100 Yard Benchrest - Luck or Skill?

[stoti]

I'll keep my opinion short and sweet. I get what you're saying about the capability of the equipment Mike, but where would the fun be in shooting at a big ole x ring that everybody could hit? This gives everybody something to strive for. The playing field is even, so why does it matter? There are guns that are capable of sub moa and shooters that can do it too. However, the phrase, "my gun or I have lots of guns that shoot sub moa at 100yds all the time" is over used, way, way over used. Yes, maybe a three shot group on a calm day, after three or four tries, or maybe you get lucky on the first try? Those that shoot a lot know it's not easy! Especially if we're talking about 5 shots on 5 targets! Now, throw in the wind and sub moa at 100yds is downright difficult. Variable winds of 10-20mph or more and it's next to impossible to shoot sub moa, multiple times on the same card!

This morning when it was dead calm, I shot a 10 shot group at 50yds that was 1/2", I was very happy with it. Then a while later, I shot my first card for Centercut's challenge. The wind had picked up and was variable 10-20mph. Even after shooting the sighters and adjusting my scope properly, my card looked like crap. There is skill to reading wind and compensating, knowing when to shoot or wait, etc. but in my opinion, that's where the luck factor really shows up. Does the wind stay at a steady speed for you, is it variable, gusty, change direction or does it stop all together when you press the trigger? You really can't assign a percentage to it because the variables are unknown but there is definitely luck involved. Good topic Centercut, something to cool to think about! Everyone have a great day!

Stoti

Ten shots at 50yds. That's about 1/2". The little squares are 1/2", 4 small squares per 1" square.. The white mark on the bottom is light showing through a hole in the paper target behind the target I was shooting today. No wind at all, none.

This target on the other hand was shot in 10-20mph variable wind at 100yds. Quite a difference when gusty 10-20mph winds are present and out of your control! Not a good card and I'm not proud at all, but there are no second chances in competition so there were no second chances here either.

 

[Yo]

 

[thomasair]

Tommy...that’s a good question.

I believe that enlarging the rings by 1 value would better determine the real top shooter. Alternatively they could just go back to shooting 75y...which the target was originally designed for. Nobody was close to shooting a perfect card at 75 before, and nobody is currently.



Making the 10 ring 1.25” means that when a shooter makes the best possible wind call he is rewarded with a 10 since his rifle is actually capable of shooting 1.25” every time. 


With the current 10 ring at 1/2”....the best wind call the same shooter can make is to place his 1.25” grouping gun over the center and hope he gets a 10. The randomness of the 1.25” pattern will get you more 9s than 10s because there is way more area between the 1/2” 10 ring and the outer pattern the gun is capable of. If you have a gun that can only reliably make a 1.25” round 25 shot pattern....you cannot hit the 10 every time...even if you did everything right. That means when you get a 10....you got lucky. The only part that was skill is that you put your 1.25” group where it was supposed to be. Where the pellet falls inside the 1.25” pattern cannot be predicted...so it cannot be skill that decides between a 10 or a 9 when you have done everything right and 10 is smaller than the capability of the equipment.

I fully believe that is why there are no repeat winners after 10 years.

Everone will shoot higher scores, the same guys will be at the top...but now the winner will be decided by his skill instead of his skill plus his luck. There is no downside to making the rings larger. It just eliminates more of the luck factor...which I would think competitors would be all for.

I don’t know how to explain it better than that. Maybe I need some drawings?

Mike 

 

[RB-AOA]

 I wish I did not have diverticulitis I would so be eating popcorn right now

Rob. 

 

[Yo]

 

[Guest]

I shoot less than 1 inch groups quite often .5 with my Impact at 100 yards but very seldom in the center of the target cuz the wind changes constantly where I am. As far as twenty five shot groups that is a bit excessive as it brings in a myriad of external conditions that I have little to no control over into play. I feel lucky to get a good three shot group but now and then if timed just right and I shoot fast enough I can get five in less than an inch. If I take my time and try to guess at all of the wind changes I will most often get a three or four inch groups at 100. Once again seldom near the center of the target unless I do a sight in shot first to see what the wind is really doing which takes away from the time I have to shoot the group before the wind changes again. So much of this is like a calm windless day at the range luck.

The EBR card has 25 targets on it. One round per target. Hence the 25 shot group.

This is a 75 shot group at 25yds benched with my .177 Thomas. So were I too shoot three cards in a BR match at 25m the score has the potential to be perfect. The 100yd target should be of a size that the best guns can attain a perfect score giving thier current capabilities. 

 

[Ghostranger169]

Luck or skill? How about BOTH. Most every competition has elements of both in it. Ben Hogan famously said " Golf is a game of luck. The more I practice, the luckier I get".

What about the luck of wind conditions at different relay times? Or which lane you shoot in? Even if they(AOA) make the 10 ring size bigger to 1.25", there would still be a "luck of the draw" component(best shooter/rifle combo may not win). I guess they would have to build a 100 yard indoor facility to remove the wind variable?

Probably best not to overthink it too much. I believe most people are attracted to 100 yard benchrest shooting(EBR style) because it is fun. Imo, this arguement seems to be sucking some of the "fun" out of it.

 

[edosan]

Luck or Skill?, both in different %

IMO when you shoot for see consistency in steady wind conditions of your rifle, is just the gun. Better if the gun is on a vice or something like that.

Add now targets @ 100 Outdoors (or any distance for what matters), and now is not the gun (you got it already and is consistent) is about the skill of the shooter to read the wind, and conditions, but no matter how skilled you are, a gust in the wrong moment can take all south. (so luck plays in that area sometimes)

BTW: 1 MOA @ 100y with 25 shots INDOORS is way possible today (IMO), outdoors different story wind plays too much with pellets ... but what about slugs? dang! those are forbidden on BR events! Hope that change.

Or maybe in 25y the rings are too big! jajaja today (last years) I see a lot 250 scores...on 25y that is the gun or the shooter? to be or not to be ... The question (if I understand correct) is why winners always change in 100y, and probably in 25 and 50 benchrest event do not? I think that is what Mike (Thomas) is referring to with the size of the target 100y ring? (make sense to me) luck plays here (but is for sure not the only player), might be the rings or...

Precision sports are about consistency. Take PGA golf for example (a precision sport) almost all pga players has the swing for the clubs (Airgun sub moa) , they play 4 days, one day in the morning, other in the afternoon, so on... point is to take "luck" out of the equation as much as possible, the winners usually are the ones that can read the wind, read the greens, and make the best decisions on the field. Long Distance airgun shooting may learn from there, at the end is a precision sport, same as golf.

my 2 cents

 

[tommyb]

Tommy...that’s a good question.

I believe that enlarging the rings by 1 value would better determine the real top shooter. Alternatively they could just go back to shooting 75y...which the target was originally designed for. Nobody was close to shooting a perfect card at 75 before, and nobody is currently.



Making the 10 ring 1.25” means that when a shooter makes the best possible wind call he is rewarded with a 10 since his rifle is actually capable of shooting 1.25” every time. 


With the current 10 ring at 1/2”....the best wind call the same shooter can make is to place his 1.25” grouping gun over the center and hope he gets a 10. The randomness of the 1.25” pattern will get you more 9s than 10s because there is way more area between the 1/2” 10 ring and the outer pattern the gun is capable of. If you have a gun that can only reliably make a 1.25” round 25 shot pattern....you cannot hit the 10 every time...even if you did everything right. That means when you get a 10....you got lucky. The only part that was skill is that you put your 1.25” group where it was supposed to be. Where the pellet falls inside the 1.25” pattern cannot be predicted...so it cannot be skill that decides between a 10 or a 9 when you have done everything right and 10 is smaller than the capability of the equipment.

I fully believe that is why there are no repeat winners after 10 years.

Everone will shoot higher scores, the same guys will be at the top...but now the winner will be decided by his skill instead of his skill plus his luck. There is no downside to making the rings larger. It just eliminates more of the luck factor...which I would think competitors would be all for.

I don’t know how to explain it better than that. Maybe I need some drawings?

Mike 

Understand, and good explanation. FWIW - I think there are many that would like to see a rules change that enlarges the EBR target for 100 yard BR competition. Again, this is a loooooooooooooooong way to shoot so accurately with a pellet gun based on my RF experience.

My overarching point regardless if the rules change or not; ......100 yard BR outdoor shooting requires much more skill than luck from the POV of a “novice or average“ shooter like me.

 

[thomasair]

Ghost ranger...You’re probably right. This would make perfect sense to people that shoot competitively. I guess I’m the fool for suggesting to improve a fun shoot by removing as much luck as possible. Takes the “fun” right out of it, apparently.

Mike

 

[edosan]

I guess I’m the fool for suggesting to improve a fun shoot by removing as much luck as possible. Takes the “fun” right out of it, apparently.

Mike

Not at all, precision sports needs to take the luck out of it for sure (as much as possible) IMO too. The question is how... it needs to be commercial and fun too

 

[boscoebrea]

I see what thomasair is saying,and it makes sense,butt we are not talking making sense we are talking about being consistently lucky.

It is not luck,it is practice and knowing your equipment and yourself and the other variables....that takes a lot of practice and a learning carve=skill.

So if the rifle shoots 1" and the target is a 1/2"..you would be lucky to hit the 1/2" target consistently.

 

[tommyb]

Ghost ranger...You’re probably right. This would make perfect sense to people that shoot competitively. I guess I’m the fool for suggesting to improve a fun shoot by removing as much luck as possible. Takes the “fun” right out of it, apparently.

Mike

No Mike, you are not the fool. 

Do you realize how much smarter and more informed we all are because of various skill levels, experiences, and spirited points of view? Why do you think there are over 2400 views right now and that number is rising? Members are interested in learning and contributing and obviously like the discussion. We all benefit! 

Nobody is taking the fun out of anything, and certainly not you. It’s a forum, keep your opinion and defend what you believe. If someone were to give me a quiz on this thread, I guarantee I would do well on the content of what was contributed by a bunch of smart people. 

This is a giant WiN for anyone who cares about the topic. 

 

[brink]

Just for grins I rescored my best target which was a 231-3X shot before the last rule change where you shoot one shot per bull then move on to the next bull. I scored it by moving the scoring rings out one number so the old 10 ring in now the X, then 9 now becomes the 10 ring and so on my new score would have been a 247-9X shot with a 22 and not using any scoring plugs. I'm sure that there would be a number of 250's shot and how many "X's" would be the first tie breaker? The second tie breaker would be the widest shot looses? Curious to know what other people think? I like it my self and think that it would be a game changer.

 

[Ghostranger169]

Thomasair,

I'm sorry if my opinion offended you(you too Centercut). This "debate" has been going on for a while and doesn't seem "productive". Your arguement for a bigger(more reasonable) 10 ring makes perfect sense. It is totally logical, would be fairer, and I hope the people at AOA are listening. What doesn't make sense is to continue to shoot targets which you find frustrating. Here's an idea, do just what you did when you started designing/making rifles, make a better alternative. You are an industry leader and seem to know exactly what size you believe would be fair, so design the target size for 100 yards and start a new "alternative" challenge thread. I(and many others) would be glad to shoot it and advocate for it's use. Just a thought

 

[sonny]

The time of day you shoot, morning or afternoon, the lane your assigned ETC is also part of the luck factor. Maybe a top 5 shootout for final score would be a better way to crown the champion.

 

[thomasair]

Nobody offended me so no worries about that.

There will always be some luck in any competition...but to find the real winner, there should be as much of it removed as possible.

I believe the rings are too small, and too far apart to effectively separate the top shooters and determine the truly best shooter. This is especially true if not plugging.

Maybe I will design a more appropriate one for the distance and equipment used....and we can try it out and see. Thanks for the suggestion.

Mike 

 

[Ghostranger169]

Thomasair,

Good to hear. I think most people agree with you about the size of the target needs to be bigger. I(and many) commend and support your efforts to develop a better 100 yard BR target and to make 100 yard br shooting fairer.

Regards,

Phil

 

[Centercut]

I think since we’re working on 100Y perhaps we should also look at other distances. For instance, is current .22 Airgun Technology capable of hitting 25 (or 75 over 3 cards) bulls in a row at 50 yards? It’s never been done in actual competition, so is it possible or perhaps we should make the targets larger? Just a thought...

 

[Yo]