Possibly the best sniper ?

[General Pain]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_Hayha

[Muti]

Yes, it's him

http://www.snipercentral.com/snipers.htm

[Eddie]

I always hate claims like this for one simple reason.

It's inaccurate to label someone "the best" because they operated in the most target rich environment ever.

[copeab]

I always hate claims like this for one simple reason.

It's inaccurate to label someone "the best" because they operated in the most target rich environment ever.

At what point do you stop discounting a sniper's accomplishments then If you don't consider the sniper with the highest kill total the best, how do you determine the best Remember Simo was using a standard-issue rifle without a scope and without benefit of a spotter -- and he did it all in 100 days. It's not his fault he made the best of the situation.

[Fusilier]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_Hayha

Possibly.

But I am skeptical to the accuracy of the claims. Not saying he wasn't very successful, but it isn't unheard of for nations to inflate things to create heroes. The references don't help confirm anything either, with most of them being news or television outlets (which also include contradictory information).

[jester]

Read it before and other accounts as well. I do wonder what if any role he had in the "Continuation War"

And then the label of "BEST" it all depends on what criteria is being used for that label. Just like the discussion of "ELITE." If you are going by sheet numbers okay. Or, what about shooting ability long or difficult shots Or infiltration to very secure areas to make the shot Or stalking the target until you can make the shot There are so many criteria that can be considered. Just like the game, alot of the players who have no clue think its just a high rifle score. To be a good sniper takes intelligence as well as a shooting ability and then you learn lots and lots of fieldcraft.

I mean, some countries or organizations call people who are snipers because they sit on a tower or atop a building and can put a round through the bullseye with a long barreled custom rifle and glass. Other organizations, it is about camo, stalking and the ability to shoot. I guess what I am saying is, its more than just having the skill pulling a trigger from my perspective.

So, what is the criteria for the best, that is the thing to decide.

In that case, the guy was a good shot and had a good amount of fieldcraft due to his background, <it seems similiar to a couple other snipers I have read too> But one also must admit, not only was that time and conflict one where it was target rich. Really, there were cases of units not having enough rifles or ammo for all its personel. But also, the Russians were from many of the accounts I have read well, words like bumbling and incompetent could be used. It was really just by sheer weight of numbers that they prevailed....oh yeah, and the complete failure of the league of nations and the betrayal of the European Powers at that era of history to do anything to stop expansionism by two certain nations of Europe.

[Trooper]

To be honest Simo H$yh$ is not famous in Finland. Finish army didn"t like idea of kills and snipers were not popular heroes during WW II. There wasn"t even an official training for snipers before 1940. H$yh$ was member of civil guard where he received some crude training for sniping and he was also local rifle champion. He also didn"t have any career at military. Before winter 39/40 he was an farmer and reserve corporal like so many other men in Finland.

H$yh$ evaded nearly certain death at several occasions and there were fierce battles at Kollaa front. Russian had proper equipment and armament but they were poorly lead. There is even finish saying Kollaa kest$$ oe meaning something like we will not give up.

[HorseSoldier]

"Best" is always a topic that invites hair splitting and such. Guy was definitely hard as a coffin nail and someone I'd rather have on my side than the other one, though.

[Eddie]

At what point do you stop discounting a sniper's accomplishments then If you don't consider the sniper with the highest kill total the best, how do you determine the best Remember Simo was using a standard-issue rifle without a scope and without benefit of a spotter -- and he did it all in 100 days. It's not his fault he made the best of the situation.

Read through Jester's reply. You could add in the ability to get a consistent sight picture, grouping size, any number of other metrics besides a target is up, now it's down.

[copeab]

Read through Jester's reply. You could add in the ability to get a consistent sight picture, grouping size, any number of other metrics besides a target is up, now it's down.

In the end, all that really matters is "sniper kills target, sniper gets away to kill another target".

[copeab]

Read it before and other accounts as well. I do wonder what if any role he had in the "Continuation War"

It's my understanding he never saw action after getting shot in the face -- which I can forgive him for

And then the label of "BEST" it all depends on what criteria is being used for that label. Just like the discussion of "ELITE." If you are going by sheet numbers okay. Or, what about shooting ability long or difficult shots Or infiltration to very secure areas to make the shot Or stalking the target until you can make the shot There are so many criteria that can be considered. Just like the game, alot of the players who have no clue think its just a high rifle score. To be a good sniper takes intelligence as well as a shooting ability and then you learn lots and lots of fieldcraft.

In threads on creating a sniper in other game systems, I've argued that Stealth and Camouflage are slightly more important to a military sniper than Rifle (a police sniper is a different matter).

[Eddie]

Yeah, but any member of the XBox generation can bet taught to shoot a target and crawl away. But skill comes in with the ability to do it without relying on luck, i.e., the ability to hit the same spot over and over and over. Or realistically speaking, relatively close to the same spot. Or being able to hit the part that you want and not just hoping for a hit. Because when you're shooting at a person versus a paper target, that extremity shot doesn't achieve the same effect. Your opinion obviously varies.

[copeab]

Yeah, but any member of the XBox generation can bet taught to shoot a target and crawl away. But skill comes in with the ability to do it without relying on luck

I'd hardly call killing over five Russians a day for 100 days with an unscoped infantry rifle "relying on luck"

As he was a hunter for many, many years, I'm sure most of his sniper kills came from fairly short range (100-200m) while well-hidden from the enemy.

[Eddie]

I'd hardly call killing over five Russians a day for 100 days with an unscoped infantry rifle "relying on luck"

The point is that body count is not the only metric.

As he was a hunter for many, many years, I'm sure most of his sniper kills came from fairly short range (100-200m) while well-hidden from the enemy.

If he shot from that close then it was nothing but luck that kept him from being compromised despite all the camouflage in the world.

Like I said, your opinion obviously varies.

[HorseSoldier]

Given the terrain he was in, and the equipment he was using they would have to have been at very close range by sniping standards. My recollection is that some of his kills were actually with a submachinegun, so perhaps his accomplishments shouldn't be considered in the 'great sniper' category at all, but rather put him on the 'greatest gunfighters' list.