Trapshooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,625 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am curious if anyone has ever figured out the probability of actually getting a "3-hole" target, when the trap is in a 3-hole setting.

Obviously a 3 hole target has a wider angle than a 2 hole. However, a majority of the time, the trap will be throwing targets within the 2 hole range anyways. It would only be on the extremes of a trap (right and left) where it would make any difference.

Are we talking 1-2 targets 100, 1-2 targets per round, 1-2 targets per station? The percentage would be smaller than the percentage of hard left and hard right targets you get now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,758 Posts
More than that.

This weekend I shot DTL, which is a true 3-hole target (I know, these are old Winchester/LaPorte machines they use over here, and they still have the circular platter with holes in it...)

I got, I would guess, 10. Maybe more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,295 Posts
Skeetman,

The old Winchesters would keep you on the edge, every machine was just a bit different and they could throw you 8 to 10 targets all the same. Today's Pat is much nicer to you, altho even some of those will do it.

But I don't have the answer you are looking for.

Rick in MT
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,644 Posts
Those Winchesters with the planetary interrupter were the essence of random. Best randomizing mechanism ever. The previous models w/out an interrupter were easily read and many folks did it.

The Pats seem to live in the center of the field and I have no idea how random they may or may not be - - but it doesn't make much difference anyway it's still in the center.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,214 Posts
The old Winchester Automatic we shoot on at one old club in southern Alberta is always set on hole 3. The hard lefts and right remind me of the targets I learned to shoot trap with at the old Lethbridge Trap Club. Challenging.

Ron Burr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
399 Posts
. . . actually a very interesting question that likely has a bigger impact on average scores than 2 vs 3 hole, 1oz vs 1-1/8oz, 7.5s vs 8s, etc.

I don't know what the machines mentioned use as their oscillating mechanism but one could conceive of an apparatus that gives whatever distribution one wants, but Simple Harmonic Motion (SHM) or Linear are the two obvious ones. SHM could spend more time on the extremes or the middle depending on how it's constructed (I think). Linear would give equal probability for any angle but you'd probably perceive this as "centre weighted".

With electronics one could make the distribution discontinuous and arbitrary, i.e. almost all a mixture of hard left and hard rights, with maybe one in five in the middle to keep you on your toes, but basically a three position trap.

Andrew.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
218 Posts
Neil, I seem to remember you answered my question or comment on this some time in the past and your estimate, due to the two different methods of angle change, i.e. a rotating plate vs. a instant reversal by a switch, was a mathematical probability of a 16% reduction in the machine (Pat) throwing in the outside or extreme 3 degrees of the spread per side if I recall correctly. I could be off on the exact number you gave.

While you may be looking for someone else to jump in on this mathematically, I was hoping you had perhaps proven or disproved your 16% reduction in the outside 3%. If not, do you still consider 16% as a good estimate?

Most everyone would agree that the most difficult target for the majority of shooters is the extreme or maximum angle while on the outside posts. To be presented with fewer needs to shoot this target combined with not as wide a target to start with as in the past, should be the major contributor to higher scores. After all, wasn't this reduction in maximum angle what the delegates wanted in 1996 because they wanted higher scores?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,758 Posts
Neil,

I shall endeavor. However, having just come back from the bar after having had a couple of Castle Milk Stouts, my thinking may be off base. (We're 8 hours ahead of USA Central Time, lest anyone think I'm imbibing at lunch time...)

To 'properly' answer your question, one would have to know the rotating speed of the Winchester platen, the speed of linear motion of the Pat Trap hydraulic ram, the dimensions of the linkages of the two machines, and how long the Pat trap hydraulic ram "dwells" at each end of its travel.

The Winchester machine uses a 4-bar linkage for it's oscillating mechanism; one of the 4-bar linkages being in 360 degree rotation about it's pivot point, resulting in a pure sinusoidal motion left to right, of the machine.

The Pat Trap uses a linear hydraulic ram with one end fixed and the other attached to the machine. It's angular speed of travel is very nearly linear.

So, the angular velocity at the limits of travel, and even through the center of travel where a straight is thrown, are not the same. The Winchester slows down at its limit of travel, and speeds up on its pass through the center of travel, whereas the Pat is completely linear, spending the same amount of time at either end of travel.

This is all, of course, interruptor notwithstanding...

Did I pass?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
Tim99,
You "sound" like one smart SOB, just think two more Castle Milk Stouts and you would be an Aussie Einstein or was it south Africa where you are at?. I enjoyed your typing, but then I usually do. ;) Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my recollection is that the Winchester and GMV Superstar machines have interrupters that operate fairly randomly, hold a while, then resume oscillation, while the PAT trap moves to a new random position, then stops until the next target is thrown. If that is true, it seems to me that the PAT trap may produce a nearly uniform distribution of angles, while the other two may need a more detailed analysis of their interrupter cycle and linkages to make an answer. On the other hand, this seems to me to be much more of a problem to analyze by statistics rather than probability.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,716 Posts
Interrupters on Pats are just an electric Motor that operates a few switches that stop/change direction of the machine. If you have a Pat that doesn't change the angle or seems like its stuck, Try replacing the interrupter it just plugs in like a relay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,941 Posts
Tim, you not only pass, you get the gold star with oak leaf cluster.

For those who don't watch tennis, a sine wave looks like this:



In your mind, label the horizontal axis "time" and the vertical axis "position." Then the slope of the snaky line will be "velocity" but think of it as "speed," how fast the trap is moving, side to side. This sine wave illustrates the travel of a Winchester-Western or a GMV or any other trap who's oscillation is controlled by a rotating disc.

Where the line crosses the horizontal midpoint, where the trap is in the center, the slope is greatest; that is, it's speed is the highest. In contrast, as the line (the trap) approaches its highest and lowest values (trap is approaching hard-left and hard-right) the slope lessens (the trap slows down) and at the extreme it stops before smoothly accelerating up to maximum speed in the other direction which speed will again occur when the trap is in the middle.

Now in your mind replace the sine wave with simple saw-teeth, moving from one high to the next low, then the next high in straight lines. This is more like the motion of a Pat trap which hardly stops at all when it is changing directions.*

If the uninterrupted travel is the same, say ten cycles a minute, then you can see the differences. The speed in the center of the Pat trap is less, but the speed is maintained almost to the point where it reverses. So the WW (or GMV) trap spends more time at near the extremes for two reasons:

1. The motion of the trap slows as it gets far-right or far-left so it spends more time there, increasing the chances that it will be there when the command to throw a target arrives and

2. The motion of the trap is fastest as toward the middle so it spends less time there, decreasing the chances that it will be there when the command to throw a target arrives.

The combined effect of 1. and 2. is that Pat Traps throw fewer angles and more straightaways than do either WW or GMV traps.

I cannot agree with you, Tim, that you need to know the rotational speed of the platen or the linear speed of the Pat Trap. I think the ratios of time spent at the various points will be the same - and so the relative performance in respect to angles thrown - is not dependent on the speed at all.

Past-President Crausbay was the first to alert me that the machines differed in this respect and I thank him for his insight. I also think it is another thing to add to Gary's list of reasons people score better now than they used to.

Neil

*In fact the reversal is so quick it has spawned a theory of its own, namely that Pat Traps are designed/constructed in such a way that a bird is not thrown when it is an extreme angle. People have seen tiny reversals, brakings, or speed-ups to make this possible, but of course it's not true; the machine has no idea where it is so can't make any special arrangements based on its position.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top