Did you realize, the more you shoot, the worse you shoot?

This is a discussion on Did you realize, the more you shoot, the worse you shoot? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I ran across this on Wikipedia (therefore you are apprised). It seems that the more shots fired, the larger the group grows. That sounds kind ...

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 57
Like Tree7Likes

Thread: Did you realize, the more you shoot, the worse you shoot?

  1. #1
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,714

    Did you realize, the more you shoot, the worse you shoot?

    I ran across this on Wikipedia (therefore you are apprised). It seems that the more shots fired, the larger the group grows. That sounds kind of counter-intuitive to me, but here is a table listing the number of shots fired vs group size. All fired from a MOA accuracy gun.

    No of shots.....Group Size(′/MOA)
    2...................1.77
    3...................2.41
    5...................3.07
    10..................3.81
    20..................4.45
    100................5.69

    I guess the lesson here is if you do get that great, impressive first shot, or 2 shot group, stop shooting, it's just going to get worse.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,890
    I don't believe that, because , it doesn't really tell the whole thing orget to the heart of the matter. Kinda, technically correct but not really.

    For instance, I worked up a group for an all weather model Ruger 77 in 223, using reloads that measured 3/8 of an inch at 100 yards. Does that mean if I fired additional shots my group would have opened?

    If so, would it have been due to something such as Wilkipedia suggests, or because I have increased my margin of error and pulled the next shot?

  4. #3
    Senior Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,158
    Well, I wish it worked that way for me, lol. The other day at the range, I went from all over the target with the first 24 rounds - to 13/17 bullseye and the rest within 1" to 1.5" by the end of the hundred round box. I just need to practice a lot more, though. I assume fatigue is a factor for a skilled shooter.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,890
    Is the results listed due to barrel walk, changing weather or what? I don't really see how they get their data, because it does not match my experience. Maybe their MOA rifle was screwed up. If it fired 1.77 for the first group, that doesn't sound MOA to me to start with.

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array FLSlim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    565
    As the OP suggested, consider the source. Wiki probably isn't the place to go for definitive information on any topic. On the other hand, it has tons of stuff and the links can keep you busy on the i'net rather than hitting the range or loading bench...
    Chose a weapon that goes bang EVERY time!

  7. #6
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,714
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Is the results listed due to barrel walk, changing weather or what? I don't really see how they get their data, because it does not match my experience. Maybe their MOA rifle was screwed up. If it fired 1.77 for the first group, that doesn't sound MOA to me to start with.
    I'm guessing that the MOA has been established for the gun elsewhere. Of course that doesn't mean all will be able to shoot to a MOA.

    I think this may be a statistical thing. Say we shoot two shots (100 yards) and the holes are touching. How much would you be willing to bet that the third shot eaually well? How about the next 97? Again, I "think", it's just a predictable statistical outcome. I.e. What woud the chances be of getting two shots touching as compared to getting 100 shots within the same group size.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,890
    Math was never a strong point for me, so I guess since I didn't know the statistics were against me, I expect whatever mechanical accuracy of the gun I shoot to be consistant.

    It's a good thing Carlos Hathcock was not a mathametician.:)

    If my first two shots were touching, I would expect , and probably be willing to bet the third would clover leaf the group. That is assuming I knew that rifle and ammo.

  9. #8
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,781
    I've said a million times here that 30 minutes and 20 shots is much better time spent than an hour and 200 shots. I know that is not exactly what we are talking about here, but the more time you sit behind the barrel in one setting, the more fatigue sets in and the more prone you are to rushing the shot.
    Old School, TN_Mike, enk5 and 4 others like this.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array Hiram25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wyoming, DE
    Posts
    11,050
    Well, I shoot a whole bunch of 1/4" groups, one at a time!
    Hiram25
    You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
    Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
    dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku

  11. #10
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,714
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Math was never a strong point for me, so I guess since I didn't know the statistics were against me, I expect whatever mechanical accuracy of the gun I shoot to be consistant.

    It's a good thing Carlos Hathcock was not a mathametician.:)

    If my first two shots were touching, I would expect , and probably be willing to bet the third would clover leaf the group. That is assuming I knew that rifle and ammo.
    But how much would you be willing to bet (just figuratively speaking) that the fouth shot would lie within the same radius of the first three? How about the the next 96?

    I did some more checking, statistics is not my strong suit either so I ran this by a professor that teaches statistics. Without hesitation the professor agreed with the table, not the actual numbers per se, but the statistical probabilities reflected by the table.

    As for Hathcock, I seriously doubt he could shoot as tight of a group with 100 shots as he could 5 shots.

    I think the accuracy of the gun is a constant. We could relate this to shooting foul shots in basketball. The more foul shots a person attempts, the greater the probability of a miss. I mean, sooner or later.... The probability of a hit, never increases, the probability of a miss does.

    Also, I was told that this very thing came up in association with the NRA, and they state the same statistical outcome. Apparently this is true.

    It's a little disconcerting to think that some (probably most) of our activities are statistically predictable.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,890
    I understand what you are saying, and I think I can wrap my small brain around the statistics of it, but it hurts!

    I also agree wholeheartedly with sixto , less is more.

  13. #12
    VIP Member
    Array C hawk Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    W. Washington
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    I've said a million times here that 30 minutes and 20 shots is much better time spent than an hour and 200 shots. I know that is not exactly what we are talking about here, but the more time you sit behind the barrel in one setting, the more fatigue sets in and the more prone you are to rushing the shot.
    SIXTO! You stole my thunder! LOL.....
    Ccccccc what? Ccccccccccc Hawks!

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array gottabkiddin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    7,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Hiram25 View Post
    Well, I shoot a whole bunch of 1/4" groups, one at a time!
    +1
    "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luke 22:36

    "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." Thomas Jefferson

  15. #14
    Distinguished Member Array bigmacque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,773
    I have to agree with Sixto on this one also.

    Most of us old farts have hands that get tired of squeezing the grip and pulling the trigger after a while, or the arthritis sets in, or any other number of bodily imperfections that can affect shooting. I'm always more accurate early in my range time than I am later.

    The thing is, all this addresses is things like extended range time, where I take couple of hundred rounds to the range with three or four shooters, and spend a good hour giving my grip and my trigger finger a workout. When it comes to the time I'll really need to be accurate, I feel assured that my first magazine load or six will be accurate.
    I'm in favor of gun control -- I think every citizen should have control of a gun.
    1 Thess. 5:16-18

  16. #15
    los
    los is offline
    VIP Member Array los's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Tx
    Posts
    2,483
    Mechanical and Physical fatigue along with inconsistent ammo loads will always compromise the ability to produce exact results. The probability and propensity will increase when you factor distance of target and ever changing outdoor elements.
    What we've got here is failure to communicate.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

1911r1
,
always shooting a little low center
,
basketball shot worsen
,
first shot good shoot more worse pellet rifle
,
foul shot misses rkm
,
pics of targets you shot
,
shooting gets worse as i shoot
,
shooting worse the more i practice
,
statistical probability of same numbers coming up
,
the more i shoot the worse i get
,
tutorial on designing a trial or simulation for a basketball player shooting freethrows
,

wikipedia group size shooting

,
you more you shoot the worse you shoot
Click on a term to search for related topics.