From: osmith@abbott.SEAS.UCLA.EDU (Owen I. Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: 1992 Palma Match Results, etc.
Date: 31 Aug 92 22:02:19 GMT
Organization: SEASnet, University of California, Los Angeles


Here are the results from the 1992 Palma Match at Raton, in order of finish

Country              800 Yds       900 Yds      1000 Yds        Total
-------------        --------      --------     --------        -------
Great Britain        2392-165      2369-108     2320- 70        7082-343
Canada               2392-134      2348- 82     2283- 59        7023-275
New Zealand          2385-125      2348- 75     2265- 57        6998-257
Australia           2387-130      2342- 84     2263- 61        6992-275
United States        2391-123      2322- 80     2256- 64        6969-267
E + Central Africa   2374-110      2300- 54     2199- 49        6873-208
Europe               2337- 93      2240- 65     2069- 28        6646-186

As you can see, the Great Britain team shot extremely well and won by a
comfortable margin.  The US finished a very disappointing fifth.  As usual,
the numbers really don't tell the whole story.  

By way of background, the range at Raton was divided into 7 banks of 4 targets 
each, e.g. targets 20-24, 30-34, 40-44, ..., 80-84.  As at Camp Perry,
the left hand (little) end is more desirable under most conditions. 
During the prevailing conditions at the match, wind corrections on bank
one were perhaps 30% less than on bank 7.   Teams are assigned to banks by 
drawing, with the stipulation that no team may shoot on the same bank twice.
A separate drawing is held for each range.  The target used at all ranges is 
the US 1000 Yd decimal target. 
 
The US and GB shot next to one another at 800 yds, on banks 4 and 5.  
Although the scores at 800 were relatively close, the British were in fact 
shooting much better.  The US had quite a number of shots just inside the 
10 ring, while the British were shooting many more X's.  The combination of 
rifle and shooter clearly favored the British, but at 800 yds the target is 
easy enough so that it was not reflected in the score.  It was clear to me 
that, if the coaches on the respective teams were of about equal wind doping
ability, the US was going to need some luck to keep up with the British at 900 
and 1000.  

At 900 yds, the US moved to bank 6.  The GB team drew a bank in the lower
half (probably 3, but I can't remember for sure).  It's now about 10:30 am,
and the wind is starting to pick up as usual.  As the numbers show, the
wheels really started to come off the US wagon.  The US was running 4-5 
minutes of windage, and the coaches were having considerable difficulty 
keeping up with the changes.  The US coaches were using different strategies.
One of the US coaches had his shooters holding for a relatively narrow range of 
wind conditions.  This seemed to be working best, but it kept the shooters
on the line a long time waiting out the changes.  As the wind picked up
later in the morning, the holds became longer and longer, and eventually
the time limit (100 minutes for 4 x [2 sighters + 15 record]) became a
factor.  Near the end of the 900 yd stage, one of the less experienced
shooters (but actually one of the best holders, e.g. 150-14x at 800 yds!)
ended up cross-firing at the adjacent bank.  At that point he had been on the 
line between 30-40 minutes, and still had about half of his record shots to go. 
Time was definitely a factor, and the pressure was on the shooters to get
rid of the shot asap, before the conditions changed again.  
I did not watch the British much at 900, but they obviously had little trouble.

After the fiasco at 900, the US began the 1000 yd stage squarely behind the 
8 ball.  Realistically, their only hope at this stage was that GB would draw 
a bank on the high end while they drew on the low end.  Instead, GB drew bank 
1 and the US drew bank 7 - from our point of view the worst possible outcome.  
The US shot this stage using 6-8 minutes of wind most of the time.  NZ (on
bank 2 or 3) used 4-6 minutes, so the British probably used even less.  The 
mirage was so flat that the changes were extremely difficult to see, so I'd 
guess this ended up costing the US about 2-3 points a man (e.g. 32-48 points 
total) relative to the teams on the low end.  In addition, we had one more 
cross-fire (no excuse this time; the shooter was a multi-time national
champion). 

In the end, it's clear that the British were the class of the field.  They
certainly had the best equipment, and their shooters and coaches were of
at least the equals of any other team.  If elements of chance were removed,
I have no doubt that they would have won the match.  As it turned out,
they were relatively lucky in the draws, shot an outstanding score and won by
a wide margin.  The US, on the other hand, really had only 3 outstanding
rifles on the team, drew nearly the worst set of targets possible under the
rules, and made several major mistakes to boot.  

In retrospect, it's clear that the highly publicized Ruger rifles were an 
impediment to success in this match, although they should help in subsequent 
years.  They were delivered very late, and turned out to shoot unacceptably.
Although 2 Rugers  were used, most of the team members chose to modify
their own rifles to shoot the new 155 gr Serria bullet used in the Palma 
ammo.  With the exception of a few rifles in which everything apparently
went together right the first time, there was just not enough time to 
work out the bugs.  The word was that neither of the Rugers used would
shoot sub MOA, and these were among the best of the lot.  Apparently the
major problem was in the barrels used.  I understand that they were made by
Ruger's usual supplier, who had never made a competition barrel before
but apparently wanted the chance.  Seeing as how Ruger furnished the rifles
(my understanding is that the NRA did not pay for them), there is certainly
nothing wrong with this.  However, in view of the high probability the
rifles would not shoot acceptably as furnished and the insufficient time
for further modification and testing, is was a mistake to count on them.

We have been complaining about the overseas ammo for years (especially the 
Canadian and British), so I expect our guests were a little curious about 
how ours would shoot.   It appears to have lived up to its advance billing.
Despite some obvious quality control problems in the assembly,
the ammo shot well enough so that (until the next rule change) all future
Palma matches will use the Serria 155 bullet.  The improved ammunition also 
lead to the adoption of the much more difficult US 1000 yd target for 
future Palma matches. Predictably, the British seemed to be especially 
impressed with the ammo. I understand they intend to order several million 
155 Serrias.  So, while we got trounced in the match, we may end up winning
the balance of payments battle.

Owen I Smith; UCLA DEPT CHEM ENG; 5531 Boelter Hall; LA CA 90024; (213)825-2125
Internet:osmith@SEAS.UCLA.EDU                 UUCP: ... {ucbvax!ucla-cs}!osmith