Benchrest Winning score EBR/RMAC - how good relatively?

[Centercut]

I’ve been thinking of how to compare just how well the winning scores have been compared to the other top shooters in that tournament. So for instance, which performance was better, the 229 at EBR 2022 or the 239 at RMAC 2023?

So I looked at post Covid “Majors” and played with some numbers. What I did was average the top 5 non winners in each event (2nd thru 6th), and compare that to the Winners score.

So, here we go:

RMAC 2023, winner 239, next 5 avg 235, winning margin 1.7%.

RMAC 2022, winner 231, next 5 avg 222.8, winning margin 3.7%.

RMAC 2021, winner 228, next 5 avg 221.6, winning margin 2.9%.

EBR 2022, winner 229, next 5 avg 217.2, winning margin 5.4%.

EBR 2021, winner 222, next 5 avg 213.4, winning margin 4.0%.

So post Covid Major Pro 100Y BR, the most dominating performance was EBR 2022 with a 5.4% margin over the next 5 best scores, and surprisingly, the least dominating performance was RMAC 2023 with a 1.7% margin. Interesting… and it goes to show that score alone doesn’t indicate how well the winner did without a frame of reference.

 

[Soren Drost]

Weather and wind is definitely a factor and the shooters and equipment are getting better as well

 

[oOmpH]

Interesting pov.
239 is one helluva dominating score though so my "how good" vote therefor goes to RMAC '23 regardless of how close the other shooters where. 239 is the new to beat.

 

[Centercut]

Yeah, I wasn’t trying to determine the best Score, that’s easy. 239. I was trying to determine the best shooting Performance. That’s not so easy, and why I used the method I did, which made sense to me. I think if the winds were very bad, and the winning score was 205, compared to a 185 average of the next top five shooters, that Performance would be MUCH better than a 239 where the next five average 235…IMHO

 

[hameditor]

I’ve been thinking of how to compare just how well the winning scores have been compared to the other top shooters in that tournament. So for instance, which performance was better, the 229 at EBR 2022 or the 239 at RMAC 2023?

So I looked at post Covid “Majors” and played with some numbers. What I did was average the top 5 non winners in each event (2nd thru 7th), and compare that to the Winners score.

So, here we go:

RMAC 2023, winner 239, next 5 avg 235, winning margin 1.7%.

RMAC 2022, winner 231, next 5 avg 222.8, winning margin 3.7%.

RMAC 2021, winner 228, next 5 avg 221.6, winning margin 2.9%.

EBR 2022, winner 229, next 5 avg 217.2, winning margin 5.4%.

EBR 2021, winner 222, next 5 avg 213.4, winning margin 4.0%.

So post Covid Major Pro 100Y BR, the most dominating performance was EBR 2022 with a 5.4% margin over the next 5 best scores, and surprisingly, the least dominating performance was RMAC 2023 with a 1.7% margin. Interesting… and it goes to show that score alone doesn’t indicate how well the winner did without a frame of reference.

Mike, thanks.

I have never seen an analysis similar to this, thanks for sharing.

To me, THIS IS AN IDEA OF GENIUS. I LOVE IT!!!!!

It provides a simple, yet data-based comparative analysis of marksmanship - at least for the winner. It has the advantage of being very simple, yet does - as you describe - set the winner's performance against a "benchmark" provided by the scores of the next 5 top shooters.

This is a great way to account for wind and such weather conditions, if it were the case that all shooters were affected reasonably equally by them.

It seems to me that it could also be applied to many (most) categories of shooting sports.

I can see your idea being developed to be a "CENTERCUT FACTOR" that could be applied to the winner's score at the time of the match. For example, a winner with a Centercut factor of more than 5% could be awarded an additional prize.

Now for some suggestions...

I would like to see an analysis based on a larger number of match samples (at least 25 sets of results from multiple matches, but the more the merrier). That would develop a really robust set of values for the "Centercut Factor". I would be happy to work with you on that, if you would like.

Also there's the nagging issue of "all shooters being affected reasonably equally". For example, it always seems (to me) at EBR that wind is less in the center of the range than at the edges - due to the berms? RMAC has a more open range, I think. Could that account for the EBR-winning margins being higher than those at RMAC?

Again I believe that THIS IS AN IDEA OF GENIUS. I think that it has the potential to become a shooting sports standard for marksmanship recognition.

I hope that you will continue to develop the concept and look forward to see how much support there is for a mature version of the "Centercut Factor" in future airgun competition, something like the way the "Troyer Factor" has taken hold in Field Target circles.

 

[Centercut]

Mike, thanks.

I have never seen an analysis similar to this, thanks for sharing.

To me, THIS IS AN IDEA OF GENIUS. I LOVE IT!!!!!

It provides a simple, yet data-based comparative analysis of marksmanship - at least for the winner. It has the advantage of being very simple, yet does - as you describe - set the winner's performance against a "benchmark" provided by the scores of the next 5 top shooters.

This is a great way to account for wind and such weather conditions, if it were the case that all shooters were affected reasonably equally by them.

It seems to me that it could also be applied to many (most) categories of shooting sports.

I can see your idea being developed to be a "CENTERCUT FACTOR" that could be applied to the winner's score at the time of the match. For example, a winner with a Centercut factor of more than 5% could be awarded an additional prize.

Now for some suggestions...

I would like to see an analysis based on a larger number of match samples (at least 25 sets of results from multiple matches, but the more the merrier). That would develop a really robust set of values for the "Centercut Factor". I would be happy to work with you on that, if you would like.

Also there's the nagging issue of "all shooters being affected reasonably equally". For example, it always seems (to me) at EBR that wind is less in the center of the range than at the edges - due to the berms? RMAC has a more open range, I think. Could that account for the EBR-winning margins being higher than those at RMAC?

Again I believe that THIS IS AN IDEA OF GENIUS. I think that it has the potential to become a shooting sports standard for marksmanship recognition.

I hope that you will continue to develop the concept and look forward to see how much support there is for a mature version of the "Centercut Factor" in future airgun competition, something like the way the "Troyer Factor" has taken hold in Field Target circles.

Thank you.

I didn’t go back pre-Covid because things have changed so much since then. Guns, ammo, shooters, etc. I thought about using the top ten vice the top five.

I’ve also considered using a points number vice a percentage, like the winner was 9 points over the top 5 (or 10), since all maximum scores are 250. Targets are almost the same except the RMAC are slightly larger than EBR but only 0.015 inches at the 10 ring.

I thought of this years ago when I had a really good score at RMAC 2021 in the first Pro qualification round. We had 20 shooters, I shot a 229-8x and the next highest score was 218. That’s how I knew it was more than just a good score….

PS. Centercut Factor? I like that!!!!

 

[hameditor]

Because the Centercut Factor is a ratio, rather than an absolute value, I would expect the concept to be equally applicable to pre-COVID results, too. Shooters, equipment etc changes would apply to everyone. I would certainly extend your analysis to cover these older events...

 

[wolfmangreg]

Your reasoning- and method-are very sound.

Anyone else old enough to remember those "Real Men of Genius" radio spots? One of the beer companies I think?

Here's to you, Mr. Airgun Competition Centercut Factor inventor!

 

[IAMzehTOASTY1]

Rreeaalll mennn offff geeeeeniuuuuuus
old bud light commercial
Past times of watching the pigskin get tossed around once the rabbit ears were aligned

 

[ctshooter]

I think it would be interesting if you were able to find out the temp/wind conditions the day of each Final. It would also be statistically interesting to know which air rifle, caliber and pellet each person in the top 7 used.

 

[IAMzehTOASTY1]

I think it would be interesting if you were able to find out the temp/wind conditions the day of each Final. It would also be statistically interesting to know which air rifle, caliber and pellet each person in the top 7 used.

The research for that
...
...It IS possible though...

 

[Pumacarl]

Bravo! A very good way to put things in perspective.

 

[Centercut]

I’m going to give this more thought and do a separate post on the CF. (Centercut Factor). This CF could be used in all types of shooting like Extreme Field Target for example.

 

[hameditor]

I’m going to give this more thought and do a separate post on the CF. (Centercut Factor). This CF could be used in all types of shooting like Extreme Field Target for example.

Mike, I'm very glad to hear it! Thanks for the idea and for taking-on a project that has the potential to help shooters across a wide range of disciplines

 

[IAMzehTOASTY1]

Mike, I'm very glad to hear it! Thanks for the idea and for taking-on a project that has the potential to help shooters across a wide range of disciplines

I second the kudos! That's a lot of info to sort through

 

[Centercut]

Thought I'd run a quick calculation, and the (CF) Centercut Factor for the (PAC) Pyramyd Air Cup was the lowest I've calculated at 1.1%

PAC 2023, winner 232, next 5 avg 229.4, winning margin 1.1%.

This shows that ANY of the top 5 shooters could easily have won with only the smallest of breaks. It seems good luck comes more into play the smaller the CF happens to be...
See my initial post above on this topic for the CF for the other big tournaments post Covid-19. I did not list the NAC since it was more of a "medium" tournament as compared to EBR, RMAC, and PAC.

Low CFs also tell you the general shooting conditions, as the gentler conditions seem to have a much closer top 5 or top 10 than the harsher condition competitions. In this case, I'd say IMHO this and the RMAC 2023 has the calmest conditions and/or easiest to score conditions post Covid-19. This doesn't mean there was no wind (like at RMAC), but it does indicate that the WIND CONDITIONS were amenable to good scores, such as the right to left fairly consistent wind conditions seen at the PAC finals...

Edit: if we factor in the NAC, we find:

NAC 2023, winner 219, next 5 avg 217, winning margin 0.9%.

Wow, this one could have gone in any direction... With a winning margin of 0.9%, the 2023 NAC was anyone's ball game and a roll of the dice...

 

[hameditor]

Thought I'd run a quick calculation, and the (CF) Centercut Factor for the (PAC) Pyramyd Air Cup was the lowest I've calculated at 1.1%

PAC 2023, winner 232, next 5 avg 229.4, winning margin 1.1%.

This shows that ANY of the top 5 shooters could easily have won with only the smallest of breaks. It seems good luck comes more into play the smaller the CF happens to be...
See my initial post above on this topic for the CF for the other big tournaments post Covid-19. I did not list the NAC since it was more of a "medium" tournament as compared to EBR, RMAC, and PAC.

Low CFs also tell you the general shooting conditions, as the gentler conditions seem to have a much closer top 5 or top 10 than the harsher condition competitions. In this case, I'd say IMHO this and the RMAC 2023 has the calmest conditions and/or easiest to score conditions post Covid-19. This doesn't mean there was no wind (like at RMAC), but it does indicate that the WIND CONDITIONS were amenable to good scores, such as the right to left fairly consistent wind conditions seen at the PAC finals...

Mike yes the PA Cup finals were shot in fairly calm and consistent wind - as you say. So your CF continues to make sense.

Have you tried applying the CF to the scores from the 2023 FT Worlds in ZA yet? I would be interested to see how that plays out as I believe the wind conditions were VERY tricky.

 

[Centercut]

Mike yes the PA Cup finals were shot in fairly calm and consistent wind - as you say. So your CF continues to make sense.

Have you tried applying the CF to the scores from the 2023 FT Worlds in ZA yet? I would be interested to see how that plays out as I believe the wind conditions were VERY tricky.

No, but I will for the for the 50M competition at the BR Worlds in Czech Republic. I’ll look at the FT Worlds but I haven’t come up with a good correction factor for FT.
The true standout there was American Cam Kerndt winning Springer with a score good enough for 8th in PCP! Amazing.

I was thinking of doing CF for the recent N50 “Nationals” but there are just too many other variables and not that many shooters. Plus a great deal of those guys specialize in 50Y N50 BR and I don’t think it would tell me much. Same names, same guns, limited number of shooters, etc.

EDIT:

I ran some numbers in the World 50M BR Championships is the Czech Republic recently.

WRABF 2023, winner 725, next 5 avg. 711, winning margin 1.97%. However, to gain equivalency with all of the above one card winners, we'll need to multiply by a factor of three (3). So, the true winning margin is 5.91%, the most dominant performance we've seen post COVID in a major BR Championship! This even surpasses the stellar performance by the 2022 EBR Winner which had been the most domination performance until then.