How do you know this to be true? What is your competition experience?
How do you know this to be true?
Like what things? Please be specific.
Actually, yes. I see between 30-50 big game animals a year taken, almost all by those same people.
And you know this because of what experience competing?
Actually, hitting is the hard part and where most fail.
Well I’m killing multiples of hundreds of game animals, and seeing thousands killed by others, I would say that second round corrections are very important and nearly as important of a skill as first round hits past 300’ish yards. Past 500’ish second round corrections done quickly is more important that first round hit ability. Or at least that is what has shown up in those animals killed.
How do you know this? I don’t generally miss- I’ve missed twice in the last 60-70 animals; but I people do miss and in over 90% of cases they get a second shot. For someone that is trained correctly, they will spot their own impact/miss, correct and send another round as fast or faster than a spotter could could call it.
Ok- go on. What is your experience of using a calibrated FFP reticle (specifically mil) on animals and targets at speed?
I never said that it’s “marginal if not detrimental to the killers focus” beyond 600. Most people, regardless of equipment, do not have enough knowledge, skill, or ability to be taking shots on animals past 450’ish yards in broken terrain- that’s factually true. That has nothing to with what is the best “setup, gear and practice”. That can only be determined by shooting and tracking performance differences in hit rates and time to hit between techniques in large data sets…. Generally called competition.
Actually that’s not we’ll known at all. That is an excuse that people who don’t perform when measured objectively use- “ya, well if it was real, I would have totally dominated”. What had proven out repeatedly in every single study and research project measuring stress and ability is that there is no “magic” ability to perform above someone’s baseline under stress. In other words- if you can’t do it consistently on a range, you can not do it consistently “for real”.
The highlighted part is so laughably false, it boggles the mind as the information is not hard to find. Point in fact, historically the best units in war (read most effective) very often had high levels of competitive background, or outright demanded their members to compete. All of the data collected over the last decade since it has been really measured and looked at has found a direct correlation between someone’s on demand shooting skills, and their performance under stress. So much so that an entire branch of the US armed forces has completely rewritten their marksmanship doctrine.