Concur that patterning requires more than one pattern, not sure if ten is required for statistical consistency. While Jones set 10 as a number to shoot, I believe that it can be done with less, say 6-8, but it is definitely more than two or three, much less one
Jones picked 10 for statistical confidence. Shooting fewer reduces confidence. That doesn't mean the data is worthless, just lower confidence. Shotgun patterns are a lot more variable than has been generally recognized in the past. A three shot group from a rifle tells you something. A five shot group tells you more and ten tell the story pretty well.
Shooting patterns is not a problem. Analysis, meaningful analysis, is. Using Jones's Shotgun In-Sights pattern analysis reduces the effort required and increases the significance of the data. It makes the data collectible and comparable among experimenters.
DDA
