Let’s break this down point by point.
Your first sentence is demonstrably faults. I have read tens of thousands of post on this site over the last 11years. Looked at thousands of groups, Countless rifle set ups. Many match results. Ladder test OCW test, load test, scope test, etc. So, you are simply wrong.
Your second sentence assumes I was making fun of or deriding which I was not in any way doing. There are many great shooters in various disciplines here.
You also apparently assume I do not understand math. My degrees in math and science would refute that but oh well.
My experience in guiding hundreds of hunters over many years is that the more complex the rifle set up, the more gadgets, adjustments, bubble levels, canted this and raised that the worse the hunter did in the field. More so when things happened quickly.
It’s just my opinion that excessively high scopes are slight less durable, slightly more prone to canting error, slightly more difficult to place a bullet exactly at short range and much less pointable for fast shots
This can all be calculated as to degree by math.
I really have no interest in how anyone mounts their scope, I simply pointed out that there are downsides.
BTW, high scopes are far from a new idea. Did anyone ever see D. Tubb’s highpower offhand set up? Those scopes were many inches over and somewhat offset from the bore. Such a set up works but becomes a single or limited use tool.
