jeffer1942 wrote on Jan 1
st, 2014 at 8:59pm:
"Tell us how you feel about male gynecologists, astronomers, particle physicists, non-flying aircraft designers, football coaches and historians.
I would wager that I've fired more rifle shots in testing in the past year than you have. Also in the past 53 years."
Joe: To the first part of the quoted statement I say "Whaaa???"
To the second part I say: show us some targets that support your statements. Show us some match results. There are those who theorize and never publish repeatable results. You have done neither. The amount of work you put into these discussions are commendable but ultimately are not practical for the most part.
Lastly, I don't know how many shots you have fired this past year cause you never picture your results and frankly, I don't care. And, by the way, I both test and compete. Currently hold the ASSRA 100 yd. Affiliated Club Record for smallest 5 shot group (Rimfire) .2368
I'd bet that you say "Whaaa?" a lot.
Except for a couple of times at the Florida Scheutzen Society, 350 miles away, I haven't shot in competition since moving to the Keys in 2000. The closest range, 100 yards, is 100 miles from home. Prior to 2000 I was a fairly active competitor bench and offhand. If you're
interested, get out the Journals and get to work.
None of which touches the point. Competitive ranking has absolutely nothing to do with technical shooting matters. My ability to analyze shooting data and draw conclusions has little to do with shooting, less to do with scores, nothing to do with competitive ranking. Baby doctors don't have to be women, astronomers don't have to be astronauts, football coaches don't have to be and generally aren't/weren't top players. Why do I feel like I'm talking to a stone?