Regardless the rules of engagement, if both sides agreed to them before the contest began, the writer is still wincing from sour grapes. It's poor sportsmanship to agree to the rules then complain about them when you lose.
This explains the one barrel, two barrel statement a bit better:
"July 6 Sporting Life editorial regarding the match by Will Park
This foreign trip has proven one thing quite conclusively, and that is this – the American gun and ammunition is unsurpassed by the same product of any other country. The skill of the American gunner has also been proven superior to that of the foreigners and it can also be said that we have the largest number of experts in this line of sport on the globe.
The English method of shooting at “clay birds,” as they call the inanimate flying targets, is to throw a rather high flight, follow it well to it’s height, and fire both barrels in rapid succession, trusting, as one might say, to luck. The American style, on the other hand, is careful, deliberate, but with a certain quickness which does not permit the target to get beyond a reasonably fair range. That the American style is superior, or their skill vastly greater, has been shown by the recent matches. It was also shown that the Americans were better prepared for this kind of shooting. The guns were heavier, and handled a larger load of powder and shot, all reaching a point of perfection acquired only through a series of exhaustive tests and continual experiments by the manufacturers of such goods and constant practice by the users of them."
SRH
Sounds like a good bit of patriotic flag waving to me. I wonder if the Brits or Italians would agree/
