Real talent? Or just model level hotness?
Let me start off by saying I know absolutely zero about competitive shooting. It interests me as much as wasting my valuable time watching people play any other sports such as football, baseball etc. The objective of professional competitions normally are to try and win though… so I find Glock’s acquisition of Michelle Viscusi interesting to say the least.
Is she really good enough to roll with the rest of Team Glock?
“While I am new to competitive shooting, I am not new to the world of competitive sports.”
She was a disappointing 5th out of 18 people to be eliminated on Top Douchebag season 4. I never watched the show so I can’t tell you if she got screwed somehow on that, but I’m sure the producers would have loved to have her on there for ratings if they could have somehow swung it. Also, I’ve never seen her shoot, and before someone makes some smart-ass comment about how well I can or cannot shoot I’ll save you the trouble and say I know she can shoot better than me. That said, I find it incredibly hard to believe that out of every professional level man or woman that should have been on Glock’s radar, she was the best. Best looking, possibly… but best shooter? What is the purpose of Team Glock anyway? Is it just a PR machine to strut around at trade shows and have a presence in the competitive shooting world? Does winning or losing really not matter?
You can read the full press release / interview with Viscusi over at Military Times. After reading the article there is no doubt she is a hard worker, but I still question if all her practice and recent dedication has got her skills at par with the other competitive shooters that took years to get where’s shes now at.
With Tori Nanonka also on the team, Glock is definitely going to have some killer calendar material if they ever want to raise some money.