Synthetic worked example · not a user result
Air Rifle session analysis: stable group size, falling score
Two synthetic 10-shot series have almost the same spread. The second scores four points lower because the complete pattern moves low-right. Here is how to read the difference without rushing to a conclusion.
The series data
| Series | Score / X | Extreme spread | Mean radius | Group centre |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Series 1 | 95 / 4 X | 8.2 mm | 2.0 mm | 0.8 mm left · 0.5 mm high |
| Series 2 | 91 / 1 X | 8.0 mm | 2.1 mm | 4.4 mm right · 2.0 mm low |
Observation 1: precision is nearly unchanged
Extreme spread changes by only 0.2 mm and mean radius by 0.1 mm. On these two small samples, there is little evidence that the internal compactness of Series 2 became materially worse. The lower score needs another explanation.
Observation 2: placement changed
The first group is close to target centre. The second average moves 4.4 mm right and 2.0 mm low—large enough on the tiny Air Rifle target to turn otherwise similar relative shot positions into lower ring values.
A centred-score simulation would help demonstrate the same point: move the second pattern without changing distances between its shots, and much of the score difference disappears.
What this example does not prove
- One shifted series does not prove the sights require adjustment.
- The table does not identify whether position, aim, setup or another factor caused the movement.
- Ten shots are not enough to declare a lasting precision trend.
- A real review should inspect card order, notes and verified hole positions before acting.
A careful next step
Record the shift as an observation, check whether it persists on a fresh comparable group, and only then use the sight's documented click value or a deliberate setup test. Preserve the original series instead of retrospectively centring or deleting it from the log.