Thread: : Snipers vs. Competition Shooters

I dont know what your reading Gimp but ---According to their tests, the standard deviation of aiming error for the best, formally-trained operational snipers was three times worse than tested High Power and Long Range competition shooters sufficiently skilled to compete successfully in national level match competition at Camp Perry and the like. In fact, the worst competition shooters tested were as good or better than the best snipers in basic holding and shooting fundamentals.



Kraig Stuart
Aug 01, 2013 @ 15:14:18

Because I have a bit of experience in both sniping and competition I was asked my thoughts on this from a guy on another forum. As I said, I’m not surprised of the results. I’ve ran several sniper schools, the problem is once a person attends the school, they quit. I don’t mean totally, but they don’t practice their craft near to the point of a High Power shooter, both in practice and competition.

A high power shooter will practice several hours for each hour he spends in competition. You just don’t see that with snipers. I’ve had sniper students who “got hooked” and took up High Power, hitting me up for ammo and support ( I was also running the AK NG Marksmanship Unit as I was running sniper schools), Some, should I say most, I never heard of again unless they want to attend another course for “for a refresher”. The HP shooter/sniper didn’t need a refresher.

This only deals with the shooting aspect of sniping, not the observation/scouting aspect, but that too needs practice or its a lost art. I have guardsmen from urban areas and I had guardsmen from the Alaska Bush, mainly Alaska Natives who make their living off the land. Guess which one didn’t need refreshers in observation/scouting.

Kraig Stuart
Distinguished Rifle Badge #1071
USAMU Sniper School, Oct ’78

I'm reading the fucking paper the stupid page you linked is quoting, something you might benefit from doing instead of posting random quotes of comments some guy on the internet made on a shitty "article" that cherry-picks a bit of meaningless misinterpreted trivia from a paper about something entirely unrelated which actually completely ignores that piece of trivia in its own deliberations

R93: The point is there IS NO TEST


The page El B linked is a bullshit "article" totally misinterpreting a table in a study of something else, that the study actually decided wasn't important, and is sourced from a 1990 paper that estimated it (which I can't find online to read).

Originally Posted by gimp

R93: The point is there IS NO TEST


The page El B linked is a bullshit "article" totally misinterpreting a table in a study of something else, that the study actually decided wasn't important, and is sourced from a 1990 paper that estimated it (which I can't find online to read).

I know. I just cant help myself.

what your talking of Gimp isnt obvious as there is no hyper link to it --i found it but its 85pp -still some pertinent comment that back what im saying --practice more!ill look it over tomorrow

page 16 it where this stuff comes from it appears --look it up by cut and paste

weapon Fire Control Error Budget Analysis
Weapons & Materials Research Directorate, Army Research Laboratory
ARL-TR-2065

another interesting observation by the author on page 30

1: http://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/1999/ARL-TR-2065.pdf is the paper that retarded link is talking about
2: the authors of the paper ignored the table of ~*snipers vs competition shooter*~ for the purposes of their paper (Because it doesn't say what the retarded link says, and it's only estimated)
3: the paper is from 1999
4: the paper is about estimating how a fire control system could increase hit probability, there is no testing, and it focuses entirely on other variables than the shooter
5: fucking jesus christ next time just take my word for it that it's retarded

are you suggesting Gimp you know more than these guys and they know shit? The special forces shoulda just called you for a savings of a few hundred thousand dollars and you coulda put them right .

Originally Posted by el borracho

are you suggesting Gimp you know more than these guys and they know shit? The special forces shoulda just called you for a savings of a few hundred thousand dollars and you coulda put them right .

are you literally incapable of reading?

Originally Posted by gimp

are you literally incapable of reading?

I dont get ya Gimp -other than its way more pages than I want to read it is an analysis done for the Special operation unit and you think it shit --well Ok doesnt alter the original point though -snipers shoot less than target shooters ...well in the US and hence their ability shoot first round hit at distance are less than a well rehearsed target shooter --no hard to comprehend in my view

Originally Posted by el borracho

I dont get ya Gimp -other than its way more pages than I want to read it is an analysis done for the Special operation unit and you think it shit --well Ok doesnt alter the original point though -snipers shoot less than target shooters ...well in the US and hence their ability shoot first round hit at distance are less than a well rehearsed target shooter --no hard to comprehend in my view

So you're saying Gimp is wrong because you're too lazy to read? I dont get ya?

Originally Posted by el borracho

I dont get ya Gimp -other than its way more pages than I want to read it is an analysis done for the Special operation unit and you think it shit --well Ok doesnt alter the original point though -snipers shoot less than target shooters ...well in the US and hence their ability shoot first round hit at distance are less than a well rehearsed target shooter --no hard to comprehend in my view

No the analysis literally has nothing to do with what you and your shit clickbait link think it does and you seem to be completely unable to read my posts pointing this out or, I dunno, the original source

Originally Posted by gimp

No the analysis literally has nothing to do with what you and your shit clickbait link think it does and you seem to be completely unable to read my posts pointing this out or, I dunno, the original source

prove me wrong with a cut and paste -more than willing to take it on the chin Gimp !!!

Play nice children

oh gawd, 6 pages of wanabe forum "snipers" debating "special operations" stuff

guys, if you really want to see who has the biggest winkie, just meet behind the boys toilet and whip em out ok