Why is it called a V bull?

[IainWR]

F Class shooting has improved to the point where there is a central spot within the conventional V Bull and that is now scored as 6, the V-Bull is 5 and the TR Bull is 4.

As equipment and manufacture has improved tolerances the V Bull came in to split ties of 50's. In recent years the Palma Long Range target was scored as X, 10, 9, 8 and so on and was a metric target with proportional sized scoring rings, similar to smallbore. I am all for this move to metric targets but even though I would like to score HPS's all the time I would also like the challenge of getting to that possible and get penalised for a wind call that wasn't as accurate as I could have done with out 'getting away' wit a Bull, nota V Bull.

However, pressure from some unknown areas has meant that Palma targets have reverted to V, 5, 4, 3 etc. A very bad move IMHO

Errrrr ... no.

F-class have reverted to using the v as a tiebreaker. And at short range in the UK they have their own target set, with rings and aiming marks that are a lot smaller than the TR targets for the corresponding distance.

The ICFRA Palma target rings are 10" V, 20" 5, 32" 4, 44" 3, 72" 2. They are not equispaced like the ISSF smallbore or 300m targets. When used for F-class a 5" diameter white spot is added - that's the F-class V.

The pressure to revert to V5 for the Palma etc came from a substantial majority of the national representatives on the ICFRA TR Committee. And the only practical difference between v54321 and X109876 is the penalty for a miss. Under V5 a miss costs you 5 points (possibly recoverable in some large competitions), under X10 it costs you 10 points - much more difficult to get back in any circumstances.

Iain
Vice-chairman NRA Shooting Committee
Chairman ICFRA Target Rifle Committee

[Griff]

F Class shooting has improved to the point where there is a central spot within the conventional V Bull and that is now scored as 6, the V-Bull is 5 and the TR Bull is 4.

As equipment and manufacture has improved tolerances the V Bull came in to split ties of 50's. In recent years the Palma Long Range target was scored as X, 10, 9, 8 and so on and was a metric target with proportional sized scoring rings, similar to smallbore. I am all for this move to metric targets but even though I would like to score HPS's all the time I would also like the challenge of getting to that possible and get penalised for a wind call that wasn't as accurate as I could have done with out 'getting away' wit a Bull, nota V Bull.

However, pressure from some unknown areas has meant that Palma targets have reverted to V, 5, 4, 3 etc. A very bad move IMHO

Errrrr ... no.

F-class have reverted to using the v as a tiebreaker. And at short range in the UK they have their own target set, with rings and aiming marks that are a lot smaller than the TR targets for the corresponding distance.

The ICFRA Palma target rings are 10" V, 20" 5, 32" 4, 44" 3, 72" 2. They are not equispaced like the ISSF smallbore or 300m targets. When used for F-class a 5" diameter white spot is added - that's the F-class V.

The pressure to revert to V5 for the Palma etc came from a substantial majority of the national representatives on the ICFRA TR Committee. And the only practical difference between v54321 and X109876 is the penalty for a miss. Under V5 a miss costs you 5 points (possibly recoverable in some large competitions), under X10 it costs you 10 points - much more difficult to get back in any circumstances.

Iain
Vice-chairman NRA Shooting Committee
Chairman ICFRA Target Rifle Committee

Sorry Ian, those were just my opinions, and I will admit, based upon my knowledge a the time. Thanks for the correction.

Having been competing on ISSF targets for the last 8-10 years I can honestly say that as an individual it is much more satisfying scoring an X or 10 compared to a V or 5 due to the size of the rings. It might be a bit of luck but when hit consistently is a much more accurate indicator of skill, where a 9 is a mild penalty for inaccuracy and relatively a lot easier to recover etc. With V5, yes, good to hit but a 4 is a much bigger penalty. IMOP we see this on NRA Targets where a bad 5 could still win a competition but get a 4, regardless of how good or bad.... try looking on page 2+!! (a small exaggeration I admit).

As to recoverable team / individual scores when a shooter misses..... why would you want to make it more recoverable and reward a miss?? Irrespective of pride, range layout, lane number positioning, a competitor should still be able to hit their target. I need only quote Matt Emmons (USA) 50M Mens 3 Position Final in the Athens 2004 Olympics.

( http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/5785670/ )

Only in rugby do we see a reward of 5 pts for the ideal score, Air Rifle, Air Pistol, Smallbore Rifle, Archery... at the top level and even at club level all 10, 9, 8 etc

Sorry to rattle on!

[Chapuis]

Only in rugby do we see a reward of 5 pts for the ideal score, Air Rifle, Air Pistol, Smallbore Rifle, Archery... at the top level and even at club level all 10, 9, 8 etc

Not quite Griff, what about gallery rifle (multi target) ? The targets used are a modified figure 11.

[cheeky]

However, pressure from some unknown areas has meant that Palma targets have reverted to V, 5, 4, 3 etc. A very bad move IMHO

I am so glad nobody has scored perfectly in the Grand Agg during the TR Imperial, when it has been achieved there MUST be a change in the targets / scoring rings. Glyn Barnnett has been the closest so far in recent times dropping only 3 points out of 650?

Out of 705 I think.

Changing from 10/X to 5/V on the Palma (now ICFRA) targets can only be a bad thing if you want to penalise misses more. Otherwise, it essentially makes no difference because (other than the effect of a miss) score relativity is just the same.

[Griff]

Only in rugby do we see a reward of 5 pts for the ideal score, Air Rifle, Air Pistol, Smallbore Rifle, Archery... at the top level and even at club level all 10, 9, 8 etc

Not quite Griff, what about gallery rifle (multi target) ? The targets used are a modified figure 11.

Just meant Olympic Disciplines.

Guess I'm getting the hackles of some people up by innocently making my point, albeit probably in my own mind, I'll shut up now...