The high accuracy, low precision regime seems so strange to me! I think not many would call that situation “high accuracy” with most of the shots missing the bullseye!
Plus it seems like if you just keep increasing accuracy, you necessarily force all the shots to converge on the bullseye, don’t you? Then you get precision “for free” which is strange!
If you average out the low precision, high accuracy shots you will get a single point as your result. If that point is not already in the dead centre, then increasing accuracy is simply a matter of shifting that point closer to it. You can do that without increasing precision by moving the entire shot spread in that direction.
I’ve found this analogy often confuses people because in the shooting world the terminology is a little different. There the high precision spread would be considered high accuracy, with it only being a matter of adjusting the sights to get it on centre. And nobody is winning a shooting competition by arguing that the average of their shot spread is in the centre.
Yeah I get that the centre of the distribution is on the bullseye, it just doesn’t fit with the ordinary meaning of the word “accurate.”
It also falls apart with a small sample size. If I fire only a single shot and hit the bullseye, that doesn’t tell you anything. However, in everyday speech most people would describe that as an accurate shot.
The high accuracy, low precision regime seems so strange to me! I think not many would call that situation “high accuracy” with most of the shots missing the bullseye!
Plus it seems like if you just keep increasing accuracy, you necessarily force all the shots to converge on the bullseye, don’t you? Then you get precision “for free” which is strange!
If you average out the low precision, high accuracy shots you will get a single point as your result. If that point is not already in the dead centre, then increasing accuracy is simply a matter of shifting that point closer to it. You can do that without increasing precision by moving the entire shot spread in that direction.
I’ve found this analogy often confuses people because in the shooting world the terminology is a little different. There the high precision spread would be considered high accuracy, with it only being a matter of adjusting the sights to get it on centre. And nobody is winning a shooting competition by arguing that the average of their shot spread is in the centre.
Yeah I get that the centre of the distribution is on the bullseye, it just doesn’t fit with the ordinary meaning of the word “accurate.”
It also falls apart with a small sample size. If I fire only a single shot and hit the bullseye, that doesn’t tell you anything. However, in everyday speech most people would describe that as an accurate shot.