TargetTalk

hi everyone.

this is regarding 10m air pistol: how much does wobble zone affect the result of the shot, if sight alignment and trigger squeeze are executed perfectly (in which ring does the pellet hit if the above process is followed.)?

If sight alignment and trigger release are perfect then, providing there is nothing wrong with the pellet or pistol, the hole will be somewhere in an area the same size as the hold area (wobble zone).

It might be in the middle or it might be at the edge.

Whether the centre of the likely hit area is in the centre of the target will depend on how well the sights are adjusted and whether the hold area for that particular shot was in the same place as it normally is.

I got some good advice from the experts on this list when I asked a similar question..... Execution of the sight alignment and trigger will produce significantly better results than trying to control the size of the wobble area. I then went out and proved it to myself last weekend. Rough group/low 80 scores turned into tighter group/high 80/low 90 scores by just concentrating (almost solely) on the sight picture.

Cheers

David

Guess this was almost at the middle of the "shake" area... ;))

I'll never forget the time when I first understood this concept. Air Pistol class in college, the instructor was trying so hard to convince a kid of this notion. Keep the sights lined up and the hole will still be a 10 if the lined up sight movement (wobble) is reasonable.

To prove the point he gave the kid a pencil and had him stand with the pencil basically on the target to show how small the 'wobble zone' really was. Keep the sights aligned and the location of the hole will remain in the area of that relatively minor movement. It's slightly angled sight alignment that keeps shots from being 10's. Not the wobble.

Oz wrote:...Air Pistol class in college...

You went to a better college than I did.

http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?t=20504

Steve Swartz

guests wrote:http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?t=20504

Steve Swartz

THAT, is an excellent thread and bookmark worthy. Every new shooter should be required to read that thread before anything else.

Oz:

I agree with you.

What's intriguing (to me) is that I have written the "bottom line" of that thread in my shooting journal . . . as a hjuge "epiphany" with asterisks and stars . . . about every six months like clockwork. Since 1998.

So it certainly isn't just the "new shooters" who need to learn the incredibly important lesson of the primacy of sight alignment and trigger control.

The real question is this:

"Why is something so important, so critical, and so simple to understand . . . the one principle most commonly ignored, rebelled against, paid lip service to, and generally mis-applied and mis-understood among all principles of technique involved in shooting?

I suppose I don't realy want to know the answer to that question. For if all shooters truly understood, accepted, embraced and applied this most critical principle, *everyone* would be shooting 580s . . .

I'm actually pretty happy that everyone else is focusing on wobble area and working on holding exercises; or, alternately, testing pellets or worrying about some other tangential issues!

Steve Swartz

guests wrote: For if all shooters truly understood, accepted, embraced and applied this most critical principle, *everyone* would be shooting 580s . . .
Steve Swartz

Because it is not as easy as you suggest. Despite all the hours of practice you have spent to master this principle, they are few compared to the cumulative hours you have spent on actions we all do 'automagically' like eating or driving an automobile.

I have also 're-realised' this a couple of times and the reason is that for me it is so counter-intuitive I have to fight it all the time. Its like having a religious faith in something when you are an aetheist - its possible, but you dont go hard at it.

Having said that, I am getting more 'converted' ! Had my second 550+ in a comp at the weekend, so very happy!

Fred:

Sorry if I implied that it was "easy."

What I meant to say is that it is "simple" or "uncomplicated."

I learned a while back that in this sport, "Simple" and "Easy" are about 180 degrees apart!

Steve

[It is indeed "SIMPLE." What makes it "HARD" is that it is very, very, counter-intuitive!]

Steve Swartz wrote: [It is indeed "SIMPLE." What makes it "HARD" is that it is very, very, counter-intuitive!]

Indeed, especially for someone like myself who was taught to hold the front sight at the bottom of the bull.