NRL realism

[hereinaz]

To confirm and summarize what other have said, the matches are attractive for lots of reasons.

It’s a vacation trip for me.
Games are fun.
You meet good people.
You test your gear, and check out others gear.
You can learn good stuff from others.
Blind stages are good because you don’t know the course ahead of time.
You shoot in a new location.
Two days compresses experience and learning.
Repeating a timed stressed event prepares you for the stress of a hunt.
You can get tired and exposed to the elements, kinda like a hunt.

 

[hereinaz]

Viewing NRL Hunter competitions (or others) through a training tool lens for hunting or real life, versus it being golf with a rifle…..


When designing matches you have a sliding scale of “scenario replication” of whatever someone believes “real life” is, versus shooting skill development and measurement.
Perfect replication of real life in a match is not possible. Real life has time constraints that the shooter does not control- you are on the targets time; as well as the target moving randomly. Matches have to decide how much is given between those two view points.


Using another venue such pistol- you have two main options- static or mostly static competition, and action pistol where it is anything but static. Static pistol matches such as Bullseye- are good for one thing, precision. They fail at nearly every other aspect of shooting. Action pistol matches on the other hand give up a bit in pre precision measurement, but they measure and foster every other skill that used for a handgun. Bullseye shooting is fantastic, but action shooting is far better for skill development in all around use with a pistol.
In action shooting there are really only two venues USPSA and IDPA. USPSA measures raw skill- with no real desire or effort to measure “tactics”. IDPA was started to address the “unrealisticness” of USPSA and force “tactics”.
The “tactical” world repeats ad nauseam that USPSA scenarios are “unrealistic”, and that is true somewhat- USPSA isn’t supposed to replicate scenarios of real life, but to measure raw skill.
USPSA measures and scores all the factors of shooting handguns- drawing, accuracy, recoil control, multiple targets, target to target transitions, reloading, movement, shooting on the move, entering and exiting positions, rapid position changes, varying distances and target sizes, etc, etc; all while being measured to the hundredth of a second. How many points you get per stage (accuracy) and how long it took you to get those points add up to each persons score- that’s total points in a stage divided by your time - this is known as “Hit Factor” scoring. There is no “perfect” score- you can max the points on targets, but someone can always shoot it faster. This means that there is no ceiling to performance as there is no “perfect score” (unlike points and par times).
Equipment ranges from factory Glocks from retention holsters to open guns from open holsters. In either case the skills transfer from one gun to the next- that is a top end Open division shooter, is a top end Production division shooter the first time they pick the production gun up. Same is true in reverse, but to a slightly lessor extent as their is a learning curve to red dots on open pistols.
USPSA is a “free-flow” event. As long as you stay within certain guidelines for safety, you can shoot, move, and engage the targets on each stage as you see fit.


IDPA is relatively similar, except it mandates drawing from concealment, mandates use of cover, mandates when and what type of reloads, target engagement sequences, and when and how to engage targets. It is a time plus scoring in that your raw time is your score, with any missed shots being time added. In order to try to make it “realistic” it becomes far more contrived and unrealistic. Because IDPA tries to force the “scenario” instead of giving people the targets and letting them figure out the best way to shoot it- it artificially limits performance and growth in skill.

Between the two (and every other way) as a raw predictor of skill with a pistol in non-static use- USPSA/IPSC has no equal. Take a mid level or above USPSA shooter and put them on any pistol task that involves dynamic shooting, and they will perform extremely well.



Now let’s compare “rifle” matches. PRS is akin to benchrest, and has almost no real transfer to hunting. Yes it is better than no distance practice, but the equipment and gear is so removed from practicality that it has become too specialized to have much real transfer.

NRL Hunter was ostensibly started to address that. NRL Hunter does not replicate the “real life animal” scenario variability, but instead attempts to replicate the “shooting variability” side of it.
The stages are such that you have a fixed time to find the targets, range them and shoot them. The most movement is from one of four positions on the same target. Almost all shots are from prone, tripod, or triple pull bipod. There is no reloading, and only two shots per target- so no rapid shooting, no target to target transitions, etc, etc. Stages are such that under the par time you must find the targets, range them, and then shoot them.

The very obvious difference right from the start compared to the pistol matches above- is par time versus “time plus” scoring. You have “x” amount of time to shoot a stage, and shooting it faster does not increase your score. This is a massive difference between say USPSA action pistol, 3-gun/multi-gun, and NRL Hunter.
Unless par times are so short that there is no possible way to get all the points in time, the very nature of it means that equipment and focus will be put on other aspects of shooting- this is why PRS has become barricade bench-rest. The long par times as well as the start of NRL Hunter being PRS competitors and not action competitors, is why the “light” gun is 12lbs and they are mostly just lighter versions of PRS rifles. The vast majority of shots are from one of three positions- prone, tripod, triple pull bipod and that, with long par times, has artificially pushed everyone into certain contrived support equipment to do well.

The main issue is that the skill transfer is less than ideal outside of those environments. What you see when good, to really good NRL Hunter competitors (but not action competitors) are hunting, is that as long as the hunting situation and animal presents as they do in matches- they tend to do fine…. Unless they miss or wound on the first shot. Then on average their habituated loading and shooting techniques, the animal moving, any required positions changes, and time being a massive factor- is that their performance drops considerably. When things go wrong, their ability to recover and finish the animal/event is noticeably affected by their lack of ability to “shoot and move” under stress and time. Juxtapose that over to a good, to really good 3-gunner, and the issue you run into with them, is they can shoot before the spotter is ready, and they often shoot animals to the ground.
In seeing a lot of people kill animals, and while holding the other variables inline as much as feasible- when things go wrong action competitors perform better.
Which is logical when you break down what each type of match is doing to, and measuring of- the shooter. It is not that NRL Hunter is “easy” or that it is useless- far from it. It’s that it is measuring less, and what it does measure (and therefor pushes people to improve at) is not necessarily the best things for all-around hunting, and definitely not for recovery on missed or wounded animals.


Take a good NRL Hunter performer and they don’t generally do all that well in other shooting or hunting tasks that are active.




Competition breeds skill- no one is actually highly skilled without competition. Lots of people say they are awesome without ever competing at whatever event they are engaged in; yet when actually measured where they don’t control the event- it never works out that way. One can be “ok” without competing if they take practice seriously and measure their performance; but people aren’t truly skilled compared to those actively competing- the target and the timer are unforgiving mistresses and they don’t care about your feelings.
NRL Hunter and others matches of the same type are better than no competition. Finding the targets is a decent thing on the clock, however, the common matches are not as good as they should be for raw skill development.


Simply switching to a hit factor or time plus scoring systems would dramatically change the landscape of NRL Hunter. So too would it dramatically change/reduce the equipment common to be competitive. Making the max weights match the most common hunting rifles, making unsupported and offhand shots common, and making movement during stage be just enough to cause equipment and rifle management to be a real factor (crawling, climbing, going through or over obstacles, etc.).


If someone doesn’t shoot any matches at all, NRL Hunter is absolutely beneficial. Someone taking their actual hunting rifle, competing and trying to win- is much, much better than just going to a range and banging steel plates.

Very good critique and review…

It definitely has its limitations.

 

[Justin Crossley]

I’ve been thinking about trying the skills division at a match that will be close to me this summer. A couple days ago I was talking about it with a friend of mine over a few beers. I was explaining to him what the matches were all about, how they worked, divisions, etc. I was saying the matches were designed to best replicate hunting situations and it could sharpen our skills instead of just going out into the mountains to shoot.

As I was explaining everything he said, “how is that a realistic hunting experience?”. As we talked about it more I started to wonder about this myself.

On a hunt who carries rifles up to 16lbs? I know there are other divisions but seems to me most people in these matches are gaming the system to get as close to 12lbs as possible. The 12-16lb class gun is nothing but a truck gun, if that. Do most people actually use their hunting rifle for these matches? Who carries 2-3 bags hanging off or inside their pack? Besides that who also brings their tac table in addition to all this other stuff? Now, the one that really confused us, who can hunt with a 10rnd mag? The power factor minimum seems odd as well. Other than this forum, does nobody hunt with a smaller cartridge than a 6.5 creed shooting the 143? There’s a few other things but those were the main things we talked about.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m in no way shape or form bashing the matches. It’s just billed as a “Hunter” style match but seems at odds to that in many ways.

With all that said, I’m going to be at the 2 Oregon matches if I can swing it.

My comp rifle killed two deer and a bear this year. Would have been more but those were the only hunts I had time for this season.

Triple-pull bipod, 10-round magazine and all. My son even used my RRS tripod for rear support to kill this buck.



Nobody is forced to use a rifle with a minimum weight. The maximum is just 12 or 16 respectively.

Are the comps exactly like hunting? No
Are they really good practice, eye opening for most, and great for testing gear? Absolutely!

 

[Justin Crossley]

I have been around them and the matches are a blast. Do they mimic hunting situations? In some regards yes, but as far as equipment no, not at all. It would be great to see all the bells and whistles stripped away and the weight limit reduced for the light division. Either that or make an ultra light/stripped hunter division. Folks are simply too reliant on equip and the rifles are a far cry from what most would hunt with. I will be competing this year, but wish it was more hunter oriented. As the sport grows I would imagine things will adapt. Lighter weight divisions, tripod/bag regs, electronics limitations, etc. would be wonderful and truly test the skills of the competitors more than the depth of their pocket books.

Why? Why do people keep saying the gear or weight limits need be be changed? You are free to use whatever you want.

The rules are actually irrelevant as far as match placement goes. The guys who win now will win regardless of the limits.

 

[Carl Ross]

@Formidilosus

We agree 90-95%.

I like rifle golf, and enjoy shooting both PRS and NRL Hunter. I also shoot them to win, not as a training opportunity for hunting. I wouldn’t typically take a triple pull or a little bastard hunting, but I will use them to gain points in a match.

I do think PRS skills transfer a little better than you do. Certainly not saying it’s ideal training, but I do think there are many skills you’ll develop that will also help in field engagements:

• Getting a good zero
• Getting good dope
• Getting into some positions efficiently (while not as fast as if it was scored time-plus, a good PRS shooter is WAY faster than those who don’t compete in anything timed)
• Reading the wind (beginner and midpack shooters might crowd source wind calls, but top shooters typically don’t)
• Pointing their rifle at a target such that the target is in the field of view without searching
• Executing a shot process with some consistency
• Seeing what happens down-range, and making quick and accurate corrections from that information

If you took a top PRS or NRL shooter and had them shoot the S2H school pretest with a decent hunting rifle, do you think they’d perform above average vs the other students? I’d take that bet.

If you took that same shooter and had them train for a competition that better reflected field engagements, would they smoke the current version of themselves? I’d take that bet too.

None of that to argue that someone trying to optimize their field shooting should focus on PRS, just making a case that a very good PRS shooter will have skills that will put them ahead of the curve in a separate but related discipline. Which has yet to be established. But if there was a S2H match I'd try to find my way there.


As a sidebar, I have one of these:



It won't pick up suppressed rifle shots, and as such I haven't shot my hunter course in time-plus fashion. Any recommendations on a timer that will reliably pick up extra quiet rifles? I've looked at the Shooters Global and the Kestrel, but haven't tried either out in that specific application.

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus

We agree 90-95%.

I like rifle golf, and enjoy shooting both PRS and NRL Hunter. I also shoot them to win, not as a training opportunity for hunting. I wouldn’t typically take a triple pull or a little bastard hunting, but I will use them to gain points in a match.

I do think PRS skills transfer a little better than you do. Certainly not saying it’s ideal training, but I do think there are many skills you’ll develop that will also help in field engagements:

• Getting a good zero
• Getting good dope
• Getting into some positions efficiently (while not as fast as if it was scored time-plus, a good PRS shooter is WAY faster than those who don’t compete in anything timed)
• Reading the wind (beginner and midpack shooters might crowd source wind calls, but top shooters typically don’t)
• Pointing their rifle at a target such that the target is in the field of view without searching
• Executing a shot process with some consistency
• Seeing what happens down-range, and making quick and accurate corrections from that information

Absolutely. Apologies as I was writing that post while thinking. That post was more- NRL Hunter isn’t as ideal as it should be compared to what it could be. It was mainly in response to the OP’s question on whether NRL Hunter is realistic, and then whether it is optimal. I did not explain that sufficiently.

If you took a top PRS or NRL shooter and had them shoot the S2H school pretest with a decent hunting rifle, do you think they’d perform above average vs the other students? I’d take that bet.

We’ve had a few very good PRS shooters do that. The ones that have no background in action shooting, are only marginally better in Pretest than average- in targets/scenarios that aren’t timed or have a long allowed time- they do better than average definitely. Those that have a solid level of action shooting background do noticeably perform better than average, simply because they figure out that they don’t have time to futz around and they are comfortable with that. The PRS guys just simply do not setup, move, and shoot fast enough and therefore like most people, don’t get shots off before running out if time.

If you took that same shooter and had them train for a competition that better reflected field engagements, would they smoke the current version of themselves? I’d take that bet too.

Yes of course.

None of that to argue that someone trying to optimize their field shooting should focus on PRS, just making a case that a very good PRS shooter will have skills that will put them ahead of the curve in a separate but related discipline.

Yes sir. Again- I wasn’t as clear as I should have been as to where/what I was meaning.

If someone has never shot long range field matches- they absolutely should shoot them, and try to win.

Which has yet to be established. But if there was a S2H match I'd try to find my way there.

They’ve discussed it. The match director that would be used is excellent, and it would be very different than current matches.

As a sidebar, I have one of these:

View attachment 810258

It won't pick up suppressed rifle shots, and as such I haven't shot my hunter course in time-plus fashion. Any recommendations on a timer that will reliably pick up extra quiet rifles? I've looked at the Shooters Global and the Kestrel, but haven't tried either out in that specific application.

Those won’t work for suppressed. CED 7000’s are what we use and when the sensitivity is set correctly they pick up suppressed shots well- though you do need to get it beside the shooter closer to the muzzle. Hit me up and I’ll send you one or two to try.

 

[Justin Crossley]

@Formidilosus what are the typical timed scenarios like? As in backpack on, rifle in hand as if hunting? Are the target locations known? How much time is typically the limit for one shot?

 

[Bluumoon]

Going to run my course Tuesday 0900 if anyone in the 4 corners (SWCO) wants to join. 15 stations 3ish miles mixed terrain 50 yards to 7 or 800. Will identify targets, return to start hit timer and go, points/time.

Mostly a test run of some changes I’ve made, will do a planned run spring/summer.

 

[Carl Ross]

Absolutely. Apologies as I was writing that post while thinking. That post was more- NRL Hunter isn’t as ideal as it should be compared to what it could be. It was mainly in response to the OP’s question on whether NRL Hunter is realistic, and then whether it is optimal. I did not explain that sufficiently.

It was a good post in general, and gave me a couple ideas to tweak my course. That context makes sense.

We’ve had a few very good PRS shooters do that. The ones that have no background in action shooting, are only marginally better in Pretest than average- in targets/scenarios that aren’t timed or have a long allowed time- they do better than average definitely. Those that have a solid level of action shooting background do noticeably perform better than average, simply because they figure out that they don’t have time to futz around and they are comfortable with that. The PRS guys just simply do not setup, move, and shoot fast enough and therefore like most people, don’t get shots off before running out if time.

That makes sense too. I can totally see if someone has never had to/practiced doing the whole thing under time where they wouldn't have that pathway developed at all.

They’ve discussed it. The match director that would be used is excellent, and it would be very different than current matches.

Copy.

Those won’t work for suppressed. CED 7000’s are what we use and when the sensitivity is set correctly they pick up suppressed shots well- though you do need to get it beside the shooter closer to the muzzle. Hit me up and I’ll send you one or two to try.

Copy. Appreciate the offer, if they were $300 like the Kestrel I'd take you up on it. They're pretty cheap, I'll just order one to try and save us both a little hassle.

 

[Lawnboi]

I have shot prs, nrl and uspsa.

They are all games, and all will make you a better shooter.

I have gained skill and knowledge doing all three.

If your not shooting under pressure and someone else’s rules your not training to your full potential.

 

[hereinaz]

Going to run my course Tuesday 0900 if anyone in the 4 corners (SWCO) wants to join. 15 stations 3ish miles mixed terrain 50 yards to 7 or 800. Will identify targets, return to start hit timer and go, points/time.

Mostly a test run of some changes I’ve made, will do a planned run spring/summer.

Hey. I wanna come up and do it. Around Memorial Day I head up to Cortez area.

 

[Bluumoon]

Hey. I wanna come up and do it. Around Memorial Day I head up to Cortez area.

I can see Cortez from the house. Shoot me dates and we’ll try to get one together

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus what are the typical timed scenarios like?
As in backpack on, rifle in hand as if hunting? Are the target locations known? How much time is typically the limit for one shot?

In the S2H classes?

If so, it varies. Carl’s Modified hunting rifle drill is always shot, as well as two baseline groups. The field scenarios are different and based on animals from the year prior. As best as can be, the animal, situation, terrain, position, and time from a hunt the year prior is used for each scenario. The times are unknown to the shooter- they get a brief of the situation and what brought them to this point, and any pertinent information about the “animal”. The target location is known to the shooter. That gives the shooter enough information to make judgements about how to proceed.

 

[Bluumoon]

Absolutely. Apologies as I was writing that post while thinking. That post was more- NRL Hunter isn’t as ideal as it should be compared to what it could be. It was mainly in response to the OP’s question on whether NRL Hunter is realistic, and then whether it is optimal. I did not explain that sufficiently.





We’ve had a few very good PRS shooters do that. The ones that have no background in action shooting, are only marginally better in Pretest than average- in targets/scenarios that aren’t timed or have a long allowed time- they do better than average definitely. Those that have a solid level of action shooting background do noticeably perform better than average, simply because they figure out that they don’t have time to futz around and they are comfortable with that. The PRS guys just simply do not setup, move, and shoot fast enough and therefore like most people, don’t get shots off before running out if time.





Yes of course.




Yes sir. Again- I wasn’t as clear as I should have been as to where/what I was meaning.

If someone has never shot long range field matches- they absolutely should shoot them, and try to win.





They’ve discussed it. The match director that would be used is excellent, and it would be very different than current matches.







Those won’t work for suppressed. CED 7000’s are what we use and when the sensitivity is set correctly they pick up suppressed shots well- though you do need to get it beside the shooter closer to the muzzle. Hit me up and I’ll send you one or two to try.

Let me know where and when that comp is a thing.

 

[actionshooter]

The decision to go forth and participate in a competition forces a shooter check their ego, look fear and nerves in the face, manage so many tasks and force them to perform in front of audience and peers. A very small percentage of shooters thrive on this environment, most will never leave their comfort zone to find out. It's not for everyone.......

Exactly.... bottom line is that any competition shooting makes you a better shooter... a better shooter makes you a better hunter from a shooting skills aspect...

I don't think people realize how many skills can be learned from a few matches until they do it, that's not even taking the confidence factor into account.

Doesn't really matter is NRL is realistic or not, the skills translate to the field.