His chances would be even less than shooting a 30 in a group match and being scored with a 20 cal reticle. Only 5 targets to measure in a group match, but in score you get the diameter advantage on each shot. I wonder how long before a even larger caliber will take over because of the flawed rules. Im not trying to ruffle any feathers its just the way I see it. Im done. Dave
Dave, your point is well taken - please do not take this as a personal affront - it's just an opportunity to defend tradition.
Where were those Championing smaller bullet diameter(s), one-size-fits-all reticles, etc., while the 6MM was king, but before the thirties proved their worth, and trumped the 6MMs?? The answer to THAT is, ZERO!
Prior to Jim Goody (THREE Consecutive SOY awards, PLUS Y2K National VfS CHAMPION), shooting a, "full-blown Hunter Rifle chambering" (30 JAG) in VfS and dominating for three consecutive seasons, one was either an idiot, a fool, or, both for shooting anything other than a 6PPC . . . nobody cared a whit about smaller calibers - not even the old faitful .224.
Within, the rules, nothing changed. Without equal precision, the [so called] 30 caliber "advantage" CANNOT be exploited!
And if you'd attended the IA State Group event, you'd have seen that the 30s held their own . . . but, as usual, that was probably just a fluke!
Throughout this discussion, is the insinuation that somehow, the scoring system is "flawed" or, lacking. However at Group tournaments/events, the winner is often determined by a statistacially insignificant and UNMEASURABLE "score" - by default, both the IBS and NBRSA rule books agree that groups cannot be measured anymore precisely than +/- 0.009": when a protest is envoked, the amount necessary to have the scorer's group measurement changed.
Many tournaments are won/lost by lesser amounts! Somehow, this glitch goes conveniently ignored, or worse, assumed to be pristine!
Further, I hear no similar peal, to revamp the scoring (Methods/tools) during group events, to a system which would produce a more statistically meaningful result. During group events, the REAL winner is often incorrectly determined/dumped because of one errant shot! Measuring the largest spread is a pittiful measurement of dispersion: Sd, based upon group-center, would be much more meaningful - where's all the noise for THAT?
The normal answer is, "we know that" . . . Please, come and play before demanding change.
Is one discipline better or, worse than the other? I think not - they present differing challenges, strategies, and methods of measuring the apptitude and skills of competitors using, essentially, the same equipment. Neither is perfect.
Both have a following. As sanctioned under IBS rules, VfS is a GREAT recruiting tool - the scoring is very easily understood and readily accepted by newcomers! Again, to date, it's the best I've seen.
Worth repeating: the ten-ring is quite ample - shame on anyone for missing it - regardless of how many Xes are compiled it's sudden death. We know THAT!
RG
