TargetTalk

Russ , once again you seem to present yourself as someone who has knowledge above all else. Funny you could not put this knowledge to good use and shoot the scores you espouse to be worthy of your input. Spoken like a true want to be!

shooter560 wrote:Don't take too much (no matter how good they think they are) from those who coach as a business and are only out to help if they think a buck could be earned, I'd say the best coach is the one who is passionate about a sport and willing to give back as well, I don't mind anyone covering expenses BUT not being bothered to read as there's no personal gain is proof of a business not a passion.

I totally disagree.

Whether a coach charges or not has no bearing on his/her ability to get the best out of the shooter.

Some brilliant coaches charge for their services, others don't.

Greg Derr wrote:Russ , once again you seem to present yourself as someone who has knowledge above all else. Funny you could not put this knowledge to good use and shoot the scores you espouse to be worthy of your input. Spoken like a true want to be!

What if participation in competitions is above my financial abilities at the present time and I have more important goals in my life. :(
So in these circumstances I choose to provide help to those individuals, who actually can afford to participate on the higher level competitions others than local club competitions. I am investing my time to teach two days class and I supporting my class up to one year by e-mails or by phone. I think I charge fair fee for my time, experience, knowledge and education.

Thank you Greg for your support me in the NPA concept. It was unlike for your manners. ;)

Herzliya, Israel, International Olympic Shooting Center (1993 AP 580)
http://midwestacademyconsulting.wordpre ... 11/03/525/

David Levene wrote:
I totally disagree.

Whether a coach charges or not has no bearing on his/her ability to get the best out of the shooter.

Some brilliant coaches charge for their services, others don't.

David, I would normally agree with that statement however if you went onto another sports forum and found that someone was only posting about what could be, and not offering help as they came across as more interested in getting people to sign up for paid for coaching, and then that person also said that they said something similar to what Russ posted

I do not have too much time and desire to read or correct what you guys are "sharing" in “Olympic Pistol”, including misconceptions of the certain values related to your own insufficient score performance. Sharing these misconceptions with other members is not doing any good for them, it only makes your “TT appearance score” higher.

Wouldn't you also see that as a 'I'm not being paid so I'm not helping attitude?' ??

I know some great world class coaches in several sports, target orientated as well and yes some do charge but they also give information and help feely especially on forums, as they work on the basis that if they can help while spending time on the net they will and in tern it could and does bring new customers to them, give and take is the name of the game.

Mind I'm a nobody who's new to air pistol shooting so I wouldn't know anything :)

Dear shooter560, Thank you for marketing advice.
Here some of my thoughts of providing help online. They are absolutely free of charge.
"Ignorance of not initially taking professional help in a timely manner will possibly lead to a development of not only one problem of what is bothering you at this point, but multiple issues. I’m very uncomfortable to provide assistance without initial evaluation of performance. I feel that “help” will possibly mask other important issues and it will compromise my intention to help. It is above my level of expertise to provide help without initial evaluation."

http://midwestacademyconsulting.wordpre ... -behavior/

Russ wrote:Dear shooter560, Thank you for marketing advice.
Here some of my thoughts of providing help online. They are absolutely free of charge.
"Ignorance of not initially taking professional help in a timely manner will possibly lead to a development of not only one problem of what is bothering you at this point, but multiple issues. I’m very uncomfortable to provide assistance without initial evaluation of performance. I feel that “help” will possibly mask other important issues and it will compromise my intention to help. It is above my level of expertise to provide help without initial evaluation."

http://midwestacademyconsulting.wordpre ... -behavior/

Since helping others in the forum is something you seem not only to dislike personally, but to find offensive and destructive generally (ie; it seems you wish that shooting-related forums should be shut down to prevent damage to shooters' careers) then perhaps your best course of action might be to look elsewhere. If you keep hammering away, with almost 1000 posts now Russ and so many of them saying this same stuff about 'tips' being dangerous, you are only going to hurt yourself, your own motivation as a consultant.

And again, advertising your services for free... I should think that a businessman such as yourself might give just a bit of a nod to Pilkguns, your gracious host, and pay for a small banner ad, rather than selling your services in the forum discussions while simultaneously repeating over and over how dangerous this same forum is to shooters. Do you not see the inherently contradictory nature of your comments?

Not nessesary. For recreational activities it will fit perfectly. Do not need to be so dramatic. ;)

"'tips' being dangerous" Gerard wrote.

Tips are contrprodactive for competitive athelet. This is mine statement.

Russ, I agree getting help can and does help matters quicker than trial and error, however paying for that privilege is something that doesn't need to be done and in fact should not be done without doing some research rather than just reading some postings that imply someone is the best available.

Ability to shoot however is NOT proof that a person can coach, nor does it mean that if someone can't shoot to a high level they can't be a good coach

shooter560 wrote: Ability to shoot however is NOT proof that a person can coach, nor does it mean that if someone can't shoot to a high level they can't be a good coach

I’m agree with this statement. We discussed this issue with David long time ago.
At the same time, it will be perfectly fine to have “service” were athelet can solve long lasting problems with short period of time. I see those problems and I do not see "quick fix" online.

I agree there is NO quick fix online, however refusing to offer help and suggestions is counter productive if someone is trying to run a business in the service/coaching market.

I would have thought even you could offer some advice without seeing a person, of course with the rider that as its unseen there is no assurance that you are advising correctly, then at least you could be seen as helping and not just on the look out for more paying customers, helping freely where possible WILL bring more feet to your door I'm sure

shooter560 wrote:I agree there is NO quick fix online, however refusing to offer help and suggestions is counter productive if someone is trying to run a business in the service/coaching market.

I would have thought even you could offer some advice without seeing a person, of course with the rider that as its unseen there is no assurance that you are advising correctly, then at least you could be seen as helping and not just on the look out for more paying customers, helping freely where possible WILL bring more feet to your door I'm sure

Today me, you and Greg were able to say that "NPA is an important part of the sucessful performance in Olympic Pistol". Do you think there is no value for this revealing factor in the US market? :)

The value of something, anything is only what people will pay for it, and in this day of the internet and freedom of information its simple to find enough out there to give pointers and advice. Simple stuff like NPA is only of value if you can't find it by other means, but you can find loads on it and so nope I don't think its worth a lot (certainly none of my cash will be spent on it).

"certainly none of my cash will be spent on it" :(
You can disapoint a lot of people with this statement.

;-)

I think original poster can benefit from all matters and thanks all of you gentlemen. From myself I can say that you Cecil have a very nice points. I hope someone will recognize them.

Rover wrote:...there is no NPOA.

Why would Brian Zins back him up?

Interesting. I was in Zins most recent clinic. Yes, he *very* firmly stated that there was no such thing as NPOA.

However, I think a few things are worth mentioning, things he and Alan stressed during the clinic.

1. When Zins says there is no NPOA, he's talking about Conventional Pistol. He freely and repeatedly says during his clinic that everything he teaches would be completely different if he were teaching a combat pistol course or a course for any other discipline. Literally, even basic safe gun handling rules change when the disciplines change.

2. Zins has definite opinions about the utility of trigger control in Conventional Pistol but is absolutely clear that those opinions have *nothing* to do with Free Pistol, Air Pistol, or, basically, any of the ISSF sports where a different approach is generally warranted. An example he cited in class was that pretty much the only thing shared by Free Pistol and Conventional Pistol (with irons) is the sight picture; nothing else is the same.

3. Despite saying there's no such thing as NPOA, Zins and Moody both teach that there's a range of angles of body relative to the target that are appropriate and it's counterproductive to exceed those ranges. As he told one shooter in our class "It's easier to shoot downrange when you're not standing facing the parking lot."

During that part of the class, they stress that this range isn't set in stone and can change based on what you ate this morning, how many pounds you gained last month, the current state of your shoulder muscles because of weightlifting, etc., ad infinitum. Ultimately, the example they gave was someone who stands on the line, works very hard to determine their NPOA and then breaks out a length of chalk to mark their foot position on the floor so that they can return to exactly the same body-to-target angle the next day. Their point was that those marks might be fine right now but they might be a little off after lunch and they might be ridiculously wrong a month in the future.

The lesson I took from all this was that a quantifiable NPOA, a defined angle of body to target within a few degrees that does not vary with conditions, is impossible to determine or successfully use. The body changes and the best NPOA body position today may not be even close to what's best in a few months.

I further got the impression that if an athlete is and remains fit and practices rigorously under unchanging conditions, that angle will remain fairly constant.

For Zins, teaching a bullseye clinic, this doesn't mean much. The National Championship for which he trains is basically shot out in a cow pasture (his words, not mine) where variations in footing may cause/require noticeable changes in the angle of body to target.

I think that "Zins says NPOA doesn't exist" is true but also an oversimplification, something that he essentially acknowledged during the class. There was a lot I learned in his clinic but, frankly, if I switched to shooting free pistol I imagine this would be one of the first bits of knowledge I'd either discard entirely or substantially modify.

4. Having said all that, I also know it's easy to find both online and in print from acknowledged experts instructions to pistol shooters that tell them to blade the body 90 degrees from the firing line. Period. No variation. I've tried that. My shoulders screamed at me for a week.

So, no matter who's doing the teaching or talking, whether they're charging money or not, I'm going to listen and apply my own brain to whatever is said. Doing that to this thread is enough to give me a headache; so many of you essentially agree about basic things but insist on arguing over terminology...without even defining terms.

Reading here and elsewhere has helped me enormously but, frankly, I've improved more in the last couple of months by taking personal instruction from champions, molding their pronouncements into something I believe I can use, going to the range immediately after breakfast 5 days a week to fire 30 to 50 shots as perfectly as I can (at which point I reach my limit of concentration endurance and pack it in) and dry-firing in 2 daily sessions to the point to boredom. Once a week I re-review my written shot process and modify or notate as seems appropriate. That's about the limit of what I'm willing to put into becoming a better shot at the moment and I'm making measurable progress.

So please understand that I mean no disrespect to anyone here (especially here) but my groups on target have shrunk by half since I've started essentially ignoring everything I see online in this and (especially) certain other forums. The conclusion I've reached is that there is no such thing as basic marksmanship. There are only particular techniques for particular disciplines and while some cross-talk between disciplines can be helpful, most of it is just noise.

I just don't understand why people spend so much time arguing about stuff they basically already agree on. I'd rather spend my time practising. I note that the volume of my posts here and elsewhere has fallen precipitously of late. Some people should probably send me thank you cards. :-)

Brian Zins and Andy Moody are very smart shooters. So much of shooting is mental and practice, that telling someone step by step how to do it, is like telling someone how to play the piano.
I will disagree on one point though,Camp Perry is definitely NOT a cow pasture. It is a dry swamp on the edge of Lake Erie. When it rains, it is more of an actual swamp :-)

shooter560 wrote:

David Levene wrote:
I totally disagree.

Whether a coach charges or not has no bearing on his/her ability to get the best out of the shooter.

Some brilliant coaches charge for their services, others don't.

David, I would normally agree with that statement however if you went onto another sports forum and found that someone was only posting about what could be, and not offering help as they came across as more interested in getting people to sign up for paid for coaching, and then that person also said that they said something similar to what Russ posted

I do not have too much time and desire to read or correct what you guys are "sharing" in “Olympic Pistol”, including misconceptions of the certain values related to your own insufficient score performance. Sharing these misconceptions with other members is not doing any good for them, it only makes your “TT appearance score” higher.

Wouldn't you also see that as a 'I'm not being paid so I'm not helping attitude?' ??

You seem to be basing your "passionate coach is better than a business coach" on your personal opinion of one person's posting on this forum.

When he has posted technical advice, as he has done many times, there has been very little that I have disagreed with. Does that make him a good coach? Not in itself, of course it doesn't. You can only judge a good coach by the improvement and sustained quality of his/her shooters.

Out of interest, have you ever seen Russ in action as a coach or witnessed the results. I certainly haven't so can not make any judgement at all on his coaching ability; can you?

David, No I have not seen Russ in person, nor have I seen him shoot, however I am basing my comments on what I have read and not just this thread, I wouldn't be so rude towards Russ, he deserves my respect and so I read for several hours through many of the posts and from that I drew my conclusions.

What I have issues with and I've seen it many many times before is you seem to find 'good/passionate' coaches that are willing to help others, throw ideas into the mixing pot so to speak on forums and do so freely and then you find the same type of coaches who post subjective and reserved comments but don't generally help freely as they are only looking for a paying customer to help, unfortunately IMHO Russ appears to fall into the later category though I am willing to stand corrected. I am not questioning his ability in 1 to 1 situations rather his business only manner on this forum.

My wife an I also took Zins's clinic a few years back, and found it very helpful. I highly recommend it to anyone who shoots pistol of any sort.

On the Natural Point of Aim issue, Zins had a laser pointer that he had people experiment with. He claims that if your stance is too far one way, you tend to be more unstable vertically. Too far the other way, and you will wobble side to side. Somewhere in the middle, there will be a position that minimizes the overall wobble. He believes that it is more important to find the alignment of your body that maximizes hold stability and align THAT with the target than to align the conventional NPOA. There is also nothing that says those two positions will be significantly different.

I played with the laser pointer a bit and have experimented with one on my own since then. Even at extreme positions, I mostly tend to wobble side to side, and I can't find a precise position that really seems to minimize this. I am slightly wobblier if I align my body with the line to the target. In a range of alignments close to either side to my NPOA, I can't see any significant improvement in stability.

It's possible that with a lot of time with an electronic training aid like a RIKA, SCATT or Noptel, one could find an ideal position, but then how do you locate it every time you approach the firing line? You could determine & apply an offset from your NPOA, but then whats to say that offset will be consistent?

It may also be that if you are inherently more stable, subtle difference can be seen, and that one could take advantage of this. For me, my NPOA is quite easily determined with a fair degree of repeatability. If one of the primary goals in shooting is consistency, I find that checking my NPOA as part of my shot process is a benefit. I certainly see it vary a bit from day to day, and even from start to finish in a match as my muscles stretch and/or fatigue.