Originally Posted by paul4be
Why has this become a problem for some? 2 sessions, 1 starting at 9, 2nd starting at 1 gives 4 hours per session if needed. You know it's going to take around that long before deciding to go, so what's the bother? Why does it need to be a mad dash because somebody is missing Eastenders or something??????? I appreciate that there is a lot of travelling, but again, this is a know factor and not some sudden surprise.
I've only just had a dabble with GP's for the first time this year. Yes they are longer than a winter league shoot, but I never felt as though there was a hold up. It was just a steady plod through the course at a sensible pace. Most people like the sociable side of the shoots as well.
The only time that I have felt that things were taking far too long was during a winter league shoot when a partner was taking an absolute age for every shot, despite gentle "hints" about this. To be honest I would quite like the GP timed lanes to be used for the W/L shoots as well.
Also, why do threads like this always seem to end up getting around to whether the courses are too hard/ easy etc. As they are not cleared by a group of shooters all the time, why the call to make them harder?? Could those who are asking for more challenging courses all the time, mini kills, more positionals etc please post how many GP courses they have actually cleared to date within the current format?? I'm sure that plenty reading the thread would like to know.
As the main culprit, I will answer your last questions.
I have never cleared a GP course and may never clear one. But some have, and I know the course builders didn't want it to happen.
My reason for proposing harder GP's was mainly to counter Holly's request for an easier one.
And the other reason is because I think (no-one else does!) with 47 ex 50 getting you to 12th place means its too tight at the top. This particular problem has been raised before and tweeking the grading system will not cure it. The only cure is harder courses. However, no-one else sees a problem now, so it can be forgotten.
I would however, still like to see the combined positional distance rule scrapped as it doesn't make any sense.