bronko22000

https://allposttimes.com/world-recor...usted-tuesday/

Nomercy448

These exhibition shots as “world records” are exceptionally poorly regulated, and frankly, in the instances of the last few “records,” they’ve largely been fabricated. This shot, for example, connected on the 69th shot on a 4ft x 8ft target, and no further shots were taken (meaning they weren’t walking onto target, and they didn’t even attempt to repeat the shot to confirm capability). Wholly coincidental that it hit near the orange dot. Not just any Joe blow with a super magnum rifle could EVER hit these targets, but this game of 69 shots to connect is just playing probabilities - a couple good spotters, time, and ammo. When it happens, we don’t gain knowledge and don’t advance in the ELR culture - we simply have a new coincidence happening where the right lottery numbers were chosen.

Also this week, a properly regulated cold bore world record was also broken - cold bore + 2 (which was actually +3, as he went 4 shots in a row at 2585yards on a 36”x36” plate, in competition, on the clock. Derek Love of Severance Training Center, on Team Cutting Edge Bullets shooting a tweaked 416 Stroker he calls the 416 STC set this record at Spearpoint Ranch in Kansas this weekend at their year end ELR Series Finale.

Derek beat out another shooter at this Finale match which ALSO set an ELR record last spring at the same range. Ryan Cheney connected on the farthest ELR shot in competition history at 4134yrds on a 72” square plate - also hitting 2 out of 5 shots taken at that range.

Two of these records were sanctioned and legitimate, demonstrating repeatable performance - the other is simply a statistical probability which occurs when enough shots are slung at a target with even the most moderate skill.

bronko22000

NoMercy the bullet actually hit the 8" orange dot. I agree anyone with decent shooting experience can likely duplicate this feat provided he had the right equipment and enough of ammo.

Nomercy448

What does the random possibility of hitting the 8” circle prove? At 7700 yards, he couldn’t see that spot in his scope, I can tell you that for certain, and if we try to pretend hitting the dot was any kind of intent, rather than a simple matter of happenstance, then why did all of the other 68 rounds completely miss the target - 6x by 15x larger than the dot? He didn’t walk onto an 8” dot. He threw enough rounds at a big white piece of steel, and it happened to hit a part of the target which was painted.

Not so dissimilar than when we hit a hanger bolt head on a full sized IPSC at a mile. Ooh, aah… no wait, did we purposefully hit an inch and a half bolt head at a mile, or did a shot hitting within the area of an 18”x30” target happen to hit on the bolt head.

Missing a white 4ft x10ft target 68 times in a row then accidentally hitting it - let alone accidentally hitting the painted circle doesn’t suggest hitting the dot was done by skill or intent. That dot is smaller than the center dot of the reticle in the scope he used, with almost 8,000 yards of atmosphere distorting that image to nothing at all by the time it bounced through his prisms.

Scott and Shepherd have been open about what this exhibition was - just silliness flinging bullets until they maybe ran into something. He’s certainly a skilled ELR shooter, but not sufficiently so to justify this as within his repeatable capacity. Paul Phillips’ record before this one was just as much a gimmick - Paul also being someone very skilled in ELR shooting. But these are like those 1 mile milk jug challenge videos using 223’s, or Uncle Jerry shooting an IPSC at 1000yrds with a 9mm revolver. It’s not really the point of the spear in long range marksmanship, it’s just a statistical certainty.

bronko22000

Not arguing with you Nomercy. I agree. Even the article says it is not scientifically repeatable...Well no kidding! But I guess that depends on what you consider repeatable. Now that the shooter was "in the ball park" maybe he could hit it repeatably once every 50 shots or less.
But what this "record" does show is that a bullet is dangerous for a distance of almost 5 miles and can kill someone who just happens to be in its path.

Nomercy448

“Repeatability” is largely “predictability.” If we can do something once, can we predict that we can do it again? Predictably, if you have the skill to ALMOST achieve something, then in many cases, just doing it enough times will yield achievement. Contrarily, a word record for deadlift has no opportunity for statistical certainty - either you can lift the bar, or you can’t. But just like shooting groups at 100yrds, USUALLY our first bullet won’t hit perfectly center on the bullseye, but every now and again, with enough groups fired, it does. We’d tend to call it “luck” or “coincidence,” as it’s not something we can predictably do. For these 7000+ yard records, that’s largely how they are achieved. They have the skills and gear to rain shots on the area, and in doing so with enough shots, one WILL hit.

These records out in the grey space, off of the edge of the page of the capability of current gear, knowledge, and skill represent what WILL come in the future. Guys like Derek, Ryan, and Rob (who are all competing this weekend in King of 2 Mile) will eventually be shooting competition records at that distance, and eventually shooting that distance as a standard of competition. The page will grow into this grey space, and then the exhibition records still beyond that will grow from 7000 out to 10,000 or 12,000 yards.

jeony

Some exhibition shooting records, especially those involving unconventional or difficult shots, may not have strict regulations or standardized verification processes.
In certain cases, records may be based on statistical probabilities rather than repeatable performance, as a large number of shots are taken to increase the chances of success

Nomercy448

The point of my response above is that, rather, these records are not dependent upon "a large number of shots to increase the chances of success," but instead dependent upon "a large number of shots to guarantee success, because the chance of success guarantees success if enough chances are taken." In a matter of speaking, if you roll a pair of dice 3 times, you SHOULD roll a 6 - but if you roll a pair of dice a specific number of times, you guarantee you will have rolled a 6. A shooter raining shots around a target, given enough shots, WILL hit the target - that's how statistical probabilities work.

Given a shooter and a rifle with the ability to deliver 1/3MOA at 100yrds, sustaining reliable 1moa at 1000yrds, sliding out to 7700 yards (where 1MOA is 77"), with 68% of shots falling within the center ~1/3 of the group, we have a very high confidence that hitting a target ~ 2/3 x 1 moa if we simply send enough rounds downrange. Not everyone has the ability to center a group on target at 7700 yards, but there are around 100 dudes in the country which could put together a team to make shots like this happen. It's not cheap - you're renting access to one of only a handful of places where you can safely deliver 4 mile shots, plus travel for the team to reach and stay at the location on multiple occasions to scout, prepare, and then finally set the event, putting up a complete sheet of steel as the single target which would cost around $400 alone, in most cases using microphones and downrange spotter bunkers which might cost over $1000 each plus their transportation, then burning through $400 or so in ammo (in the case of the last two records)... Not to mention making expensive modifications to an already expensive rifle - my ELR rifle and associated gear to make the ammo for it, not so dissimilar to the rifles used for the last two "records," cost around $12,000 all in, and they needed additional cheek riser and scope angle compensation gear over my rifle - which of course, the rifle survives for other use, but the average joe isn't just jumping at this record with their Rem 700 in 270win... Guys would be sitting behind 10's of 1,000's of dollars in optics to spot, will have thousands of dollars in video and audio equipment for spotting, and more money invested in small gear like a few $700 Kestrels with custom drag models, laser range finders capable of extreme distance measurement, etc etc...

Knowledge of known science is transferable, reliable, and repeatable. If we apply heat to wood, it burns, so we can teach someone else how to make fire. We can distill crude oil into gasoline, and train new engineers and operators how to do so every day. And when we do the same thing, we get the same result... But these "records" are more like the tik-tok videos of folks throwing CD's across the room and wedging them into a laundry clip, or bouncing a ping pong ball off of a dozen pots and pans and landing it on the mouth of a pop bottle - they have the ability to design the exhibition and sufficient skill to get close enough that after throwing the CD or ping pong ball a hundred times, they succeed. It's a statistical certainty.

But there ARE dudes out there (the guys making these records included) which can set legitimate, structured records which are slightly outside of the reach of all other competitors, at least temporarily. These guys are making controlled shots past 4000yrds every season, and repeating 3+ cold bore shots past 2500yrds...