J
JackieStogsdill
Guest
Keith, it has been a long time since I shot 300, so I am not sure about the clicks. With a 1/8 click scope I am thinking 18-20 clicks. That should get you close enough to dial it on in.
Gulf Coast Region Proposal For Slight Change In Varmint For Score
- Thread starter jackie schmidt
- Start date
Dick Grosbier
Club Coordinator
Whatever it takes to go from 100 to 200 (usually 7 or 8 clicks) it is just about double that to 300 on all my 30 BR's .
Dick
Dick
I think Jerry Hensler hit the nail on the head, as he so often does. The NBRSA has an opportunity to fix a problem that has plagued IBS score shooting for years. The target is too big.
A fix by the NBRSA would occasion one logistical problem -- a different target would be needed for the Hunter class, unless those kind souls would be willing to retire the old records and begin anew. Not likely.
Actually, Long Range IBS has fixed the problem. There are few 50s or 100s (10 shot matches) shot. The 600 yard Long Range target is smaller than the 300 yard point-blank target.
i have a thought -- instead of using the Creedmore method, ties should be decided by the offhand score. That is how we resolved all the 20X-200 prone scores in 4-position NRA smallbore back in the late 1950s. Then we used the 50-meter ISU targets a bit. Wow, We weren't as perfect as we all thought. Our hats began to fit again. I stopped shooting NRA 4 position soon after, but I'm told they did finally change the target.
A fix by the NBRSA would occasion one logistical problem -- a different target would be needed for the Hunter class, unless those kind souls would be willing to retire the old records and begin anew. Not likely.
Actually, Long Range IBS has fixed the problem. There are few 50s or 100s (10 shot matches) shot. The 600 yard Long Range target is smaller than the 300 yard point-blank target.
i have a thought -- instead of using the Creedmore method, ties should be decided by the offhand score. That is how we resolved all the 20X-200 prone scores in 4-position NRA smallbore back in the late 1950s. Then we used the 50-meter ISU targets a bit. Wow, We weren't as perfect as we all thought. Our hats began to fit again. I stopped shooting NRA 4 position soon after, but I'm told they did finally change the target.
C
caroby
Guest
Grey,
TOTALLY agree with your posts..... FVS is TOUGH............ As opposed to Group shoots, """one CAN NOT come back in the Agg"""
Once a dropped point.......... DONE and no come back @ 100, though there is a "chance" of "come back" @ 200 for a dropped point but generally not.....
Leave rules as is and NBRSA adopt the two additional sighter rings on 100/200 targets.
cale
A
abintx
Guest
Cale ...
No need for additional sighter rings. I shoot for the center of the small "S" [that little red line in the very center of the S] on both sides of the larger sighter. I save the larger sighter for when I absolutely need it.
No need for additional sighter rings. I shoot for the center of the small "S" [that little red line in the very center of the S] on both sides of the larger sighter. I save the larger sighter for when I absolutely need it.
JerrySharrett
Senile Member
JerrySharrett
Senile Member
If someone would like to do a test on the efficacy of smaller targets at a club match, just use the 50-foot rimfire target, or one of the 50-yard rimfire benchrest targets at 100 yards. If 10s become significant, it would be evidence that smaller targets would help. I did propose this for a Rockingham club match, but the guy running it worried people might complain.
If nobody's got the hutzpah to run a full match with a smaller target, It could be tried as an extra target after a regular match. Anything to get some notion on whether or not changing the 10 ring could be a factor.
For those who think people will only come if it is easy, what does that say about us Americans? I was raised to believe that for a country to succeed, people had to work, and not be afraid of setbacks as long as there was some hope of eventual success.
If nobody's got the hutzpah to run a full match with a smaller target, It could be tried as an extra target after a regular match. Anything to get some notion on whether or not changing the 10 ring could be a factor.
For those who think people will only come if it is easy, what does that say about us Americans? I was raised to believe that for a country to succeed, people had to work, and not be afraid of setbacks as long as there was some hope of eventual success.
pbike
New member
Jackie recently shot a potential world record group aggregate at 100 yards. I have a few questions about that as it relates to this conversation. By what margin did he crush the current world record? As I remember it was a huge margin. Next question, were all 25 of Jackies shots centered in the ten ring and not hitting the lines at all? I haven't seen the targets. What about the previous world record aggregate, how close would it have been to a 250-25x. Now before all you armchair keypad shooters jump on me, I shoot group also and I know you don't aim specifically to get a ten or x in group, and your target is measured for group only and not placement. All I am saying is that group is a different game and it is scored differently, but that it does take a hell of an aggregate to hit 250-25x's and furthermore it takes perfect placement of 25 shots, not just a great group out in the 8 ring. What I am getting to is this, the aggregate that Jackie shot was approimately .1118, but don't be confused in saying that group aggregates near .11's are shot regularly, the prior record is a .13, is that to say.13's are shot regularly, no these are recods and they haven't been broken in years. What I see in group is that now and then 14's to .17's are shot on a great day but mostly .18's to .19's win matches. Transfer this thinking to score and would you say 25x's are shot all the time NO. They happen to a great shooter on the right day. And 25 wipe outs have happened to nobody.
Don't fix what isn't broken, the fix that needs to happen is the NBRSA needs to add two ten rings with x's to the sighter target like the ibs adopted a few years ago.
Paul
Don't fix what isn't broken, the fix that needs to happen is the NBRSA needs to add two ten rings with x's to the sighter target like the ibs adopted a few years ago.
Paul
I had some 70% targets made up about 10 years ago for a shoot and run them at the club matches back then. They definately were harder and lots less 250's were shot. That was before the 30 really caught on though. At the time we had a few complaints, mostly from guys that dropped a point. Unfortunately, I still have lots of them. If anyone is really interested, I would part with some for what I have in them. I think they were about the same price as the current targets.
R
rparker
Guest
Jackie
The object of a match is to ID the best shooter. With the current scoring system in VFS (and maybe Hunter class) this is not true. We award a higher point count all the way up to the 10 ring and then if a ”x” is cut you get a tiebreaker. Why not make a “X” count 10 and a “10” count as a 9 and so forth on down. It seems silly that it is possible ( not likely to happen I confess) that a 250/0X will beat a 249/24X. Who was the best shooter that day? If these two scores were scored as I have suggested the 250/0X would be a 225, and the 249/24X would be a 249, and more closely ID the better shooter. It also would keep more shooters in the game even after a single bad shot. Currently after a dropped point you might as well go home as there is no way to come back even with all “Xs” the rest of the day. We place a lot of importance on a “X” so why not score it with points? The current system worked OK for Hunter class when the “Xs” were not so high (with the use of 6X scopes), but today those guys are even getting up there with their great scores.
By the way Jackie, Vic would have won Sunday at Tomball with you 2nd, Carl, Tommy and Russell tied for 3th, and Nick and I tied for 4th. I would have benefited the most going from 9th to a tie for 4th, so it seems to be self serving on my part.
Also I like the idea of more “10” rings in the sighter bull as has been suggested by other shooters. The more the better. Maybe five total? I also think that the black ink would be better for the targets.
Ron
The object of a match is to ID the best shooter. With the current scoring system in VFS (and maybe Hunter class) this is not true. We award a higher point count all the way up to the 10 ring and then if a ”x” is cut you get a tiebreaker. Why not make a “X” count 10 and a “10” count as a 9 and so forth on down. It seems silly that it is possible ( not likely to happen I confess) that a 250/0X will beat a 249/24X. Who was the best shooter that day? If these two scores were scored as I have suggested the 250/0X would be a 225, and the 249/24X would be a 249, and more closely ID the better shooter. It also would keep more shooters in the game even after a single bad shot. Currently after a dropped point you might as well go home as there is no way to come back even with all “Xs” the rest of the day. We place a lot of importance on a “X” so why not score it with points? The current system worked OK for Hunter class when the “Xs” were not so high (with the use of 6X scopes), but today those guys are even getting up there with their great scores.
By the way Jackie, Vic would have won Sunday at Tomball with you 2nd, Carl, Tommy and Russell tied for 3th, and Nick and I tied for 4th. I would have benefited the most going from 9th to a tie for 4th, so it seems to be self serving on my part.
Also I like the idea of more “10” rings in the sighter bull as has been suggested by other shooters. The more the better. Maybe five total? I also think that the black ink would be better for the targets.
Ron
Dan H
New member
Paul, I agree whole heartedly, you got a lot of people that want to fix something before it even gets started in the NBRSA, you have people that have never shot score, probably never will because none is shot in their local that want to get a dog in this fight.
L
longrange223
Guest
smaller targets just won't work well,people don't like to shoot them if they can't shoot a 250,look at the usrb centerfire target,it's a great target to shoot & really challenging,it's been tried several places & nobody likes it because they can't shoot a 250,on it the 10 ring is .100 & has to be wiped out to be scored an x,if it didn't work for usbr i can't see it working for nbrsa
Well, if that's the goal, why don't we make the targets really big? That way, everybody can shoot perfectly. The resulting tie can be broken by something else -- Coca-Cola chugging, largest belly, prettiest dog, whatever.
W
wolf gray
Guest
I think the challenge to become a better shooter is "where it's at". I like Jackies idea, but if we have to go to a bigger target I think the "prettiest dog" idea has some potential.
Best,
Dan Batko
"Where are we going and why am I in this basket?"
333smitty
Tomball Gun Club
5-10 Ring Sighter Bull
I'm with you Ron,
I also would woud like to see 5-10 rings in the sighter bull.
I'm with you Ron,
I also would woud like to see 5-10 rings in the sighter bull.