ORIGINAL: MGH_PA
ORIGINAL: gzg38b
ORIGINAL: MGH_PA
ORIGINAL: gzg38b
Get your hunting clothes on.
Screw on your broadeads.
Climb your treestand, and place a 3d target at 30 yards.
You get ONE arrow.
If you hitBOTH lungs I'll give you $100.
If you MISS the lungs, YOU give ME $1,000.
Would you take that bet? If not, 30 yards is beyond your "effective range".
Interesting way to look at it
Interesting way of putting it. I'm not even sure I would take that bet at 20yds (although I'm almost positive I could hit it). Not to say the risk of a monetary loss is greater than wounding a live animal, but your scenario (in my case) wouldn't be a true measurement of my effective range. I'm not a gambling man, or much of a risk taker for that matter
You really wouldn't take that bet even at 20 yards? Really all the bet is asking is whether or not you believe that you can hit your mark, under hunting conditions, 90% of the time or better.
If you can't do that, I'd say that distance is beyond your effective range.
It's not so much about the fact of whether or not I can or can't hit it. I can hit the 2" Morrell dots pretty much everytime at 20yds. My comment was more about placing a monetary bet on the shot.
Pressure like that can do a lot to people that don't handle it well. I doubt I would be pressured enough to miss a lung shot at that distance, but you never know. I'm not risking $1,000 over it, and that's the point
Isn't there also alot of pressure when you're shooting at a live animal? To me, this bet is the best way to simulate a live hunting situation: one shot (no practice), from a treestand, with broadheads, at a 3d target, AND the added element of pressure. At least you know the target isn't doing to duck the string!
Personally I'd rather lose $1,000 on a bet than wound an animal. My maximum effective range is that maximum range that I'd be willing to accept this bet. For me, that's about 25 yards.