Please Read, Another Perspective on "Score Shooting"

[David Halblom]

Finally

All you'd need is a moving backer system and you could have a Group tournament.

Adding layers of complexity to what should be a simple event isn't what you want to do, IMO. One of the biggest positives to Score shooting is that they're much easier to run than a Group event.

In the example above, the scorer will have to make five times the amount of measurements that they would in a Group tournament. A Group target has one measurement. A Score target done as outlined will have five measurements on it.

Here's some other numbers: A 30 shooter tournament, with a warm up match and five record matches, would require 900 measurements.

For one yardage.

To me, a better solution would be to simply decrease the size of the 10 ring and subsequent scoring rings.....that way the philospophy of Score shooting remains the same, the difficulty level increases and you're still rewarding the shooters that shoot closest to the center.

a voice of reason!!!!!!!!!!

 

[abintx]

Jackie ...

To me, a better solution would be to simply decrease the size of the 10 ring and subsequent scoring rings.....that way the philosophy of Score shooting remains the same, the difficulty level increases and you're still rewarding the shooters that shoot closest to the center.

Now there's a very pragmatic answer to your concerns. Simple "is" better!

 

[mike in co]

since the basis of these two sporting groups is the promotion of rifle accuracy, and since jackie's proposal is all about rifle accuracy, how about trying the system for a year and then making a decision.

the vote against doing the same old thing..is just that..it is not moving forward with rifle accuracy, it is adding lemmings to the gene pool.

move forward, or get out of the way.


mike in co

 

[Redrock]

Al has a point

Tougher Target, and we can still use our current scoring reticles. Sound like a little KISS

 

[jazzy]

Is it all about rifle accuracy or does it also include ones ability to improve thier own ability to shot the rifle? I also wonder how many new shooter will hang around if they start out shooting against Mr. Boyer at every match they attend. There must be a place for the mediocar shooter to compete and feel good at the end of the day.

just a few more thoughts

 

[Greyfox]

I can't see how adding another discipline to a sport that's already divided into two organizations and several different point blank forms of competition. Certainly Jackie's suggestion has merit and would be fun, but the problem is, we don't get enough participation in what we already have. Add to that the simple fact that no one has mastered what we already have. I don't have Joe's list in front of me, but it's not like someone shoots a 250-25x every week, or month, or year for that matter. When that begins to happen there may be a place for something else.

Making the 10 ring smaller won't make anyone a better shooter. Neither will measuring the distance from the center or worst edge scoring. It wouldn't take long to show that the best would still be the best, we'd just be measuring it a different way. Is this really what we want?

Rick

 

[jackie schmidt]

Jazzy

At Tomball, we have an excellent Club Match program where you can shoot one of three classes, Factory, Modified, Or Benchrest.

They are all competitive, but that is the nature of the game.

We all started somewhere. I can remember when I thought PPC meant "police proficiency course'.............jackie

 

[Joe Duke]

Different Disiplines are fun

In the last year, I have shot all of the Tomball club score matches, three 400 yard events shooting at clay pigeons, and one registered group match; the Bluebonnet. I have had a blast shooting them all and have read all the ideas thrown out here. Jackie's proposal sounds as if it would be fun and I would like to try it.

However, in light of getting VFS recognized in the NBRSA, I think my vote would be just like the proposal we put forward at the Bluebonnet. Paraphrasing but basically any legal HV rifle shooting at the HBR target and scoring using the existing rules. This will get score shooting going in the NBRSA with a minimum of fuss and change.
I think that would be a good thing. Maybe after a couple of years, change would be needed. Who knows. Meanwhile, let's shoot.

By the way, I think Jackie's proposal is a lot like the old time string shooters scoring. They shot several shots at a bullseye. Then they pinned a string in the center of the bullseye and put a plug in each bullet hole. The string was then passed around each plugged bullet hole and back around the center pin. The shortest string won the match.

Joe

 

[savet06]

For what it's worth in my sample size of one match:
My decision to start score shoots at my range was based on all of the above mentioned points:
ease of scoring, running, and funding a match. I knew that if I couldn't get a cadre of volunteers that I could run the match on my own if necessary. A moving backer system was out of the question without outside help (not to mention that it would have to be mobile at our range). If you want to encourage new shooters go with the simplest plan to get the most people to join.

Ask the guys who shoot score if they would like a more challenging target at which to shoot. Most likely the guys who are winning with the old target are going to win with the new one, just with lower scores...you still have to get closest to the center more times than the other guy. You and your gun have to be able to put your bullet on that .06" dot 20+ times to win a match at a100yds. I don't think that the top shooters are thinking about counting on getting away with a reticle "x" just the same as a group shooter isn't hoping to shoot well enough overall to allow a 0.3" to not ruin their day.
My decision to shoot in score matches was that it was fun, demanded a high degree of skill, only a perfect score and a high x-count would win, and I just happened to want to build a 30br because of its tuning behavior relative to other cartridges.

Whatever the board decides I don't envy their position. A new target might bring out IBS score shooters to try it (I would) as well as current NBRSA members. Conversely you may push away potential VFS shooters who have based their inventory on a particular caliber because of the current target setup. Either way SOMEBODY isn't going to like it!
Mike

 

[glp]

Is it all about rifle accuracy or does it also include ones ability to improve thier own ability to shot the rifle? I also wonder how many new shooter will hang around if they start out shooting against Mr. Boyer at every match they attend. There must be a place for the mediocar shooter to compete and feel good at the end of the day.

just a few more thoughts

Yes, its about accuracy. But, score shooting is also about hitting the X. That's the basic premis of the endeavor. Accuracy sure a heck helps doing that but don't lose sight of the aim of the discipline. I can buy into a smaller 10 ring and maybe a bigger 9 ring. Another thought on expanding the sport...I think lots of shooters don't take the plunge because they are afraid of being beat, not doing well, looking bad, etc., etc. It's tough enough to get shooters into the game with the existing target, if its made to seem more challenging???

 

[TonyinKY]

My perspective....

My perspective from a 50% hunter, 40% shooter, 10% competitive shooter:
1. The 10 ring is a hit. A 9 ring is a miss. X is for tie breakers on 10 ring only. WO is for tie breakers on X count only. Measuring from center? 1 shot 5” away from center and 4 shots dead center would equal 5 shots 1” from center. 5” group ties 2” group?
2. I appreciate all the people that make these shoots possible. I be damned if I’d make it harder on these people by making the targets harder to score.
3. Best edge scoring? I like it. My 50% hunter wants to bust something big with a 40BR.
4. It aint over til the fat lady sings! Drop a point? Don’t give up. Last relay, last match, cease fire and then it matters.
5. Beginners getting discouraged? What about shooter ranking for VFS? Keep everything EXACTLY as is but have classifications like Master, Sniper, Hunter etc... This would give new shooters a level to achieve. You don’t have to win the match to gain something. Qualifications based on number of matches entered, 5X cards, 250’s shot, etc… This would be tracked by the main office. Match results would show shooter class next to their name.
My $.02
Tony McCoy

 

[glp]

Tony...

My perspective from a 50% hunter, 40% shooter, 10% competitive shooter:
1. The 10 ring is a hit. A 9 ring is a miss. X is for tie breakers on 10 ring only. WO is for tie breakers on X count only. Measuring from center? 1 shot 5” away from center and 4 shots dead center would equal 5 shots 1” from center. 5” group ties 2” group?
2. I appreciate all the people that make these shoots possible. I be damned if I’d make it harder on these people by making the targets harder to score.
3. Best edge scoring? I like it. My 50% hunter wants to bust something big with a 40BR.
4. It aint over til the fat lady sings! Drop a point? Don’t give up. Last relay, last match, cease fire and then it matters.
5. Beginners getting discouraged? What about shooter ranking for VFS? Keep everything EXACTLY as is but have classifications like Master, Sniper, Hunter etc... This would give new shooters a level to achieve. You don’t have to win the match to gain something. Qualifications based on number of matches entered, 5X cards, 250’s shot, etc… This would be tracked by the main office. Match results would show shooter class next to their name.
My $.02
Tony McCoy

I used to shoot A LOT of skeet. The sport has classes. Many times, lets say I was in A, I would beat the top AA score but only get a 1st in A...against 1 other shooter. I think the no class system serves score very well. it's an incentive to learn to read flags and tune a gun.

 

[TonyinKY]

I'm not suggesting.....

I used to shoot A LOT of skeet. The sport has classes. Many times, lets say I was in A, I would beat the top AA score but only get a 1st in A...against 1 other shooter. I think the no class system serves score very well. it's an incentive to learn to read flags and tune a gun.

I'm not suggesting the ranking should change the match winning results in any way. It would only serve the purpose of allowing shooters to compare their scores against others with the same ranking. And to have an attainable goal for each shooter. “Hey, I didn’t win anything at the match, BUT I did shoot a 250 at 200 yds. And now I’m only 24 points from advancing to Marksman.”

 

[jackie schmidt]

Tony

Classifications tend not to work in Benchrest, (whether it be Group Shooting or Score Shooting), because the game is so equipment oriented.

If a shooter earns a certain classification with a killer barrel, and then has to re-join the rest of humanity when that tube gives up, then he will be back sitting in the cheap seats trying to figure out what happenned.

Shoot Competitive Benchrest for a while, and this becomes apparent.

The best way to shoot Benchrest is to jumpin the deep end, and don't look back.......jackie

 

[Doug Penttinen]

I dis-agree

Maybe your not to sure how easy it is to DROP a point !!!... You can end up doing that at the begining , mid, or end. The guy who has dropped a point in my opinion should have payed more attention to the flagg as it switched. It can happen to anybody... Still the object is to shoot clean, and that is still hard enough to do at 100 yrds let alone 200

 

[ron collins]

I would like.....

to see the way score shooting is scored changed because it is getting to easy.
We are seeing a lot of 25x targets. With most of the Xs barley touching the X. What I would like to see is, the shooter would have to place the bullet totaly inside the 10 ring without touching the 10 ring to be an X. This way the X count would be lower. This would allow the best shooter of the day to win. We would start to see first place winners with scores like 250 -5,6,or7
Xs to win. I believe this would also bring back a lot of 6PPC shooters back into score shooting. Thus the field would be larger, more shooters in a match.
This would allow the ranges to use what they already have with no new devices. At two hundred yards the same target is used, but a 1/2' circle is put around the X to get the same results. This would make score shooting all about accuracy and true precision.

 

[eww1350]

I know that I live way out in the sticks and don't get to the city very often, but...I read every (score) match report at the IBS website..I also see quite a bit of back slapping going on when a 250-25x is shot in a registered match...so mutch so that Borden Rifles uses it in their ads online...If the 250-25x is so common as it is written in this thread...Why is it such a BIG deal when it happens???
In fact I have yet to read an IBS match report with a 250-25x being shot by more than one shooter during ONE match...If I am wrong please define the date and match report so I can see such with my own eyes...!
I still think the NBRSA would be trying to find a solution to a "non exsistant problem" if they are concerned that VFS will be a match that all the competitors will shoot a 250-25x and will have to flip coins,draw straws, or see who can spit furthur to determine a winner...
By the way how many 250-25x score have been fired this year in the NBRSA..?
I'll bet you can count them on one hand especially here in the Southwest or Gulf Coast Region....
The IBS already has VFS and I don't hear that they are hell bent on changing it "RIGHT NOW" to get rid of all those pesky 250-25x scores...
Ken Livengood has his photo at the Borden Rifle website for shooting all of 3 250-25x in 6 weeks during 2007...Why the big deal if everybody does it so often..!!!

 

[Pete Wass]

It's sort of like records

It's a pretty big deal until someone else breaks yours, eh. I do think shooting 25 x's is an achievement and should be celebrated. It has become more common and I am happy for folks who are able to do it. Just think how difficult it was for Dennis Collins to do way back, eh and how long it took to duplicate his feat.

I think there are more shooters with great equipment capable of shooting 25 and probably will be even more as time goes on. Certainly Conditions haven' gotten way better over the years.

On the other hand, if the target were made mo difficult and folks were not able to get a Blue & White sticker most of the time, perhaps mo people would start shootin 6 Power. That might be good for the sport

 

[Maddog]

It's a pretty big deal until someone else breaks yours, eh. I do think shooting 25 x's is an achievement and should be celebrated. It has become more common and I am happy for folks who are able to do it. Just think how difficult it was for Dennis Collins to do way back, eh and how long it took to duplicate his feat.

I think there are more shooters with great equipment capable of shooting 25 and probably will be even more as time goes on. Certainly Conditions haven' gotten way better over the years.

On the other hand, if the target were made mo difficult and folks were not able to get a Blue & White sticker most of the time, perhaps mo people would start shootin 6 Power. That might be good for the sport

Pete,
if the target was "made harder to shoot" it will be harder for the VFS and the hunter as well. Kabish????
DA

 

[LHSmith]

Ken Livengood has his photo at the Borden Rifle website for shooting all of 3 250-25x in 6 weeks during 2007...Why the big deal if everybody does it so often..!!!

This was accomplished at 2 state tournaments and the Nationals.

A 4th 25x was originally scored by Ken on 2 Sept '07 at Sulphur Springs but it must have been reviewed by the records committee and re-scored.......talk about being in 'THE ZONE"

Dennis Collins did it with the 6ppc and as scorer at Bowmanstown score matches he gives a club award to the top 6mm VFS shooter......a nice incentive to attract new score shooters.

Sometimes it's the little things, yes even the teeny-tiny IBS "250"stickers that count.