Would you like to see smaller f open targets?

[davidjoe]

I could only find that one old score sheet, and the bottom was cropped. There were 89 shooters. But far more X’s are shot now.

If I can illustrate with Larry B, our present Texas state Long Range champ, who’s both shown above and shoots now. Larry shot 49 X’s out of 100 shots at 1,000 yards this past April. 1/2 MOA X ring at 1,000 - not 600. (Amazing Larry, only one person shot 50)

In 2004 above, Larry shot 19 X’s out of 45 shots. At 600, not 1,000. Larry was great then too, if you’re wondering. And yet they STILL reduced target size.

I can’t find 1,000 yd. scores from back then, but I am certain guys didn’t shoot more X’s at 1,000 than they did at 600, and we see what they shoot now.

I think the poster’s point is that X’s and 10’s are way more common now, despite the fact that targets have already been reduced, once, by 1/2 the diameter of the old score. Why that is doesn’t really matter.

Should X’s at 600 be more frequent than 10’s, because they basically are. It’s poker with Jokers, 4’s and 9’s and Jacks being wild. Yes, there are ways to solve a tie, including a coin flip several tiers down, according to the NRA.

No one regrets the 2006 size reduction. Sure enough the leaders were spread out after that, .... for a while. The scores are at that same point again, is all that is being observed.

 

[Bindi2]

Go sh


Go shoot benchrest then. There needs to be a delay. 10seconds minimum. 7 isn’t long enough.
No delay and the average shot is 4-5 seconds, that is not f class. Only trigger pulling which is benchrest. Nobody get their panties in wad from that statement but it’s fact.

You are trying to remove a perceived advantage to a condition you can not do or a skill you have that is being by passed by a new skill that can be used with ETs. Train wrecks are much bigger with ETs and speed shooting. By the way 4-5 seconds is slow try scoring for a shooter in half that time. The rules don't say he cant he can and does but does wreck when he misses a wind change. The current rules work fine just change the way you think about them your shooting may improve.

 

[Zilla]

I also think there should be at least a 7 second delay on etargets. I don't think we should change the sport to accomodate the capability of the targets. It should be the other way around.

 

[Lbart]

davidjoe
Not a big thing or even a thing, but the scores you quoted for me in 2004 were from Friday's 1k match. In Saturday's 600 I had 32x's. The X'ring was 3" & 10 ring 7". I guess I learned to shoot a bit better since then. BTW, John Brewer the 1st FC Open Champ cleaned all three 600's that day with 38x's. i have all the scores if you are interested.

 

[Bindi2]

If you want a time delay shoot two to a target 45 seconds per shot it is called Bisley shooting. Leave string shooting alone.

 

[davidjoe]

davidjoe
Not a big thing or even a thing, but the scores you quoted for me in 2004 were from Friday's 1k match. In Saturday's 600 I had 32x's. The X'ring was 3" & 10 ring 7". I guess I learned to shoot a bit better since then. BTW, John Brewer the 1st FC Open Champ cleaned all three 600's that day with 38x's. i have all the scores if you are interested.

Evening Larry,

... Just going off that page attached above from the US team archive website. Idk, it says 600 yards on top, just going off it. Yeah, I was curious about size. I knew bullets got better, ... but I was scratching my head because I had seen that by 2006, the bulletin reported the nationals and it made it sound like the 1/2 moa X target scheme was new that year, but you recall they were already small in 2004, which I suppose is why the X counted as a 11 points and an X.

PS, I changed it, above on that 1 moa ring X size subject.

 

[MattPeetz]

You are trying to remove a perceived advantage to a condition you can not do or a skill you have that is being by passed by a new skill that can be used with ETs. Train wrecks are much bigger with ETs and speed shooting. By the way 4-5 seconds is slow try scoring for a shooter in half that time. The rules don't say he cant he can and does but does wreck when he misses a wind change. The current rules work fine just change the way you think about them your shooting may improve.

4-5 seconds is slow? Pulling a target, marking it, pasting and moving scoring disk in 5 seconds. And your saying there are people out there doing all that in 2 1/2 seconds. Calling BS on that.
I wholeheartedly agree on pair firing. Get rid of string shooting.

 

[Bindi2]

4-5 seconds is slow? Pulling a target, marking it, pasting and moving scoring disk in 5 seconds. And your saying there are people out there doing all that in 2 1/2 seconds. Calling BS on that.
I wholeheartedly agree on pair firing. Get rid of string shooting.

E Ts not manual. My club ditched manual targets over ten years ago. I wont shoot Bisley or on manual targets nor do I shoot as fast as many do but if the conditions warrant faster speed I can and do. With the advent of the SOLO and Shotmarker ETs even the smaller clubs are moving to ETs. Manual targets are dead here.

 

[dskogman]

At 600 yards, if you decreased the size of both the x ring and the 10 ring by 1/2 moa, instead of the x ring getting shot out, both the x ring and the 10 ring would get shot out. The people shooting sub 3" groups are still going to shoot sub 3" groups. The same number of holes are going to be in the same 3" circle. It is just going to wipe out 2 rings.

There is nothing wrong with deciding matches by x count. I don't even understand the argument.

That’s not exactly true. 10’s and X’s count the same. If I the 10 ring is smaller some of those are now 9’s and hardly anyone cleans. That means if you happen drop one point in the first match by .001” you can still come back and win.
Now that is not the case.

 

[MattPeetz]

E Ts not manual. My club ditched manual targets over ten years ago. I wont shoot Bisley or on manual targets nor do I shoot as fast as many do but if the conditions warrant faster speed I can and do. With the advent of the SOLO and Shotmarker ETs even the smaller clubs are moving to ETs. Manual targets are dead here.

Yup and that is benchrest. Not close to f class.

 

[davidjoe]

There was no mention of score or cleans in my post. My post was not about score. It was about the center getting shot out.

That said, if someone drops one point in the first match and that puts them out of contention, that means the winner shot better. Is the smaller ring idea somehow meant to level the playing field? If so, I like the idea even less.

We should be able to overcome paper accumulating holes if we can achieve center punching 1,000 yard targets with $5k rifles. Isn’t the goal to shoot out the center, after all, how can it be both the goal and a problem at the same time.

If anything, the idea is meant to unlevel scores that shouldn’t be the same. Smaller rings do a better job of differentiating scores. There would be no score ties in 60 shots if scoring rings were half an inch apart and the center X was an inch. Now, no one is suggesting “that” much definition is needed, but it illustrates the point. By the way has anyone seen an air gun center. ( . )

We are trying to hit the middle of the black; if on a still winter morning, one shooter holds the center inch of the five inch X ring for 20 shots and beside him the shooter put 3 in the center inch and 17 all over the rest of the 5 inch circle, and they both drop a 10 on shot 21, the score will report identical shooting.

But it wasn’t identical shooting, as benchresters know. Fclass isn’t about group size as two 10’s at 9 and 3 o’clock are worth the same 20 points as two 10’s touching, but it IS about middle of the black.

78.5 square inches is the size of the 10 ring at 1,000. Shot dispersion keeps shrinking with better shooters and gear. Ranges can’t physically increase distance beyond 1,000. Matches are already shot during windy hours. The easiest and only conceivable eventuality to really differentiate clustering shooters is smaller scoring rings.

 

[Bindi2]

Yup and that is benchrest. Not close to f class.

The current rules say it is F Class. If you don't like it go and shoot something more to what you like. Maybe optical Palma.

 

[dcali]

I'm only half way through my first cup of coffee this morning, so this might actually be a bad idea, but here goes:

Count Xs as 11 points. Then, they're requirements to win, rather than tie breakers, and a guy who shoots a 599-49x would win over a guy who shoots a 600-30x (under current rules), which makes sense to me. Ties could still be broken creedmoor style. The same thing could be accomplished by getting rid of the x ring and calling that the 10 ring, and shifting every other ring down one point (Xs are now 10s, 10s are now 9s, etc).

The only downsides I can think of would be that the math gets harder, and that classifications would get all jacked up.

 

[ED3]

As I read this there seems to be a dual issue with high/ close scores, and the premature destruction of target centers.
If so, the an obvious solution would be to make the center more difficult to hit.
This would lower/ spread scores, and save targets.

Eliminating the rear bag would certainly be a step in that direction.
It would not effect, or necessarily discourage equipment development per se, merely (re-)introduce more of the human control element to this discipline of prone shooting.
That is, if that's what truly desired.

 

[dcali]

I think the only solution to shooting out the center is to replace them more often. Or, E targets, but they're arguably not accurate enough mid-range x ring precision.

 

[davidjoe]

I think the only solution to shooting out the center is to replace them more often. Or, E targets, but they're arguably not accurate enough mid-range x ring precision.

I’ll trust electronic targets when bemchresters adopt them at the distances we shot.

 

[sdean]

Maybe y'all quit beating on this dead horse. Nothing is going to change because it is hard to fix something not broke. Those guys with enough concentration to shoot all those x's over 3 strings probably deserve to win.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Make them shoot factory ammo .

 

[243Mendoza]

You folks need ranges with much more wind! Come over to the Pacific Northwest in spring!

East of the Cascades, not the wind free ranges on the west side

 

[davidjoe]

Maybe y'all quit beating on this dead horse. Nothing is going to change because it is hard to fix something not broke. Those guys with enough concentration to shoot all those x's over 3 strings probably deserve to win.

300 is broken. Virtually any spotter you put in the hole is going to burst the next shot.

Maybe y'all quit beating on this dead horse. Nothing is going to change because it is hard to fix something not broke. Those guys with enough concentration to shoot all those x's over 3 strings probably deserve to win.

Aw heckfire, the same guys would be winning, but instead of 25 A+‘s being given, and two B’s, the A+’s would be fewer and more meaningful. Last horse hit from me.