Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Texas Jack Daniels

Target Shape - What is optimal?

Recommended Posts

Phantom I think you'll like these Cowboys I believe the middle one is like 16 x 18

20190419_101341.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You been sneakin over to the Bar-3 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

J Bar,

I've never done the math and you make a good, valid point.     And probably very few would shoot clean.

 

I guess it does sound good, but when you get right down to it, 2 misses per stage average ain't gonna

keep to many folks happy.

 

..........Widder

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gunner Gatlin, SASS # 10274 said:

 Just turn them squares sideways and you get more exciting diamonds.

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Swing em on a pendulum and it starts getting real interesting.  Lots more misses, but the challenge is the same for everybody.  And the feedback comments we get at our Ft. Miller event indicate that a lot of shooters like the challenge, fun, and laughs of shooting dynamic targets.  But I don't know about a swinging cowboy or buzzard.  That would be very hard to like.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Yusta B. said:

You been sneakin over to the Bar-3 ?

I was there in April.  One of the best places I've ever been to !:FlagAm:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hells Comin said:

I was there in April.  One of the best places I've ever been to !:FlagAm:

It's a wunderment ! :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Square

 

Circle okay...

 

Hate Cowboys and the like. Nothing like missing thru an arm and then seeing your competition get a hit on a toe...

 

Phantom

We have a couple cowgirl shooters who seem to purposefully shoot low center on the cowboys.  They get a lot of misses by shooting a bit too low, between the legs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

 

And THAT is really sad!!  I’ve only ever complained about one target pattern and then only in jest.

 

 Those skinny Indians down at Gunfight in Dixie have always given me fits, but I will shoot them gladly if they are mixed in with other shapes and placed at reasonable distances and safe angles.

 

Challenge me! Push me! Stump me! Confuse me!! Even defeat me!!

 

For Pete’s sake!! DON’T BORE ME!!!!!!

 

Otherwise, just put up one big 4’X8’ sheet of steel. Place it at 12 feet. Line us up. Then just see who can manipulate the guns and do the fastest transitions.:rolleyes: <_<

 

For variety, you can turn the steel sheet horizontally!  Don’t stand it on a corner!!  You’ll surely get all sorts complaints if you do!!  :o  :lol:

Think of it as a canvas and paint lead splotch pictures on it, just for fun.   All shooting is fun, or can be made fun by the shooter.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

 

That orta satisfy the “big” proponents! Get ‘em close enough and most folks won’t complain!!

 

Most folks!!

Cost of that much 500 must be up there! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

I like these also... ^

 

I've heard for many years that our targets, sizes, shapes, distances, etc..... should be established

where 90% of the shooters will hit 90% of the targets.... 90% of the time.

 

Whatever that may be, I think is a worthy goal.

 

TJD:  I like those targets, especially the sizes.   Even Blackwater should be able to hit those... :lol:

 

..........Widder

 

Just for fun, we did an experiment last year, where we put a 4" red dot in the centers of four 3' square rifle targets set at 35 yds. 

The previous month, 26 shooters had 11 misses on the same black targets with no center dot.   At this shoot (with the dots), 23 shooters had ZERO misses.  - - - - Aim tight, miss tight.  

Edited by Dusty Devil Dale
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

Cost of that much 500 must be up there! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having spent the remainder of the evening, (after my earlier posts in this thread) I’ve decided that I would like to see more matches with more of those shapes that others take exception to, but add both large isosceles and right triangles turned in all directions to the selection!!!  :ph34r:  :o  :rolleyes:

 

Betcha’ THAT would get some unrepeatable responses.  :lol:  :lol:

 

Me??  I’D LOVE IT!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great topic.  Just look at the variety in personal preferences.  I think we just have to use different kinds of target arrays and provide variety in any match.   The good shooters can handle it.  The others will at least enjoy it.  Maybe everyone will have a laugh or two.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should not matter as to the shape, size or distance of the targets at any given match. They are not there to strike fear into your heart or ruin your day. They are simply there for the enjoyment of a few hours of bang-N-clang. Most importantly : THEY ARE THE SAME FOR EACH AND EVERY SHOOTER at that said match, whether you drove there from across the county or from across the country. Therefore before the entire SASS outfit drives itsself to extinction or at least loses pard after pard because of the constant bitching and whinning of late about the subject of target size, shape and distance, I will take it upon myself to send a friendly reminder..... Firearms have sights on them for a reason. When used correctly,  the lead projectile will hit the bold little cowboy at whatever distance he is challenging us from wither its 3 yds or 53 yds. If however the lead projectile continues on its forward path into the berm because it went under the bold little cowboys armpit, that is not the fault of the target, the match director, the posse marshal or anyone else in this great big ol' politicaly correct I'm entitled to a prize world. A hit or miss is on the shooter and the shooter alone. As the operators of firearms it is our responsibility to run them at a speed as to which we are capable of doing so safely and can keep the sights aligned and the destination of the projectile under control. If we miss a target, its because we were a little reckless in our aim, we were a little unsteady or we pulled the trigger a little to soon. Yep- one got away.  We've all done it and we'll probably do it some more. We should work on simple marksmanship and not expect the game to soften anymore then it already has.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fence Cutter!!

 

YOU SAID A MOUTHFUL!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fence Cutter said:

It should not matter as to the shape, size or distance of the targets at any given match. They are not there to strike fear into your heart or ruin your day. They are simply there for the enjoyment of a few hours of bang-N-clang. Most importantly : THEY ARE THE SAME FOR EACH AND EVERY SHOOTER at that said match, whether you drove there from across the county or from across the country. Therefore before the entire SASS outfit drives itsself to extinction or at least loses pard after pard because of the constant bitching and whinning of late about the subject of target size, shape and distance, I will take it upon myself to send a friendly reminder..... Firearms have sights on them for a reason. When used correctly,  the lead projectile will hit the bold little cowboy at whatever distance he is challenging us from wither its 3 yds or 53 yds. If however the lead projectile continues on its forward path into the berm because it went under the bold little cowboys armpit, that is not the fault of the target, the match director, the posse marshal or anyone else in this great big ol' politicaly correct I'm entitled to a prize world. A hit or miss is on the shooter and the shooter alone. As the operators of firearms it is our responsibility to run them at a speed as to which we are capable of doing so safely and can keep the sights aligned and the destination of the projectile under control. If we miss a target, its because we were a little reckless in our aim, we were a little unsteady or we pulled the trigger a little to soon. Yep- one got away.  We've all done it and we'll probably do it some more. We should work on simple marksmanship and not expect the game to soften anymore then it already has.

Ah but it is an entertainment business and if you aren’t entertaining your customers a large number of them won’t come back. There used to be a match 8 miles from my house and I’d shoot it once maybe twice a year, it was not entertaining. If I have to grit my teeth and shoot a match and not be entertained I’ll likely not return. I’m there to have fun and if the fun factor has been removed by hard to hit targets, brain twist stage writing on every stage, etc.. I’ll find something else to do. You might enjoy that stuff but a lot of people don’t. So before you start bitching and whining at those of us that don’t enjoy the same stuff you do tell me what ranges you frequent and I’ll be sure never to shoot there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I mention hard to hit targets or say the phrase brain twist stage writing......??????

Or did I merely suggest perhaps some Marksmanship may be in order?

I mean after all they are firearms.....

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fence Cutter said:

Did I mention hard to hit targets or say the phrase brain twist stage writing......??????

Or did I merely suggest perhaps some Marksmanship may be in order?

I mean after all they are firearms.....

No, but your opinion...in my opinion, is what drives folks away.

 

That everyone shoots the same targets...so that somehow makes anything and everything okay.

 

So now we've gone from "What is optimal", to what's your favorite...to what interesting targets have YOU shot...to who gives a damn cuz we all shoot the same targets.

 

Wow...ooooookay....

 

Phantom

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I am incorrect by thinking each shooter should shoot the same targets at a stage?

 

 

Simply trying to suggest that if shooter (a) has to slow down to hit a certain target, there's a good chance shooter (b) will need to do the same thing. Most shooters would need to slow down while a few others won't , no matter what the size or shape of the target is. Since this is no longer anything but a speed match, that's how the winners are determined. Now if we were all shooting at a 10' by 10' wall- I bet the same fastest shooters would still beat the slower shooters.

  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Fence Cutter said:

So I am incorrect by thinking each shooter should shoot the same targets at a stage?

 

 

Simply trying to suggest that if shooter (a) has to slow down to hit a certain target, there's a good chance shooter (b) will need to do the same thing. Most shooters would need to slow down while a few others won't , no matter what the size or shape of the target is. Since this is no longer anything but a speed match, that's how the winners are determined. Now if we were all shooting at a 10' by 10' wall- I bet the same fastest shooters would still beat the slower shooters.

I'm at a loss with that question...

 

I'm at a loss with the thought that I have to explain...sorry.

 

So by all means, design stages with the overriding philosophy that "We all shoot the same targets"...

 

Now back to the avoidance of the Original Question...

 

Phantom

Edited by Phantom, SASS #54973
Yes, my speelin' sux
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we’re to assume that we have to get to the lowest common denominator, then the biggest square target HAS TO BE the “optimal” target.

 

That round and diamond and other “odd shaped” targets are too difficult for many shooters is a sad commentary on what today’s “entertainment” has become!!

 

 I will gladly shoot all square 2’X2’ targets if that is what it will take to keep everyone else playing the game! Lord knows, the last two and a half years haven’t been great for me as far as getting to shoot at all! I’ll not likely ever be really competitive again because of age and health issues, BUT I’ve been cooped up for a long time now and boring matches that don’t challenge my aim and my mind could send me back to the garage or to the road, (my motorcycle says it misses me and my welding skills and several projects I’ve been putting off are collecting dust and rust) more often and to the range less.

 

I love this game!! I want to play it a while longer, but my boredom quotient is really at a critical level right now and some fun targets would not be the worst thing that I could encounter.  I’m dying to shoot Comin’AtCha the end of next month!  My old 10ga hammer double is just chompin’ at the bit to git after them chickens!! I’m just hoping I can get healed up and steady on my feet enough to do it!!

 

REGUARDLESS! I’ll see y’all at the Bar3!!

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

If we’re to assume that we have to get to the lowest common denominator, then the biggest square target HAS TO BE the “optimal” target.

 

That round and diamond and other “odd shaped” targets are too difficult for many shooters is a sad commentary on what today’s “entertainment” has become!!

 

 I will gladly shoot all square 2’X2’ targets if that is what it will take to keep everyone else playing the game! Lord knows, the last two and a half years haven’t been great for me as far as getting to shoot at all! I’ll not likely ever be really competitive again because of age and health issues, BUT I’ve been cooped up for a long time now and boring matches that don’t challenge my aim and my mind could send me back to the garage or to the road, (my motorcycle says it misses me and my welding skills and several projects I’ve been putting off are collecting dust and rust) more often and to the range less.

 

I love this game!! I want to play it a while longer, but my boredom quotient is really at a critical level right now and some fun targets would not be the worst thing that I could encounter.  I’m dying to shoot Comin’AtCha the end of next month!  My old 10ga hammer double is just chompin’ at the bit to git after them chickens!! I’m just hoping I can get healed up and steady on my feet enough to do it!!

 

REGUARDLESS! I’ll see y’all at the Bar3!!

Incorrect.

 

Optimal does not mean easiest. That's the fallacy in your premise. In fact, I would argue that "optimal" in the context of the original post would lean toward a definition that would balance Speed and Accuracy without either extreme.

 

Phantom

 

 

Edited by Phantom, SASS #54973
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fence Cutter said:

It should not matter as to the shape, size or distance of the targets at any given match. They are not there to strike fear into your heart or ruin your day. They are simply there for the enjoyment of a few hours of bang-N-clang. Most importantly : THEY ARE THE SAME FOR EACH AND EVERY SHOOTER at that said match, whether you drove there from across the county or from across the country. Therefore before the entire SASS outfit drives itsself to extinction or at least loses pard after pard because of the constant bitching and whinning of late about the subject of target size, shape and distance, I will take it upon myself to send a friendly reminder..... Firearms have sights on them for a reason. When used correctly,  the lead projectile will hit the bold little cowboy at whatever distance he is challenging us from wither its 3 yds or 53 yds. If however the lead projectile continues on its forward path into the berm because it went under the bold little cowboys armpit, that is not the fault of the target, the match director, the posse marshal or anyone else in this great big ol' politicaly correct I'm entitled to a prize world. A hit or miss is on the shooter and the shooter alone. As the operators of firearms it is our responsibility to run them at a speed as to which we are capable of doing so safely and can keep the sights aligned and the destination of the projectile under control. If we miss a target, its because we were a little reckless in our aim, we were a little unsteady or we pulled the trigger a little to soon. Yep- one got away.  We've all done it and we'll probably do it some more. We should work on simple marksmanship and not expect the game to soften anymore then it already has.

I still vividly recall one of my very early matches, when after three or four misses, Snakebite (TO at the time) tapped my shoulder, looked me in the face, and said, "Dale, I can't understand a person irresponsibly pulling the trigger before the target is within his sights".   That admonition still haunts me every time I leave the loading table in response to  "Next shooter please".   

 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Incorrect.

 

Optimal does not mean easiest. That's the fallacy in your premise. In fact, I would argue that "optimal" in the context of the original post would lean toward a definition that would balance Speed and Accuracy without either extreme.

 

Phantom

 

 

 

Using your own parameters and taking the consensus of those who  postulate that anything other than a square target is more difficult to shoot, a square target IS the optimal target for a balance of speed and accuracy. Anything besides a square tilts the scale toward accuracy. The only remaining questions are how far, what size, and what arrangement. Those last three will have the greater influence on the speed aspect of the equation. 

 

By your own admission, you would exclude any target with a void in its confines, almost any target with an irregular outline,  (if I recall correctly, you said buffalo were acceptable) and others have dismissed round and diamond shaped targets as too difficult. I recommended triangles in jest, but I realize that they are merely half diamond and can be oriented in even more diabolical positions. That would make even more hated targets!  Maybe ovals? Perhaps ellipticals?? Certainly not trapezoids or parallelograms! Non-equilateral rectangles likely would have similar flawed characteristics.

 

No! You haven’t entirely ruled out other shapes yourself, but between your own expressed dislikes and those of many others, it appears that the humble square is the shape du joure.

 

Not my choice, but until the climate and tastes change, I figure we’ll likely see more squares. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yul Lose said:

If I have to grit my teeth and shoot a match and not be entertained I’ll likely not return. .

Yep, last time I shot a match like that the average score was 14 misses:wacko: ........but it was the same fun for everyone, right:P Nope not for that poor gal that had 25+ misses. :blink: Back to the OP, I prefer a good mix 16"x16", 18"x24", Tombstones, buffaloes, poppers etc...etc. If I do use something like the train set I'll use the larger pieces and give them a good 2''-3'' border to help draw the eye to the center.  We have enough BP shooters at setup to paint  nice border on all of the targets. Good Luck:) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic just keeps coming up--and seemingly always contentiously.   I don't see any single solution.   Everybody has different taste in everything.  Nobody is likely to find all matches and all targets to their "optimum" liking.  Part of what makes this game so fun is the ability to go from place to place and individually find the particular kind of shooting we are looking for, and make new friends and see old ones in the process.  All of it is all good shooting. 

 

As for accuracy, I don't know of ANY CAS shooter I would want shooting at me.  I'm not one of the optimum target shapes, but I think all of our shooters can focus, breathe, and hit any kind of target if need arises. 

So whether we shoot for speed, accuracy, or both, in CAS we can all pursue our own goals.  We don't have to want all the same things.  I'll still be glad to see you when we next meet up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Good Topic, TJD.

 

Personally, I don't like diamonds.   But, here is the big nemesis, in my opinion.

 

If you set up 4 stages with 16x16 squares, and then set up a stage with the SAME targets turned to diamond

shape,  you've thrown a 'stealth' stage into the match.   

 

I agree with what Branchwater stated above.   In my opinion, The diamond shapes are deceitful.

Its almost like they have 4 aiming points and each one is at the edge of the steel.   Deceitful!

 

I ain't crazy about a couple other target shapes, but the diamond is the deceitful gremlin.

 

..........Widder

 

 Jedi's have no problems with any nemesis.

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

When I first started writing stages I was told there were tricks you used to make a stage different. Target size IMO is just another trick for the MD to use. Nothing wrong with it but you don't want to add too many tricks to one stage......too many tricks = no fun. It's all about balance. 

 

That said we don't use to many odd targets but we use some. I'd use more but when we started circles & squares where cheaper so that's what we have mostly. 

Edited by Cowboy Junky
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Gunner Gatlin, SASS # 10274 said:

 Jedi's have no problems with any nemesis.

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

 

Even Obi One Kenobi didn't sit tall in the saddle..... :lol:

 

..........Widder

 

Edited by Widder, SASS #59054
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

Even Obi One Kenobi didn't sit tall in the saddle..... :lol:

 

..........Widder

 

 

Kenobi didn't need a saddle ;) 

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

 

Using your own parameters and taking the consensus of those who  postulate that anything other than a square target is more difficult to shoot, a square target IS the optimal target for a balance of speed and accuracy. Anything besides a square tilts the scale toward accuracy. The only remaining questions are how far, what size, and what arrangement. Those last three will have the greater influence on the speed aspect of the equation. 

 

By your own admission, you would exclude any target with a void in its confines, almost any target with an irregular outline,  (if I recall correctly, you said buffalo were acceptable) and others have dismissed round and diamond shaped targets as too difficult. I recommended triangles in jest, but I realize that they are merely half diamond and can be oriented in even more diabolical positions. That would make even more hated targets!  Maybe ovals? Perhaps ellipticals?? Certainly not trapezoids or parallelograms! Non-equilateral rectangles likely would have similar flawed characteristics.

 

No! You haven’t entirely ruled out other shapes yourself, but between your own expressed dislikes and those of many others, it appears that the humble square is the shape du joure.

 

Not my choice, but until the climate and tastes change, I figure we’ll likely see more squares. :rolleyes:

Again, faulty.

 

Having square targets has nothing to do with lessening accuracy in the game. You want to vary the degree of accuracy needed, do it with target size/distance.

 

If someone wants to argue that we need odd shaped targets and in the same breath wants targets with holes in them, ask how hitting a hat brim or the toe of a boot rewards accuracy.

 

Phantom

Edited by Phantom, SASS #54973
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fancy shapes are very nice and pretty to view. From the perspective of a stage writer, target maker, buyer of steel, and target carrier, I prefer squares, rectangles, and diamonds. It takes twice as much time to cut shapes and you lose 25% or more material vs. plain old squares. Circles aren't bad but there's still lost material. The size of a man's chest is roughly 16 x 16. We are shooting bad guys, right. For those that don't cut, carry, and set up targets its easy to say let's have all those cool shapes. They also stack neatly back into storage. And, I've carried my share of targets.

 

And, assuming everyone has to shoot the same targets and scenarios. Yes they do. However, what's a little difficult for a really good shooter becomes very difficult for a not so good shooter.

Those cute little buzzards or chickens may be the reason folks don't come back to your match.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.