My vote is no qualifying. I see this more as a big party for single shot shooters. Is there a better way to disenfranchise new shooters then to tell them they can't come if they are not already experts? Besides, the qualifying thing already makes this into an ISSA sort of match.

We need to keep the fest in schuetzenfest. It's not only about a contest to determine the best shooter, although that's certainly a big part of it. The fest is also about the social aspects like a banquet, hamburger fry, renewing old friendships and making new ones. A match that's open to all comers will attract the most shooters.
If we select a center fire program of events, such as a 100-shot offhand, 100-shot bench rest plus, perhaps, an Honor Target (3-shots offhand) we could then do a two-phase national. Etna Green could shoot it at their spring or summer shoot and Raton could work the course of fire into their match in August. Combine the scores after the match(s) and simple math will determine the winners. If such a format were used, I can make a one guarantee, even though the matches would be held at different locations and at different times, the best shooters will win.
For the ASSRA and ISSA to attempt a initial national match at a neutral range would, IMO, ensure it never happens. Our organizations are not large enough at this time to continue with our regular programs plus the additional manpower and money needed for a completely new match to be organized, administered and run.
I'm open to any doable solution for a national match and I will attend.

Quarter_Bore wrote on Dec 17^th, 2015 at 7:31am:


Much of the format will have to be based on how many days for the shoot, benches available and how many shooters to accommodate. I agree that we don't want to leave anyone out and that wasn't my intent regarding qualifying.

I was really looking at the qualifying aspect as more "hyp" leading up to the shoot itself, insuring the best shooters get a spot and a way to generate more money to finance it. But, what I'd rather hear is that the boards of both organizations, decided that there should be no qualifying

The rules will not be mine but, for the boards to decide. These are my ideas for options for the format, nothing else. All ideas are more than welcome.

I'm not sure how your linking qualifying to the ISSA, as I've never had to qualify to shoot any matches.

Another thing to think about is, how many on this forum would like to be able to meet the other members and talk, face to face?

Frank

  (You need to Login or Register to view media files and links);  

I have to agree with Randy. We need to start and work toward a goal not argue what the end result will be. I like the idea of a modern version of a telegraph match. It could be done at the two closest matches for the ISSA and the ASSRA I think that would be the summer match at Etna Green and the Grand Schuetzenfest in Raton. We would have to agree to a course of fire and some basic scoring rules but it could be a start. Maybe if we get a Telegraph match together we will find a way to actually shoot together. 
  It doesn’t have to start with the money first we need to prove to potential sponsors that we can work together before anybody will put money into this.

40 Rod

I am #126 started in 1987

Has to be a shoulder to shoulder match at a location in the middle of the lower forty eight, like Nebraska/Kansas. Has to be advertised in a national publication. 

Large corporate sponsors mandatory? Why again? Tax relief? I don't think Coors made any money on the Coors matches. 

We have people out there who know how to acquire sponsors. The man I'm thinking of hangs with the Irish. Not a problem as he himself is not Irish. 

           Joe.