Joe afraid we don't agree on several points.  I don't want to be augmentative but here  goes.

On equipment if it's up to standard there is not a hill of beans different in potential between one outfit and another.  Not comparing to 25 years ago, top outfits on the line today.  CPA-Miller-Ballard   Douglas -Shillen-RKS   Unertil-Weaver-Leopold  Hart-Sinclair-Outer.  Equipment is what  we read about and like to talk about but it's human performance that makes winners.  As long as the equipment works properly that is.  That's my opinion.

On distance and the effect on target.  Been shooting at distance for over 40 years and have seen a lot of competiton.  Ain't no formula that lets you calculate the effect as distance increases. Longer is harder due to more exposure to conditions, No way around it.

Look at ASSRA scores.  Highest is 50' gallery no conditions at all. Next highest scores are at 100 rimfire.  Most difficult target to score high on is the 200 yard target

Go to NRA Silhouette and look at how many people have cleaned the 500 meter rams, very few compared to the targets closer.  In MOA the rams are larger than Turkeys or Chickens.  Still much harder targets to score on.  I know have been chasing a 10 in a row Ram pin for years and never got one. All the other critters have shot 10 more than once, most frequent on the near targets less so on the long ones. 500 separates good from ordinary shooters.

I shoot a fair amount of IDPA pistol matches. We have guys that are real good on short targets 7 & 10 yards, lighting fast and accurate too.   Last year at the Carolina cup they had 6 targets for 3 shots each set from 35 to 50 yards.  Guys that were considered contenders and had never shot over 20 yards lost the match on that stage alone.  Lowest scores by far on the standard classifier match is on the 20 yards leg.  Many clean it at 7 & 10 and drop all there points at 20.

Distance makes a big difference

Boats

Quote:



Crackin me up Dave!! 

[quote author=727F716463100 link=1267717673/47#47 date=1269023537]Joe afraid we don't agree on several points.  I don't want to be augmentative but here  goes.

On distance and the effect on target.  Been shooting at distance for over 40 years and have seen a lot of competiton.  Ain't no formula that lets you calculate the effect as distance increases. 

Yes, there is. This thread piqued my interest and prompted me to start the calculations to compare group sizes at 100 and 200 yards. Without conditions we would expect 200 yard groups to be double the size of 100 yard groups. With conditions we would expect 200 yard groups to be MORE than double the size of 100 yard groups. So far te analysis shows that 5 shot 200 yard groups ~2.2 X the size of 100 yard groups; 10 shot 200 yard groups ~ 2.35 X the size of 100 yard groups. (2.2 and 2.35 are sort of the expectedd values) Dividing into 1, 1/2.2 = .46, 1/2.35 = .43. Means 100 yard 5 shot groups will be .46X 200 yard size, 10 shot 100 yard groups .43 X 200 yard size.
All other things but range being equal.
This interesting-at-least-to-me analysis shows that it is possible to have a positive result from a discussion with Republicans.
joe b.





Longer is harder due to more exposure to conditions, No way around it.

boats is correct.  most of us dont have enough time or money to be a pioneer. go to matches, see what the majority of the best shooters are using, get as much of that equipment as you can and learn to shoot with it then the variable is you   art ruggiero