Good Marksmanship - 24hourcampfire

Jeff Cooper recently wrote that a good marksman should be able to hit a tea cup at 100 meters with the first shot using field positions. In 5 seconds.
 
 Yup I should think that is good shootin.

Full or empty? It would be an interesting thing to try, of course the wife might not be too impressed if I shoot up all her nice cups. [Linked Image]

He didn't say, but at that rate of fire, a person could account for a full set of 12 in one minute. I supose the dinner plates would be out past 500 meters.

First let me say that I am NOT, repeat NOT as good a marksman some who post here. I simply can not get my rifles to print three touching holes at 100 yards without shooting four times [Linked Image]

But ... My coffee cup at hand (yes I drink tea from it too!) is three inches in diameter without counting the handle and three and a half inches tall. Are you implying that the average hunter would have trouble pulling up his rifle and hitting a three inch circle at 100 yards? 5 seconds from start to first shot with a round chambered really is not all that fast.
 
 I'll concede that cycling the action and getting back on target within five seconds would be difficult, but one shot?
 
 How else can you hit bunnies or birds with a 22?

Mike,
 There are a lot of people on this board who hunt with the public and are therefore better able to say what the average hunter is capable of in the way of marksmanship.
 
 Speaking for myself, the odds of pulling off a shot like that would be something in the area of 50%. Mr. Cooper didn't specify how many times in say 10 the shooter should be successful. I suspect 50% would not be a passing grade.
 
 I think a neat practice exercise would be to use clay pigeons hung somehow without a target backer. If the target breaks, it is easy for all to see. If it takes half a box of cartridges to break one clay, more practice is indicated.
 
 Oh yeah, the distance is 100 meters or 130 yards.

Mike, we thought about this for the Poatal match, but decided that all those shards of tea cups would be difficult to measure accurately. [Linked Image]

Since 100m is roughly 108 yards, I'll shoot 100m while the rest of you shoot 130 yards (grin). Call it handicapping [Linked Image]

.

LOL, maybe that is my trouble. [Linked Image]

Just goes to show you keep me talking long enough and eventually I step in it somewhere.

do I smell quick draw Poatal match coming?
 
 [Linked Image]

Yeah, and the average hunter needs eight shots to kill one dove. Glad I don't have to hunt with average hunters. [Linked Image]

Don't EVEN talk to me about dove. God put them on this earth to show everyone what a crappy wingshot I am. [Linked Image]

Bill in NE,
 
 Since you won the last Poatal match, perhaps you can tell us how well you were able to shoot offhand at 100.
 
 I never submitted a target, but I was just barely able to keep 3 rounds on paper, given a five second limitation. Give me 10 seconds though, and I do much better, but still I estimate I would only hit a 3 inch circle only 30% of the time offhand at 100.
 
 If you are talking about some sort of supported field position, well, that's a whole nother matter.
 
 As for bunnies and birds, I don't hit them 100% by any stretch of the imagination, and most of them are well within 100 yards.
 
 Scott

capt e:
 
 Bunnies and birds are most often closer, but tea cups don't hop or fly.
 
 After further reflection:
 
 Ok I'm "sure" I could hit the cup first shot, but not bet your life sure. I might hit 10 in a row, but I might miss some too. But hey - I consider myself a poor shot among the ranks of posters here. Maybe better than the first ten guys off theh street but certainly much poorer than those I would call "good marksmen". There are no competition trophies on my shelves. Anyone who can nail it 100% of the time would deserve that title. But IMHO anyone who hunts ought to be able to hit it much more often than not.

I have more than enough competition in my job, I no longer like to include it in my hobbies. I also feel strongly that the "sports" of hunting and fishing are no place for competition. I do however have trophies for sheet shooting and rifle shooting laying around from my younger days.
 
 You said you were not "bet your life" sure of your ability to hit that tea cup every time. You reminded me of something I told a quail hunting partner many years ago. He had just paid me a complement and said something to the effect of " you are the only person I have ever seen kill five quail from a covey rise. And you do it with a 20 gauge pump gun". I said "thank you, but you know flushing quail are one thing. Can you imigine what it might be like to have to shoot a charging Africian lion that had just flushed out of the grass right under your feet".
 
 Flushing quail still startle me even when the dog has them pointed and I know it is coming. And I hunted quail three to four times a week for several years. My point is, and you made reference to it, shooting a target is one thing. Having to shoot under great stress is an entirely different ball game. Placing a time limit on target shooting adds a small element of stress but nothing near the stress we deal with when fear leaves that copper taste in your mouth. Does anyone other than combat solders and law enforcement people know what I am talking about?

I've never had to shoot under such pressure either. The way I figure, the people that do (elite special forces or swat type LE groups) have developed training methods to enable green troops or officers to be scared as hell yet still function. You fight like you train.
 
 I heard Gunsight, the famous shooting school offered a rifle course for first timers going to Africa. There wasn't enough interest in it to keep the class going. Too bad.
 
 These types of schools still offer tactical rifle and shotgun classes to the general public. I don't suppose it would hurt a hunter to take a class or two. Even folks with extensive military or police training claim they get a lot out of the classes.

Scott, I hit the paper, that's all I remember. It was no where near a 3" group at 100 yards offhand, but then the last match was a combination of targets at 50, 100 and 250 yards. I'm sure I just squeaked in.
 I feel that I really needed about 7 or 8 seconds to make a good shot at 250. It seems as though it would have been easier. But it was not supposed to be easy.
 
 Please take the time to shoot the present match. I hope that it will show us individually our strengths and weaknesses.
 By being somewhat free to choose our rifle rest(bipod, sling, daypack, shooting sticks), I hope that we can learn to be even better game shots, even though it is difficult to add the excitement of a hunt to paper shooting.

Well, I didn't read the article so am not sure what is included in "field positions", but I'll bet there are not many people around, including most on this board who can shoot minute of tea cup size groups(I just measured a real one, it is roughly 2 1/2 high by 3 1/4 wide, which translates, if you round it, into roughly 2 1/2 MOA) standing at 100m. And, this means, no shooting jacket, using a hunting type trigger. I am sure a few can, but like the coach said, it won't take long to call the roll for that class.

Just for kicks I set a soup can on a stick at 100 paces, and had my son count to five while I tried to get on target and put a pill through it.
 
 Five seconds is not as long as it used to be!
 
 The good news is that I found a new form of recreation with cheap targets [Linked Image]

I was amazed at how many times a plain old tin can could be hit with a 375 H&H and still be a viable target.
 
 15 seconds was easy. 10 seconds was pressured but possible. 5 seconds was 50% hits or less.
 
 My apologies to those of you who regularly work with a timer. It was NOT as easy as I thought it would be.
 
 But I DO recommend that you go out and try it! You will not be sorry. It was a hoot.
 
 Now if I can just get an Oryx within 100 yards (yeah right) for 10-15 seconds ....

IFID
 
 Here is the statement:
 
 Does a soldier need to shoot well? Good question. I know of three cases in which excellent field marksmanship decided the action. These were the Boers at Majuba Hill, the US Marines at Chateau Thierry, and the Volksturm reservists at the Arnhem bridgehead. There may be other such cases, but if so they are not widely documented. Chroniclers are rarely interested in battle techniques, so the fact that something is not reported certainly does not mean that it did not occur. Nonetheless, good field marksmanship is a rarity - in or out of uniform.
 
 What then is a good field marksman? In my opinion, a man who can hit a tea cup at 100 meters with his first shot, from a field position, in a 5 second interval is a good shot. Try this test on yourself, but do not call for witnesses. People who talk about good shots are usually terrible liars.
 
 This is where I found it.
 http://www.dvc.org.uk/~johnny/jeff/ Click on volume 10 number 6

As someone said earlier, I am certain there are posters here that can shoot rings around me. Certainly everybody elses rifles shoot better than do mine. But, about 25 years ago, I participated in a shooting match with hunting rifles. 10 riflemen particiapted and one of the events was to stand up and off-hand shoot at a 8.5 x 11 inch piece of white paper at 100 yards. As I recall, only three of the 10 of us even hit the paper. Now hitting a coffee cup or a small can at 100 would be a challenge. I think we should all give it a try this weekend and report back. The rules are----only one shot attempted at 100 yards. The shooter must be standing, unassisted, not touching anything else and not using a shooting jacket or target sling. Let's make this a hunting challenge.

Sounds like fun, I am going to cheat and set 5 of them at 100m and shoot once at each one, just for kicks. I think I will use full cans, they're probably pretty safe.

I did the can thing yesterday and had a hoot. I promise that you will enjoy it, and I bet that you will be amazed at the punishment an empty can takes. Everbody knows that you can bang all day at one witha 22lr, but with a 375 H&H? I was sure surprised.
 
 I tried the paper target tonight. Lots of fun too, but I think it is more fun to see the cans go flying at impact [Linked Image]

. Also the paper will not be a challenge for you unless you try to hurry the shot. 5 seconds is still just a tad too fast for me, but maybe with practice....

Rolly- I'm going to give it a try, and will do it off-hand, but does "a field position" mean it has to be off-hand? What other positions might Cooper have been talking about?

Acy - Seated, squatting and kneeling are all much more effective than offhand, especially if you practice these positions, and are able to use your sling.
 
 Bill in NE - I'll certainly try to submit some targets for this Poatal Match, but who knows if it will all come together. I'll definitely do some "accelerated heart rate" shooting, just to see how that affects me.
 
 Also, I saw in another forum that you'll be in San Francisco later this month. Perhaps we could hook up for a beer/coffee/meal.
 
 Regards,
 Scott

That statement is so disapointing. I don't follow Cooper but I do know that the "teacup" example is about the MOA ratio of the ten ring at 200 yards which is used for rapid fire postion rifle competition. So I guess that's how Cooper came up with it. And competent shots do hit it almost all of the time from prone. The other positions are more difficult for most.
 
 Good shooting can be done. It comes from competition. If you do compete you will find that you can shoot much better than you thought.

What do you think of this definition of "field positions"?
 
 Any unaided position the shooter can assume and still take the shot in the allotted time. The only exception to "unaided" would be a shooter in a semi-permanent cast, brace, wheel chair or other device that is on or takes the place of injured/missing body parts. Shooters who fall into this description would still have to deal with the 5-second time limit. The idea being the game animal or armed enemy will not cut you slack due to a disability.

I think Col Cooper's train of thought is that the person starts with the rifle at "Port Arms" or the "Ready Position" as he calls it, then, on command assumes any position he desires and fires one round into a 3" circle @ 100m, all within 5 seconds including looping up if desired.
 
 If anyone has read The Art of The Rifle he alludes to this kind of testing in the last chapter. Col Cooper seems to have no time for persons who desire perfection in their groups only those who desire to excel as shooters under pressure.
 
 Just my take on the above,
 Bob

I think that this illustrates how a relatively accurate rifle that fits a shooter well is all that is needed for good shooting. For most, money would be better spent on ammo than "extras". Not making this some anti-expensive/custom gun thread, just making an observation.

Why do we shoot our pistols with both hands? Because it's easier to hit things that way. Cooper didn't come up with this idea, but he is the reason we all do it, and he approaches rifle shooting the same way. If you haven't read The Art of the Rifle, you really owe it to yourself to do so immediately.
 
 Has anyone tried the Rifle Ten or Snaps as outlined in The Art of the Rifle? You need a 300m range and a rangemaster who will let you run around on it with a loaded rifle, but both are GREAT exercises. I shoot them every chance I get, especially if I've been feeling like a badass. They can be a brutal dose of reality. Okie John.