How good a shot are the stalkers in the UK?

[Mungo]

Curious thread.

Assuming that shooting ability has the same distribution as most other traits (bell curve), the majority of us will be... about average (by definition).

So, if we had someone with a very large sample size of 'normal' stalkers (not habitual target shooters), they could tell us what average was.

There is the problem that we probably all over rate our own ability (selectively remember the very good performances and rationalise the poor as being unrepresentative), and we may well under rate the ability of others (selectively remember their poor performances, and rationalise the good as being unrepresentative).

I will hazard a guess that, if you were to cancel out all the unconscious biases and got hold of raw, representative data from a big enough sample, you'd find the average to be a 2 inch group at 100m off a bipod, with about 25% who could regularly keep it to an inch, but another 25% consistently unable to group less than 3 inches.

 

[User00003]

Curious thread.

Assuming that shooting ability has the same distribution as most other traits (bell curve), the majority of us will be... about average (by definition).

..and like society, at both ends of the curve there are bell ends

 

[tackb]

Curious thread.

Assuming that shooting ability has the same distribution as most other traits (bell curve), the majority of us will be... about average (by definition).

So, if we had someone with a very large sample size of 'normal' stalkers (not habitual target shooters), they could tell us what average was.

There is the problem that we probably all over rate our own ability (selectively remember the very good performances and rationalise the poor as being unrepresentative), and we may well under rate the ability of others (selectively remember their poor performances, and rationalise the good as being unrepresentative).

I will hazard a guess that, if you were to cancel out all the unconscious biases and got hold of raw, representative data from a big enough sample, you'd find the average to be a 2 inch group at 100m off a bipod, with about 25% who could regularly keep it to an inch, but another 25% consistently unable to group less than 3 inches.

I will hazard your right , i'd love to claim i'm a 1/2moa shooter but the odd time i manage it isn't a true gauge of my ability , realisticly i know i can shoot an inch off a bipod but more importantly i know where my first round will go clean and cold ?

 

[finnbear270]

I'm pretty glad mine doesn't "Keyhole" though, I much prefer " Bughole"!!!

 

[Labrat]

I think some of the comments above about the difficulty of practicing for people coming into the sport are fair

I also think that much of the reason for this is the 'Bisley approach' to shooting whereby the NRA have sucked the life and fun out of it - its all well and good punching holes in a target from prone or a bench at 100 or 200 metres but it bears sod all relationship to sporting shooting - even the BDS test, although a leap forward, is somewhat unrealistic with known ranges and conditions, a nice flat range etc - (usual accompaniments, can I bring the car door with me please? and why are there no trees to lean against? )

I went out with a friend to an (air rifle) field target shoot - it was a bit of a revelation, best fun ever - so wonderful to see people having fun with guns at realistic targets at random distances, and I have to wonder is there isn't the opportunity to do something like that on a bigger scale for sporting shooting - nice big old quarry somewhere near Bisley perhaps?

 

[bewsher500]

I went out with a friend to an (air rifle) field target shoot - it was a bit of a revelation, best fun ever - so wonderful to see people having fun with guns at realistic targets at random distances, and I have to wonder is there isn't the opportunity to do something like that on a bigger scale for sporting shooting - nice big old quarry somewhere near Edinburgh perhaps?

fixed it for you!
totally agree, get the CLA Game fair to make a rifle range at the next Game Fair.
The clay chaps have a good old day. would be good to see a firing point with 3 targets at unknown distances that people could rock up to and compete on.
or would rifles just be too scary for the general public to deal with!?

 

[I. Farticus]

I think some of the comments above about the difficulty of practicing for people coming into the sport are fair

I also think that much of the reason for this is the 'Bisley approach' to shooting whereby the NRA have sucked the life and fun out of it - its all well and good punching holes in a target from prone or a bench at 100 or 200 metres but it bears sod all relationship to sporting shooting - even the BDS test, although a leap forward, is somewhat unrealistic with known ranges and conditions, a nice flat range etc - (usual accompaniments, can I bring the car door with me please? and why are there no trees to lean against? )

I went out with a friend to an (air rifle) field target shoot - it was a bit of a revelation, best fun ever - so wonderful to see people having fun with guns at realistic targets at random distances, and I have to wonder is there isn't the opportunity to do something like that on a bigger scale for sporting shooting - nice big old quarry somewhere near Bisley perhaps?

I absolutely agree with all these points, but the issue with doing this anywhere in the South East is the density of population... At the wrong angle, a round shot on the BSRC range from my 6.5x55 will land anything up to 4k away. That's halfway to the M3, so how many houses, schools etc within that distance?

This needs to be miles from anywhere, which is why parts of Wales or The Highlands are ideal - WMS looks like a hoot!!

Cheers
iain

 

[paul k]

There are some good points here but if I can add a few from the recreational stalker perspective. Firstly I consider myself a goodish shot, I was in the school small bore team, I got my Marksman's badge in the cadets and I have only needed two bullets on a deer once.

I shoot relatively infrequently and live no nearer than one hour to a range I can use for practice on an ad hoc basis. This means that it is very difficult to "pop down to the range" for a practice so I am pretty much forced to go to places like Calton Moor (excellent) and Minsterley when I want to check zero. These days I pay for outings with professional stalkers and the timing of the stalk, distance travelled and stalker facilities don't always make it easy to practice or recheck zero prior to going out. Most stalkers I go with know I can shoot straight, I travel with my rifles in a padded case and as long as they haven't received a knock everything will be OK but there's always that slight concern as the trigger is squeezed.

I was always little lacking in confidence about my accuracy over longer ranges and not wishing to risk wounding deer, tended not to take shots much over 150 metres, possibly needlessly. What did me a power of good was being taken out to "play" by an expert long distance shot. He put up a paper fox target at very long range but didn't tell me how far. When he had checked the wind, got a rangefinder reading and adjusted the scope on his ASI metal rifle using ballistics charts he told me to take two shots. I hit the target with both, one in the vital area, and the range was then revealed as 720 metres. Now obviously I would never shoot at a live target at anything like this but it gave me huge confidence in my ability at shorter ranges and I now shoot deer out to over 200 metres very happily and confidence/lack of nerves has a lot to do with straight shooting.

Fortunately I am fairly calm, not prone to buck fever, almost never aim anywhere other than the heart, I am happy to pass on a shot where I am not comfortable and this has a lot to do with my low poor shot ratio.

Not all stalkers are good shots, some are downright poor, even on a range with no other factors and there must be numbers of deer badly shot as a result. Being good on the range is also no guarantee of good shooting at a live target as excitement and less than ideal rests come into play. This means that every stalker has the potential to miss, some more than others, but sadly the only sure way to find out who is good enough on live targets is to take them stalking.

Even those stalkers that have beed refused an outing after a shooting test will eventually find somewhere they are not tested and will get out on live quarry whereas they should have the honesty and respect for their quarry that says maybe they should not be stalking.

 

[Crosshair243]

I'm quite lucky in as much as my boss is happy to conduct his stalking by himself but many of my gamekeeper friends have to take their employer and guests both foreign and British out for accompanied stalking. Some of the stories I hear about poor accuracy are crazy.

I personally cannot figure it out. If you can use a mouse to align a cursor with an icon on a computer then you should be capable of hitting a 4" target at 0-100 yards no problem- it is that simple!

So, what is going wrong?

Poorly zeroed equipment
Nerves
Buck fever
Flinching
Lack of killer instinct (I read somewhere about how during ww2 a high percentage of the shots taken were missed unconsciously because the guys pulling the trigger couldn't bring themselves to do it)
Rushing
Not cushioning the stock on a hard surface

I can't think of anything else that would throw a bullet that far out?
Or is there something I'm not considering?

 

[RickoShay]

I personally cannot figure it out. If you can use a mouse to align a cursor with an icon on a computer then you should be capable of hitting a 4" target at 0-100 yards no problem- it is that simple!

Let's just think about this.

1. Position & hold must be firm enough to support the rifle/mouse
2. The rifle/mouse should point naturally at the target without undue physical effort
3. Sight picture, sight and bore alignment should be correct and in focus
4. The shot should be squeezed, released & followed through without disturbance to the position and sight picture

From my experience one of the four factors above out of sync (because of a lapse in firing discipline/ability/strength) with the others will cause a shot to be outside the intended POA; times this tenfold for a pistol and when the traffic is coming the other way.

It's not a XBox, it is a rifle.

 

[Crosshair243]

Let's just think about this.

1. Position & hold must be firm enough to support the rifle/mouse
2. The rifle/mouse should point naturally at the target without undue physical effort
3. Sight picture, sight and bore alignment should be correct and in focus
4. The shot should be squeezed, released & followed through without disturbance to the position and sight picture

From my experience one of the four factors above out of sync (because of a lapse in firing discipline/ability/strength) with the others will cause a shot to be outside the intended POA; times this tenfold for a pistol and when the traffic is coming the other way.

It's not a XBox, it is a rifle.

Sorry mate, I'm not really sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing here.
If you're fit and able enough to be out stalking and are equipped with a suitable set of sticks, I can't see how these people miss a broadside deer. And by all accounts, they do on a regular basis.
Even in a 20mph full value wind, if you bracket it off (ie aim at the upwind side of the kill zone) you shouldn't be missing a sub 100y deer.

I know it's our collective passion and we love obsessing over every detail but it isn't hard! Hence my list of other suggestions as to why people are missing.

I think my point still stands, if you've got the physical fitness to be even contemplating stalking (and I'm not referring to disabled people here as in my experience, they make crack shots!) and the hand-eye coordination to work a computer, then you've got no reasonable excuse.

 

[RickoShay]

I'm disagreeing, but no offence intended. An explanation..
Does your cursor wobble? No.
It's comparing apples with pears, they are similar but not the same.
My screen is not about to run for cover, neither does it show me only part of it's body, it doesn't fog up in the cold from by breath, as for the mouse well that only has to move on a 2 Dimensional surface and if I click it at the wrong time there is no risk of anyone being hurt, the mouse does not recoil, neither does it jump, the strike is almost certainly where I clicked..
Shooting a deer, or anything else living for that matter, is not like pointing and clicking a cursor of a mouse mate.

Even 'crack shots' (many hundreds on here) will have misplaced shots on deer; not so much a reasonable excuse, more that there are many more factors at play than fitness and 2D hand eye coordination.
They miss by "inches" because a little wobble at the shooting end even with a 10X or 6X magnification scope is going to equal a significant "miss" from the intended POA at the target end; experienced shooters will know this.
People miss at 40m on DSC1 off sticks, they don't 'mean' to miss, but they do.
Almost certainly one or more of the aforementioned POM above will be out of kilter - that is why they miss - or the deer has moved (but not on DSC1!).

 

[limulus]

Sorry mate, I'm not really sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing here.
If you're fit and able enough to be out stalking and are equipped with a suitable set of sticks, I can't see how these people miss a broadside deer. And by all accounts, they do on a regular basis.
Even in a 20mph full value wind, if you bracket it off (ie aim at the upwind side of the kill zone) you shouldn't be missing a sub 100y deer.

I know it's our collective passion and we love obsessing over every detail but it isn't hard! Hence my list of other suggestions as to why people are missing.

I think my point still stands, if you've got the physical fitness to be even contemplating stalking (and I'm not referring to disabled people here as in my experience, they make crack shots!) and the hand-eye coordination to work a computer, then you've got no reasonable excuse.

I dont consider myself a 'crack shot' by any means but I do hit the majority of what I shoot at where I aim.
But, as an example of 'no reasonable explanation', on Tuesday night I shot a fox at 220yds off the bonnet of the truck then 10 mins later missed a fox at 70yds off the wing mirror with the next round. Go figure.

 

[Solwaystalker]

Must have been admiring yourself in the mirror with one eye

 

[Crosshair243]

I dont consider myself a 'crack shot' by any means but I do hit the majority of what I shoot at where I aim.
But, as an example of 'no reasonable explanation', on Tuesday night I shot a fox at 220yds off the bonnet of the truck then 10 mins later missed a fox at 70yds off the wing mirror with the next round. Go figure.

Karma meant that about half an hour after writing my post I missed a 90yard newly fledged crow with my .223

A fox is different, you've only got four vertical inches to hit, less with a cub. To miss an adult deer of muntjac size or larger completely requires an almost superhuman effort!!!

 

[Paul at Fechan]

sometimes you put a bullet exactly where you want but the deer isn't there where the bullet gets there (a shockingly lucky buck a few weeks ago that lifted it's head), other times you put the cross hairs exactly where you want the bullet to go but it doesn't get there because it's a bit further that you thought (yeh done that)

I can print my group on paper inside the black for as many rounds as I can be bothered but deer are never truly still and in the live world with all the variables you're not nearly as good as you think on paper.

 

[Monkey Spanker]

In my experience, most deer that are 'cleanly missed' - aren't!!!!
It takes an awful lot to miss a deer completely and if it is something you are doing often then you should give up!!
Sadly, it is easier in more ways than way to claim a complete miss than have to admit that you have probably wounded an animal which has run off.
If you have the courage of conviction to pull the trigger, then you should also have the courage to admit mistakes and follow up EVERY shot to a humane conclusion!
MS

 

[CWMMAN3738]

+1 to both points and we have all done it!
paul at barony

SD RegularJoin DateJul 2009LocationSW ScotlandPosts3,897

sometimes you put a bullet exactly where you want but the deer isn't there where the bullet gets there (a shockingly lucky buck a few weeks ago that lifted it's head), other times you put the cross hairs exactly where you want the bullet to go but it doesn't get there because it's a bit further that you thought (yeh done that)

I can print my group on paper inside the black for as many rounds as I can be bothered but deer are never truly still and in the live world with all the variables you're not nearly as good as you think on paper.​

relax ..... read the questions through carefully and don't forget the kitkats
​

​

​