View Single Post
Old 15th March 2016, 11:13 AM
Brian.Samson's Avatar
Brian.Samson Brian.Samson is online now
Allowed in Sales
Join Date: Jun 2009
Member of: Pontefract, Doncaster Airgun Range
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 2,331

One shooter was allowed to use a tablet with their dope settings on it at the World Championships in NZ - I 'think' someone was also allowed to do the same thing in Lithuania as well.

Personally, I'm against allowing it to continue.

The argument for allowing it is - "well it's no different than just using a piece of paper" - I've heard that justification at least a couple of times now.

My reasons for being opposed to the idea are :
  • If it's the same as using a piece of paper - use a piece of paper!
  • The sport is already seen as being too technical and too far removed from regular airgun shooting, the use of computers on the firing line will do us no favours when it comes to the image of the sport.
  • When things are allowed, it's harder to ban them in the future - technology moves quickly, what will smartphones be capable of in the future and how would we be able to police their use in say 10 years time. If the use of one application is allowed on a smartphone, how do we know that an application that isn't allowed is being used?
  • How easy it is to make one device communicate with other devices in a way that would be undetectable by marshals. That opens up a world of potential cheating by collaboration that would be difficult to detect and even harder to stop.

Those are just my personal views and aren't necessarily the views of the rule's committee's I have any involvement in, although if asked the question - that would very likely be my reply to any committee that asked for my opinion.

Writing apps for smartphones and tablet computers is something I do professionally so maybe that makes me a little bit more aware of what the potential for undetectable misuse is.

I could write an app right now (nevermind in 10 years time) that would give everyone using it a definite and substantial advantage on an FT course and it would be undetectable. Technology has already moved on a long way since those lads tried to gain an advantage with a laptop computer at Newbury, I can't even begin to imagine what might be possible in 10 years time.
Reply With Quote