Question for score shooters?

J

Jim Pag

Registered User
I was wondering to all the people out there who shoot SR score. If you had the choice of settling a tie score at the end of a match, would you prefer the current creedmore system or would you prefer some sort of a shoot-off between the 2 shooters who ended with a tie?
 
Jim
I am a first year shooter, but once I understood the creedmore system it makes good sense and seems to work fairly even if it goes all the way to x outs.
It seems a bit unfair to the competitors not involved in the tie to have to wait to gather flags and break down their gear while a shoot off occurs.
 
Jim Pag said:
I was wondering to all the people out there who shoot SR score. If you had the choice of settling a tie score at the end of a match, would you prefer the current creedmore system or would you prefer some sort of a shoot-off between the 2 shooters who ended with a tie?
Click to expand...

Three years ago, the NBRSA adopted, on a one year probationary trial, using "wipeouts"in the event of a tie. In other words, if two shooters tied with the same X count, the number of wipeouts determined the higher placing.

It seemed like a good Idea, except going back and using the reticle on every target was tedious. Sometimes, you had more than one tie for all of the top five, so that got to be e real hassle.

When it came up for a vote after the probationary period, it was voted down, and we went back to the Creedmore.

That is the only viable method I can see that would have been an option. Having shoot offs would just take up more time, and other shooters not involved might want to get on the road.

Also, many shooters come to score matches preloaded. What if they didn't have any load rounds left.

I have won by Creedmore, and lost by it. I guess in the end, it evens out.
 
Last edited:
I have heard that some shooting matches(not necessarily BR) are won by the guy with the most ammo.......Eh...
 
A smaller target would fix things, probably. What if we shot the 200 yards on the current 100 yard target and the 100 on some version of the 50 yard rimfire target? Just a thought.

Harold
 
jackie schmidt said:
Three years ago, the NBRSA adopted, on a one year probationary trial, using "wipeouts"in the event of a tie. In other words, if two shooters tied with the same X count, the number of wipeouts determined the higher placing.

It seemed like a good Idea, except going back and using the reticle on every target was tedious. Sometimes, you had more than one tie for all of the top five, so that got to be e real hassle.

When it came up for a vote after the probationary period, it was voted down, and we went back to the Creedmore.

That is the only viable method I can see that would have been an option. Having shoot offs would just take up more time, and other shooters not involved might want to get on the road.

Also, many shooters come to score matches preloaded. What if they didn't have any load rounds left.

I have won by Creedmore, and lost by it. I guess in the end, it evens out.
Click to expand...
You have some good points there Jackie.
 
Jim Pag said:
You have some good points there Jackie.
Click to expand...

I'm with Jackie. It's not perfect but it works. At the UBR Nats recently, I shot a 10 on the 1st bull of the 1st target...Not good for me...but it is what it is.It sucked to watch me lose a few creedmoor's along the way, though.

The match prior to this one, I lost several shots to the reticle. I made the comment that they would be in next time...and many were...but not enough. That's how it goes. Knock the center out of all of them and this is a non-issue.
 
Harold M said:
A smaller target would fix things, probably. What if we shot the 200 yards on the current 100 yard target and the 100 on some version of the 50 yard rimfire target? Just a thought.

Harold
Click to expand...

I will opt for a smaller target when I get bored shooting 500 50x.:cool:
 
The idea of a shoot off is appealing. But then you face questions regarding whether it is treated as another match, do the range personnel need to hang targets at every target frame, how do you break a tie in the shootoff, etc. They cowboy side of me wants a shoot off, the practical side of me accepts that creedmor is likely the best answer still, even though it kicks our butts sometimes.
 
When going back to the first target to settle a tie, it makes sense to me to view the target in it's entirety instead of looking at the individual bulls in sequence. I believe that is how we do it currently in the NBRSA. It avoids the situation where a 50-1X target beats a 50-4x target in a tie breaker.
 
Jim

I shoot trap as well rifle score shooting. I enjoy nothing better than being in a shoot off. It's just not feasible time wise for rifle shooting.

In score shooting the creedmore work's the best.

Example: one year at the grand American nationals trapshooting Leo Harrison & Foster Barthalow both broke 200 straight in the championship 16 yard event they went another 900 straight in the shoot off!! they decided to call it a draw and be co champions. It took three day's.
 
R Stiner said:
Jim

I shoot trap as well rifle score shooting. I enjoy nothing better than being in a shoot off. It's just not feasible time wise for rifle shooting.

In score shooting the creedmore work's the best.

Example: one year at the grand American nationals trapshooting Leo Harrison & Foster Barthalow both broke 200 straight in the championship 16 yard event they went another 900 straight in the shoot off!! they decided to call it a draw and be co champions. It took three day's.
Click to expand...

I could see that happening in a trap shoot, but I figured having a shoot off at whatever the last yardage that was shot wouldn't take up too much time, but I know plenty of guy's who just want to pick-up their flags and get headed home.
 
Too Many Ties

Harold M said:
A smaller target would fix things, probably. What if we shot the 200 yards on the current 100 yard target and the 100 on some version of the 50 yard rimfire target? Just a thought.

Harold
Click to expand...

This is what was done in "F" class.......... and it works.......
bill
 
jackie schmidt said:
Three years ago, the NBRSA adopted, on a one year probationary trial, using "wipeouts"in the event of a tie. In other words, if two shooters tied with the same X count, the number of wipeouts determined the higher placing.

It seemed like a good Idea, except going back and using the reticle on every target was tedious. Sometimes, you had more than one tie for all of the top five, so that got to be e real hassle.

When it came up for a vote after the probationary period, it was voted down, and we went back to the Creedmore.

That is the only viable method I can see that would have been an option. Having shoot offs would just take up more time, and other shooters not involved might want to get on the road.

Also, many shooters come to score matches preloaded. What if they didn't have any load rounds left.

I have won by Creedmore, and lost by it. I guess in the end, it evens out.
Click to expand...
Jackie. What if only match 1 was looked at and whoever had the most wipe-outs would win? If it was a tie, then match 2 would determine the winner and so on?
 
Jim Pag said:
Jackie. What if only match 1 was looked at and whoever had the most wipe-outs would win? If it was a tie, then match 2 would determine the winner and so on?
Click to expand...

Jim, we went through most of the options being discusse back when, and I feel safe in saying that NOTHING is going to change any time soon.

There are still a lot of NBRSA members who don't even believe we should be sanctioning Varmint for Score Matches in the first place. They ignore the original mandate of the Sanctioning Body, that being described in the first Mandate in our Rule Book, achieving extreme ACCURACY. Precision, as in Group Shooting, is covered in the second Mandate.

Many shooters do not see the problem, as they are still trying to achieve a good enough score to even get into a "tie breaker".

It's good to have these discussions, though. If we didn't, nothing would ever change for the better.
 
B.Larson said:
This is what was done in "F" class.......... and it works.......
bill
Click to expand...
I can't see how making the target smaller would change anything. UBR's targets are smaller in relation to bullet size than the IBS/NBRSA targets and we still have ties. Smaller targets would just mean fewer x's and 10's. You would still have ties. As has been mentioned shoot off's would mean longer matches and I'm pretty sure that I would get complaints as match director if we had to keep folks from picking up their flags and leaving. The Creedmore rule still looks like the best option from my POV.

Rick
 
Greyfox said:
I can't see how making the target smaller would change anything. UBR's targets are smaller in relation to bullet size than the IBS/NBRSA targets and we still have ties. Smaller targets would just mean fewer x's and 10's. You would still have ties. As has been mentioned shoot off's would mean longer matches and I'm pretty sure that I would get complaints as match director if we had to keep folks from picking up their flags and leaving. The Creedmore rule still looks like the best option from my POV.

Rick
Click to expand...

The further apart the rings are, the more shot locations will have the same value. With rings closer together, fewer targets will have identical scores, so fewer ties would be expected. Fewer- not "none."
I expect it wouldn't be popular since many shooters like the feeling of shooting "clean."
 
Last edited:
It does seem to me the ten ring is big when 33 out of 45 shoot 250's at the national at 100 yds. You would think that with guns that shoot in the zeros the target would be smaller than a 1/2" then maybe there would not be so many ties? A .5 minute ten ring at 100 yds. and a .7 minute ten ring at a 1000 yds. with 10 times the conditions deal with and you can't see the holes or go back to the sighter..... and yes, i shot both....... jim O'Hara
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top