The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

snayperskaya wrote:I could be wrong but it seems you over-analyse things, especially what other people post......this isn't a criticism, merely an observation and I have no desire to fall out over anything posted

You could be right and there could be some truth in that.

And there could also be some truth in the idea that doing so makes me less likely to toss out ill-formed or ill-informed opinions.

And even though you're not a fan of analysing things...

What does giving a trophy/reward to everyone mean? It fundamentally means “lowering expectations" and can lead to a lack of ambition and motivation

Or it could mean cultivating a liking for sport for its own sake rather than something that requires you to win.
The benefits of exercise apply to everyone, not just the Mo Farahs and Jessica Ennis-Hills of this world, but if at an early age a child is told that they're no good at it, do you not think that some will be dissuaded from doing it at all?

If children are encouraged to participate, and rewarded for the act of taking part and doing their best, then do you not think that more of them will end up doing it even if they're never going to trouble the Guinness Book Of Records? That they will come to regard it as something which is fun, rather than a struggle to beat everyone else?

Teaching a child that they should want to be a winner is also reaching them that they should want everyone else to be a loser.

......why push yourself for excellence if everyone gets the same recognition?

If you really believe that people only ever push themselves for excellence in the hope of a reward, rather than because they genuinely want to do well for their and its own sake then you have a very cynical and jaundiced view of life.

It could be said that it teaches youngsters that they are entitled to something for nothing with little or no effort needed and hardly a valuable life lesson.This doesn't just apply to sports, it applies to many aspects of life.

Or it could be said that it teaches them that it's OK to have fun even if they aren't the best.

How many people here have a cabinet at home to store their guns in, but know that they'll never need one for silverware? Would you brand them failures, and discourage them from enjoying shooting to the best of their abilities by telling them that what really matters is winning?

How many people here have learned to speak a (bit of a) foreign language without any intention or desire to sit a GCSE to see how good they are?

How many people play a musical instrument despite the full and certain knowledge that they'll never even get hits on a YouTube video, let alone play Wembley?


School sports days do not have to be a form of competition, there's absolutely no reason why they cannot exist alongside competitive events for those who want to compete.

We don't seem to have a shortage of Olympic champion class athletes in this country.

Interest in competitive activities is at an all time high - look at all the TV shows based around competitive quizzing, baking, sewing, cooking, buying and selling tat at car boot sales...

https://howtoadult.com/having-winners-l ... -9975.html

https://www.debate.org/debates/Non-comp ... ts-days/1/


Would you like critical thinking and research to be regarded here as a competition, with people branded winners and losers? Should "you're talking utter b****cks and I'm going to ignore you rather than justify myself" be sort of analogous to lamping your opponent and walking off the track in a huff?

clapclap clapclap clapclap

As one who shoots solely to see how good I can get, rather than how many I can beat, I empathise..............

Pete

TRG-22 wrote:
.....why push yourself for excellence if everyone gets the same recognition?

If you really believe that people only ever push themselves for excellence in the hope of a reward, rather than because they genuinely want to do well for their and its own sake then you have a very cynical and jaundiced view of life.

[/quote]

I think I said recognition, not reward.Can you seriously tell me that if you pushed yourself at something, whether it is a sport or career related or whatever and at the end you got the same recognition as someone that didn't try at all you wouldn't be cheesed off?.

And how do you know I don't analyse things?, you know sweet FA about me!.

Anyway, like I said it seems like you overthink things too much and I can't really be bothered now as you seem to also have an argumentative streak so I think we should agree to disagree and move on.

snayperskaya wrote:I think I said recognition, not reward.

Yes, sorry. But they are often pretty much indistinguishable - there's not much of a "reward" for the winner of Masterchef, for example, unless they want and are able to commercially exploit their recognition.

Can you seriously tell me that if you pushed yourself at something, whether it is a sport or career related or whatever and at the end you got the same recognition as someone that didn't try at all you wouldn't be cheesed off?.

I might well be, but that doesn't mean that I'd stop trying to excel. Nor does it address the point that not everything has to be ruthlessly competitive. OOI, did you follow those links to articles with research about the pros/cons of making school sports days competitive situations?

Everybody who completes the London Marathon gets a medal. I guess there must be some upper limit to how long you can take, but basically, unless you're one of the elite world-class people trying for an absolute record or to come first, if you've pushed yourself to achieve a personal best, however far off the pace that might be, are you really going to feel that your efforts were devalued because some people gave up pushing themselves so hard and came in hours after you?

That race isn't one, but have you never heard the term "fun run"?

And how do you know I don't analyse things?, you know sweet FA about me!.

True, but you did object to the extent to which I did it, whereas for me what I did was completely natural and normal.

Anyway, like I said it seems like you overthink things too much and I can't really be bothered now as you seem to also have an argumentative streak so I think we should agree to disagree and move on.

It is true that I am strongly disinclined to not argue with people who I think are wrong.

I should point out though that I mean "arguing" as in "discussing/debating", absolutely not "shouting/rowing".

And that I don't do it for any point scoring reasons, nor (and how fitting is this) because I see it as a competition where what matters is winning.

I just think that "the world would be a better place" if people weren't wrong about things, (that term ascribes far more importance to this issue than it really has, but I can't think of a better one).

TRG-22 wrote: I just think that "the world would be a better place" if people weren't wrong about things.

We have the solution to that: just agree with us and you'll always be right.

I am looking at getting a PCP airgun or two.
Really don't want the dive bottle scenario so looked at various compressors.
All made in china. And some of them have very good reviews.

mag41uk wrote:I am looking at getting a PCP airgun or two.
Really don't want the dive bottle scenario so looked at various compressors.
All made in china. And some of them have very good reviews.

Now there is a thought, I have a Bambi 5 gallon tank compressor for my airbrushes.

I presume that you just get a connector and pump up the reservoir on the airgun direct from the compressor?

Depends on the pressure that the compressor can output, most PCP air guns that I have seen want to be charged to about 200 bar, which I think is approaching 3000psi.

I wouldn't have thought something designed for airbrushes would go that high.

Thought it was going to be too easy, it goes up to 120psi.