Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles faking tight shot groups by stacking targets on top of each other?

There WAS an article in Gun Digest in the 1990's(?) that had a similar context. It was titled something like, "What 15 shots can tell you.", or "What you can learn with 15 shots."

The shooter had multiple targets stacked and directly spaced behind each other at ( I think) 100 yards. I don't remember the exact "experiment design" or methodology, but it went something like this:

-the first target stayed in place for all 15 shots, showing a single 15 shot group size to measure.
-the second target-maybe 1-2 inches behind the first target, was changed every 5 shots-yielding three targets with 5 shots each to measure group size.
-the third target, again spaced 1-2" behind the second target (and ~ 4' behind the first target), was changed every three shots, yielding 5 targets having a 3 shot group to measure for group size..
-there may have been another target to get two 10-shot group sizes-but don't remember.

I believe the point of the article was to simple address if there was a statistical difference in group size between a single 3-shot group (compared to an aggregate, or average (?) of 5, 3-shot groups) , vs. a single 5-shot group (compared to an aggregate or maybe average of 3, 5-shot groups, vs. one or two 10-shot groups vs a single 15-shot group. I don't remember the conclusion of the experiment. There was not a hint of intent to "trick" or "intent to glean any advantage of reporting a "tweaked" group size." The intent of the article was simply, "this technique CAN be done, and here's how I did it." I remember it being done in the interest of science and statistical probability (with a certain level of statistical confidence, (ie "6 sigma analysis"), and not a means to find a way to "cheat" or falsely report a tighter-than-achieved group size.

So, "Yes" there was an article in a "major" firearms publication that covered the OP's overall concept-but with a different intent or focus.