Yes, good topic Murray. Hits a raw nerve with me (and others)
This has been going on and on for far too long and it's a bit of a mess. It's in the "too hard basket" some of it.
The problem is that there are several Hunter National Championships where either none of the results now exist or if they do exist only top ten are recorded and therefore the total entry numbers are not known. The total entry numbers are important as there are minimum numbers required before any winner can be allocated the HOF points. It is 20 per class or 40 aggregate in 2 gun. You need 15 points to qualify for Hunter HOF. At the last National Championship (Rockhampton) Barry Edgley calculated as best he could the allocated points that could be substatiated. It looks like Phil Jones and Paul Sullivan have enough points to qualify even without needing to use the points they may have earned in events yet be substantiated.
One good reason I am cranky about these lost records is that I believe I also qualify. I am allocated 14 points as of now but I have about another 8 National Championship gold medals from events where the results are either now apparently lost or were never sent to the Chairman or recored anywhere permanently. Now in most of those events I know we had only 18 or 19 per class so I know they don't qualify and I don't expect points from these but there were other events like the Newcastle Nationals in 1994 where there were enough numbers (in Rimfire)and I have the medals and always understood I earned the HOF points legitimately. I believe there are other people in the same boat as me. I also have some other evidence to this fact and may yet put a case to the committee but my point is there will likely be other people in a similar position to me now who may not have any evidence which they can get their hands on.
I know some will say "sour grapes" but it's about the principle that annoys me. If anyone earns HOF fame points legitamately but ends up not getting those points counted because of some incompetence by officials somewhere or somehow is unacceptable. Barry Edgley has indicated (and I don't disagree with his position on this) that anyone who thinks they are due HOF points from any Nationals where results do not appear to exist need to provided evidence. That is; show the Gold medals and the results or something. It annoys me that any of us have to provide this all due to someone elses incompetence. I know that the results of the 1994 Nationals were put in the National Chairmans files by Tony Allinson. For some reason those results and others apparently are now lost. There are other results from the two Championships held at Harvey Bay which were never ever recorded or kept by anyone let alone sent to the National Chairman as is required!!!!!
Anyway congratulations to Phil and Sully. Lucky for them they have more than 15 points without having to somehow prove their "other" points from the Harvey Bay Nationals.
Keith,
Yes I think I have a copy that Barry gave me somewhere. He put together a list as best he could complile. I'll try and find it and post it. I don't think that Barry can access this site for some reason otherwise he could post it.
Sorry about that one Stuart - Didn't mean to hit a nerve.
I have never fully been up to speed on what was proposed, only that a HOF was suggested at one time. I just wanted to know if it was still going ahead as I wasn't sure and hadn't heard any news.
I agree with your sentiments, all your points are more than valid.
For some reason I vaguely thought that early on there was a suggestion of a cutoff date for post dating points, not fair on some I fully realise but I thought this was suggested way back due to the issue of lack of records, I can understand how that wouldn't stand, espeically if you have the gold medals to prove your wins...
Thanks for digging up the current list Stuart.
I can understand that there may be some issues - there always will be early on, but my way of thinking the sooner we get it out in the open the sooner we can work through resolving the problems. If someone can justify points and do so with old results sheets, medals or general proof / concensus of committee members it might just jog someone elses memory or dig up some of the results and help out a fellow shooter earn some points as well.
At least if we have what is compiled so far posted we can possably fill in any gaps or produce any medals etc unaccounted for then i think we will just have to continue on from there.
Yes, good topic Murray. Hits a raw nerve with me (and others)
This has been going on and on for far too long and it's a bit of a mess. It's in the "too hard basket" some of it.
The problem is that there are several Hunter National Championships where either none of the results now exist or if they do exist only top ten are recorded and therefore the total entry numbers are not known. The total entry numbers are important as there are minimum numbers required before any winner can be allocated the HOF points. It is 20 per class or 40 aggregate in 2 gun. You need 15 points to qualify for Hunter HOF. At the last National Championship (Rockhampton) Barry Edgley calculated as best he could the allocated points that could be substatiated. It looks like Phil Jones and Paul Sullivan have enough points to qualify even without needing to use the points they may have earned in events yet be substantiated.
One good reason I am cranky about these lost records is that I believe I also qualify. I am allocated 14 points as of now but I have about another 8 National Championship gold medals from events where the results are either now apparently lost or were never sent to the Chairman or recored anywhere permanently. Now in most of those events I know we had only 18 or 19 per class so I know they don't qualify and I don't expect points from these but there were other events like the Newcastle Nationals in 1994 where there were enough numbers (in Rimfire)and I have the medals and always understood I earned the HOF points legitimately. I believe there are other people in the same boat as me. I also have some other evidence to this fact and may yet put a case to the committee but my point is there will likely be other people in a similar position to me now who may not have any evidence which they can get their hands on.
I know some will say "sour grapes" but it's about the principle that annoys me. If anyone earns HOF fame points legitamately but ends up not getting those points counted because of some incompetence by officials somewhere or somehow is unacceptable. Barry Edgley has indicated (and I don't disagree with his position on this) that anyone who thinks they are due HOF points from any Nationals where results do not appear to exist need to provided evidence. That is; show the Gold medals and the results or something. It annoys me that any of us have to provide this all due to someone elses incompetence. I know that the results of the 1994 Nationals were put in the National Chairmans files by Tony Allinson. For some reason those results and others apparently are now lost. There are other results from the two Championships held at Harvey Bay which were never ever recorded or kept by anyone let alone sent to the National Chairman as is required!!!!!
Anyway congratulations to Phil and Sully. Lucky for them they have more than 15 points without having to somehow prove their "other" points from the Harvey Bay Nationals.
Just my thoughts,
Stuart
Annie & Stuart Elliott
www.benchrest.com.au
Is there a list of people who have gained points and the number of points they have?
Keith
Keith,
Yes I think I have a copy that Barry gave me somewhere. He put together a list as best he could complile. I'll try and find it and post it. I don't think that Barry can access this site for some reason otherwise he could post it.
Stuart
Annie & Stuart Elliott
www.benchrest.com.au
Sorry about that one Stuart - Didn't mean to hit a nerve.
I have never fully been up to speed on what was proposed, only that a HOF was suggested at one time. I just wanted to know if it was still going ahead as I wasn't sure and hadn't heard any news.
I agree with your sentiments, all your points are more than valid.
For some reason I vaguely thought that early on there was a suggestion of a cutoff date for post dating points, not fair on some I fully realise but I thought this was suggested way back due to the issue of lack of records, I can understand how that wouldn't stand, espeically if you have the gold medals to prove your wins...
Thanks for digging up the current list Stuart.
I can understand that there may be some issues - there always will be early on, but my way of thinking the sooner we get it out in the open the sooner we can work through resolving the problems. If someone can justify points and do so with old results sheets, medals or general proof / concensus of committee members it might just jog someone elses memory or dig up some of the results and help out a fellow shooter earn some points as well.
Just my humble 2c.
Oh and Congrats Phil and Sully - well done!!
Cheers
Muz
At least if we have what is compiled so far posted we can possably fill in any gaps or produce any medals etc unaccounted for then i think we will just have to continue on from there.