wsftr wrote:To what point? To say shooters in one discipline are better than the others? I think the fact that its not divisive so far is more a reflection of the maturity of those commenting than the topic and approach used to determine some sort of conclusion.
I'm puzzled that you think that any sort of performance comparisons between disciplines should be a taboo subject, whereas within disciplines scoring and competition is all about performance comparison. Do you also regard scoring and grading within disciplines as divisive?
I dunno , I think we should Quit this topic while we are all talking civil to each other lol! It all works well ! Leave it alone . Mho. Last time , which I was the main Zellot , and I deeply regret. It got very , very nasty. So if we continue on we run the risk of opening old wounds. In which I’ll be taking no part in . Regards Graham.
wsftr wrote:To what point? To say shooters in one discipline are better than the others? I think the fact that its not divisive so far is more a reflection of the maturity of those commenting than the topic and approach used to determine some sort of conclusion.
I'm puzzled that you think that any sort of performance comparisons between disciplines should be a taboo subject, whereas within disciplines scoring and competition is all about performance comparison. Do you also regard scoring and grading within disciplines as divisive?
Nope I don't...but I might depending on how it was done and to what point the comparison was done. Anyways - plug on you seem determined to - you'll be fine most on this forum seem pretty level headed.
wsftr wrote: To what point? To say shooters in one discipline are better than the others?
I think the point of the exercise is to occupy our minds and, to the contrary, it looks to me as if there's no difference in wind reading skill. As I said in an earlier post, I'd be interested in a t test. I'd do it myself but don't have the numbers.
to me the point is that we all know we can improve our wind reading, even the best. the goal of this is to be in front more often than behind it. this takes serious time and serious mental effort to achieve. fclass is a discipline where it is observable that some try to avoid the issue by such things as higher b.c. and more speed. and shooting as fast as possible to minimize exposure to changes. but this leaves us behind the ball rather than in front. stopping shooting due to a change is not keeping in front, but avoiding the issue. bruce.
That's a fair question Jason. One that I've asked of others in the past.
Its quite simple actually. The subject came up on another thread, and in fact crops up from time to time elsewhere in the forums and also in casual conversation on the range. I find this subject INTERESTING, and believe others do as well, nothing more than that. It ties in with several other interests being statistics, ballistics and of course F-Class performance. Its not the first such analysis I've undertaken. You may have heard of the MCSI system which enables all disciplines to compete directly in low level team competition and club level awards. There is also the F-Class ranking system published on this website. And I've developed several ballistics applications in Excel, one of which can be used to analyse how various errors and ballistic characteristics affect scores.
So this is not intended to divide the disciplines. Its just another analysis which has hopefully provided new information about one of the many topics discussed on this forum.
bruce moulds wrote:stopping shooting due to a change is not keeping in front, but avoiding the issue. bruce.
Yes and no Bruce. Depends on the circumstances. Without doubt there is more to be learned by keeping on shooting. If it's an important match and the overarching imperative is to WIN it a prudent captain will down tools and wait - unless time's running out.
Alan could you please clarify why you used the top 30 tr shooters? When i do this sort of comparative analysis I will generally try and ID step change in the results in order to "decide" what data comes from the best/similar performers. Simply looking at the recent QRA Queens clearly establishes 3 shooters in FTR that out performed the rest of the field. F Open really only has Dave FSTD maybe only the top 2 TR 9 shooters befor the results drop notably more rapidly per shooter You can establish other step by graphing the results. Just wondering how/why you picked 30, 10, 5 and 5
I decided to concentrate on the top end of the field, firstly because the subject of the analysis is the best windreading in each discipline, not the overall average. Also because going further down the order would give it more of a local (Queensland) bias, and I wanted it to be more of a national study. The figure of the top 30 Queens agg placegetters for TR seemed about right to achieve those qualities. I then took a similar percentage (very approximate) from the top placegetters of the other disciplines, being FStd 10, F-Open and F/TR 5.
Note that this sort analysis can't be done on the recent 2020 Queens (or any other Hexta target Queens that I'm aware of) because of squadding, which is unfortunate (for these purposes at least) because the 2016 data is of course about 4 years old, and my impression is that the top shooters in all disciplines have improved in various ways since then, with F/TR probably the most.
Menu
Newest members