Lanning R. Hochhauser wrote:
After attaining proper hold and coming down on the target begin to slowly, steadily to pull the trigger to the rear until the shot breaks. The break should be a surprise.
Without paraphrasing anyone else here, I believe I'm right in saying it should not be a suprise. It should be subconsciously controlled rather than a conscious act but that doesn't mean it's unexpected.
Unfortunately Russ has deserted us otherwise we could have benefitted from his wisdom - or we might just have got '60% there' ;-)
I can understand everyone's dislike of how Russ came onto this forum (as do I). However, now as he is trying to impart some of his knowledge to the group (which is what everyone has been crying about) he is getting slammed to leave. You may not care for the process he is using, but he is trying to make the group "think" about thier definition of trigger control. He is trying to allow one persons response trigger a thought by another possible responder. If you would have let it play out for a little longer we would have heard his thoughts on trigger control. If you don't want to play, why not let those that want to play the space to do it. Just pass over any post by Russ if you don't care to read them. I have pointed many new shooters to forums like this one. Most of them only stayed for a short while because of all the negative banter between poster's that occurs on these sites (just too much static). Because of this it becomes difficult to keep them interested in our sport as possible competitors. I have read probably 50 different definitions of sight alignment & trigger control in forums, websites, and books; but only one made a lightbulb go off in my head. Though his process is not acceptable to some in the group, he may just explain things in a way that will connect with someone. Competitive shooters in our sport(s) are shrinking in the number of participants for various reasons. Is it possible that some of what goes on in these forums are a contributing factor?
Anonymous wrote:If you would have let it play out for a little longer we would have heard his thoughts on trigger control.
I admire your confidence. I would be interested to know if you have seen any posting of his on this board giving advice on shooting techniques.
I suspect, that we would have reached a point of "See, I told you that you should come on one of my courses". I openly admit that I may be wrong, but somehow I don't think I am too wide of the mark.
Anonymous wrote:I can understand everyone's dislike of how Russ came onto this forum (as do I). However, now as he is trying to impart some of his knowledge to the group (which is what everyone has been crying about) he is getting slammed to leave.
Dear Annonymous,
Russ has volunteered to leave this forum and I for one have never suggested he do so. His efforts were not focused on increasing peoples knowledge via the forum rather suggesting they find a decent coach which is what most people objected to. I've learned nothing from this thread on trigger control other than I didn't give Russ all the answers he wanted. How exactly does that fulfill the objective of helping other shooters ? I suspect I speak for the majority on here in that Russ and anyone else is free to spread their experiences, wisdom and knowledge but that is what he has totally failed to do thus far. I have no problems whatsoever if he carries on posting as before, as you say, we don't have to read his comments if we choose not to.
Rob,
I understand the objections that most people, myself included, have. The thread, though unconvetional in format for a forum, is similar to conversations I have had with top shooters at my club. Instead of just explaining their thoughts, they would ask questions that would make me ponder and explain my ideas on a subject. The conversation would go back and forth like this until they get thier point across. I guess it could be better stated as 'finding my way to their point'. Again, tough in a forum but the process works for me.
This will be way to philosophical and preachy to most folks, but let's have alittle perspective on this whole "Russ Phenomenon:"
People are flawed, imperfect, self-referential creatures with pride, ego and a host of other characterstics that make life difficult for oneself and each other.
However
As grown-ups we *strive* to conduct ourselves on a higher plane; knowing we aren't perfect but trying to be "better" people in spite of our flaws.
A key to this is that we should conduct ourselves with polite, rational, honest discourse with each other in ways that add value to our lives and the lives of others.
Some people don't see the world that way.
Some people strive harder than others, apparently.
It has always been so- it always will.
We all make choices how we conduct ourselves, and we all have choices as to who we interact with.
Down off the soapbox- back to discussing our shared passion! (shooting)
And oh, Rick- it's called the "Socratic" method of teaching/learning (as opposed to the classical "Aristotlean" approach).
The Socratic approach to learning has also been adopted by many popular marketing/sales gurus ("I see you have a lot of children . . . how would you describe your current auto on a long trip . . . wouldn't it be nice to have 7-passenger seating . . . what are the maximum monthly payments you can afford . . . ?)
Speaking *only* for myself (as usual), I'm not at all put off by the Socratic approach for learning or the Socratic approach for sales and marketing.
I am somewhat put off by the practice of doing sales in a learning forum however. Throw in some other issues and my personal "Peeve-ometer" gets pegged.
Yeah, yeah, I have no right to criticize because I'm " . . . only a barely 560-570 shooter . . . " [sic].
I thought this thread was finally Russ'es attempt to give some useful teaching, but so far I also am not impressed. Come on Russ, shed some light on this mystery you have created, or call it quits altogether
Whether one finds the exchanges useful or annoying, by sheer count the number of readers for this thread outstrips many of the others. Feels a bit tabloid at the check-out aisle. For some, the esoteric soliloquies may approach archane. Perhaps Russ has stepped on toes in his zeal. Perhaps he has proffered thought processes emanating from a different culture. One cannot, however, refute that he has galvanized thoughts with respect to the dedication that most of us who read, post, or lurk here. For some, it may only be to improve so that they can shoot better than Russ. I suspect for most, this flurry is a passing tempest in our little teapot and we will continue to chase 10's, perfect our technique or simply enjoy doing something that offers us infinite challenge. We control how we shoot.....or at least we can control it when we put all the little elements together in sound formation. We shooters are no different from golfers or musicians or race car drivers. The subtleties hide from the uninitiated and loom for the afficianados. I have enjoyed the exchanges, learned from the cogent observations and bristled at the summary dispatch to those who "don't always follow the accepted ways".
Let's just move on. Read what interests you, ask about what puzzles you and share the enjoyment we find in shooting (and talking about it) Thanks for listening(sic)/reading. CraigE
Yep, Craig, and just because everybody talks about Paris Hilton doesn't mean she is making a contribution . . . or elevating our discussion . . . or getting us to think about useful things . . .
(hmm why do I suddenly feel the urge to eat a hamburger and/or wash my car?)
Steve Swartz
On second thought maybe "Michael Jackson" would have been a better example of "quantity of dialogue" not being related to "quality of discussion" but then I couldn't have made my little attempt at humor at the end.
For that matter I could have used my own commetary in this thread as a prime example of useless chatter. I think I'll stop now! Maybe Russ was really spreading one of those computer viruses that acts by getting everybody to send messages about the (nonexistant) virus . . .
