Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Threads merged.
History Channel's "Top Shot" on Sunday night
- Thread starter Dewey 68
- Start date
- Status
This Mike guy got screwed by choosing to go against the kid who's actually on the National Rifle Team. Mike's friends that voted for the kid to be in the challenge messed up as well. Had they chosen the black guy, it may have been a challenge. The kid is just too good with a rifle and Mike had no chance.
If someone wants to win, he has to choose a strategy to stay in the competition regardless of his shooting. That's what they do on "Survivor", that's what has to be done on any "reality" show.
The kid was a little obnoxious, too. You don't go around telling how you were putting "smiley faces" on targets. That's not going to win you any respect.
If someone wants to win, he has to choose a strategy to stay in the competition regardless of his shooting. That's what they do on "Survivor", that's what has to be done on any "reality" show.
The kid was a little obnoxious, too. You don't go around telling how you were putting "smiley faces" on targets. That's not going to win you any respect.
pikid89
Member
-Ben
i hope you didnt have any hand in writing the synopsis about your episode
no 1911?!?!?!
Rembrandt
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2003
- Messages
- 4,657
Felt like I was sucker baited by the pre-show publicity...."Top Shot", competition by "Sixteen of the nation's most skilled marksmen have been carefully selected to compete for the title".....blah blah blah.
Perhaps spoiled because the History channel has been featuring Jerry Mickluk, Tom Knapp, Byron Ferguson, Bill Ogelsby, Bob Munden...I expected they would be featuring competition of those kinds of "TOP SHOTS" with firearms.
Now that I know what the show is about, I can lower the expectations and accept it for what it is....a game show with firearms.
Perhaps spoiled because the History channel has been featuring Jerry Mickluk, Tom Knapp, Byron Ferguson, Bill Ogelsby, Bob Munden...I expected they would be featuring competition of those kinds of "TOP SHOTS" with firearms.
Now that I know what the show is about, I can lower the expectations and accept it for what it is....a game show with firearms.
Last edited:
Ben Stoeger
Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Messages
- 11
Obviously I didn't tell them to call a Beretta "slide action". They did ask me a lot of questions about the gun, but I can't control what they decide to write.
Next week is Berettas... just wait and see if they have other guns you like better later on. =)
Next week is Berettas... just wait and see if they have other guns you like better later on. =)
Jim Watson
Member
I like nearly all guns.
I am apprehensive about references to slingshots and such junk, though.
I am apprehensive about references to slingshots and such junk, though.
OP
OP
Dewey 68
Member
Survivor with guns is absolutely correct
They have to "drama it up" to get other people than gun nuts to tune in. The History Channel is trying to make money like any other channel.
More history would have been great, and in it's present format I think they could have eliminated the practice sessions and gave more history of the weapons themselves, but they are playing up the interpersonal drama and the game aspect of the show. The best marksman probably won't win, the better "Player" will.
Kelly screwed up with his comments about putting the smiley face on the target before eliminations, IMO. I don't think that will help him in "the game" aspect of the show, but he backed it up when it came time to shoot.
I also noticed as others did the disparity of the shots at the elimination targets with the Beretta. Some were shooting bulls, and others were well off. I was thinking that some may set up their sites differently on their guns. I know I've shot other people's guns and it takes me a few shots to get their sites zeroed in for me, so I could see with only shooting one shot that they could be that far off.
Not what I hoped for, as I'm not a reality TV game fan, but as an earlier poster pointed out, we aren't the target audience. If we were the target audience, it would be on one of the 3 outdoor channels on cable because it wouldn't sell enough ad revenue to be on a bigger channel like History. I'll finish the series, although I'll probably watch "Breaking Bad" next week in that time slot and watch "Top Shot" on Monday.
They have to "drama it up" to get other people than gun nuts to tune in. The History Channel is trying to make money like any other channel.
More history would have been great, and in it's present format I think they could have eliminated the practice sessions and gave more history of the weapons themselves, but they are playing up the interpersonal drama and the game aspect of the show. The best marksman probably won't win, the better "Player" will.
Kelly screwed up with his comments about putting the smiley face on the target before eliminations, IMO. I don't think that will help him in "the game" aspect of the show, but he backed it up when it came time to shoot.
I also noticed as others did the disparity of the shots at the elimination targets with the Beretta. Some were shooting bulls, and others were well off. I was thinking that some may set up their sites differently on their guns. I know I've shot other people's guns and it takes me a few shots to get their sites zeroed in for me, so I could see with only shooting one shot that they could be that far off.
Not what I hoped for, as I'm not a reality TV game fan, but as an earlier poster pointed out, we aren't the target audience. If we were the target audience, it would be on one of the 3 outdoor channels on cable because it wouldn't sell enough ad revenue to be on a bigger channel like History. I'll finish the series, although I'll probably watch "Breaking Bad" next week in that time slot and watch "Top Shot" on Monday.
Lorenzo Rojo
Member
This episode was a bitter disappointment. The only thing I liked was Andre drilling the bull on Mike's Elimination Challenge Target. (Yeah, this one's for you Sgt. York!) The kid showed plenty of skill but zero class, up to and including bragging about the "smiley face" and making sure he didn't give his spotter any credit for his 600 yard shot. I really hated the dude who said, "pick me, don't send Mike my idol home." Mike failed at doing something 95% of us could do, even with jacked-up sights. Andre was a terrible spotter. The female police officer had apparently never used any kind of zooming optic whatsover. The kid was obnoxious. The "double grandmaster dude" was sure mouthy. Like many of you, I thought it was going to be a serious contest between experts from many disciplines to see who was the best overall marksman with a variety of weapons and styles. Instead, nearly pure crap. I'm going to give it one more week.
Oh yeah, was it my imagination, or did the lady police officer look like Spock? Ponytail too tight, maybe?
Oh yeah, was it my imagination, or did the lady police officer look like Spock? Ponytail too tight, maybe?
Chemist
Member
It is REALITY television and they do edit to cause drama.
Any of you could be edited to create an appearance of whatever the producers want.
Overall, I give the history channel kudos for making a pro-gun show.
Any of you could be edited to create an appearance of whatever the producers want.
Overall, I give the history channel kudos for making a pro-gun show.
I thought the show was a bit cheesy, to say the least.
Regarding some of the comments here about the guy who couldn't hit the target at 100 yards, and the pressure getting to him, etc....come on, it obvious the sights on the rifles on both teams were way off. In fact, the guy on the blue team doing the same shoot there made a comment to his spotter "I'm aiming off two whole targets!" - at 100 yards, they must've skewed those sights something chronic to be that far off. Pretty poor TV trick I thought - makes the shooters look like idiots. As we've even got people here believing these people can't shoot - what do you do the general public thinks?
Regarding some of the comments here about the guy who couldn't hit the target at 100 yards, and the pressure getting to him, etc....come on, it obvious the sights on the rifles on both teams were way off. In fact, the guy on the blue team doing the same shoot there made a comment to his spotter "I'm aiming off two whole targets!" - at 100 yards, they must've skewed those sights something chronic to be that far off. Pretty poor TV trick I thought - makes the shooters look like idiots. As we've even got people here believing these people can't shoot - what do you do the general public thinks?
primetime
Member
Kelly is a young kid..his arrogance showed. (smiley face with the ex navy SEAL spotting for him for practice. Did anyone notice the SEAL was not amused by it?) BUT, Kelly's skill with the long range weapons can not be denied. Those are extremely hard shots he took at 400 and 600 yds in cross wind..
I felt Mike tried his best, but perhaps he wasn't as good as he claimed to be? yes his spotter was questionable during the team competition. But during his elimination challenge, under equal conditions, he couldn't hit jack either! so that tells you something.
I think next week will be better..Pistols. The frequent long commercial breaks are ridiculous though..I'm going to have to DVR this and watch it without commercials now.
I felt Mike tried his best, but perhaps he wasn't as good as he claimed to be? yes his spotter was questionable during the team competition. But during his elimination challenge, under equal conditions, he couldn't hit jack either! so that tells you something.
I think next week will be better..Pistols. The frequent long commercial breaks are ridiculous though..I'm going to have to DVR this and watch it without commercials now.
Last edited:
KodiakBeer
member
Not what I hoped for, but I still enjoyed it. The loser had just spotted for his partner, so he should have had some idea where to hold. Then at five yards he couldn't hit an 8" bull with a Beretta? And now he's blaming "loose" sights?
It looks like they've got a few actual good shooters sprinkled with some others who have only very narrow skill sets.
It looks like they've got a few actual good shooters sprinkled with some others who have only very narrow skill sets.
primetime
Member
Exactly...I agree.
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
If what Mike said about the rear sight being loose on the 1903 is true, then the show should have given him a re-shoot.
In any proper competition, if a stage involves a pickup gun (ie a gun that isn't yours) and the gun has a mechanical failure, the fair thing to do is to give the competitor another chance to shoot the stage.
That said, I did enjoy the show, and plan to continue watching it. Frankly, it seems like shooting is experiencing something of a renaissance on television, between all of the instructional shows like Shooting Gallery, Shooting USA, SWAT, Guns & Ammo, and now Top Shot.
For those of you who are more interested in a show that's more shooting-oriented than personality based, I'd suggest checking out 3-Gun Nation, a show that's based around the sport of 3Gun and will be making its premiere on the VS. network sometime this year.
In any proper competition, if a stage involves a pickup gun (ie a gun that isn't yours) and the gun has a mechanical failure, the fair thing to do is to give the competitor another chance to shoot the stage.
That said, I did enjoy the show, and plan to continue watching it. Frankly, it seems like shooting is experiencing something of a renaissance on television, between all of the instructional shows like Shooting Gallery, Shooting USA, SWAT, Guns & Ammo, and now Top Shot.
For those of you who are more interested in a show that's more shooting-oriented than personality based, I'd suggest checking out 3-Gun Nation, a show that's based around the sport of 3Gun and will be making its premiere on the VS. network sometime this year.
primetime
Member
Justin what channels are those other shows on? Military channel? I know 3G is on Versus network..
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
I know Michael Bane's shows are all on the Outdoor Channel. I'm not sure about the others.
brboyer
Member
See, that's the thing. It's not a competition, it's a TV show. The general public is their target audience - we all know how stupid the general public is, right?
You ever take your non-shooting wife, daughter, niece, nephew, next door neighbor to watch you shoot your rifle? It's worse than watching golf - BORING! Got to have drama.
I can guarantee that the messed up sights were intentional as well as I'm sure they were not allowed to adjust them and were not given enough time to really become familiar with the weapon.
To anyone that is upset that this is not a real competition, come on really? It's on the History Channel! Not VS or Outdoor Channel.
It's a TV show depecting firearms in a positive light (or at least nor negatively)
rscalzo
Member
Everyone seems to think these experienced shooters have a background in all those firearms. Knowing Jim Sinclair, he intimately experienced in the 03 and Mosant rifles. Look at his Camp Perry scores and you will see his capabilities. But hand him a handgun and he's outside his element. Many handgun shooters have never touched a service rifle. We have long time trap and skeet shooters that don't have a clue about handguns or rifles to any great degree.
the point is, it is a TV show for entertainment. These people had a 100k riding on it. They also seemed to not want professionals who do it primarily for a living. They want the average guy with about average skills to play the game.
Jim was restricted what he could discuss so I have to watch like everyone else. He was impressed with the 92F to go out and buy one.
the point is, it is a TV show for entertainment. These people had a 100k riding on it. They also seemed to not want professionals who do it primarily for a living. They want the average guy with about average skills to play the game.
Jim was restricted what he could discuss so I have to watch like everyone else. He was impressed with the 92F to go out and buy one.
desidog
Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2008
- Messages
- 2,595
The show's topic had a lot more potential than the finished product.
The thing that i find real issue with is that it is on the History Channel. They are apparently following the Music Television (MTV) approach of airing shows that have nothing to do with the channel's intended subject. History Channel used to have a great wealth of historically accurate educational shows, now their line-up has little or nothing to do with history. Examples include: Ax Men, Pawn Stars, UFO Hunters, Modern Marvels, MonsterQuest....wait, that's more than half their shows. The other ones aren't much more on-topic. Where's the historical aspect? So weak, IMHO.
The thing that i find real issue with is that it is on the History Channel. They are apparently following the Music Television (MTV) approach of airing shows that have nothing to do with the channel's intended subject. History Channel used to have a great wealth of historically accurate educational shows, now their line-up has little or nothing to do with history. Examples include: Ax Men, Pawn Stars, UFO Hunters, Modern Marvels, MonsterQuest....wait, that's more than half their shows. The other ones aren't much more on-topic. Where's the historical aspect? So weak, IMHO.
The jury is still out on this....the fallout will be interesting to watch over time; but how many incorrect impressions are they making on impressionable viewers? Heck, most of us here could hit a plate at 100yds firing from the hip with 37rds.
Last edited:
DammitBoy
Member
At least they are using historical weapons and it doesn't portray the shooting sports in a negative light. Who knows, perhaps some folks will try shooting after watching this show?
As to the guy who got voted off, what was his excuse for not being able to hit the 100 yard target with a scoped Remington 700 and a good spotter?
As to the guy who got voted off, what was his excuse for not being able to hit the 100 yard target with a scoped Remington 700 and a good spotter?
I saw the last 15-20 minutes of the show. I've got the rest on dvr. Survivor with guns seems like a fairly accurate description from what I saw. And I don't see a problem with that. They played up the drama, that's what they are supposed to do to emphasize the different personalities. Makes the show interesting, gives people watching someone to root for, someone to hate.
Maybe this show isn't for die hard shooters, it's for the average reality viewer. That is a good thing. With all our nit picky criticisms, if this show brings more people into the fold by portraying firearms in a positive light then I think this will be a fantastic show. The more average people on our side the better. I congratulate the History Channel for taking a chance on this to mainstream guns in the general public's mind.
Maybe this show isn't for die hard shooters, it's for the average reality viewer. That is a good thing. With all our nit picky criticisms, if this show brings more people into the fold by portraying firearms in a positive light then I think this will be a fantastic show. The more average people on our side the better. I congratulate the History Channel for taking a chance on this to mainstream guns in the general public's mind.
primetime
Member
Lol!
Seriously though..I thought Mike was a whole lot of "talk" but it turns out, a whole lot of bad shooting is all he could muster....
- Status
