All 3 matches were sanctioned so yes they are included.
275 scoring in 50/50
- Thread starter GordonE
- Start date
All 3 matches were sanctioned so yes they are included.
tonykharper
Well-known member
If we back out the 300+ targets, and the 100+ shooters that only shoot IR 50/50 as part of the Triple Crown our stats take on a little different picture.
Thanks for the info.
TKH
So, if we're "gaming" the stats you need to back out last years Triple Crown targets also. Picture stays about the same...
C
cut rifled
Guest
Here are the numbers for ARA since 2012 for shooters that shot at least 1 match, pretty much has stayed the same, you gain some you lose some.
2012 674
2013 634
2014 635
2015 643
2016 665
2017 630 so far this year, probably end up mid to upper 630's
glynn angle
Member
**** Dave is telling the REAL story, exactly the way it happened. (sorry I was away when this thread started). Milt Cook brought about RBA because he was inflexible. I spent quite a bit of time on the phone with Milt trying to smooth things over. (that didn't work) I then told him he should sell IR50-50 right then because the value would drop, because we had no choice but to start a new org. BEFORE THE SPLIT AFTER CHARLOTTE, YOU HAD TO GET YOUR ENTRY IN TO THE NATIONALS THE FIRST DAY ALLOWED TO GET A SLOT. There were two 120 limit sellouts in Richmond, then the 160 limit sellout in Charlotte, before the split.
Slick Willy
Member
Those are some big #`s!
Did not know Milt Cook , just the storys ! Sounds like similar scenario is in the works now!
Did not know Milt Cook , just the storys ! Sounds like similar scenario is in the works now!
D
Doug
Guest
RBA had some good ideas:
Slightly smaller 10 Ring.
3 Gun was Sporter, 10.5 & Unl
The only thing I disagreed with was 2 Gun Aggs.
They did not make sense in RBA or IR 50/50
Slightly smaller 10 Ring.
3 Gun was Sporter, 10.5 & Unl
The only thing I disagreed with was 2 Gun Aggs.
They did not make sense in RBA or IR 50/50
Far too many posts I'd like to quote and respond to... I will put down general thoughts, both in response to posts in this thread as well as feedback from a "newbie".
I have a HUGE amount of respect for the work Landy does with measuring/analyzing targets and calculating the statistics from the results. I come from a semi-technical background and am inclined to go with science over "art" and "black magic" every time. His statements about 8s and 9s not being fliers per say, but rather just examples of shots that are within the standard deviation but outside of where we would like them to be, or more likely(and I tend to believe strongly) a missed condition change or sloppy bench manners, resulting in dropped points, rather than an actual bad round. As stated above I am a relative newbie compared to the experience of many. I have gone through a little under 2 cases of ammo since I started shooting benchrest in July 2015, including testing lots and all the matches I have shot. In that time I have had 1 round that went inches, with an S, as in many, from the expected point of impact. It would have been many standard deviations from the center of the composite group created by all the other rounds in that case of ammo. That is 1 round in the ~9000 rounds I've fired. I may go another 10 years or 50 cases of ammo before it happens again, or it may happen again tomorrow. When and if it does, I will B**** and moan for a few minutes, pull up my big boy pants and get on with life. No different than if I was at the dirt track or drag strip and had an electrode in a $5 spark plug fail and cost me the race, or any of a 100 other examples of 1 small piece of the puzzle being "off" costing me the win. Don't make excuses, get back on the horse, and keep at it.
I am passively opposed to changing the scoring in IR5050 to the 275 model as a method of increasing participation. I feel we don't have a unfair scoring system in place that is routinely rewarding an undeserving winner at the expense of the better shooter. I also feel that the thought of a 249 automatically putting you out of contention is a load of cow pies as well. I would encourage everyone to head over to the IR5050 site and really take a close look at the data. Unfortunately it is difficult to extract and put it into excel to further analyze, but is relatively easy to just view on the website. I took the time to gather a few facts from the 2017 season thus far. In the 10.5# class so far this year there have been 1138 targets shot in 156 3gun matches. Of those 1138 targets 144 of them were 250s, or about 12.65%. There were .923 250s per match, less than 1 per match if the distribution was even across all matches, which it isn't, not even close. I know a match I attended this year had 5 or 6 from just 8 or 9 shooters, and I doubt that is an anomaly but don't have exact data to back it up, other than poking around in the results and noticing trends. When the conditions are "good" there are plenty of shooters with adequate equipment and skills to take advantage at every match I have ever attended. I took a good look at the results from the club I run matches at and the results rarely changed when I computed score using the 275 model and comparing them to the current scoring model. I would encourage everyone to look at some of your club's results from this year and see what the change would be. Minimal changes at best, and doubtful that it would increase participation in my opinion.
I then looked at some sporter results. Much harder to do as the scoreline includes sporter match results as well as 3gun match results. If you look to the top of the list you will see Ed Hosier. I met Ed briefly at the nationals this year, but unfortunately didn't have much to say as I was star-struck to be in the presence of that good of a sporter shooter. In looking at Ed's sporter results this year he has shot 18 250s in 97 sporter targets. 18.5% of the time Ed shoots a 250 with his sporter, and many of them have big X counts too. Dominating performance to say the least! Another interesting stat is that 24.7% of the time Ed drops 4 or more points, leaving the door wide open for someone to shoot a 249, 248, or even a 247 to possibly take the win. Again, I would say- Don't make excuses, get back on the horse, and do it again, even when you drop a point. Not trying to single Ed out, but he has one of the larger sample sizes since he shoots lots of sporter targets.
As long as we are talking sporters and being a new guy- What is with the thought that sporters are expensive and hard to build? And along the same lines, that rimfire guns are somehow harder to build than centerfire rifles? I have built both of the guns I am currently shooting. They also happen to be the only 2 rimfire benchrest rifles I have built, or shot for that matter. The only other real bench gun I have shot is my uncle's 6ppc at prairie dogs. I put both guns together using readily available components available from the common suppliers. The places I ordered from didn't know me, as I was unheard of in the rimfire world(still am, for the record...) when I was ordering the parts. I am confident that I did not receive hand selected components or special treatment. I am also confident I got the next one on the pile as my orders were pulled. Did I happen to steal a golden horseshoe off a unicorn to end up with a competitive sporter on my first rimfire build? Is it just a myth that rimfires, and especially sporters are harder to build than any other rifle? From the little machine shop knowledge I have, threading and chambering barrels is equivalent to apprentice level machine shop work. Indicating the bore of round objects in a 4 jaw chuck is everyday practice. Is the oft repeated talk of being hard to build and expensive what keeps people away? Looking back at both my sporter and heavy gun builds I know the heavy gun was ~$1000 more expensive, largely because the stock and scope were both twice the cost of their sporter counterparts. Seems like a ton of money, until you talk to the guy you know who runs sprint cars and has a $25k engine that blows a couple times a season and needs a full rebuild, or the guy with the $8k drift boat carrying $5k in fly rods and reels. This is a hobby, and hobbies are supposed to be expensive
Talking sporters and heavy guns bring us to another topic. Having to own and shoot 2 guns to play IR5050 3gun. I hear plenty of gripes that you would have to have a second gun to compete and what a burden it is. Somehow that burden goes away when guys show up with 2-3-4 unlimited/Heavy guns with ammo matched to each gun for an ARA/PSL match, cause redundancy is always a good thing and it would be a shame if the barrel went south, or the humidity or temperature moved out of the primary guns preferred range and they shot poorly that match. I also hear about having to have 2 rest setups. Not true as you can shoot ARA/PSL off a 2 piece setup. The argument has been made before that the 1 piece rest isn't an advantage and doesn't help scores, so sell it and get a 2 piece setup and then you can shoot any class anywhere. Seems to me there is little merit, and lots of excuse making. Don't make excuses, show up and shoot, or tell us that a 1 piece rest is easier to shoot from and that's why you won't shoot IR5050. Can't have it both ways here...
The ammo chase- Finding ammo that shoots good in your gun can be a chore, and can be expensive. We all know this. It is part of the rimfire game, and isn't unique to IR5050. Is anyone complaining that ARA or PSL attendance is down because of the ammo chase? Is it easier to find ammo for an unlimited gun than a 10.5# or sporter? Are the a select few who are in tight with the distribution network who are getting the good ammo before the rest of us have a chance? For the past 2 years I have been shooting eley match that was made/imported the year prior to the season I shot it in. The first season I blind squirreled 2 different lots, a 2 machine @ 1056, and a 5 machine at 1068. I shot a couple matches, didn't finish anywhere near the top, and had fun doing it. I didn't know what I didn't know so I went back for more at the end of September and bought enough for my planned matches in 2016. If I remember correctly ammo was a little more scarce in 15 as everything coming in was getting bought up within days of arrival. I tried to buy test lots, but by the time it made it from Zanders to me 1/2 were already sold out. I started this spring with enough ammo left from last season to shoot the first match in April. I ended up ordering 7 test lots. Most shot decent, but I wouldn't know "killer" ammo if it was written on the box, and 1 showed more promise than the rest. Killough ran a sale in May so I jumped on a full case. I have been shooting it all season, in both the sporter and heavy gun. I have shot as good as 250-20x with both guns, and have also managed to also shoot some low 230s with both guns as well. Pure luck that I was able to find decent shooting ammo that worked in both guns and allowed me to be competitive some of the time? Is there better ammo that I missed out on that would have resulted in more Xs and no scores in the 230s? Is it an internet legend that you must test 40-75-120 lots of ammo to find anything remotely good? Is talk of having to test hundreds or thousands in ammo to find something that allows you to be competitive scaring people off?
15 years ago I would see cardboard backers with a grid of holes left behind on the range. Occasionally I would see a target in the trash and thought it looked kinda neat. Just out of college, still living at home, and earning a meager living didn't leave much room for benchrest. Fast forward to 2008 and an email comes from the club asking for volunteers to help pour concrete bench tops for the new 50yd range. I helped, met some of the guys, talked a little benchrest, and then shelved it for another 7 years until 2015. Now in a better position to dispose of income on recreation I checked the club calendar and showed up at a match, after already placing my order for a 2500XS action. I met a group of guys who were willing to answer questions and explain some of the ins and outs. I also witnessed Doug Bell shoot a world record target that day, which almost caused me to reconsider doing this if I was going to have to compete against that level, but his humble reaction and commenting that the next target he shot wouldn't be nearly as good convinced me to stay the course. Dean Bircher stayed after that match and spent a couple hours giving me more information than I could comprehend at the time. The willingness of those shooters to share what they knew with a young guy just starting out made a huge difference. I would still be messing around trying to figure out what end was up if they hadn't shaved YEARS off the learning curve for me by sharing what they knew. As stated by others, one of the biggest barriers to new participants is even knowing it exists. As ambassadors for our sport we need to get the word out about the game we play, and be as inviting as possible to anyone who shows even a shred of interest. Keep it fun, after all it is just a game. As a new shooter who started with no equipment I also didn't find the current rules difficult to follow, overbearing, or overly restrictive. I think some minor tweaks could be made that don't alter the game, but allow for more freedom and access to equipment.
Potential Take-Aways:
Encourage people to show up and shoot. Get the word out to anyone who will listen. Let the newbie shoot whatever they bring to get a feel for the game. It makes little sense to chase someone away who probably isn't going to be competitive in their first match anyways. If they are serious they will quickly upgrade and meet the rules, if not, at least you know you tried to get them involved. Offer to loan equipment if you have extra, or to try your equipment after a match.
Worry less about what the other guy is doing and making excuses about it, and more time worrying about hitting the next X on your own card.
Recognize those who do well. Share results with one another via the forums and social media. Clap and give atta-boys at matches.
If you have read this far you may be thinking that many of my comments are pretty arrogant, about how good my equipment is or lucky I am in finding ammo, or how easy machining is. That is not my intention in the least. I have been fortunate to win some target this year, even some matches, but I've finished 3rd, 4th, 7th, 17th, or worse more times than I have won, by a large margin. I made the comments to hopefully show that getting started as a newbie and becoming competitive is possible and accessible, and the situation isn't as dire as some people try to make it.
Overall- Thank you to Tony for starting the topic and getting the ball rolling. I find this type of open, back and forth dialogue to be a positive which will hopefully allow us to maintain and grow the sport.
Travis
PS- Show up and shoot!
I would also like to say that Travis, this is not only an extremely well thought out comment but also.....thank you, it would go a hell of a long way if you could package it and sell it. It is seen less often than more and I guess I have been around pretty much from the beginning.
I offer one last thought because like you, I have a lot of appreciation for a guy like Landy....I've had a few conversations with him and no doubt he's a natural talent and provides lots of useful info.
Along those lines, and complinenting what he's already stated, the following:
ELEY now provides visual reference in there testing of all lots and , like many, I have had a rifle sent/tested to Killoughs and lots of groups with several lots I had tested as well as others results. Would'nt somewhere in there we see evidence of true fliers ? I have seen shots outside of the groups to some degree, but to call them fliers is based on exactly what???
As others I feel dicussions like this DO in fact help, if nothing else allow some reflection and thoughtful evaluation.
I am a real noobie to IR50.. but i have been told so many times that in order to really do well you must clean the target with a high X count.. the first time i heard that, i replied that i knew how to fix that.. the only problem is with it, is enforcing it.. but the easiest way to fix it is, once you have shot that first bull for record.. you may not shoot any more sighters after that.. i know that several are not going to like that idea, being that you're so used to doing it the way it is now.. but if you want to bring the challenge back to the sport, ya gotta change the way it is shot per se..
There's plenty of challenge to IR50/50. How many 250-25X targets have been shot?? The sporter game is a huge challenge for the shooter. It seems that most of the complaints about IR50/50 has to do with the sporter being too hard that many don't want to bother with it. Some may use the expense of a second gun as an excuse but how many shooters have just one gun in their battery? Not many. There is a beauty in the challenge of having to achieve a certain level of accuracy with ALL your shots in order to maximize your chances of winning. Yes, one bad shot will very likely mean you lose, but that's the game and IMO, that's the way it should be. Whether that bad shot is from missing the condition or blaming it on ammo, a miss is a miss and missing can mean you lose.
It is a beautiful game. It doesn't need changing. What it needs is more shooters stepping up and embracing the unique challenge of this game. I seriously doubt that changes will resurrect IR50/50, only more shooters willing to shoot ALL the BR games will do that.
It is a beautiful game. It doesn't need changing. What it needs is more shooters stepping up and embracing the unique challenge of this game. I seriously doubt that changes will resurrect IR50/50, only more shooters willing to shoot ALL the BR games will do that.
Last edited:
;-), what i was saying was a response to what i have heard.. it is a joke in how i responded.. Bill do you like to go fishing?
At well if you don't want that ammo, give it to me so i can learn this game better!
You wouldn't want it. What I've got is some very expensive Eley Match plinking ammo. I wouldn't feel good about selling it to anyone and since I've got it, I might was well practice up with my pistol and get some use out of it.
Sorry for being so blunt Tony, but hogwash!! Explain to me how it makes any sense for someone to forgo shooting for the X on an IR50/50 target but rather try to shoot for the outer parts of the 10 ring? When you shoot for the center X and you slightly miss and you still hit the 10, (yeah!), you haven't lost a point. The distance between the center of the X and the edge of the 10 ring is your margin of error. If, as you apparently imply, a shooter rather than aiming for the center X, instead aims to hit the outer parts of the 10 ring and they miss the condition, say a little let-up in wind velocity, then, bam, they get a 9. Also, every match I ever shot I always assumed that someone is going to hit a 250 and that X count would decide the winner. To not shoot for Xs only means you are likely only shooting to lose. When I was competing I would haved love to shoot against the guy who is aiming to hit the outer parts of the 10 ring and not the center.
The ridiculous example of a 250-0X beating a 249-22X, I would say to anyone; show me where that has ever happened at any match that we would really care about (State, Regional, or National). It will happen that say a 250-15X will beat a 249-20X but that is how it should be. The guy shooting the 250-15X met the criteria (and goal of the game) of putting all his shots on the 10 ring. To imply the guy shooting the 250-15 was somehow "gaming" to win by not trying to shoot Xs is ludicrous and exists only in the mind of a sore-loser.
Last edited:
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Regarding the Nationals,
In my opinion, if the Nationals were moved around the country, there may be more attendance. I realize I live at the other end of the pipe but for me to travel to Bristol is a two overnight each way and a lot of miles. If they were held in say Richmond, I'd likely go but Bristol is too far for me. I realize one needs a decent sized venue to hold a Nationals event, I have run one. I think attendance would benefit from moving the event around. Other Benchrest Orgs move their Nationals around and I think it works for them.
Thanks,
Pete
In my opinion, if the Nationals were moved around the country, there may be more attendance. I realize I live at the other end of the pipe but for me to travel to Bristol is a two overnight each way and a lot of miles. If they were held in say Richmond, I'd likely go but Bristol is too far for me. I realize one needs a decent sized venue to hold a Nationals event, I have run one. I think attendance would benefit from moving the event around. Other Benchrest Orgs move their Nationals around and I think it works for them.
Thanks,
Pete
When the winds are horrible and everyone is struggling to hit the 10 ring I can guarantee you no one on the line is shooting for Xs, they are lucky happenstance. Everybody is just hoping to hit that 10 ring. If that's gaming, then I was guilty of that when I won the sporter target at the 2011 Nationals with a 248-10X @ 50 meters and won by 3 pts.
mwezell
Mike Ezell
"Like"
Also, would the result have been different if the x's were points? Sometimes it makes a difference, but not every time.
Often just shooting for the 10 ring is good enough..but not if the x is a point and you're tied with someone going into the last card.
Last edited:
"Like"
Also, would the result have been different if the x's were points? Sometimes it makes a difference, but not every time.
Often just shooting for the 10 ring is good enough..but not if the x is a point and you're tied with someone going into the last card.
I honestly can't remember what the other close scores were. But I know no one that day can honestly say there were aiming for that X. When shooting a sporter, where you can't see the 10 ring much less the X in that 6.5X scope and with conditions so windy that the hold-off was off the last ring of the target, just hitting that 10 ring was reason to celebrate.