T
therealld
Guest
Big boys?
Ones that can read as well as talk?
Ones that can read as well as talk?
C
cris
Guest
LD,
Look forward to your thoughts on scoring.
I shot an ARA target this morning at 25 yards, very challenging.
Look forward to your thoughts on scoring.
I shot an ARA target this morning at 25 yards, very challenging.
Boyd Allen
Active member
I am curious. What is the flaw with measuring outside to outside and subtracting the actual measured diameter of a single pellet hole, of the caliber that the group was shot with?
Another thing, if you ask a question, and someone gives an answer, you might want to simply take note of his opinion, and go on, rather than getting so emotional. Opinions vary. That is only natural. I am sure that the fellow that wrote of fairness was not commenting on your character, but simply making a comment on the suitability of a rule. As it happens, I think that not taking pellet hole size into account, on a caliber by caliber basis, introduces errors that are undesirable, and avoidable, if the goal is CTC group measurements that are directly comparable. This does not mean that you are not a fine fellow, just that I might do it differently. BTW, what is the usual range of group sizes that you typically see at a your matches? Are competitors using flags?
Another thing, if you ask a question, and someone gives an answer, you might want to simply take note of his opinion, and go on, rather than getting so emotional. Opinions vary. That is only natural. I am sure that the fellow that wrote of fairness was not commenting on your character, but simply making a comment on the suitability of a rule. As it happens, I think that not taking pellet hole size into account, on a caliber by caliber basis, introduces errors that are undesirable, and avoidable, if the goal is CTC group measurements that are directly comparable. This does not mean that you are not a fine fellow, just that I might do it differently. BTW, what is the usual range of group sizes that you typically see at a your matches? Are competitors using flags?
T
therealld
Guest
Boyd
I a person replies with words to effect that "no way that you do can be fair", or "here's how the big boys do it", or similar snide remarks, KNOWING I have pretty fair knowledge base and experience in the matter prior, well, he deserves a reply in the same vein.
As to the range of group sizes we see at our matches, they are as large as two plus inches, and as small as under 1/8". And, yes, we use flags. Were you to read some of the recent match results under "Temecula 50 yard benchrest matches, you would get more of a feel for what we are doing.
As to your statement about subtracting a caliber size .... well, shoot a three shot group with a .22 caliber air rifle and a .177 one from 50yards and LOOK closely at the groups on the targets ... I mean REALLY stare at em, then dip a pellet's base in ink and make a caliber sized hole near a group and try to rationalize subtracting something like THAT from the group.
Now we HAVE been measuring the way most others do til last month, but I've been looking at the issue for awhile. As it stands, even a .177 plug is so oversize it could be easily and fairly used to gage center locations of holes made by .22 pellets (unless they overlapped)!
I a person replies with words to effect that "no way that you do can be fair", or "here's how the big boys do it", or similar snide remarks, KNOWING I have pretty fair knowledge base and experience in the matter prior, well, he deserves a reply in the same vein.
As to the range of group sizes we see at our matches, they are as large as two plus inches, and as small as under 1/8". And, yes, we use flags. Were you to read some of the recent match results under "Temecula 50 yard benchrest matches, you would get more of a feel for what we are doing.
As to your statement about subtracting a caliber size .... well, shoot a three shot group with a .22 caliber air rifle and a .177 one from 50yards and LOOK closely at the groups on the targets ... I mean REALLY stare at em, then dip a pellet's base in ink and make a caliber sized hole near a group and try to rationalize subtracting something like THAT from the group.
Now we HAVE been measuring the way most others do til last month, but I've been looking at the issue for awhile. As it stands, even a .177 plug is so oversize it could be easily and fairly used to gage center locations of holes made by .22 pellets (unless they overlapped)!
Last edited by a moderator:
D
deliterman
Guest
wrinkle!
no matter how you slice it that Roger is one tuff guy to beat at 25 or 50 yds with any cal.whats his take on this scoreing ? H.B.
no matter how you slice it that Roger is one tuff guy to beat at 25 or 50 yds with any cal.whats his take on this scoreing ? H.B.
T
therealld
Guest
He (Roger) seemed ok with it
Since he knows its a change meant to even things up a little, and to help us get a fairer representation of ot TRUE center to center distances while hopefully easing some of the scoring tasks for the guys that volunteer to do it.
Previously there was more "guesswork" involved, since the scorers were attempting to decide where the probable edge of the pellet was iin relation to the hole, and now its an easier task to simple measure what is there, rather than try to guess by grey marks or intuition, or whatever.
I have plans to continue working on a method I feel will take about ALL the objectivity out, but its gonna be awhile yet. In essence, the plan is to digitize targets and measure the groups by first identifying the circles, locating the centers, then measuring from center to center. The issue of identifying doubled holes may be possible with hi level zooming as well, though this isn't the primary focus of the project.
Since he knows its a change meant to even things up a little, and to help us get a fairer representation of ot TRUE center to center distances while hopefully easing some of the scoring tasks for the guys that volunteer to do it.
Previously there was more "guesswork" involved, since the scorers were attempting to decide where the probable edge of the pellet was iin relation to the hole, and now its an easier task to simple measure what is there, rather than try to guess by grey marks or intuition, or whatever.
I have plans to continue working on a method I feel will take about ALL the objectivity out, but its gonna be awhile yet. In essence, the plan is to digitize targets and measure the groups by first identifying the circles, locating the centers, then measuring from center to center. The issue of identifying doubled holes may be possible with hi level zooming as well, though this isn't the primary focus of the project.
D
deliterman
Guest
new wrinkle !
Now your talking ,with all the new Technology out there that sounds like the way to go.keep up the fine work,I have been scoreing target the old way for 22 years It's about time somebody got in to the 21 century on this.Happy trails.H.B.
Now your talking ,with all the new Technology out there that sounds like the way to go.keep up the fine work,I have been scoreing target the old way for 22 years It's about time somebody got in to the 21 century on this.Happy trails.H.B.
G
goofoff
Guest
Wilbur, glad that you jumped in to this,what does all this mean- where the edge is inturrupted matters not ? and what kind of group measuring device are you talking about ? is a plug involved ? my head is spining , please clear all this up if you would.with all different cals and stuff in this mix.thanks.
Boyd Allen
Active member
Therealld,
Sometimes when I read a post I get in too big of a hurry and I believe that you have done that when you read mine. I did not say subtract the diameter of the pellet. What I said was subtract the actual diameter of a single pellet hole. By that I meant the pellet being used to shoot the group being measured. It doesn't matter what the caliber is, or what the hole size is. If you can measure from outside of hole to outside of hole of the two widest spaced shots, at that point you are a half of a hole from the center of each. By subtracting one actual hole diameter, not the pellet diameter, you have the center to center measurement of the two widest shots. As long as you subtract the actual size of the hole that the pellet that the group was shot with, it does not matter what the pellet size is in relation to that hole. Since I am not experienced with this type of projectile, is what I have described possible with the targets that you measure? If it is, then your problem is solved. Have a good day.
Sometimes when I read a post I get in too big of a hurry and I believe that you have done that when you read mine. I did not say subtract the diameter of the pellet. What I said was subtract the actual diameter of a single pellet hole. By that I meant the pellet being used to shoot the group being measured. It doesn't matter what the caliber is, or what the hole size is. If you can measure from outside of hole to outside of hole of the two widest spaced shots, at that point you are a half of a hole from the center of each. By subtracting one actual hole diameter, not the pellet diameter, you have the center to center measurement of the two widest shots. As long as you subtract the actual size of the hole that the pellet that the group was shot with, it does not matter what the pellet size is in relation to that hole. Since I am not experienced with this type of projectile, is what I have described possible with the targets that you measure? If it is, then your problem is solved. Have a good day.