Charles, You must not have read all my post.
This will double the number of shooters in shoot off's. This system will make it fair for a range with 10 benches or a range with 20. We could also advance three shooters(three for group and three for score) from a relay larger than 25, just is case a range decides to add on. As range time becomes more difficult to get at our range. There are two new ranges with 20 benches and I can foresee problems in future.
Gordy Mitchell
Mr. Mitchell, I did read all your post. If you generalize to accommodate the day when we have a 30-bench range, what you're saying is you advance 1 shooter per 10 (or maximum of 10) to the shootoff.
And of course, that's what the rest of us who advocate shooting simultaneous relays have been doing for years.
The difference is you seem to feel -- or members of your club are pressuring you to feel -- it is somehow unfair if a shooter on, say bench 6 has a higher score/smaller group than a shooter on bench 16, but does not move on.
The point I've been trying to make is that drawing particular benches is just as unfair. If you've been shooting long enough, you know that. I only shot Pella once, at the 2005 Nationals. As I remember, the very low benches and bench 20 gave you the greatest chances. OK. In a regular match -- relays & a shootoff -- your best chance of getting into the shootoff if you draw bench 9 is to only have to beat one end of the line, not both. So, which system is "more unfair"?
In other words, the perceived injustice is just that, an armchair exercise in mathematics, not a real-world situation -- Unless, somehow, all of Harris' benches produce an equal chance. Sight unseen, I don't believe they do. There are always Honey Holes, which may change under different conditions. That's why there is bench rotation at big matches in point-blank benchrest.
And on the off-chance you haven't noticed to date, Life isn't completely fair. Some of us are just poor, not "pre-rich."
Accepting that there will be some injustice no matter what system you choose, there is an advantage to having simultaneous relays: no rule change is needed. Historically, we've been doing it for years on those few ranges that used more than 12 benches. As an established solution, using it will generate much less whining and complains, save from some newcommers who come up with constructions where it is "unfair."
The whole .6 maximum issue should never have come up, because the relays should never have been allowed to go over 10-12 shooters per relay to start with.
BTW, variations on your idea are not new. We mooted it back in the days when a few new clubs were shooting five or six benches per relay, when the rest of us were shooting 10-11.
