Originally Posted by Yorkshiretea
I've never been a fan of the awarding 100% for, well, not hitting 100% and I'm not a fan of Mean Average either, I'd much prefer an accurate % and just get your grade from score divided by the number of targets shot because that will give you a 100% accurate % and it's not even that complex to understand.
As much fun as it is managing a 80% against Gilly/Kes/Neil you know it's falsely inflated because they didn't do that well, not that rewarding really but I can see the attraction of shooting against the worlds best & course rather than just the course.
End of the day tho, you've just got to hit more targets.
Yeh, but we've done this. That only works if you can't drop a round in that series. But if you hit 100% targets on a day where the course setter didn't put them out beyond 30 yds, and then your rival hit 98% on a day you missed but there were none under 50 yds, you'd not say that was a fair outcome.
Of course, we could suggest make all rounds count. With 7 GP's that's a possibility... I seem to remember some long debate on the subject before, about people missing one, but then it is a series?