It has occured to me that with the DTL scoring system a shooter who hits all the birds but has a few second barrell kills can finish behind someone who misses one target completely but has no second barrrels kills. i.e a 100 / 296 is beaten by a 99 / 297.
Now in my simple mind someone who hits all the targets irrespective of the number of second barrells beats a person that misses one target and has less second barrels (100/287 verses 99/297). Soooooo should the scoring be based on number of kills first and then points accummulated second.
If the points accummulated is the sole influence in deciding position why show the number of kills at all (except in a points draw where I assume number of first barrell kills then influences the outcome)?
As highlighted recently in another thread a shooter who shot 100/289 finished in 40th place when only twenty 100 straights were recorded. Is this fair?
Discuss
DT
Now in my simple mind someone who hits all the targets irrespective of the number of second barrells beats a person that misses one target and has less second barrels (100/287 verses 99/297). Soooooo should the scoring be based on number of kills first and then points accummulated second.
If the points accummulated is the sole influence in deciding position why show the number of kills at all (except in a points draw where I assume number of first barrell kills then influences the outcome)?
As highlighted recently in another thread a shooter who shot 100/289 finished in 40th place when only twenty 100 straights were recorded. Is this fair?
Discuss
DT
