MCSI, update needed

[DannyS]

Yesterday, we held one of our team shoots against the Portland Rifle Club . All Portland members were shooting F Open and Hamilton members shot F Standard and one FTR. As usual we used the MCSI and as usual Hamilton won on the MCSI but not on scratch. I think Portland members are starting to become a bit disillusioned with the system as a the moment it appears weighted quite heavily in favour of F standard.

The last update was from figures gained in 2014, I think F Standard scores have improved since that time.

So, Alan, can we have an update please.

Cheers
Danny

[John T]

Hello Danny.

At what distances are these teams events conducted? Is there a pattern, for example, are the scratch scores at short ranges fairly close, but the difference is larger with the MCSI adjusted scores? Does this imbalance lessen as the ranges get longer?

Regards,
John T.

[DannyS]

Ranges were 500 & 900, 4 Shooters to a team. FO had a scratch score of 468.32 compared to f standard 455.22, however, when using the MCSI , scores were FO 677.5, f standard 681.5.

Top score in f open 119.9 got done by f standard score of 117.8

[John T]

Danny.

Can you breakdown the scores to give the results at 500 and 900, separately? Previous results would be interesting.

Regards,
John T.

[jasmay]

I tend to agree, top score in FTR can’t get the same MCSI score as a top FS.

Personally, and even statistically FS scores are on average higher than FTR.

They notion heavy bullets make it easier is negated by the bipod and light rifle.

Time for a re-look me thinks!!

[jasmay]

Danny.

Can you breakdown the scores to give the results at 500 and 900, separately? Previous results would be interesting.

Regards,
John T.

John, just go and have a look at a few different Queens results. At the very least you will
See the FS vs FTR misnomer I mentioned.

[AlanF]

... it appears weighted quite heavily in favour of F standard.

The last update was from figures gained in 2014, I think F Standard scores have improved since that time.

So, Alan, can we have an update please.

Cheers
Danny

Danny,

I agree, F-Open and F/TR seem to be getting the raw end of the stick by MCSI at present. I think the main reason is that they are derived from Queens results, and it seems that F-Open and F/TR shooters generally don't go to Queens unless they think they'll be competitive, whereas in F-Std, particularly B Grade, many don't takes things quite as seriously. So you end up with a situation where good F-Std shooters get the benefit of an overly generous MCSI rating. The same thing applies to TR. I may try something slightly different next time, and weight the F-Std and TR results more towards their A-Grade performances. However it wouldn't want to go too far in that direction, because MCSI is probably more important to the battlers than the ones at the sharp end.

[BillB]

Danny we will keep shooting mainly because it good fun when the two clubs get together
Bill

[DannyS]

It would be good to see the scores a bit closer Bill, or you may just have to lift your game

[6.5x47]

Its okay Bill we will just shoot the open rifles next year and you can shoot target

[BillB]

Target rifle ,wash your mouth out

[6.5x47]

It would be nice to have this MCIS system updated and accurrate, also a program that one could enter the shooters names and scores and the results generated. It gets a bit longhanded doing this manually.
I have washed and gargled