A Synopsis on the Score Discussions.

jackie schmidt

jackie schmidt

New member
So, here is what we have learned concerning The institution of Varmint for Score as a Sanctioned, (Registered), Competition in the NBRSA.

Best Edge Scoring:
This is what is currently used in HBR and IBS Varmint for Score Competition. The pros are, everybody knows the game, it is "user friendly", and easy to score. The most complicated item a Scorer needs is a reticle to check any doubtful shots. Also, since this is already an established Format, about all the clubs would have to do is decide to hold a Match.
The one drawback to worst edge scoring is that in favors a larger caliber bullet over a smaller.

Worst Edge Scoring:
This is just the opposite to Best Edge. The single biggest drawback to Worst Edge Scoring is that, like Best Edge, it also is caliber sensitive, favoring the smallest bullet instead of the larger. In a Discipline where everybody shoots the same diameter bullet, (ie, ARA Rimfire), this is a moot point. It was suugested that The NBRSA could institute a caliber restriction, but the discussion determined that this would be counterproductive to the overall goal of bringing in new shooters, as well as possibly forcing the vast majority of current shooters to build something to suite.

Center of Target to Center of Bullet Scoring:
This is the only one where the diameter of the bullet does not matter as far as the scoring is concerned. The shooter is free to shoot the most accurate combination available with no regard to how big a hole the bullet punches in the target. The drawback is the logistics of measuring each individule bullseye individulally, and then tallying the 5 scores for that target sheet. Perhaps this could be overcome with a quicker and faster maeasuring system.

I talked to Scott Hunter today, (the Gulf Coast Region Director), and he has been in discussion with others concerning all three of these systems. At this time he favors, (as do I), presenting our proposal utilizing the current target and "best edge scoring" so that at the very least, Varmint for Score can become a Registered Competition in the NBRSA.

In Short, the NBRSA Proposal says: Varmint for score will be instituted as a Sanctioned Event, using the current target and scoring system that is used in NBRSA Hunters Rifle Competition. Any Rifle that is legal to be used in NBRSA Class Heavy Varmint will be legal in Varmint for Score. All other rules pertaining to NBRSA Class Heavy Varmint will be in affect........jackie
 
Last edited:
jackie schmidt said:
So, here is what we have learned concerning The institution of Varmint for Score as a Sanctioned, (Registered), Competition in the NBRSA.

Best Edge Scoring:
This is what is currently used in HBR and IBS Varmint for Score Competition. The pros are, everybody knows the game, it is "user friendly", and easy to score. The most complicated item a Scorer needs is a reticle to check any doubtful shots. Also, since this is already an established Format, about all the clubs would have to do is decide to hold a Match.
The one drawback to worst edge scoring is that in favors a larger caliber bullet over a smaller.

Worst Edge Scoring:
This is just the opposite to Best Edge. The single biggest drawback to Worst Edge Scoring is that, like Best Edge, it also is caliber sensitive, favoring the smallest bullet instead of the larger. In a Discipline where everybody shoots the same diameter bullet, (ie, ARA Rimfire), this is a moot point. It was suugested that The NBRSA could institute a caliber restriction, but the discussion determined that this would be counterproductive to the overall goal of bringing in new shooters, as well as possibly forcing the vast majority of current shooters to build something to suite.

Center of Target to Center of Bullet Scoring:
This is the only one where the diameter of the bullet does not matter as far as the scoring is concerned. The shooter is free to shoot the most accurate combination available with no regard to how big a hole the bullet punches in the target. The drawback is the logistics of measuring each individule bullseye individulally, and then tallying the 5 scores for that target sheet. Perhaps this could be overcome with a quicker and faster maeasuring system.

I talked to Scott Hunter today, (the Gulf Coast Region Director), and he has been in discussion with others concerning all three of these systems. At this time he favors, (as do I), presenting our proposal utilizing the current target and "best edge scoring" so that at the very least, Varmint for Score can become a Registered Competition in the NBRSA.

In Short, the NBRSA Proposal says: Varmint for score will be instituted as a Sanctioned Event, using the current target and scoring system that is used in NBRSA Hunters Rifle Competition. Any Rifle that is legal to be used in NBRSA Class Heavy Varmint will be legal in Varmint for Score. All other rules pertaining to NBRSA Class Heavy Varmint will be in affect........jackie
Click to expand...




"Best Edge Scoring:
This is what is currently used in HBR and IBS Varmint for Score Competition. The pros are, everybody knows the game, it is "user friendly", and easy to score. The most complicated item a Scorer needs is a reticle to check any doubtful shots. Also, since this is already an established Format, about all the clubs would have to do is decide to hold a Match.
The one drawback to worst edge scoring is that in favors a larger caliber bullet over a smaller."



I think you mean best here......

Why does the current NBRSA proposal to sanction Score shooting preclude the LV gun??? If both claases of gun were included a 2 gun affair could be had. Just wondering why??
David
 
Jackie ...

jackie schmidt said:
I talked to Scott Hunter today, (the Gulf Coast Region Director), and he has been in discussion with others concerning all three of these systems. At this time he favors, (as do I), presenting our proposal utilizing the current target and "best edge scoring" so that at the very least, Varmint for Score can become a Registered Competition in the NBRSA.

In Short, the NBRSA Proposal says: Varmint for score will be instituted as a Sanctioned Event, using the current target and scoring system that is used in NBRSA Hunters Rifle Competition. Any Rifle that is legal to be used in NBRSA Class Heavy Varmint will be legal in Varmint for Score. All other rules pertaining to NBRSA Class Heavy Varmint will be in affect..jackie
Click to expand...

Sounds great! I've enjoyed VFS at the club level and would surely look forward to competing in it at the Registered bracket if adopted. Thanks for your interest, commitment, and drive, and all contributions to the proposal presentation. Good luck! Art :)
 
David

The second half of our Gulf Coast Region Meeting will take place at Midland in two weeks, I am going to propose that we do indeed submitt our proposal as "LV-HV" so that clubs can shoot Varmint for Score as a Two Gun Event, just like in Group.

We will see how it goes.........jackie
 
You left one option out Jackie

and I think it’s the best option for both NBRSA and IBS.

No edge, dead center scoring, using a reticle or a plug that determines the shot center by using the next larger (evenly spaced) ring as the reference.

All you need is one scoring reticle scribed for all three calibers, and an outer scribed ring that would show if the shot “center” was in or out.

No extra effort at all for the club or target scorer, it would take no longer than it does now to score a target, and the “vast majority” of “varmint” calibers group shooters use would fit right in using something capable of earning HOF points at group match….

If someone can find a flaw with this system I’d be interested in hearing it.
 
Jj

It will have to be proposed during the discussion portion of the National BOD Meeting. Scott Hunter feels that what we should strive for at this time to get Varmint for Score in with as little controversy as possible.

Please keep in mind, this is not like a simple equipment change, such as allowing the use of tuners. This will be the sanctioning of an entire new course of fire, with a new class structure.

Nobody said it will be easy. I suggest you contact your Region Director and discuss the matter with him............jackie
 
Thanks Jackie,
I’m sure David will read this threads when he gets back from Webster City, if he hasn’t already.
It’s not far from here and I thought about going over just to pet Max (the windflag shadow chasing dog) and to listen to some of the discussion that’s bound to happen on the subject. But there’s a conflicting USBR rimfire score match I’m going to tomorrow.
I did shoot the IBS score target again with our previous director a couple of weeks ago (at a club that used to hold registered group matches) and he suggested going to the IBS nats, but I really think he just want to see me be eaten alive LOL.

These open discussions generate ideas and get them out to a lot of people, not just RD‘s. Someone out there may have the perfect solution but is hesitant to share it on an open forum. I hope not, there has to be a way to shoot (centerfire) score fairly.
 
Maybe a practical compromise

..would be scoring each shot as the average of best and worst edge scoring.

A shot well inside the 10 ring is a 10 with either method, so then it is given a 10.

A shot inside, but partially out of the 10 ring, it is scored as a 9.5 (10 best edge, 9 worst edge, 9.5 average).

In this form, the 30's will have an advantage to turn a shot outside the 10 ring into a 9.5.
And the 6's will have an advantage of not dropping their score on a shot inside the 10 ring but just borderline.

For X's, no solution that I can see if it were to remain a 1/8" dot.

However the X could be elimnated all together, and instead the 10 could be reduced to a 0.5" circle for instance. With this method to get a 10 the shot has to be an almost dead center punch. Many X's today will not make it into a 10 then.

George
 
Off the top of my head, I really like George's idea. It seems a simple way to approximate Olympic scoring, where each shot is, in effect, measured from dead perfect. But I imagine the Olympic electronic targets are far too expensive for us.

Id retain the X dot, at least, at first. Even with the graduated scoring, it might be needed to break numeric ties.

The larger picture about score shooting needs to be remembers, too. I'm sure the fully committed score shooters are just like the fully committed group shooters. Drive whatever distance. Put up with whatever hardships. Spend what it takes.

But the sport of Benchrest is best served if the slightly less committed are served as well. I don't mean the "I'll quit if I don't get my way, don't shoot a perfect score," whatever. We don't need to attract these kind of people, and we sure don't need to try & hold on to the few that stumble in.

But there are a fair number of us who can't/won't take at least one day of work, spend the money on lodging and meals, etc., to shoot a group match. Put another way, I will take a day -- sometimes two -- off to shoot a group match, but I'll only do that a few times a year.

Score is a different proposition. If I can get up around 4:30 A.M., travel to the match, shoot, & get home by 8:00 P.M. & have the next day to rest up, I can shoot a lot more matches.

(We could have such as group matches, but I doubt it'll happen).

Score matches are easier for the host club, too. No moving backers needed.

I realize this is all old news, but think it *should* be part of the decision process at the NBRSA directors meeting. Score matches are going to be a factor, whether they are offered by only the IBS or both IBS and NBRSA. Yes, they will detract from group matches, but probably not as much as people worry about. And they will offer more opportunities for the shooters who can't/wont' afford the long weekend group matches, but are at some level the backbone of benchrest.

Charles Ellertson
 
Re Scoring...

I caution, what I write here comes from years of shooting experience but none as a competitor in centerfire score shooting (there isn't any around here) so take it with a grain of salt and purely as a suggestion of a concept.

This past year I have started shooting in AGBR matches. After 58 years of shooting rimfire (both score and position competition) and centerfire, AGBR (score shooting) is a whole new learning experience for me. One of the key things I learned is that the founders of AGBR came up with what I think is a clever solution to scoring when allowing different calibers to be used in matches and that is a stepped plug (my own terminology?) to score best edge... By stepped plug, I'm referring to a plug with a pilot for one caliber and a scoring shoulder that is a standardized diameter based on largest caliber used.

Plugs used for AGBR scoring have one body or shoulder diameter for the largest caliber allowed and the pilot shank of various plugs is to fit the caliber of the hole in the target based on caliber of the gun used. In the case of AGBR, calibers are .177, .20, and .22 and the scoring shoulder or major diameter of all plugs is between .223"-.224" regardless of caliber being plugged. Scoring is based on best edge of the plug, not the edge of the hole which eliminates any advantage of a larger caliber as all scoring is from center of hole regardless of caliber used.

I have also come to realize that pilot diameter of the scoring plug is not critical, it needs to be a good fit in the bullet hole and concentric with the scoring shoulder and nothing more. What this means is that one plug can be used for calibers of similar but not necessarily the exact same dimension due to the way the give of target paper closes back in after the bullet penetrates. End result is the need for a scoring plug for each and every caliber is not necessary, one can probably end up with three or four plugs total to score all calibers used.

It would seem to me this method of scoring would work for centerfire score shooting as well.

Now if I can only convince someone we should have centerfire score matches within driving distance of where I live, my .223 could make me a happy camper...

Happy Shooting Y'all,
Mitch & Shadow...
 
I must say, Mitch and his shadow have an interesting idea there. I assume the same thing could be done with a reticle set up, with a 6mm or .22 ring inside a .30 cal ring, but always score the .30 ring.

Rick Graham
 
Score Perspective

I agree with JJ-IA that center hole scoring is the only fair way to score.I think that the flaw that favors large calibers should be adressed before adopting in the NBRSA. Once any decisions are made they will be very hard to change. If score shooting is adopted I also think some LV matches would make it fairer for the 1 rifle shooter with a LV do it all rifle and make for a fair 2 gun. The way it is now score and group shooters are seldom the same people. A center hole rule would make smaller caliber shooters get a fair shake and I believe there would be more crossovers. Dave
 
All this "fair" talk has me cringing. Its the competitor that must adapt to whatever game he wishes to play. NOT the other way around. The entire reason we have cartridges like the 6PPC and 30BR, as well as the cutting edge equipment to make them shine, is the result of shooters and gunsmiths that are never satisfied. Trying to make any game "fair" for everyone is a sure fire way to loss of interest.
 
Hal D. said:
All this "fair" talk has me cringing. Its the competitor that must adapt to whatever game he wishes to play. NOT the other way around. The entire reason we have cartridges like the 6PPC and 30BR, as well as the cutting edge equipment to make them shine, is the result of shooters and gunsmiths that are never satisfied. Trying to make any game "fair" for everyone is a sure fire way to loss of interest.
Click to expand...

Hal,

FAIR is for the benefit of people shooting heavy recoiling 30’s and sweet little 22’s.
EASY would be limiting “Varmint” for score to the varmint caliber 90+% of all competition shooters use.
Fair & Easy would be no-edge center scoring.
Group may fade completely away some day, do you really want development limited to big heavy recoiling calibers?
 
One final thought before I leave for the day

If VFS is adopted by the NBRSA with the existing IBS rules people purchasing that first rifle for BR will have a big decision to make. Get a 30 so they stand a chance at all those score matches close to home, or get a 6 or maybe a 22 so they stand a chance at winning a big group match. Not everyone has unlimited funds.

Under the existing rules its a very easy decision.
If you see your local match director practicing at the range with a 30, forget shooting group....

When its so easy to fix, "that's just silly". ;)
 
Just an observation that the "stepped plug" idea, if you really think about it, ends up being equivalent to Jackie's "closest to center" idea and would seem to be quicker to score.

I'm not saying that a plug should really be the measuring tool just a common-sized scoring ring ends up being the same as measuring from the center.

It takes some thinking...

Greg J.
 
JJ-IA said:
If VFS is adopted by the NBRSA with the existing IBS rules people purchasing that first rifle for BR will have a big decision to make. Get a 30 so they stand a chance at all those score matches close to home, or get a 6 or maybe a 22 so they stand a chance at winning a big group match. Not everyone has unlimited funds.

Under the existing rules its a very easy decision.
If you see your local match director practicing at the range with a 30, forget shooting group....

When its so easy to fix, "that's just silly". ;)
Click to expand...


Sometimes my simple mind can't tell if someone is writing satire or is really serious. It's got to be satire, because it's too absurd to be serious.

I can't figure out if the people who are proposing all these changes to a game that is so simple, so easy to run and no more expensive to outfit for than anything else, are just arging for arguments sake or if they just haven't thought it through.

VFS matches can be run by one person. Scoring can easily be done between relays by that person. No moving backers are necessary. Targets are readily available. Scoring reticles are inexpensive and available. Matches are shot all the time with .22s and 6mms as well as 30s. Should one wish to keep their current PPC boltface, barrels can be chambered in 30PPC or 30Maj. Shooting group with a PPC and score with some form of 30 is as simple as a barrel swap, if that is what a person wants to do. and BTW- the jury is still out on whether or not a 30 is as accurate as a PPC in the right hands. But in our part of the world there are no registered group shoots within 300 miles anyway.

No person on the planet has mastered VFS. In 14 years there were 28 250-25x scores. I haven't looked it up, but I think there have been two this year. Multiple perfect scores at a match is not exactly a problem. If it becomes a problem, let's work with it then.

Really, the easiest thing for a club that wants to shoot registered benchrest matches would be to sign up with IBS for VFS matches. But then, that's what many of us have already done. If NBRSA wants something easy and simple just follow the model that is working. If they want to create something different, then they can sort through all the wondeful ideas that are out there, work out the differences and in 40-50 years, get back to us and lets us know how it all worked out.

Trying to fix something that is working just fine is what is "silly".
Rick
 
Greyfox said:
wrote in part......

VFS matches can be run by one person. Scoring can easily be done between relays by that person. No moving backers are necessary. Targets are readily available. Scoring reticles are inexpensive and available.

Rick
Click to expand...

Read Rick's words over a few times until it sinks in and the light bulb comes on.

The matches are relatively easy to put on, without huge expense, without a large pit crew. This helps make Score shooting, as currently practiced, readily available to many clubs and shooters.

We were even able to recycle our old shot-to-pieces moving backer frames that had been idled for over 20 years and made them into score target frames! If you have a range you can have a score shoot.

Score is not broken in any way, its , easy to produce, great fun and it is plenty hard enough just like it is now. Why meddle with a winning combination? Going with the way its run now is a no-brainer.
 
Greyfox said:
Sometimes my simple mind can't tell if someone is writing satire or is really serious. It's got to be satire, because it's too absurd to be serious.

I can't figure out if the people who are proposing all these changes to a game that is so simple, so easy to run and no more expensive to outfit for than anything else, are just arging for arguments sake or if they just haven't thought it through.

VFS matches can be run by one person. Scoring can easily be done between relays by that person. No moving backers are necessary. Targets are readily available. Scoring reticles are inexpensive and available. Matches are shot all the time with .22s and 6mms as well as 30s. Should one wish to keep their current PPC boltface, barrels can be chambered in 30PPC or 30Maj. Shooting group with a PPC and score with some form of 30 is as simple as a barrel swap, if that is what a person wants to do. and BTW- the jury is still out on whether or not a 30 is as accurate as a PPC in the right hands. But in our part of the world there are no registered group shoots within 300 miles anyway.

No person on the planet has mastered VFS. In 14 years there were 28 250-25x scores. I haven't looked it up, but I think there have been two this year. Multiple perfect scores at a match is not exactly a problem. If it becomes a problem, let's work with it then.

Really, the easiest thing for a club that wants to shoot registered benchrest matches would be to sign up with IBS for VFS matches. But then, that's what many of us have already done. If NBRSA wants something easy and simple just follow the model that is working. If they want to create something different, then they can sort through all the wondeful ideas that are out there, work out the differences and in 40-50 years, get back to us and lets us know how it all worked out.

Trying to fix something that is working just fine is what is "silly".
Rick
Click to expand...

Yes I’m serious, and I’ve shot both registered C/F group, and R/F score matches.
If you lost your scoring reticle or plug, would it be harder or easier to score a target using center scoring?
Seriously, you should give it a try.
The human mind is very good at precisely finding the center of a hole, maybe that‘s why round targets are so popular(?), but I’m always plugging shots to see if that imaginary caliber diameter edge is touching something.

The quote “that’s just silly” was a impulse comment I made about 15 years ago, when I was choosing a cartridge and my gunsmith gave the IBS VFS rules as another reason for building the 6-ppc over a 22.
Today I’m guessing he’d just ask, are you shooting group or score? In a few more years of using two different bullets for two different forms of BR, he may not need to ask at all.

Note to gunsmith if your reading this: Thanks for making my personal goals come true back then, you‘re tops in my book! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top