Multi discipline shooting at competitions

[Josh Cox]

With the emerging ET being shot at a number of competitions, does this make it possible for shooters to shoot more than one discipline ?, for example some shooters have target rifles, f standard, f open and FTR, is there any reason the could not shoot two different rifles in two different disciplines ?

[Tim L]

Apart from the rules, probably not.

2.2.3.6 A Competitor may only enter one Grade or one Class of Competition
in any single competition. The following are examples:-
(a) A competitor cannot enter in both a TR Class and an F Class in the same competition.
(b) A competitor cannot enter both F Standard and F Open in the same competition.
(c) A competitor cannot enter in more than one Grade in the same competition.

If we had squadded shoots it would probably be even easier.

[Josh Cox]

All rules can be changed................

[williada]

Josh, perhaps there is a perception that people can have an advantage in reading the conditions when they have had a dry run in another class. Then there are the issues of squadding and being able to perform all the duties of scoring and check scoring if shooters go missing and in big shoots the “draw” determines the scheduling for the balance of the shoot. There is no doubt that the use of electronic targets and associated computer scoring could eliminate some of the current constraints. With fewer competitors the opportunity certainly presents to have a go for those with enough time and energy to shoot multiple disciplines. It would give new meaning to the grand aggregate. It wouldn’t worry me because I think the top shooters are separated by centre counts rather than points these days. Yes, the rules can be changed but there has to be a critical mass of support for them to be changed. So by all means put it out there. David.

[AlanF]

To me one of the attractions of our sport is the relaxed pace, even at the top level. We've recently seen a decision with ETs not to discourage fast shooting. Now your proposal would allow shooters to effectively double their rate of activity in a shooting day and would change the atmosphere at Queens shoots dramatically. Worth considering Josh, but I wouldn't expect the average shooter to want to do it, or to allow others to do it, because it would affect everyone.

[Peter Hulett]

Over the years we have had our ETs we have occasionally had Prize Meeting shooters who wanted to enter and shoot two disciplines and we have allowed this. A single firing point makes this quite easy as you can be in two details without upsetting other shooters. It would be much more difficult if shooters had to move from firing point to firing point. Nevertheless at club shoots we usually have four or five shooters who will fire two disciplines in an afternoon. Usually F-Standard and Field class but some will put a bipod on and shoot FTR or even pick up a target rifle and have a go with the peep sights. If you can add some variety to the shooting that we do then all to the good as far as I can see.

[BATattack]

If you shot F/tr first then went to FO for example you would have distinct advantage in knowing what the weather is doing.

Effectively you would have just had 12 sighting shots.

[williada]

Diverging from topic just a little. Peter has indicated, it is possible to accommodate more than one discipline. There is another issue that could be resolved and it is a differing perspective between shooters who shoot for score or who shoot for group, if clubs were prepared to run events where a shooter could shoot more than one discipline and use a result system across disciplines similar to Alan's scoring system. This is an important system because it saves clubs the expense of coming up with multiple prizes and is pretty fair.

Given the computing power we have, how hard would it be to separate shooters by including the value of their bullet's BC as a factor in the scoring system? We are moving towards uniform range muzzle energy limits where we will have to declare in advance what we are using. Why not use this information in the scoring system?

FTR highlighted this issue for me recently, where a change to a heavier bullet can significantly reduce wind drift in rough conditions. If a multi-discipline scoring system included the BC factor as a discriminator, then those using 6mm's or peep sights would not be at a disadvantage and people who disagree about which is more important, a score or a group as to who is really the best shot would have little to disagree about. David.

[ShaneG]

Not sure how they do it but Canada have the option of shooting 2 classes at their July Invitational shoot.
I seem to recall they limited the slots available though?

[Tim L]

Diverging from topic just a little. Peter has indicated, it is possible to accommodate more than one discipline. There is another issue that could be resolved and it is a differing perspective between shooters who shoot for score or who shoot for group, if clubs were prepared to run events where a shooter could shoot more than one discipline and use a result system across disciplines similar to Alan's scoring system. This is an important system because it saves clubs the expense of coming up with multiple prizes and is pretty fair.

Given the computing power we have, how hard would it be to separate shooters by including the value of their bullet's BC as a factor in the scoring system? We are moving towards uniform range muzzle energy limits where we will have to declare in advance what we are using. Why not use this information in the scoring system?

FTR highlighted this issue for me recently, where a change to a heavier bullet can significantly reduce wind drift in rough conditions. If a multi-discipline scoring system included the BC factor as a discriminator, then those using 6mm's or peep sights would not be at a disadvantage and people who disagree about which is more important, a score or a group as to who is really the best shot would have little to disagree about. David.

Whos bc will we use? The manufacturers!
How do we incorporate custom projectiles?

What you're suggesting seems to move away from scoring the result and start scoring how a shooter got there.

[mike H]

Some years ago I used to think that it was a long day to shoot three 10shot matches and we could all shoot more shots in the day.Now that I have got older and slowed down,I actually enjoy the slower pace.Having said that,and experienced 15 and 20 shot matches in Match Rifle and FTR,I see no reason for 10 shot matches,it is only a few more minutes to fire the additional shots and the extra few shots and minutes make you work a lot harder.

This is easier to do than run extra matches in different disciplines.
Mike.

[williada]

Tim,

Quote,
“Whos bc will we use? The manufacturers!
How do we incorporate custom projectiles?

What you're suggesting seems to move away from scoring the result and start scoring how a shooter got there.”


My view is the scope events are in a transition period and some restrictions will be imposed by muzzle energy limits. If you read comments about competition results, everyone wants to know what gear the other is using, so in time I feel with the spread of technical knowledge, (through media like this site) and copying the gear of champions, the gear will become uniform because it is the most competitive. The only thing that will separate champions will be their ability to read conditions; so I think its wiser to know how to get there in the future for consistent results because brute force and technological advantage will be a thing of the past.

The scores we see now are at the very edge of probability and you can almost argue that 10 x’s in a ten shot shoot could be random groups, just how the mop flops at that point in time. So really when it cuts up rough, one is really shooting for score not group and it is truly an advantage to use a high BC projectile.

Savvy shooters already know for practical purposes the BC of their projectile and I’m sure with the knowledge of many people on this site they can soon tell you what a particular projectile does. Sure, they can get it from published data(G1, G7 etc) or measure sections of bullets to work out a drag co-efficient for a BC estimate.

However a simple and effective way to measure BC including custom projectiles is by comparing 2 velocities at set ranges then use publically available software such as http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmbcv-5.1.cgi or the many commercial software programs with all the bells and whistles.

If you want to know more about BC try this site: https://www.shootingsoftware.com/coefficients.htm

Yes the BC, whatever your poison G1 or G7 does vary with sectional distances, but I feel a commonly accepted average of a BC would be a valuable discriminator to include in a system of scoring multi-disciplines but not for single disciplines. David.

[bsouthernau]

...Having said that,and experienced 15 and 20 shot matches in Match Rifle and FTR,I see no reason for 10 shot matches,it is only a few more minutes to fire the additional shots and the extra few shots and minutes make you work a lot harder....

I agree but don't grizzle about 10 shot matches Mike. The VRA Medal - and as a consequence a round of our club championship - is three ranges 2+7!! You spend more time setting up and getting up than shooting.

Barry

[ShaneG]

100% agree Mike
If we are only doing 3 ranges a day then make them 15 + 2
Those extra few shots require another level of concentration compared to 10 + 2
Also requires a barrel that will stay true with the extra heat generated

[Tim L]

I won't disagree with you on the reasoning Dave, but the resolution doesn't sit well. To my mind, artificially constructed penalties can't produce a true result.
15 shot matches may well produce a gap. Smaller graduation targets almost certainly will.