QRA Queen’s

Results, photos of recent events, plan future events, let people know where you'll be competing.

Moderator: Mod

Message
Author
scott/r
Posts: 885
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:22 pm
Location: far north brisbane

Re: QRA Queen’s

#46 Postby scott/r » Tue Aug 18, 2020 11:21 am

Yeh Denis, it's known as hells corner when the westerly is blowing, which it was. And guess where I got. Number 34 as far right as it got. I didn't stand a change competing with the A Graders, but the 2nd place b grader (only 5 centers different) was on number 10 and our scores counted for b grade championship. When I got with a 63.5 I said to my scorer, " well, 2nd will have to do". But Pete got smashed just as much over on the other side.
Would I do it again?
Damn straight I would. It was a huge privilege for me to be up there totally out of my league with those guys.
Do I think it's fair shooting accross the whole range?
Definitely. It's all part of the deal when it comes to target allocation. Sometimes you get good ones ,sometimes you don't. We all know that when we sign on each day.
I haven't shot many Queen's compared to most, but I reckon that that was the best I've been apart of. Hope that they stick with it.
Scott.

DenisA
Posts: 1526
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:00 pm
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD

Re: QRA Queen’s

#47 Postby DenisA » Tue Aug 18, 2020 12:37 pm

Scott it is the way it is. I accept that. I always have accepted that at the many different Queens and prize meets I’ve shot at Belmont. I don’t need the condescending message in your post to understand that.

The point is, in this new arrangement if it is to be utilised for future Queens, with only the top 8 shooters competing in my discipline (for example) the question is could the last range of a one week shoot be setup any better next time? I believe the answer is yes as per the opinion I’ve expressed.
In FSTD Scott we’re shooting the same bricks with the same loads as you guys at a target 1/2 the size as you guys. 4’s are deveststing to us. Why not make that last shoot as fair as possible if we can?

scott/r
Posts: 885
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:22 pm
Location: far north brisbane

Re: QRA Queen’s

#48 Postby scott/r » Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:05 pm

Denis, if you find any of my post "condescending", then I don't know what to think or say, so I'll just mind my own business and keep my opinions to myself. I only mentioned you in regards to "hells corner".
Scott.

GSells
Posts: 798
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:04 pm
Location: Qld

Re: QRA Queen’s

#49 Postby GSells » Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:06 pm

Ok Guys we all love each other !!! :lol:
Both points put aside , Denis has a valid point . For someone to lead feel ripped off because of tgt position is not a nice thing. That’s what we want to avoid next time hopefully! There will be a survey coming out soon so I’m told , so we can all have our say .

On the whole the Best Queens that I’ve been too with correct decisions made at the right time except for hells corner .
I’m sure they will read this and the survey and get it right for next year ! God Willing, I’ll be there again! I thoroughly enjoyed! =D> =D> =D>

AlanF
Posts: 7494
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Maffra, Vic

Re: QRA Queen’s

#50 Postby AlanF » Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:21 pm

Any enquiry the QRA may have into squadding and mounds position has a very useful resource at its disposal, and that is the Hexta data from this Queens. A statistical analysis which includes target numbers could be very informative for making decisions. The higher the level of competition, the more consideration needs to be given to reducing the luck of the draw factor.

pjifl
Posts: 883
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Innisfail, Far North QLD.

Re: QRA Queen’s

#51 Postby pjifl » Wed Aug 19, 2020 1:18 am

I have been dabbling with the position plots of all FO and all TR shooters in the last 1000y match. Eventually I will somehow post comparisons based on Target Positions.

BUT FIRST I would like some feedback on the Wind Direction and which targets one would expect to be shooting into least and worst disturbed air during this last 1000y match.

It is too big a job to consider ALL shoots at ALL ranges. After all, I am looking at every shot position - not just scores.

I deliberately included all TR shooters in the last 1000y because they spanned a wider swathe of targets and I am not particularly interested in trying to compare Wind Reading Ability between FO and TR.

One simplistic comment - the last 1000y range was dominated by shooters who could hold elevation more than read wind for both the FO and TR shooters.

Peter Smith.

scott/r
Posts: 885
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:22 pm
Location: far north brisbane

Re: QRA Queen’s

#52 Postby scott/r » Wed Aug 19, 2020 4:31 am

If you are going off hexta, the target positions were not correct. Hexta says I was on target 2, where infact I was on 34. It also says Margy Kerlin (f std) and was on 1, when she was on the target directly to my left, which i believe that would have had her cross firing onto 31? Rob Caddin in t/r was on the same as Margy.
Scott.

Gyro
Posts: 764
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: QRA Queen’s

#53 Postby Gyro » Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:17 am

One other important factor is that two shooters shooting at the same time beside each other can still have a very different experience just because of how each one works thier way through thier string. One shooter can still have a better flag line. Some shooters I believe have a stronger mental ability to process and see what is happening more clearly out there maybe because thier brain just works well for that particular application. One shooter can still have more 'luck' in deciding which flags to use. One shooter can take lots more time to try and work out a plan before they get down re which flags they will use. One shooter can be discovered to be releasing shots on much higher wind values than the other which straight away means they are taking more risks. The list goes on ... It's a bloody interesting topic that's for sure and a big challenge to master.

DenisA
Posts: 1526
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:00 pm
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD

Re: QRA Queen’s

#54 Postby DenisA » Wed Aug 19, 2020 6:01 am

Peter. The wind was coming from the right hand side and rolling over the burm and tree line. Scott is correct regarding those ET numbers Vs lane numbers. We have seen it at Belmont many times in the past at 1000y that sometimes the closest shooter to the tree line (on either side depending on wind direction) looks to be in a protected pocket under the wind rolling over the tree line and and burm. I suspect the wind drops down and turbulates effecting the next number of targets erratically.

GSells
Posts: 798
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:04 pm
Location: Qld

Re: QRA Queen’s

#55 Postby GSells » Wed Aug 19, 2020 7:05 am

Pete I was on 12 and was the highest tgt value on my side , right on the flag line shooting about 3 tgt left cross firing from the flag line . Some one might chime in but was about 6 tgt to my left . Wind was 18 mph gust , from 4 o’clock, full value , 2 o’clock. Dave B was right down the opposite end from memory?

GSells
Posts: 798
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:04 pm
Location: Qld

Re: QRA Queen’s

#56 Postby GSells » Wed Aug 19, 2020 7:06 am

DenisA wrote:Peter. The wind was coming from the right hand side and rolling over the burm and tree line. Scott is correct regarding those ET numbers Vs lane numbers. We have seen it at Belmont many times in the past at 1000y that sometimes the closest shooter to the tree line (on either side depending on wind direction) looks to be in a protected pocket under the wind rolling over the tree line and and burm. I suspect the wind drops down and turbulates effecting the next number of targets erratically.

So Margy was right up on the tree line ?

GSells
Posts: 798
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:04 pm
Location: Qld

Re: QRA Queen’s

#57 Postby GSells » Wed Aug 19, 2020 7:18 am

DBA62C96-4148-4704-9799-D0FDEA54A0B8.jpeg


Edit ! I may have been on tgt 11 ! ?? It’s just such a blur . Was just full on watching the conditions. So Pete is most likely right . Sean was to my left . So don’t rely on my info too much on tgt numbers . #-o
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by GSells on Wed Aug 19, 2020 1:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.

pjifl
Posts: 883
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Innisfail, Far North QLD.

Re: QRA Queen’s

#58 Postby pjifl » Wed Aug 19, 2020 11:52 am

I never considered that Target Number may not correspond with Lane Number, nor that Hexta may have listed some incorrect Target Numbers. Oh Well - life was never meant to be easy ?

FWIW, here are the Target Numbers Hexta list for TR-A and FO. I chose these because they represent groups with the largest number of shooters. TR is especially interesting because the larger numbers are spread further across a wider range. FO because I am especially interested in all of the shooters.

Originally, I chose the final 1000y because Shooters were lined up at the same time. Ironically,, however, the list of shooters in the same cohort was pruned way down. Like there were 27 FO shooters but only 9 shot in the 'Grande Finale' 1000y. Perhaps there is more to be gleaned by looking at a different range with all of its complications. Perhaps a range shot first thing in a session when it is more likely that Cohorts are more Time aligned. I think it will be very hard to arrive at anything really meaningful.

Peter Smith
=============================================

T-Rifle - A

Helen Griffiths Pacific 10
Bob Crawford Gympie-Kilkivan 28
Darren Enslin Pacific 24
Charles Arrowsmith Brisbane Mariners 15
Brett McCauley Mungindi Border 26
Andrew Mayfield Ipswich & Dist 27
Ash Bidgood Crows Nest G/bungee21
Jim Bailey Holsworthy 19
Mitchell Bailey Holsworthy 22
Mark Thurtell Lyndhurst 23
Eric Christie Townsville Marksmen 29
Jim Jeffery Lyndhurst 20
Josh Pratt Natives 17
Benjamin Emms Lyndhurst 18
Gordon Duncan Albert & Central 30
Gillian Webb-Enslin Pacific 14
Dean Enslin Pacific 13
Derek Sharp Brisbane Mariners 12
Michael Chad Port Macquarie 32 15
Tina Thornhill Albert & Central 31
Shane Abood Albert & Central 16
Kim O'Loghlen Natives 25
Rob Cadden Albert & Central 1

====================================================

F-Open - A

David Boreham North Arm 14
Graham Sells Dalby-Tara 11
Sean Campbell Inverell R.S.M. 12
Mark Azzopardi Cairns Rifle Club Inc 18
David Reddan Gatton Glenore Gr 13
Michael Heironymus Goondiwindi 16
Jason Mayers Brisbane 10
Peter Carter Cairns Rifle Club Inc 15
Jamie Mettam Goondiwindi 17

====================================================

AlanF
Posts: 7494
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Maffra, Vic

Re: QRA Queen’s

#59 Postby AlanF » Wed Aug 19, 2020 1:54 pm

FWIW, here is a simple analysis which gives some indication of what was going on Sunday. It is a comparison of Saturday and Sunday 1000 yd performances of those who made the "Top 50". The graphs show how many points were lost on Sunday (as a percentage) of each shooter's Saturday score at the same distance. There does seem to be a generally higher points loss for those shooting targets 30, 31 and 32 on the Sunday.

Notes:
1. The target numbers are those published on the Hexta results, which may not correspond exactly with real mound/target numbers.
2. Targets 1 and 2 seem to have been used (not sure why?) but this analysis is confined to the continuous block of targets used from 10 to 32.
3. TR scores were converted to F-Class type scores by adding the centre counts to the points.
4. F-Class scores were stripped of the Xs.

qraqueens2020moundposition1000ydcomparison.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

pjifl
Posts: 883
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Innisfail, Far North QLD.

Re: QRA Queen’s

#60 Postby pjifl » Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:13 pm

I have looked at ALL TR-A and TR-B shoots combined at 1000y - Day2.

Also in the last 'Top 50' for FO and the TR-A.
This was done in such a way that trends should be visible across different targets.

In all honesty, I cannot say that I see any definite trends. I have decided NOT to put the results up because I do not want anyone to latch onto any supposed trend when the evidence is just so thin. There is a danger that myths could develop from almost no evidence and this could be detrimental to Belmont and the sport.

Sorry about that but I think it is better this way.

In the process, I have seen a lot of interesting plots of shoots and overlaid many. Applying WHAT IF ? to them can be fascinating. Seeing positions of shots is so much more informative than a simple list of shot values and scores.

My original observation still holds - at 1000y there is a constant battle between elevation consistency and wind reading. The elevation consistency is just so important. It would be fascinating to be able to differentiate between shooter/rifle elevation and atmospheric elevation inconsistency.

Some of the groups are heartbreaking - but we all knew that.

Thanks to the Hexta site and all those Guinea Pigs that provided data.

Peter Smith.


Return to “Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests