Up Coming Rule and By-Law Changes 2023

PRC #2

Current Wording:
Rule:

REQUIREMENT 3 – CHARTER/STATE INFORMATION
Section A – State Championship Play

3. Residency

State Championship Tournaments are open only to those NHPA members who legally reside in
that State and meet the regular eligibility requirements imposed for the event. An exception to
this shall be active-duty members of the U.S. Armed Forces and their immediate family (if
married) who may pitch in the State Championship event of any State in which they are
stationed/reside, provided they meet the other eligibility requirements of that Charter. No one
will be allowed to pitch in more than one State Championship Tournament per year.

Proposal:
REQUIREMENT 3 – CHARTER/STATE INFORMATION

Section A – State Championship Play
3. Residency Eligibility

“State Championship Tournaments are open to those NHPA Members who meet the residency
eligibility requirements imposed for the event by the State Charter. An exception to this shall be
active-duty members of the U.S. Armed Forces and their immediate family (if married) who may
pitch in the State Championship event of any State in which they are stationed/reside, provided
they meet the other eligibility requirements of that the
Charter. No one will be allowed to pitch in more than one State Championship Tournament per
year.

Rationale:
There are several reasons this adjustment for State Tournament eligibility should be made. The
advent of eShoe allows anyone from any location to join any charter of their choosing, regardless
of any residency definitions. Additionally, individuals in neighboring states may geographically
have greater proximity and/or social-community connectivity to a charter not of their home state,
including snowbirds who reside in two states (or more) for several months of the year. There is a
history of NHPA granting such exceptions extending 3-4 decades in some instances. Rather than
the NHPA dictating to the charters who may and may not participation in their state
championship, this change codifies that the charters set all eligibility requirements to participate
in their respective state tournaments.
PRC #3
Rule 11; Section D; 1:

Current Wording:
1. No Current Average – Any contestant without a current ringer average at their pitching
distance shall pitch a minimum of one hundred (100) consecutive shoes on a sanctioned court to
establish their tournament seeding percentage. This qualifying must be scored in writing and
witnessed by two (2) NHPA members no more than thirty (30) days prior to the entry deadline.
Note: This 100-shoe qualifier is not a sanctioned event. Alternately, NHPA Sanctioned League
ringer percentage averages may be used if they are based on one hundred (100) or more shoes.

Proposed Wording:
1. No Current Average – Any contestant without a current ringer average at their pitching
distance shall pitch a minimum of one hundred (100) consecutive shoes on a sanctioned court to
establish their tournament seeding percentage. This qualifying must be scored in writing and
witnessed by two (2) one (1) NHPA members no more than thirty (30) days prior to the entry
deadline. Note: This 100-shoe qualifier is not a sanctioned event. Alternately, NHPA Sanctioned
League ringer percentage averages may be used if they are based on one hundred (100) or more
shoes.

Reasoning:
I would change from two NHPA players viewing to one (1) on the hundred shoe toss. Even if the
stats were fudged, it would only affect the players first tournament.

PRC #4
Under “III Guideline”, “Section A Regular Doubles”

Current Wording:
Section A – Regular Doubles

In regular doubles, both team members use the same pair of shoes and all contestants stay at the
same end of the court for the entire game. To begin the game, the highest-rated contestants will
decide on the first pitch and pitch their shoes, just as in singles competition. Their partners, at the
opposite end, will decide on and call the score, retrieve the shoes, and pitch them back following
the same procedure. The decision on who pitches first in each inning depends upon the scoring
system being used, following the rules of singles play. A single score sheet should be used that
clearly shows the ringers and shoes pitched by all contestants.

Proposed Wording:
Section A – Regular Doubles

In regular doubles, both team members use the same pair of shoes and all contestants stay at the
same end of the court for the entire game. To begin the game, the tournament director will
determine who starts the pitching and how the pitching rotation continues. the highest-rated
contestants will decide on the first pitch and pitch their shoes, just as in singles competition.
Their partners, at the opposite end, will decide on and call the score, retrieve the shoes, and pitch
them back following the same procedure. The decision on who pitches first in each inning
depends upon the scoring system being used, following the rules of singles play. A single score
sheet should be used that clearly shows the ringers and shoes pitched by all contestants.

PRC #5
 
Under “III Guideline”, “Section B Walking Doubles, 1. Shoe-limit games”

Current wording:
Section B – Walking Doubles

In walking doubles, all contestants will pitch their own shoes. A single score sheet should be
used that clearly shows the ringers and shoes pitched by all contestants. 1. Shoe-limit Games –
The lower-rated contestants will decide on the first pitch and pitch their four (4) shoes. The
higher-rated pitchers will then pitch their four (4) shoes and all pitchers will then walk to the
opposite end, decide on the scoring, and pick up their shoes. The scores of the highest rated team
should be recorded first and they will also pitch first for the remainder of the game. Which one
of them (and their opponents) pitches first depends upon the scoring system (cancellation or
count-all) being used, following the rules of singles play. This procedure will continue until the
game is over.

Proposed Wording:
Section B – Walking Doubles

In walking doubles, all contestants will pitch their own shoes. A single score sheet should be
used that clearly shows the ringers and shoes pitched by all contestants.

1. Shoe-limit Games – The lower-rated contestants will decide on the first pitch and pitch their
four (4) shoes. The higher-rated pitchers will then pitch their four (4) shoes and all pitchers will
then walk to the opposite end, decide on the scoring, and pick up their shoes. The tournament
director will determine who starts the pitching and how the pitching rotation continues. The
pitchers at both ends will pitch their four shoes and then walk to the other end and decide the
scoring and pick up their shoes. The scores of the highest rated team should be recorded first
and they will also pitch first for the remainder of the game. Which one of them (and their
opponents) pitches first depends upon the scoring system (cancellation or count-all) being used,
following the rules of singles play. This procedure will continue until the game is over.
PRC #6
 
Under “III Guideline”, “Section B Walking Doubles, 2. Point-limit games”

Current Wording:
The tournament director will determine who starts the pitching and how the pitching rotation
continues. The higher-rated contestants will decide on the first pitch and pitch their four (4)
shoes. The lower-rated contestants will determine the scoring for these shoes. The partner of the
pitcher who scores (or the partner of the contestant who pitched last, in case of a no-score
situation) will call or record the score and will pitch first in the next inning. All pitchers will now
walk to the opposite end. The highest-rated contestants will pick up their shoes (already scored)
and step back. The scoring of the last four (4) shoes pitched will be determined and called or
recorded. The contestant calling the score always pitches first. This procedure is continued until
the game is over. For safety or other reasons, the Tournament/League Officials may select an
alternative walking sequence, as long as the scoring sequence remains the same.
Proposed Wording:
Section B – Walking Doubles

2. Point-limit Games –

The tournament director will determine who starts the pitching and how the pitching rotation
continues. The higher-rated contestants will decide on the first pitch and pitch their four (4)
shoes. The lower-rated contestants will determine the scoring for these shoes. The partner of the
pitcher who scores (or the partner of the contestant who pitched last, in case of a no-score
situation) will call or record the score and will pitch first in the next inning. All pitchers will now
walk to the opposite end. The highest-rated contestants will pick up their shoes (already scored)
and step back. The scoring of the last four (4) shoes pitched will be determined and called or
recorded. The contestant calling the score always pitches first. This procedure is continued until
the game is over. For safety or other reasons, the Tournament/League Officials may select an
alternative walking sequence, as long as the scoring sequence remains the same.

Reasoning:
The reason for the above changes is that The NHPA does not need to suggest who pitches first in
doubles.
PRC #7
 
Under “Requirement 1 – Tournament/League”, “2. During the Event.”

Add a second line to “a.”
“Leagues can pitch non-members as pacers to encourage new players to participate.”

PRC #8
 
Under “Requirements 2 – All NHPA Tournaments/Leagues”, “Section B”

After the word “Pacers” add:
“except in league play where non-members can be used as pacers”

Reasoning:
The reason for these changes is to allow non-members a chance to pitch and participate and
perhaps
join the NHPA.

PBC #1

By-Law changes

Under “Article IV: Executive Council”, “Section 3. Meetings”, “c.”

Add before the word “or”, “Electronic Meetings”
… by any means available

Reason:
Just the modern way we do things.
PBC #2

Under “Article V: Officers; SECTION 5:

Current Wording:
All NHPA positions listed above in section 3 (a-f), who attend the World Tournament will
receive a travel allowance in accordance with the current Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
guide of the NHPA. Those with dual responsibilities receive only one travel allowance.

Proposed Wording:
Replace the whole section with:

“All NHPA positions listed above in Section 3 (a-f) who attend the World Tournament may
request a travel allowance in accordance with the current Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
of the NHPA. The President, with council approval, has full authority to grant a request, modify
the request, or deny the request. Those with dual responsibilities receive only one travel
allowance.”

Reason:
It was never intended to be open to any position without regards to WT duties.
PBC #3

Current wording:
SECTION 8. Terms of office

a. All officers shall serve a three-year term.

Proposed wording:
SECTION 8. Terms of office

a. All officers shall serve a three-year term.

ADD
b. All officers shall serve a maximum of three (3) consecutive elected terms.

Footnote: Those currently in office shall go retro beginning the first year they were elected in
office.

Rationale:
Our officer team is the head of our organization. Our organization is struggling to keep
membership and have more involved players. This gives members a chance to become more
involved. The sayings “incumbents are almost NEVER beat” or “why should I run against an
incumbent, they will win” is no longer an excuse. Having these terms limits put the organization
back in the memberships hands and give a voice to those wanting to take the leap to become
officers but not strong enough to run against someone with experience. We need change at the
top. It is the epiphany of insanity to “do the same thing over and over and expect different
results.” We elect the same officers each three years and expect different results. Some of our
officers have been in for almost 10 years and we are expecting different results and have not seen
numerical growth or added value. Even in US politics there are term limits for our President and
elected officials. We should be taking matters into our own hands as members and giving the
opportunity for a fresh voice to come in and serve us.
(Continued on Page 11)
PBC #4
 
Article V; Section 8

Add:
F. All Officers who have been elected to an NHPA officer position three consecutive times may
not run for that office until after one election cycle for that position has been completed. If
they were appointed to the position, they may not run after a third Elected consecutive term.
They may not be appointed back into that position in either of these circumstances.

PBC #5
 
By Laws; Article III; Section 7

Current Wording:
SECTION 7. A membership card must be issued by the Charter in which the member maintains
legal residence as determined by the filing of federal and state tax returns, voting, and/or driver
license laws. Charters collecting NHPA dues for a non-residence member should give only a
receipt, and then forward the dues and address information to the NHPA Secretary-Treasurer
who will advise the Charter of record. Residents of a State having no active Charter may become
an NHPA member by sending their dues directly to
the NHPA Secretary/Treasurer.

Proposed Wording:
SECTION 7. A membership card can be issued by eShoe or the Charter in which the member
maintains legal residence as determined by the filing of federal and state tax returns or voting.
and/or driver license laws. The NHPA Executive Council can grant exceptions to the residency
rule on a case by case basis following established council guidelines. Charters collecting NHPA
dues for a non-residence member should give only a receipt, and then forward the dues and
address information to the NHPA Secretary-Treasurer who will advise the Charter of record.
Residents of a State having no active Charter may become an NHPA member by sending their
dues directly to the NHPA Secretary/Treasurer.

Reasoning:

There are some cases in which the residency rule doesn’t make sense. There is an elder who
resides in Texas for 6 months and has his legal residency there for tax purposes. He plays no
sanction horseshoe in Texas but plays all of his tournaments and leagues in his home state. He
should be allowed to buy his membership card in that state where he plays, and play in that state
tournament. Another case is a player who lives very near the border of a state and pitches all of
their horseshoes across the state line because there is no horseshoe activity where they live.
These situations are already happening and folks see that it’s common sense and it is not
questioned. However, there are some small minded folks out there that will press this issue to the
letter of the Bylaws and that is why I feel that the NHPA council should have the authority to

grant exceptions to this requirement.