100 Yard Benchrest - Luck or Skill?

[thomasair]

Mike...I’m not butt hurt...I’m just getting tired of trying to explain the same thing over and over.

I don’t think you need to be told that chance induced from poor target design is not the same as someone making a lucky guess at the wind and getting it right.


How big of a 25 shot group do you think your rifle shoots in good conditions?


Mike 

 

[thomasair]

Jimmy...that is correct. I was just confused as to the way it was written. Sorry.

Mike 

 

[thomasair]

Making the 10 ring bigger so it’s suited more to the equipment removes the luck from poor target design.

Making the rest of the rings more tightly spaced makes the process of determining who did the best job more accurate.

Mike 

 

[Centercut]

Good, because I thought we were friends... And I do agree with you about the target, but also think the amount of error or luck induced by that design is miniscule compared to the potential error from either not reading the wind correctly, or reading it correctly only to have it change while we shoot. And yes, its not exactly the same, but it IS luck...

I'm not sure what it shoots 25 shot group at 100 yards is with my Bleu Wolf, probably within couple hundredths of what your gun shoots. I haven't come across conditions good enough to try it out, since I'm working during the week, so the mornings are out, and the evenings would be OK but where I shoot the sun is directly in my face in the evening when the wind dies down. And its squirrel and rabbit season, so weekends are out early AM... I think probably a 25 shot group blocked on the rest with no wind or consistent light wind maybe 1 1/4 inches...

So lets agree on a size, and on spacing (your 1/2 inch looked good), insert an X ring (size?) and I'll do the targets same as the previous ones, you can post with link since its your idea.

 

[CampFussell]

According to EBR site, the 10 ring is really 0.475"

 

[Centercut]

Yes, I was using 1/2" for ease of Math and because the RMAC and PAC targets are closer to 1/2"... Most people don't know the target sizes for RMAC and PAC are slightly larger than EBR targets...

 

[thomasair]

It’s actually not miniscule, and it’s also not remotely comparable to guessing the wind. As you pointed out...a good shooter guesses the wind correctly more often than a novice. It’s vitally important to get awarded the highest value for doing the right thing. Currently with a 1.25” gun...you could get a 9, a 10, or a 10x for doing the best job. That’s not a small issue, and it will not work itself out fairly by itself. 

Ok...so if good guns shoot 1.25” 25 shot groups at 100...that means the highest value ring should be at .900” when using a plug. This value should be the 10x, not the 10, though. I think a .875” 10x and a 1”10 would be good. Then space the rest of the rings at 3/8” increments. Just go to 5 would be fine and anything outside the 5 is a 4.

Mike 

 

[Guest]

Also, I’d like to know of those voting to change the 10 ring size, how many have competed in EBR, RMAC or PAC 100Y BR? I’m only asking this because I’ve recently had FT questions about what rangefinding has to do with marksmanship and why prone kinda wasn’t truly allowed, and was told to shoot it first a couple times prior to criticizing the discipline. I’m not going to be like that, but I am curious. Not 100Y at your local range at dawn or dusk, but actual in competition with swirling winds that make it hard to hit the 8 ring let alone the 9 or 10 rings... The top score at all three major 100Y BR competitions in 2019 was 225 FYI.

I shot 25yd indoor, and 25m outdoor br for three years. This included a regional and national event. I was at all my matches with mostly factory ft guns so top scores weren't my goal. As for 100yd events I scored at last year's PA Cup and if I remember correctly not a single card with my signature was protested. 

Is my opinion valid now?

 

[thomasair]

Here is my proposal.

 

[brink]

H'ummm, that's the biggest X ring that I have ever seen on a target compared to the 10 ring and I have shot a lot of targets in my life! My humble opinion. 

 

[thomasair]

The X is the highest value...making it small means you are back to adding in a luck factor.

Mike.

 

[brink]

OK, I understand what you are saying and besides it is your target. I shoot Cast Bullet Association matches the X ring is .074 at 100 yards when we move to 200 yards the 10 ring doubles but the X stays the same .074 very lucky to hit a X at 200 yards! Lots of space around that X ring!

 

[thomasair]

I certainly don’t mind suggestions. I appreciate the feedback.


Im not familiar with the repeatable accuracy of your cast bullet shooting...but I assume it’s better than a pellet. 


Mike.

 

[mmahoney]

Would a dark 10 ring make it easier to distinguish a 9 vs 10 vs X? 

 

[thomasair]

Maybe...I can try it both ways. It certainly draws your eye to the center better.

Mike 

 

[Scotchmo]

I think the targets are fine as-is. If the equipment is not yet capable of a perfect score without a significant factor "good luck", than so be it. There will always be some luck involved. Even at the current state of 100yd airgun benchrest, there is still a sufficient skill requirement to call it a competition. As the equipment improves, the luck factor will be reduced some, but it will never go away completely.

There is no such think as a 1moa gun (every shot/always). Better to think of guns as having a standard deviation of error. If the one standard deviation is +/- 1/2moa, than 66% of your shots will be within a 1moa diameter circle. You need a standard deviation of about +/- 0.32moa in order to have a 50% chance of being inside a 1moa circle. No matter how small you can get the SD, the gun will NEVER have a 100% chance of landing ALL shots within a 1moa circle. So for any group/card/target that you shoot, there will always be some luck as to whether you can get a perfect score.

Rather than bigger targets to reduce the "luck factor", I prefer there remain an incentive for manufacturers to develop and produce more accurate guns and projectiles.

 

[CampFussell]

The more I'm looking at this and comparing to 25 meter and 50 meter targets, I'm thinking the EBR target is where it should be? It looks pretty forgiving compared to a 50 meter target?

I've heard folks say that a 250 score at 25 meters has been done repetitively, but the x shots are what determines the winner. You have to completely obliterate the x ring to score an x and I don't think anyone has scored a 250 w/25x at competition yet?

I'll leave these target sizes here for you smarter fellas to ponder, but I think EBR target size is on the money. Maybe make the 10 ring a solid 1/2" instead of 0.475" like they do at RMAC and PAC?

25 meters
10 Ring 2mm .07874 inches
9 Ring 8mm .31495 inches
8 Ring 14mm .55118 inches
7 Ring 22mm .86614 inches
6 Ring 30 mm 1.18110 inches
5 Ring 39mm 1.53542 inches


50 meters
10 X 0.792mm .0312 inches
10 Ring 6.350mm .25 inches
9 Ring 12.700mm .50 inches
8 Ring 19.050mm .75 inches
7 Ring 25.400mm 1.0 inches
6 Ring 31.750mm 1.25 inches
5 Ring 38.100 mm 1.50 inches

EBR ring sizes

X ring ……… 0.200 inches
10 ring……… 0.475
9 ring………. 1.250
8 ring………. 2.000
7 ring……… 2.800
6 ring……… 3.580
5 ring……… 4.36
4 ring……….5.125

 

[thomasair]

 












There is luck in many things ...but allowing luck where it can be removed is not good practice.

Here is a PDF of a practice target if anyone wants to try it.

Mike
View attachment 1594423539_14715259905f08f8f3d998e1.53557280.pdf

 

[thomasair]

Hi Jimmy....what makes you say it’s on the money?

Mike 

 

[CampFussell]

Hi Jimmy....what makes you say it’s on the money?

Mike

Mike, I'm just comparing the 50 meter target to the EBR target.

The x ring is 6.4 times bigger on the EBR target

The 10 ring is in question as it's only 1.9 times bigger? A 2.5 times increase would put it at 0.625 inches which might be an improvement?

The EBR 9 ring is 2.5 times bigger than the 50 meter 9 ring

The EBR 8 ring is 2.667 times bigger

The EBR 7 ring is 2.8 times bigger and so forth