One of the problems shooters have is a hard time seperating result from the process.
There are those shooters however who do that. I can think of two shooters this weekend. One dropped less than 6 and said he wasn't shooting well mind. Another dropped many more and said he was shooting well. That's because they are objective enough to seperate the process they can control from the result they can't.
That's not a common trend. The more common trend is that a score is a reflection on their shooting even though it's affected by variables outside of that shooters control.
It's only with data can you actually determine the bit you have control over is better.
You will tend to find the better shots that are consistent have the better approaches. But that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. And knowing or trying to work out where that improvement can be made is better off starting with data than trial and error, guess work, or luck.
Tell me, how do you know the scope you are using is the best for you for rangefinding? Did you get the idea from someone else? Did you try all the scopes and blind test your consistency and accuracy? Did you keep the one you had some good results with? How does it compare with other scopes?
When you look at how people learn, very few naturally work in a logical manner to determine the best result. Most are just happy to take the shortcuts that get them close or that fit the bill. If they get the results they expect or want generally they are happy. Doesn't mean though that they are performing at their optimum.
BFTA/NSRA County Coach
CSFTA Chairman/BFTA Rep