had 300 hundred members shooting in 42 monthly categories there might be competition in all 42 categories. But that's not going to happen. I have a solution if the members want to keep SFTS and still have some competition for the Silver Buckle, let's go back to the original SASS categories from say 1988.