By way of qualification I have never shot a 100 shot Hudson match in a single day. (I've shot no more than 15 Hudsons in total) Usually shoot say 60 shots one morning and finish the next. Shot or sat out relays  relative to conditions.

But I've come to feel that the Hudson match should be fired as it was in the early days. When you fire that 100 shots in a day you may experience changes in conditions. You compensate. You will experience changes in energy level. So did those before us. These various factors are challenging to your mental and physical condition. But that's what a sport is all about! We can't make everything easy and attainable to all persons. (Does any body still get to the hunting grounds on foot or horseback or do they use an ATV?). Those of us who shot in the early Coors matches and the continuation of same via the ISSA, shoot a 50 shot offhand match in 2.5 hours. Personally, I do not want any advantage over what was done in Golden Era of Schuetzen. 

Re-entry targets. Wonderful, have to have them. There are so
many who enjoy shooting them and they are such a fine source of revenue. And for folks with ailments or are simply getting old, yours truly included, the re-entry matches are paramount. I recall a re-entry across-the-log muzzleloading shoot some years ago near Richmond, VA. Only six targets but you could reenter. Heard a chap say, "I may be outshot at first but I will not be outfinanced"!

Dick

Dick:
     I think they should make the Hudson a reentry match so that I would have something to shoot for each day.   
mes

Dick

I came to Schuetzen from Silouette were you have 2.5 minutes for 5 shots. I found it plenty of time to get the shots off.  If you read the books, "The Russian Book or "Tubbs "Rifle" Etc they all say your hold and sight picture is the best in the first few seconds. Tubb in particular gets his shot off right away or puts it down and re-mounts. Several years ago I was forced by working overseas to shoot Small bore prone for competition, Members of the club were very good shooters some ex Australian Olympic team. They all said once the sight picture is aquired get the shot off.  We had 20 minutes for 20 shots but all the good shooters finished in half that time

Of course you have to load a Schuetzen in a more leinghy process but I still think it's an advantage to work your way through it with some dispatch.  I find 2 10 shot targets in a 45 minute relay is easy to do. 3 targets pushes me and perhaps is a disavantage.  I could use extra time after a break and in particular if eating lunch should wait some time before getting back to it.  I get around that by drinking water and eating something simple like peanuts all day long.

You do see people taking much longer. One competitor I see  that shoots very good scores and takes two days for the Hudson spends his off time resting quietly and not interacting much with anyone, Focusing.  Thats a big advantage but Shooting offhand then going to bench rest, discussing politics, or some other thing then going back to the offhand targets is a clear disavantage. The other thing is if you are truily fatigued from shooting its best to rest before resumeing the match.

About the only disavantage to single day I can see if if you get a real big conditon change. Nice weather one day and terrible the next. That is surely a disadvantage but you can almost always tell from Forecast if thats going to be the case.

Boats

Well tomorrow we that is the Eau Claire Rifle Club Schuetzen Committee will be doing our Fall 100 shot match. It generaly takes about 3 to 4 hours. If we feel up to it we may shoot a few bench matches if someone is up to it.
fallingblock

The idea of using fixed ammo for schuetzen is not all that wild assuming that the chamber/throat is appropriate for it.  I am wondering what charge weight works well and "gently" for people who shoot 4227 in a barrel modern steel for .32-40.  Somewhere on this or the old Shooter's.com board we had a thread going about just the topic of fixed rounds for schuetzen.  Is there any interest in revisiting the topic on a new thread (besides my own interest?  )

Froggie

PS  My Ruger #1 offhand rifle has a Douglas barrel in .32-40 and seems to like a 4227 load behind a 195gr Welch bullet, so the question is not merely academic!   

Pete,

In my 38/55 so far fixed is just as good as breech seated ammo.  I used to shoot it BPCS and spent a lot of time developing loads and brass.  And so far I don't have the right Breech seated bullet.

In my 32/40 barrel the reverse is true. Breech seated loads are much better probably because that's about all I have ever done with it.  I did load it fixed some time ago for the ASSRA 100 yard postal and results were pretty ordanary. I also have a very good fixed Squib load for indoors.

The real reason I breech seat is it's so much easier than all the brass manuplation required to produce good loads with cast bullets.  Every case is a different problem and potential variable.  And neck pull is a major issue, too much and you deform the bullet too little and ignition is inconsistent.

It's usefull to have some fixed loads for matches that are short duration or range, Gallery squibs are a lot of fun too. Indoors with a dark firing line you can't breech seat.  For short range pratice not carrying all the stuff normaly required for breech seating and using fixed is not a bad idea either.

For a long time I resisted it, But for the general run of Schuetzen matches I think Breech is the way go.

Boats

Boats,

 I agree with what you say 100%. The only reason I use fixed ammo for offhand shooting is there is enuf fatique in shooting a 100 rd. match without having to deal with doing all the work necessary for breech seating added on top. Fixed ammo also allows you to catch a condition and maybe get a coupla shots off before things change. At our range this only happens during the first relay, and sometimes the second. Then the wind picks up and swirls around the berms on the left side, and you spend the rest of the day holding off or changing sights for every shot. So mostly fixed ammo is more a convenience that anything else.

 For short... 10 shot offhand matches..... I'll more than likely breech seat, and of course do that for all bench matches. So far I've never seen a gun that didn't shoot better when breech seated.

PETE

P.S. Fallinblock..... What's that All American match consist of. From the scores it doesn't look easy.

Boats,

  Amen! Plus I think Steve has mentioned that using the .22 for the Hudson Challenge cuts down the fatique quite a bit over the length of the match. This is something many don't figure on. If you're not used to it a 12# gun gets pretty heavy, and then you add on top of that the fatique created from shooting a 100 rounds of the over .30 caliber CF's and most people will be wore out at the end, and their scores will show it. A .22 is definitely the way to go if you're looking for the highest score possible. But, I like to compare my scores with what they shot in the old days, and most shot .32 calibers back then.

  Yeah! I hate reading those offhand scores at the various matches. I figure for the Election Day Match if I can put up a score in the 1800 range I'll consider it a job well done on my part. Don't figure I'll scare anybody with that either.

PETE

Coolhand, as the late Duchess of Windsor put it "you can never be too rich, too young, or too thin". 

I think it's time to start talking about that "hot" topic of around 1989, the use of shooting jackets in our sport. I understand that several shooters at Etta Green are using them. The WSU has two classes, traditional and modern, the latter permits jackets, gloves, boots, whatever. I would think that the designation "J" should appear afters scores shoot with a jacket. Hey, I might be trying a jacket myself and promise to notify all in that event.

Dick

coolhd,

  I certainly agree with your assessment of the Hudson Match.

  Just a coupla corrections. The Election Day Match that Hudson set his record was held on Oct. 1st, 1903. I've never read any account of what the weather was like but more than likely they shot out of a shooting house so would be protected from the wind/weather.

  On the use of scopes then...... Altho Hudson did shoot his record with iron sights, scopes were allowed in that match. Several shooters showed up with them, including Pope, and after much arguing a vote was taken and they were allowed. There was quite a bit of hard feelings about this vote, so much so that the expected match winner, along with a few others, left without firing a shot.

PETE

coolhd,

  Again, I agree with you.

  For myself I find it takes about two weeks of shooting almost every day with iron sights to get the "hang" of them again every Spring. Scopes of course have there own problems but, for me seem to be easier to get up to speed with.

  Never having shot out of a shooting house I can't give an opinion on if it would be easier than shooting in the open or not. Like you I like to feel the air move around me as I feel that air movement closest to you has the greatest effect on the bullets flight. But I'll bet, like me, you've shot in conditions when you wished you had some protection from the wind. 

  As I mentioned in my last message scopes were still a controversial issue in 1903, but from what I read they had been in match use for a few years prior. Always with a lot of pro and con. Sometimes they were allowed, sometimes not. The problem as seen by it's detractors was that it gave an unfair advantage. The supporters felt that, like today, a scope allowed the older shooters to keep on shooting after their eyesight started to fail.

  You might have trouble finding the source I used for the Hudson match. It was completely covered in the Nov. 12, 1903 issue of Shooting & Fishing. A very complete writeup with every shot fired by every competitor. There must have been quite a bit of interest in the gun and load Hudson used as a picture and description are in the Nov. 26 issue. If I recall right I posted the latter here a while back.

  If you, or anyone else that's interested, can't obtain the article I can type it in as a message on here. It's kind of long, but very interesting. I can also enter in the individual shooters, where from, guns, loads, and total score, but think I'll pass on entering each individual shot. Probably gonna take two or three messages as it is!

  One of the things that intriqued me, until I just re-read the article, was why was it called the Election Day match when it was shot in Oct. Apparently, from it's enception ten years previous to 1903, the match was held on Nov. 3rd at Armbruster's Greenville shooting Park in Jersey City. Due to a misunderstanding in 1902 the match was taken over by the Zettler Rifle Club in 1903.

PETE

Dick

Here is my 2 cents worth on the points.

Shooting houses. They are a definite advantage offhand. The wind blows your body around and has more effect on your hold than it does to your bullet. The house is worth right many points on some days. 

Shooting coats. They are no advantage. I know Highpower shooters use them but  Highpower shooters often are slaves to fashion. You do need a coat for prone and I think they just leave them on without considering the effect. Offhand it's better to be able to steer the rifle and not inhibited by the coat.

Tubb says in his book they are not helpfull for good scores Offhand. He prefers the hip rest bone supported positon we use in Schuetzen. UIT rules don't allow a strapped in coat, 10 Meter Airgun shooters can't use them either. The coat they wear helps with it's sticky surfaces but we have hook butt plates that do the same thing.  By the rules no Silouette shooters use them and NRA rules Silouette has some of the best offhand shooters that exist today. 

Scopes, The advantage depends on your individual eyes but look at the ISSA Scope vs Iron scores just posted. about a 2 percent disavantage to Irons. Thats 50 points in the Hudson match for a top level shooter.

In the end the individual match rules don't make a whole lot of difference as long as you are shooting under the same ones as the rest of the competitors. It's a good idea to be somwhat flexable and able to adapt to local or match rules, You will always find some local quick to adapt to.

Boats

Jackets. Some years back I had the chance to try a variety of jackets at the 200 yard range. I did not shoot but dry-fired at the ASSRA target with my scoped Miller. I was shocked by the stability given by the use of the NRA approved jackets, appx. 8mm thickness. They tightened around your fanny and hips, it felt like I was enclosed in a steel pipe. The reduction in wobble was remarkable. Gary Anderson was on the scene and he commented that aside from offering protection while shooting prone, that the majority of highpower shooters would simply quit because they would become frustrated when shooting offhand. David Tubbs talks about shooting from the hip rest but what about those who because of arm-hip configuration can't acheive that position? Jim Luke and Jim Feren are among those shots, great shots, who can shoot with elbow on hip. Note that Tubbs in spite of touting the line that "jackets don't help offhand" always wore one where permitted!

Dick

Boats,

  I feel you're right about the bone supported hold. My problem, and by others I suspect, is that my elbow isn't long enuf to be supported by my hip.

  Bone support must not be the norm for most people as when mentioning holds the different famous old time Schuetzen shooters used, it is always mentioned when a particular shooter was able to use it.

  In regard to gun support one of the reasons for the "Perch Belly" stock was so the shooter could rest the stock on the protusion of their stomach. Being famous for their beer drinking this was a fairly common feature of most of them. We tend to forget that offhand shooting of old was done in quite a different manner than we do it today, being a more "across the body" style with the shooter facing at a more 90 degree angle to the target.

PETE

Boats,

  I understand your thoughts on modern gun hip rest shooting and stocks adjustable to the point that you can do almost anything with them, and agree with them. But......

   I'm mostly a traditonal Schuetzen shooter, both in gun design and caliber, so this doesn't leave a lot of room for adjusting things.

  I do have two gun designed for offhand work..... A German rilfe and the Schoyen-Ballard. But neither really allow me to assume a hip rest. As mentioned they were designed for a different method of holding the gun than we use today. Many, many years ago I could bend my body over enuf that I could put my elbow on my hip bone, but even then it was very uncomfortable. Wouldn't even try and attempt it today. Might not be able to straighten up.  I assume many in the old days had the same problem as they got older and it's why guns were designed then to take that into account.

  You're right about modern across the course shooters. If I recall right you win those type matches by being a better offhand shot. Seems I've read about the same thing for BP Shilouette shooting to.

  As for coats..... As I mentioned I tried them one Winter in our indoor .22 league and did find they added point to your score. I only used the coat but can imagine with a full outfit it would have added even more points. But I haven't used one since just because I like the challenge of doing it like the old timers did.

  Not to disparge anyone personally, but in the upcoming Election Day Match at our club I'll probably be the only one using a CF gun just as all the shooters did in the 1903 match Hudson set his record in. Seems kinda like cheating to use a .22 to try and beat his record. Of course the reply is..... It was legal to use it at that match, so......

PETE