Saw this one and a couple similar some time back. A good thing to post for others!
I was "afraid" this was going to be another "noooooo....THIS is what happens" post.
Sometimes, in my case at least, ignorance is bliss and KISS needs to be applied so I dont give myself a headache and all along my bullets were going WHERE I wanted and doing WHAT I wanted.
If I shoot small (by my definition) groups at 25 yards, 100 yards, 200 yards, etc, (but the same in MOA) this is telling me that I have an ideal charge behind the proper weight bullet, in a ideal length barrel with a perfect crown. In other words a matched load out of good equipment.
If I was to shoot a large group at short range but a small group at longer ranges (in terms of MOA), I certainly would investigate the cause of the apparent lack of accuracy at short range.
The problem with the example presented as "proof" that a bullet gets more stable with longer range is that the viewer has no idea of the quality of the barrel and especially the crown of that barrel.
Secondly I would want to know if the barrel twist is appropriate for the weight of bullet being fired.
Third, I would want to know if the powder charge and burn rate is appropriate for the barrel length and bullet weight.
Sorry folks, I just have never seen indications of a bullet "going to sleep" for any reasonable, safe combination of bullet, powder, and barrel length.
Having said that, I have always felt (but could never prove) that the 8 twist barrel and the 80 grain .223 bullet is just not optimum for the 300 yard reduced course. It is plenty good for 600 yards though.
Especially since I have cleaned the 300 yard target with this combination. I just think the Kreiger 7.7 twist is better for the 80 grain .223 bullet.
I am a simple person. I just shoot and my scores get recorded by my scorekeeper.
I have an email into the creator of that visual, Brian Litz (chief ballistician at Berger Bullets and a Palma shooter, for those who don't know but care). When I get a response, I'll post.