Are 5 shot groups worthless statistically?

I tried to watch most of the video, but I found it pointless. No, not right, it isn't pointless, it just doesn't address the question originally asked, "why doesn't the bullet go through the same hole every time?" Math and statistics may suggest future performance based on results obtained with a host of variables. But if you are a competitive BR shooter, that information is not helpful. You know the variables involved in constructing your ammo and in shooting conditions at the bench. You have to load and test ammo to make your choices. If load A is 10% more likely to shoot .25 MOA as compared to load B, I don't care and don't need to know. I'm going to shoot load A. The exercises described may be of academic interest to a scientist, and that's great, but it's not a short cut to developing the best load. The answer to the question asked is finally answered in the video. Many variables are involved that affect where the bullet goes. Some examples: bullet (many types and weights), powder type and amount, primer brand and type, brass, neck thickness, primer pocket dimension, bullet seating depth, neck tension (based on sizing bushing used), etc. And these variables are in play with the environment, temperature can change the whole recipe. The purpose of the exercise shown in the video, IMO, is academic in nature. It may be very useful if one is wishing to compile shooting statistics based on the performance of a plethora of variables, but I see little proactive value in developing shooting performance, or in choosing the number of shots you wish to shoot in your groups. But then my wife says I'm always wrong, and I cannot say the same about her.
Honestly, when I posted this I was wondering what the comments would be. I disagree with the fact that the guy used scopes AND Red Dots at 100 yards, it's an either or IMHO. Then toss in different platforms and you have more variables. I suppose that would be statistically significant to prove his math. But apparently it's impossible by his math to ever get a zero shot. We see darn good shooting at matches that further disprove his theory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jetpopt
Since 95% of my shooting is off hand I don't shoot for groups. I try to get as close to center/bullseye as possible. The only time I shoot for a group is when sighting on a rest.
But whats the difference if you shot 1 in 5 targets or 5 in one target? The end result / goal the same ,right?
 
For me there is a difference in 10 in one or 1 per 10. It has it most impact when I am on a single shot per bull with multiple bulls. One shot per bull, with 10 or 25 bulls is different from the 10 on a single bull I often do with longer ranges. There is a move and rest adjustment error that is added when I go from one bull to the next. While shooting 10 on a single bull I have the rifle set, and don't want to disturb things any more than I have to while adjusting for wind, or other elements for each shot. These adjustments tend to be smaller movements and not involve a lot of gross motor activity. Moving from one bull to the next for the next shot means I have to reposition the rifle/rest and adjust for wind or other elements. As I shoot a lot of springer stuff that means variations in some part of the hold each time. More changes for error.
 
Try it and see? The variable of human anxiety over ruining the accumulating shots was mentioned.
Tried and failed , 30y irons cphp.177 pretty overcast. Left one shot each , right another round. 30y, multi, r9, irons 3.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: drpietrzak
Not sure who said it but: Numbers Lie and Liars Use Numbers.

Numbers can be manipulated into almost any type of conclusion.

There seems to be a difference though in terms of shooting for groups and shooting for accuracy. From what I have seen, qualitatively, over many many posts of target groups is that when people are shooting for groups they aren't focused on accuracy. So many groups are posted that are not close to the bullseye, but are still tight groups. How does that impact the validity? Does that mean it's a precise but not accurate rifle? Does one try harder when have a clean X for one shot on each target? What if you take a sheet of 20 targets and overlay them - does that equal a group?
I think alt of people don’t adjust their scope when trying different pellets , I like to leave scope alone ,this way I see what pellets are shooting almost the same. On high power shooting 10 gr HN I have the same impact point as with jsb 8.4 on medium power, you can get an idea by your groups shooting high low side to side,I’ve shot pellets of same weight and had two inch difference between where they impact
 
  • Like
Reactions: jetpopt
But whats the difference if you shot 1 in 5 targets or 5 in one target? The end result / goal the same ,right?

5 or 10 shot groups pellets can go through the same hole and if your hole is a quarter size you don't really know if they are dead center or off to the side of the hole. 1 shot on a target you will always know where it's actually hitting.

Here's an example of 10 shot groups at 27 yards. Fun but after so many shots your just trying to shoot through the hole. And not sure they are on the 10 ring or the 9 ring or 8.

20221216_123640.jpg

20221216_123208.jpg
 
Last edited:
5 or 10 shot groups pellets can go through the same hole and if your hole is a quarter size you don't really know if they are dead center or off to the side of the hole. 1 shot on a target you will always know where it's actually hitting.

Here's an example of 10 shot groups at 27 yards. Fun but after so many shots your just trying to shoot through the hole. And not sure they are on the 10 ring or the 9 ring or 8.

View attachment 365676
There a traced nickle . But same thing but a traced dime. R9, 30y rested still stock irons ( no scopes no peeps) cphp. ( Not saying it's so great or wonderful . Just saying)
more,r9,30y,action.jpg
Even use a tad smaller german 1 pfennig (hw ya know)
th-142338040.jpg
 
Last edited:
There a traced nickle . But same thing but a traced dime. R9, 30y rested still stock irons ( no scopes no peeps) cphp. ( Not saying it's so great or wonderful . Just saying)
View attachment 365681
Even use a tad smaller german 1 pfennig (hw ya know)
View attachment 365684

Ya , I said a quarter so you would be included also. Jk Lol My target was 40 shots all under a dime. Not saying it's good just trying to explain its hard to put a score on even dime size groups.