There is a simple test to see if the shooter is better than their gun: Have them try another gun (rifle & ammo) combo that is a known shooter. If the scores suddenly jump the rifle was holding the shooter back. If the scores stay the same then you need to look to the shooter or something else.
My own sad story on this was almost 30 yrs ago at the USISC where in the PR60 event nothing went right and nothing made sense. I came home, tail tucked between my legs and confidence thorougly bruised. I switched to my backup gun and my PR60 scores jumped a quick 10 points (high 580s) and 5 weeks later fired a 3199 in an American Prone match. .... I guess it was the gun. (note I was shooting the same ammo the only change was the gun)
'Dude
2nd for Eric U in Sydney world cup March 2011
Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer
If only it were that simple. There's loads of confounding factors that make that assessment very difficult and interpretation almost impossible; Guns are set up very differently, poor ammo (or batch) selection etc, then you have all the psychological factors - about 'another' gun.justadude wrote:There is a simple test to see if the shooter is better than their gun: Have them try another gun (rifle & ammo) combo that is a known shooter. If the scores suddenly jump the rifle was holding the shooter back. If the scores stay the same then you need to look to the shooter or something else.
<snip>
'Dude
Rob.
shadowing
Eric, first of all congratulations. You, Wong and the others gave us a very exiting final to watch. Also congratulations to Harald. Scoring 5th in a WC final at the age of 58 is a victory in itself!
I have a question: Your teammate Emmonds was giving commentary during the match and mentioned that during qualification you used shadowing "very agressively". Most of us know the principles of shadowing, but can you explane how you can shadow with such accuracy when the frontsight is in sharp focus and the target is a blurred dot. With the amount of wind in Sidney shadowing must have been minimal, so how do you obtain such accuracy when the target is out of focus?
With great respect for your performance,
Albert
(The Netherlands)
I have a question: Your teammate Emmonds was giving commentary during the match and mentioned that during qualification you used shadowing "very agressively". Most of us know the principles of shadowing, but can you explane how you can shadow with such accuracy when the frontsight is in sharp focus and the target is a blurred dot. With the amount of wind in Sidney shadowing must have been minimal, so how do you obtain such accuracy when the target is out of focus?
With great respect for your performance,
Albert
(The Netherlands)
Thanks to everyone for your congratulations. I had a good match that just happened to end up in 2nd place.
When shooting in fairly switchy wind, I use shading very frequently. I guess the key to doing it well is to do it often...and I do. When I'm shooting either a match or practice, I'm not afraid to point as far out as 9.5 or so. To me it is much quicker than clicking, and very nearly as accurate. It also makes you focus on your shot process more. The best way to learn to use shading from scratch is by using an electronic trainer and dry-firing. Point a 10.5, 10.2, 9.9 on purpose at 4 o'clock and 10 o'clock. Repeat often... My eye focus goes back and forth between my front sight and the target...therefore neither of them is a gray blob for long. I always use the same size front aperture, regardless of of what the light looks like. This helps me get my hold-offs the same every day.
Hope this helps,
Eric U
When shooting in fairly switchy wind, I use shading very frequently. I guess the key to doing it well is to do it often...and I do. When I'm shooting either a match or practice, I'm not afraid to point as far out as 9.5 or so. To me it is much quicker than clicking, and very nearly as accurate. It also makes you focus on your shot process more. The best way to learn to use shading from scratch is by using an electronic trainer and dry-firing. Point a 10.5, 10.2, 9.9 on purpose at 4 o'clock and 10 o'clock. Repeat often... My eye focus goes back and forth between my front sight and the target...therefore neither of them is a gray blob for long. I always use the same size front aperture, regardless of of what the light looks like. This helps me get my hold-offs the same every day.
Hope this helps,
Eric U
Hi Tsokasn,
shading is simply aiming such that the target is NOT central in the foresight - you deliberately have slightly more white between the foresight and aiming mark on one side so that the wind blows the shot back into the bull.
Basically:
With a right-to-left wind you have more white at 4 o'Clock and with a Left-to-right wind, more white at 10 o'Clock.
It's an alternative technique to clicking the sights when shooting in the wind but it requires practice, confidence and good wind reading skills....
This is one situation where a larger foresight can be an asset - if your foresight is too tight then it becomes difficult to accurately judge how far out of the bull you are aiming.
<Doh.... too slow.>
shading is simply aiming such that the target is NOT central in the foresight - you deliberately have slightly more white between the foresight and aiming mark on one side so that the wind blows the shot back into the bull.
Basically:
With a right-to-left wind you have more white at 4 o'Clock and with a Left-to-right wind, more white at 10 o'Clock.
It's an alternative technique to clicking the sights when shooting in the wind but it requires practice, confidence and good wind reading skills....
This is one situation where a larger foresight can be an asset - if your foresight is too tight then it becomes difficult to accurately judge how far out of the bull you are aiming.
<Doh.... too slow.>
Kenny,
I think I just got back down into position wrong after they got us out of position for the introductions. My first two sighters after laying back down were 9.5 and 9.6 out the right. I adjusted my position some and shot a 10 before the final actually started. I didn't think the wind had changed much if at all, but my first two shots were both on the right too. I did make a sight adjustment after that, whether the shots on the right came from the wind or my position.
Eric U
I think I just got back down into position wrong after they got us out of position for the introductions. My first two sighters after laying back down were 9.5 and 9.6 out the right. I adjusted my position some and shot a 10 before the final actually started. I didn't think the wind had changed much if at all, but my first two shots were both on the right too. I did make a sight adjustment after that, whether the shots on the right came from the wind or my position.
Eric U
focussing back and forth
Eric, just because I am curious: do you use this focussing back and forth on frontsight and target only when shadowing or with every shot?
As you are an army man: In the Netherlands some promising shooters are offered a job in the army. (This is done in cooperation with our shooting association). Half their 'working hours' are used for regular service, the outher half (aprox) is dedicated to training/shooting, sponsored by the army. (Despite their special status they still had to serve a half year tour of duty in Afghanistan).
Does the US have a simular strategy (al shooting/training sponsored by the army in working hours) or is all your training/shooting done in spare time?
Thanks,
Albert (The Netherlands)
As you are an army man: In the Netherlands some promising shooters are offered a job in the army. (This is done in cooperation with our shooting association). Half their 'working hours' are used for regular service, the outher half (aprox) is dedicated to training/shooting, sponsored by the army. (Despite their special status they still had to serve a half year tour of duty in Afghanistan).
Does the US have a simular strategy (al shooting/training sponsored by the army in working hours) or is all your training/shooting done in spare time?
Thanks,
Albert (The Netherlands)
Eric, i once had someone tell me that one can shade just as well by moving your head slightly on the cheekpiece to mis-align the sights, rather than holding over with the front sight. I didn't buy it then, and still don't. But I was unable to tell him why; could not come up with a solid answer other than that i didn't know of any high level shooters doing it, and really had not ever heard of anyone doing that.
What would you say?
Larry
What would you say?
Larry
Sawyer, as I see it there are several ways for shading, but placing your cheeck on a different spot on the cheeckpiece would result in a different direction of force acting to he rifle, while aiming and during the shot. This would (as I see it) result in an always changing reaction (jump) of the rifle and therefore a different and uncontrolled P.O.I. : this causes flyers . If the place and force of the cheeck on the cheeckpiece is the same with every shot, the reaction (jump) of the rifle will stay the same and controlled.
Albert T (The Netherlands)
Albert T (The Netherlands)
Also something to consider is that the rearsight iris will be around 1mm diameter while your eye's iris will be significantly bigger than that depending on light conditions.
If you move your head slightly, light coming through the rearsight would just be entering a different part of the eye's iris, following a different path through the eye's lens and ending up in pretty much the same place on the retina.
You can move your head quite a lot on the cheekpiece without seeing much displacement of the sight picture (in my experience anyway).
So that kind of "aiming off" isn't a consistently repeatable way of doing it.
As I'm aging and my lens/cornea is getting degraded, I find myself adjusting my head position to find the clearest bit of eye to see through without distortion...
I have a Centra Mirror in my rearsight sometimes to check I'm not overdoing it.
K.
If you move your head slightly, light coming through the rearsight would just be entering a different part of the eye's iris, following a different path through the eye's lens and ending up in pretty much the same place on the retina.
You can move your head quite a lot on the cheekpiece without seeing much displacement of the sight picture (in my experience anyway).
So that kind of "aiming off" isn't a consistently repeatable way of doing it.
As I'm aging and my lens/cornea is getting degraded, I find myself adjusting my head position to find the clearest bit of eye to see through without distortion...
I have a Centra Mirror in my rearsight sometimes to check I'm not overdoing it.
K.
Moving your head around the cheek piece is imprecise. It also reinforces bad practices - we are always trying to shoot consistently and position our bodies consistently. Mathematically it's also much more difficult to know exactly where to place the gun on your cheek. Shading just moves the point of aim slightly so you can work out where to point to make those small changes.Sawyer wrote:Eric, i once had someone tell me that one can shade just as well by moving your head slightly on the cheekpiece to mis-align the sights, rather than holding over with the front sight. I didn't buy it then, and still don't. But I was unable to tell him why; could not come up with a solid answer other than that i didn't know of any high level shooters doing it, and really had not ever heard of anyone doing that.
What would you say?
Larry
Rob.