The same percentage of rifles thirty years ago would not agg in the teens.

Rick, there is little doubt that XP was modified to some extent but that doesn't change the fact that it was 1980-something rifle building technology. That people today choose to use one of the precise and commonly available (commonly available to those willing to wait, in some cases!) custom or semi-custom, precision actions instead of a modified Remington doesn't change the original premise; there is a lack of technological change. I'm sure Lester no longer uses, or even owns, that rifle but he probably doesn't wear the same shoes either. My only point was that real good rifles of thirty years ago may very well have been capable of competitive accuracy even by today's standards. This especially when used by today's best shooters.
In a backhanded way, I'm trying to point out that potential new shooters needn't fear the equipment they see on the line. None of it is in the least "magic". They are only rifle assemble using common machine shop techniques just as they have been for more than a quarter century. The new shooter doesn't need to cough up 1800 dollars for an action. He does need to have an action which is straight and concentric. He does need to have a good barrel, properly installed. The barreled action does have to be properly fitted and affixed to a stock designed to work well from the bench. He does need decent optics solidly attached to the rifle. All of these things can be accomplished just the same way they have been in the past. Now, the cold hard fact is this; a Remington rifle costs as much as many good precision actions so is hardly worth acquiring to use as the basis of a BR rifle. If, however, the Remington is the "bird in the hand" it might be worth considering. Regards,   Bill.

Rick,
This website will undoubtedly go a long way toward increasing participation. The disemmination of information related to benchrest is beneficial and so is the give and take on various forums.
One problem which is everpresent and even increasing is the expense related to competition. This applies to everything from equipment to components to the cost of travel.  Another problem is what one might call the "intimidation factor". People are convinced they will have to (a) spend major bucks on a rifle and optics and (b) always shoot little tiny groups. Neither situation is always true. It is possible to have fancy equipment and shoot big groups and it is possible to have slightly pedestrian equipment and shoot respectably well.
Another problem I have noticed at some of the matches I have attended is the seeming inability of some shooters to just shoot their match. Their actions and behaviour don't just lean towards poor sportsmanship but are perfect examples of it. In addition, the concept of gentlemanly behaviour has apparently been cast aside over the last couple of decades. I know this is largely reflective of society as a whole but a bit of effort at good manners would help to attract and keep shooters. In years long past, there were always some shooters whose language could be described as "colourful". In those days these people were mostly the exception and, perhaps, tolerated because of it. Nowadays, the use of vulgarity is overwhelming ( and I don't say I've never been guilty) and I know it is offensive to some who would attend the matches. It shows a lack of respect for others and it's reduction would help to attract new shooters. Really!
As I said, this website will do a lot and Rick, you are to be commended for your work in setting this up.   Regards,   Bill.

I have it on DVD. I posted some links to some of it that I have on photobucket. I can lend you the dvd if you like.