Sheez Tim - What's rattled your cage? You're not one of the guys who's been twiddling their thumbs in R&D for the last 30 years in a rimfire factory are you?
Going back over a hundred years to 1909 the BSA No. 12 Martini actioned target rifle was expected to keep 9 out 10 shots within an inch at 100 yards.
HERE
The Martini International Mk 3 from the 1960's was expected to keep all shots within .75 at 100 yards.
HERE
A consensus of opinion seems to indicate that the very best rimfire ammunition ever produced was in the 1990's from the fabled Eley No 5 machine.
Sure, .22 accuracy has improved, but not by much over the last 50 years and very little has been due to more accurate ammunition, of course, we're talking about good quality match ammunition here.
Top quality match barrels better? Yes, probably a little and more consistent quality, but I think most of the improvements have come from a better understanding of barrel harmonics and the use of various types of tuners/dampers etc.
Could you please just explain where you think my group measurements are incorrect.
OK we' ll do this nice and polite....you see if you agree.
Now without getting into al kinds of self important bragadosio, I live in the benchrest world...rimfire and centerfire, know many of the best smiths and own/owned /shoot/ comp guns from most everybody. All smiths, build better guns today. All componants are better than even 5-10 years ago, better actions, better triggers, better stocks, better, far more consistant barrels, and damn good ammo.
Don't believe me look at any big time rimefire BR sanctioning body, records are dropping like flies.
One of the guys I shoot with, In ,IR50 sporter, the 7 1/2 lb class with 6X scope shot 8 250's in a row this year.....8. A few years back you never heard of 250's with the sporter.
As I said before, go read the ELEY production articles....they're on line, they go into stuff like the fact that for TENNEX every single slug that is used....every one, is computer scanned before it's seated in the case that is scanned to insure the powder charge is exact.
That said, on to groups.
First off, you do not measure the hole, you measure the dark radius outside it where the slug actually cuts, and folds the paper.....how do you think that dark radius got there?
Next, your sub caliber groups CANNOT, by defination, be those measurements.
A .22 hole, call it .200" means for a group to be inside that the subsequent shots must cut inside that hole, they cannot be adjacent to it let alone paper between holes. This is pretty easy stuff. This is one of the reasons calibers have limited accuracy and if you have ever sen real sanctioned BR measurement calipers are used with an attached etched reticle.
So in the end.... Nothing really rattled my cage but if you go to all this trouple to note, record, post all these groups, shouldn't, maybe, they be accurate.
Lastly, I directed a few seasoned BR competitors from BRC to come take a look and I got a universal, WTF, response.
Number one factoid given.....group cannot be sub caliber unless all followup holes cut well inside the first.......basic physics my friend....take it or leave it as you see fit.
Well, I re-read what I wrote. What I read now is not what I was thinking as I was typing, and what a typical reader would visualize reading this is a helluva lot better than I did. Over egg-saturated? Yeah. (Eating crow.) My one 10/22 would do half inch groups at 50 yards. (I have a couple of TC Contenders that will do that also.) That is double what others have posted and what a good shooter could do today. Yes, I have shot 1/2" groups at 100 with that lucky carton of ammo when I was doing a lot of shooting, but since I have not been shooting them in a long while, and not even consistently, since I have been into big pistols....I likely could not shoot like that today, not even with same brand of ammo. I don't shoot near enough .22LR now to even consider trying the "3 of 4 groups under an inch at 100 yards on the same target". One of four? Maybe? 
