I mentioned earlier about target shooting & hunting needing completely different approaches (in the .270 thread, I think?) I was actually once lambasted by mentioning this very thing on my own (now closed) forum & was told that the error increases as the range lengthens. This is quite right of course, but if you take the target area as being roughly the size of a soup bowl it would be a poor hunter who couldn't consistently hit that at reasonable ethical ranges..............say 200 yards maximum, in most UK scenarios? I've never given a blue fart if my groups are a couple of inches, for several reasons..................
One; My practice sessions are to try & replicate conditions I'll experience in the field: standing, kneeling shots from bipod, sticks and freehand. Show me a guy who can cloverleaf at 100 yards off the shoulder & we'll have found the New God
Two; As long as I can get within the kill zone diameter I see no advantage to be gained by hitting the middle of the heart, as opposed to being an inch or two out
Three; I don't shoot at long ranges (for no other reason than I shoot to hunt & target shooting doesn't appeal to me unless it's relevant practice)
My rifles are capable of far better groups than I can shoot from them, and this alone gives me the confidence to know that if I hold them straight the bullet is going to end up more or less where I need it to. And of course you're never going to be worrying about grouping on live quarry, so if you have the confidence that that first shot is going to find its mark you'll not mess it up through hesitating. And that's where practice and technique come in, as far as hunting goes anyway.
That's not a dig at the target guys though, far from it! I shot my .270 at 1000 yards last year (or near as damn it) with a No4 reticule on a 6x42 & although I managed to get a couple of rounds on the target (out of more than I care to recall
) it gave me a whole load of respect for anyone who can get any kind of consistency at that range