
FOREST AND STREAM. 
471 


U. S. Government 
Ammunition Test. 
Accuracy test of Krag-Jorgensen .30-Caliber Cartridges held at Springfield 
by order of the Ordnance Department, United States Army. 
TESTED—Ammunition of all the American Manufacturers. 
CONDITIONS—1o and 20 shot targets, muzzle rest. 
10 and 20 shot targets, fixed rest. 
DISTANCE—1,000 yards. 
RESULT and OFFICIAL REPORT: 
U. S. Cartridges excelled 
UNITED STATES CARTRIDGE 
Agencies: 497-503 Pearl St., 35-43 Park St., New York. 

Re Handicaps. 
Tuts year’s doings of the Grand American 
Handicap 
Committee has broadened out materially, in the way 
of discussion, during the recent warm August days. 
The members’ years of active experience, in all that 
pertains to trapshooting competition, seems to have 
singuiarly unfitted them for their important position, 
if one accepts the adverse criticism as being sound, 
There are many shooters, old and young, wise and 
simple, fat and lean, who do not know the true func- 
tions of a handicap committee. 
Some new and important points have been presented, 
since the publication of our editorial ‘“‘Re Handicaps, ’ 
in FOREST AND STREAM of July 13. At the outset, we 
desire to reiterate that our remarks herewith are in 
no wise to be construed as a defense of the committee. 
No defense is necessary. 
Our purpose is to explain some points which have 
been obscured by false inferences and fallacious argu- 
ment. 
The criticism adverse to the handicap committee, in 
its one tangibie torm, is presented by the gentle editress 
of Sporting Life, Mrs. W. K. Park, as follows: 
“With al: due respect to the esteemed handicap com- 
mittee, than whose task none is more thankless, we 
think this year’s Grand American, with its close to 5.0 
entries, should have seen the gradation of shooters 
from 23 yards to 16 yards, as duly set forth in the 
programme, More dissatisfaction was expressed on that 
one point than perhaps any other of the recent record- 
breaking event.” 
Obviously, the issue, as presented, is difficult to meet 
because of its vagueness, irrelevancy and insufficient 
specification. Summed up, the three counts are as 
follows: 
(1) The gradation of shooters as a matter of personal 
opinion, should have been from 16 to 23 yards. 
lhe right to hold an opinion cannot be controverted. 
But opinion is not proof. 
(2) The programme set forth 
yards.” 
In respect to this point, the fair editress, in accepting 
the interpretation of the “‘dissatisfied,”’ is in error, As 
this is ostensibly the crux of the whole discussion, we 
“handicaps 16 to 23 
will treat it fully. : 
But first of all, let us consider the true meaning of 
the word “handicap,” for it is sharply clear that the 
handicap committee and that vague body, the ‘‘dis- 
satisfied,” interpret it quite differently, Webster de- 
fines “handicap,” in this specific relation, as follows: 
“(2) A race, for horses or men, or any contest of 
agility, strength or skill, in which there is an allowance 
ot time, distance, weight or other advantage, to equalize 
the chances of the competitors.” 

Please keep in mind that the qualifying clause, 
“equalize the chances,’’ is dominating and important. 
Handicap is inseparable from equity in practice. A 
handicapper who would arrogate the power to put arbi- 
trarily a contestant on a mark further back than the 

MANUFACTURED BY 
LOWELL, MASS., U. S. A. 
contestant’s skill warranted, ceases to be a handicapper. 
He thereby ejects the contestant from the competition, 
and becomes a lawless ejector instead of a handicapper. 
The handicapper and the ejector are two distinct 
capacities, yet, the affirmative of this discussion assumes 
that, under the rules, there is such double capacity in 
the committee. If a handicapper shouid abandon the 
matter of equity much or little, he accordingly arrogates 
to himself powers not compatible with the honest ex- 
ercise of his office and wanders into an unlimited realm 
of fancy. The Interstate Association, nor any other as- 
sociation, would not make a rule which violates a 
natural law of what is just. 
Human nature, among trapshooters, however, is the 
same old and good human nature of the people at 
large. There are many true gentlemen who are devotees 
of trapshooting, and there are some who have the ex- 
ternals of manhood and gentility, but who also have 
the inward grace of homeless shoats. 
The common sense allotment of the limitations, ‘“‘handi- 
caps 16 to 23 yards,’’ was not at all limited to the com- 
mittee of 1907. <All prior committees had a concurrence 
of interpretation on that point. Such was according to 
the intent of the Interstate Association itself. It was 
according to the understanding of the public at large. 
It was according to the necessities of the case. ‘Thus 
the usage of years oppose the contentions of the ‘‘dis- 
satisfied.’” In years bygone, nearly every live-bird shoot, 
that of the Grand American Handicap at live birds in- 
cluded, had the following handicap limitations: 25 to 
33 yards. But the 33-yard mark was never used in the 
Grand American Handicap. Why? Because the handi- 
cappers so decreed. The Interstate Association never 
demurred thereat. The latter body was represented at 
the handicap committee meetings by their able manager, 
Elmer E, Shaner. No one will deny that Mr. Shaner 
knows the rules. No one will deny that he knows the 
principles of the rules in every particular. No one wiil 
deny that, if a rule was violated, he would object to 
the violation instantly. This interpretatiun was uniform 
till the discovery of the ‘‘dissatished’ of 1907, which in 
substance holds that to expel is the same as_ to 
handicap. 

But let us examine the records which show why the 
committees of 1906 and 1907 were averse to the 22 and 
23-yard mark. 
‘the first Interstate Association handicap at targets 
was held in 1500. 
‘Lhe conditions were ‘14 to 25 yards.” 
According to the 
“dissatisfied’’ of 1907, the handicappers 
should have used all the marks specified. The back 
mark was 23 yards with the following results: Fanning 
80, Elliott 78. Heikes scored 91 from 22 yards and won 
the handicap. His fellow shooters on the 22-yard mark 
were Crosby, 84; Leroy, 80; Fulford, 77. 
The limitations, “14 to 25 yards” also 
1901, 1902 and 1903, but that extreme back 
never used. 
In 1904, the Association changed the limit to 22 yards. 
It was so made for the express reason that the handi- 
cappers did not use a greater distance. 
prevailed in 
distance was 
Armory 

all others. 
COo., 
114-116 Market St., San Francisco. 
DARAADARARABELIAN 

the handicappers. Re- 
In 1901, 22 yards was used by 
suits: Glover, 86; Heikes, 84; Gilbert, 85; Crosby, 87. 
they thus were hardly within hailing distance of the 
winner, E. C. Griffith, who won from 19 yards with a 
score of 95, 
In 1902, it was 22 yards again. What was the re- 
sult? Crosby, 78; Heikes, 74. 
At 21 yards the results were: Elliott, 79; Phil, 76; 
Squier, 87; Hirschy, 78; Griffith, 79. Let us note 
therewith that two yards handicap made a difference of 
16 targets between Griffith’s score of 1901 and 1902. 
In 1903, the members of the committee were renowned 
shooters exclusively, and of course were better equipped 
to make handicaps than were the sporting press 
attaches—so they adopted 23 yards, with results as follows: 
Crosby, 81; Gilbert, 88. Diefenderfer won with a score 
of 94. The 90's, 89’s and 88’s won $36 each. At 22 yards, 
good 


Garrett broke 82; Hirschy, 86; Hughes, 91. 
In 1904, there was a return to 22 yards. The results 
were: Gilbert, 90; Crosby, 84. 
At 21 yards, Elliott, 88; Heer, 
89; Powers, 93. 
Hirschy, 87; Young, 86; 

Guptill scored 96 in 1904 and won. Any score less 
than 91 was not in the money, yet that score in 1900 
won the handicap. 
In 1905, 22 yards again was the back mark. Crosby, 
94; Heer, 92; Powers, 938; Gilbert, 91; Young, 92. ‘The 
93’s were not in the money. Barber won with s, 
‘Lhe $4’s received $3.80. 
In 1906 the committee made 21 yards the back mark. 
Results: Crosby, $0; Spencer, ; Heer, 91. Sixteen 
shot on the 20-yard mark, in 1906, and none of them 
scored 90 or better, excepting 
scored 91. 
Taylor and Morrison, who 
Rogers scored 94 and won, 
It will be noted that the contestants on the back 
mark, those on 20 yards and more, had far from an 
even chance with the nearer contestants, in the handi- 
caps of the Interstate Association. Owing to misjudg- 
ment, there was not therefore uniform equity that 
should have been established, one mark with another. 
This review will clearly illustrate why at Chicago the 
writer advocated 20 yards as the back mark. It has 
been repeatedly and clearly -demonstrated that gun and 
man, back of 20 yards, have not an equitable chance 
in the competition. 
It is entirely irrelevant to force into the 
that a gun will, with more or less certainty break tar 
gets from 40 yards, or more. We are now considering 
inseparable factors, that is, the gun and man, the 10 
targets and the conditions. 
Now let us further consider 
to serve on the _ handicap 
discussion 
that the 
committee, 
men, appointed 
were always 
specially selected because of what was considered their 
special fitness. 
After observing that 23 yards and 22 yards over-taxed 
the back-mark men, as handicappers of integrity, what 
should they do? Put the experts still further back? No. 
It will be noted that the 23-yard mark was not used at 
any handicap of the Association, east, west, north and 
south this year. 

