8b, are you saying you could get the stated %'s as an average for 10 succesive patterns? I'm not saying you didn't, but if you did, you were rare indeed. What was it you did to get such patterns? Could you replicate this performance at will?
You don't "need" new technology to have a good hunt. But then, neither does a guy shooting a cyl bored flinter. Drawing a line in the sand for technology development is a slippery slope. "Hey, we don't need no stinkin' radial tires. Let's all go back to bias; and no belts because they lead to radials."
Larry, you can know what % of unbroken targets had what number of hits. However, that tells you nothing as to what % of broken targets broke from how many hits. I've been watching some pretty good skeet shooters and there are a considerable number of two/three/four piece targets. If you look at Dr. J's work, you can see a lot of similarity to barely broken targets on the field. I think Winston and Jones will have some good data on this in the near future.
11F, as you wish!!
