[Zero Sum]

If both shooters had been “perfect”, there would be exactly one hole in the target & it would be the size that the largest bullet had made.

No, in this example the second shooter was "perfect", becuase he hit what he was aiming for every single time.

How did her precision (or lack of precision) affect his accuracy?

It didn't. It affected HER accuracy.

[Zero Sum]

If both shooters had been “perfect”, there would be exactly one hole in the target & it would be the size that the largest bullet had made.

***

No, in this example the second shooter was "perfect", becuase he hit what he was aiming for every single time.

Actually, you were right, because if the first shooter had been "perfect" as well (assuming she was aiming for the bullseye) then this would be the result. But the second shooter was still "perfect".

[GoLightly]

No, in this example the second shooter was "perfect", becuase he hit what he was aiming for every single time.

His shooting was more perfect than hers, but it wasn't perfect. If her skill had matched his, how many holes would have been in the target after she shot all of her rounds? If we assume that her first shot was placed perfectly, wouldn't her initial hole become her new target?

I said, "How did her precision (or lack of precision) affect his accuracy?" It didn't.

Correct. His accuracy was unaffected by hers.

It affected HER accuracy.

As the first shooter, she set the standard. Her skill affected her accuracy & her accuracy determined the precision of the session.