TargetTalk

Mr. Hall, thank you for this little bit a wisdom, I think it bears repeating:
"Training should be the arena to try changes and work on perfecting technique while matches should be an avenue to evaluate how your training has prepared you for the competition. You should approach each match as an opportunity to see where you are on your path. The acceptance of performance enlarges into the acceptance of self at whatever level you have attained. Enter a match with full confidence that you will perform to your ability. After the match, evaluate what that ability is and modify your training to meet your goals."

BTW, I do make sight adjustments occasionally during a match but the critical question is the term one other fellow mentioned and that is the term "as necessary"

I tend to agree strongly with Steve that you have to go back your behavoirs, and keep analyzing those behavoirs. If you percieve you are following your shoot plan, the technique looked real good (sights aligned, smooth on the trigger) perhaps you should consider making a sight change. My tendency is that I find one of the basic techniques that I need reemphasize before a sight change.

But I take a very positive approach. It is not what am I doing wrong, it is what will I do better. If the pattern shifts slightly to the left, I think of exact sight alignment. If the pattern is down and left, I think about smooth trigger squeeze. I replay what the sights looked like, did I see movement? But that comes from reviewing my technique on each shoot during a training session and during a match and then using the results as a feed back.

Ed, perhaps this is a basic error in my training program and approach to the sport.

Hi Steve,

Sorry I lit such a fire. It was not my intention. Additionally, my posts to the forum (even though flagged to an individual) are wordsmithed to be to the group and therefore I add/exaggerate some ideas for wider dissemination. As a final thought along this line, although these information centers are great for time-shifting messages, they fall quite short of the direct exchange of ideas that can occur face to face, though we still confuse even direct information due to language ambiguities and environmental programming.

Back to the regularly scheduled program:

Perhaps I am either misunderstanding- or being misunderstood. I find it quite puzzling to read that I am advocating some deep thinking trouble shooting during a match. Next thing you know, folks will be saying I actually think the "Wheel of Misfortune" is a good idea . . . (I hate that thing).

I'm not accusing you of "deep thinking trouble shooting." However, I am suggesting that any troubleshooting pulls mental energy away from the task at hand and changes your match attitude. Think about the mental contrast between having a good string of shots where everything falls into the ten and trying to correct a flaw, no matter how minor that flaw. There is a definite difference in your approach to the current shot.

I must applaud your "Wheel of Misfortune" note. I've often used "The Wheel" as an attention step by presenting it, discussing it briefly and then totally destroying it, asking, "Why study all the things we can do wrong?" Unless shooting is our profession, we don't have time to spend on that side. We need to study all the things that take us to the center of the black, instead of all the things that take us out.

Not being properly properly sighted in in the first place is indeed an improtant issue- but I thouhgt we agreed that that was already taken care of and quite necessary for local conditions.

This may seem like a no-brainer, but of course I must add a bit of dialogue. How do we know for certain that our zero, obtained during our sighting period, is 100% dead-for-sure correct? What guarantee do we have that it wasn't influenced by a minor imperfection? What if, along about shot fifteen, we subconsciously move back into our correct technique, eliminating the minor imperfection we zeroed for? Our zero is now different and no matter how much we try to "correct" our technique, we're fighting the wrong battle.

To take this idea further, and to agree with the "No Stinkin Thinkin" principle, I suggest not analyzing at all during a match. Analysis leads to judgment which leads to a change in attitude which leads to a change in performance. Just as you learn deeper and deeper levels of hold acceptance, learn deeper and deeper levels of technical performance acceptance. Strive for perfection in your technique, but don't try to "correct" anything at a match. Accept today's ability to perform and if your group moves - no analysis - move it over and press forward. If it moves back, again, move it over and press on. No judgment, no troubleshooting, no fixing of errors, just performance without adding the emotional baggage.

If, after properly adjusting your sights, the MPI shifts during a match YOU have slipped somewhere. Either "unslip yourself" (my point) OR adjust your sights and press (not recommended). I prefer to unslip my technique.

What if you unslipped from your sighting zero which was flawed? I'm making an assumption here, but I'm expecting that you haven't noticed a technical error during the MPI shift. If you try to find one now, you'll affect your game. Groups are built from consistent application of specific actions. Whether those actions are 100% perfect to our individual definition, or 95% perfect, consistency counts for more than those 5%. That's why I advocate sight adjustment without trying to "fix" anything.

In a match I advocate striving for proper application of the learned technique, accepting what your level of ability produces and moving the group with sights, if necessary.

Ref exercise about executing proper behaviors without analyzing target- MY POINT EXACTLY! Why does this exercise work? Because focusing on EXECUTING PROPER BEHAVIORS (and not chasing your sights around) is a Good Idea.

But, if you are focusing on "EXECUTING PROPER BEHAVIORS" and your MPI changes, adjust the sights and keep the same focus. If your current focus is giving you a group, why care if your technique is flawed? Move the group and gather points. Points are the determining factor in a match. Arnie Vitarbo talks of a fellow shooter in an article he has at the AF Team site, "He broke 2650 twelve times and never won a match with it. He was the only shooter I ever met who actually had his sights adjusted for a controlled 'Jerk.' Anyone else who shot his guns always shot high and right." Would those 2650's have won if he'd corrected his technique? Was his technique really flawed? What really determines whether a set routine is perfect? I know you won't say the hole on paper, so how do we determine perfection? Is it something we can define objectively, or is it subjective to an individual?

How about this: do your exercise during sighters- then adjust the sights- THEN SHOOT THE MATCH. Right? No? Why not? As long as you are EXECUTING THE PROPER BEHAVIORS YOUR MPI WON'T CHANGE . . . right? Wrong? (that's my point- and I agree it is by itself controversial and against "conventional wisdom.").

How about shooting the match that way? I've had some pretty good luck leaving my spotting scope at home. Even though I've occasionally lost some points on the first SF target (Conventional Bullseye - no sighting period), my average has gone up. Ah, but back to AP (+FP) for the group. I also skip the scope for my other disciplines as well, but depending on where you're firing AP and FP you may see results continually anyway, and BE is my primary focus these days. (Actually, my AP shooting took a huge downswing due to mechanical issues and my mental baulking at paying $10.00 per each little o-ring just because the gun has a "Name" or some such reason - Sorry, got off track!) Your MPI may change for a host of reasons. Leave the study of those reasons for the training sessions and go with the flow for the matches.

Steve - I'm sorry to have caused stress and ill-feelings. No malice was intended. I will probably slip back into the shadows of the lurkers soon, until another subject beckons me forth, because I just feel compelled to suggest my points of view.

Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.geocities.com/ed_ka2fwj/

Steve maybe you should write more when your tired as this post made the most sense and to me explained your position more clearly than your orignal post. I have enjoyed this discussion and I hope no one is offended, but I think by having an opinion challenged and vigorously defended it helps to clarify it and allows one to truely understand all the points of view and take away a better understanding whether they agree or not. (By the way I totally agree with your point but I still will probably adjust the sights sometimes, I'm only human forgive me for my sins 8)

Back and rested after a good night's sleep . . . (Uh Oh!) . . .

[First a parenthetical note to Ed: there is a lot of mythology and folklore from the old-timers; maybe more so in bullseye and service rifle than other disciplines. Some folks may honestly believe the stories they tell actually happened! Think about that "calibrated jerk" story rationally Ed . . . ]

Perhaps the semantic disconnect between Ed and I revolves around what exactly he/I/we mean by "analysis."

Does it change anything if I define (what I mean by) "analysis" for the purpose of this topic as -- >

"The mental process whereby we ensure we are following proper technique and can therefore proceed with the release of the shot."

Hopefully we are *all* performing this level of analysis on a regular basis (at least 60 times!) during a match!

*If* we are performing that level of analysis, what does it mean when the MPI shifts?

The MPI *won't* shift. We won't be releasing any shots that result from flawed technique.

Again, my point is that the reasons given by Don in the Notes are misleading. Most of the reasons he gives for MPI shifting are behavioral- and need to be fixed (my opinion) at the source, not with a screwdriver. The *two* reasons he gives for MPI shift (changing light conditions) are not applicable.

Bottom Line: Do We Really Need Big Easy Twisty Things (as opposed to a hard to get to recessed screw) On Match-Grade Air Pistols?

No.

Steve

(p.s. True Confessions FYI- as my skills have increased over the years, I am using the screwdriver much less now than I ever did. The shift in MPI is a useful tool for improving my technique, not a useful excuse for getting some mileage out of my adjustment screws. When I note an MPI shift, I would rather shoot better than move the errors closer to the center. And yes, I still keep a screwdriver on the bench. And yes, I will ocasionally put in one or two clicks as the mood strikes me; just because it makes me feel better. Heck, sometimes I add three clicks! Take That! Inevitably, when I pull my head out of my butt, the clicks have to come off. Maybe I *should* lock-tite those babies after all.)

Steve,
All you said suddenly made perfect sense when you said "move the errors closer to the center"...
Now I understand what you are saying.
JLK

Hi Steve,

My understanding of your analysis is along your lines of description. My suggestion is to let the subconscious take care of that while only observing the activity. Learn to understand the cues from the subconscious as to whether the current shot technique will result in success. Let it control for 60 shots.

Thanks for your points, and don't think I totally misunderstand your view. Even though our discussion has been focused on mechanical sight change, I think we are writing on slightly different issues. I applaud your search for perfection and your steadfast work zeroing in on that perfection in technique. I too search for that in training. On the other hand, I am working in the area of reduced mental change thoughout the match by accepting today's performance. Although I must admit to trying to perform technically perfect execution for each shot, I'm searching more for consistency than the correction of anything during a match. This doesn't mean I won't change something in my technique, if it will tighten my group, but I won't change something in my technique to move my MPI if my group is OK. I'm stepping onto a limb here, but I think we both agree that single shots (or even two) that sneak off center are not to be considered an MPI change.

I must attend to some issues that are piling up. Good luck in your next matches.

BTW, not to upset, but to provide some food for thought, I too would have avoided using the term "calibrated jerk" in the Arnie Vitarbo writings. Those were his words. But, I pose the following question: If I grip my AP such that the front sight is always aligned high right with the rear, but consistently in the same alignment, and then I proceed to pull the front sight into correct alignment with the rear sight using my trigger, what would that seem like to an "outsider?"

Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.geocities.com/ed_ka2fwj/