Ammo Counts for Pro Shooters
How much ammunition pro shooters really use, and why most gun owners will never achieve their success.
Some gun owners say they’d like to be better shooters but are concerned about the cost and availability of ammunition.
Send me next week’s winning lottery numbers then I might be able to afford to shoot 100-200 rounds a day to become proficient.
The top competitors shoot 300,000-400,000 rounds a year thanks to sponsors. Because of ammo prices, the average shooter can’t afford to shoot enough to be that good.
It is pretty sad. I don’t mean the cost and availability of ammunition for “regular” gun owners; I mean the whining by low-skill novices who foolishly believe lack of ammo is their biggest obstacle.
Most gun owners could greatly improve their marksmanship skills more than they realize by shooting no more ammunition than they’re already using. Far more valuable to learning how to shoot better is the knowledge and practice of consistent shooting technique, the steps to a good shot process, how to call and evaluate each shot, and how to overcome common issues that plague lower-skill shooters.
For example, you could take a group of beginners, teach them the techniques of marksmanship for a few sessions with them only firing a few dozen shots each time, supplemented by much dry fire practice during and between each live session, and make them better shooters than probably 90% of long-time hunters, military, and police personnel with decades of “experience.” One shot properly executed and evaluated is far more valuable to learning than 100 sloppily executed, especially when skills are refined with many repetitions via dry practice between live fire sessions. Of course, this is “boring” and takes much more discipline than most gun owners are willing to use.
The best tell that sponsorship would be wasted on someone is to evaluate their current marksmanship accomplishments.
A serious, disciplined shooter will have already climbed at least partway up an “achievement ladder” on their own. Business, family, and financial commitments can certainly prevent one from being competitive at the national or state levels, but everyone can progress in something.
Anyone with sufficient disposable income to own a firearm and accessories, along with enough ammo to indulge in occasional plinking or hunting, can just as easily channel some of that into shooting local matches. Local clubs affiliated with a national organization host Classification systems that reveal how one stacks up nationally. I know shooters who rarely fired live ammunition outside matches but leveled up several rungs of a Classification ladder using only diligent dry practice in between matches. It’s possible to earn enough Excellence In Competition points to go Distinguished in fewer than half a dozen matches, and EIC matches are hosted at civilian and military ranges across the country.
Offering sponsorship support to someone who hasn’t bothered to work up an organization’s Classification ladder or earn EIC points at local matches would be wasted because they’re unwilling to accomplish even low-level wins within every gun owner’s grasp.
Insufficient ammo or lack of “match grade” equipment may be a valid reason why a shooter has “only” managed to get to the bottom end of Master class in their respective discipline, or why they “only” finish in the top 10-20 percent at local club matches. It is NOT a valid reason why a shooter isn’t good enough to be competitive among local hobby shooters classified in the bottom bracket.
Actual tests of military and police personnel demonstrate that even those with “expert” qualifications are often incapable of shooting well enough to keep up with local hobby shooters in the bottom classification tier, even though military/police qualifications are performed while on paid duty at taxpayer expense.
Not even sponsored shooters have the ammunition that’s sometimes cited. Doing the math will reveal the ridiculousness of these claims.
Let’s pretend team shooters Samantha Sponsored and Mike Military have unlimited ammunition and no other responsibilities other than shooting, averaging five days a week, 52 weeks a year on the range. That’s 260 range sessions a year. At 300,000 to 400,000 rounds per year, that’s 1,150 to 1,530 rounds for every session. No competent marksman will shoot that much every session, five sessions a week, for an entire year and claim it’s necessary to show progress in skill. Some fools could waste that much ammo in a day (especially if someone else paid for it), but no skilled shooter will do it daily for a year and claim it’s necessary for progress.
This assumes a person can manage range time 260 days a year, which is a false assertion. Not even top shooters in the Army Marksmanship Unit spend every duty day on the range, and sponsored pro shooters enjoying a full ride (there are very few of them) have other responsibilities for sponsoring companies besides their training, practice, and match prep.
Consistently getting one or two live sessions a week (say, 60-70 a year) with 100-200 rounds each would take 6,000 to 14,000 rounds each year in practice. Two firm weekly sessions at 200 rounds each is just under 21,000 rounds. Add in ammo for 1-2 matches a month, and we might be at 25,000-30,000 rounds a year. Add in copious dry practice, and these figures are close to what sponsored national-level champion competitors might be doing, even for high-volume action shooting; precision disciplines will have lower ammo counts.
With some rare exceptions, not even fully sponsored champion shooters in high-round-count competitive disciplines will be shooting this much on an ongoing basis, and most will be far less. Many shooters at Master class levels or higher never averaged more than a few thousand rounds a year.
One example is Ben Stoeger, a multiple USPSA Nationals champion in Production class. He has stated that he earned his Grand Master classification by shooting just over 5,000 rounds of centerfire ammunition total. While he is certainly an outlier, it demonstrates how much more important dry practice and proper training organization are compared to round count.
How one shooter earned Grandmaster in about 5,000 rounds:
Nothing makes me feel more like a clown than hearing how little the top guys shoot. I'll see Master and Grand Master competitors at USPSA matches talk about shooting 5,000-7,000 rounds a year. Shows how much more precision I need in my training!
A person who understands and applies good training habits, coupled with organized dry practice/training can build a considerable amount of skill with 1,000-2,000 rounds a year. Two live sessions a month of 100 rounds each is 2,400 rounds a year.
Most gun owners would enjoy an enormous jump in skill with 600 rounds a year and daily dry practice. One well-organized and disciplined live fire session of 50 rounds each month coupled with daily dry sessions will yield thousands of repetitions per month with just enough live shooting to confirm the dry practice is working. This can be supplemented with air guns at home and/or an inexpensive training gun chambered in 22 Long Rifle to increase the round count at a low cost.
“Regularly scheduled” and “organized” are where most people fail. You don’t need 4,000 rounds a year (or 40,000, or 400,000…) to gain substantial improvement, especially at first. However, you must train skills in a regular, ongoing, organized fashion. Most gun owners, hunters, tactical operators, soldiers, marines, and cops will never do this. And their shooting skills will remain at novice levels because of it. Blaming ammunition availability is a convenient excuse for a failure to put in the work.