Well, My Targets Did Not Survive the Scrutiny of the Official Scorers

[Kris Whitman]

Any time you shoot multiple 0's and 1's you are living right....much less in Midland Texas!!! To accomplish what you did in the conditions you had to shoot in...that is just unbelievable. You showed us your true colors with that performance.....record or not!!

Awesome job Jackie.....

Kris Whitman

 

[B J Atkinson]

We employ a system 'down under' where any potential records must be measured by a committee of three (which includes our National Scorer) and their results aggregated. We consider that to be a 'fair go' and the best way to do it.
Interestingly, it is my experience that those who criticize the system have (usually) never actually had to measure targets themselves. Over the years I have had to measure thousands of them at benchrest shoots, and it is certainly not an exciting pastime.
However, even though it missed out on the record, Jackie's agg was certainly a ripper, and it created plenty of discussion.

Brendan Atkinson....in South Australia

 

[amamnn]

If I may be allowed an observation and a suggestion:

I have been using Caldwell's practice targets for some years. They are made of some sort of paper and plastic or just plastic substance. When a bullet passes through them they make a hole that does not partially close up after. There's no doubt where the hole ends and the target begins. The target that yielded a .235" group when fresh yielded the same group measure when pressed in a logbook--or an envelope or whatever. Even if the hole made in the target was slightly irregular--a scoring reticle would swiftly reveal the actual circumference of the hole. So---- why not let the scoring committee test some of these targets to see how they like them and possibly sanctioning agencies will adapt this type of target. I am sure they could be had from a number of suppliers-- I have seen this kind of material in several other applications. An added bonus: they are waterproof, which is a real plus in my area.