"Average" is how good, exactly?

[Ed Ames]

You really should have just re-read the thread.

But I'm still waiting for YOURS.........

Post #9 in this thread: "The local ranges near me will kick shooters out for more than 1 shot every 2 seconds. There are always people shooting at incredibly close range...3 yards and the like... and they are putting holes EVERYWHERE on man-sized targets at that range."

Post #11 in this thread: "At the local ranges around here, DFW Tejas, you see a lot of people scattering holes across man-sized targets at 3 yards. That's with a range-enforced max rate of fire of 1 round every 2 seconds, and no holster use allowed. The average is probably 15" at 3 yards."

I'm curious how well you "must shoot to accomplish your goals." What are your goals? How did you define them? How did you determine how well you must shoot?

And, again, post #9: "My goal is a 2" group. I figure that's about the margin you have for a stopping (CNS) shot so there is no reason to practice anything else. I practice at whatever range lanes are available (from 3 to 25 yards) and am usually disappointed with my 25 yard shooting."

I could be a lot more specific, but what's the point if you don't read your own thread?

 

[David E]

For some reason, I did happen to ignore all your posts.......my bad.....

Thanks to everyone else for their input.

 

[Ed Ames]

LOL...that was predictable.

We're left where we started though. What "average shooter" means is easy to understand. The definition has nothing to do with "typing paper". It is also totally irrelevant because real-world needs (whether self defense, hunting, competition, or "other") aren't established by "average" but by specifics of the problem domain. A competitive shooter's needs are based on the targets she shoots. A hunter's needs are based on the type of animals she shoots. A self defense shooter's needs are based on human physiology. A shooter's, even an average shooter's, skills may be more than adequate for one need and totally useless for another.

If you want to define an average to have a standard to measure others against, go to a shooting range, look at how well everyone is shooting, and consider that the average. It's a low standard but should make you feel good.

If you want a standard for measuring how good you need to be, you must first specify your problem domain -- the why and what of your shooting. The standard of acceptable (as opposed to Average) accuracy derives from that, and only that. It differs for anti-mugging self defense, ending random public shootings, putting rabbits on the dinner table, winning competitions, and every other specific type of shooting a person might choose to do.

 

[David E]

The definition has nothing to do with "typing paper".

If you understood the OP, then you'd know that the sheet of typing paper represents the maximum acceptable size of the group fired. It's certainly easier to tape a sheet of paper to the target than drawing specific dimensions on it.

Bullseye it ain't.

Defining a minimum defensive skills standard is another endeavor entirely. Maybe you should start that thread....

 

[Ed Ames]

I understood what you were trying to do with you "typing paper", but what you were proposing is in no useful way a measure or description of average because it applies to only one vector...one type of ability.

It's like saying, "Let's discuss average MPG for cars. I think we should all agree that the average is measured driving back and forth between my house and the nearest KFC." That isn't average. It's average for a very limited test. The average is measurable, but not with that test.

If you want a good enough answer to the thread title, start looking at shot up targets at the local shooting range. If you want to set a performance goal for yourself, you must know why you are shooting and what you are shooting at.

Either way, this isn't "one size fits all".

 

[tipoc]

The average shooter is the one who can read through this thread and not shoot himself.

tipoc

 

[David E]

It's like saying, "Let's discuss average MPG for cars. I think we should all agree that the average is measured driving back and forth between my house and the nearest KFC."

That's not at all what I posted or what I meant. And any person of reasonable intelligence knows that. Your post is revealing.

Tipoc, I must agree !

 

[Dave/hoff]

@ tipoc

HA! yes, per #56.

I'm w/ Ed Ames, I really don't care what anyone else has the ability to do...only what is my OWN average ability.

@ David E: I think that "averages" must be calculated, and I think that if the criteria you propose for the test, along with your proposed sampling pool, (e.g. every gunowner) were used, the "average" shooter would not score any hits on an 8.5x11 sheet at the rate of fire your test requires.

 

[David E]

It seems that many are basing their assessment of the "average shooter" by only looking at the below average shooting pool. This presumes that gunowners cannot shoot at all, and the macho below average shooters are somehow representative of the average.

I don't care how someone else shoots, either. (Unless they're better than me and I can learn from them)

As I said in my OP, "Average" isn't a skill level to aspire to, it is one to surpass."

 

[Dave/hoff]

Sorry, David E,

but "average" is a calculation, not a "skill level".

And now I'm out...as you could quickly calculate, with this post I have now surpassed my AVERAGE monthly post total.

Good luck with this wind-chasing.

 

[budiceman]

I'm below average and my daughter is above. I'm old and she is very young!

 

[Brian Williams]

closed per OP request.