I forgot to post this when the story ran last week, but we got exclusive information about a radical change to the rules that govern the Army sniper competition this year.
Snipers from around the world will soon shoot against each other at Fort Benning, Ga., but this year they’ll have to leave their fine-tuned rifles and high-powered optics at home.
For the first time in the eleven-year history of the U.S. Army International Sniper Competition, all competitors will use the same sniper rifle and optics of equal power.The new rules are designed to “level the playing field, so it isn’t so much an equipment race,” said Capt. Daniel Wilcox, who overseas Army Sniper School at Benning as commander of C Company, 2nd Battalion, 29th Infantry Regiment.
The story goes on to say that part of the reasoning was that foreign competitors had a hard time bringing in their own rifles. But Kit Up! has also heard from some high-end competitors that this is akin to telling Tiger Woods he can’t bring his own clubs to the Masters but has to rent instead.
Now, I understand the reasoning on both sides: if you’re a top shot, you should be able to put a round through a fleas ass at 200 yards whether it’s a BB gun or a custom .338 Lapua. By the same token, it seems to me that precision marksmanship at this level is all about how in tune you are with the gear you shoot. Again, it’s like asking a professional golfer to use rentals — it throws to game too much to chance…
What say you?
[EDITOR'S NOTE: It's confusing, but the "Army" in answer #1 is meant to distinguish "regular Army" as opposed to USASOC Army.]
{ 54 comments… read them below or add one }
How about two stages? One with your own gun, and one with the "standard", provided gun? Champs in each stage and an overall winner.
Probably the smartest and coolest option. But also as they mentioned, foreign competitiors had a hard time bringing their stuff with 'em.
But I don't think not being able to make it is a good excuse to change the competition completely
Not so easy. Do we have them stalk a target with their weapon or the issue one? Do we set up two ranges? Now multiply that across all the events.
I think this is good and bad. The new rule is supposed to level the playing field, but it really doesn’t. I’ve been to the competition (not as a competitor), and there are competitors from all over the world and from every branch. The shooting events will favor the teams that are familiar with the weapons being used. How is that a level playing field? That’s assuming snipers will use a different rifle for different stages. If they use the same rifle throughout the competition, again the same problem comes up. Those teams that are familiar with those rifles will automatically have an advantage. This really doesn’t make much sense. Fine tuning your weapons systems and developing DOPE is as much a part of being a sniper as training to read wind and estimate range. Letting the sniper use his own rifle doesn’t change the fact that the sniper still has to perform all the complex tasks of a skilled shooter.
If the foreign teams can’t get their guns in the country, then the U.S. DOD needs to figure it out. I would think they would have some pull in this regard. If they want to level the playing field a little, then they should have a few events that use this concept. Having say, 4 events with different sniper rifles could be cool, and it would allow everyone to see how well the concept works (or doesn’t work). Every sniper in the competition is allowed to make the same mods to his rifle based on class, so noone should be unprepared. Changing the entire competition doesn’t sound like a good idea to me.
BTW The Army doesn’t lose every year. Where did that come from?
Guess who
"BTW The Army doesn't lose every year. Where did that come from?"
I caught that too…..if anything didn't Army shooters win most of the comps?
@DJ3- I would have to look it up, but the Army snipers not only win most of the events but have won a number of the competitions. I know SFC Johnson and SFC St. John of the Army Marksmanship Unit have won several times. Army SF (the best snipers in the world IMO) won last year.
It means "regular Army" as opposed to SF…some in the USASOC sniper community say Benning wants their snipers to win so they shoved their weapons down the competition's throats…
The USASOC community is mistaken. The competition is run by the Sniper school. AMU doesn't get a vote though they have an arms room large enough to field 20+ teams of snipers something the sniper school can't even do.
Once the International Race Of Champions worked out all of their kinks, it became a pretty popular event. Don’t see why the same treatment can’t be applied to shooting.
How 'bout we keep it the usual way and get ANOTHER competition going on with identical rifles, optics, & equipment.
It should be a measure of your shooting and fieldcraft so being equipment neutral will be a better judge of the sniper, not the armorer and your unit's budget.
The golf analogy is interesting. I played with a scratch golfer where he hit a monster drive right down the middle of the fairway with his club. We were talking that morning about my Tailor Made driver, which he had never hit, so I let him take a wack. The second ball, off a club he had never even held before, landed about three feet from the first. It was the golfer, not the equipment.
Its true that a skilled sniper should be able to perform in a pinch. However, I don’t think your going to get the “Best” out of everyone if you slap a rifle in their hand and tell them to shoot. They should be more specific in the equipment restrictions in the different classes, that’s it. In 3gun matches you shoot with your own equipment (which is heavily regulated) and If you make it to a shoot off, you must shoot the supplied weapons. The 3gun model would probably work much better.
I am assuming they would get familiarization and tuning time, right? If not, then I agree with you
From what I've read they will have a day or two to shoot their "issued" weapons.
"A travesty. The Army snipers lose every year and this is a way for Benning to save face."
The US Army Snipers do not lose every year. CAG, Army Special Forces and 75th Ranger Regiment always dominate the competition and end up placing in the Top 3. USMC does great also.
Here are the results from the 2010 International Sniper Competition:
Overall Winners by points:
Team # 26 (D CO SWTG) Special Forces Sniper School
Service Class:
1.Team # 26 (D CO SWTG) Special Forces Sniper School
2.Team # 30 USMC Scout Sniper (Camp Pendelton, Calif.)
3.Team # 20 USMC (SSC DET, Hawaii)
Open Class:
1. Team # 23 (USASOC/CAG)
2. Team # 25 (D CO SWTG) Special Forces Sniper School
3. Team # 19 (HHC, 3/75 Ranger Regt.)
Agree. Army teams have won 9 of 10 competitions. Army teams also typically outshine every branch in national shooting comps. Who put the survey together?
80% Technique & Training & Practice
18% Equipment – We have all seen great shooters with non tricked out rifles and optics
2% As goofy as this sounds, it is the "force" that be with them
Good shooters can shoot well with any rifle. As to dope, the programs available take the "dope" out of it. One just needs to confirm the computer. And a short stroke action should not be an issue with equipment familiarity. Plus, I believe the armourers of the Army Marksmanship Unit will be more than happy to help set the equipment up to the individual shooter.
But that being said, any shooter is best with his rifle, ammo and set up.
I really think that this will hurt teams unfamiliar with the competition issued equipment especially during the stalk. Having to pull out unfamiliar optics to estimate range is a big handicap. Out in the real word I like my Gucci laser range finder? Is Benning going to issue that?
You can use your own optics as long as they don't exceed 12x.
Looks good Iam disappointing that they wont let Marines and SEALs bring there M-14s and M-40A3s.
I can see both sides of the argument. If getting equipment into the US is a problem, which doesn't make sense, then let/require every team to come in a few days early, and give them plenty of range time to get familiar with the standard gun/optics platform issued to each team.
this civilian doesnt quite understand. i watched a few of the TV shows on the M-history channel. there were like 8 different competitions, including one from a helicopter (?!) .
beyond streamling the process by which foriegn teams get their equipment here… its sounds like the army is trying to fix something that aint broke or worse, stacking the competition.
let the foriegn teams bring they're own gear. let them bring they're own "honeys".
lemme guess… three the four rounds will be… 5.56, 308, .50cal …. shocker.
why not go the opposite direction and make the competition a bit of a show case? who wouldnt want to see the czech team bring a 14.5 gepard for the heavy competition…? let the "eastern bloc" teams bring their various exotic rifles and rounds so that we can see what they're capable of.
just my unqualified opinion.
Only one caliber will be in use, 7.62. There is no "heavy competition".
Service class shoots 7.62. Open class snipers shoot pretty much whatever they want. The heavy portion of the competition has competitors using the M107 .50BMG SASR.
How does the 7.62 AMU supplied weaspons impact the heavy class?
USCG uses snipers on helos if required when doing boardings on large vessals as overwatch, also used to take out engines/helmsman on smallboats.
This move will be of great benefit to the US Forces members competing as it will help to take the focus off the toys and place more emphasis on core soldier skills! Over reliance on "cutting edge technology" and uncontrolled complexity in planning and execution is mostly what screws up your Spec Ops.
Of course it's going to benefit the US forces, because everyone else is going to have to use US gear. That doesn't level the playing field. It's straight up favoritism for US teams.
It would be fair if they would use gear that nobody is trained with.
From the old street drag racing days, I am of the "Run what ya brung" mentality.
It the "playing field" is to be truly level, and that is absolutely the goal, then all should have a weapon they are familiar with or none should have a weapon they are familiar with.
Why not do both? Part of the competition use a common rifle, another part use their regular kit. I don’t understand why it has to be one or the other.
I think this will be a great addition to this year's competition. Personally I believe limiting all shooter's to the same platform is a great idea. A superior marksman must be able to adapt to any situation and any weapon that they encounter on the battlefield.
They need to do both. Shooting competitions like this before the new rules is like the old F1 rules where almost anything goes. That is to say, it became a skills race AND a technological showcase. I want manufacturers to continue to compete with the shooters so we get newer and better guns. If everyone starts getting dramatically better scores they should increase distances, difficulties, and variety, to push shooter and equipment to the very brink.
If memory serves correct the Irish Defense forces team was very limited in what they were able to use (ex: zero experience with the M107) and didn't have the fortune that our military has in being able to get the necessary gear. Having the entire weapons systems equal would make it a more true intl sniper competition in my humble opinion, that way it boils down to skills over technology.
The whole 'foreigners having trouble bringing in their rifles' part bugs me. You'd think foreign armies would fly in on a military airplane, land on a US military airfield and have no issues with their kit? I might be biased for being used to see my buddies cross our big ole undefended border to go on exercises though.
So what are they going to do? Issue L115A3′s to everyone. Then the European teams will be at an advantage. Maybe issue the XM2010. Then the Army snipers will have an advantage. The M40A3. Now the Marines have an advantage. Certain branches, certain countries, will have an advantage no matter how you look at it. Optics? The SF use a Nightforce with zero stops. What happens when they issue a Leuopold with pinch-locking turrets? The SF are supposed to suck it up, while the Army runs an optic they are familiar with?
Then the question of ballistic solvers. Issue them to the teams or not? Some units don’t use them much while others have tossed their data books in the trash. So the team that is familiar with that program will be able to run it smoothly, while the guys from Thailand try to figure out how to change the language settings. By trying to level the field, you end up stacking it in the favor of a few. This isn’t Top Shot. This is the Military sniper community pitting their best skills and best equipment against each other. Let’s see what works and what doesn’t. Regulate the equipment In each class a little closer and let them shoot.
absolutely freakin right….
what you're asking is… "whats the point of the US Army ISC"…? what should it be…?
the Army seems to be leaning towards National pride.
shouldnt the Army be trying to figure things out, especially as concerns the equipment being used and how fast its changing…? what actually works, what doesnt, what holds up in tough conditions, what doesnt, whats easy to use, what isnt, what skill sets and training methods work, what of the same are a waste of time and unrealistic etc etc etc.
Really good points, I mean, I get the idea of trying to level the playing field with having standardized equipment… but couldn't they at least standardize the specs and let the competitors bring their own rifle(s) that meet the specs? At least that way, the playing field would be levelled… and since everyone would be comfortable with their weapon system, then the competition would (or should) be based more on skill
I totally agree with you, this idea in no way levels the playing field, it just gives an advantage to certain teams is all. For this to work they should just choose a rifle that nobody uses, if that's even possible, maybe a straight off the shelf civilian rifle. Some people may have a slight advantage if it's a rifle they personally own or have shot with in the past but it shouldn't be as a big an advantage as using something that's actually in active service with somebody. Maybe have everybody use something like a stock Ruger 10/22 or Mini-14, a nice civilian only type of plinker to truly test a sniper's skill.
It's not fair to make people shoot with a system that it's the one with train and practice with every day.
It would be like giving every tennis pro the exact same tennis racquet and telling them they have to win Wimbledon.
Why not an "open" class-bring your own and a "trooper" class where teams shoot the provided weapon? Feh, next thing you know they'll be restricting calibers….now get off my lawn!
Buffoonery. Every rifle is different from each other, has a personality, and knowing the capabilities, limitations, and lifespan of ones gear marks the true professional.
Firstly, I wouldn't trust the Army to have enough operable rifles to have a fair competition. When I went to the US Army course I went through 3 rifles because of servicability issues. #1 throat wore out and would not zero, #2 trigger broke and finally #3 didn't even have the optics mounted in a manner to hit past 700m, ran out of elevation.
Secondly, I see it as an innovation stifling move. Competition breeds innovation and shows best practices. Looks to me like the US Army is scared of getting spanked by newer more capable equipment combinations, or embarrassed by their procurement choices.
If they wanted to have classes: 7.62×51, 300winMag, .338Lapua etc… that would do more to level the ballistic playing field than handing out bags of poo to all.
I just find it strange that people are acccusing the Army of being afraid to lose when its won 9 of 10 competitions. Where's the demonstrated threat? There is also zero consideration for what it takes to set up this competition? Different classes? As it is the sniper school is trying to minimize wait times between events like the Best Ranger competition to stress shooters.
There's a huge focus on toys here. Its not a marksmanship comp, it's a sniper comp. Though steel on target is important the competitors are going to be evaluated on physical fitness, target detection/descrimination, stalking and land navigation. There will be engagements for the spotter and specific pistol targets.
If competitors aren't happy they can set up their own competition, no? I mean how hard is it, right?
In watching Top-Shot it seems that having multiple competitions with various weapons is the truest way to test a person's all around abilities. What I see is some shooters are good with some weapons some are not. Some have familiarity with certain systems that give a great advantage. It would be interesting if they varied they weapons a bit for this comp and I look forward to hearing about how it goes down.
I agree for the most part but when it comes to sniping, I'd like to see who is the best at doing a lot of things using his personal weapon. Finding a good all-around shooter is pretty awesome, and the Top Shot guys have a lot of skills, but it's not important for snipers to have tomahawk throwing skills.
The only rule should be a maximum weight limit and barrel length, a list of approved calibers, and a minimum standard for durability. This is to keep them from using something ridiculous like an M95 or a CheyTac, or some sort of delicate target rifle.
After all, it's a competition between military snipers, not between marksman. It should be done in combat conditions with combat rifles.
Ofcourse, but you'd think that they'd be bringing the same rifle they would be deploying with right? I mean, what's the point of training with a rifle so that you know it inside and out only to not deploy with it?
Not agree. Not possible create "combat conditions" in the end you have guys with better bike/car/plane/speedboat in the star line. You Dont have COMPETITION at all . -Kidding- only you can if you put referees returning fire or infiltred observers on training and at end of the year make a Score list
Making them run, crawl, jump, and hide…. shoot from helicopters and through holes in tile roofs…. have people judging how well they've concealed themselves… shooting at tiny, partially-exposed targets at extreme ranges. Those are combat conditions.
Competitors should use their own equipment. It is a chance to put yourself and YOUR equipment to the test. This is of greater benefit to the snipers who compete and may have to use their skills and equipment somewhere in the world.
I belive it is fair rule in military enviroment. Keep aside machines and trial the men. I don know about army sniper training but in " memoirs of team six sniper" say SEAL Team Two spent many thousand of rounds weekly by operator ( I figure six team sniper can do it so too). The more score sniper in US military history one army NCO in Vietnam can sweat blood to keep the pace of today army sniper neither a new graduate without the same list of current "toys" and him had been learned to use it, of course. I´m in No open class line.
There are a couple potential solutions. A two-phase approach would be neat, as would a grab bag of weapons – one bolt-action, one semi-auto, and one high-caliber, if the competition supports it. You could have your choice, but within a constrained set.
Editor – Thanks for clarification. Can't find where USASOC teams dominate except for last year. In '09 half of the winners were USMC, NG and Ft. Knox. Before that the AMU was the overall winner. Where's the "plot" especially since the AMU doesn't have a role in running the sniper comp?
Sowing distrust between the "Army" and USASOC based on faulty info or conjecture is bothersome. I was a minor sponsor of the '09 comp. I only saw comraderie and a very open learning attitude between the teams. I acknowledge friction exists between the conventional and special ops side but unlike in the past it seems both sides have been at fault recently (e.g. big Army grooming issues, special ops not coordinating when conducting ops in a conventional unit's AO).
As opposed to making this a USASOC vs. Big Army issue (terms that don't build teamwork). Why not frame this as what it is? Should sniper skills or sniper equip be emphasized in the international sniper competition? USASOC has their own sniper competion (4-9 Dec) . 19 special ops and police dep't teams competed for the second time last year. Looks like a GREAT opportunity to show off gear.
Adapt and overcome!!! If the ammo is the same(ha-ha) and the break-in period long enough to create the shooters own dope (screw the book) than the only other variable is skill. Make them all select from a pool of weapons and they are all on the same playing field. Given enough time and practice the better shooters will emerge