Cognitive Bias in Shooting Community
- Thread starter Maple57
- Start date
Rediscovering old topics! The reason competitive folks don't shoot 223 or 308 at money matches is that any high BC bullet going 3000 ft/s buys you 2 mph of wind error and 40 yards of range error. Neither the 223 or 308 have the case capacity to do that, hence training status. You don't have to drive all the way to Utah to drink beer either!
KT
It seems your style on all the BBS you frequent is to pick out certain people and inflict your vitriol on them. On one of your latest rants against another prominent person in the US on another BBS got you this comment from another member of than myself: "I realized a long time ago, people who speak of other people without naming, never trust them. You have a lot of Ghost in your life."
You don't bring any relational and intelligent thought to the discussion. All you seem to want to do is attack your chosen person on each BBS for some weird personnel desire. Why don't you just knock it off and go away.
It seems your style on all the BBS you frequent is to pick out certain people and inflict your vitriol on them. On one of your latest rants against another prominent person in the US on another BBS got you this comment from another member of than myself: "I realized a long time ago, people who speak of other people without naming, never trust them. You have a lot of Ghost in your life."
You don't bring any relational and intelligent thought to the discussion. All you seem to want to do is attack your chosen person on each BBS for some weird personnel desire. Why don't you just knock it off and go away.
Last edited:
I had to look that one up - that was in reference to me being critical of the 6.5 SAUM cartridge and how it was being represented. The founder made ridiculous claims to barrel life, it ended up coming out that he set the barrel back x4 times in order to get the barrel life that he claimed (2,400 rounds), which he did not originally state. I have no problem with the founder nor the cartridge itself, but people are going to be set up for disappointment if they get a 6.5 SAUM barrel and expect to get 2,400 rounds out of it (especially with his ballistics claims). How he originally represented the barrel life was a bit disingenuous to say the least.
The only forum I get much criticism on is this one, and only from a couple of members. For every criticism I get here on CGN, I get about 3 private messages from people thanking me for speaking up. I'm not that negative of a person, but I am pretty hard headed at times and will stick up for my view point. Diversity in thought is a great thing, and I respect what other disciplines bring to the table (F-class, benchrest, etc). But when someone says something that is pretty poor advice, which seems to happen a lot on this forum, especially since the discipline is relatively new up here compared to the US (where it's been going on for +15-20 years in various forms), I feel the need to speak up.
The reason why I don't give it up is because people with little experience in a certain discipline like to interject and pretend to be experts on a discipline they are very new at. They add a lot of value to the forum in other ways, but they are still early on in their learning curve with PRS and PRS type shooting. I disagree with you saying that I "don't bring any relational and intelligent thought to the discussion", and I don't think that's a fair comment. While at times arguments can get heated on here, I feel like I've done a good job representing my view point and bring fair and balanced points in the discussion. Just because they don't fall in line with your line of thinking or your experience, doesn't make my comments unintelligent or "relationable" (not really sure what that means, perhaps you meant 'rational'?).
Based on the plethora of discussions at competitions, training, general shooting, and through the PM's I get, I don't believe my comments are that far off base. As I stated above, I get a lot more people thanking me on here then are critical. The people that are the most critical of me are the ones with minimal experience in the shooting disciplines in which I provide advice. I don't go telling people how to shoot F-class or benchrest matches, or tell them what gear they need to be successful in that discipline. Perhaps one day they will come to understand the evolution of the sport and why the gear and techniques that are currently employed are in use. It did not happen over night, and a lot of money, time, sweat and frustration shooting in all sorts of environments have evolved the sport into what it is today. It's great to try new things out, but don't discount the collective experience of 15-20+ years of the sport as it currently stands. I would be pretty humble if I entered a new shooting discipline, and I would be looking at the experienced people that have been shooting it for years and leaning on them for technique and gear advice, rather the coming in on my own and telling people why they are doing their sport wrong because we do it in 'X' discipline this way.
There are certainly ways in which I can improve. I have been harsh of certain brands due to design and/or execution not being top level, but I'm backing away from that. I want to see companies succeed, and being hypercritical (with the best of intents of wanting the best products available), may not be the most productive way to get there.
I have absolutely no ill-will against anybody on this board. While there is a few I constantly butt heads with, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they mean well. I wish everyone success in their shooting and their businesses, and hope the experiences and skillsets in Canada continues to grow. I hope more people pursue professional training, and more and more people take up some competitions and see what they are about - especially some of the bigger more established ones in the US. And at the end of the day, it should be okay to have open and candid discussions.
And on the flip side, if I started to shoot a couple of grass roots F-class matches in my area and won a few trophies, and started to post all over this forum in threads about F-class shooting spreading obviously bad advice on gear and techniques based off of your guys long and storied experience in the sport, you guys would be jumping all over me. Especially if I never listened, continued to spread horrible advice and was steering newer shooters in the sport in the completely wrong direction. You guys would probably have a hey-day if I was trying to tell people trying to get into F-class shooting that they need tactical actions, tactical chassis, tactical bipods, FFP scopes with christmas tree reticles in order to best set them up for success in the sport.
KT
This was from a post you were involved in around the same time you answered my post. Seems like another person seems to have the same opinion I do. That's 3 for 3!!
Quote from PGW post regarding new semi auto 338 Laupa. This return from another CGN member is in answer to another similar type negative comment you made. Enuff said for now!!!!
"But hey, you always are the naysayer unless it concerns certain businesses and products that you seem to love.......... Have a nice evening."
This was from a post you were involved in around the same time you answered my post. Seems like another person seems to have the same opinion I do. That's 3 for 3!!
Quote from PGW post regarding new semi auto 338 Laupa. This return from another CGN member is in answer to another similar type negative comment you made. Enuff said for now!!!!
"But hey, you always are the naysayer unless it concerns certain businesses and products that you seem to love.......... Have a nice evening."
He has a tight relationship with IBI. I've been critical of IBI in the past because of the quality of their early products. Not a whole lot of luck with IBI in my shooting circles, but it sounds like they may be turning it around.
I call balls and strikes as I see them. Doesn't do anyone any good to pretend everything is fine with a product when it's not. Companies and products don't get better if they don't receive honest feedback - good or bad.
If we are not allowed to have honest and candid discussions about products on this forum, then I don't know why the forum exists. I don't have any sponsorships, I don't have any professional relationships with any firearm companies and I don't sell any products. I speak from my experience and those in my tight shooting circle. I have nothing to gain no matter what company a consumer buys a product from.
Bench rest is accuracy for only 5 or 10 shots but F Class is the proving ground for consistent long range accuracy in large quantities.
The thing is that in F Class we get feedback for every shot so we can closely associate the result to the conditions we see... one shot at a time. The 1/2 MOA V Bull is very small and we need to hit it almost every time.
PRS is first of all on the clock and you don't have time to examine mirage and keep an eye on all those wind flags. It happens fast and you never really know exactly how you will set up until you get up there. It's largely about problem solving and stress under pressure and you need to keep a cool head.
I think a PRS shooter is an all around more versatile shooter, but I would ask an F Class shooter for load tips before a PRS shooter.
PRS guys often brag about loads to hit 1500 yard targets but in reality almost never hit them, and since 90 percent of the targets are inside 800 yards, its hardly worth the chase anyway especially when you consider the clock and relate to target prioritization.
When an F Class shooter goes into PRS he will generally do badly for a while, because he needs to get familiar with position shooting which attributes more to high scores than good ballistics or pin point accuracy.
The thing is that in F Class we get feedback for every shot so we can closely associate the result to the conditions we see... one shot at a time. The 1/2 MOA V Bull is very small and we need to hit it almost every time.
PRS is first of all on the clock and you don't have time to examine mirage and keep an eye on all those wind flags. It happens fast and you never really know exactly how you will set up until you get up there. It's largely about problem solving and stress under pressure and you need to keep a cool head.
I think a PRS shooter is an all around more versatile shooter, but I would ask an F Class shooter for load tips before a PRS shooter.
PRS guys often brag about loads to hit 1500 yard targets but in reality almost never hit them, and since 90 percent of the targets are inside 800 yards, its hardly worth the chase anyway especially when you consider the clock and relate to target prioritization.
When an F Class shooter goes into PRS he will generally do badly for a while, because he needs to get familiar with position shooting which attributes more to high scores than good ballistics or pin point accuracy.
I’m guessing you have never competed in Benchrest so I’ll try to clarify
It’s about the ability to tune a rifle to shoot very small groups and then Making it do it over and over again all week end or all week if it’s a nationals .No matter how rough the conditions get.
So that’s a 100 rnds in a weekend match on record or just over 300 on record at a nationals to win, and your 4 gun grand agg will need to be 1/4 moa to win, this year two days had 28 mph winds and switchy .
If we associate the result with the conditions we have already lost , in br you need to read the conditions and hold accordingly to put the shot in the group , there is no room for letting one get away and then correcting , the Bullet holes will tell if the rifle is in tune or not . If we shoot 1/2 moa we are probably in last place .
This does not mean it’s harder than any other discipline , it’s just different , they all are
Every discipline is difficult at the highest levels and its apples and oranges , each appeals to shooters for different reasons
Pick what you like and fly at it ,
It’s about the ability to tune a rifle to shoot very small groups and then Making it do it over and over again all week end or all week if it’s a nationals .No matter how rough the conditions get.
So that’s a 100 rnds in a weekend match on record or just over 300 on record at a nationals to win, and your 4 gun grand agg will need to be 1/4 moa to win, this year two days had 28 mph winds and switchy .
If we associate the result with the conditions we have already lost , in br you need to read the conditions and hold accordingly to put the shot in the group , there is no room for letting one get away and then correcting , the Bullet holes will tell if the rifle is in tune or not . If we shoot 1/2 moa we are probably in last place .
This does not mean it’s harder than any other discipline , it’s just different , they all are
Every discipline is difficult at the highest levels and its apples and oranges , each appeals to shooters for different reasons
Pick what you like and fly at it ,
Things that I see that are poor advice, completely incorrect or general misconceptions that are often posted by certain forum "leaders" based on their cognitive bias:
1.The 783 is the "best" and "only" budget PRS rifle option. Very limited aftermarket support make this a poor choice to suggest to beginners. Lots of fit for purpose PRS budget rifles have been coming out the past couple of years, and more and more coming out on the horizon. No need to "bubba" together a gun if you want to stay under a certain budget for PRS. I will give the 783 some credit in that it is gaining aftermarket support, but it's still extremely limited. No matter how good the action may be, limited aftermarket support prevents you from having a system that you can "grow into". I promise that as you shoot more, your preferences and needs/wants in a rifle are going to change. A rifle that can change with you is really nice to have.
2. Rem 783 quality is good enough that you can swap out bolts without effecting headspace. Test sample size of two bolts in one action - statistically irrelevant and very dangerous advice.
3. Barrel nut barrels are superior in pretty much all ways to their shouldered barrel counterparts. Barrel nuts have their place, but their are certain limitations to a barrel nut barrel. Best to understand the pros and cons of each type and make a decision on whats going to work best for YOU. In my case, I will take a shouldered barrel 10 times out of 10 over a barrel nut barrel. For some shooters a barrel nut barrel will be the more appropriate solution, but it's not the answer for everyone and every situation.
4. Shouldered barrels cannot/or are very difficult to change out by the end-user and a gunsmith is required. In reality it takes minimal tools and ~5 minutes of time and you can easily change out a shouldered barrel yourself. In principal it's the same concept as changing a light bulb, which surely everyone here can do.
5. Pre-fit barrels are only available in barrel nut configurations and that shouldered barrels are super expensive and take forever to get. Plenty of new actions are made to such tight tolerances that more and more companies are making shouldered pre-fits for various actions (ARC, Bighorn, Impact, Lone Peak, Curtis, Terminus, even Tikka!). Shouldered options are becoming more and more readily available, and surely there will be more great budget options coming available.
6. That f-class bipods such as the M-pod are good for disciplines like PRS. Their lack of adjustability makes them a rather poor choice for anything but prone stages, which are usually few and far between. Even with prone stages, we are not usually shooting off of leveled flat ground, and the lack of rapid adjustments on an F-class bipod can be very timely when trying to get the proper settings on the clock. Then you are stuck with carrying around two bipods. Why not just get one that works well in pretty much all conditions you will encounter at a PRS match?
7. That you don't need to spend money on a better quality bipod, in most cases you can get away with a chinese knock-off bipod, or at most spend the money on the Harris. To openly advocate the support of knock-off products should be an instant ban from the forum IMO, I won't get into that anymore here. Harris bipods are poor value proposition, and you will generally be finding yourself spending a lot of money to rig it out for PRS - aftermarket mounts for picatinny or ARCA/RRS, aftermarket feet, aftermarket adjustable legs, etc, - and at the end of the day you still end up with a poorly manufactured stamped metal bipod. Of course a better manufactured and feature rich bipod is going to cost a lot more, in some cases its absolutely worth it.
8. That "slack" in a bipod is a bad thing - you need as stiff/rigid of a bipod as possible. There's a reason why all bipods developed for field use have some slack built into the system, and it mostly has to do with recoil management in compromised positions (not straight back prone on an F-class line). In general, a stiff/rigid F-class or benchrest bipod is a poor choice for PRS/field shooting, for multiple reasons, some of which already covered above.
9. Certain members don't understand that the tactical division has bullet and speed limitations as it's intent is for getting more .gov shooters in the sport in which they can competitively play the game with their issued rifles. It's NOT for people to try and hot-rod .223's with high BC projectiles so that they can game a limited field and increase their odds of bringing a trophy home (easier to do if you are only competing against ~10% or less of the field). No one is stopping you from hot-rodding your .223 - go ahead and shoot with the rest of the field.
10. That cheap products are always better then the more expensive counterparts. Certain members disingenuously promote cheaper products as being every bit as good as their more expensive counterpart. Commonly seen with everything from bipods (as covered above) to actions, barrels, stocks, scopes, etc. A Savage action is not going to be as reliable in poor conditions as an Impact, nor will it have the manufacturing quality, features, or smoothness, ease of bolt lift/close of operation. An Athlon scope is not going to have the same build quality or features as a Zero Compromise scope. An Athlon spotting scope isn't going to be near as good as a Swarovski. A Leofoto tripod is not as quality or as reliable as an RRS (which was plainly evident at a certain PRS match). But for some people, an Athlon and a Savage is a perfectly acceptable solution and the extra money spent will provide no benefit, or perhaps it's all they can afford to spend. There's a reason some products cost more then others. Manufacturing and raw material quality, QA/QC, number and quality of features, research and development, customer service, etc. It's up to the consumer to determine what they need from a product, and what the cost/benefit analysis of going cheaper versus more expensive. You don't need a $10k gun to start in this sport, and there are better and better budget options coming out every day. Just understand what compromises are being made as you go cheaper.
11. Bonus point - as a very, very well respected gunsmith says down in the US, "put anything but a top tier barrel on your rifle is like putting 7 cylinders in a V8". Same principal as #10, just love the quote.
I'm not using this to strike down or slander any forum members. But the above is a list of common bad advice I see above, which shows the lack of experience in the sport that they try and represent themselves as experts in while shooting down/trying to discredit those on here that have been shooting the discipline much longer then they have. We all learn somewhere, and ingenuity and experimenting with new techniques and equipment is admirable and a great (albeit expensive) way to learn. Love seeing new people try out new things, and always curious to follow the results. But lets not represent these experiments as "best practices" or as "the best" and "only" budget gear options available out there when clearly there are proven fit for purpose budget gear available. We are only setting up future shooters up for frustration. Great that more people are venturing out and trying new disciplines, but a little bit of humility and openness to understanding the evolution of the sport and why we are where we are in the sport is the same respect that we would extend to you guys if we were to start shooting a new discipline, such as F-class and benchrest.
1.The 783 is the "best" and "only" budget PRS rifle option. Very limited aftermarket support make this a poor choice to suggest to beginners. Lots of fit for purpose PRS budget rifles have been coming out the past couple of years, and more and more coming out on the horizon. No need to "bubba" together a gun if you want to stay under a certain budget for PRS. I will give the 783 some credit in that it is gaining aftermarket support, but it's still extremely limited. No matter how good the action may be, limited aftermarket support prevents you from having a system that you can "grow into". I promise that as you shoot more, your preferences and needs/wants in a rifle are going to change. A rifle that can change with you is really nice to have.
2. Rem 783 quality is good enough that you can swap out bolts without effecting headspace. Test sample size of two bolts in one action - statistically irrelevant and very dangerous advice.
3. Barrel nut barrels are superior in pretty much all ways to their shouldered barrel counterparts. Barrel nuts have their place, but their are certain limitations to a barrel nut barrel. Best to understand the pros and cons of each type and make a decision on whats going to work best for YOU. In my case, I will take a shouldered barrel 10 times out of 10 over a barrel nut barrel. For some shooters a barrel nut barrel will be the more appropriate solution, but it's not the answer for everyone and every situation.
4. Shouldered barrels cannot/or are very difficult to change out by the end-user and a gunsmith is required. In reality it takes minimal tools and ~5 minutes of time and you can easily change out a shouldered barrel yourself. In principal it's the same concept as changing a light bulb, which surely everyone here can do.
5. Pre-fit barrels are only available in barrel nut configurations and that shouldered barrels are super expensive and take forever to get. Plenty of new actions are made to such tight tolerances that more and more companies are making shouldered pre-fits for various actions (ARC, Bighorn, Impact, Lone Peak, Curtis, Terminus, even Tikka!). Shouldered options are becoming more and more readily available, and surely there will be more great budget options coming available.
6. That f-class bipods such as the M-pod are good for disciplines like PRS. Their lack of adjustability makes them a rather poor choice for anything but prone stages, which are usually few and far between. Even with prone stages, we are not usually shooting off of leveled flat ground, and the lack of rapid adjustments on an F-class bipod can be very timely when trying to get the proper settings on the clock. Then you are stuck with carrying around two bipods. Why not just get one that works well in pretty much all conditions you will encounter at a PRS match?
7. That you don't need to spend money on a better quality bipod, in most cases you can get away with a chinese knock-off bipod, or at most spend the money on the Harris. To openly advocate the support of knock-off products should be an instant ban from the forum IMO, I won't get into that anymore here. Harris bipods are poor value proposition, and you will generally be finding yourself spending a lot of money to rig it out for PRS - aftermarket mounts for picatinny or ARCA/RRS, aftermarket feet, aftermarket adjustable legs, etc, - and at the end of the day you still end up with a poorly manufactured stamped metal bipod. Of course a better manufactured and feature rich bipod is going to cost a lot more, in some cases its absolutely worth it.
8. That "slack" in a bipod is a bad thing - you need as stiff/rigid of a bipod as possible. There's a reason why all bipods developed for field use have some slack built into the system, and it mostly has to do with recoil management in compromised positions (not straight back prone on an F-class line). In general, a stiff/rigid F-class or benchrest bipod is a poor choice for PRS/field shooting, for multiple reasons, some of which already covered above.
9. Certain members don't understand that the tactical division has bullet and speed limitations as it's intent is for getting more .gov shooters in the sport in which they can competitively play the game with their issued rifles. It's NOT for people to try and hot-rod .223's with high BC projectiles so that they can game a limited field and increase their odds of bringing a trophy home (easier to do if you are only competing against ~10% or less of the field). No one is stopping you from hot-rodding your .223 - go ahead and shoot with the rest of the field.
10. That cheap products are always better then the more expensive counterparts. Certain members disingenuously promote cheaper products as being every bit as good as their more expensive counterpart. Commonly seen with everything from bipods (as covered above) to actions, barrels, stocks, scopes, etc. A Savage action is not going to be as reliable in poor conditions as an Impact, nor will it have the manufacturing quality, features, or smoothness, ease of bolt lift/close of operation. An Athlon scope is not going to have the same build quality or features as a Zero Compromise scope. An Athlon spotting scope isn't going to be near as good as a Swarovski. A Leofoto tripod is not as quality or as reliable as an RRS (which was plainly evident at a certain PRS match). But for some people, an Athlon and a Savage is a perfectly acceptable solution and the extra money spent will provide no benefit, or perhaps it's all they can afford to spend. There's a reason some products cost more then others. Manufacturing and raw material quality, QA/QC, number and quality of features, research and development, customer service, etc. It's up to the consumer to determine what they need from a product, and what the cost/benefit analysis of going cheaper versus more expensive. You don't need a $10k gun to start in this sport, and there are better and better budget options coming out every day. Just understand what compromises are being made as you go cheaper.
11. Bonus point - as a very, very well respected gunsmith says down in the US, "put anything but a top tier barrel on your rifle is like putting 7 cylinders in a V8". Same principal as #10, just love the quote.
I'm not using this to strike down or slander any forum members. But the above is a list of common bad advice I see above, which shows the lack of experience in the sport that they try and represent themselves as experts in while shooting down/trying to discredit those on here that have been shooting the discipline much longer then they have. We all learn somewhere, and ingenuity and experimenting with new techniques and equipment is admirable and a great (albeit expensive) way to learn. Love seeing new people try out new things, and always curious to follow the results. But lets not represent these experiments as "best practices" or as "the best" and "only" budget gear options available out there when clearly there are proven fit for purpose budget gear available. We are only setting up future shooters up for frustration. Great that more people are venturing out and trying new disciplines, but a little bit of humility and openness to understanding the evolution of the sport and why we are where we are in the sport is the same respect that we would extend to you guys if we were to start shooting a new discipline, such as F-class and benchrest.
Last edited:
Wow... Seems a little harsh... Just wondering if KT is in the bipod business.
The number one rule of quality is that anything spent to make something better than it needs to be is a form of waste.
I hope I don't get banned for this, but I have a bunch of bipods from Chinese Harris style to Chinese Atlas and I have the real ones as well.
I can agree the "real ones" are "better" but at the same time I have never had one of the Chinese bipods fail me, so both work just fine.
If a guy cannot justify or afford $300-$500 for a bipod, he is nobody's fool if he goes with a knock off that's for sure.
In fact I would say the last place... the very last place a guy should spend big money on his PRS rifle is the bipod. Nobody wins a PRS match because he has an expensive bipod.
Just think about how many PRS stages even let you use one.
Last edited:
It astounds me that this thread still has legs...
You do realize that advocating for knockoffs is essentially advocating for theft, right? Company A invests the time and money to develop, manufacture and market a product only to then have their product ripped off and manufactured in an inferior manner by offshore companies not affected by patents or IP legislation (read chicoms). It must take some very serious "cognitive bias" to see that as even remotely ethical. Not to mention that their theft is economically driven in that if no one bought them, they would cease to copy them. Would you advocate buying offshore knockoffs of say, a chassis designed and manufactured in Canada? The chicoms have CNC machines too, I'm sure.
A Harris bipod costs about $150, that's what, 3-4 boxes of factory match ammo?
I always shake my head when I see a precision rifle on top of a chi-com bipod. If you can’t afford a Harris you need to go be poor somewhere else
It's literally the foundation between the rifle and the ground. A pretty important piece for a "precision rifle" you would think.
And no, I don't sell bipods. I don't sell any firearm related products, nor do I have a professional relationship with any company in the firearm industry. I have nothing to personally gain from anyone buying any precision rifle related products. But I do think it's ethically wrong to buy products that are literally IP theft from those that are putting in the R&D to develop products that benefit and evolve the sport.
